Curricular principles and approaches: A collection of curriculum-themed articles from Impact, the Chartered College of Teaching’s termly journal
Curricular principles and approaches: A collection of curriculum-themed articles from Impact, the Chartered College of Teaching’s termly journal
Teacher development and leadership: A collection of curriculum-themed articles from Impact, the Chartered College of Teaching’s termly journal
Curriculum design in context: A collection of curriculum-themed articles from Impact, the Chartered College of Teaching’s termly journal
Approaches to assessment: A collection of curriculum-themed articles from Impact, the Chartered College of Teaching's termly journal
Beyond the subject: A collection of curriculum-themed articles from Impact, the Chartered College of Teaching's termly journal
Perspectives on assessment: A collection of curriculum-themed articles from Impact, the Chartered College of Teaching's termly journal
Jane Green MBE FCCT, Founder and Chair of SEDSConnective
As a former assistant headteacher who focused on supporting students with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND), I have long been concerned about attendance and attainment among neurodivergent children. The co-occurrence of physical health challenges linked to hypermobility for this population is not well understood – physical symptoms can be mistaken for growing pains, burnout or anxiety, with many children and young people wrongly assumed to be engaging in emotionally based school avoidance. Furthermore, physical pain and discomfort can cause fatigue, concentration problems and emotional dysregulation (Eccles, 2024), leading to higher rates of school absence and reduced academic attainment. Overlooking physical discomfort experienced by neurodivergent children can also undermine children’s and young people’s agency in communicating their pain, making it difficult for them to acknowledge or even accept their symptoms later in life (Newton, 2013).
After working to raise awareness of these issues through writing articles, developing toolkits and delivering presentations (for example, Green, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023a, 2023b) I decided to collaborate with colleagues to collect evidence on the connections between co-occurring physical health challenges, hypermobility and neurodivergence for the peer-reviewed topical review paper summarised in this article. The paper examines the connection between physical health challenges associated with hypermobility and neurodivergence, which has historically been underreported in the research literature. The full paper can be found here:
Donaghy B, Moore D and Green J (2023) Co-Occurring Physical Health Challenges in Neurodivergent Children and Young People: A Topical Review and Recommendation. Child Care in Practice 29(1): 3–21.
Neurodivergence refers to a brain that behaves, learns and processes differently from the neuromajority, encompassing neurodevelopmental conditions and traits with a variety of characteristics and strengths (Eccles, 2024). Leading researchers in this field argue that it is likely that connective tissues are different in identified neurodivergent populations such as those with autism, ADHD, dyspraxia, Tourette’s and probably dyslexia, dyscalculia and dysgraphia (Csecs et al., 2022; Cerdlof et al., 2016; Sharp et al., 2021; Baeza-Velasco et al., 2018; Blajwajs et al, 2023., Ward et al., 2023). Neurodivergence is associated with the increased prevalence of pain and chronic physical health across the whole body. Eccles (2024) emphasises that hypermobility is the mechanism for these issues of chronic pain – neurodivergent individuals are more than twice as likely to have hypermobility than the general population.
Hypermobile Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome (hEDS) and Hypermobility Spectrum Disorder (HSD) are the most common types of hypermobility disorders. For children and young people, generalised Joint Hypermobility (GJH) is also prevalent. The connective tissue structure is different for a person with hypermobility compared to the general population. Such people often used to be called ‘double-jointed’, but hypermobility is multisystemic and affects so much more than the joints – it can affect the autonomic nervous system, stomach, bowel, bladder, heart and immune response. The symptoms can intensify after injury, hormone phases and viral infections, leading to chronic pain and fatigue which can be lifelong. Hypermobility can also be associated with conditions such as myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS), fibromyalgia, long COVID, dysautonomia including postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS), orthostatic intolerance (OI), mast cell activation syndrome (MCAS) and irritable bowel syndrome. The complexity in diagnosing these conditions adds to the fog of understanding their impact on neurodivergent students, both in research and educational practice, making them underdiagnosed even though they are not rare based on our observations and the topical review paper discussed here.
The article by Donaghy, Moore and Green (2023) is rooted in a narrative review approach, rather than a systematic review. This was a deliberate choice to address the need for a broader exploration of research and practice in an area that is often overlooked. Specifically, the paper discusses the core issues related to neurodivergence in children and young people with hypermobility-related pain, examining the connection between the body and mind. The misattribution and diagnostic overshadowing of hypermobility with the neurodivergent population is endemic so we aimed to explain the issues in a narrative approach. We were looking to discuss the issues that we saw from both an academic and person-facing approach and consider the experiences or potential experiences of neurodivergence in children and young people with hypermobility pain (Cederlof et al.,2016).
Traditionally, interventions and approaches to support neurodivergent students focus on social, sensory, emotional, mental and environmental areas. The topical review highlights the need for a shift in educational and healthcare practices to better support neurodivergent children and young people with co-occurring physical health challenges. A greater understanding of these challenges and more comprehensive approaches could significantly improve both attendance and attainment outcomes for this population. Recommendations include:
Eight in 10 learners say that technology makes it easier for them to participate at school (Pearson, 2024).
Schools that have recently adopted new technology are seeing improved confidence and independence for all students, including those formally identified as having special educational needs and disabilities (SEND). However, across the UK, assistive technology is still a heavily underutilised asset.
Leo Academy Trust they rolled out Chromebooks to staff and students across nine primary schools. Since then, the number of children on the SEN register needing additional intervention programmes has reduced by around one-third. Students feel more empowered to work autonomously in the classroom, with features like screen-readers and voice-to-text reducing the need for additional teaching support.
Interestingly, 29 per cent of students choose to use screen readers at different points in their day – even if they have the skills to read themselves. This figure is higher than the percentage of students on the SEN register.
At LEO Academy Trust, we believe that every student deserves the opportunity to learn and succeed independently. Accessible technology helps us to do just that.
Graham Macaulay, Director of Strategic Partnerships at LEO
All Chromebooks have accessibility tools built in, without the need to pay for additional services. These include:
Abingdon House School is a collective of specialist independent schools across London that encourage student independence using Chromebooks. For students who have trouble reading and writing, Chromebook’s screen reader and voice typing helped with their ability to interpret the texts they were studying in class. Teachers reported that the overlap of technology and learning helped students to independently engage in work without needing the additional support of an adult there to help them. Chromebook supports voice control and verbal feedback to help all learners access and interact with the information they need day to day.
Some key features helping empower student independence are:
East Lothian Council oversees a catchment of primary and secondary schools in Scotland. For students with motor control issues or dyslexia, it can be challenging to develop confidence around skills such as handwriting and keyboard use. East Lothian Council leadership distributed Chromebook Tab 10 devices with styluses and handwriting recognition as an alternative to typing, helping to remove this barrier from the classroom. Chromebook empowers all students with more ways to enter information, by making usability adjustments that help them navigate learning with gestures suited to their needs.
With a suite of innovative accessibility tools built-in, Chromebooks are helping many schools create more inclusive learning environments. Download our e-book to learn more about accessibility on Chromebooks.
By Jo Van Herwegen, Professor of Developmental Psychology and Education, UCL’s Institute of Education
Recent evidence shows that students with Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND) have lower educational outcomes compared to their peers and that this gap continues to increase (Tuckett et al., 2021). Although previous reviews have addressed how these students can benefit from best practice related to universal teaching, it is unclear what the evidence base looks like for targeted interventions. Most previous studies that have examined the impact of targeted interventions have either focused on specific targeted interventions (e.g. Does Lego Therapy work?) or on specific groups (e.g. Do targeted interventions work for students with dyslexia?). Whilst useful, such overviews do not allow insight for which educational outcomes or groups of SEND we lack research evidence for, or whether particular targeted interventions might benefit various educational outcomes and groups with SEND. In addition, many teachers have difficulties accessing research evidence, and thus might be limited to make research-informed decisions about which targeted interventions to use with their students.
The MetaSENse study carried out by researchers at the Centre for Educational Neuroscience and the Department of Psychology and Human Development at UCL aimed to address these issues. The study was funded by the Nuffield Foundation and included three phases:
The first phase examined the existing research evidence base. It included a systematic review and meta-analysisA quantitative study design used to systematically assess the results of multiple studies in order to draw conclusions about that body of research of studies that used Randomised Controlled Trials and Quasi-Experimental Designs to evaluate the impact of targeted interventions for students with SEND aged four to 25. The systematic review identified 467 studies worldwide reporting on 1,758 outcomes, predominantly related to reading (n = 1139), with fewer studies focusing on writing outcomes (n = 279), mathematical outcomes (n = 284), science outcomes (n = 3), and general attainment (n = 53). Only 21 studies were from the UK.
Overall, the results from the systematic review and meta-analysis are positive in that targeted interventions can raise educational outcomes among students with SEND by an average of five months of progress compared to those receiving teaching-as-usual or active control interventions. So, there is evidence that some interventions can be effective!
Interestingly, the intervention effects did not vary according to whether they were delivered in a small group, or one-to-one, or who implemented them. Of course, the meta-analysis looks for overall effects. This does not mean that all interventions work equally well in small groups rather than on a one-to-one basis, but it does mean that we can explore whether more of these targeted interventions can be delivered in small groups or to a whole classroom. With some adaptation, some of these good practices could apply to a whole group of children and this might benefit 1) children who have not yet been identified or diagnosed with SEND and 2) reduce waiting lists for children who are currently waiting to receive certain interventions on a one-to-one basis.
The review also shows that effects were larger for mathematical outcomes than for reading outcomes. This can be explained by the fact that mathematics is multi-componential (e.g., counting component, an arithmetic component, algebra) and that most targeted interventions focused on a specific component. In contrast, most reading interventions targeted broader reading abilities and thus, it is likely that it takes much longer to achieve similar improvements. This information is helpful in that teachers should consider when they review what works for students with SEND. If they review targeted interventions in their practice after only one term for example, this might not be long enough to see improvements for certain interventions that target broader skills, compared to very specific ones. However, most interventions in the review were implemented for only one term and for both reading and mathematics there was evidence that targeted interventions work. As many students with SEND often have low mathematical outcomes, the findings from the MetaSENse review show that mathematical interventions should be prioritised more, in that they can positively benefit students with SEND.
However, the review also highlights some gaps in the research evidence. This was particularly true for those students with intellectual disabilities, physical disabilities, and sensory disabilities such as vision and hearing impairments, as 50 percent of the studies focused on students with specific learning difficulties. There was also a lack of studies that examined what worked for students with SEND in secondary schools, especially for mathematical abilities. In terms of educational outcomes, there was a lack of focus on general attainment and on science outcomes. This shows that for a number of SEND groups it is difficult to advise teachers about evidence-based intervention approaches. However, in a next stage we hope to examine what the core components are from successful interventions that have been included in the MetaSENse study, as this will allow us to extrapolate what might work for those groups that have been under-researched.
In phase 2, we interviewed 33 educational professionals from mainstream and special primary and secondary schools in England as well as various professionals who work for local authorities but work with schools (e.g. educational psychologists, specialist assessors etc). The in-depth individual interviews focused on current targeted intervention practices and how evidence is used in schools, and explored barriers to implementing effective practices.
Interviews revealed that educational practitioners varied in their understanding of evidence-informed practice and how to access this information. Interviews also revealed practitioners experienced barriers in trying to implement interventions, with mainstream schools, especially secondary schools, showing a preference for off-the-shelf interventions. The interviews also highlighted that what is evaluated in the research literature is very different from the targeted interventions used in the classroom.
Whilst most schools collect data on pre-and post-intervention abilities, very few review this data across individual students to see what interventions are working and which ones have stopped working and might need to be reviewed or replaced. So, whilst many schools seem to have a long list of targeted interventions they can implement in their schools, it seems most schools do not have a systematic approach when it comes to evaluating the targeted interventions they are using. Last but perhaps most importantly, many interviewees discussed the need to adapt interventions to their specific setting or students, or that interventions were being watered down due to the fact that training for delivering the targeted interventions often happened through cascaded in-house continuous professional development (CPD) training (i.e. one member of staff would receive the training and then train further staff in house). Yet, often no record was being kept of the implementation of the interventions and how this might differ from the original intervention or how the intervention was evaluated in research studies.
As such, the findings from phase 1 and phase 2 show that whilst we do know that some interventions work, practitioners do not always have access to the research evidence of what works. This limits their ability to make evidence-informed decisions on which interventions to use with particular groups with SEND.
Combing the findings from phase 1 and phase 2, the third and final phase included the co-production of a toolkit, an online tool that allows educators to search for evidenced-based approaches for particular educational outcomes and SEN groups. The toolkit includes a searchable database that includes those targeted interventions that were included in the review and are available, either commercially or via researchers’ webpages, for teachers to use or purchase. Educational professionals also told us that it was important not only to ensure that interventions are included that can be accessed by teachers, but also to include why these interventions might work and to provide a short description of what each study that evaluated the intervention found. As such the database allows teachers to search by either educational outcomes, SEND group, age group, and many other factors. For example, teachers might want to know what interventions are available to improve mathematical outcomes for students with various SEND in Key stage 1. Others might want to know if a particular targeted intervention works and can search using the name of the intervention. The database also allows users to search all interventions that have been evaluated for particular groups of SEND (for example, autism or ADHD). Each search then returns an overview of all the interventions available (see Figure 1a) and by clicking on the name of the intervention a new form opens that describes that intervention, what is required to implement it, how the intervention works (theory of change), and the research outcomes (See Figure 1b).
Figure 1a - image of the search function
Figure 1b - an example of the intervention overview
The toolkit will be updated in the years to come to ensure it remains up-to-date. At the moment, the database only includes studies that have measured educational outcomes, and thus very few interventions relate to behavioural improvements or wellbeing. Also, as there is already a very helpful database for speech-and language approaches we did not include these interventions in the MetaSENse database. However, we hope to expand on the MetaSENse database in the near future to include non-academic outcomes as well.
“I think this could have a huge impact on interventions in school. I know teachers often do not have the time to search for new interventions and find the evidence of if it works. I believe having one place to go and easily find new things to try will greatly improve what schools are able to offer and hopefully improve the quality.” (Headteacher, anonymous)
Although students with SEND have lower educational outcomes, the MetaSENse review shows that there is a growing evidence base of targeted interventions that can improve these students’ outcomes. However, teachers have problems accessing research studies and do not always review what works in their classroom. In moving forward, we hope that teachers will systematically review the interventions that they are using in their classroom to improve reading, writing, and mathematical abilities and that they will use the MetaSENse database to make evidence-based decisions to select the best approaches.
In addition, we would encourage headteachers and SENDco’s to systematically capture the data they collect to evaluate the impact of interventions in their schools. They may also want to explore how they can capture data from a control condition. For example, can the school first assess the child with SEND a few weeks apart before the child starts the intervention to capture a baseline or can another school, that has similar students in their school but who are not using a specific intervention, provide control data? This might require the schools to work together and decide how best to capture pre-and post- data. However, if schools can work together with universities or research centres, these might be able to provide some reliable assessment measures and even help with the data analyses. I know our colleagues at the Centre for Educational Neuroscience would be very happy to help with this! By educational professionals and researchers working more closely together, it will be possible to close the research-practice gap in relation to SEND.
Finally, we would encourage schools to invest in CPD for teachers and teaching assistants (TAs). Firstly, by providing them with more insight into developmental psychology and specific knowledge about the different groups of SEND they work with. We have developed some affordable self-paced online short courses that can help with this. Secondly, to include CPD regarding what research evidence is, where to find it, and how to assess evidence as well as how to evaluate their own practice. Research has shown that journal clubs can support educational practitioners’ research-informed practice (Breckon & Dodson, 2016).
For more information about the MetaSENse study and the full study report please visit the website: http://www.educationalneuroscience.org.uk/metasense/
The MetaSENse study was carried out by researchers at UCL’s Institute of Education: Professor Jo Van Herwegen, Thomas Masterman, Dr Catherine Antalek, Professor Chloë Marshall, Professor Julie Dockrell, and Dr Rebecca Gordon; and Professor Michael Thomas from the Centre for Educational Neuroscience, Birkbeck, University of London.
References
Breckon, J., & Dodson, J. (2016). Using evidence: What works? A discussion paper. Alliance for useful evidence. Available at: https://media.nesta.org.uk/documents/using_evidence_what_works.pdf accessed on 5th November 2024
Galuschka, K. et al., (2020). Effectiveness of spelling interventions for learners with dyslexia: A meta-analysis and systematic review. Educational Psychologist, 55(1), 1-20, DOI: 10.1080/00461520.2019.1659794
Narzisi, A. et al. (2021). Could You Give Me the Blue Brick? LEGO®-Based Therapy as a Social Development Program for Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder: A Systematic Review. Brain Sciences, 11, 702. https://doi.org/10.3390/ brainsci11060702
Tuckett, S., Robinson, D., & Bunting, F. (2021). Measuring the Disadvantage Gap in 16-19 Education. Education Policy Institute. https://epi.org.uk/wpcontent/uploads/2021/02/Measuring-the-16-19-disadvantage-attainment-gap_EPI-2021.pdf.
This article has been published as part of the Rethinking Curriculum project, kindly funded by The Helen Hamlyn Trust.
Kimberly Safford, Honorary Associate, The Open University, and Trustee of Climate
Climate Change All Change is a charity that places professional designers in primary schools. The designers are from a range of sectors, such as architecture, fashion, landscape, engineering and food. Half a term, children, teachers and designers imagine the future and develop creative designs that respond to the climate crisis.
School leaders and teachers work with designers to develop a topic and activities that build on children’s prior learning and experiences, reflect the school ethos and link with other subjects across the curriculum.
Here are some recent examples:
Teamwork and problem-solving are features of children’s learning in Climate Change All Change. Sharing and presenting are also key components, as children display their work in a school assembly, school social media, a community event or in a community exhibition space. Children receive feedback from professional designers and see their ideas rendered by professionals in large-scale and digital formats.
Schools do much to inform and inspire children to reduce, reuse, recycle and protect the natural environment. Climate Change All Change aims to build on this work, focusing on the design implications of climate change, to address these issues:
Building design skills for the future
Faced with climate and biodiversity emergencies and high levels of social and economic inequality, the need to design – and redesign – is urgent. Design and technology is a required curriculum subject in primary schools, but there are no accurate statistics for the uptake and nature of D&T activities. The number of young people taking D&T GCSEs in secondary schools has declined sharply: from 430,000 in 2003 to 78,000 in 2024. The number of D&T-trained subject teachers has declined from 15,000 in 2009 to 6,000 in 2024 (Ryan, 2024).
Children’s futures and employability
By the end of primary school, children have formed ideas about what they might be and do when they grow up. The UK government’s strategy for sustainability and climate change in education (DfEDepartment for Education - a ministerial department responsible for children’s services and education in England, 2023) refers to children’s future employability in the context of climate change, in careers that support the transition to net zero, the restoration of biodiversity and a sustainable future.
Promoting climate literacy for children and teachers
It is important to promote the UK government’s strategy that children should learn about the ‘causes and impacts of climate change’ and about ‘the importance of sustainability’ (DfE, 2023).
Supporting teacher knowledge and confidence
A survey of over 8,000 teachers found that 92 per cent are concerned about climate change, 89 per cent think that climate change is relevant to their subject area and 70 per cent feel that they haven’t received adequate training to educate learners about climate change (Teach the Future, 2023).
Learning about climate change through art and design
The climate crisis can make children feel anxious, depressed and angry (Clayton et al., 2023). Art and design offer potential to create new images and metaphors and for climate learning (Bentz, 2020).
Engaging school leadership
There is a need to support school leaders and subject leads to foster school structures, culture and teacher agency in relation to climate change education (Rushton et al., 2024).
Since 2020, over 1,000 children have experienced the Climate Change All Change programme (see Appendix). According to the most recent external evaluation:
‘The commitment and passion of incoming experts, together with their expertise in a topic, can clearly motivate students and teachers. Moreover, the specialist nature of a partnership encourages schools to carve out time to the project, creating space for children to engage… As a result, gains in children’s learning, and in their attitudes to a topic, are likely to increase. [Several children] … expressed views about how the project had given them a better understanding of climate change and a desire to make a difference:
“I didn’t know anything about climate change until [the teacher] was explaining it and we were talking about it over and over with [the designer]” (Student focus group, School D).
Notably, the programme was also perceived to be beneficial from the perspective of the teachers and the designers:
“I think I now feel more hopeful about the future. And I think that’s what children need to be feeling, because otherwise they’ll feel if it’s going to be like this, we can’t do anything. I think it gave them power. And I think that’s what’s really strong” (Teacher interview, School B).
“This feels like the most significant project of my year” (Designer interview, School E).’ (Wood et al., 2024, p. 43)
External evaluators also observed that children working ‘as a designer’ and having input from professionals is a powerful way in which to showcase future careers:
‘“I enjoyed it as it’s opening up new jobs. If I didn’t know about sustainability or fashion designers, I wouldn’t have liked to be one. If I hadn’t known what it was… it shows children can do what they want, what they put their mind to” (Student focus group, School A).’ (Wood et al., 2024, p. 43)
School leaders have observed that learning design skills and climate change concepts in a creative, cross-curricular project has promoted new understanding and new skills for children, and a sense of responsibility:
“We have seen how mature and capable the children can be when they are inspired and encouraged” (Teacher interview, School C).’ (Wood et al., 2024, p. 45)
References
Bentz J (2020) Learning about climate change in, with and through art. Climatic Change 162: 1595–1612.
Clayton S, Manning CM, Hill AN et al. (2023) Mental health and our changing climate: Children and youth report 2023. American Psychological Association and ecoAmerica. Available at: www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2023/10/mental-health-youth-report-2023.pdf (accessed 16 August 2024).
Department for EducationThe ministerial department responsible for children’s services and education in England (DfE) (2023) Sustainability and climate change: A strategy for the education and children’s services systems. Available at: www.gov.uk/government/publications/sustainability-and-climate-change-strategy/sustainability-and-climate-change-a-strategy-for-the-education-and-childrens-services-systems#action-area-1-climate-education (accessed 16 August 2024).
Rushton EAC, Dunlop L and Atkinson L (2024) Fostering teacher agency in school-based climate change education in England, UK. The Curriculum Journal 00: 1–16. DOI: 10.1002/curj.253.
Ryan T (2024) Chief Executive Officer, Design and Technology Association, personal communication, 24 April 2024.
Teach the Future (2023) Written evidence submitted to UK Parliament (EDU0027). Available at: https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/120247/pdf (accessed 16 August 2024).
Wood L, King H and Glackin M (2024) Working with external partners to support climate change education through a focus on design. Journal of Emergent Science 26: 41–46.
