TY - JOUR

T1 - Systematic review of the evidence to support expert practice in the education and care of children and young people with special educational needs and disability in the UK

AU - Clarry, Laura

AU - Wood, Annie

AU - Long, Tony

PY - 2023/7/31

Y1 - 2023/7/31

N2 - Scopus, EBSCO, ERIC and British Education Index were interrogated in a systematic review of primary research since 2014 addressing expert practice and outcomes in education and care for young people with special educational needs and disability in the UK. Grey literature and studies of medical settings, preschool children, mainstream education or professional education were excluded. Quality was gauged by effect sizes, risk of bias and the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme. The search identified 7058 items. Twenty-eight studies were included, with 1839 participants of 4–22 years. Risk of bias was low, with effect sizes from small to extremely large. The qualitative studies were rigorous. Expert practice with positive outcomes was evidenced in comprehensive assessment, enhancing engagement and personalised interventions. Correction of visual problems, use of humanoid robots, and tested models were generally effective. There was rigorous evidence for efficacy of frameworks and reasonable evidence for creative approaches to physical activity. Drama lessons were valued. Standing frame use improved peer interaction or caused segregation. Disparity between problem identification and planned support in education health and care plans, and addressing personal and physical health factors were problematic. The voice of young people was lacking. More training was required in augmented and alternative communication.

AB - Scopus, EBSCO, ERIC and British Education Index were interrogated in a systematic review of primary research since 2014 addressing expert practice and outcomes in education and care for young people with special educational needs and disability in the UK. Grey literature and studies of medical settings, preschool children, mainstream education or professional education were excluded. Quality was gauged by effect sizes, risk of bias and the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme. The search identified 7058 items. Twenty-eight studies were included, with 1839 participants of 4–22 years. Risk of bias was low, with effect sizes from small to extremely large. The qualitative studies were rigorous. Expert practice with positive outcomes was evidenced in comprehensive assessment, enhancing engagement and personalised interventions. Correction of visual problems, use of humanoid robots, and tested models were generally effective. There was rigorous evidence for efficacy of frameworks and reasonable evidence for creative approaches to physical activity. Drama lessons were valued. Standing frame use improved peer interaction or caused segregation. Disparity between problem identification and planned support in education health and care plans, and addressing personal and physical health factors were problematic. The voice of young people was lacking. More training was required in augmented and alternative communication.

U2 - 10.1111/1471-3802.12589

DO - 10.1111/1471-3802.12589

M3 - Journal article

VL - 23

SP - 175

EP - 198

JO - Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs

JF - Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs

IS - 3

ER -