Different approaches to SEND in 14 countries provide valuable insight for English policymakers ahead of white paper, say Loic Menzies and Taylor Hughson “If you push too strongly towards inclusion, you will run into political resistance, and you are doomed to failure.鈥澛� This was the stark warning issued by a policymaker in one nearby country, interviewed as part of the It鈥檚 a stark warning to those in Whitehall girding their loins in anticipation of the white paper鈥檚 launch. I am not sure anyone in Westminster is looking for more warnings right now. But the great thing about looking overseas is that you soon realise there is nothing new under the sun. Important lessons Most countries are trying to improve their approach to special needs, and several have introduced major reforms against tough odds. There are therefore important lessons we can learn from our neighbours, without falling into the trap of 鈥減olicy borrowing鈥�. Firstly, it seems that countries get in trouble when they focus too much on where pupils are taught, rather than what support they receive once there. Pressure from the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities has encouraged many countries, such as Estonia and Ireland, to reduce their dependence on specialist settings. But when they do, it is often parents of pupils with SEND who end up pushing back against 鈥渋nclusion in name only鈥�. Demand for separate provision in England might therefore be reduced, but only if specialist support in areas such as and dyslexia becomes more widely available within mainstream schools. Regional alliances A short hop across the grey North Sea affords a glimpse of how that could happen. In 2012, the Netherlands passed the 鈥渆ducation that fits鈥� act, to ensure pupils could access support wherever they were taught. SEND funding was decentralised and handed to new collaborative regional alliances. Although there have been challenges, and it would be a mistake to copy the country鈥檚 approach wholesale, a of the reforms shows that cross-school, localised decision-making can be in pupils鈥� 鈥� as well as the public purse鈥檚 鈥� interests. It is also an approach that would be in keeping with the original intent behind 鈥渓ocal offers鈥� 鈥� a much neglected element of England鈥檚 2014 SEND reforms that are set for a reboot as new 鈥渓ocal inclusion support offers鈥�. Even closer to home, Wales has been attracting English policymakers鈥� attention recently, following a trend-bucking drop in the proportion of pupils identified as having SEND 鈥� or additional learning needs (ALN) as they are now called. What is striking is that, despite the change in terminology, it is identification practices that have shifted 鈥� not definitions. On the other hand, this has not actually translated into a drop in costs, though spending may have increased at a lower rate than would have been expected. Definitions aren鈥檛 magic So, while speculation about England鈥檚 white paper has tended to centre on definitions of SEND, particularly the status of EHCPs and changes to tiering, the government should be under no illusions: definitions aren鈥檛 magic. Finland is one place where changes to SEND policy do seem to have driven big changes. In 2010 the country shifted from a primarily using a 鈥渂ackpack-based鈥� model, in which funding follows individual pupils, to a 鈥渃ensus based鈥� approach, in which municipalities are allocated a block of funding, based on likely need. There has also been a shift towards early support. A 2020 study suggests that this drove a significant drop in full-time special education, as well as in the proportion of students taught in separate SEND classrooms. Despite these changes, Finland continues to face difficulties with uneven interpretation of national norms and variation in support, often linked to disparities between local budgets. Indeed, it seems that none of the 14 countries we studied have yet managed to ensure that all pupils with SEND get the support they need. But perhaps countries would stand a better chance of success if they spent a little more time sharing the lessons learned. And that is exactly what our recent study aimed to do. A new independent briefing by Ellie Harris on the implications of CES’s research for SEND reform in England