In 2024/25, there were approximately **** million students with special educational needs in England, compared with **** million in the previous year, and **** million in 2015/16.

Number of Students with Special Educational Needs (SEN) in Public Sector Ordinary Primary and Secondary Schools from the 2019/20 to 2024/25 school years - categorised by School Level and SEN Type

Special needs schools in Japan reported that ***** of their students were physically or psychologically harmed by bullying behavior in the academic year 2023. The majority of victims were visiting their ***** year of **** school. While the number of bullying incidents at regular schools in the country occurred primarily at the ********** school level, bullying among students at special needs schools in Japan peaked during their **** school education.

A list of all independent schools and special post-16 institutions for children with special educational needs or disabilities (SEND) approved under section 41 of the Children and Families Act 2014 in England and Wales.

You can filter the list by local authority or by type of setting.

Our guide for independent special schools and special post-16 institutions explains how to apply for approval under section 41.

Voluntary removal

Contact hns.sos@education.gov.uk to request removal from the approved list, stating your reason. We will remove your institution in the next update and notify local authorities. The published list includes all removed institutions.

Once removed, you cannot re-apply for one full academic year.

Other special schools

Details of all special schools in England are available on the https://www.get-information-schools.service.gov.uk/Search" class="govuk-link">Department for Education’s Get Information about Schools system. This includes:

• maintained schools
• academies
• independent schools
• non-maintained schools

The SEND guide for parents and carers explains how parents can ask for one of these schools or special post-16 institutions to be named in their child’s education, health and care plan.

Special needs schools in Japan reported that *** of their female students were physically or psychologically harmed by bully behavior in 2020. The majority of female victims were visiting the last year of middle school and the first year of high school, summing up to *** high school girls respectively. While the number of bullying incidents at regular schools in the country occurred predominantly at elementary school level, bullying among students at special needs schools in Japan peaked during their high school education.

Although inclusion is the declared goal, the transition from a system based on special schools to an inclusive school system has only been progressing very slowly in individual countries. In an evolving school system, the existing special schools keep struggling to justify their existence. This project investigates the regional distribution effects based on official school data and shows the influence of a pull effect on special schools as a distance effect of special schools affecting the placement of students. For this purpose, official school statistics including all students at special and regular schools in the years 2010, 2015 and 2020 (N = 11 280 040) are evaluated in a spatiotemporal comparison using Educational Data Mining. In a hierarchical regression model on school placement in inclusive schools, the distance between primary and special schools has the highest influence (β = 0.48) on the inclusion rate (i.e., the proportion of students with special needs who are educated in regular schools in relation to all students with disabilities), along with the size (β = −0.14) and the density of special schools in a district (β = −0.12). The effects differ according to the population density of the region and are stronger in large cities. When the proportion of students with and without SEN in regular schools is considered (support rate), the density of special schools has the greatest impact on school placement (ß = 43.44).

See other items

This paper aims to examine the changes in school composition in England from 2011 to 2017 by school type and school phase; the speed of academisation by region; and the changes in the proportions of pupils with special educational needs (SEN) at SEN Support and EHC Plan levels overall. We analyse publicly available school level data from the National Pupil Database (NPD) to document two simultaneous trends in English education between 2011 and 2017. First, we observe an increasing percentage of the schools that have become Academies, especially in the secondary mainstream sector, but also among primary schools, special schools and pupil referral units. Second, we document a decreasing percentage of pupils who were classified as having SEN. While the decrease happened across all types of schools, it was particularly steep in Sponsored Academies. This evidence does not necessarily imply that the academisation of English schools has had a negative effect on the inclusion of pupils with SEN. However, the findings have significance to provide the basis for a more in-depth analysis of these trends and the causal effects of academisation involving individual and school level analyses. They can also inform national and local policy review of how pupils are identified as having SEN and in the context of international moves toward greater inclusive education.

Special needs schools in Japan reported that ***** of their male students were physically or psychologically harmed by bully behavior in 2020. The majority of male victims were visiting the first year of high school, summing up to *** high school boys. While the number of bullying incidents at regular schools in the country occurred predominantly at elementary school level, bullying among students at special needs schools in Japan peaked during their high school education.

Snapshot img

Special Education Teacher Training Market Size 2025-2029

The special education teacher training market size is forecast to increase by USD 145.3 million at a CAGR of 4.7% between 2024 and 2029.

The market is experiencing significant growth due to the rising prevalence of disabilities and the increasing awareness of the importance of providing quality education to this population. According to various reports, the number of children with disabilities is on the rise, creating a growing demand for specialized teachers to cater to their unique needs. However, a key challenge facing the market is the limited access to quality training programs for special education teachers. To address this issue, there has been an increase in the number of short courses and online training programs being offered. These flexible training options enable current and aspiring teachers to acquire the necessary skills and knowledge to effectively teach students with disabilities. As the demand for special education continues to grow, companies offering training programs that cater to this need will have ample opportunities to expand their offerings and capitalize on this market trend. Additionally, partnerships between educational institutions and organizations specializing in special education can lead to innovative training programs and collaborative efforts to improve the overall quality of education for students with disabilities.

What will be the Size of the Special Education Teacher Training Market during the forecast period?

Request Free SampleThe market: Trends and Dynamics Special education teacher training is a significant market, driven by the increasing number of students with hearing impairments, visual impairments, learning disabilities, behavioral disorders, physical disabilities, and other special needs. This market focuses on differentiated instruction, educational psychology, occupational therapy, speech therapy, literacy skills, numeracy skills, social skills development, positive behavior support, IEP implementation, inclusion practices, and classroom management. Applied behavior analysis and transition planning are essential components of special education teacher training, ensuring students receive the necessary support for their unique needs. Assistive technology plays a crucial role in enhancing learning experiences and promoting inclusive education. Market research publishers, such as Market Research Future (MRFR), Grand View Research, FMI Study, and others, highlight the importance of teacher training in special education. These reports indicate a growing demand for specialized training in areas like applied behavior analysis, inclusive education, and classroom management. Special education teacher training is a dynamic and evolving market, with ongoing research and development in educational psychology, positive behavior support, and assistive technology. As the needs of students with special needs continue to change, so too will the demands on special education teachers and the training they receive. Increased focus on inclusive education and IEP implementation necessitates continuous teacher training to ensure effective instruction and support for students with diverse learning needs. By staying informed of the latest trends and best practices, special education teachers can better meet the needs of their students and help them reach their full potential.

How is this Special Education Teacher Training Industry segmented?

The special education teacher training industry research report provides comprehensive data (region-wise segment analysis), with forecasts and estimates in 'USD million' for the period 2025-2029, as well as historical data from 2019-2023 for the following segments. TypeOfflineOnlineProductFormal education programsOthersPrice RangeBasic certificationAdvanced certificationMaster certificationAge GroupProspective teachersCurrent teachersSchool administratorsSpecial education professionalsGeographyNorth AmericaUSCanadaEuropeFranceGermanySpainThe NetherlandsUKAPACChinaIndiaJapan

By Type Insights

The offline segment is estimated to witness significant growth during the forecast period.Offline training plays a significant role in the professional development of educators specializing in special education. This form of education includes hands-on activities, simulations, and practical experiences that enable teachers to directly apply concepts in real-world settings. In-person training offers immediate feedback from instructors and peers, allowing educators to refine their techniques and learn effective practices. Instructors can provide personalized attention to participants, addressing their unique needs, questions, and concerns. Offline training fosters a sense of community among educators, facilitating collaboration and networking opportunities. For instance, a Master of Arts degree from Teachers College Columb

Abstract

Urban education is emerging as a significant topic of discussion in Tanzania and other Sub-Saharan African (SSA) countries, particularly focusing on the challenges faced by the population residing in impoverished urban areas. Learners from low-income households in urban settings encounter more difficulties in their educational journey compared to their more privileged counterparts. Tanzania, like many SSA nations, is undergoing substantial urbanization, marked by a notable rise in rural-to-urban migration, projected to reach approximately 55% of the country’s population by 2050. Understanding the current state of urban education is crucial for developing plans to address the escalating demands of urban education in the future. The study aimed to address these issues through the following research questions: 1. What are the schooling patterns among children living in urban poor households in Tanzania – including those with special needs? 2. How do urban poor communities perceive and understand education as a right in the context of urbanization in Tanzania? and, 3. What available education opportunities exist for children with special needs and living in poor urban households? In collaboration with HakiElimu and technical support from the National Bureau of Statistics, APHRC conducted a cross-sectional concurrent mixedmethods study. Quantitative data were gathered from 1,200 randomly selected low-income households in Dar es Salaam and Dodoma, along with input from 98 educational institutional heads from schools enrolling learners from the sampled households. Qualitative data were obtained through focus group discussions with caregivers/parents, in-depth interviews, and key informant interviews involving opinion leaders and policymakers. The study received ethical and administrative approvals from relevant authorities. Data analysis focused on 2,150 children aged 5-17, reflecting the basic education schooling age in Tanzania. A wealth score, derived from household belongings, was categorized into three equal tertiles for analysis purposes. The key results highlights have been presented below and thereafter a set of key study recommendations.

Schooling patterns: The findings indicate that 98.1% of children have attended school, with a slightly higher percentage among girls. Among learners with special needs (2.3% of the total), only 10% have received schooling, revealing an access gap for these vulnerable children. Six out of ten (60%) schools have provisions for learners with special needs, while those without reported inadequate facilities. In the academic year 2022, the majority of learners in pre-primary, primary, and ordinary level secondary education were enrolled in government schools (79.9%, 87.3%, and 90.6%, respectively). This underscores significant government control over enrollment spaces for learners from low-income urban households. The primary factor influencing school choice was the cost, suggesting the success of Tanzania’s free primary and secondary education initiatives. However, among the surveyed schools, the pupil-teacher ratio exceeded the government’s recommended number (40) across all levels. Additionally, the average class size surpassed 100 learners per class in primary school signaling quality issues.

Perceptions of Right to Education The right to education is categorized into three sub-themes: policy and strategies, law enforcement, and the school feeding program. 1. Policy and Strategies: Stakeholders acknowledged the state’s obligation to protect and promote the RTE. Examples cited included the Tanzania Education and Training Policy of 2014 (2023 edition) which cites the successes in the provision of the fee-free primary and secondary education, illustrating the government’s efforts to ensure universal access to education. 2. Law Enforcement: Local government authorities (LGAs) actively encourage parents to send their children to school. Those who fail to comply are presented to legal enforcement agencies, emphasizing the commitment to ensuring children’s attendance. However, implementation varies from one LGA to the other. 3. School Feeding Program (SFP): The government’s dedication to protecting the RTE is evident through the implementation of school feeding programs (SFPs).

Geographic coverage

Urban informal settlements of Tanzania, specifically in Dar es Salaam and Dodoma

Analysis unit

Households: The study analyzes household characteristics, such as size, head of household information, and wealth tertiles. Individuals (Children): The study focuses on children aged 3-19, specifically looking at their schooling patterns, participation, and characteristics. Schools: The study includes a school survey, analyzing school facilities, teacher qualifications, pupil-teacher ratios, and other school-level factors. Community: The study explores the perceptions and roles of community leaders and the community in relation to the right to education.

Universe

The survey covered households with school going children aged 3 to 19 years in selceted urban informal settlements in Dar esr Salaam and Dodoma

Sampling procedure

A sample of 1,200 households and 2,593 children aged 3 to 19 years was randomly selected through proportional allocation by region, ward, street, household head sex and age category.

The initial stage involved the listing of eligible households in the selected informal settlements. The initial criteria used was to ensure the household had at least one child who was aged 3-19 years. The listing exercise adopted a systematic approach: Starting from the furthest point of the enumeration areas, research assistants identified and listed the first eligible households. They would then skip to the fifth household. If the fifth household was not eligible, they would move to the next until they identified an eligible one. As a result, 3,567 households with 7,742 children aged 3-19 years were reached.

Using the data obtained from listing as a sampling frame, a sample of 1,200 households and 2,593 children aged 3 to 19 years was randomly selected through proportional allocation by region, ward, street, household head sex and age category. The household sample size was designed to allow estimation of key schooling indicators. The following indicators were considered in estimating the minimum sample size: enrollment, out of school, and attendance and primary and secondary school intake rates.

We utilised primary school net enrolment rate of 81.33%2 (World Bank 2018) for it gives the highest sample size.Besides, we made the following assumptions i) a design effect of 1.5 ii) average number of people aged between 3 and 19 years per household as two; iii) a 5% level of significance, which corresponds to 1.96 critical value for the standard normal distribution corresponding to a Type I error); and iv) a 5% margin of error respectively. The minimum estimated sample size was 2,389 children aged 3-19 years from 1,195 households after adjusting for a 90% response rate. The sample stratified proportionately between the two study sides based on their population and thereafter, randomly sampled households to participate in the study based on the listing.

Sampling deviation

The minimum estimated sample size was 2,389 children aged 3-19 years from 1,195 households after adjusting for a 90% response rate.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

Household Questionnaire included household membership and their characteristics , social-economic characteristics, including food security, household shocks, household poverty well-being, and household schedule.

The individual schooling history questionnaire included detailed schooling information about individuals aged between 3 and 19 years, which consist of schooling information (enrolment, type of school enrolled, participation in preschool among others) for the year (2022), and 5 years retrospectively based on the age of the child.

The parental or guardian involment questionnaire helped sought information on parental involvement in their children's schooling including homework support, details of last schooling year(s), parental perception of student schooling experience, feeding and costs of schooling.

The institutional questionnaire contains information on institutional heads, staff and fees.

Cleaning operations

Data quality assessments continued during the data collection period by assessing for consistency of the responses as well as comparing data collected by field workers against spot check data collected by the senior research team and field supervisors.

Upon data collection completion, data were rigorously checked for consistency and outliers.

Data cleaning was carried out using Stata v.17.0.

Response rate

90%

Sampling error estimates

The following assumptions were made i) a design effect of 1.5 ii) average number of people aged between 3 and 19 years per household as two; iii) a 5% level of significance, which corresponds to 1.96 critical value for the standard normal distribution corresponding to a Type I error); and iv) a 5% margin of error respectively.

Therefore, the minimum estimated sample size was 2,389 children aged 3-19 years from 1,195 households after adjusting for a 90% response rate.

Attitudes, needs, assessments and wishes of parents of children with special educational needs.

Topics: Perception of reporting on the subject of joint learning in the media; knowledge of the concept of inclusion; information on children: number, age (year of birth) and sex of children with special educational needs; time at which special educational needs were identified (before or after school enrolment); identifying person; class level attended; class level repeated; class changed.

Information on school: type of school (regular school or special school); full-time school; change of type of school; discussions about the choice of school type with acquaintances versus private decision; most suitable type of school; type of school currently attended is desired type of school; obstacles to choice of school; educational aspiration: desired school leaving certificate and attainable school leaving certificate; funding priority; degree of impairment.

School satisfaction: satisfaction with school; social impact of school types on the child; isolation of the child in school; composition of class; assessment of school; assessment of performance and social integration of the child in school; local density of special schools; importance of various aspects of support for school choice; assessment of aspects of support with regard to the offer in special schools or regular schools; opinion on performance motivation by grades.

Parents with children in regular schools were asked: double staffing of teachers; composition of the double staffing (normal teacher and special teacher); weekly hours with special teacher; satisfaction with the child´s encouragement in the regular school; assessment of inclusion; assessment of release from class (better learning success vs. bad experience); good preparation of teachers; advantages of inclusion (more friends, better learning performance, no social exclusion, individual encouragement plans, continued friendships from the neighbourhood); social integration of the child: frequency of: complaints about the child in school, invitations to birthdays of children without impairment, playing with children without impairment in school or invitations to play with other children, contact with other parents in school with children without impairment).

Demography: sex; age; German nationality; country of birth (migration background); school leaving certificate; number of school-age children; country of birth of children; language spoken in the household; participation of the child in lessons German as a second language; single parent.

Additionally coded was: respondent ID; federal state.

Interviewer rating: respondent´s understanding of questions; social stratum of household; willingness to participate in follow-up survey.

Abstract copyright UK Data Service and data collection copyright owner.The Scottish Executive has sponsored surveys of school-leavers and young people since the early 1970s. These include the first incarnation of the Scottish School-Leavers Survey (SSLS) which, in the mid-1980s, was subsumed within the broader Scottish Young People's Survey (SYPS - this series is held at the UK Data Archive (UKDA) under GN 33227). Following a review in 1991 of the use made of the findings by the Scottish Executive Education and Industry Department (SEEID), the survey was redesigned and resumed the title of the Scottish School-Leavers Survey. A further review in 1996 led to the establishment of the current design, which involves sampling cohorts of young people in fourth year and then collecting data from them on four occasions, at the ages of 16-17, 18-19, 21-22 and 23-24 years. The series is conducted for the Scottish Executive by the National Centre for Social Research (NatCen), who were known as Social and Community Planning Research prior to 1999. The Scottish Centre for Social Research (SCSR or ScotCen) was created in 2004 by combining NatCen's existing operation in Scotland with an independent research consultancy, Scottish Health Feedback. SCSR have now taken over the running of the SSLS series. The SSLS series obtains information on the educational and employment activities of young people after they leave school; their views and experiences of school itself; and key decisions made about whether to stay on at school or not. In addition, background characteristics are gathered, such as parents' level of education and social class, family circumstances and housing tenure. One of the main aims of the survey is to try and predict demand for higher education. The survey involves a random sample of all pupils in the relevant school year group. The only exception is that pupils at special schools (but not those in mainstream schools registered as having special educational needs) are excluded from the survey. The sample consists of all pupils born on any one of certain predetermined days of the month. Sweep Two Cohort Two, Sweep Two, conducted with 18-19 year-olds, was the first follow-up survey (i.e. second interview) with the first cohort of pupils selected since the series was redesigned in 1996 (Cohort One was drawn from respondents already included in the SLSS prior to the redesign). The population of interest was those pupils in the fourth year of secondary school during the academic year 1995-96. Their first interview was in 1997 aged 16-17 (that study is held at UK Data Archive under SN 4478, though the respondents were not explicitly identified by cohort number then). The names and addresses of all eligible pupils were supplied to SEEID by schools as an additional part of the school-leavers censuses. This information was then passed on to NatCen and a sample of 10% of all eligible pupils was drawn from the list by identifying all those whose birthday fell on three randomly selected dates in the month. Selected respondents were sent a questionnaire in the post to complete. It is those who returned questionnaires in 1997 that formed the population of interest for this survey. As was the case with the other 1999 surveys, students identified as having Special Educational Needs (SENs) were not included in the sample. Sweep Three In spring 2004, Cohort Two members were surveyed for the third and final time, via self-completion postal questionnaire, when they were aged 23-24. Questionnaires were only mailed to the 2,491 sample members who had returned their questionnaire at Sweep Two in 1999; those who had not responded were removed from the sample list for Sweep Three. For the second edition of the UK Data Archive study, data and documentation from Sweep Three were added.

This study aims to examine implementation of the Inclusive program in schools, specifically SDN 1 Sangkawana. The study was conducted with a descriptive qualitative approach with Observation techniques, interviews, documentation. The key informants in this study were the principal, the coordinator of the inclusive school and teachers of grades 1, 2 and 3. The data validity technique used triangulation of sources. The results showed that the application of the inclusive education program at SDN 1 Sangkawana was divided into 2 stages, namely the preparatory stage and the implementation stage. During the preparatory phase at the beginning of the new school year, the work program for SDN 1 Sangkawana refers to the program of the Minister of National Education Republic of Indonesia Number 70 of 2009 concerning inclusive education. At the application stage, SDN 1 Sangkawana touched on several aspects, namely curriculum, teaching staff, infrastructure. Teaching and learning processes that are integrated between students with special needs and regular students force schools to adjust the curriculum to facilitate students with special needs without leaving aside regular students. Therefore some changes were made in the syllabus and lesson plans, especially in the indicators of competency achievement, learning objectives, learning materials and learning evaluation. For educators, the school is facilitated by the Ministry of Education and Culture formed by cooperating with the Australian government with the INNOVATION program so that teachers and schools get guidance, direction and training to handle students with special needs integrated in the regular classrooms. For inclusive education facilities and infrastructure, SDN 1 Sangkawana is still lacking, so it still needs to be developed and organized to support the successful implementation of an inclusive education program.

Place funding is allocated to: all types of special schools, apart from independent special schools all types of mainstream school with an SEN unit or RP, and/or a sixth form that has pupils with high needs all types of college that educate students who have high needs Place funding is allocated as an annual amount of core high needs funding. Once place funding is allocated, it is not associated with or reserved for a specific local authority or individual pupil or student. It is for the school or college to decide how best to apportion their total allocated place funding across the actual number of places commissioned by local authorities, considering the provision and support that may be specified in the individual pupils' or students' EHC plan.

Further information about the BCS70 and may be found on the Centre for Longitudinal Studies website. As well as BCS70, the CLS now also conducts the NCDS series.

1970 British Cohort Study: Age 10, Sweep 3 Special Needs Survey, 1980

One particular concern on the educational side of the BCS70 Sweep 3 (see SN 3723), when respondents were aged 10 years, was to gather information on educational attainment on children who were unlikely to be able to complete the educational attainment tests administered at ten years. Teachers were given the option of electing to ask for a Special Educational Pack with easier tests for any child for whom they considered the standard testing too hard. The other criteria for selecting children for the receipt of Special Educational Packs included children who had completed the ordinary pack but had scored in the bottom 5 per cent on the Edinburgh Reading Test and/or the Friendly Maths Test. All children receiving Special Educational Treatment (SET) were also sent a Special Educational Pack. Each Special Educational Pack contained the standard educational test material which teachers were asked to try with the child in order to know where the child fitted within the lower end of the distributions of the standard pack test scores.

Survey instrumentation for Sweep 3 was distributed through education and health authorities. The Special Needs Tests were included in the materials distributed through Local Education Authorities and, where parental consent was obtained, administered to cohort members in school with the assistance of teachers.

For the second edition (June 2016) a small number of primary identifiers (BCSID) have been changed to realign them to previous sweeps of data. See the documentation for full details of the work done.