 |  |
| |
Warnock (1978) (page numbers in brackets) Preliminary pages (i-xiii)
Introduction (1-3)
Appendices Appendix 1 (367-379)
Index (395-416) |
The Warnock Report (1978) Special Educational Needs Report of the Committee of Enquiry into the Education of Handicapped Children and Young People London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office 1978
[page 1] 1. In November 1973 the Rt Hon Margaret Thatcher MP, then Secretary of State for Education and Science, announced that she proposed, in conjunction with the then Secretaries of State for Scotland and Wales and after consultation with the then Secretaries of State for Social Services and Employment, to appoint a Committee with the following terms of reference: 'To review educational provision in England, Scotland and Wales for children and young people handicapped by disabilities of body or mind, taking account of the medical aspects of their needs, together with arrangements to prepare them for entry into employment; to consider the most effective use of resources for these purposes; and to make recommendations'.The Committee was established the following year and we held our first meeting in September 1974. 2. In view of both our size and the breadth of our terms of reference we decided early in 1975 to divide our work among four sub-committees. The division was as follows: the needs of handicapped children under five; the education of handicapped children in ordinary schools; day special schools and boarding provision; and the educational and other needs of handicapped school leavers. The sub-committees on special educational provision in ordinary and special schools were subsequently amalgamated and a further sub-committee was established in 1976 to consider arrangements for the training of teachers. In addition, small sub-groups met for varying lengths of time to discuss particular topics. These included the curriculum in special education; confidentiality and the flow of information; advice and support in special education; co-ordination of services; the SE Forms procedure; and research and development. 3. Although our membership covered a wide range of interest and expertise, we felt that we would benefit from the presence on our sub-committees of additional members with relevant knowledge and experience. We therefore co-opted a number of members, to whom we are indebted for their help. We list them below. Mrs M Blythman - Head of the Special Education Department, Moray House College of Education, Edinburgh
[page 2] Mr P J Lowman - Production Director, Rosalind Foods Ltd, Great Yarmouth, until 1976
4. The sub-comrnittees completed their work by May 1977 and their findings formed the basis of our report. We also took into account the many submissions of written evidence - nearly 400 - which we received from a variety of organisations and from individuals with a personal or professional interest in special education. We invited representatives of some of these organisations as well as a number of the individuals to discuss with us points of special interest in their submissions and we also asked other people with expertise in particular fields to meet us for discussion of specific topics. Those organisations and individuals who submitted written evidence or gave oral evidence to us in full Committee, in sub- committees or in sub-groups are listed in Appendix 1. 5. Our report also draws on the findings of a number of research projects undertaken on our behalf. A review of recent research in special education was produced for us by Mr C Cave and Mrs P Maddison. Two projects were concerned with provision for children under five and their parents: a survey of services for parents of handicapped children under five carried out under the co-direction of Professor M Chazan and Dr AF Laing of the University College of Swansea; and a study of pre-school education and handicapped and exceptional children in the Grampian Region of Scotland directed by Dr MM Clark of the University of Strathclyde. A project on the employment experiences of handicapped school leavers was commissioned from the National Children's Bureau and carried out by Mr A Walker. Two surveys were undertaken for us by the Department of Education and Science: one of the views of teachers in special and ordinary schools on various aspects of provision for children with special educational needs; and the other of the cost per place in special schools and special classes and units in nine local education authorities. Details of some of these projects are given in Appendices 5-8. We should like to express our thanks to those who undertook research projects for us, as well as to those parents, young people, professionals in different services and others who were the source of their information. 6. In the course of our work we made many visits, individually or in groups, to a wide range of institutions in England, Scotland and Wales. The places visited are too numerous to list but they included nursery schools and special nursery units, ordinary schools, maintained and non-maintained special schools, independent schools catering wholly or mainly for handicapped pupils, hospitals, assessment centres, colleges of further education, colleges of education and departments of education in polytechnics. We are extremely grateful to all those who received us in the course of our visits and, by answering our questions, helped us to formulate our views on the future development of special education. [page 3] 7. Small parties of our members also visited a number of other countries. One party visited the United States of America and our Vice-Chairman visited Canada to study arrangements for special educational provision. Another group went to Denmark and Sweden to study the implementation of the policy of educating severely handicapped children in ordinary schools and the provision made for handicapped young people over 16. A third party visited Holland and West Germany to see a range of special schools in those countries. Although short, these visits were very valuable in enabling those who took part to re-examine particular issues from a different perspective. 8. One difficulty which confronted us in preparing this report was the existence of certain differences in terminology between England, Wales and Scotland. For example, the terms local education authority and social services department, which occur frequently throughout our report, are peculiar to England and Wales; their Scottish counterparts are education authority and social work department. The term 'region' has a variety of meanings in England, depending on the context in which it is used: in the context of the education service it means a group of local education authorities. The term has no meaning in Wales, while in Scotland the region is the local authority. References to regional planning and co-ordination in Wales and Scotland, therefore, are meaningful only if 'inter-authority' is substituted for 'regional'. Our report would, however, have been very cumbersome had we given both English and Scottish terms wherever necessary. For the sake of convenience, therefore, we decided to use the terminology current in England except when making proposals or recommendations specific to Scotland or Wales. 
|
