Seòmar agus comataidhean

Scottish Autism submission of 19 October 2021

PE1870/F - Ensure teachers of autistic pupils are appropriately qualified

As an organisation that supports autistic people, Scottish Autism recognises and understands the concerns outlined in the petition. We believe it is important, firstly, to highlight the significant and enduring issues that lead to petitions of this type being submitted.

As partners in the production of the “Not Included, Not Engaged, Not Involved” report published in 2018, we have consistently highlighted the issue of unlawful exclusion and other discriminatory practices that result in the significant loss of education for far too many autistic learners.

We have welcomed the work by GTCS to enhance the Initial Teacher Education (ITE) Curriculum and the proposed changes to accreditation requirements of ITE programmes.

The Morgan review also addresses enduring concerns. However, progress on implementation is slow. We were disappointed that the review was conducted with presumption of mainstreaming remaining a “given”. Our evidence gathering through the “Not Included” report and the data from our advice line shows that in its present form, this policy is not delivering an adequate level of education for many autistic learners. We do not yet have a satisfactory system where specialist provision for autistic learners sits comfortably alongside, or within mainstream provision.

Like many others, Scottish Autism is frustrated by the seemingly perpetual cycle of reviews, evaluations and working groups. We are calling instead for increased accountability from providers and local authorities for implementing change and improving outcomes. Moreover, meaningful, systemic change requires sustainable and appropriate funding.

Teacher training, including ongoing professional development is an important factor. Whilst we broadly welcome any initiative that will improve the situation, there are a number of related issues that would need to be simultaneously addressed for the proposed legislation to have a meaningful impact on the educational experiences of autistic learners, and several routes to change available.

In the context of Scotland’s presumption of mainstream policy, the proposed legislation would, potentially, require all teachers to be autism qualified. However, experience of reforming ITE thus far suggests that implementation could be challenging and slow. For teachers of children and young people with a visual or hearing impairment or both, the Scottish Government has defined a range of competencies that teachers must meet. This could, in our view, be a viable approach to improving teaching and learning for autistic pupils. This would require systemic change in terms of professional registration and changes to regulation, inspection, and the performance management of teachers.

A second route to change would be the provision of specialist autism practitioners to support school staff with comprehensive profiling and support strategies to meet autistic learners’ needs. Our recent work with pupils at risk of exclusion in one local authority found autism profiling in several mainstream schools to be inadequate. However, the support and engagement of an autism specialist to both train teachers and provide a holistic profiling process was greatly appreciated by education practitioners. This supports identification of individual needs and adds greater value than simply providing generic training.

A third route to change would be a requirement for whole school approaches to supporting autistic learners. The rationale for this being that what are essential components to good teaching practice for an autistic person would be beneficial for the rest of the school population. Autistic learners can be challenged by the sensory stressors of a school’s physical environment, as well as by the demands of inflexible or standardised teaching practice. Adaptations to environment and culture can make schools more welcoming and accessible learning environments for everybody.

The social and environmental demands of mainstream school can become a significant barrier to autistic learners’ education and impact significantly on young people’s mental health and wellbeing. There is currently a lack of alternatives for young people who cannot thrive in mainstream school. Acknowledgement of this, and greater provision of high quality alternatives would greatly improve the educational experiences and outcomes of autistic learners.

The best education provision combines a strong value-base with specialist knowledge of the specific needs of autistic learners. GIRFEC provides a laudable statement of values, but inclusivity can only be achieved with a sound understanding of autism, comprehensive individual profiling, flexible teaching practice and low-stress environments. The nature of practitioner training is therefore critical. Deficit-based understandings of autism that site an individual’s difficulties entirely within their own cognition should give way to practical training that includes an understanding of social and environmental stressors and places the onus on practitioners and service providers to develop their own mind-sets and change practice. Many of the components of this good practice have been highlighted by the work of NAIT (National Autism Implementation Team) in Scotland. The Synergy programme delivered by AT- Autism, and the LASER programme deliver by Studio III are a further examples of this approach.