In the latest survey of National Education Union members, conducted ahead of Annual Conference in Brighton, 10,311 teacher members and 2,996 support staff members in English state schools gave us their assessment of existing provision for pupils with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) in their settings, and how vital funding is for the future.
We found that:
- 89 per cent of teachers told us that class sizes are too big and hamper the ability of their setting to be properly inclusive.
- Just 22 per cent of teacher respondents have confidence that referral will result in the help needed for an individual student. Primary teachers are more likely to lack confidence (68 per cent).
- Teachers believe the most ‘significant’ barriers preventing successful inclusion are an insufficient number of support staff (83 per cent), high workload (74 per cent) and a lack of access to specialist services (69 per cent).
- Support staff themselves confirm that insufficient staffing levels are a crucial factor, with 96 per cent of those who responded to our survey agreeing it is a barrier.
- More than half of teachers (51 per cent) point to an inappropriate curriculum as a ‘significant barrier’, with this being most acute in primary schools (61 per cent).
- 85 per cent of teachers told us that being able to afford physical resources for their school would have a positive impact on SEND provision, with 54 per cent believing this would have a ‘major’ impact.
Barriers to inclusion
We asked teachers and support staff about the barriers in their settings that prevent it being fully inclusive/accessible for SEND students.
The overwhelming issues for schools are starkly evident in these results, with teachers taking the view that a lack of support staff, high workload and a shortage of support services are the most ‘significant’ barriers to inclusion (83, 74 and 69 per cent respectively).
There is concern in almost every area, with very few teachers holding the opinion that their school has no issues with sufficient support staff (2 per cent), workload (3 per cent) or a lack of resources (4 per cent).
One told us about the need for “Having an extra adult to support the learning. When there is an extra adult available the SEND children are more involved and lessons are more inclusive.”
More pupils are in classes of over 30 than at any time since 2002. The number of teacher respondents who believe this is a ‘significant barrier’ to SEND inclusion has risen from 51 per cent to 62 per cent in the space of just twelve months. Overall, 89 per cent view it as a barrier.
Overall, 88 per cent of teacher respondents took the view that an inappropriate curriculum was to some degree a barrier. The curriculum can hold little relevance to student’s own lives, and the amount of content allows insufficient time for checking understanding and falls hardest on those with SEND. A slim majority (51 per cent) described the curriculum as a ‘significant’ barrier for SEND students, up from 43 per cent last year. The sentiment is highest among primary teachers, with 61 per cent calling the curriculum a significant barrier compared to 50 per cent last year. Secondary saw a rise from 36 per cent to 43 per cent in the same period.
The number of teachers identifying a lack of SEND training as a significant barrier rose according to the level of deprivation in their geographical location. A quarter of teachers (26 per cent) in the areas least affected expressed this sentiment, rising to a third (33 per cent) in areas with the highest deprivation.
The majority of listed barriers to inclusion are more ‘significant’ among primary teachers, with the exceptions of class size (57 per cent compared to 71 per cent in secondaries) and assessment/high-stakes exams (45 per cent compared to 51 per cent). Figures on workload as a ‘significant barrier’ are equal for secondary and primary (75 per cent).
Turning to support staff, a vital part of a school and who engage closely with SEND pupils, we found similar sentiment.
An overwhelming 96 per cent confirmed that a shortage of support staff was a barrier to fully inclusive and accessible learning, with 78 per cent of respondents saying it was a significant issue.
Support staff are more likely than teachers to point to a lack of training as a significant barrier. A lack of resources to meet specific needs was more likely to be a barrier for support staff working in primary schools (68 per cent) than secondary schools (60 per cent). Conversely, secondary school staff were more likely to point to assessment and high-stakes exams as barriers overall (42 per cent) than in primary schools (34 per cent).
Confidence in referrals
There remains widespread concern that the system for obtaining specialist support, including EHCP referrals, is failing young people. It has for a long time been characterised by long waiting lists and students going for months or even years without much needed support. Local authority services have collapsed under recent governments. In this latest survey, we asked teachers for their current view.
Across the board there is a pessimism about the likelihood of support materialising. Just 22 per cent of teachers have any confidence in help coming through. Primary teachers are much more likely to lack confidence (68 per cent) than secondary teachers (43 per cent).
These responses are very similar to 2024, when we last asked this question. There is only a small increase in the percentage of neutral responses.
One teacher told us, “I have a suicidal boy in my class who is on a six-month waitlist just to be ‘seen’ by a specialist. How can this be?”
Special Educational Needs and Disabilities Coordinators (SENDCO), who work as teachers and are well versed in the system, have even less faith in the system than other teachers. Two thirds (66 per cent) are unconfident that students will receive the assessment, diagnosis and specialist support they need.
Impact of funding
The government’s recent White Paper on SEND promises new money for inclusion (£1.6bn), for training (£200m), and investment to rebuild local authority SEND teams (£1.8bn). However, the NEU is concerned that these commitments do not go far enough. The SEND White Paper pledges an Inclusion Grant that equates only to a part-time teaching assessment for the average primary school and two teaching assistants for the average secondary school.
It is doubtful that the proposals will result in significant positive impacts at school level. Teachers responding to our survey point out the ways in which government – and new funding - could make a difference.
The most keenly felt area of provision for teachers was the need for additional support staff, with 83 per cent saying it would have a major impact. The figure rose to 89 per cent in primary schools. This gives the lie to the government’s notion that school leaders should look to ‘efficiency’ savings to meet staffing costs.
For teachers, access to specialists is another crucial factor with an overwhelming 94 per cent believing that extra funding in that area would have an impact. Just 1.4 per cent of respondents disagreed. These findings echo the first question where 91 per cent believed that a lack of access to specialists was a barrier to inclusion.
Pastoral provision is a type of support that helps inclusion through behaviour support and parental liaison. It would make a difference for 99 per cent of teacher respondents, with two thirds (67 per cent) believing that funding in this area would have a ‘major impact’.
Affordability also applies to physical resources. Facilities such as sensory rooms, learning hubs, IT packages and specialist classrooms are desirable for schools if they are to deliver for young people with SEND. 85 per cent of teachers believe funding for these resources would have an impact, with more than half (54 per cent) believing it would be a ‘major impact’. This was highest in special schools and pupil referral units (69 per cent), followed by primary schools (59 per cent) and then secondary (47 per cent).
One respondent told us how “We have set up, and funded from our own budget, a SEND provision space for the pupils who should be in a special school but can’t get a space. It is working well but this is due to the commitment and efforts of the staff despite a lack of funding…”
A teacher responding to the survey said: “I have children who have EHCPs who have been waiting for funding for four years – it still hasn’t come through.”
One observed that “We have an incredible SENDCo and pastoral support team who are completely overworked. There is so much need in the school we need more of them to support.”
Another: “Our SEND provision is exemplary. We simply do not have the support of external agencies and the local authority. We do not have sufficient funding and support staff. We do the best with what we have.”
Commenting on the findings of the survey, Daniel Kebede, general secretary of the National Education Union, said:
“While the National Education Union supports many of the principles in the White Paper, this survey of teachers demonstrates that mainstream schools are simply not resourced or staffed to cope with the current level of pupil need.
“All children must have ready access to special needs support from their school without a long bureaucratic process. The planned Inclusion Grant must be increased. The average primary school will receive around £13,000, while the Department for Education itself admits that schools will have to make cuts to afford any pay rise for staff next year. Even a modest 2 per cent increase would leave the average primary needing to find savings of £20,000. So, the Inclusion Grant will not fund inclusion - it will merely soften the blow of underfunding from the Treasury.
“Schools need significantly more resources to allow the government’s ambitions, as set out in the White Paper, to be achievable.”
Editor’s Note
The online survey of National Education Union members was conducted between 5-16 February 2026.
We received responses from teachers, support staff and other members in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. This release focuses on the responses from 10,311 teachers and 2,996 support staff in English state schools, reweighted by personal and professional characteristics in line with data from the most recent School Workforce Census.
Deprivation is calculated using IDACI bands, band 1 corresponds to the least deprived schools and band 5 to the most.
For reweighting purposes, teachers in state-funded primary and state-funded nursery schools are counted together, as this is how they are recorded in the School Workforce Census. However, state nursery teachers represent only 0.3% of the primary and nursery sample, and so although the group name is used in full in the charts, we mostly refer to this group as “primary” in the text.