News

MetaSENse database identifies targeted interventions for SEN students

SEND research SENCOs Inclusion Interventions
Researchers have launched a database to help teachers find evidence-backed targeted interventions to raise outcomes for students with SEN.
Image: Adobe Stock

A study from the UCL Centre for Educational Neuroscience (Van Herwegen et al, 2024), has found that targeted interventions can lead to an additional five months’ progress for SEN students when compared to “teaching as usual” or standard interventions.

The researchers have now used their findings to build a “first-of its-kind” database – entitled MetaSENse – to help teachers find appropriate targeted interventions for their SEN students.

In England, the number of students with SEN has increased in recent years to around 1.7 million. The study reminds us that, on average, students with SEN are at least two years behind their peers by the end of secondary school.

The systematic review focused on 467 global studies, half of which involved students with dyslexia/reading difficulties and/or dyscalculia/mathematical difficulties.

Most interventions studied were short – less than 12 weeks – with just under half being for 19 hours or less.

The review found that interventions targeting specific types of SEN delivered an average of five months’ additional progress, with reading interventions for dyslexic students and mathematics interventions for those with dyscalculia being particularly effective.

Indeed, the findings suggest that targeted SEN interventions have a larger positive effect on mathematics (six months of progress) than on reading (five months). The team also analysed outcomes for science and general attainment finding an overall average of five months’ additional progress.

There were positive effects for interventions also targeting students with ADHD, speech, language and commnunication needs (SCLN), mixed SEN, and social, emotional and mental health needs (SEMH).

The researchers defined a targeted intervention as one that focuses on specific difficulties for students who fail to make academic progress despite having received high-quality teaching.

These interventions provide additional instruction using targeted support and often include a specific approach or named programme. Staff often need additional training or CPD to deliver targeted interventions.

The research study finds that interventions at primary level have a bigger impact than those at secondary when it comes to mathematical outcomes (eight months), whereas interventions for students with writing difficulties saw bigger impact in the secondary phase (12 months).

Drawing on their findings, the researchers recommend that teachers planning interventions consider three key points:

  • How we explore and evaluate research evidence related to specific targeted interventions.
  • How we balance fidelity to the intervention instructions and adaptation when implementing the targeted interventions.
  • How we monitor the effectiveness of the interventions, in terms of the assessment strategies we use but also when and how we review which targeted approaches should be replaced.

The report recommends: “It is essential that teachers receive training on understanding evidence related to interventions and how to evaluate its credibility. This will enable them to effectively apply robust research findings in classroom settings … as well as helping them evaluate their own practices effectively.”

The researchers have used their findings to build a “first-of its-kind” database to support teachers of students with SEN. Called MetaSENse, it is aimed at helping teachers to find evidence-backed targeted interventions.

Lead author of the research review, Professor Jo Van Herwegen, from the Institute of Education UCL’s Faculty of Education amd Society, said: “As teachers often have multiple students with different SEND in their classrooms, it is important to know whether certain targeted interventions can support students with different SEND and across different academic outcomes.

“Through interviews, we also found that education professionals have difficulty accessing research evidence or evaluating what works in their classroom, and that there is a gap between the targeted interventions that are used in classrooms and those evaluated by researchers. Our systematic review examined which targeted interventions have been evaluated and are effective to create a toolkit for teachers so they can implement research-informed practices in their classrooms.”

Prof Van Herwegen added: “We found that there is more good-quality evidence available than we anticipated. However, there is a lack of research on what works for students with intellectual and physical disabilities, as well as sensory disabilities such as vision and hearing impairments.

“This means that while we have some evidence on what works for dyslexic and dyscalculic students, for students with other needs it is unclear how they can be supported in the classroom.”

Alice Reeves, research grants and programmes manager at the Nuffield Foundation, which funded the research programme and the creation of the MetaSENse database, said: “Children and young people with SEND are often considered to be a single group but in truth their needs are hugely diverse. We hope the MetaSENse database will help teachers find the most suitable and effective interventions to use with their pupils who have different kinds of SEND.”