General background/scene-setting

The first table presented (Table 1) looks at whether the child enjoys school. This question was considered important to include because a child’s emotional health is just as important as their physical health (Greenberg, et al. 2001). Children also spend a lot of time in educational settings so whether they enjoy the

94

experience or not is worthy of inclusion. This section takes a broad approach to education, focusing less on academic achievement and more on the child and their interactions in education settings with a number of players – be they family or professionals.

Table 1 (below) gauges the level of enjoyment a child experiences at school. It would appear that a higher proportion of BME children with LSIs (‘always’) enjoy school compared to white children with LSIs (57% and 40%, respectively). In terms of the results, the difference between BME and white children with LSIs is statistically significant (P<0.05).

Table 1*All the chi-square results, throughout this chapter, refer to the differences between BME children with LSIs and white children with LSIs, unless otherwise stated.

Table 1 - Whether Child enjoys school (P<0.001)*

White BME

With LSIs Without LSIs With LSIs Without LSIs

N % N % N % N % Always 605 40.0 4627 51.0 117 56.5 1401 74.0 Usually 674 44.5 3772 41.5 57 27.5 401 21.2 Sometimes 194 12.8 618 6.8 30 14.5 83 4.4 Never 40 2.6 62 0.7 3 1.4 8 0.4 Total 1513 99.9 9079 100 207 99.9 1893 100

95

Whether a child is absent from school or not can have a considerable impact on parent carers of disabled children or those with LSIs. Connections are made between academic success and school attendance (Gottfried, 2010). Frequent absenteeism can affect parents in several ways including having a negative impact on their ability to work, thus potentially placing an extra onus on parent carers. This could result in loss of earnings; it is difficult to arrange childcare if a child has complex support needs. This could add extra mental stress and worry for parents, in addition to the challenge to their finances. Asked if the child had been off school this year (Table 2), 8% of white children with LSIs answered yes, compared to 11% of the BME group with LSIs, indicating that there is a higher incidence of absenteeism amongst the BME category. Here there is no statistical significance (P>0.05). However, this absence from school could negatively impact on the educational attainment of BME children, as well as having adverse effects on the child’s emotional health and well-being; those who attend special schools can receive a number of health checks and other related services in school (such as access to a paediatrician, physiotherapy, occupational therapy, speech therapy).

Table 2 - During this school year, has Child ever been off school? (P=0.068)

White BME

With LSIs Without LSIs With LSIs Without LSIs

N % N % N % N %

Yes 113 7.5 257 2.8 23 11.1 73 3.9

No 1402 92.5 8824 97.2 184 88.9 1821 96.2

96

The question relating to suspension from school (Table 3 below) was considered relevant for inclusion because certain BME groups of children have been shown to have higher rates of suspension from schools. Research conducted by Bhattacharyya, et al (2003, p. 3) found that, “Black Caribbean pupils are around three times more likely than white pupils to be permanently excluded from school”. Disproportionate discipline, such as suspension from school, has also been linked to the underachievement of BME students (Gregory, et al., 2010). When asked if the child has been suspended from school for at least one day, 3% of the white group with LSIs said yes, compared to 2% of the BME group with LSIs. The results in Table 3, for children with LSIs are not statistically significant (P>0.05).

Table 3 -Has Child been (temporarily) suspended from school for at least a day? (P=0.271)

White BME

With LSIs Without LSIs With LSIs Without LSIs

N % N % N % N %

Yes 51 3.4 127 1.4 4 1.9 27 1.4

No 1464 96.6 8954 98.6 203 98.1 1867 98.6

Total 1515 100 9081 100 207 100 1894 100

The next two tables (Table 4 and 5, below) provide data relating to whether or not the parent carers have been informed that their child has special needs, and whether the child has a statement of special educational needs. Having a statement of special needs can be helpful to families for accessing further formal support services. It can also be an indication of the severity of a child’s condition, as the greater the special needs the more likely the child will be to have a

97

statement. Research undertaken by Marchant, et al., (2006) found that when comparing numbers of statements issued to white children with those for Asian children, a lower proportion of Asian children had a statement. This could negatively affect their ability to access formal support from a range of statutory and voluntary organisations, disadvantaging BME families.

The results in Table 4 yield similar results for children with LSIs, irrespective of ethnicity: 32% BME vs. 31% white. Table 5 reveals that a greater proportion of BME children with LSIs have a statement of educational need, compared to white children with LSIs: 75% BME vs 56% white. Table 4 is not statistically significant (P>0.05), but the results for Table 5 are statistically significant (P<0.05). This is a noteworthy difference, and important because having a statement can be an advantage to the child and their family. This challenges the findings of research undertaken by Marchant et al (2006), although that research focused only on one ethnic category (Asian). According to Bhattacharyya, et al (2003, p. 3), referring to a broader range of ethnic groups, “Proportionately more Black, Pakistani and Bangladeshi pupils are recorded as having special educational needs compared to White, Chinese and Indian pupils”, indicating that ‘race’ and ethnicity may be a factor impacting on the statementing process. A higher proportion of BME students being statemented could be an indication of BME children having disabilities that are more serious. However, concerns have also been expressed by some about the over-representation and labelling of a greater proportion of BME children and whether it is justified or a case of ‘conveniently’ labelling, when faced with a child whose first language is not English (Ali, et al., 2010).

98

Table 4 - Has Child’s school told you Child has special needs? (P=0.802)

White BME

With LSIs Without LSIs With LSIs Without LSIs

N % N % N % N %

Yes 470 31.0 743 8.2 66 31.9 97 5.1

No 1045 69.0 8336 91.8 141 68.1 1797 94.9

Total 1515 100 9081 100 207 100 1894 100

Table 5 – Does Child have a statement of Special Needs (P=0.013)

White BME

With LSIs Without LSIs With LSIs Without LSIs

N % N % N % N % Yes 265 56.4 253 34.3 49 75.4 34 35.4 No 185 39.4 461 62.5 15 23.1 57 59.4 Child currently being assessed 20 4.4 24 3.3 1 1.5 5 5.2 Total 470 100.2 738 100.1 65 100 96 100

Table 6 looks at whether the child has a bedroom of their own, and if there is ethnic variance. A larger proportion of white children have a bedroom of their own, compared to BME children. Of those children with LSIs, 75% of white children have their own bedroom, compared to 50% of BME children. To speculate, the larger proportion of BME children sharing a bedroom could be for a range of reasons, including cultural norms and traditions, an indication of inadequate housing, or possibly larger family sizes. The negative impact of not having your own bedroom is that there is less privacy for a child, or somewhere to study without interruptions.

99

Table 6- Does CM have a Bedroom of their own? (P<0.001)

White BME

With LSIs Without LSIs With LSIs Without LSIs

N % N % N % N % Own bedroom 1132 74.7 6944 77.3 103 50.2 905 48.4 Shared bedroom 383 25.3 2040 22.7 102 49.8 966 51.6 Total 1515 100 8984 100 205 100 1871 100

100

Grandparents can play an important role in supporting families, especially in relation to providing childcare for working parents (Mitchell, 2008). They can also be a source of informal and social support for families. When asked how often the child sees their grandparents (See Table 7), the data reveal that there is very little difference, across all categories, in the proportions of children seeing their grandparents every day. There is no difference between children with LSIs, irrespective of ethnicity. A statistic worth drawing attention to is that a higher proportion of BME children, compared with their white counterparts, stated that they did not see their grandparents at all or less than once a week. It would appear that 8% of BME children with LSIs (compared to 3% of white children with LSIs) do not see their grandparents at all. This challenges some of the assumptions made in academic and practitioner discourse regarding BME families, multi-generational households, and the greater availability of intergenerational support and intergenerational households and support systems (Katbamna, et al. 2004). This discrepancy could be explained by things like the parents being first generation immigrants, stringent immigration laws, or could just be a result of the changing demographics in society. Another explanation could be minority ethnic groups assimilating with the majority culture and adopting values where there is less contact with family members outside the immediate family. Alternatively, only one parent may have family in the UK and the other may have come over for marriage, and have no family in this country, thus immediately reducing this source by half. However, not every family will have close bonds between parents and grandparents and other dynamics within a family can affect the relationship (Mirfin, Veitch and Bray, 1997).

101

Table 7 - How often CM sees Grandparents (P<0.001)

White BME

With LSIs Without LSIs With LSIs Without LSIs

N % N % N % N % Every day or almost every day 309 20.3 1683 18.5 42 20.3 317 16.7 Several times a week 249 16.4 1656 18.2 24 11.6 169 8.9 Once or twice a week 429 28.2 2724 30.0 51 24.6 459 24.2 Once or twice a month 246 16.2 1464 16.1 20 9.7 204 10.7 Less often than once a month 210 13.8 1212 13.3 38 18.4 350 18.4 Not at all 39 2.6 191 2.1 16 7.7 228 12.0 Total 1482 97.5 8930 98.2 191 92.3 1727 90.2

Tables 1 -7 (above) provide some general information and help explore whether ethnicity impacts on different groups of children, and it would appear that sometimes it does and other times it does not.