Ofsted inspecting inclusion in mainstream schools in England

Executive Summary

The introduction of a standalone inclusion judgement in Ofsted’s Education Inspection Framework (EIF) in November 2025 represents an important policy development in England. It recognises that schools have responsibilities beyond academic attainment and must respond to the diverse needs of pupils, including those with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND), disadvantaged learners and children experiencing barriers to learning and wellbeing. However, the effectiveness of this reform depends on whether inspection can evaluate the lived experience of inclusion, rather than primarily assess schools’ policies, documentation and compliance.

This policy brief recommends that Ofsted adopt a more transparent, participatory and context-sensitive approach to inspecting inclusion. Inspection should evaluate not only whether schools have appropriate policies, but also whether pupils experience equitable access, meaningful participation, safety and belonging. It should recognise the respective responsibilities of schools, local authorities and national government, ensuring that accountability drives sustainable improvement rather than defensive compliance. Inspection should present evidence that leads to multi-agent collaboration for school improvement.

Policy Recommendations

1. Establish a clear, rights-based definition of inclusion. Ofsted should explicitly connect inclusion to equitable access, participation, reasonable adjustments, wellbeing and belonging. Inspection criteria should reflect schools’ anticipatory duties under the Equality Act 2010 and recognise that inclusive practice requires sustained cultural change and a needs-based approach, rather than simply the existence of policies and procedures.
2. Strengthen pupil and family participation in inspection. Ofsted should provide practical guidance for inspectors on gathering evidence from pupils with diverse communication needs, including those who use augmentative and alternative communication or experience anxiety. Inspectors should triangulate pupils’ accounts with parental views, observations of daily practice and other relevant evidence. Participation methods should be accessible, age-appropriate and sensitive to individual needs. Schools should not be judged on pupil and parent voice alone, but on how school-family-learner-specialist-community interaction informs decisions and improvements.
3. Improve transparency and consistency in inspection judgements. Ofsted should clarify the evidence sources, triangulation methods and decision-making principles used to evaluate inclusion. Toolkits should specify how inspectors assess participation, accessibility, attendance, exclusions and access to enrichment. Published feedback should identify concrete strengths, weaknesses and actionable next steps, enabling schools to understand judgements, obtain resources, and improve practice.
4. Evaluate inclusive leadership and whole-school culture. Inspection should assess how leaders embed inclusion in teaching, curriculum design, staff development, resource allocation and relationships with pupils and families. Inspectors should consider whether reasonable adjustments are anticipated, whether staff are supported to respond to diverse needs, and whether pupils experience genuine belonging. Leadership commitment should be evidenced through practice and pupil experience, rather than policy documentation and data alone.
5. Align accountability with system capacity and shared responsibility. Ofsted should distinguish between factors within schools’ control and constraints arising from local and national systems, including specialist workforce shortages, delayed assessments and insufficient provision. Inspection should examine how effectively schools collaborate with health, social care, local authorities and specialist services, while identifying unmet system needs for action by responsible agencies. DfE should ensure that inspection expectations are matched by sustained investment, specialist expertise and professional development.
6. Build inspector expertise and evaluate the impact of reform. Ofsted should strengthen inspector training in SEND legislation, neurodiversity, inclusive pedagogy and reasonable adjustments. It should also commission independent longitudinal research examining whether inspection improves pupils’ experiences and participation, reduces exclusionary practices and supports sustainable school improvement, while monitoring unintended consequences such as inspection-induced workload, stress and compliance-driven behaviour.
7. Strengthen scrutiny of exclusionary practices and off-rolling. Ofsted should proactively investigate potential off-rolling and other exclusionary practices, including the inappropriate use or misinterpretation of school behaviour policies that may result in the disproportionate exclusion, informal removal, or marginalisation of particular groups of pupils.

About the research

This brief draws on research by Meng Tian and Karen Guldberg. Tian’s research examines inspection frameworks and practices in England, Scotland and Wales between 2015 and 2026. Guldberg chaired the DfE’s Neurodivergence Task and Finish Group for mainstream education. Guldberg is a member of the DfE Expert Panel developing the National Inclusions Standards and Specialist Provision Packages.

Contact

Dr Meng Tian, Associate Professor in Educational Leadership, University of Birmingham m.tian@bham.ac.uk

Professor Karen Guldberg, Professor of Autism Studies, University of Birmingham k.k.guldberg@bham.ac.uk