Dr Susana Castro-Kemp, Director of the UCL Centre for Inclusive Education, spoke to the House of Commons Education Select Committee in June, giving evidence on the inclusivity of England’s education system to inform policy reforms.
She drew from the findings of Scope SEND, a two-year project she leads that compares SEND provision in the UK and other jurisdictions, funded by the Nuffield Foundation.
During the committee, Dr Castro-Kemp highlighted some key challenges to high-quality SEND provision across England:
Eligibility thresholds often overlook children’s everyday participation needs and strengths
A lack of comprehensive early childhood intervention systems, which are crucial to identify and address needs early
A need for training that is embedded in inclusive, needs-based practice to better prepare the workforce.
Dr Castro-Kemp emphasised the importance of a common understanding of what is meant by high-quality provision for all. This should involve written standards of practice implemented at a national level, though care must be taken to remain attuned to specific local needs.
Findings from the Scope SEND project show that there are lessons to learn from other international models.
The definition of SEND is still relatively narrow in England, in comparison to other analysed jurisdictions like Wales, Scotland and Finland, where policy acknowledges that needs can arise from conditions beyond the medical, like bereavement or learning disabilities.
The English system has long relied on diagnostic labels, but Dr Castro-Kemp emphasises how much language matters in policy. More inclusive language can lead to more public engagement and can better reflect the lived experiences of those with SEND.
Though diagnosis is not required for a child to receive support in the English system, evidence shows that diagnosis often “acts as a passport to access services” – partly due to a lack of guidance, effective training and processes to address needs.
Needs-based assessments are often in place in jurisdictions with a comprehensive early childhood system. If England were to move towards a needs-based identification system, this should be based on identifying strengths as well as needs, says Dr Castro-Kemp.
She also notes the risks of turning SEND support statutory, in that it could be seen as a bureaucratic “tick-box” exercise and enhance pressure on the service.
Evidence from Scotland shows the effectiveness of a tiered support system, where not all tiers are statutory. Scotland and Finland are the only jurisdictions where there are positive perceptions of the system, according to a systematic review of the evidence available.
The lack of effective early childhood intervention services and training of the workforce should also be addressed.
Effective early childhood interventions should be family-centred. Parents often report feeling overwhelmed with the bureaucratic nature of the system in England, but evidence suggests that collaboration with parents creates more positive experiences of the system.
In Finland, one of the analysed jurisdictions, there are broad quality standards in training that underscore the value of inclusive education. This includes multi-agency working that follows specific processes decided at the municipality level to better address local needs.
Continued models of continuing professional development (CPD) related to SEND, like coaching, are more effective especially when sustained over time.
Embedded CPD can create a culture of professional development. For example, in Finland, workplaces form close partnerships with universities, in collaboration with municipalities and the government, to develop CPD “as a professional right, rather than a professional obligation.”
In England, CPD is not mandatory nor embedded at work. Dr Castro-Kemp advocates for an embedded supervision model for the schools workforce, and frequent CPD sessions where problems can be discussed to create a context-specific, sustained culture of development.
Dr Castro-Kemp says, “True inclusion is more than mainstream placement. It’s about fostering a sense of belonging and meeting individual needs early and holistically. Our research explores how other jurisdictions are achieving this through a systemic, needs-based approach.”
Moving forward, she recommends the government undergo a thorough review of the content and pedagogy in pre-service and in-service training and fund a model of supervision.
A needs-based assessment and early childhood intervention approach must work in a transdisciplinary way to create more effective way of workings.
And as the government prepares to implement changes, there must also be a clear model for monitoring change, which involves those with lived experience of SEND to improve public engagement with government.
Related links
In TES magazine - “4 barriers to inclusive practice - and how to overcome them”
Image
Screenshot from Parliament TV live stream, Education Committee, House of Commons, 10 June 2025.
Chile’s student loan reforms promise fairer graduate repayments, financially sustainable for Chile
A UCL report provides evidence that Chile’s proposed changes to its student loan system are financially sustainable and can significantly improve repayment fairness.
23 Dec 2025
Poverty had the greatest impact on students’ educational experiences during the Covid-19 pandemic
A report co-authored by Professor Jo Van Herwegen has informed part of the UK Covid-19 Public Inquiry, established to examine the UK’s response to the pandemic and establish learnings for the future.
19 Dec 2025
Disability History Month 2025 at IOE
Here, discover a sample of inspiring and future-thinking work our colleagues are doing in disability and inclusion fields.
09 Dec 2025