Inclusion vs integration: 3 ways to nurture diversity in schools
The number of children and young people with Education, Health and Care Plans (EHCPs) increased by over 10% during 2024, bringing the total to 638,745 (Department for Education, 2025). EHCPs are legally binding documents that detail the child’s additional needs and the support that will be provided to meet those needs.
According to the SEND code of practice (2015), all schools are required to identify and address the special educational needs of their pupils. Reasonable adjustments will help to provide equal opportunities and ensure that pupils with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) are engaged in lessons and activities alongside those without SEND.
This guidance encourages schools to integrate disabled students into classrooms where they learn alongside non-disabled students. This differs from inclusion which is the right of all students to access learning opportunities, participate in activities and succeed in their local school (Slee, 2018).
Integration involves students collaborating with their peers in a diverse classroom, whereas inclusion allows for time to be split between the classroom and other settings within the school.
In this article, I will compare the advantages and disadvantages of inclusion, integration, and special education, discuss the current government attitudes towards SEND support, and suggest three actions schools can take to develop an inclusive environment.
Table of Contents
Integration
Inclusion
Special education settings
Educational contexts
Integration
Integration involves full participation of disabled students in mainstream school. The aim is to increase peer interaction and provide access to the full curriculum, within the current system.
Inclusion
Inclusion also encourages the presence of disabled children in mainstream classrooms. However, it also aims to provide flexible support for additional needs, nurturing strengths and accommodating difficulties.
Special Education settings
Special educational settings cover SEND units within mainstream schools, special schools and alternative provision. In these contexts, disabled or neurodivergent children are educated separately to non-disabled and neurotypical students.
The current climate
The government is currently discussing changes to SEND support in schools. They are looking to create specialist SEND units within mainstream schools and reduce the need for EHCPs. While this may reduce costs for local authorities, as less budget will be spent on the long assessment process, it will remove schools’ legal obligation to provide support for disabled and neurodivergent children (Vaughan and Dimsdale, 2025).
There are four key problems with this proposed change:
1. Children whose difficulties are already overlooked may not be able to receive an EHCP. You do not currently need a formal diagnosis to receive an EHCP, but without an EHCP these undiagnosed children are unlikely to receive appropriate support. They will continue to struggle in a school environment that is not designed to meet their needs.
2. If the government were to completely remove the EHCP process, there would be few ways, other than formal diagnosis, for children’s needs to be recognised by their school. This could force more parents to pursue private diagnoses for their children at a time when waiting lists are years long and few families can afford this cost.
3. Schools will be more inclined to move children to a SEND unit than to provide support for them in class. This excludes those children from opportunities to socialise with peers and access the full curriculum. It reinforces a deficit-based approach, removing children from the classroom due to their difficulties, rather than including them and nurturing their strengths. In addition, it removes diversity from the class, limiting all children’s understanding of difference.
4. This proposal further challenges the rights of disabled people, demonstrating the lack of interest society has in providing appropriate and equitable support. It follows on from debates surround Personal Independence Payments (PIP), adding to the stigma surrounding disability and neurodiversity.
The social model of disability
Developed by the disabled community and its allies, the social model of disability recognises how attitudes and barriers within society prevent disabled people from reaching their potential. It puts the responsibility on all of society, including the government and businesses, to reduce prejudice and exclusion and improve access and opportunity.
Action points for schools
SEND units and specialist provision will be necessary for some children as the mainstream system will not be able to meet their needs with current attitudes, funding and teacher-pupil ratios. However, for the majority of children, schools should be aiming to make practical changes that make the environment universally accessible.
All children should be screened early for dyslexia, dyscalculia, dyspraxia, autism and ADHD. Many children are missed due to limited teacher understanding, masking, gender stereotypes, and more.
Screenings will help identify children to be referred for further assessments and will enable support to be put in place until diagnosis is acquired.
Universal design (Burgstahler, 2020) should give all students an equal opportunity to learn and succeed. It is based on seven principles, including accessibility, flexibility, equity, simplicity and clarity. Universal design can be applied to:
· the environment e.g. lighting, noise, storage, displays
· equipment e.g. adjustable desks and chairs, sensory aids, technology
· policies and procedures e.g. rules, timetables, quiet spaces, interventions
Universal Design for Learning (CAST, 2024) involves using multiple means of imparting and representing constructs and processes, so that children fully understand the content. Then pupils should choose their preferred method of presenting their work or expressing their knowledge. This makes learning accessible, valuing each student’s strengths and preferences.
It is vital to develop an inclusive school climate in which children are educated about difference, disability and neurodiversity, and teachers model kindness, communication and collaboration.
It may be beneficial to employ a trained ELSA who can help inform classroom support and enhance children’s social and emotional development. This will improve children’s relationships, independence and identity. Further interventions, such as sensory circuits, may support pupil’s readiness to learn and reduce time out of class.
The aim should be to ensure maximum social and academic integration across all areas of school, from the classroom and playing field, to school events and off-site trips.
Conclusion
There are benefits and drawbacks to each of the different educational contexts for disabled and neurodivergent students. However, mainstream schools should make a particular effort to improve their inclusion of diverse learners. Schools are legally obliged to remove barriers and provide appropriate support, so that all pupils have access to opportunities and are able to succeed.
In response to the potential government reform of SEND provision, this article has suggested three alternative strategies to ensure schools can meet the needs of all children.
Early screening should reduce the number of children who are left to struggle unnoticed and unsupported. Universal design will ensure that the school environment and learning materials are accessible and equitable to help all children to thrive. Finally, the development of an inclusive environment will improve teacher and peer attitudes towards diversity and lead to sustainable inclusion across all areas of school life.
References
Burgstahler, S. (2020). Universal Design of Instruction (UDI): Definition, Principles, Guidelines, and Examples. Revista Acadêmica do IFMT Primavera do Leste. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/343979593_Universal_Design_of_Instruction_UDI_Definition_Principles_Guidelines_and_Examples
CAST (2024). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines version 3.0. https://udlguidelines.cast.org/
Department for Education (2025). Education, health and care plans. Department for Education. https://explore-education-statistics.service.gov.uk/find-statistics/education-health-and-care-plans/2025
Department for Education (2015). SEND code of practice. Department for Education. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/398815/SEND_Code_of_Practice_January_2015.pdf
Slee, R. (2018). Defining the scope of inclusive education. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/330741940_Defining_the_scope_of_inclusive_education_Think_piece_prepared_for_the_2020_Global_Education_Monitoring_Report_Inclusion_and_education_2
Vaughan, R. & Dimsdale, C. (2025, 8 July). Individual care plans to be phased out in SEND system overhaul. The i Paper.
