Inclusion, at what cost?

By Dr Anita Devi

Is this a provocative question?  Perhaps.  Many know me as an avid reader, I listen to a variety of voices in print and orally. I am reflective and curious, but most of all I have invested in a vision of inclusion for education for four decades plus … so long before it was ‘a thing’.

I started teaching in my London community at the age of 12.  I was teaching my parents first language and character development to those young than me.  So, whilst I wasn’t advocating ‘inclusion’ (as we know it today), I was sowing seeds in a time and geographical space where racial tension was rife.  I also come from a family steeped in patriarchy traditions … so I have broken many ‘expected’ norms.

Enough about me, back to my focus question. I would like to present a four-dimensional response:

1. Priceless
2. Not enough
3. Too costly
4. Too cheap

This will be followed up with a note on the tensions of policy in this field and where we have / are adding to the cost.

Priceless

At one level the actualisation of inclusion is priceless, because it is highly desirable by all for all.  It is the epitome of justice in expression. So, in many respects, we cannot out a price on it, and we should sacrifice everything for it.

What would you sacrifice for inclusion?  Great heroes such a Martin Luther King, Jesus Christ, Lincoln, Mother Theresa and many others (known and unsung heroes) gave their lives in pursuit of inclusion. Each focussing on a different dimension, but they knew the cost.

Not enough

Inclusion is a complex multidimensional construct, and some would ask, is full inclusion possible? From my faith perspective, I would argue it is, however not everyone will adhere to the same faith beliefs as me.  If they did, it would be indoctrination. So, there is always a choice, and some (sadly) will not choice ‘inclusion’ or ‘life’ in its fullness and will argue there are not enough resources in the world to make it happen. Again, it depends on perspective, agency and both these evolve from ‘identity’. How we see ourselves is how we project on others and the world.

Moving from the realm of aspirations and theory into reality and pragmatics …

Too costly

Much of the debate around special educational needs and disability in England (just one dimension of inclusion) has focussed on lack of resources. There is never enough, but this has also been mirrored in always putting a price tag on inclusion. Labels and diagnosis have become an access route to resources.  Yet kindness and compassion, which are at the heart of inclusion cost nothing!

Too cheap

In response, to this lack of resources debate, I formed and team and together in 2022 we set up 365 SEND, where inclusion could become part of the daily culture and ethos and setting of an educational establishment for just £1 a day for 3 years. You can read more here.  Many considered me crazy, some saw the vision and came on board, sadly a minority responded by saying, “It can’t be good if it is that cheap”. And yet our partners, who deliver the programme include national teach companies, universities, specialists, practitioners and parents.  Everyone had something to contribute.  If you still want to be part of the journey do get in touch.  It’s possible to do all threes years in one year!  That’s the beauty and flexible of the model – it embraced choice and quality, without adding financial burden.  

At this point, you may be wondering, Anita what’s your definition of inclusion?  From the other side of complexity (O’Toole, 1993), let me share, for me inclusion is about enabling each individual to be, belong and become.

National Policy

This year will see almost 50% of the global population will vote for a new national leader. It is the ultimate election year; completely unprecedented in history. In England, it also marks the 10^th anniversary of the Children & Families Act 2014.  With a heavy heart, I sigh as I see that what was a broken system previously has not improved or made significant progress.  Many resources have been added … and yet we seem to be regressing.

Why is this?

I believe, in part the problem is to do with a lack of agile resourcing and monitoring. Let me explain with a concrete example and a solution.

Example:  This year trials are being undertaken to put in place a standard national template for an Education Health Care Plan (EHCP).  I started this debate in 2022 gaining petition support from across the country.

Figure1: Support for Develop an Education Health Care Plan template for use by all local authorities Petition (2022)

Why has it taken 10 years for the government to realise localised templates aren’t working and start trialling a single version?

A solution (in part)

When the government commission partners, it has a three-year plan in mind.  There are input KPIs, but no scope for measuring a feedback loop and being agile to change and/or new circumstances. Instead, what if the government had a long-term vision, and a multi-track commission. So instead of putting all the eggs in one basket, three or four ideas run simultaneously for a year.  At the end of the year, impact is measured, not input.  The two partners who have made most progress continue to year two of the project.  At the end of year two, the project is whittled down to just one or two if both making collective impact. Can you imagine how provider accountability would change and those receiving public money would need to be more flexible to meet the population’s needs.

I recognise this is only part of the solution … but it’s a start!  Undertake a Freedom of Information (FOI) request, I think you will find government contracts tend to circulate within a small group of providers.  One government official wrote to me and said in 2022, “Yes our system does not accommodate small to medium enterprises (SMEs) and they are the most agile for delivery”.

Risk assessments of major decisions is another area I could touch on but will leave that for another time.  Just be aware laws are being passed that change, for example CCGs to IBS or national qualifications for SENCOS without much public debate. Real change for inclusion will not come just through the law! It takes people – heads, hearts and hands.

What are you thoughts on the above?  Leave a comment a let me know.

Look at for Phase 3 of the National SEND Audit too (13^th May – 28^th June 2024) … may be we also need to change the way national governments gather data and then use it to justify their plans and vision for inclusion, which often is quite distant from what’s happening at ground level.

Reference

O’Toole (193) The Executive Compass, Oxford University Press

About Anita

Anita is dedicated to enabling all to experience the ‘joy of learning’. She is founder and CEO of #TeamADL www.teamadl.uk working at many levels, but most importantly still in school doing the day-to-day stuff! Anita pioneered the international SEND Leaders’ Appreciation Day (now in its 5^th year!). Her PhD focussed on the career trajectory of SENCOs, and she had also written / contributed to many other publications / research as well as won awards.