Nicole Dempsey

I don’t have my own personal experience. I do think that, under this system or a future one (good or bad), for a child and their family and within each school, it will come down to the ownership, effort and implementation choices of the leadership there.

Better depth of understanding, better implemented systems, and so real soul searching and reflection I know can change the culture.

I don’t disagree. This is why I think reform needs to include training incorporating understanding ableism and bias, and I do think better clarity on best practice and what works would help - poor outcomes associated with SEND are due to poor practice related to SEND, not the children.

Inclusion isn’t a bolt-on. It’s the measure of whether our education system is working at all.

Classroom paramountcy - not classroom at all costs, but classroom first and foremost for every child. Being present, being known, being planned for as part of the main, and being able to contribute. No one is better off with any less than the best offer.

The importance of time, interaction, thinking and decision making in inclusion.

Banning lifejackets to reduce drownings. As the conversation around SEND reform continues, it increasingly feels like we are trying to solve problems by tackling symptoms and not causes; choosing the immediate over the impactful. We might not have time on our side, but the long game is the only game that will work - the current system is undeniably struggling, but reform must be built on honesty, insight, and a clear understanding of what will genuinely make things better for children, families, and the professionals who serve them.

Banning lifejackets to reduce drownings.

As the conversation around SEND reform continues, it increasingly feels like we are trying to solve problems by tackling symptoms and not causes; choosing the immediate over the impactful. We might not have time on our side, but the long game is the only…

Seems reasonable to me.

Just Because You Can Doesn’t Mean You Should On process, inclusion, and the cost of convenience In a world of accelerating automation, we must ask not just what technology can do for us, but what it might take away. Technology and the interne…

Process, inclusion, and the cost of convenience.

inco14.wordpress.com/2025/07/13/j...

Thread ⬇️
I cannot understand why the people in power consistently fail to understand that giving each and every child, including those with SEND, the very best start in life is literally an investment in the future. It benefits children, families, the NHS, the economy and society generally.

Absolutely this. Excellent thread. I’m not sure there is currently an understanding in government of the sheer diversity of needs and how provision needs to differ. The current discussion seems to assume that with the right adaptation/unit mainstream could work for all. It can’t.

Just Because You Can Doesn’t Mean You Should On process, inclusion, and the cost of convenience In a world of accelerating automation, we must ask not just what technology can do for us, but what it might take away. Technology and the interne…

Process, inclusion, and the cost of convenience.

inco14.wordpress.com/2025/07/13/j...

We did it for one set of reasons and found a whole load of additional reasons!

New CST discussion paper 'A new specialist narrative'.

Specialist provision is not a fiscal burden. It is a vital public asset. Our new discussion paper calls for a confident, collective vision that places special schools and alternative provision at the heart of an inclusive education system.

Read more: https://twp.ai/9PTMX4

I think some staff room culture was / is / can be quite problematic too though!

Yes, I see. I feel like staffrooms don’t get much use! Certainly not by many people at a time.

Not the informal comms of the staff room. I’m talking about the purposeful activity, communication and insight of a shared office space.

Biggest barriers - the more senior someone is, the more entitled to their own office they feel, and a perception that we need somewhere to make private phone calls. With few exceptions, it’s desirable to be overhearing colleagues phone calls, seeing their working patterns and pressures, etc.

Not the answer to all problems, but for signalling it’s a game changer. More importantly, for communication, streamlining and experience for children it’s so much smoother and more focused. The impact on staff wellbeing, managing absence / unfulfilled roles, and succession - a happy byproduct.

I think there’s an ideal we are aiming towards and there’s things we can do now to be purposefully moving towards it. We’ve done a lot but one of the simplest has been one of the most impactful - shared spaces, shared responsibilities, multidisciplinary teams.

One change I am hoping for, that I’m not seeing much mention of in all the conversations about SEND, is a new, better written SEND Code of Practice. Not just to reflect any changes or to update language, but to really promote inclusive culture, shared ownership, high quality SEN support stage etc.

We get to keep the ehcps for what they are good for, and avoid the upheaval, for some probably slower burn but better pay off benefits.

This is the dilemma isn’t it, and I think the reason we are struggling with it because that EHCPs aren’t the issue they’re just the visible (and expensive) symptom of the issue. The things you’ve highlighted, amongst others, would take the pressure off the system.

Certainly. But also the best practitioners, and where the evidence takes us too, are ones who specialise and bring a particular expertise / resource. Associate staff are vital and should be paid accordingly. The thing that lacks basis is more generic roles and ‘Velcro’ support.

I think this depends on what we mean when we say inclusion. Everyone in the same building? classroom? At the local school?

For me it’s about belonging and being part of the stability and centrality of the main offer. Not just being there, but needs being met within a broad and flexible universal.

I’m not particularly wedded to the current system. I just don’t think changing it will have positive impact - it isn’t digging deep enough. What we are in danger of though is the disruption of change, erosion of rights, further damage to trust…

This system or a changed system, what will actually make a difference? Better training, better availability of supporting services, maybe changes through curric/assess’t review, more focus on adaptivity, multi-disciplinary, culture. A better written Code of Practice.

My concern is that making changes to EHCPs is trying to solve the problem by tackling a symptom, not the underlying causes. Whatever is done to EHCPs/rights, the needs will stay the same and the sector will stay the same.

The suite of @theeef.bsky.social Learning Behaviours guidance reports

How many have you read?
educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/education-ev...

Cutting EHCPs ‘treats the symptom not cause’ of SEND crisis A parliamentary inquiry into solving the SEND crisis heard evidence today from school leaders and research experts. Here is everything you need to know

Raising the threshold at which pupils get an education, health and care plan would not solve the problems within the SEND system, experts have warned