Change the System, Not Just the Syllabus 

25 November 2025

Introduction 

On 5 November 2025, the Department for Education published the Final Report of the Curriculum and Assessment Review (CAR) – a long-awaited opportunity to rethink how England’s education system delivers equity and inclusion for all pupils. For Disabled children and young people, this should have been a moment to embed Inclusive Education at the heart of national policy. Yet, despite its value-based rhetoric of justice for all, the Review falls short of abolishing the structures that continue to exclude Disabled children and young people and limit their future pathway opportunities. 

Inclusion Rhetoric vs. Reality 

The Review sets out key ambitions to promote inclusion and equity, stating its goal of:

“a curriculum that appropriately balances… inclusivity for all children and young people.”

This explicitly encompasses all Disabled students, who we know continue to be disadvantaged by the curriculum design. 

The Review also states that: 

“We have applied a social justice lens to all aspects of our work, seeking to identify and remove barriers to progress within the curriculum and assessment system.” 

Despite this narrative of adopting a social justice lens, the Review offers few tangible, enforceable measures to end systemic barriers for Disabled pupils. 

Curriculum Principles Recommendations 

ALLFIE would like to say that we support the recommendation for a diverse and intersectional curriculum which would address the history and experience of Disabled people and our contributions to the world as part of the Curriculum Principles. However, we disagree with most of the other Curriculum Principles because they emphasise excellence, standards, and academic breadth and depth, with limited focus on the practical steps needed to remove persistent structural barriers that exclude Disabled students from full participation.  

These principles risk perpetuating systemic inequity by framing “excellence” and “high standards” through a narrow, ableist lens that assumes all learners can access and demonstrate knowledge in the same ways. When we talk about “a knowledge-rich” curriculum without talking about access, we are talking about privilege. A curriculum that measures worth by narrow academic standards tells Disabled pupils that their ways of knowing do not count. This is not aspiration; it is exclusion masked as ambition. True excellence is not achieved when some have to fight just to be included.  

An education system rooted in justice must start from the margins, recognising that Disabled pupils deserve more than accommodation – they deserve ownership, visibility, and the power to shape what learning means for them. 

Tokenistic Inclusion Measures vs. Structural Change 

The Review suggests that curriculum and assessment design should be inclusive, accessible, and adaptable, for example through “adaptive teaching,” “guidance on curriculum and pedagogical adaptation,” and inclusive assessment arrangements. However, these recommendations fail to address the systematic barriers faced by Disabled students. For instance, “adaptive teaching” (essentially differentiating the curriculum) is still rooted in a deficit-based model that treats access requirements as an exception rather than embedding inclusion into mainstream pedagogy. Moreover, because this guidance will be non-statutory, there is little accountability to ensure compliance or consistent implementation across schools. The Review also mentions exploring assessment inclusivity for Disabled students but offers no detailed proposals for curriculum changes or adjustments that would make assessments or exams truly inclusive. 

Exams vs. Equity 

Most troublingly, the Review recommends that students sit more exams. ALLFIE is deeply disappointed by this, as such an approach risks entrenching inequalities for all pupils. An exam-heavy system is often inaccessible and increases stress, disproportionately disadvantaging those already marginalised by the current system. Rather than adding more tests, ALLFIE argues that assessment reform must prioritise inclusive, flexible, and varied ways of demonstrating learning, ensuring that every student can succeed on their own terms. 

Conclusion 

The Curriculum and Assessment Review’s limited proposals fall short of the transformative vision of Inclusive Education set out by the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Disabled People (UNCRPD). Inclusive Education, as defined in General Comment No. 4 (2016), demands systemic changes (shifts in curriculum design, pedagogy, assessment, and school structures) to remove barriers and create equitable, participatory learning environments for all students. Simply placing Disabled students in mainstream settings, or offering minor adaptations through non-statutory guidance, does not constitute inclusion. 

ALLFIE therefore calls on government to move beyond rhetoric and commit to the deep structural change required by the UNCRPD: an education system where accessibility, flexibility, and the right to inclusive education are embedded in every aspect of policy and practice. Only then can Disabled children and young people experience equality and belonging in education.