Why Ofsted fails to ensure Inclusive Education

30 September 2025

Introduction 

The Office for Standards in Education (Ofsted) plays a powerful role in shaping the priorities and practices of educational institutions across England. However, its current inspection framework undermines Inclusive Education. Rather than promoting equitable access and meaningful inclusion, the framework incentivises exclusionary practices that marginalise Disabled students. Despite recent proposals for reform, the Alliance for Inclusive Education (ALLFIE) argues that the new framework will not address the systemic barriers that continue to deny Disabled students their right to Inclusive Education. This article examines the shortcomings of both the current and proposed Ofsted inspection frameworks, drawing on ALLFIE’s existing work as well as the perspectives of the Disabled Peoples Movement, Disabled people, activists and other stakeholders gathered through our recent consultations. 

What’s wrong with Ofsted’s Current Inspection Framework?  

Ofsted’s current inspection framework is a major barrier to Inclusive Education. It fosters segregation, off-rolling, and exclusion of Disabled students from mainstream educational providers which achieve, or are aiming to achieve, the highest ‘overall effectiveness’ status. These educational providers are getting away with such blatant practices of discrimination because Ofsted’s inspection framework is not designed to achieve social justice and equity for all students. Instead, it upholds a discriminatory education system, with Disabled students and other marginalised groups of students treated as collateral damage.  

What’s in Ofsted’s Proposed Inspection Framework? 

In its recent consultation, Ofsted set out some proposals for a new framework for inspecting schools and other settings where children and adults attend. The proposed inspection framework will bring an end to the single ‘overall effectiveness’ grade. Instead, several areas of a provider’s work will be evaluated and provided with a grade. There will be no ‘overall effectiveness’ grade for providers. 

It proposes a separate evaluation area for ‘inclusion’. Through this evaluation area, Ofsted aims ‘to hold providers to account for ensuring Inclusive Education’ and ensure ‘strong outcomes’ for Disabled students. Furthermore, ‘inclusion’, it suggests, will be a consistent theme across all evaluation areas. This means that ‘inspectors will focus on the extent of inclusive practices in the other evaluation areas.’ 

The other evaluation areas relate to leadership and governance, curriculum, achievement, behaviour and attitudes, attendance, personal development and well-being, safeguarding, developing teaching and training, and participation and development. 

A 5-point scale will be used to grade these different areas, grading the quality of each area from ‘exemplary’ (the highest) to ‘causing concern’ (the lowest). Inspectors will work closely with school leaders to decide the areas to focus on and mirror school leaders’ improvement priorities. 

Will this make things better?  

Unfortunately, no. 

What is ‘inadequate’ with Ofsted’s Proposed Inspection Framework?  

ALLFIE believes that the proposed inspection and reporting process will not hold education providers accountable to the extent of ending admission biases and challenging the systemic barriers experienced by Disabled students within the education system.   

Problem #1: Continuing to focus on outcomes may foster exclusions 

The inspection and reporting process will continue to ‘place more emphasis on children and learners’ outcomes’, ‘maintain a clear focus on standards’ and ‘stress the importance of the curriculum.’ This does not reassure us that the proposed framework will encourage mainstream educational providers to enrol and retain Disabled people as the emphasis on these areas in the current framework is what leads to the segregation, off-rolling, and exclusion of Disabled students from mainstream educational providers.  

In their 2023 report, Requires improvement: urgent change for 11–16 education, the Lords Education for 11–16-year-olds Committee concluded that the current, inflexible education system does not work for Disabled children and Young people. Thus, the new inspection framework may not prevent schools from excluding students who they think may lower their outcomes – exam results or other achievement or progress measures – on the basis of disability or other protected characteristics.   

Problem #2: Aiming to be ‘exemplary’ may foster exclusions 

Despite the ‘move away from an overall effectiveness grade’, mainstream educational providers may still be pushed to exclude Disabled children and Young people to achieve ‘exemplary’ grades in the evaluation areas, irrespective of whether ‘inclusion’ will be a consistent theme across all evaluation areas. This is because the inspection will focus on the performance or progress of the children and Young people who are already enrolled in an educational setting, and not its enrolment policies and practices. If there are no Disabled children and Young people in an educational setting, then the educational setting cannot be held accountable for failing to provide support or adjustments for Disabled children and Young people. 

Problem #3: Ofsted’s definition of ‘inclusion’ is rooted in ableist norms and values  

Ofsted’s increased focus on ‘inclusion’ in its new inspection framework is welcomed. However, the working definition of ‘inclusion’ that Ofsted adopted is rooted in ableist norms and values. The definition’s emphasis is more on ensuring that pupils ‘achieve’ and ‘thrive’ rather than on ensuring that ‘students of all abilities learn together in the same classroom environment.’1 Ofsted’s proposed approach to inspecting ‘inclusion’ emphasises achieving ‘outcomes’ while placing little accountability on providers to remove systematic barriers, ensure accessibility, and make the required adjustments. 

Problem #4: Leaders will be directing the focus of the inspection  

ALLFIE is also concerned that school leaders will be directing the focus of the inspection. This can result in manipulation of the inspection process by school leaders – only focusing on what they are ‘good’ at. School leaders may not disclose unregistered separate provisions and places where Disabled students are subjected to violence, such as isolation rooms, ‘calming’ rooms and ‘cages’. Therefore, it will be possible for school leaders to provide an inaccurate picture of how it treats its students. 

Problem #5: Failure to consider students and parents’ voices 

Ofsted says that the inspection ‘will focus on the experiences and outcomes of disadvantaged children and learners’ (see Foreword). However, the proposals provide no details on how Ofsted will capture and reflect the voices of students and parents.  

A Young Disabled person that attended one of ALLFIE’s Consultation meetings expressed the concern that Ofsted does not collect accurate data about the experiences of Disabled pupils in mainstream schools. The Young Disabled person said, “Ofsted need to realise that just because someone’s there, it doesn’t mean they’re having a good experience.”  

They pointed out that Ofsted cannot get an accurate picture of Disabled students’ experiences and the level of inclusion in mainstream settings without talking to Disabled students about their experience in that setting. They stressed that while school leaders may be able to talk about how they are supporting Disabled students, it is only Disabled students that can provide an accurate assessment of whether the educational provider is inclusive or not.  

Thus, the lack of details on how Ofsted will capture and reflect the experiences of Disabled students, and their parents, suggests that there is a possibility that Ofsted will not be able to get an accurate picture of whether the educational provider is inclusive or not. 

Conclusion 

While Ofsted’s proposed reforms may signal a shift in tone, they fall short of transforming the inspection system into a force for Inclusive Education. By continuing to prioritise outcomes, allowing school leaders to guide inspections, and failing to centre the lived experiences and voices of Disabled students and their families, the new framework risks reproducing the very exclusions it claims to address. Inclusion requires more than policy tweaks—it demands a fundamental reimagining of educational values and accountability mechanisms. Until Ofsted places social justice at the heart of its inspections, Disabled students will remain on the margins of a system that continues to measure success in narrow, exclusionary ableist/disablist terms. 

Recommendations for Ofsted  

1. Adopt a Social Justice-Aligned Definition of Inclusion
   • Work with Disabled People’s Organisations to define and operationalise inclusion using a social justice framework, consistent with Article 24 of the UNCRPD.
2. Enforce Legal Duties on Accessibility and Inclusion
   • Align inspections with the Equality Act 2010 and the Children and Families Act 2014, including the presumption of mainstream education for all. 
3. Support the Transition to Inclusive Education
   • Ensure inspections of special schools and alternative provisions focus on steps being taken to transition students into mainstream education. 
   • Do not normalise or reinforce segregated education. 
4. Prioritise Inclusive Curriculum and Assessment Systems
   • Push for the redesign of the National Curriculum and assessment systems based on principles of Inclusive Education. 
   • Emphasize flexible teaching, inclusive pedagogy, and equitable access to learning and achievement. 
5. Invest in Inspector Training
   • Provide ongoing training for inspectors delivered by Disabled People’s Organisations and equity-focused groups to ensure accurate identification of exclusionary practices and structural barriers. 
6. Centre the Voices of Disabled Students and Parents
   • Actively involve current and former students, and parents in the inspection process. 
   • Include student feedback to answer the key question: “What is it like to be a child or learner in this provider?” (see Proposal 1: Report cards) 
7. Scrutinise Participation, Not Just Enrolment
   • Inspect the actual inclusion of Disabled students in all aspects of school life, including exams, extracurricular activities, and physical access. 
   • Hold schools accountable for excluding Disabled students from national assessments to maintain performance metrics. 
8. Expose and Address Exclusionary Practices
   • Actively investigate off-rolling, managed moves, and the use of unregistered separate provisions. 
   • Engage with former students and families to understand hidden or undocumented exclusions. 
9. Highlight Use of Force and Unsafe Practices
   • Ensure safeguarding evaluations include scrutiny of restraint, isolation rooms, and other harmful practices disproportionately used against Disabled students. 
10. Introduce Co-Produced, Justice-Oriented Report Cards
    • Develop inspection report cards in collaboration with Disabled People’s Organisations using social justice data. 
    • Include measures such as accessibility, curriculum diversity, staff diversity, and support for inclusive relationship-building. 
11. Foster Ongoing Collaboration with DPOs
    • Involve Disabled People’s Organisations in all stages of the inspection framework’s development, implementation, and review.