Highlighting inclusive practice for Ofsted’s new EIF

Sarah Vickrage of FIN sets out how articulating learner context, utilising the learner voice and enabling learner independence can score with Ofsted on inclusion.   

Ask a learner whether their provider is inclusive and their answer is unlikely to reference a policy or strategy. Instead, they will talk about whether staff understand them, whether learning feels accessible, and whether they feel they belong.

As the Chief Inspector recently confirmed in a speech to the sixth form colleges, this learner experience is at the heart of Ofsted’s renewed focus on inclusion under the new Education Inspection Framework. For further education providers, the challenge is no longer to say the right things about inclusion, but to show, through practice and impact, how these barriers to learning are being actively removed.

The renewed EIF emphasises that inspectors will examine how providers address barriers to learning and well-being, particularly for SEND learners, those from disadvantaged backgrounds, and neurodiverse learners. However, to evidence inclusive practice effectively in an inspection, leaders and practitioners must be clear about the difference between inclusion as a value and inclusive practice in action.

Inclusion is often expressed as a commitment to equality and access for all learners, most visibly through policies, mission statements, access plans and statutory compliance with the Equality Act 2010. These documents matter, but in isolation they provide inspectors with evidence of intent rather than impact.

Inclusive practice, on the other hand, is how those intentions are realised in the everyday experience of learners, from curriculum design and teaching, to support systems and learner voice. In the renewed EIF, inclusion is both an evaluation area and a pervasive theme across inspections. Inspectors will evaluate not just documents, but whether inclusion is embedded and impactful in practice.

Articulating the learner context clearly

Before any evidence can be gathered, providers must be able to articulate and understand their learner context clearly. This might include the demographic makeup of the learner body, proportions of learners with SEND, or identified needs, the number of disadvantaged learners and local or relevant socio-economic factors as well as prevalent barriers to learning, including for neurodiverse learners. Providers can also consider barriers such as those experienced by adult learners such as parental or caring responsibility, the pressures and difficulties of shift working within an apprenticeship or language and communication barriers.

Inspectors will expect leaders to demonstrate that they understand their unique learner cohort and have identified both common and specific barriers to learning and progression. This contextual understanding informs all aspects of inclusivity planning and practice.

Utilising the learner voice

Learner voice is one of the most powerful forms of evidence available to providers. Inspectors are interested in real, lived experiences and authentic stories, not simply the results of feedback forms. These voices should reflect the full diversity of the learner cohort. This might include learners with SEND describing how they navigate the curriculum, neurodiverse learners explaining how clear routines, consistent approaches and structured support help them to learn, or disadvantaged learners outlining how additional support has enabled them to remain engaged. Ultimately, the strength of inclusive practice is revealed in how learners describe the impact of these approaches, whether they feel part of the learning community, supported and understood. Crucially, learner voice should also demonstrate influence, showing how feedback is used to shape future practice and drive meaningful change where improvement is needed.

Inclusive practice also is not about one off interventions or ad hoc adjustments. Adaptive and pre-emptive teaching includes planning that integrates different learning preferences and needs. It looks like well scaffolded tasks that maintain high expectations while allowing access, as well as assessment flexibility that allows learners to show mastery in ways that make sense to them.

Inspections will consider whether curriculum intent and implementation demonstrate a secure understanding of cohort needs. This includes evidence that providers have identified gaps in prior attainment and responded with well-sequenced support, as well as anticipating diverse learner needs rather than retrofitting adjustments, for example through the use of universal design for learning. Notably, staff should be able to articulate the rationale behind curriculum documentation, explaining not just what is taught but why it is done that way, with decisions clearly rooted in an understanding of the barriers their learners face.

Enabling learner independence

Providers should be able to evidence clear pathways of support that allow learners to become increasingly more independent. These pathways should be collaborative between curriculum and support teams and understood by all staff. Evidence of success of this might be a testimonial of a learner with autism where they explain how sensory adjustments or structured routines help them engage fully with their studies. This becomes a much more powerful message than a list of adjustments in isolation.

Finally, inclusive practice must be organisation-wide, not siloed within SEND or specialist teams. To demonstrate this, evidence could include; records of targeted professional development on inclusive pedagogies; evidence of reflective practice and shared strategies across departments; and leadership that prioritises inclusion in strategic planning. A consistent approach across the institution signals that inclusion is embedded in culture, not just policy.

Not a folder of policies

Inclusion under the EIF is both a graded area and a thread that runs through the entire inspection process. To succeed, providers must show how inclusive practice is rooted in context, embedded in everyday routines, and experienced meaningfully by learners. Successful inspection evidence is not a folder of policies, it’s the stories, routines and outcomes that demonstrate inclusive practice in action, particularly for learners whose voices too often go unheard. By grounding inclusion in practice and evidence, FE providers can not only meet inspection expectations but genuinely improve the educational experience for all learners.

By Sarah Vickrage, Fellowship of Inspection Nominees

Inclusion under the EIF is both a graded area and a thread that runs through the entire inspection process. To succeed, providers must show how inclusive practice is rooted in context, embedded in everyday routines, and experienced meaningfully by learners. Successful inspection evidence is not a folder of policies, it’s the stories, routines and outcomes that demonstrate inclusive practice in action, particularly for learners whose voices too often go unheard. By grounding inclusion in practice and evidence, FE providers can not only meet inspection expectations but genuinely improve the educational experience for all learners.

By Sarah Vickrage, Fellowship of Inspection Nominees