Belonging in School Part 2 v1.0

Part 2: A Practical Guide to Inclusive Policy Planning
Part 2: A Practical Guide to Inclusive Policy Planning
Alyssa M. Alcorn, Natalia Zdorovtsova, & Duncan E. Astle
With thanks to Sian Lewis, and the participants who shared their insights and feedback as part of
the Diverse Trajectories to Good Developmental Outcomes Workshop (2022) and the Delivering
Inclusive EducationIWorkshop (2023)
https://inclusion.mrc-cbu.cam.ac.uk/
Who is this resource for?
Belonging in School is written for all education professionals working in schools, not only
senior leaders or classroom teachers. All staff members play important roles in creating
and maintaining inclusive environments.
This resource offers planning strategies and policy suggestions to make schools more
inclusive for pupils with neurodevelopmental differences, and for everyone. Acting
on these ideas to create positive change needs local knowledge of schools and their
communities—in other words, you!
The resource will likely be most relevant for mainstream primary schools in the UK’s
school systems, but its planning strategies could be adapted and implemented in almost
any educational setting.
Version 1.0, September 2023

Text ©2023 The Belonging at School team. Alyssa Alcorn, Natalia Zdorovtsova and Duncan Astle
assert their right to be identified as the authors of this resource.
Illustrations ©2023 Kristyna Baczynski
Contributors
This resource includes contributions from the participants in the Diverse Trajectories to Good
Developmental Outcomes Workshop (University of Cambridge, December 2022), the participants in
the Delivering Inclusive EducationIWorkshop (ITAKOM conference, Edinburgh, March 2023), and Dr
Sian Lewis. See Section 5 ‘About the Belonging in School project’ for details.
Technical credits
Illustrations and action cycle figure by Kristyna Baczynski

Graphic design by Simon Strangeways
Contact information
Project website: https://inclusion.mrc-cbu.cam.ac.uk/

Please begin with our website if you are seeking more information. For other enquiries, you can
contact the project team by e-mailing diversetrajectories@mrc-cbu.cam.ac.uk
Citation information
Please cite this document as follows:

Alcorn, A.M., Zdorovtsova, N., & Astle, D.E. (2023). Belonging in School Part 2: A Practical Guide to
Inclusive Policy Planning. Medical Research Council Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, University of
Cambridge.
Funder information
Development and release of the Belonging in School resource was made possible with funding from
the Medical Research Council (MC-A0606-5PQ41) and by a donation from the Templeton World
Charitable Foundation, as part of their Global Conference on the Science of Human Flourishing.
Licensing and terms of use
The Belonging in School resource and associated materials are published under a
Creative Commons CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 license:
Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International.
• You may freely print, photocopy, and share the Belonging in School resource, so
long as you do not sell them.
• You may adapt the resource for use within your own school or classroom, including
translation into another language, but distributing adapted versions (e.g. by sharing
with other schools or posting them online) violates the terms of use.
• You may not use these materials, including the illustrations, for any commercial
purposes.
Please see the Creative Commons webpage for the CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 license for more
information on what types of use are/are not permissible.
Contents
About the Belonging in School resource...........................................................................5
1. Policy development as a cycle................................................................................6
1.1 Introducing the action cycle..............................................................................6
1.2 Key ideas in the cycle: Vision, goals, and actions........................................... 7
1.3 The action cycle step-by-step...........................................................................8
2. Four approaches to inclusive policy development................................................13
2.1 Committing to “inclusion-as-belonging”..........................................................14
2.2 Participatory policy..........................................................................................21
2.3 Inclusion by design.........................................................................................39
2.4 Committing to be a neurodiversity-affirmative school.....................................48
3. Monitoring and evaluating your policies and changes..........................................61
3.1 Quantitative data............................................................................................62
3.2 Qualitative data..............................................................................................75
3.3 Trust and managing expectations around feedback and measurement........70
4. Conclusion............................................................................................................71
5. About the Belonging in School project..................................................................72
5.1 Initial workshop...............................................................................................72
5.2 Policy briefing and feedback...........................................................................72
5.3 From Policy to Belonging in School................................................................72
6. References...........................................................................................................74
About the Belonging in School resource
About the Belonging in School

Resource
Part 2: Planning Guidance Document
The Belonging in School resource focuses on developing policies
for educational inclusion in mainstream schools, for learners with
neurodevelopmental differences. These learners may be labelled as having
Special Educational Needs and Disability (SEND; England and Northern Ireland),
Additional Support Needs (ASN; Scotland), or Additional Learning Needs (ALN;
Wales). While the resource and its planning tools can be applied across any level of
education, it will be most relevant to primary schools.
In this Planning Guidance Document we explain a five-stage Action Cycle in detail,

as a “generic” planning tool that schools could use to support existing or new inclusion
planning goals. We then provide detailed information on each of the Four Planning
Approaches, including step-by-step guidance on how you could apply each approach
using the steps of the action cycle. A final section offers guidance on collecting data
and evaluating your inclusion-related changes.
Part 1 of Belonging in School (available as a separate document) is an Overview

Report giving brief background on inclusion issues, describing characteristics of
inclusive policy, and introducing the Action Cycle and Four Planning Approaches. The
Report includes the full text of the 12 Suggested Changes, which are not repeated
here. Get Part 1 here: https://inclusion.mrc-cbu.cam.ac.uk/
Developing this content

The content in the Belonging in School resource builds on contributions from
over 100 experienced stakeholders from schools, third-sector organisations,
and academia. Over 80 people participated in the Diverse Trajectories to Good
Developmental Outcomes Workshop (December 2022) where school inclusion
was a major topic, as part of the Global Conference on the Science of Human
Flourishing. More stakeholders gave feedback as part of the Delivering Inclusive
Education Workshop at the It Takes All Kinds of Minds (ITAKOM) neurodiversity
conference (March 2023). A final stage in summer 2023 revised and extended the
earlier content for policymakers into this planning-focused resource for schools and
educators. Read more in section 5, ‘About the Belonging in School project’.
Belonging in School • https://www.inclusion.mrc-cbu.cam.ac.uk/

5
1: Policy development as a cycle
1. Policy development as a cycle

This section walks through a “generic” action cycle and explains the purpose of each step
and its key tasks. Section 2 of this document gives step-by-step guidance related to each of
our four proposed approaches to policy planning. We recommend using the generic action
cycle guidance in this section together with Section 2.
1.1 Introducing the action cycle

Action cycles are employed across many fields and settings, with variable terms but the same big
ideas of assessment, planning, implementation, and evaluation. Most critically, they represent a
repeating cycle over time, not a single process with a definite endpoint. Becoming a more inclusive
school is a living and changing process, which makes the ongoing action cycle an appropriate fit.
The goal is not to overhaul policies in practices in one go, but to plan, test, and build on changes.
While pursuing a full planning cycle is a time investment, it is “spending to save” on time and
resources later.
Figure 1 shows our version of the action cycle, followed by an explanation of key terms and details
on each of the five steps.
Engaging with an action cycle to develop policy is useful tool in itself, supports a proactive,
systems-level approach to inclusion.
.
Figure 1. A five-step action cycle for inclusive policy development. Planning includes a sub-cycle,
and may take some iteration to develop a feasible plan before going on.

6
1.2 Key ideas in the cycle: Vision, goals,

and actions
The action cycle (especially the planning sub-steps) talks about identifying a vision, identifying
goals, and choosing actions. Why three different terms and what do they mean? The cycle is easier
to understand if you understand how we use these terms, first.
Each term is at a different level of detail, moving from “the big picture” down to specific, measurable
actions that implement changes in policy, practice, or environments (Figure 2).
“
Vision: Where are we trying to go?
What would our inclusive school be like?
This is the biggest picture: what do you mean
by inclusion? What would good or successful
inclusion be like? Your school might engage
with a structured inclusion planning process
Vision: Where do we want to go?
Goals: What should we change?
Actions: How should we change it?
“
because you already have a strong vision for
inclusion, and want to work towards it.
The Four Planning Approaches (Section 2) present different visions for inclusive schools. For
example, the first approach in Section 2.1 focuses on pupils’ sense of belonging, and (in brief) says
that an inclusive school is one where pupils feel like they belong there.
Goals: Your school has a vision, but how will you get there? Setting goals is about identifying
possible target areas for change, and deciding which goals to pursue now, in this action cycle. As an
example, a school might have identified staff training as a priority for change (i.e. goal), to progress
toward their vision of a neurodiversity-affirmative school (see Section 2.4).
Actions: We have a goal, so what do we need to do to achieve it? Actions are things people
will do to meet a goal (i.e. create change). Actions needs to be specific, measurable, and feasible
for the people affected. For example, the school with a goal to improve staff knowledge might agree
an action to send two staff members to a neurodiversity training course so they can cascade this
knowledge back to the rest of the school, and a second action for as many staff as possible to attend
the local training session.
Figure 2 The relationship between a vision for inclusion, goals, and actions

7
1.3 The action cycle step-by-step

This section presents a “generic” action cycle that could be used for planning any kind of change
related to inclusion. You do not need to use one of the four approaches if they don’t fit your school.
Each step has a purpose and a series of key questions for schools to address during that step.
For example, in Step 2 schools should be able to answer “How do we define and understand
inclusion now?” before moving on.
Step 1: Prepare the planning process

Purpose • This is a “project management” step about deciding the scope
and practicalities of running your current action cycle, such as the
projected timeline and who will be involved.
• In your second and later cycles, you will also be feeding in information
from the previous cycle, and deciding which practical decisions to keep
or change.
Key questions • What is our focus in this cycle? Are we concerned with a single area
of school policy? Everything?
• What level of policy are we looking at? School, classroom, other?
• What time and resources can we commit to this planning process? Is
there a deadline?
• Who will be involved in planning (or not involved) and why?
• How will the process work, in general? Timeline, location/modes of
communication, information-sharing…
Step 2: Asess your current situation and resources

Purpose This step zooms in to the foci and level of policy you identified in step 1,
and gathers information about the current situation. Even if you think this
information is already known, it is important for everyone in the planning
process to start with a shared understanding.
Key questions • How do we define and understand inclusion now, in our setting?
• What is the current situation re: inclusion, in relation to our foci?
• What are our assets, barriers, resources, relationships, and needs
that may impact inclusion? This could include aspects outside the
school, in the wider community.
• Are there constraints that mean we cannot currently change certain
things in relation to our target area, and take them off the table?
Top tips If you are working on a new area for your school’s policies, you may need
to gather new information from pupils, parents, or others. You need to
understand the problem before attempting solutions! For example, you
may need to find out which sensory aspects of the school pose barriers for
pupils, before trying to address these.

8
Step 3: PLAN goals, actions, and measurement

Purpose Now you have gathered information about current circumstances and
resources, it’s time to develop a plan for change.
Sub-cycle This step has multiple interrelated components, and is best understood
as a “sub-cycle”. You may need to move back and forth between the sub-
cycle steps to develop a plan that meets all your requirements.
3A. Identify vision and goals

Purpose • This step is about setting out the vision for inclusion that you are
trying to achieve, and starting to break it down into individual goals.
• If this action cycle focuses on a narrow policy area or is at classroom
level, you might have a big vision for your school/policies in general,
and then an intermediate goal you are working on now.
• For example, your big vision might focus on pupil belonging, with a
current action cycle remit about peer relations, and a specific goal to
reduce bullying.
Key questions • What is our vision for inclusion? What do we think “good” or
“successful” inclusion should look like? (This may be specific to the
area your cycle focuses on).
• Goals: Which practices or circumstances will we try to change in this
cycle, in order to progress towards our vision of inclusion?
• Why do we think changing those things will be helpful or effective?
Top tips • Remember to set SMART goals! (Specific, measurable, attainable,
relevant and time-bound)
3B.Plan actions toward your goals

Purpose This sub-step is about determining how you will meet your goals, given
your starting point, resources and constraints (Step 2).
Key questions For each goal we’ve identified…

• What specific action(s) or changes will we make, in order to meet the
goal?
• Who would be responsible for the action(s) and why?
• What information, support, resources will the responsible people need,
in order to take that action?
Across all the goals…
• What are the dependencies between actions and goals? What needs
to be first?

9
3C. Plan toward measurement

Purpose Waiting until you’ve implemented your plan may be too late to gather the
information you need to determine if there have been changes in your
school. Plan now to make sure your sub-goals are measurable, and that
you’ll have the time and resources to do this.
Key questions For each goal we’ve identified…
• How could we measure our progress toward it? (i.e. how would we
know if we met that goal?)
• Who would need to collect that information, and when?
• What would we do with the information once we have it? (e.g.
analysing, summarising, or reporting it)
• How long would it take to do these things?
Top tips • If you cannot come up with a practical way to measure one of your
goals, the plan needs an adjustment. Your goal may be too big or
general—or maybe it’s not the right goal, right now.
• While your goal will be positive changes, make sure your plan
for measurement can also find out about negative effects and
experiences, if they occur. Knowing that information is really important.
• See Section 3 for our detailed guidance about measurement.
3D. Feasibility check

Purpose Sub-steps B and C encourage you to focus on one goal at a time. This
sub-step puts them back together. Is your whole plan feasible in terms of
resources and time?
Key questions • As a package, are our planned actions and measurements
feasible for key individuals and the school?
• Does our plan make full use of our school’s relationships and
resources, including external ones? (i.e. can anyone else help?)
• How do we think people will feel about this plan? How much support
or opposition is there likely to be? Who and why?
Top tips • Don’t worry if you need to go back from this step to an earlier one to
revise your plans, or cut down the scale. Now is the best time to make
changes—before you firmly commit your resources.
• Especially if your planned changes are big ones, this could be a good
point to seek feedback from the people who will be affected.

10
Step 4: IMPLEMENT your planning and begin measuring

Purpose In this step, you will begin to implement the plans you made in step
3, keeping in mind dependencies between actions—and also that
implementation will be a process.
Key questions • Check: Who should we communicate with about upcoming changes
and why they will be happening? When and how? E.g. families
• Check: Do we need to start collecting information before making
changes, in order to measure our progress? Or, to be continuously
collecting information?
• If implementing some changes isn’t working or turns out not to be
feasible, is it OK to stop? Who can decide?
Step 5: EVALUATE and reflect on your changes

Purpose This step is about answering the big questions “what happened, what was
it like for people, and did our changes make a difference?”. You may be
collecting final measurements, if not already completed, or doing summary
and analysis of information you have been collecting. Use your information
to help answer the key questions.
Key questions • What happened: Which planned actions did/did not happen in
practice? Did they evolve in practice? Why?
• How do people feel about what happened?
• Meeting goals: Based on the information we have, did we progress
toward our sub-goals, and our big-picture goal? Do we think these
were the right goals?
• Was our plan feasible in actuality? Why or why not? What does that
mean for next time?
• Do benefits or positive effects appear proportionate for the time and
resources expended?
• Check: Who should be informed of our results? How and when?
And closing the cycle back to step 1...

Purpose After Step 5, it’s time to close the circle and return to Step 1—otherwise it
won’t be a planning cycle!
Key questions • What did we learn during this cycle?

• Which policy and practice changes from this cycle do we plan to keep,
discard, or revise in a new cycle?
• Regarding inclusion policy development, when should we embark on a
new planning cycle, and where should it focus?

11
Additional planning tools and guidance from the

Educational Endowment Foundation (EEF)
As an alternative to our action cycle that also addresses process of implementing
changes in school practice, the EEF published a 2019 report on “Putting Evidence to
Work – A School’s Guide to Implementation” (Sharples, Albers, Fraser & Kime)
In addition to the freely downloadable report, there are supplementary guidance

documents and tools focusing on individual areas, such as using professional
development as one of your strategies to effect change.
In general, the EEF website can be a valuable and accessible resource for checking on
current evidence for different practices and tools.

12
2: Four approaches to inclusive policy development
2. Four approaches to inclusive policy

development
Each approach to planning inclusive policy encapsulates different values and set different
goals. They are different angles on inclusion, and pose different questions for your school to
address at each stage of the action cycle. The approaches can be used alone, or combined—
meaning you would look at multiple, complementary goals and questions at each stage of the
cycle.
The four approaches are:
1. Committing to “inclusion-as-belonging”
2. Participatory policy design
3. Inclusion by design
4. Committing to be a neurodiversity-affirmative school
The Belonging in School resource gives guidance on a process, not a step-by-step recipe for
creating a certain results. Two schools could choose the same approach—but have practices that
look very different at the end of their planning cycle, because their resources and their community’s
priorities are quite different.
Each of the approaches in this section is presented in the same format, with an introduction to the
approach, and then step-by-step information about how you might complete an action cycle using
that approach.
We recommend using the approach-specific guidance together with the generic action cycle
guidance. All the generic questions are still important at each step.

13
2.1 Committing to
“inclusion-as-belonging”
Introduction
Committing to “inclusion-as-belonging” as the vision for your policy development means
working toward greater inclusivity in your environment and practice by focusing on
understanding and facilitating your pupils’ sense of belonging at school.
Whether or not pupils feel like they belong and are part of their school community is an essential
component of inclusion. Do pupils feel like they are part of the shared life of their class and school,
or out on the margins? In this view, a learner could be present and taking part at school, but would
not be fully “included” if they personally felt left out, disrespected, “separate” or unwelcome—
regardless of the school’s values and policies. Children with different needs and from different
backgrounds (or across ages and genders) may not agree on what makes them feel included
or excluded, and why. Understanding their diverse views is one reason that we encourage
participatory strategies for developing policies (see Approach 2, section 2.2).
In the December 2022 Diverse Trajectories
workshop, belonging and related concepts
What is belonging? resurfaced repeatedly across different parts
of the programme, and there is broad support
Belonging might best be for the usefulness and centrality of this idea
understood as a ‘cluster’ of in thinking about inclusion. The concept of
concepts, as exact terms and “belongingness” connects to a larger research
ideas vary across authors and literature on school belongingness, how and why
fields where this concept has it affects pupils, and how schools can actively
been studied. In the context of support belonging (e.g. see Roffey, Boyle, &
school belonging, these may Allen, 2019 for a very short introduction). This
include the presence of positive body of research uses a variety of terms1,
relationships with teachers but focuses closely on the ideas put forth by
and/or classmates, care and Goodenow and Grady of belonging as “the extent
support, connectedness, safety to which students feel personally accepted,
at school, respect, or feeling respected, included and supported by others in
valued. Inclusion-as-belonging the school social environment” (1993). A related
is fundamentally related to definition by Libbey more explicitly includes
all school policy and practice some of the interpersonal aspects referenced in
because it is about pupils’ total discussions of inclusion and belonging, saying
experience of education, not it is present when pupils “feel close to, a part
“inclusion policy” alone. of, and happy at school; feel that teachers care
about students and treat them fairly; get along
with teachers and other students, and feel safe at
school” (2007, p52).
1
E.g. school belongingness, school membership, school connectedness. Terms vary partly because this issue has
been studied and reported across disciplines.

15
Seeking to facilitate pupils’ belonging is beneficial and meaningful in itself, but research
suggests it can also support other goals and positive outcomes, like participation and
attainment. A wide range of studies have shown relationships between pupils’ levels of school belonging
(and its related terms and constructs) to other factors and outcomes (see Allen, Kern, Vella-Brodrick,
Hattie, & Waters, 2018 for a meta-review) including academic achievement (Sirin, & Rogers-Sirin, 2004),
motivation (e.g. Goodenow & Grady, 1993), happiness (O’Rourke & Cooper, 2010). It may negatively
relate to symptoms of mental ill health, absenteeism, and risky behaviours (see a review in Slaten,
Rose, Bonifay & Ferguson, 2019)2. Multiple studies suggest that measures of school belonging have an
important predictive value for later wellbeing, For example, a recent study in England found that school
belonging measure scores were an important predictor of primary children’s wellbeing and emotional
health (Castro-Kemp, Palikara, Gaona, Eirinaki, & Furlong, 2020).3
The existing research on school belonging provides a toolbox of strategies for creating more inclusive
school environments: ones where children feel like a part of their school, are accepted, respected,
supported, feel safe, and have positive relationships. It highlights factors that are related to pupils’ school
belonging. Moreover, it suggests that whether pupils feel they belong at school is not something that
“follows on” from presence and participation, but may be an extremely important factor in whether they
are willing and able to engage with school in the first place.
2
While this literature has focused mainly on older children and adolescents, work with primary school children supports
the pattern of results, and there are measures of school belonging specifically for this age group.
3
Across these studies of school belonging, it’s important to keep in mind that the picture of causality is as yet
unclear, and may vary across different factors or groups of pupils. As Allen and colleagues point out, while teams
may say that belonging influences a particular outcomes (or vice versa) “the study designs do not allow causality
to be determined. For instance, a student’s level of academic motivation may both stem from feeling a sense of
belonging and also influence the extent to which the student belongs” in their setting (2020, p6).

16
As the other belonging literature has illustrated, we can intervene to promote belonging, and
belonging is positively related to a range of other outcomes, including academic and wellbeing
outcomes. Committing to a focus on belonging does not mean abandoning inclusion goals your
school may already have. Rather, it is about considering them in a different framework. This
framework is fundamentally about contexts and systems—not individuals in isolation. It also asks
us to go beyond thinking about “inclusion policy” as isolated. Inclusive values apply everywhere,
and across everything the school does.
“Inclusion-as-belonging” is both a statement of
values around educational inclusion, and a desired
Valuing belonging in outcome (or vision for inclusion, in the terms of
our action cycle) that can be facilitated by actions
all schools in the school community. All three things are
important and interrelated: values, actions, and
Regardless of whether you outcomes.
choose this planning strategy
“
or not, we strongly encourage
schools to adopt a definition of
educational inclusion that focuses whether pupils feel they
on, or at minimum includes,
pupils’ sense of belonging in their belong at school is not
school, and use this to guide something that “follows
your decision-making (see also
Suggested Change 1, Part 1 on” from presence and
Overview Report). participation, but may be
Emphasising the importance
an extremely important
and centrality of belonging is factor in whether they are
an important opportunity for
willing and able to engage
senior leaders to model positive
attitudes and lead by example,
potentially paving the way for
later action on belonging. What
with school in the first
place.
“
can you do to show that pupils’
belonging is an important part of
inclusion (and school in general) Concepts of inclusion-as-belonging help to shift
to you? How can you show focus beyond individuals, and towards systems,
that you are listening to pupils interactions, and school culture. Thus, when
and families about what makes we focus our inclusive policy development on
them feel like they do (or don’t) belonging, it makes sense to ask questions not
belong? only about whether individuals feel like they belong,
but what conditions, values, interactions, and
activities appear to be facilitating or hindering that,
for whom, and why.

17
An action cycle using an “inclusion as belonging” approach will need to grapple with as
many of these questions as possible (next section).
Action cycle guidance for this approach

Please use these tables with the generic action cycle guidance, in Part 1. This table focuses on
questions and actions in that are specific to this approach.
Step 1: PREPARE the planning process

In addition to generic guidance…
This strategy is about committing up front to belonging as a value and vision for inclusion, and
then using this commitment drive the other parts of the action cycle. Is the vision of inclusion-
as-belonging likely to have sufficient support from key school stakeholders and the wider
community, such that it makes sense to go forward?
Step 2: ASSESS out your current situation and resources

Key questions
• Are any of your current school policies concerned with belonging or related concepts? In
what way?
• In this cycle, will you focus on pupil belonging across the school, or focus on specific groups
of pupils, and their specific barriers to belonging?
You will need detailed information in order to proceed to the planning step. DO take the
time to ask your school community—don’t assume.
• What does belonging mean to pupils, members of school community?
• What circumstances, events, make pupils feel like they do or do not belong in the school
community? What range of ‘answers’ are present across groups of pupils?

18

3A Goals This approach’s vision for inclusion:
Pupils are included if they feel like they belong. School communities use
policies and actions to facilitate or increase pupils’ sense of belonging. These
will be different across schools, because how people understand ‘belonging’
will differ too.

Use information you collected in Step 2 to identify goals. You are likely to
have goals related to promoting circumstances or actions that are important
to your pupils’ sense of belonging (e.g. opportunity to share interests) and to
reducing other interactions, circumstances (e.g. bullying).
Don’t forget to consider… whether actions to promote belonging for certain

pupils may have unintended, negative effects on others.
3B Actions Follow generic guidance
3C Plan to measure In addition to generic guidance…
The essential questions your measurement needs to answer are “Were
our actions successful at making some pupils feel greater belonging?
Who and why?”
It will be critical to collect qualitative information directly from pupils. What do

they think and feel? Asking staff or parents/carers about effects can also be
useful and informative, but is no substitute for hearing from pupils themselves.
Check: are you planning to measure/collect feedback in a way that would also
capture negative effects and experiences, if there are any?
3D Feasibility Follow generic guidance
check

Follow generic guidance
Step 5: EVALUATE, and reflect on your changes

Key questions to answer through your collected information and team reflection
• Were our actions successful at making some pupils feel greater belonging? Who and why?
• Were there negative effects on anyone’s belonging? Who and why?
If we have both positive and negative effects on different groups of people, how can we decide a way
forwards?

19
Existing measures of school belonging

Due to the amount of research in this area, there are multiple standardised questionnaires and
surveys to measure school belonging for different age groups (terminology may vary). These tools
might help gauge levels of belonging now or trends across your population of learners, but won’t be
the right tool for finding out about school-specific questions, like which policies or people might be
contributing to pupils feeling included/excluded. Castro-Kemp and colleagues (2020) give a good
description of several measures and show example items (in-text). This paper is open-access.
Primary school measures
• Psychological Sense of School Membership Scale-Primary (PSSM-P; Wagle et al., 2018). This
paper is open-access. Find the scale items in the supplementary material, which is a separate
download to the main paper.
• Me and My School Questionnaire (Deighton et al., 2013). A downloadable measure, terms of use
and scoring information are available free via the Child Outcomes Research Consortium (CORC)
website.
Secondary school measures

• Psychological Sense of School Membership Scale (PSSM; Goodenough, 1993), currently
available for download here.
While there are many more measures are reported in the academic literature, they aren’t necessarily
available for purchase or download.

20
2.2 Participatory policy
Introduction
The core idea of participatory policy design is that members of the wider school community
take part in developing and evaluating school policies—not school leaders/staff members
alone. Pupils, families, and staff all have valuable knowledge, skills and experience that can
facilitate inclusion.
Policies developed through participation can increase inclusion by literally including more
people as planners and decision-makers, but also because the developed policies have
incorporated a wider range of needs, goals, and values along the way.
Participatory policy design is not a new idea, and goes by many names. The terminology differs
across contexts and fields4, but the idea of shared input and decision-making remains the same.
This approach differs from the other approaches in Belonging in School primarily in terms of who is
involved in the planning cycle, who has the decision-making power, and what the practicalities will
look like for organising and running your policy planning process.
There is no one, singular “participatory design method” that can be cut-and-pasted across
questions and contexts, but rather an underlying theory and a family of techniques. This guidance
includes many reflective and planning questions about who, what, when, where, and why—and
those many decisions are characteristic of participatory design approaches, whether you are
looking at metropolitan planning or mental health services or math skills apps.
Participatory design (and co-design, and co-production, other related terms and
practices) are an extremely complex area, with many diverse examples and decades
of research literature. Trying to give “an introduction” is a project for a whole book!
Writing this section was about deciding what to leave out, as well as what to include.
For Belonging in School, we have tried to focus on ideas about what participation is
and what it has to do with inclusion. We also look at levels and types of participation
that might currently be most feasible for schools. There is extensive guidance out there
for schools who want to go further—see the end of this section for some pointers.
4
Depending on which UK nation you are in and your role, you may frequently hear about co-production,
which for example appears in England’s SEND code of practice (DfE, 2015).

22
What’s the point of participation?

There are both practical and ethical (or values-based) arguments for developing inclusive
policies through participatory processes. The practical argument is that participatory design
of anything will better fit its users/community members and have greater buy-in than if it is
unilaterally designed by “experts” alone. Both adults and children are more likely to support and
use something that meets their needs, and something where they have an element of ownership.
Users bring important insight and understanding of a specific situation or problem, which is
equally as helpful and important as the information contributed by an expert or authority figure.
In the case of schools, both pupils and staff may have deep situational knowledge—but pupils
bring their expertise and view of being pupils and being children. Their experiences will always be
different to those of adults, even their teachers. A participatory policy design process represents an
opportunity for mutual learning.
There is also the ethical argument that people have a right to be involved in decision-making
around the services, tools, and spaces they must use—in this case, educational provision, tools,
and spaces. This argument is traceable back to the roots of participatory design in Scandinavian
industrial contexts (1960s-1970s), where there was a drive to democratise and to include
stakeholders in workplace decision-making5. In the UK, there is also a legal obligation to children
in terms of educational decision-making. Article 12 in the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child
(1989) specifies that a child “who is capable of forming his or her own views” has “the right to
express those views freely in all matters affecting the child, the views of the child being given due
weight in accordance with the age and maturity of the child” (Article 12.2). Lundy clarifies that,
“There may be a misperception that the right to express a view is somehow dependent on
‘the age and maturity of the child’. This phrase, which can obviously limit the application
of the right, only applies to the second part of Article 12(1) (the obligation to give views
due weight). Children’s right to express their views is not dependent upon their capacity to
express a mature view; it is dependent only on their ability to form a view, mature or not”
(2007, p935).
The long literature on participatory design with children, including young children and those with
limited verbal language or literacy, attests to a wide range of ways in which children can express
views, and decision-makers can use them. Even if this obligation may not be a deciding factor
your choice to include children in policymaking or not, the legal right is there, and all professionals
should keep it in mind when weighing up the importance of hearing and acting on children’s views.
5
E.g. see discussion in Bjerknes and Bratteteig (1995).

23
Linking participation and inclusion

There are two main arguments for how designing policies through community participation can
increase a school’s inclusiveness:
1. Inclusion by participation: Pupils, families, and others are literally included in shaping their
school environment. Marginalised or less-engaged individuals/groups might even be specifically
invited to participate for this reason. This involvement with decision-making can be a strong signal
that people are valued and belong (see Approach 1), or may also be a signal that the school
acknowledges there is work to do on inclusion. They’re taking steps to become a place where
people belong. Being part of decision-making increased a sense of ownership and buy-in over
what’s happening at school.
2. Shifting what policies are made and why: A participatory policy development process will
include a wider range of views, ideas, and experiences throughout, than when policy is created
by school leaders alone (or even by a single person!). It may result in different foci for your action
planning, different goals, different actions, different assessments of what’s working. When the
community participates, you find new solutions—and problems you might not have known
you had! Over time, your school policies are likely to be meeting more needs and promoting
belonging because the process of making those policies will include more voices and experiences.
We talk about “shifting policies” rather than “shifting inclusion policies” because
all policies can impact how inclusive and accessible your school space and your
practices are (see a discussion of this in Belonging in School Part 1, section 3.1).
If you are interested in incorporating more participation into your policymaking, we
encourage you to try it in any area of policy, not only “inclusion policy” or policies you
think are most likely to affect neurodivergent pupils.
Both of these routes only work to improve inclusion if schools (as institutions) and
individual leaders are truly committed to hearing their communities and acting on that
input, even if they are not yet in a position to share or re-distribute decision-making power.
Not all community input will be actionable, not least because of straitened resources. However,
transparency and “showing the work” can be very important in communicating why decision-
makers act on some inputs and not others.

24
Levels of participation
The literature in this area generally acknowledges that there are different levels of community
participation in decision-making, with Arnstein’s ladder of citizen participation (1969) as a
particularly well-known model that you will see referenced if you read further about this topic6.
What do “levels” of participation actually mean, however, and what makes them different from one
another?
What do “levels” mean in this context?

Discussion of participation “levels” begins with the assumption that someone or some
group of people in the community has decision-making power now, and there are other
people who are affected by these decisions, but not currently part of making them. For
example, decision-makers might be the managers of a business, city planners, or senior leadership
of a school. In many respects, the point of these roles is to make decisions! There are also other
relevant types of power that affect participation and decision-making, like who is perceived as
having knowledge or being an expert, levels of privilege/disadvantage in society generally, or who
is perceived as capable of knowing and deciding at all (an issue that particularly will affect children/
young people, and disabled people). Even outside the circle of decision-makers, sub-groups
groups of the community will likely have unequal amounts of privilege and power.
As noted in the introductory section, a core idea of participatory policy design and its relatives is
that people who will be affected by decisions should be part of making those decisions—whether
they are workers in a company, residents of a city, or pupils in a school. Talking about “levels”
of participation is a way to describe planning and decision-making processes based on
whether, and how much, the community is involved in those processes, and whether and
how much power is redistributed away from traditional decision-makers.
6
Try this short summary from the Open University:
https://www.open.edu/openlearn/mod/oucontent/view.php?id=21024&section=4.1

25
Three example levels of participatory policy development

To help illustrate what types of participation are possible and how they differ from one another, we
propose three example levels of participation. We include a comparison example with little or no
community participation. These examples were created for Belonging in School, so may not match
up neatly to other participation models. They vary in terms of how many people are participating
and what that looks like, and the extent to which community members have responsibility for
making decisions and administering the action cycle.
A. Staff-led7 policy development: One person or a small group of staff members have full
responsibility for all aspects of developing and evaluating school policies, and may or
may not consult with others or seek feedback along the way. This level effectively has no
community participation, or very little if there is a consultation at some point.
B. Staff-led policy development based on community consultation and feedback:
• Staff members manage the action cycle administration and have decision-making
responsibility.
• Throughout the action cycle, staff members use inputs from community
consultations to guide their decision-making as far as possible (i.e. identify the
priorities for change, specific goals and actions), and also gather feedback and
experiences at multiple points.
• A major planning priority is to design the consultation and feedback elements so as
to make these as accessible as possible, and to reach key people/groups within the
school. They may consult different people at different times and through different
modalities/activities.
C. Mixed “policy team” of school staff and community members:
• Staff members manage the action administration overall.
• There are one or more “policy teams” made up of staff and school community
members (e.g. pupils, parents/carers, non-teaching school staff). The same team(s)
work together over time, across stages of the action cycle.
• Teams may generate ideas that are then taken forward in more detail by staff (e.g.
writing actual policy guidance based on policy team’s discussion).
• In principle, the policy team should guide decision-making as far as possible but
they are advisory, rather than making binding decisions. Staff ultimately hold
decision-making power.
An alternate version of level C might be to have an adult policy team and a child policy team
doing complementary work. This can give you more flexibility about logistics, and meeting access
needs to make contributions manageable and meaningful. The child policy team may have
dedicated responsibilities, like leading on speaking to other children in Step 2 and Step 4/5 of the
action cycle. This creates an additional layer of decisions about who has what responsibilities and
why, and if children are being credited with capability to form and express views (as per Article 12),
and these views are being given “due weight” in the planning process.
7
We use the generic term “staff” here because we know schools may vary in terms of who has primary
responsibility for policies now, and around inclusion issues or in general. Also, inclusion-focused role titles
vary across the UK nations.

26
Next steps to greater participation beyond example C

would be…
• Combine the policy team with consultation activity at some points, to “check” the
smaller team’s planning with the larger community. Does it have wider support? Is
it seen as acceptable?
• For the action cycle planning process to be administered by the policy
team to a greater degree, especially with respect to agenda-setting. They
would become involved in steps where they have not yet been involved—for
example, in analysing inputs and feedback, and work on actually drafting policy
documentation and reporting.
• To begin sharing, delegating and re-distributing decision-making power
away from staff members only, out to a policy team or the wider community. For
example, a policy team may have binding decision-making power, and share
responsibility for drafting actual policy documents, communication around policy
changes, and/or reporting.
• Increase decision-maker transparency and accountability back to the community.
Like the Four Planning Approaches, these three participation examples may be more or less
appropriate or feasible in specific settings. One isn’t inherently better or worse than another:
it’s what seems better for your school, now. “More participation” or shared responsibility isn’t
necessarily a better option if you think people in your school will find it overwhelming! “More
participation” also may not be necessary or productive for addressing every issue, especially if
time and resources are very tight, or you are addressing a pre-defined problem (e.g. see some
discussion of this in Roper, Grey, & Cadogan, 2018). Most importantly, “more participation” may
not be a pre-requisite for achieving positive changes. As we say elsewhere in Belonging in School,
progress matters. Expanding your school community’s participation in creating school policies
can really make a positive difference in terms of meeting needs, but also belongingness and other
parts of the school experience. It is truly OK to begin modestly, and build on that foundation in the
future.

27
Action cycle guidance

Generic guidance for participatory processes
This approach begins with “Step 0”, to make a high-level decision about what level of
participation is likely to be realistic for your school, in this cycle. This is to cut down on planning
complexity and save time. If in doubt over how much participation is likely to be feasible or acceptable
in your school now, choose the less ambitious option, and work on making it as positive and successful
as you can.
Step 0: Reality check

Purpose: Decide what level or type of participation is likely to be realistic for your school in this cycle,
to narrow your planning options. For example, does example A, B, or C sound most realistic? Or
doing even more?
Key questions:
• Do we think it is realistic to involve pupils, families, and/or our wider staff team at all? If yes to
at least one of these groups…
• What level of participation do we think would be realistic and why? Are there specific types of
participation or activities we think are not realistic?
• What are our prior experiences (successful or unsuccessful) of involving school community
members in making or evaluating policies? What can we learn from these precedents? Can
we use them to rule out any options now?
Step 1: PLAN the planning process

Purpose: As in the generic guidance, this is a “project management” step about deciding the scope
and practicalities of running your current action cycle. Who will be involved, and how will it work?
If you have decided to work with a policy team, you will need to define their role (like a mini job
description) and recruit them in this step.
Key questions for recruiting a policy team:
• Will there be just one team, or multiple teams? If multiple, what are their roles?
• How big should the team be, and does everyone need to be there all the time? We
recommend teams smaller than 10.
• Will the team(s) have children, adults, or both?
• Will people be able to volunteer themselves, or will you strategically invite people with
particular experiences, or membership of certain groups in the community?
• How do practicalities feed into this decision making? E.g. where and when to meet, online or
in person… Those decisions may rule some people in or out. See the end of this section, on
logistical planning.
• How can team members get to know each other, and get ready to work together?
Remember that you can’t represent everyone in your school community without teams
becoming huge! What choices will help serve your community best, now?
Depending on your plans, the policy team (including community members) may be part of
project management decisions about how the rest of the action cycle will run.

28
After Step 1 (planning the planning process), the action cycle does not necessarily ask different
questions than in the generic guidance (Section 1.3), but may involve different people carrying out
the tasks, contributing information, or making decisions.
For each step, consider who should be involved based on the model of participation you have
chosen, or if the step provides a point where you should be consulting or seeking wider feedback
before going on.
Step 2: MAP out your current situation and resources

Even if you have a policy team that includes community members, you still need to do this
step. Part of this step may also involve information-sharing with community team members
so they can be informed decision-makers (e.g. judging if something is feasible with respect to
school resources), and understand how other decision-makers like school governors or the local
authority might fit into the planning picture.

School leadership actively and meaningfully involves the wider school
community in reviewing, developing, and evaluating school policies, and
may share decision-making power with the community.
School policies change to become more inclusive over time, because
a wider range of people are involved in making them. Where possible,
community members are directly included in the school as knowers and
decision-makers.
3B Actions Follow generic guidance

3C Plan to measure Follow generic guidance

check

29

Step 5: EVALUATE, and reflect on your changes

Evaluating your participatory process: Make sure to also collect information about your
participatory process itself. What has it been like for different people/groups to participate?
Gathering information about practical and accessibility issues is important, but also about the
experience. Who did/did not feel valued and respected, or that they could speak freely?
After Step 5…
Key reflective questions
• How manageable/unmanageable was the level and type of participation in this cycle?
For whom and why?
• How did it work to share decision-making power (or to not share this power)?
• Would the people involved this time be willing to participate in the next cycle, or would
they recommend the role to others?
• What level and type of participation would be realistic in the future?

30
Worked examples: bringing together participation levels with the action cycle
The following hypothetical examples try to illustrate how the same planning focus might look
across the action cycle for participation levels B and C. These examples have a cycle focus of
improving the sensory environment of the school, and goals around reducing visual busyness
in hallway areas—but they arrive there in different ways. In reality, the two processes would be
more likely to arrive at different solutions, but making them the same enables easier comparison.
Participation example B: Staff-led policy development based

on community consultation and feedback
Step 1 Based on ongoing feedback/communication channels with pupils and
parents, staff policymakers identify sensory aspects of school building
as an important accessibility/inclusion issue, and decide to use it as their
action cycle focus.
Step 2 Staff policymakers run a consultation with pupils and staff around sensory
experiences of the school and different spaces, to identify possible targets
for change and desired improvements (within current resource and time
constraints). They map other information relevant to sensory issues.
Step 3 Based on consultation, staff policymakers set goals to reduce visual
busyness and clutter in hallways, and identify specific actions around
reducing large, bright hallway displays and how pupil belongings/other
items are stored outside classrooms. They seek feasibility feedback
from teaching staff and adjust plans. Staff policymakers plan what
measurement information to collect.
Step 4 Staff policymakers write the new guidance for the school based on the
policy team discussions, set implementation timeline. Policy team directly
helps produce and promote communications about the new “Calm
Hallway” policies.
Step 5 Staff policymakers seek feedback from staff and pupils on their
experience of the changes8, and recommend keeping the changes based
on their analysis of the answers.
After step 5, they might return to the consultation results in Step 2 and
choose another goal to work on in the next cycle.
8
Qualitative data collection, see advice in Section 3.2

31
Participation example C: Mixed “policy team” of school staff

and community members
Step 0 School leadership decides to support a trial of participatory policy
development, managed by two main staff policymakers. They will organise
the process and take overall responsibility. Here, school leadership has not
determined a specific policy focus.
Step 1 Staff policymakers plan for a policy team with an advisory role: how it
would operate, who it would involve, timescale, etc. They choose to invite
specific staff, children, and parents/carers instead of asking for volunteers,
in order to include a range of experiences. They assemble a policy team
of 9 people: 3 staff members (including 1 who is openly neurodivergent), 1
occupational therapist, 2 parents, and 3 older pupils proposed by teachers
as likely to engage, but not be overwhelmed by participating in the
discussions with adults.
In early agenda-setting discussions, team narrows to sensory aspects of
school as a priority focus right now.
Step 2 Drawing on own experiences and additional knowledge from staff
policymakers (e.g. of planning constraints, legal obligations etc.), policy
team builds up a map of information and resources around sensory issues
in the school.
Step 3 With support from staff policymakers to narrow their focus, policy team
identifies specific goals and actions around reducing visual busyness and
noise in hallways.
Head teacher vetoes noise-related goals because all proposed actions
would cost too much, or are perceived as unlikely to be supported by
wider school. Only the goals around reducing visual busyness will go
ahead. Based on team input, staff policymakers plan what measurement
information is feasible to collect.
Step 4 Staff policymakers write the new guidance for the school based on the
policy team discussions, set implementation timeline. Policy team directly
helps produce and promote communications about the new “Calm
Hallway” policies.
Step 5 Staff policymakers have main responsibility for measurement, and share
information back to the policy team, who discusses impact of their changes
on various parts of school community. Team divided on whether changes
have been successful, future changes. Staff policymakers make a final
report to school leadership.
After step 5, they might continue their work on another goal, or add/change
members, or disband, depending on the team’s experience.

32
Even more guidance

Logistical planning is critical
In this approach, it is truly worth investing time in decision-making around how the planning
process will run, and defining the roles and responsibilities of the people involved. This is not
a step before getting to the “real work” of policy planning—it is the real work, and may be the
hardest part! Planning questions like, “where shall our policy team meet, for how long, and
how often, and should we get biscuits?” aren’t just procedural, but can be integral to the
success of your process. Decisions like these can shape who is able to take part in your process
around other commitments, and also who wants to take part, and what it is like for them. Does
this policy thing sound scary, or manageable? Does this sound like a trustworthy process that may
result in change?
Don’t assume that school buildings are a default acceptable (or positive) meeting place, or that
meeting online will be accessible to all. What about a local library, park, village hall? Do a little
digging about your options and how these might dis/advantage certain community members. Keep
in mind you don’t need to include people all at the same time or in the same ways.
If you are doing consultations, it’s equally important to get the most out of these activities by
planning them very carefully, to maximise accessibility and honesty. Again, you need to carefully
consider who you will consult, and how—and why!

33
Big questions to ask when planning consultations

• What is the purpose of this consultation? How will we communicate about that
purpose?
o For example, to scope our current issues and concerns and help decide a
planning focus?
o To decide between options?
o To feed back on a plan or an experience?
• What actions have we taken to make the consultation accessible to specific
groups/specific needs? This could be accessibility in terms of timing and location,
but also… demands for English language comprehension, amount of reading/
writing, whether there are multiple response modalities, time given to respond…
• Do we think all people will be able to contribute honestly, and be critical if they
need to be? What can we do to help ensure this?
• What will we do with the information we collect?
The importance of open questions
Especially if you are running an agenda-setting consultation or want to understand
people’s experiences about something, ask an open question if you can. Consider the
following two example questions for pupils:
“What is something that makes school difficult for you?”
“Which of these makes school most difficult for you? X, Y or Z?”
These are questions that will produce very different answers. If you suspect factors X
Y and Z are important, asking the first (open) question may turn up completely different
answers than you expected. That can be part of the beauty and surprise of participatory
design processes!
Our guidance on qualitative data collection (section 3.1) may be useful in planning
consultations. These may use recognised methods like questionnaires, focus groups,
surveys, or interviews—but don’t forget the possibility for arts-based methods and more!

34
Managing expectations around participatory activities9

If you are running a participatory process, no matter who else is involved or their level of
involvement, it’s important to manage people’s expectations about the activities they’re engaged in.
What is the purpose of what’s happening now, and will it result in change?
Common expectation 1: “This meeting/activity is about X” (actually it was about Y…)
We strongly encourage you to communicate the planned purpose of every activity, every time,
even if you are with the same team. If nothing else, this makes sure the organisers are on the
same page about the purpose! Some common purposes might be…
• Building relationships and getting to know one another
• Identifying priorities
• Generating or sharing ideas or experiences
• Reviewing or feeding back on existing content or ideas
• Making decisions
• Producing a specific output
If you need to do more than one of these on the same day/session, help people stay on track by
splitting the functions up and labelling them (e.g. on a meeting agenda, labelling sections of
an online survey). For all these types of activities, explicitly state their purpose in every meeting or
activity session, especially if different people may be joining in. Signal clearly when transitions are
happening, and whether there is capacity for people to give more input later, if they feel like the first
task isn’t finished. Feeling like there is unfinished business is common, and making preparations
for later input can be an important step in making your processes more accessible for those who
need more time to process the information or make a response.
The main risk of not clearly communicating objectives is that you will not meet the
immediate objectives—and may jeopardise longer-term ones. For example, if team activities
so far have focused on sharing ideas and experiences but today you need to make decisions,
running out of time because people are still proposing new ideas may leave the organisers 1)
making unilateral decisions in order to keep moving, or 2) changing the schedule to have the group
make the decision. Neither is ideal!
Common expectation 2: This activity will result in a concrete list of decisions, actions, or
priorities
If you are new to participatory activities (or to types of qualitative data collection like running
interviews or focus groups), it would be easy to think that “something is wrong” or “people didn’t get
it” when your activity produces a rich and messy stew of contradictory ideas and opinions and has
made zero decisions. Actually, this is the most common outcome!
9
“Activity” could be anything here—a focus group, an online consultation study, an arts-based activity, asking
people to respond to a plan…

35
A more realistic expectation: You are very unlikely to get fully-formed, actionable
contributions out of most participatory activities, without further processing the inputs.
By processing, we mean some kind of analysis. It may be simple, like…
• Counting (or estimating) what views and topics came up most or least
• Chunking similar contributions
• Splitting up big contributions that have covered many issues
• Looking at very specific or personal examples and contributions for underlying ideas or
themes.
• Filtering out “off-topic” content…but holding on to it. The most important actions or priorities
or views, according to your community, may be things you haven’t thought to ask about at
all—“off-topic” doesn’t mean irrelevant!
• Setting aside ideas that are clearly outside your current scope or stated constraints (for
example, things that are the purview of the local authority or government, and outside your
school’s control).
This can feel awkward and like you are not “using” what people have contributed, but it is an
essential step in making use of those contributions. Depending on how you are running your
process, a policy team may be doing the processing, not a staff member alone. See section 3.2 on
qualitative data analysis for more ideas and resources.
Make sure you leave time to process as you go. Do it as soon as you can! For example, after
consultation focus group 1, do some review or processing. Let’s say they proposed an idea that the
group was very excited by, and seems within your scope, budget, etc. You might want to take the
idea to your second consultation focus group to ask what they think.
Common expectation 3: The idea I shared/the plan we made will become reality
There are several levels of expectation management here. The simplest one is to make sure
people (especially, but not only, children and young people) are aware that even if they share
an idea with you, it does not mean this idea will become reality! Many other stakeholders may
share ideas as part of the current policy planning process, and these people may not agree on
what’s important or what to do about it. It won’t be possible to use all the ideas. There will be more
discussion to decide what to do next.
Especially for a policy team, you may need to manage expectations in more detail about the
possibility of proposed changes or decisions being vetoed or amended by 1) the staff members
managing the process, or 2) people higher up the food chain. Is this a possibility? What are some
reasons that may happen? Don’t let this be a nasty surprise—be honest about who has decision-
making power.
Searching for more guidance: terms and topics

As noted in Section 3 about evaluation, it can be least overwhelming to start with books, especially
books for university students, rather than braving the entirety of the conflicting advice on the
internet. If you do want to look for books (or dive into Google), remember the diversity of possible
terms in this area:
• Participatory research
• Participatory design
• Co-design
• Co-production
• Co-produced [policy] or other term

36
Many guidance resources and projects focus on health and services.

Don’t assume something won’t be useful to you, because it isn’t directly about education!
You are very unlikely to find someone who has solved the exact problem your school faces: this is
a place to look for methods and advice that may be transferrable to your setting.
Books and papers about children’s interaction design and designing technologies with
children can be some of the best sources for examples of including children in design processes,
including young or non-speaking children. These range from working with child design teams on
long-term projects, to shorter one-off sessions developing ideas or eliciting feedback on options or
prototypes.
Example resources and projects

The following is a very short list of additional sources and examples that may serve as a jumping-
off point to understand the diversity of participatory work happening now, and seek more
information.
• Co-production collective research library: A range of readings, tools, and examples around
co-produced services and research. The primary focus is not on education, so do click around
to find tools and examples that may be relevant for your setting:
https://resources.coproductioncollective.co.uk/
• Co-production: Putting principles into practice in mental health contexts. This guide from
Australia is about mental health, but provides lots of helpful questions and examples that might
be able to guide your planning. It does focus mainly on co-production, a level of participation
that is more complex and with greater power sharing than the “level C” example detailed in this
guide.
https://healthsciences.unimelb.edu.au/data/assets/pdf_file/0007/3392215/Coproduction_
putting-principles-into-practice.pdf
• Whitley researchers project (Berkshire): They describe themselves as “a partnership
between Whitley Community Development Association, local residents and the University of
Reading. The programme involves local residents in conducting their own research, voicing
their own needs and devising solutions to local issues.” One project, “Aspiration in Whitley” is
education-focused (2018). https://research.reading.ac.uk/community-based-research/whitley-
researchers-voice-in-research/
• UW KidsTeam Anatomy Guidebook: Free e-book detailing the practicalities of a long-running
kids technology design team based in a public library, with some further intro to participatory
design. NB: this resource may still be in progress; not all sections are complete.
https://www.kidsteam.ischool.uw.edu/ebook
• RECENT PAPER: Involving children, teachers and parents/carers in dialogues around
child well-being in schools. Free. Reports a knowledge exchange programme that involved
primary school children, teachers and parents/carers in dialogues around school well-being,
focusing on use of creative methods. Focuses on explaining their methods, and lessons
learned.
https://uclpress.scienceopen.com/hosted-document?doi=10.14324/RFA.07.1.12
• RECENT PAPER: Using Stakeholder Involvement, Expert Knowledge and Naturalistic
Implementation to Co-Design a Complex Intervention to Support Children’s Inclusion
and Participation in Schools: The CIRCLE Framework. Free. This paper focused specifically
on inclusion issues and UK schools, and reports using a series of stakeholder workshops to
design an intervention.
https://www.mdpi.com/2227-9067/8/3/217

37
Spotlight on participatory budgeting

Participatory budgeting initiatives include the wider community in deciding how
budgets should be spent. Participatory budgeting has been tried in many settings,
including UK schools. This could be an option for your school, or the available
guidance and projects could form practical examples for including pupils, families,
and others in decision-making. For example, how did they run sessions and
meetings? What are some options for collecting input, or groups approaching
decision-making?
Get started with these guidance sources:
• Participatory budgeting Scotland: https://pbscotland.scot/pb-in-schools
• Participatory policymaking toolkit: https://www.democracybeyondelections.org/wp-
content/uploads/2021/10/PPM_Toolkit_FINAL.pdf
• Council of Europe toolkit: https://www.coe.int/en/web/participatory-democracy/-/-
school-participatory-budgeting-new-council-of-europe-toolkit-available
Or, check out the Cost of the School Day Project with Midlothian schools: https://
www.midlothian.gov.uk/info/200284/your_community/449/participatory_budgeting/3

38
2.3 Inclusion by design
Introduction
We have included limited background about this approach because there is a large amount
of pre-existing educator guidance available online, such as via CAST (2018a) https://
udlguidelines.cast.org/ and the government of Aotearoa New Zealand (n.d.) https://inclusive.
tki.org.nz/guides/universal-design-for-learning/
We encourage you to consult these sources, and search more widely for examples of
inclusion by design in schools.
This planning approach is about changing how your school approaches policy development,
to focus on system-level inclusion planning and changing the environment to be more
accessible to everyone “as standard”, rather than changing learners.
A central idea of inclusion by design is to examine “usual” school environments and practices, and
seek to make these more universally accessible to everyone. Flexibility, agency and offering choice
are major ingredients, as well as providing multiple ways for pupils to engage, express themselves,
and show what they know. This is a system-level approach, looking at the level of the classroom,
school, or even larger systems.
A very useful framework in this area is Universal Design for Learning (UDL). CAST, a learning
sciences organisation, has developed comprehensive guidance and resources about this framework.
They explain,
“UDL is a framework to guide the design of learning environments that are accessible and
challenging for all…. UDL aims to change the design of the environment rather than
to change the learner. When environments are intentionally designed to reduce barriers,
all learners can engage in rigorous, meaningful learning” (CAST 2018b, “What’s the goal of
UDL?”)
This framework focuses on multiple means of representation, action and expression, and
engagement, for example by:
• Presenting information and content in different ways;

• Offering choices to all learners;
• Providing different modes of classroom engagement that align with students’ interests and
challenge them appropriately.
The online CAST resources provide extensive resources to explain these principles, and planning
tools to help educators to reflect on and implement these strategies.

40
This type of system-level, “change the environment” intervention contrasts clearly with common
inclusion planning approaches. Where it is apparent that a learner’s needs aren’t being met at
school, the prevalent strategy has been planning and implementing adaptations, accommodations
and supports at the level of the individual. Even if left implicit, there is a sense that we are
changing or adding to “regular” education to meet that learner’s needs. On the one hand, this makes
intuitive sense—assessing individual learners’ needs and putting supports in place accordingly
sounds like the best way to help them.
On the other hand, this strategy becomes rapidly unsustainable when each classroom is likely
to have multiple pupils and needs beyond what is provided through “education as usual”.
Neurodivergent pupils are those with other types of support needs are not rare—they are a
substantial group of mainstream pupils, and growing. Staff can only do so much at once, especially
when they are under-resourced.
Making class- or school-level changes to improve the inclusivity of environments and
practice is an investment in planning, but with potential for longer-term savings on resources
and time as more needs are met by what the school usually does, rather than by special
arrangement. It’s about “spending to save”. There is also huge potential for benefit to all learners,
not only those with neurodevelopmental differences or who currently receive support with some parts
of their learning. In addition to potentially better supporting pupils without documented differences,
there are valuable opportunities to work on pupils’ understanding of their own learning and needs,
their metacognition, and self-advocacy skills.
Providing support options is an important distinction here: this approach is not about rolling out
intensive or highly specialised programmes to all students indiscriminately, but about making
more tools and ways of doing things readily available, along with the flexibility and agency for
students to choose. There will always be learners who do need specialised, expert support such as
speech and language therapy. Inclusion by design does not in any way deny that pupils should be
able to access these supports. However, there is a large realm of less-specialised support that might
currently be offered as “adjustments” or “accommodations”—but could be offered to all, with a little
planning.
Some support options can be extremely simple and low- or no-cost, even when rolled out to
everyone. For example, always turning on closed captioning/subtitles as a default when showing
videos, or putting the schedule for the lesson or day up at the front of the room for everyone to see,
instead of only giving it to pupils who have this as an agreed support. The information is just there for
anyone who needs to refer to it—without having to ask, or be singled out by requesting or using it.
Offering this information “as standard” is unlikely to negatively impact the pupils who do not need it.
They may simply ignore it! There may be other types of physical resources your classroom already
has, like mini-whiteboards or headphones, that could be relocated where everyone is freely able to
access them if and when they think they need them.

41
Flexibility and agency are two more important features of inclusion by design. In being able
to flexibly interact with their environments and make choices, pupils gain confidence and exercise
their decision-making skills. As a result, they build their sense of agency, which has been shown
to positively impact learning, emotional regulation abilities, and engagement in problem-solving
behaviours (e.g. Taub et al., 2020). Flexibility and agency are beneficial for all children, regardless
of whether or not they have neurodevelopmental differences. Inclusion by design sets out to create
school environments in which all pupils can participate and thrive, make meaningful choices about
how to engage, and build valuable skills.
Finally, it’s important to be realistic about what this approach can achieve. Every classroom has such
a diversity of needs and experiences that it is extremely unlikely to find the “perfect” system
to meet all needs all the time—even just for this school year. Indeed, the “best” set of universal
principles can shift as different children enter and age out of school. There are also bound to be
conflicting needs—like pupils who need movement to focus, and those who are distracted by it. This
is simply part of the process, and should not discourage you from pursuing inclusion by design as a
viable approach to pursuing inclusive policies at your school. Designing for inclusion and accessibility
“as standard” can help ensure the flexibility of supports (and attitudes) are present to meet a large
proportion of needs, much of the time.
Real examples of inclusion by design

School level: Flexible seating in a London mainstream primary
Seating plans and “good sitting” are major classroom concerns, but conventional chairs and desks do
not suit all children for a range of reasons, including neurodevelopmental differences that may mean
they need movement or high sensory input in order to regulate and focus. Occupational therapists
may already recommend alternative seating for some children, and there is research on the benefits
of targeted seating interventions for individual neurodivergent children. In a pilot project led by a
teacher-researcher, her school trialled and evaluated flexible seating choices as a whole-school
inclusive adaptation available to all pupils (Al-Jayoosi, 2022). Their study asked, what if seating
alternatives were available to everyone? Could more learners benefit? Crucially, the school was able
to link this trial to their school improvement plan, which facilitated planning and staff involvement.
The school made a range of seating options available with “minimal rules”: the seats should be
accessible and visible to all pupils for them to choose and use, and have minimal direction or
rules about use. In addition to “regular” classroom chairs, the many initial options included wobble
cushions and stools, floor desks, standing desks, floor rockers, ball chairs, and rocking classroom
chairs. The school purchased a percentage of seating for pupils to try over a period of time, and
then more following extensive pupil surveys and feedback. Children explained their preferences
and decision-making in terms of comfort of different options, the extent to which these facilitated
additional movement, and how well the option supported their concentration in lessons. Some pupils
clearly found a favourite option, and others were more flexible in trying and using different seating
types. By the end of the trial, the school was able to offer 50% flexible seating options in each
classroom.

42
Overall, staff reacted very favourably to the seating trial, and reported it did not require any difficult
adjustments to their teaching, and did not create challenges for managing pupil behaviour. In fact,
they believed that pupils’ behaviour, comfort, mood, and collaboration improved with the introduction
of flexible seating choices.
Lead researcher Heba al-Jayoosi reflected that this school and its staff strongly prioritises inclusion
and serves a community with high levels of need. There is already substantial flexibility built into their
day, and how pupils and staff already sat, moved, and used classroom spaces before the seating
trial. It’s possible that in another school, there might be different barriers or facilitators to offering this
type of option as standard.
View a free online talk about this project on Youtube.
National level: Adopting UDL in Aotearoa New Zealand
In recent years, Aotearoa New Zealand’s Ministry of Education has introduced new policies and
guidance to shape more inclusive primary and secondary schools. Some of these changes, such
as the inclusion of digital technologies in teaching and learning and the move away from single
classrooms to flexible learning environments, have helped introduce educators to UDL. This in turn
has promoted curriculum accessibility and helped foster environments that minimise barriers to
learning.
The emphasis on inclusive education is paying off: compared with other OECD countries, they have
higher than average early childhood enrolment and secondary school completion (New Zealand
Government, 2020). The country’s success in implementing UDL principles, while maintaining a
commitment to high educational achievement, shows that inclusion policies can help all students do
their best at school, contribute to their school environment and feel included.
UDL in Aotearoa New Zealand is also a clear example of how and why successful inclusion
strategies are inherently local. UDL is a methodology originally from the USA, which was further
developed within Aotearoa New Zealand to fit their own values, needs, and communities (Butler,
2019). The “solution” they have developed is a unique solution that may not directly work
elsewhere—and a strong vote for why other nations or school systems should also work on
‘localising’ their strategies.

43

Please use these tables with the generic action cycle guidance, in Part 1. This table focuses on
Steps 1 and 2 may be combined to some extent in this approach. It may be difficult to plan the action
cycle and focus on system-level decisions without first reviewing the timing and scope of your current
inclusion planning.
Step 1: PREPARE the planning process AND

Step 2: ASSESS your current situation and resources
Key questions
• How (and when) do we approach inclusion planning now? To what extent do we address
needs “reactively” on for individuals, versus planning for accessibility, support, and
inclusion at a system level?
• Are there areas where we think system-level planning is successfully happening now?
Where, and what’s helping it succeed?
• Are there areas where we think we do a good job now, in providing support options or
choices to all?
• How do we think and talk about support needs in our school now?
Identify initial targets for change and use them to help identify a focus for the current cycle.
For example…
• Are there issues in the school environment previously raised by pupils, families that
might be good targets for change?
• Are there areas where many pupils already have similar exceptions or adjustments?
• Are there areas where we already offer choice/flexibility to some pupils: could we
expand?
Begin planning how you could communicate about this approach to school community
members. What is the purpose of making system-level changes? Are there likely objections?
What, and from whom? (For example, concerns that these changes will somehow disrupt or
disadvantage certain pupils?)

44

Schools improve their inclusivity by changing “education as usual” to
make teaching and environments more universally accessible to all pupils,
and to build in the flexibility to adapt to individual needs on the ground.
In their planning, schools move away from reactive accommodations for
individuals, toward proactive, system-level “inclusion by design”.
Use any targets for change from Step 1-2 to help identify specific goals.
It’s better to be focused, and not try to change everything at once!
The process of implementing this approach might begin with a

consideration of individual children’s needs. After that, you may
choose to generalise individual supports in a way that may be helpful
to a range pupils across the classroom. Sometimes, considering how
to accommodate everyone’s needs at the same time can be very
difficult, which is why it’s useful to start small. For example, one of your
pupils might already be benefitting from using a fidget toy to help them
concentrate. One way of generalising this is to keep a box of fidget toys for
anyone to use, should they need to.
Remember that changing staff and pupil knowledge and attitudes

around support needs and differences generally can also be important
systemic changes, that can strongly influence the school experiences of
neurodivergent children.
3B Actions In addition to generic guidance…
Check: Are there preliminary actions that might help your planned
changes to be successful? For example, if you will be making supports
or choices newly available to everyone, how will you explain this? Do
pupils have the vocabulary to talk about their own needs?

45
Step 3: PLAN goals, actions, and measurement - cont.

For changes that offer pupils choices or make supports newly

available to all, keep in mind that consistent or long-term use of
those options isn’t necessarily the right (or only) measure. Part of
the point of choice and availability may be to normalise the presence
of supports and people doing things differently. It can be a ‘win’ if many
people try a new option and only a few use it long term—but in the process
the option becomes unremarkable and boring because it’s not a special
exception (e.g. taking movement breaks).
It’s also good to remember that inclusive policy changes might help
different pupils for different reasons. For example, a movement break
during the school day might help a hyperactive child release excess
energy, but it might also help a child experiencing sleep issues regain
energy and focus. When planning to measure, consider this diversity
of experiences, and avoid focusing on how a policy impacts only one
particular kind of child.
Don’t forget to assess impacts on staff members, as well as pupils.

For example, are there day-to-day time costs or time savings involved in
implementing the new policies compared to the old ones?
3D Feasibility In addition to generic guidance…
check
Carefully consider how many changes or new choices you are
planning right now. If all of them are implemented at once, what would
that look like day-to-day for staff and learners? For example, could it be
confusing and stressful to offer too many new options and choices in one
go?
Step 4: Implement your planning and begin measuring

Implementation includes communicating changes and new options to pupils, and making sure
all staff are clear on the plan. Planning a non-stigmatising, non-deficit-based explanation of
changes/options will be important to how people perceive them, and their willingness to engage.
Step 5: Evaluate, and reflect on your changes


46
Linking the Belonging in School Suggested Changes to this

approach
Several of our 12 Suggested Changes are examples of system-level changes, in the sense that
they create policy changes that apply to all pupils as standard and for use where needed, instead
of creating accommodations or exceptions for individual children. For example, a school might
introducing flexibility into uniform policies (change #9) as standard for all pupils. Many pupils may not
change what they wear at all, because the current policy isn’t posing a challenge for them. However,
any pupil could use that flexibility if they want or need it, without needing to justify themselves or seek
“special” treatment. On their side, the school no longer needs to track or manage which pupils have
exceptions or not—saving time and paperwork.
As a completely different type of system-level action, Suggested Changes #10-#11 could be about
working on staff skills and attitudes at a school level.
Ultimately, applying inclusive design principles in your school will involve some creative thinking.
What are some supports currently offered to individuals, and can those supports be generalised in a
manner that might help more pupils, if they were available to them? What are some routes by which
you could offer more flexibility and a greater sense of agency to your pupils?
Suggested changes 9-11 could be examples of

system-level policy changes
9. Uniforms
Reduce barriers and sensory distress around school uniforms by making policies
more flexible for all pupils, i.e. pupils can make uniform choices that fit their own
sensory needs,
10. Inclusion CPD
At the whole school level, intervene to help better equip staff to support learners by
investing in awareness and training related to inclusion.
11. Everyone supports inclusion
Intervene to change messages, attitudes, and decision-making at the school level,
especially regarding staff. All staff play a role in making their school inclusive, and
contribute to whether learners feel respected, safe, and included.
See the Section 5 in the Belonging in School PART 1 for the full text of the Twelve
Changes.

47
2.4 Committing to be a
neurodiversity-affirmative school
Introduction
This is a complex, evolving topic. It’s not possible to say everything about it in this guide,
or any guide! We have tried to provide a level of detail that helps readers get a sense
of what this approach would mean in practice, and whether they want to (or think it is
feasible to) engage with it in more depth.
This planning approach is about explicitly adopting the neurodiversity paradigm and using it
to reflect on your school’s existing culture, values and policies, and to drive development of
new policies.
Neurodiversity means that we are all different in how we think, feel, and learn, because our brains
process information differently. More simply, it is “the diversity of human minds” (Walker, 2014). This
diversity of brains and minds within our species is a biological fact, supported by many types of
evidence, such as about differing trajectories of brain and neural development. The neurodiversity
paradigm is a position or perspective on this biological fact of human cognitive diversity. For now, we
will focus on two key ideas from the paradigm:
• Neurodiversity is naturally occurring, and thus differences in our thought and experiences are
naturally occurring too. It is part of the wide variation present within our species.
• It rejects the concept of a “normal” brain, or any type of brain/information processing being
“right” or having more value and validity than another.
This paradigm provides a positive framework for talking about neurodevelopmental differences
(diagnosed or otherwise) while still recognising needs (e.g. Milton, D., Ridout, S., Murray, D., Martin,
N., & Mills, R., eds., 2020). It rejects categorisation of some needs as being “extra” or “special”,
instead drawing attention to all people having cognitive, social, sensory, and support needs, which
may be met to different degrees in a given environment--such as a classroom. Like other types
of human diversity, “neurodiversity” is a characteristic of a group. One individual cannot be
neurodiverse, but a group of people may be neurodiverse if the members of the group have different
characteristics.
Neurotypical people have the type of information processing that is in the majority, for the group
they are in; i.e. they are typical members of that group. A group could be as small as a family, or as
large as the whole human population. Your classroom, school, or town are all groups in this sense.
Neurodivergent people are in the minority for their group, meaning they have information processing
that significantly differs from the majority. There may be many different types of neurodivergence
present in the same group. Some neurodivergent people may have neurodevelopmental diagnoses
such as ADHD or autism, but neurodivergence is not in itself any type of diagnosis, and not
shorthand for a list or collection of diagnoses.

49
It’s vital to stress that neurotypical and neurodivergent are terms that designate processing that is
more or less common, or typical, within the group you are looking at. These terms do not set up a
categorisation of “normal” or “healthy” brains versus “unhealthy” or “deficient” ones. Neurodivergent
or neurotypical are not judgements of validity or value.
In general, schools and wider society tend to be designed with the needs of the neurotypical majority
in mind. This isn’t particularly surprising, but has major repercussions for accessibility and inclusion.
As stated at the start of this section, this planning approach is about explicitly adopting the
neurodiversity paradigm and then reflecting on your policies and practice through this lens.
You would seek to increase inclusion and accessibility in your school by choosing changes that move
you closer to neurodiversity-affirming values. The rest of this section unpacks further what that might
mean and look like.
It is important to underscore how radical and different a neurodiversity-affirming school could

really be, compared to most mainstream educational systems. Adopting this paradigm requires
us to acknowledge the persistent messaging, in both education and society, that not all
people have equal value, or that their value is fragile or conditional. In schools, that value is
often contingent on performing and achieving in certain ways, and following certain standards of
“acceptable” behaviour and communication. This framework actively disadvantages neurodivergent
students. A significant number of pupils are multiply disadvantaged here due to their neurology
and their backgrounds. Beyond more concrete disadvantages, this messaging can be stigmatising,
demotivating, and demoralising, with potentially very long-lasting effects10. A neurodiversity-
affirming school would make those narratives of conditional value explicit, and work to question and
reject them.
10
See Sidebar, page 55

50
Adopting this paradigm also requires honest reflection on our own beliefs and attitudes
around neurodivergence, around support needs, and around differences generally. Can we
move away from the belief that some ways of being are more valuable or valid than others, and
choose to act accordingly? Deep acceptance is really at the centre of it all. Autistic author and
teacher Oolong reminds us,
“It is possible to wholeheartedly accept someone for who they are, while offering them
the help and support they need to thrive in life. It is not possible to fully accept someone
if you have a problem with who they are at a fundamental level, and that includes any
neurodivergence they might be born with. You can help a child to grow and learn, but know
that there are things you will never change about them, and appreciate what makes them
unique” (2019).
Committing to neurodiversity-affirming values and actions will challenge messages we have spent a
lifetime hearing from society, from our professions, or even from ourselves. It will be very natural to
feel like you have work to do on acceptance—indeed a growing awareness will be a hallmark of this
approach. The entire point of offering this planning strategy is that change is possible!
Neurodiversity language
The goal of this approach is NOT to adopt neurodiversity vocabulary in lieu of
medicalised or deficit-focused vocabulary.
While the terminology is useful, changing words is a cosmetic change without

working on day-to-day practice, and on people’s beliefs about neurodevelopmental
differences. It doesn’t really matter what terms are used, if a school is working to
‘fix’ their learners, and treats neurodivergent ways of being and learning as less
valid than neurotypical ones. On the other hand, your school might already have
taken major actions to de-stigmatise and normalise supports or to implement other
elements of a neurodiversity-affirmative classroom (see below), but not be using
these vocabulary terms. This said, it can be very useful to have a shared vocabulary
within your team as you embark on your planning.

51
What might a neurodiversity-affirmative school be like?

A neurodiversity-affirmative classroom or school is one that applies the principles of the
neurodiversity paradigm, in different ways. Here are 10 characteristics or actions that begin to
outline such a school, but are not exhaustive.
1. They expect heterogeneity in general, and assume that every classroom and
staffroom is neurodiverse (i.e. contains a mix of neurotypical people and different
types of neurodivergence) and operate accordingly, because neurodivergence is both
naturally occurring and common.
2. They actively teach about neurodiversity and neurodivergence in relation to human
diversity. Pupils and staff have the vocabulary to talk about these ideas, and see how
they apply to their own school and lives.
3. They actively seek to identify and remove policies and practices that systematically
disadvantage neurodivergent pupils.
4. They actively reject normalisation, and that certain ways of being are “better” than
other ways of being. In the process of becoming neurodiversity-affirming, a school
will actively seek to identify and remove policies and practices that intend to normalise
children. They actively affirm that there are many equally valid and valuable ways of
being, doing, and learning. They seek to identify where practices make implicit or explicit
value/validity judgements, and to change these practices.
5. They counter transactional views and narratives around support needs. These
schools do not treat support provision as making an exchange. By exchange, we
mean messaging that implicitly or explicitly states that having your support needs met
is conditional: learners must “earn” help or “justify” struggling in some domains by
demonstrating their talent, useful contributions, or good behaviour in another part of
school1. All pupils deserve to be part of a school environment that respects them and
works to meet their needs and support their access to learning.
6. In these schools, receiving and asking for support is de-stigmatised and does not
mean a person has less value than a person who does not need help or supports.
Everyone has a right to have their needs met.
7. Interventions and supports are led by people’s goals, not diagnoses. They seek to
facilitate access to learning and the school community, rather than “correcting”
deficits.
8. They treat neurodiversity like other protected dimensions of equality and diversity.
They actively fight stigma and discrimination. This may need dedicated interventions
for staff, pupils, and/or the wider community to change people’s beliefs and actions.
9. They cultivates pupils’ self-knowledge and self-advocacy, so that they can
understand, talk about, and advocate for their own needs.
10. These schools are environments in which people can safely and freely choose
whether or not to disclose their neurodivergence, or to explore whether they might
be neurodivergent, and all choices are equally acceptable.

52
One professional contributor shared this: the more time you spend considering educational practice
in terms of the neurodiversity paradigm, the more normalisation and ableism you begin to see. You
can’t sweep it all away in one go, because you can’t see it all at once. It’s more like an onion, peeling
away one layer at a time and encountering others underneath. In this way, the action cycle lends
itself very well to this planning approach, because by definition you will keep revisiting your policies
and practices over time, and seeing them differently as the school community evolves.
It can be admittedly difficult to envision what a strongly neurodiversity-affirming setting is like. As we

have repeated throughout Belonging in School, applying any of the approaches will look different
across settings, because their communities and starting points are different. There is no one way a
neurodiversity-affirming setting will look.
“
Here is one concrete example of a
behavioural expectation that can actively
disadvantage neurodivergent students
(especially autistic students) and would be the more time you spend
handled very differently in a neurodiversity-
affirming school. Many schools
considering educational
communicate specific expectations practice in terms of the
around what “good listening” looks like,
and expect or actively demand that pupils
neurodiversity paradigm,
make eye contact when speaking to/
listening to others, or immediately look
at the teacher when they address the
the more normalisation
and ableism you begin
to see.
“
class. Autistic people often don’t show the
same patterns of eye contact as neurotypical
people, and making eye contact can be
immensely effortful, even painful (e.g. Trevisan,
Roberts, Lin & Birmingham, 2017). Autistic
adults have written eloquently about how they can feel forced to choose between actually listening
and looking like they are listening11. This has obvious repercussions for students in the classroom!
Not only can it be distressing to force eye contact repeatedly all day, but autistic pupils will miss
important information. A neurodiversity-affirming school would instead openly discuss that there are
many ways of “good listening” [points #2, 4 above], and encourage people to listen in the way that
works for them [point #8 about self-advocacy]. They might talk about adjusting our expectations of
looking and listening, and encourage patience and acceptance when others may not do what we
expect.
If you begin with this example and reflect on other behavioural expectations in the same way12, you
may start to see similar ways in which they privilege some ways of being (usually neurotypical ways)
over others, or may actively disadvantage pupils who cannot meet those expectations due to their
neurodevelopmental differences.
11
See this great comic from artist Beth Wilson http://doodlebeth.com/eye-contact/, or this page which has
collected content on eye contact from multiple autistic creators https://stimpunks.org/eye-contact/
12
For example, the expectation to sit still for long periods of time!

53
Potential benefits and risks of this planning approach

It would be disingenuous to deny that there is an element of uncertainty in this approach, because
it hasn’t been heavily studied in relation to educational practice. As yet, it has a limited evidence
base. However, developing inclusive policies around the neurodiversity paradigm does align with
other diversity and inclusion initiatives that are more established in schools, and with individual
concepts and methods that are well-established (e.g. participatory working, staff leadership,
promoting belonging, self-advocacy, anti-stigma interventions).
Working towards being a neurodiversity-affirming school has potentially extensive and long-lasting
benefits across all pupils. The vision is for a school in which all children are respected, valued,
understand themselves, and can advocate for their own needs. They have not been implicitly
taught to feel ashamed or deficient because of their differences from others. In a neurodiversity-
affirming school, it truly is not wrong to be different. More specifically, benefits could include:
• A greater understanding of neurodevelopmental differences, and normalising these

differences.
• Reduction in stigma around neurodevelopmental differences. Stigma has a causal
relationship with poor mental health outcomes (see page 55).
• Greater empathy and understanding between pupils, reduced conflict around use of
supports or differences in treatment from staff.
• An increase in pupils’ sense of belonging in school, which is linked to other positive
outcomes (see Approach 1).
• Reductions in inequalities, including in non-attendance and exclusion.
• Greater support and acknowledgement of needs for all pupils, not only those with
diagnosed differences.
• Preparing pupils with the vocabulary and self-advocacy skills to help talk about and seek
support for their needs, both in school and across other settings.
• All pupils being more respected and valued.
All of these potential benefits apply to all pupils and in many cases staff members, because
neurodiversity is about the entire group, not neurodivergent children alone.

54
Adopting neurodiversity-affirming approach

also has risks. More so than the other planning
Stigma and wellbeing approaches we describe, it relies on structural
outcomes for change and consistent culture across the
whole school in order to be truly successful.
neurodivergent children Neurodiversity affirmation requires a deep
and young people and sincere level of acceptance in the
school community—and getting to that
Promoting acceptance and point asks people to be vulnerable about
understanding is badly needed. In their experiences and needs. In a school
childhood and longer-term, there are community with very uneven attitudes and
unacceptable disparities between beliefs around neurodevelopmental differences,
neurodivergent children and young there is a real risk that drawing attention to
people’s wellbeing compared with neurodiversity issues may be used against
neurotypical peers (e.g. Cassidy openly neurodivergent people.
& Rodgers, 2017; Fink, Deighton,
Humphrey & Wolpert, 2015; Paget, Finally, as already acknowledged, the
Parker, Henley, Heron, Ford, & Emond, neurodiversity paradigm points towards a
2015; Law, Rush, Schoon & Parsons, radically different set of values and actions
2009; Emerson & Hatton, 2007). than many current education systems and
In schools, negative attitudes from practices. There are obvious conflicts with
both staff and peers can compound current education legislation and funding
existing daily-life challenges, and limit models that aggressively gate-keep access to
educational potential (e.g. Macmillan, scarce resources (though the exact points of
Goodall, & Fletcher-Watson, 2018; friction won’t be the same in all the UK nations).
Sasson et al., 2017; Wood & Freeth, Even if you are in a school system where
2016; May & Stone, 2010). a diagnosis is a pre-requisite for offering
certain types of support, this does not
There is widespread evidence that automatically mean your school cannot work
stigma is a driver of this group’s toward being more neurodiversity-affirming.
strikingly poor mental health outcomes, As we have stressed throughout Belonging in
and in turn lack of acceptance from School, school culture, knowledge, attitudes
others, bullying, and peer victimisation and beliefs are extremely important. Your school
(e.g. Lever & Geurts, 2016; Schroeder, can still work on knowledge and attitudes, and
Cappadocia, Bebko, Pepler, & Weiss on changing deficit-focused narratives around
2014). All of these are serious barriers needs, support and help.
to attainment and thriving in education.
Addressing information gaps and stigma
tackles a root cause of poor mental
health in neurodivergent young people.
Dedicated teaching about neurodiversity
and neurodivergence can directly
address poor knowledge and stigma
(e.g. Heijnders & Van Der Meij, 2006;
Pinfold et al,. 2003).

55

Please use these tables with the generic action cycle guidance in Section 1. This table focuses on
As in Approach 2, we recommend a ‘reality check’ in step 0. As with “inclusion as belonging”,
neurodiversity affirmation is both a position you hold, and a vision for the type of inclusive school
environment you want to create. While you can make some changes immediately, it is highly likely to
be a longer-term programme of reviewing and revising, over multiple action cycles. Is there sufficient
support for neurodiversity-affirming beliefs and actions in your school, such that it makes sense to
use them as a basis for change?
Step 0: Reality check

Purpose: Estimate how well prepared your team may be, and how much support (or opposition)
there may be within your school community.
Key tasks:
• If they are not already familiar with this topic, request key team members to read around
neurodiversity and neurodiversity-affirming practice, to get more comfortable with these
concepts and the types of changes that may be involved.
• Have a discussion about the feasibility of committing to a neurodiversity-affirming
position, and using it to drive your planning. Is this position likely to have sufficient
support from key school stakeholders and the wider community? There may be other
groundwork to do first, for example if people lack the factual knowledge to judge if they
would support this position or not.
• Consider pupil and staff interactions now. If your school has known issues with pupils
and/or staff members bullying one another, we would encourage you to work on those
issues first, before embarking on any programme of change that brings additional
attention to people’s differences.
“
As a special note for senior leaders and staff
in inclusion-focused roles, staff attitudes and
interactions with children are a critical ingredient
to the success of this approach. If you are a staff attitudes and
senior leader or other staff member with responsibility
for inclusion, it will be important first to understand
interactions with
the current culture of your school. Trying to drive children are a critical
this planning approach “top down” in the context of ingredient to the
generally low support, or a contingent who will actively
oppose it, or eye-roll and treat it as a joke, could be
counterproductive. In this circumstance, it would be
better to opt for another approach in the short- to
success of this
approach.
“
medium-term, and, in parallel, build knowledge and
awareness of neurodiversity across the school.

56
Low support right now doesn’t mean that neurodiversity issues are completely off the
table. There are other steps you can take towards better neurodiversity understanding, like
improving factual knowledge, tackling stigma, and understanding your colleagues’ current beliefs
and reservations. If support for these values or this vision for inclusion is low, why? Knowledge of
neurodiversity and neurodivergence alone may not be the issue, and there may be practical and
pedagogical problems to solve first.
Step 1: PLAN the planning process

Level of policy you plan to change: This strategy is most likely to be successful and has
the fewest ethical concerns at school level. Implementing it only in certain classrooms poses
challenges, particularly for neurodivergent pupils, if attitudes and teaching practices vary widely
across the school. For example, it would be—at minimum—extremely distressing to move from
a neurodiversity-affirming classroom in one year to a strongly normalising one in the next.
Focus in this cycle: While many aspects of neurodiversity-affirming practice are

interconnected, you can’t do it all at once. Do choose a more specific focus, and remember it’s
OK to start small.
See the notes at the end of this section, suggesting some possible foci for early action
cycles.
Step 2: ASSESS your current situation and resources

This is an especially critical step for this approach, and it is worth investing time here to explore
the gap between the vision of a neurodiversity-affirming school, and where various aspects of
your school’s values and practice are now.
Give particular attention to mapping out current knowledge and attitudes, particularly (but
not only) for staff. Your findings might point to necessary, early actions in Step 3 around training.
Consider your internal resources around neurodiversity and neurodivergence. Do you

have staff members or parents/carers who are openly neurodivergent, and who might want to
contribute to planning or feedback? If you’re not sure, do you want to explore options for people
to volunteer themselves, or to privately feed back on planning?
Consider external resources that might help give input or directly work with staff or pupils. For
example, are there third-sector organisations or family/adult groups related to neurodivergence
in your area, or neurodivergent adults who deliver training and workshops?

57

Schools adopt the neurodiversity paradigm, and commit to policies and
practices that reflect that position and its values. They work toward
becoming a neurodiversity-affirming school, for example though the
actions detailed on Page 52.
Consider whether the school will make a public commitment to this

goal, and announce that to the community. That type of commitment
could be a useful shared understanding and framework for explaining
individual changes, but there may be drawbacks to being public. It would
also be possible to pursue individual goals and actions, but without
positioning them as part of a bigger programme. What might serve your
school best?
3B Actions In addition to generic guidance…
Consider what you may need to do to implement actions/changes as

consistently as possible across the school. What can you do to help
facilitate that? Will there be trade-offs on how many actions you can take
now, and consistency?
Qualitative data collection will likely be very important, regardless of

your exact goals. This is both because there are relatively few existing
quantitative tools that might be useful, and because beliefs and attitudes
are such a big component of the approach as a whole.
Make sure that you are collecting information from both neurodivergent
and neurotypical learners and staff members. It’s unhelpful to focus
exclusively on neurodivergent people in your measurement, as it sends
a misleading message about who neurodiversity concerns, or is about.
You are also then likely to miss people who are not on the books as
neurodivergent: they may not know it, or may not want to share with the
school or peers, or may not have formal documentation.
check

58
Step 4: Implement your planning and begin measuring

Plan in advance how you will explain specific changes to pupils (and others in the school
community), especially if you haven’t announced an overall commitment. For example, what
if your school removed an expectation that “good listening” requires eye contact? How will
you explain the new expectation—and also why the old rule was taken away? Piloting these
explanations with other staff or a small number of pupils may help improve and clarify them.
Step 5: Evaluate, and reflect on your changes


59
Focusing your early action cycles

If your school is interested in this approach but feeling stuck on how to narrow your focus in early
action cycles, here are some suggestions. This is an un-ordered list (not ranked in terms of difficulty
or importance).
Try taking one of these areas as a focus in your first (or an early) action cycle:
• Staff and pupil knowledge of neurodiversity: Invest in staff training on neurodiversity, or
teaching lessons on neurodiversity for pupils13.
• Everyday, basic classroom rules and expectations: Reflect on official school rules, or
unwritten but strong expectations. For example, around sitting still and moving, listening,
looking, types of communication people are expected to use (or not use) and so on. Do these
expectations privilege neurotypical ways of doing things? Might any of them particularly
advantage (or disadvantage) certain pupils? Most importantly, can any of these expectations
be changed?
• “Additional” supports, “special” needs: Reflect on the attitudes and beliefs that are
present in how your school talks about and treats pupil support needs. Look for language or
attitudes that implicitly position these things as exceptional or negative, even if this has not
been staff members’ intention. Do you currently acknowledge that all pupils have needs in the
school environment? Are supports positioned as trying to “fix” deficits? See what actions you
might be able to take around changing language, de-stigmatising supports, and expanding
discussion of “needs” to include all in the school community.
• Discussions, record-keeping, and feedback about or to pupils: What type of attitudes
and value judgements may be communicated when you talk to pupils about their work and
behaviour, or about pupils? Do they privilege neurotypical norms and expectations, even if
that is unintentional? For example, which pupils might currently be judged as being helpful,
or cheerful, or well/poorly behaved, and why? If we think we see problems in discussions,
record-keeping, and feedback, what can we do to shift our values and attitudes, and how can
we (kindly) hold one another accountable?
• More detailed review of policies/practices in a particular area: For example, looking at
policies around attendance, or those related to break/lunch time spaces and expectations.
Are there choices or issues that may be specifically disadvantaging/excluding/causing
distress for neurodivergent pupils?
This is not an exhaustive list by any means, but may help your thinking in identifying a manageable
focus to start your action cycle. You will see that most of these do ultimately come back to attitudes
and beliefs in one way or another. What do we truly believe about differences, and how does this
show up in our daily interactions and practice?
As an alternative to the above list, you could start with a listening exercise or focus group
with neurodivergent pupils and/or staff. For those who choose to be involved and share their
experiences, can they help identify priorities for change, and do they want to be part of making those
changes happen?
13
For example, the free Learning About Neurodiversity at School (LEANS) programme for primary school
classes (Alcorn et al., 2022).

60
3. Monitoring and evaluating your
policies and changes
Whatever inclusion-related actions you choose to take, it’s important to monitor your activities
(individually and as a whole), regularly evaluating them and adjusting them for continuous
improvement. By evaluation, we mean collecting and using evidence to make judgements about
the performance of policies and practices. Did they have the effects they were designed to have?
In the simplest terms, “did it work?”.
“
Let any planned monitoring and evaluation be led
did it work?
“ by your goals. What do you want to find out, and
how would you use that information, when you have
it? You will need to establish meaningful and
feasible way to gather data in your setting—for
example, the picture of what’s feasible may be
different in a class that has a device available for
every pupil, versus one that doesn’t.
As highlighted in Step 3C of the generic action cycle guidance (“Plan toward measurement”)
in Section 1.3, the best time to consider your evaluation is when you are planning your new
activities or your changes to practice, not after they are implemented. Sometimes, small up-
front changes to the plan can make things far easier for your team when it comes time to gather
your data. It can also make sure you have planned for things like time to score questionnaires or
analyse results.
Remember that evaluation can start before you have implemented anything, by
collecting formative feedback on your plans. For example, as part of your ‘feasibility
check’ in Step 3D of the action cycle. This is a great place to involve staff, pupils,
and/or families. Make sure you only seek out that feedback if you have time and
capacity to reflect on it and revise your plans.
Ideally, the data you collect to measure the effects of inclusion policies should be both
qualitative—collected by talking to children, staff and families—and quantitative, collected
through school records, surveys and questionnaires. The following sections explain these in
more detail, and give specific ideas and tips.
Finally, your goal will be to facilitate positive changes for learners and/or staff, it is extremely
important to be alert to the possibility of negative impacts, and to evaluate your efforts in a way that
will help you to find out about these, if they happen. See the 3.2, the Qualitative Data subsection
‘Biased questions and other pitfalls’.

61
3: Monitoring and evaluating your policies and changes
3.1 Quantitative data

What is quantitative data?
Quantitative data is about quantifying things—how much and how many? It is expressed in terms
of numbers and statistics. For example, you might count the number of children in your school and
the percentage receiving free school meals, rate happiness on a numerical scale, or report test
scores.
Examples of quantitative data

Your school likely collects a lot of quantitative data already about pupils and staff, some of which
might be useful for understanding inclusion now (action cycle step 2: Assessing current situation),
or for looking at changes over time (steps 4 and 5, implementation and evaluation).
Examples of quantitative data you might have or collect in the future include:
• Data on how many pupils you have, and how many are in certain categories (e.g. classified
as having Additional Support Needs [Scotland]).
• Counting instances of exclusion, suspension and isolation (including formal and informal
instances).
• Counting how often/how long particular resources or spaces are used.
• Counting certain events in the classroom.
• Attendance data (though this is not unproblematic, as many factors around attendance may
be outside of pupils’ control).
• Test scores.
• Standardised questionnaires or assessments (see box), such measures of wellbeing14.
• Use of numerical ratings or rankings. For example, you might ask staff to rank their
priorities for training, or how to use some funding.
Creating a custom measure is complex, even for researchers or others who have specialised
training. It’s even harder in an area like inclusion, where there may not be clear standards and
definitions. Rather than immediately creating your own measures, check for existing
measures that may fit your needs (see box on Page 63, for a list of things to check). Using
existing measures also allows for comparison across schools, which can be useful. While
some measures are proprietary and very expensive to buy and use, there are free, high-quality
measures available. For one example, the CORE measurements of young people’s mental health
and wellbeing (e.g. the CORE-10, Barkham et al., 2012). As noted in Section 2.1, there are also
existing, research-backed tools to measure specific constructs like school belongingness.
14
For example, the Stirling Children’s Wellbeing Scale (Liddle & Carter, 2015) is an accessible and easy-to-score
option https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/sci/med/research/platform/wemwbs/using/faq/scwbs_children_report.pdf

62
Suggestions and tips for using standardised measures

If you are planning to use standardised questionnaires or assessments, make sure to
read the fine print in any introductory materials or manuals. First, do they appear to
be evidence-based, and validated ? Then, are they appropriate for you?
When looking at measures, check for…

• Age groups for which they were designed and validated. A few years older or
younger than your pupils may not be close enough.
• Whether or not they are intended for measuring change over short
timescales (e.g. <6 months, <1 year). Some instruments aren’t suitable for
capturing those changes. Check the fine print—do they say not to administer
again within a certain time period?
• Whether the questionnaire/instrument itself poses accessibility barriers
for pupils. For example, barriers related to the type or wording of questions,
presence of time limits, or rules that prohibit an adult from helping the child
to complete the questions. Don’t hamper your own evaluation by choosing a
measure that might be particularly inaccessible to neurodivergent children,
such as those with challenges around reading and language!
• Similarly, will any parent/carer report measures be accessible to families
at your school? (e.g. complex language, need for internet access, time)
• Where and when measure was developed: English-language measures
developed elsewhere in the world, including the USA (or particularly old
measures) may include terms or cultural references that could pose a problem
for your pupils.
Finally, don’t forget to consider staff impacts of choosing a particular measure,

especially if using paper. How hard will it be and how long will it take to score it, and
to enter and analyse any data?
Some online sources exist to help teachers find and decide between options, and can provide
information on a large number of options. The Educational Endowment Foundation website
includes information on assessments (and regularly adds new content). The Childhood Outcomes
Research Constortium (CORC) includes lists of outcome assessments with notes about each
measure, e.g. age groups, scoring, how to access the measure.
The free e-book “Assessing Wellbeing in Schools”, authored by education researchers, reviews
a large number of existing measures for pupils and adult staff members, and includes tips on
choosing measures for your school (Bates & Boren, 2020).

63
Digital tools
If your school has suitable technology, digital surveys, assessments and other tools can be fast,
flexible and low-cost for a large number of pupils. Often, the greatest benefit is that they can
automatically score and visualise data, saving staff members’ time. For example, Artemis-A,
developed by mental health experts at the University of Cambridge, is a fast, digital “mental health
check” for secondary school pupils (free to eligible schools).
As with paper tools, check carefully if they are suitable for the age groups you are working with,
and the questions you want to ask. Find out as much as you can about any digital tools, especially
if they are not computer-based versions of established measures (e.g. an online version of a paper
questionnaire). Who made this, and how did they test it? These questions are equally as important
for paid and free tools. A free tool isn’t a bargain if it doesn’t do what you need.
When reviewing options, be suspicious. There are many digital tools out there (for example,
claiming to measure pupils’ wellbeing), many are commercial, and anyone can make ANY
claim. If you cannot find any information about who made a tool or if it was tested, that’s not
good news. As a very rough rule, tools created by (or in partnership with) universities, charities/
educational organisations or governments are more likely to be based on evidence, provide
information on how they were made, and have been tested in some way prior to release. This is
not to say reputable commercial tools don’t exist, but it can be harder to find out their details and
features before paying for them.
Don’t forget about security and privacy issues! Read the fine print about how and
where your learners’ or staff members’ data are stored, and who can access them. Is
this tool GDPR compliant? Make sure it complies with any school or local authority
policies about security, privacy, and data processing.

64
3.2 Qualitative data

What is qualitative data?
Qualitative data is descriptive or narrative. It is often about understanding situations, experiences,
and relationships. Quantitative data can tell you how many children receive teaching assistant
support in class, but qualitative data could help you understand how children feel about that. You
might have collected qualitative data already, if you have interviewed someone or run a focus
group. If you have had any training in these skills or in survey/questionnaire design (for example, in
initial teacher training or as part of professional development) now is the time to dig out your books
or notes!).
Qualitative data might include text or recorded conversations, but also could be videos,
photographs, objects, or a mixture of content. You may want to collect qualitative data to better
understand the views, values, or experiences of people in your school community—and how
these may differ from one another. For example, to find out about people’s experiences of a new
programme or policy change your school has tried.
Just like with quantitative data, it’s important to be clear about your goals. What type of information
do you want to find out from people, and why? What will you do with the information once you
have it? Analysing qualitative data is not the same as quantitative data analysis, and can vary in
complexity. Some reference books or sources will seem scarily complex, because they are focused
on qualitative research projects and have different concerns than you might in your school or
classroom. Introductory information is out there! (see box on Page 66).
It’s possible to get useful qualitative information to inform planning or evaluate your
services without all the complexity and steps of an academic research project. Worrying
over which community members you are—or are not—hearing from will be more important
than worrying over your exact analysis methods.
For example, in many cases simple content analysis might be all you need—such as categorising
the content of feedback you’ve received, and noting which ideas or issues have been raised by
more or fewer people. You may have done something similar to that already!

65
Searching for qualitative research guidance:

don’t get scared!
Searching online for “qualitative research” or “qualitative data analysis” produces
an overwhelming number of results, some of which are for commercial contexts
like market research, some of which are paid services, and some of which are for
academic researchers. Beware going down the rabbit hole! Commercially-focused
sites are not likely to be relevant for educators, and many research-focused sources
may have far more complexity than what you need.
If you want general tools and information, your best bet may be to go to the library
for an introductory textbook on qualitative research, or advice books for taught
students doing qualitative research projects. You can sometimes get older editions
of such books very cheaply online. Or, look for online materials for students, such
as how-to guides or lecture notes for research methods courses.
Some academic journals publish “how-to” articles about particular methods,

which may be open-access (free). Burnard, Gill, Stewart, and Chadwick (2008) is
a short, accessible methods example article, showing thematic content analysis
of real data from a dental public health study, exploring primary school children’s
understanding of food.
Examples of qualitative data you could collect

There are many media in which you could collect qualitative data—it doesn’t have to be written!
Especially for younger pupils or anyone who has challenges around language and literacy, using
methods not focused on writing can remove a barrier. Examples include…
• Conversations (interviews)
• Keeping a diary or photo diary
• Asking people to respond to a prompt by making a drawing, collage, or other piece of art, or
by sharing something that is important to them (bringing an object, a song…)
You can also combine these methods, such as asking a child to take photos of “things that help
them feel like they belong”, and then talking through their images to explain what they chose and
why. Or, asking a parent/carer to help the child make some notes about their images.
Qualitative data collection can also be low-key and ongoing all the time. A “feedback mailbox” in
the classroom or school library could be a way for pupils to share ideas or worries as they have
them, and anonymously if they choose.

66
When choosing a method, actively consider whether there are options that might better
facilitate participation from certain pupils/groups, or may disadvantage them. For example,
do you have pupils who would happily talk to their teacher about their experiences, but struggle to
write down feedback? Or others who would nervously say “I don’t know” in conversation, but write
down thoughtful ideas?
Consider also which options are most likely to produce honest feedback, even where this feedback
may be critical, or sharing that something doesn’t help. Given your goals, would it be OK for
feedback to be anonymous, especially if you are trying to evaluate a broad response to a policy
or activity, rather than checking in with individuals? Can you let people choose how they want to
answer?
Tips for successful qualitative data collection

In our experience as researchers, it’s very easy to be over-ambitious with qualitative
data collection, and create problems for yourself with any or all of these:
• Asking people (especially children) to respond to too many questions in a
given time. Keep the list short. Think carefully about the thing you most need to
know, and ask it first!
• How long it will take a person/team to look at all the data, across everyone you
are asking.
• How long it will take to summarise or analyse the data, for example to report
back to staff and the community.
Keep it simple! Collect the information you most need, and know you can review and
use.
Top tips: If you are planning to collect any qualitative data…

• Test new questions or methods with at least one person in each target group
(e.g. pupils of different ages, parents). It’s a way to find and fix problems fast
like if instructions aren’t understood.
• Always ask an open “anything else?” question. They often bring in the most
valuable information you hadn’t anticipated, so did not know to ask about! This
question is equally important in writing, or speaking to people. E.g. “is there
anything else you want to say about things that make you feel like you belong
[don’t belong] in our school?”

67
Biased questions and other pitfalls

When your goals are to create positive changes, it’s very easy to over-focus on positive effects
and outcomes when planning your evaluation an unintended result can be biased or “leading”
questions. As a result, you can miss important information about ambiguous or negative effects
and experiences. This is a serious problem, if you are using the information you collect to make
decisions. Biased questions are a similar idea to “leading the witness” in a courtroom drama. It
means that the wording of a question itself suggests a particular answer.
If you are writing bespoke questions, for example as written feedback prompts or to interview
people, it is extremely easy to unintentionally create biased questions! Let’s say your school has
recently made ear defenders available to more learners, to use during the school day if they
wish. Consider the difference between these four similar questions for a learner who has
tried them out:
A) How much did it help you to use the

ear defenders yesterday?
B) Did it help you to use the ear
defenders yesterday?
C) Did it affect you to use the ear
D) What was it like using the ear
Question A is essentially putting words in the respondent’s mouth: it assumes the ear defenders
were helpful, and frames the response in those terms. In a situation that already has a power
imbalance, learners may say (or write) what they think adults expect. It may be harder and
much more uncomfortable to say that the ear defenders weren’t very helpful after all, or to share
ambiguous or mixed views. It may not even occur to people to share other types of feedback,
because you have asked specifically about helping. For example, maybe the biggest issue is that
the ear defenders were the wrong size! Question B is less directive, but still has a big clue about
the ‘right’ answer, and many of the same issues as in A. Question C, asking about effects, is
more open and more likely to elicit mixed or negative answers, if that was the learner’s experience.
Question D is more open still, and might elicit more varied or broader information than B. For
example, a pupil might volunteer that while ear defenders were useful yesterday and helped them
feel calm, when they really needed them was on the bus coming to school this morning!

68
More common question pitfalls

Creating your own feedback questionnaire or planning to interview people? Check
your questions for these common issues…
• Double-barrelled questions asking about two things at once, e.g. “Have
you taught pupils diagnosed with ADHD or autism?” “Does your school have
flexible uniform and attendance policies?”. Ask about only one thing at a
time.
• Does the question use jargon or rely on knowledge all respondents may
not have? For example, using policy acronyms in something for parents/
carers?
• Prestige or social desirability biases: are some answers likely to be
perceived as “better” or more acceptable than others, and might this colour
how people respond? For example, asking staff non-anonymously about
attitudes toward inclusion or neurodivergence might have a strong social
desirability bias. Professionals know how they “should” respond.
• Ambiguous questions: Piloting your questions can help you find out if
respondents understand them the way you meant them.
• Questions are too long! If you can trim them down, do it.
Creating clear informative interviews, surveys, and questionnaires is tricky—but

fortunately there are many available books and guides. If your school plans to rely
heavily on these methods for decision-making, we would encourage you to look up
further guidance, or check if any of your staff members have had prior training in
this area (for example, a research methods course).

69
3.3 Trust and managing expectations around

feedback and measurement
In multiple places, we have encouraged you to seek community input while making plans, to get
feedback on draft plans, or get feedback on how things have worked out in practice. So often,
even a little feedback can reshape plans for the better, or head off a course of action that works on
paper but wouldn’t in practice. With this in mind, it can be tempting to think, “we’ll ask people, just
in case, even if we don’t end up using it.”
A report contributor with extensive experience in school research and participatory design
cautions that collecting feedback or ideas at any point or in any medium can require careful
expectation management, particularly (but not only) for children. Inevitably, not all suggestions
are actionable. A teacher or school asking for feedback or new ideas does not mean that all (or
any!) of these things will be changed, just because people asked for them. It can create mistrust
if people think they are being heard and that there will be changes—and then there aren’t. Or, if
people believe you asked for their ideas and feedback without ever intending to use them.
We recommend being as honest and up-front as you can about…
• Why you are asking particular people/groups for information, and why now.
• What will happen to the information next? Who will see and/or discuss it?
• Who else gets a say in the current issue? (For example, school governors or local
authority?)
• Who has the power to decide on the current issue(s)?
• The overall predicted timeline of collecting information, decision-making, and implementing
change—it may be far longer than people expect.
The more personal the feedback issue is, the more important this clear and honest communication
becomes.
If the truth is that nothing will happen to the information you collect, or that there is no
capacity to act on people’s input, the most ethical course may be not to collect it in the first
place. Be honest with colleagues, children, and other community members if decisions
have already been made.

70
4: Conclusion
4. Conclusion
In this document, Part 2 of Belonging in School, we’ve moved from the general introduction in Part 1 to
a focus on planning and measuring. The Action Cycle and Four Approaches provide structure and
‘lenses’ for schools to reflect on their choices, policies and values around inclusion, and plan towards
policies and practices that better meet the needs of neurodivergent learners.
“
Even if using a tool like the action cycle to break
things down and set measurable goals, inclusion
is still a huge issue that touches on many areas Inclusion issues can feel
of practice. It can feel overwhelming, especially
if you see a big gap between what you want to
overwhelming, especially if
happen in your school, and where things are you see a big gap between
now. Whether you engage with one of the four
approaches or work on policy development
in some other way, we want to stress that
what you want to happen
in your school, and where
things are now.
“
incremental progress on inclusion matters.
It is valuable. It can positively affect learners’
experiences. None of the planning guidance in
this document assumes a single huge, transformative period of change that “fixes” your school’s policies
once and for all. It assumes that some things may be working well now, and others less well. It assumes
that schools will be making and evaluating a series of changes over time, towards a shared vision for
inclusive practice and positive daily experiences.
As we said in relation to Part 1, there are indisputably major, national-level inclusion barriers related to
funding and staff workload. Across the board, schools are asked to do ever more for their learners and
local communities as other sources of support are lost. Even so, we truly think it matters to dedicate time
to reflecting on, and developing, more inclusive practices. The beneficiaries are not only learners with
known neurodevelopmental differences, but all learners, who can benefit from greater accessibility and
acceptance, vocabulary and skills for self-advocacy, and an environment in which differences or needing
help are not sources of shame.
Even if what’s manageable for your school now is planning one change, we would encourage
you to do that. It matters. It’s a start!
Before you go, we encourage you…

1. To identify at least one change to make this year.
2. To set a timeline towards undertaking an inclusion planning cycle—even if this
may be a longer-term goal at your school.
3. To share the Belonging in School resource with your colleagues.
Thank you for reading!
If you started with this document, Belonging in School also has a Part 1 providing
background on inclusion and characteristics of inclusive policies, as well as 12
Suggested Changes to school policies. Don’t have Part 1? Download it here:

71
5: About the Belonging in School project
5. About the Belonging in School project

The Belonging in School resource is the final output of a series of stakeholder workshops, and builds
on earlier reporting for a policy audience (Lewis, Zdorovtsova & Astle, 2023). It was not stand-alone
research project, but resulted from opportunistically developing and extending the policy-
focused outputs into a hands-on, action-focused tool for educators and schools.
Development and release of the Belonging in School resource was made possible with funding
from the Medical Research Council (MC-A0606-5PQ41) and by a donation from the Templeton
World Charitable Foundation, as part of their Global Conference on the Science of Human
Flourishing.
5.1 Initial workshop

In October 2022, Professor Duncan Astle received a donation from the Templeton World Charity
Foundation to run a workshop as part of the Global Scientific Conference on Global Flourishing.
The November 2022 Diverse Trajectories to Good Developmental Outcomes Workshop aimed to
integrate our growing scientific understanding of the diversity that exists in neurodevelopment with
pragmatic policy recommendations for achieving good developmental outcomes. The workshop
included over 80 experienced contributors from education, policy, the charity sector, academic
research, and clinical practice, alongside people with lived experience of neurodivergence.
5.2 Policy briefing, feedback, and second workshop

The first output based on the Diverse Trajectories workshop was a policy briefing about barriers
to inclusion and potential solutions in UK schools (Lewis, Zdorovtsova & Astle, 2023). Following
this output, the team sought additional feedback from the original workshop attendees, and from a
mixed group of researchers, practitioners, and community members with lived experience as part
of the Delivering Inclusive EducationIworkshop (ITAKOM conference, Edinburgh, March 2023).
These inputs contributed to a revised briefing.
5.3 From Policy to Belonging in School

The policy briefing was originally tailored to a very broad audience of educators and policymakers,
and was concerned with policies, barriers, and actions at multiple levels from classroom level up
to national level. An additional goal was to build on the workshop contributions and revised policy
briefing to develop new resource content that could help schools implement inclusive practices.
Here, the focus would be more specifically on educators and schools—local inclusion issues, not
national ones.
This second writing and development phase became Belonging in School. It launched in June 2023,
and the team welcomed Dr Alyssa Alcorn as the Public Engagement Lead. While the outputs of the
Diverse Trajectories and Delivering Inclusive Education workshops informed the current resource
and its recommendations, Belonging in School adds new content and references. It is a different type
of content, oriented towards engaging in reflection and taking action.

72
Thank you!
We would like to thank all participants in the Diverse
Trajectories to Good Developmental Outcomes
Workshop (2022) and the Delivering Inclusive Education
Workshop (2023) for sharing their experiences and
professional insights during the events, plus giving
feedback on the earlier policy briefs. We would also
especially like to thank Dr Sian Lewis for her work on the
Diverse Trajectories Workshop and on the policy brief.
6: References
6. References
Alcorn, A.M., Fletcher-Watson, S., McGeown, S., Murray, F., Aitken, D., Peacock, L.J.J., &
Mandy, W. (2022). Learning About Neurodiversity at School: A resource pack for primary school
teachers and pupils. University of Edinburgh. https://salvesen-research.ed.ac.uk/leans
Al-Jayoosi, H (2022, October 12). Evaluating the use of flexible seating in a mainstream primary
school [Speech video recording] in the CRAE Webinar Series. Youtube. https://www.youtube.com/
watch?v=uzGXuXk2HKg
Allen, K., Kern, M. L., Vella-Brodrick, D., Hattie, J., & Waters, L. (2018). What schools need to
know about fostering school belonging: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 30, 1-34.
Arnstein, S. R. (1969). A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of
planners, 35(4), 216-224.
Arslan, G., & Duru, E. (2017). Initial development and validation of the School Belongingness
Scale. Child Indicators Research,10(4), 1043–1058.
Artemis-A (2023). Website. Cambridge: University of Cambridge; 2023 (https://www.artemis-a.
org/).
Barkham, M., Bewick, B., Mullin, T., Gilbody, S., Connell, J., Cahill, J., et al. (2012). The
CORE-10: A short measure of psychological distress for routine use in the psychological
therapies. Counselling and Psychotherapy Research, 1–11. http://doi.org/10.1080/14733145.2012.
729069.
Bates, M., & McKay Boren, D. (2020). Assessing wellbeing in schools: An educators practical
guide to measuring wellbeing in schools. EdTech Books. https://edtechbooks.org/wellbeing
Bjerknes, G. and Bratteteig, T. (1995). User participation and democracy: a discussion of
Scandinavian research on systems development. Scand. J. Inf. Syst., 7(1):73–98
Burnard, P., Gill, P., Stewart, K., & Chadwick, B. (2008). Analysing and presenting qualitative
data. Br Dent J 204, 429–432. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2008.292
Butler C. Translating UDL: an Aotearoa/New Zealand Story (2019). In: Learning Designed
[website]. Lynnfield: CAST (https://www.learningdesigned.org/resource/translating-udl-
aotearoanew-zealand-story).
Cassidy, S., & Rodgers, J. (2017). Understanding and prevention of suicide in autism.
The Lancet Psychiatry, 4 (6), e11.
CAST (2018a). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines version 2.2. Retrieved from
http://udlguidelines.cast.org
CAST (2018b). Frequently Asked Questions, in Universal Design for Learning Guidelines website.
https://udlguidelines.cast.org/more/frequently-asked-questions

74
6: References
Castro-Kemp, S., Palikara, O., Gaona, C., Eirinaki, V. & Furlong, M. J. (2020). The Role of
Psychological Sense of School Membership and Postcode as Predictors of Profiles of
Socio-emotional Health in Primary School Children in England. School Mental Health 12, 284–295.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12310-019-09349-7
Deighton, J., Tymms, P., Vostanis, P., Belsky, J., Fonagy, P., Brown, A., Martin, A., Patalay,
P. & Wolpert, W. (2013). The Development of a School-Based Measure of Child Mental Health.
Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 31:247.
Department for Education. (2015). Special educational needs and disability code of practice: 0 to
25 years. Department for Education. England. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/send-
code-of-practice-0-to-25
Druin, A. (2002). The role of children in the design of new technology. Behaviour and information
technology, 21(1), 1-25.
Emerson, E., & Hatton, C. (2007). Mental health of children and adolescents with intellectual
disabilities in Britain. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 191(6), 493-499.
Fink, E., Deighton, J., Humphrey, N., & Wolpert, M. (2015). Assessing the bullying and
victimisation experiences of children with special educational needs in mainstream schools:
Development and validation of the Bullying Behaviour and Experience Scale. Research in
developmental disabilities, 36, 611-619.
Goodenow, C. (1993). The psychological sense of school membership among adolescents: Scale
development and educational correlates. Psychology in the Schools, 30(1), 79-90.
Goodenow, C., & Grady, K.E. (1993). The relationship of school belonging and friends’ values to
academic motivation among urban adolescent students. Journal of Experimental Education, 62,
60–71. doi:10.1080/00220973.1993.9943831
Heijnders, M., & Van Der Meij, S. (2006). The fight against stigma: an overview of stigma-
reduction strategies and interventions. Psychology, health & medicine, 11 (3), 353-363.
Law, J., Rush, R., Schoon, I., & Parsons, S. (2009). Modeling developmental language
difficulties from school entry into adulthood: Literacy, mental health, and employment outcomes.
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research.
Lever, A. G., & Geurts, H. M. (2016). Psychiatric co-occurring symptoms and disorders in young,
middle-aged, and older adults with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of autism and developmental
disorders, 46(6), 1916-1930.
Lewis, S., Zdorovtsova, N., & Astle, D.E. (2023). Towards inclusive schools: enabling all students
to flourish. Medical Research Council Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, University of Cambridge.
https://github.com/nataliazdorovtsova/Diverse-Trajectories-Workshop/blob/main/InclusionBrief.pdf
Libbey, H. P. (2007). School connectedness: Influence above and beyond family connectedness.
University of Minnesota.

75
6: References
Liddle, I., & Carter, G. F. (2015). Emotional and psychological well-being in children: the
development and validation of the Stirling Children’s Well-being Scale. Educational Psychology in
Practice, 31(2), 174-185.
Lundy, L. (2007). ‘Voice’ is not enough: conceptualising Article 12 of the United Nations
Convention on the Rights of the Child. British educational research journal, 33(6), 927-942.
Macmillan, K., Goodall, K., & Fletcher-Watson, S. (2018). Do autistic individuals experience
understanding in school? A retrospective mixed-methods study. Open Science Framework,
preprint, 10.31219/osf.io/awzuk
May, A. L., & Stone, C. A. (2010). Stereotypes of individuals with learning disabilities: Views of
college students with and without learning disabilities. Journal of learning disabilities, 43(6),
483-499.
Milton, D., Ridout, S., Murray, D., Martin, N., & Mills, R., eds. (2020). The Neurodiversity
Reader: exploring concepts, lived experiences and implications for practice. Pavilion, Hove, UK
New Zealand Government (n.d.). Guide to Universal Design for Learning [website]. Wellington:
New Zealand Government. https://inclusive.tki.org.nz/guides/universal-design-for-learning/
New Zealand Government (2020). How does New Zealand’s education system compare?
OECD’s education at a glance 2020. Wellington: New Zealand Government.
https://www.educationcounts.govt.nz/publications/ECE/education-at-a-glance/how-does-new-
zealands-education-system-compare-oecds-education-at-a-glance-2020
Oolong. (2019, October 19). Neurodiversity is for everyone. Medium.
https://oolong.medium.com/neurodiversity-is-for-everyone-f375a27aa3c9
O’Rourke, J., & Cooper, M. (2010). Lucky to be happy: A study of happiness in Australian primary
students. Australian Journal of Educational & Developmental Psychology, 10, 94-107.
Paget, A., Parker, C., Henley, W., Heron, J., Ford, T., & Emond, A. (2015). Which children and
young people are excluded from school? Findings from the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and
Children (ALSPAC). The Lancet, 385, S76.
Pinfold, V., Toulmin, H., Thornicroft, G., Huxley, P., Farmer, P., & Graham, T. (2003). Reducing
psychiatric stigma and discrimination: evaluation of educational interventions in UK secondary
schools. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 182 (4), 342-346.
Roffey, S., Boyle, C., & Allen, K. A. (2019). School belonging–Why are our students longing to
belong to school?. Educational & Child Psychology, 36(2), 7.
Roper, C., Grey, F., & Cadogan, E. (2018). Co-production: Putting principles into practice in
mental health contexts. Melbourne: University of Melbourne. https://healthsciences.unimelb.edu.
au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/3392215/Coproduction_putting-principles-into-practice.pdf
Sasson, N. J., Faso, D. J., … & Grossman, R. B. (2017). Neurotypical peers are less willing to
interact with those with autism based on thin slice judgments. Scientific reports, 7, 40700.

76
6: References
Schroeder, J. H., Cappadocia, M. C., Bebko, J. M., Pepler, D. J., & Weiss, J. A. (2014).
Shedding light on a pervasive problem: A review of research on bullying experiences among
children with autism spectrum disorders. Journal of autism and developmental disorders, 44(7),
1520-1534.
Sharples, J., Albers, B., Fraser, S., & Kime, S. (2019). Putting Evidence to Work: A School’s
Guide to Implementation. Guidance Report. Second edition. Education Endowment Foundation.
https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/education-evidence/guidance-reports/
implementation
Sirin, S. R., & Rogers-Sirin, L. (2004). Exploring school engagement of middle-class African
American adolescents. Youth & society, 35(3), 323-340.
Slaten, C. D., Rose, C. A., Bonifay, W., & Ferguson, J. K. (2019). The Milwaukee Youth
Belongingness Scale (MYBS): Development and validation of the scale utilizing item response
theory. School Psychology, 34(3), 296–306. https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000299
Taub, M., Sawyer, R., Smith, A., Rowe, J., Azevedo, R., & Lester, J. (2020). The agency effect:
The impact of student agency on learning, emotions, and problem-solving behaviors in a
game-based learning environment. Computers & Education, 147, 103781.
Trevisan, D. A., Roberts, N., Lin, C., & Birmingham, E. (2017). How do adults and teens with
self-declared Autism Spectrum Disorder experience eye contact? A qualitative analysis of first-hand
accounts. PloS one, 12(11), e0188446.
United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (November 20, 1989). https://www.
unicef.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/UNCRC_PRESS200910web.pdf
Wagle, R., Dowdy, E., Yang, C., Palikara, O., Castro, S., Nylund-Gibson, K., & Furlong, M.
J. (2018). Preliminary investigation of the psychological sense of school membership scale with
primary school students in a cross-cultural context. School Psychology International, 39(6),
568–586. https://doi.org/10.1177/0143034318803670
Wagle, R., Dowdy, E., Yang, C., Palikara, O., Castro, S., Nylund-Gibson, K., & J. Furlong, M.
(2018). Supplemental material for Preliminary investigation of the psychological sense of school
membership scale with primary school students in a cross-cultural context (Version 1). SAGE
Journals. https://doi.org/10.25384/SAGE.7176215.v1
Walker, N. (2014). Neurodiversity: Some Basis Terms & Definitions. Neuroqueer (blog).
https://neuroqueer.com/neurodiversity-terms-and-definitions/
The Whitley Researchers (2018). Aspiration in Whitley: Improving the collaboration between
schools, families, and the community. University of Reading and Whitley Community Development
Association. https://aspiration-in-whitley.whitley-cda.org/
Wood, C., & Freeth, M. (2016). Students’ Stereotypes of Autism. Journal of Educational Issues,
2 (2), 131-140. the thank yoexactly as in Part 1, p36 (it is exactly the same content)

77
Text ©2023 The Belonging in School team. Alyssa Alcorn, Natalia Zdorovtsova
and Duncan Astle assert their right to be identified as the authors of this resource.
Illustrations ©2023 Kristyna Baczynski
Please cite Part 2 of Belonging in School as follows:

Alcorn, A.M., Zdorovtsova, N., & Astle, D.E. (2023). Belonging in School Part 2:
A Practical Guide to Inclusive Policy Planning. Medical Research Council
Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, University of Cambridge.
The Belonging in School resource and associated materials are published

under a Creative Commons CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 license:
Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International. Please review
the terms of this license for guidance on how you can and cannot use, share, and
adapt this work.
Contact the project team: diversetrajectories@mrc-cbu.cam.ac.uk

Belonging in School Part 2 v1.0

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Belonging in School Part 2 v1.0

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Belonging in School Part 2 v1.0

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Part 2: A Practical Guide to Inclusive Policy Planning

Part 2: A Practical Guide to Inclusive Policy Planning

Alyssa M. Alcorn, Natalia Zdorovtsova, & Duncan E. Astle

Who is this resource for?

Version 1.0, September 2023

Illustrations ©2023 Kristyna Baczynski

Illustrations and action cycle figure by Kristyna Baczynski

Project website: https://inclusion.mrc-cbu.cam.ac.uk/

Please cite this document as follows:

Licensing and terms of use

About the Belonging in School

In this Planning Guidance Document we explain a five-stage Action Cycle in detail,

Part 1 of Belonging in School (available as a separate document) is an Overview

Developing this content

Belonging in School • https://www.inclusion.mrc-cbu.cam.ac.uk/

1. Policy development as a cycle

1.1 Introducing the action cycle

Belonging in School • https://www.inclusion.mrc-cbu.cam.ac.uk/

1.2 Key ideas in the cycle: Vision, goals,

Belonging in School • https://www.inclusion.mrc-cbu.cam.ac.uk/

1.3 The action cycle step-by-step

Step 1: Prepare the planning process

Step 2: Asess your current situation and resources

Belonging in School • https://www.inclusion.mrc-cbu.cam.ac.uk/

Step 3: PLAN goals, actions, and measurement

3A. Identify vision and goals

3B.Plan actions toward your goals

Key questions For each goal we’ve identified…

Belonging in School • https://www.inclusion.mrc-cbu.cam.ac.uk/

3C. Plan toward measurement

3D. Feasibility check

Belonging in School • https://www.inclusion.mrc-cbu.cam.ac.uk/

Step 4: IMPLEMENT your planning and begin measuring

Step 5: EVALUATE and reflect on your changes

And closing the cycle back to step 1...

Key questions • What did we learn during this cycle?

Belonging in School • https://www.inclusion.mrc-cbu.cam.ac.uk/

Additional planning tools and guidance from the

In addition to the freely downloadable report, there are supplementary guidance

Belonging in School • https://www.inclusion.mrc-cbu.cam.ac.uk/

2. Four approaches to inclusive policy

Belonging in School • https://www.inclusion.mrc-cbu.cam.ac.uk/

Belonging in School • https://www.inclusion.mrc-cbu.cam.ac.uk/

Belonging in School • https://www.inclusion.mrc-cbu.cam.ac.uk/

Belonging in School • https://www.inclusion.mrc-cbu.cam.ac.uk/

Action cycle guidance for this approach

Step 1: PREPARE the planning process

Step 2: ASSESS out your current situation and resources

Belonging in School • https://www.inclusion.mrc-cbu.cam.ac.uk/

Step 3: PLAN goals, actions, and measurement

In addition to generic guidance…

Don’t forget to consider… whether actions to promote belonging for certain

It will be critical to collect qualitative information directly from pupils. What do

Step 4: IMPLEMENT your planning and begin measuring

Step 5: EVALUATE, and reflect on your changes

Belonging in School • https://www.inclusion.mrc-cbu.cam.ac.uk/

Existing measures of school belonging

Secondary school measures

Belonging in School • https://www.inclusion.mrc-cbu.cam.ac.uk/

Belonging in School • https://www.inclusion.mrc-cbu.cam.ac.uk/