There is much I am pleased to see, both as a practitioner and as someone who has actively participated in the consultation process thus far. The White Paper is encouraging in both tone and honesty. There is a clear acknowledgement that continuing as we are is not an option if we are to prevent so many children remaining disengaged, absent and ultimately NEET when they leave education. This is an important starting point:

“Simply continuing the approach we have taken in the past will leave us with an education system that fails too many. That failure is seen in children who move from struggling at school to not attending or attaining, and go on to become part of the nearly one million young people not in education, employment or training (NEET).”

I am also heartened by the commitment to evidence-informed practice and the acknowledgement that high-quality teaching and learning matter enormously to students’ outcomes:

“High-quality teaching must be at the heart of our school system. We must double down on evidence-based pedagogy on what works for all children and their learning. And we need to go further, building the evidence on what works for children’s engagement.”

It is also an important move to acknowledge explicitly the role of belonging and to demonstrate an understanding that children achieve most when they feel safe, connected and valued; something those working with children and young people often recognise intuitively, but which has too often been noticeably absent from policy.

There is a clear mandate, too, for partnership and collaborative working, not only across settings but also with families, potentially breaking down some of the adversarial dynamics the current system has inadvertently created. The recognition of the expertise held within alternative and special school settings “to embed inclusive practice confidently and consistently” is certainly welcome.

However, strengthening mainstream must not unintentionally narrow flexible or alternative pathways that support children whose needs are not currently being met; inclusion should not mean conformity to a singular educational offer.

The intention to reform the role of alternative provision could either empower choice or further diminish it. Close attention must therefore be given to ensuring both quality and impact are secured through a broader measure of outcomes.

“Specialist settings – including in early years, special schools, alternative provision, and specialist post-16 institutions – will play a dual role: delivering high-quality education for those with the most complex needs, and acting as catalysts for improvement across the system through outreach, short-term placements, and joint professional development.”

Furthermore, the proposed review of Progress 8 is a step in the right direction, recognising the need to rethink accountability in ways that better reflect inclusion and breadth. However, there remains ambiguity around what will constitute approved subjects or programmes within the proposed “breadth and choice” elements.

Finally, I would reflect that the ambition is significant, and the three-phased approach to implementation will take time. Whilst this is not inherently problematic, as meaningful and purposeful change rarely happens overnight, it does mean practitioners will continue to work within existing pressures in the interim. We cannot wait for reform to be enacted before meeting the needs of our current student cohorts.

The sector now has both an opportunity and a responsibility to engage fully with the invitation to collaborate, ensuring reform is enacted well and shaped by those of us working daily with children and their families. I would certainly encourage everyone to continue engaging with these opportunities. The formal consultation on these proposals remains open until 18 May and is available here: https://consult.education.gov.uk/send-strategy-division/send-reform-putting-children-and-young-people-firs/