High SEND schools 5 times more likely to miss Ofsted inclusion standard

Schools with a higher proportion of pupils with special educational needs or disabilities are more likely to get lower grades across all of Ofsted’s main evaluation areas - including on inclusion.

And secondary schools with the highest levels of SEND are five times more likely to be rated as below the “expected standard” on inclusion than those with the lowest proportion, exclusive findings reveal.

Tes has seen two separate analyses of inspection reports that show a link between higher levels of pupils with SEND and negative Ofsted judgements across all the main evaluation areas.

The research also highlights a similar pattern for schools with higher levels of pupils on free school meals and those with high rates of pupils with low prior attainment.

Experts warn that the data points to “serious flaws” in the framework, which Ofsted began inspecting schools with in November last year.

Ofsted’s inclusion focus

Inclusion, a new inspection area under Ofsted’s report card framework, is seen by the government as a crucial part of its reforms to the SEND system.

Last year, Ofsted’s chief inspector Sir Martyn Oliver said the inclusion category would allow the watchdog to report on how “every single education provider supports disadvantaged children, vulnerable children [and] children with SEND”.

An analysis for Tes by SchoolDash finds that schools rated as missing the “expected standard” on inclusion have, on average, more pupils with education, health and care plans (EHCPs) and more pupils on SEN support compared with those rated as being at a “strong standard” or “exceptional”.

The data, published in a blog post today, shows that at schools with an “exceptional” inclusion rating, 12.2 per cent of pupils identify as being on SEN support, on average.

But this rises to 17.1 per cent for schools with the lowest grade of “urgent improvement” for inclusion.

Overall, a clear pattern emerges: the lower the grade on inclusion, the higher the proportion of pupils on SEN support.

A similar trend was found with pupils who have EHCPs.

Schools that received an “exceptional” grade for inclusion had 3.58 per cent of their overall pupil intake with EHCPs, compared with 5.22 per cent for schools with the lowest grade.

Meanwhile, a separate report seen by Tes by former Ofsted HMI and subject lead inspector Steve Wren has found that just 3 per cent of secondaries with the lowest level of SEND fell below the “expected standard” on inclusion.

This compared with 15 per cent of the schools with the highest level. Mr Wren has not yet run the same analysis for primaries.

Inspections are ‘not taking context fully into account’

Andy Jordan, inspection and accountability specialist at the Association of School and College Leaders, said: “It has been clear for some time that there are serious flaws in Ofsted’s methodology and how the renewed framework is being applied in schools and colleges.”

He added: “The fact that schools with higher percentages of pupils on the SEND register are doing less well in the inclusion evaluation area demonstrates that inspections are not taking context fully into account.”

Ofsted inspects schools across at least six different evaluation areas using a five-point grading scale.

As part of its assessment on inclusion, the watchdog’s inspection toolkits require inspectors to consider how school staff identify and support disadvantaged pupils, those with SEND or who are known to children’s social care.

Ofsted says schools should embed a culture in which an early and accurate assessment of needs is prioritised, and reduce barriers to pupils’ learning and/or wellbeing.

But there have been concerns that Ofsted has not looked at schools’ approaches to admissions and who joins a school as part of its assessment on inclusion.

Ofsted’s approach ‘damages inclusive schools’

Former headteachers’ union leader Geoff Barton, who last year led a task force on inclusion, warned at the time that inspecting inclusion would be “diluted” without also investigating school admissions.

Responding to today’s findings, education consultant and former multi-academy trust chief Jonny Uttley said: “Since Ofsted announced it would grade inclusion when inspecting schools, it has refused to take the most basic first step in considering inclusion, which is to ask, ‘who comes to this school, who doesn’t and why?’”

He said the latest analysis of Ofsted grades “demonstrates that it is harder for schools with higher proportions of vulnerable children, children with SEND or children from disadvantaged backgrounds to be judged positively by Ofsted.”

Mr Uttley warned that Ofsted’s approach creates “a completely false picture of the school system and damages inclusive schools”.

Findings ‘undermine’ government inclusion agenda

Tes commissioned SchoolDash to analyse all Ofsted report card inspections that took place under the new framework in the 2025-26 academic year.

The SchoolDash report shows that, across every evaluation area, schools that achieved higher grades on average had lower proportions of pupils on SEN support.

The most striking difference can be seen in the attendance and behaviour category, with schools rated as “urgent improvement” having twice the proportion of pupils on SEN support as those ranked as “exceptional” in this area.

A similar trend can be seen for pupils with EHCPs. In almost all evaluation areas and grades, the lower the grade, the higher the average proportion of pupils with EHCPs.

Liz Robinson, national director of education transformation for the Oasis Community Learning Trust, said the findings “deeply undermine this government’s key agenda on inclusion, and reinforce the negative motivation for school leaders to resist being more inclusive in their intake”.

Similar pattern for FSM

The SchoolDash analysis also finds a pattern for pupils on free school meals - with higher proportions of pupils found in schools with lower grades.

However, in some evaluation areas, disadvantage levels are likely to be higher in “exceptional”-rated schools.

The picture is “less ambiguous” in secondaries, SchoolDash’s Timo Hannay says in his blog post today.

Across all inspection areas, “schools with worse inspection grades tend to have higher proportions of FSM-eligible pupils”, he writes.

Mr Hannay asks: “Are we to conclude that secondary schools with higher proportions of poor pupils are systematically less well led, or simply that Ofsted rates them more harshly?”

Report poses questions for Ofsted

Mr Wren carried out the analysis of Ofsted grades out of a fear - from before inspections had started - that the toolkits and their secure fit methodology would systematically disadvantage schools in more challenging contexts, particularly in secondary schools.

His report adds: “If inspection outcomes are as much, or more, a function of school context than of the quality of provision, then inspection is serving little useful purpose and is almost certainly detrimental to ensuring that the most vulnerable in society get the highest quality of education possible.”

Mr Wren’s report splits secondary schools into five national quintiles, measuring them by the proportion of pupils with SEND, pupils on FSM and the prior attainment of pupils.

It finds that schools with lower levels of SEND are more likely to be graded highly across all the main evaluation areas - with the most striking pattern found in curriculum and teaching, achievement, and attendance and behaviour judgement areas.

His report, which has been sent to the Commons Education Select Committee, suggests a series of questions for MPs to put to the watchdog’s chief inspector.

This includes whether schools with higher SEND profiles are being graded lower in key judgement areas because they “typically provide weaker education, or because the framework disadvantages them, or because inspectors lack the tools to identify strengths in high‑SEND contexts”.

Like SchoolDash’s findings, his report raises concerns about the link between the proportion of pupils eligible for FSM and lower grades.

A Tes investigation has previously revealed that schools with a higher number of disadvantaged pupils were more likely to be marked down by Ofsted on achievement.

Low prior attainment

Mr Wren’s report shows the same trend for pupils’ prior attainment - with lower grades linked to schools with more previously low-attaining pupils - across multiple grading areas, not just achievement.

An Ofsted spokesperson said: “We have high expectations for all children, regardless of their backgrounds. While inspectors take a school’s context into account, inspection outcomes are based on the evidence gathered during inspection.

“Inclusion is a golden thread running throughout our inspection framework. The inclusion evaluation area focuses on leaders’ ambitions for all children, how effectively they identify those who need support and the actions they take to help them succeed.”