Mainstream inclusion innovation research

Throughout my research for this review I assumed that I was looking for the best hierarchical structure to allow SENDCos and teachers to follow a path that would lead them to the specific resource they needed. It wasn’t until I had finished the review that I realised that we are looking at 2 different things

• Information pages

• Directory of resources

I haven’t yet found a council that has created a searchable directory of mainstream inclusion resources. 

Hierarchy

As an example of hierarchical pages we have 

Home > Schools and learning > SEND Graduated Approach Toolkit > Setting and school staff > School age > Graduated approach > Key Stage >Area of need > Subject > Individual Intervention0

This would be a lot of clicks through a lot of pages, each with a number of alternative paths to other resources (such as Assessment, or Top tips). Eventually they would find the resource they are looking for, and could then bookmark that page. 

A teacher would need to bookmark a number of pages to be able to find resources to cover the whole curriculum. 

Repeated content

The problem with this approach is that it leads to a LOT of repeated content. It is a waste of resources to have to update the same information on every page.

An obvious alternative

Nothing is obvious until you see it, of course. I realised that we need 2 types of content, which can, in some cases, be displayed together. 

Information and advice pages

For example, pages about

• the graduated approach

• universal, targeted, and specialist support

• general information about Areas of Need

A directory with filters

Individual resources, added once, and filtered with categories. 

Rather than starting at the top of the hierarchy and moving down, we can start with a specific resource, and tag it.

Topics and fields

The topics and fields needed to create this type of searchable directory are up for discussion with all stakeholders. 

Implementing a directory, and keeping it up to date is notoriously difficult. Some guidelines for including resources are essential. For example

• Approved by the SIT team

• Simple to understand quickly by class teachers and TAs

• Clear, short explanations of how to use the resource

• Downloadable resources available directly from the Directory

Fields for tagging might include 

• Support level

• Useful for Whole School Policy 

• Key Stage

• Training or coaching resource

• Area of need

• SIT support

We will need to work with SIT, SENCOs, and teachers to define the fields that will work best for Calderdale. 

While trying to find a specific resource to demonstrate this, I encountered a huge number of problems, which I hope we can avoid in a curated list of resources for Calderdale. 

• free resources that require a full log in on a payment platform

• free resources that were blog posts

• awful videos of people waffling for the first half of the video

• paid for assessment programmes

• unsafe websites (no security certificate)

• broken links

• links to huge resources that require a lot of sifting through to find what you need (hierarchical, not filterable) 

• resources that had to be downloaded before you could see what they were

Although I can't share the full report, this is a summary of the findings from the review of mainstream inclusion resources from 6 councils. 

1. Accessibility & Navigation Issues

• Documents are difficult to locate within cluttered pages

• Heavy reliance on PDFs and Word documents, creating accessibility barriers

• Information is fragmented and repetitive across different pages

• No clear stepped approach or logical flow through information

• Poor information architecture requiring frequent back-and-forth navigation

• Lack of table of contents and clear headings

• Broken links

2. Content Structure Problems

• Artificial separation between professional, parent, and pupil sections

• Redundant content across different areas

• Inconsistent terminology between sections

• Stages and progression not clearly defined

• Dense, poorly organised documents

3. Age-Appropriate Content

• Content appears primary-school focused

• Difficult to find KS3-specific guidance

• Some provision grids don't differentiate by age

• Activities labelled as "age appropriate" without filtering options

4. Resource Limitations

• Limited targeted support advice

• Few direct links to specific resources

• Teachers must conduct additional research for activities

• No apparent resource sharing between SIT and SENCO

• Outdated documents

• CPD mentions without accompanying links

5. Parent/Carer Considerations

• Lack of transparency about the graduated approach

• Complex language may be barrier for parents

• No clear guidance for initiating conversations with teachers/SENCOs

• Parents must search multiple sections for comprehensive information

6. Positive Aspects

• Universal advice that could benefit all pupils

• Good basic introduction to SEND

• Minimal legal jargon and confusing acronyms

• Some effective SENCO support

• Useful "persistent and significant" difficulties framing

• Good Intervention Overview (when found)

7. Technical Issues

• Word and PDF documents create problems with

  • Finding information

  • Maintaining updates

  • Ensuring accuracy

  • Managing information density

8. Suggested Improvements

• Web page format (HTML) instead of PDFs/Word docs

• Clear navigation structure

• Consistent terminology

• Age-appropriate filtering

• Direct resource links

• Simplified parent/carer guidance

• Better integration of shared resources

• Regular content updates

• Improved searchability