Issuu

Making the difference in Church Schools:

Strategies for tackling inequity in exclusions for Church of England schools

Introduction ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................ 2 Executive Summary

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ..........3

Context: The Church of England’s Vision for Education

................................ ................................ ................................ ................. 4

What the evidence says can work in reducing exclusion

................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 6

2.1 Contextual adaptations

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 6

2.2 Whole school and targeted interventions 2.3 Relational practice

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .......7

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .......................... 8

2.4 Effective use of Alternative Provision (AP)

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ....8

2.5 Parent/carer and community engagement

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ....9

3.The Difference Inclusive Leadership Course 3.1 A shared purpose

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 9

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................. 9

3.2 Aims ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ......................... 9 3.3 General outcomes from The Difference course across all cohorts 3.4 What leaders tell us

................................ ................................ ............. 10

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .................... 10

4.Learnings and reflections from Church school leaders on the Inclusive Leadership Course 4.1 General feedback from Church schools 4.2 Reasons for joining the course

................................ ....10

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .........10

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .............................. 11

4.3 Impact on Professional Understanding and Practice

................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 11

4.4 Case Study: Stefan Roos, Executive Headteacher, St Mary’s CE Primary School 4.5 Case Study: Fiona Brooks, Headteacher, Hope Hamilton CE Primary school

................................ ................ 12 ................................ ........................ 12

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................. 13

Bibliography ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .............................. 15

Making the Difference in Church schools Strategies for

tackling inequity in exclusions

for Church of England schools

Introduction The issue of inequity in school exclusions has been of great concern to the National Society for Education ( NSE ) for many years. Over several years, across schools of all types, the same groups of pupils have been routinely 1 excluded at a higher rate than their peers. The same appears to be true in Church of England schools . These groups are: • • •

Specific ethnic groups, namely Caribbean, White and Caribbean mixed and Romani, Roma and Traveller (often known as GRT) pupils Pupils with Special Educational Needs and Disabilities, including those with Education Health Care Plans (EHCPs) Care experienced pupils, those on C hild in N eed and C hild P rotection plans, and those in receipt of free school meals

Given the National Society’s historical roots in establishing schooling - free at the point of access - for the most disadvantaged children in society , it is of gr ave concern to see the additional risk of exclusion that exists for our most vulnerable pupils. There are many reasons for this, and we know that no school takes the decision to exclude a pupil lightly. The NSE also laments the role of the Church in the ‘ESN’ schools of the mid -1900s and has committed itself to 2 putting decisive actions in place which address the legacy of these schools. Key actions taken to address this in recent years have included raising awareness of the over -representation of pupils from Caribbean backgrounds within exclusion figures, designing training for dioceses and school leaders in racial justice, establishing a flagship leadership development programme for teachers from global majority heritage (GMH) backgrounds and 3 producing anti -discrimination guidance regarding race -based bullying. However, we have yet to see a noticeable shift in reducing inequity between groups when it comes to school exclusions. Therefore , we have a strong moral imperative to seek out as many ways as we can to implement what available research is telling us about practice that works in this space . Over the last two years, a number of key studies in particular have shaped our thinking. These studies build on the comprehensive Timpson Review of Exclusions published in 2019 4 and look at strategies for specific groups of pupils. The Black Task Force report by the Institute 5 for Equity University Centre set s out key principles which can address the exclusion of black pupils, specifically. Furthermore, a report by the Runnymede Trust looks at the factors around GRT exclusions (the group of pupils

Department for Education. Statistics: Exclusions . GOV.UK. Last updated July 9, 2026. https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/statistics - exclusions 2 For more about ESN schools, see: Bernard Coard, How the West Indian Child Is Made Educationally Subnormal in the British School System: The Scandal of the Black Child in Schools in Britain (London: New Beacon for the Caribbean Education and Community Workers’ Association, 1971). 3 National Society for Education, Flourishing for All ; National Society for Education, Leaders Like Us ; and National Society for Education, Inclusion: Racial Justice , accessed August 5, 2026, https://www.nse.org.uk. 4 Edward Timpson, Timpson Review of School Exclusion (London: Department for Education, 2019), https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/timpson -review -of -school -exclusion . 5 Paul Miller, Black Exclusion Taskforce Report: A Report on the Operations and Impact of the Taskforce on Black Exclusion and Black Achievement (Institute for Equity, University Centre, September 2024)

6 with the highest exclusion figures). The Difference charity’s report on 7 the core issues and then seeks ways forward to address them.

Who is Losing Learning?

sets out many of

One approach has been to work in partnership to upskill school leaders, and gather case study evidence about the sorts of strategies that can work well within a Church school context. Through 2025 -26, the NSE worked with several dioceses around the country to facilitate senior leaders from a range of Church schools (specifically targeting areas where exclusions are particularly high) to engage with T he Difference c harity’s Inclusive Leadership Course . Through this course , leaders learnt about the key factors underpinning the kind of inclusive and preventative cultures which have been shown to reduce inequity in exclusions, and were tasked with putting their learning into action. This report seeks to draw key learnings from the experiences of these leaders , in the hope that they may support and inspire other leaders to follow in their footsteps. 'Where there are few flourishing adults, there will be few flourishing children'. 8 Similarly, without inclusive leaders, we cannot have inclusive schools. And without inclusive schools, the evidence indicates that we will not see a reduction in the current state of inequity that exists with exclusions and hence greater flourishing for all pupils. We hope this report, and the associated workflow which follows, will assist school leaders, dioceses and the NSE in considering what part we can all can play in making a difference to every pupil, that all may flourish in a Church of England school. Emily Norman, Head of Curriculum and Inclusion

Executive Summary •

•

• • •

There is a persistent inequity in school exclusions, with particular groups over -represented in exclusion figures. These include some minoriti sed groups (particularly Caribbean , mixed Caribbean and White, GRT) , vulnerable and disadvantaged pupils, and those with special educational needs and disabilities. There is a moral and theological imperative for Church schools to address this inequity , due to the historical foundations of the National Society and the narrative of scripture which lifts up the excluded and marginalised. This is predicated on the belief that each pupil (and adult) is made in the image of God and has innate dignity. This is further highlighted by Jesus’ interactions with those on the margins of society in the gospels. T his report seeks to synthesise the evidence about inequity in school exclusions and consider , through the lens of Church school leaders hip, how different strategies might be utilised to impact pupils who are most adversely affected by exclusion. Partnership with The Difference charity enabled the NSE and a group of Church school leaders to explore what can work in a variety of school phases and contexts. Creating an inclusive culture of bel onging , in which all are valued , is seen as the best preventative measure ; this also includes compassionate engagement with families and local communities. All interventions need to be contextual, taking into account local factors and the specific needs within each school. Approaches should be phase -specific, recognising that early intervention is ideal wherever possible.

Simon Hood and Grace Preston, Excluded: Misrecognition, Control and the Roma Experience in Bradford Schools (London: Runnymede Trust, 2026) 7 Eleanor Harris, Cristín O’Brien, Kiran Gill, Loic Menzies, Efua Poku -Amanfo , Kirsten Rooney, and Jenny Graham, Who Is Losing Learning? Finding Solutions to the School Engagement Crisis (London: Institute for Public Policy Research and The Difference, March 2025). 8 Lynn E. Swaner and Andy Wolfe, Flourishing Together: A Christian Vision for Students, Educators, and Schools (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company

, 2021)

• • • •

Contextual safeguarding, combined with relational and trauma -informed approaches can be instrumental in building inclusive cultures. The consideration of different pathways, which ensures pupils are treated with dignity, is necessary in some cases. This includes alternative provision and specialist intervention. Recognising the need to address inequity in school exclusions does not diminish the harm that can be caused , and victims of that harm should always be protected and kept safe. This work requires courageous, committed leadership and buy -in from the whole staff and school community.

1. Context: The Church of England’s Vision for Education The school leaders who took part in this course were encouraged to engage with the Church of England’s for Education 9 throughout th e work, rooting their approaches within a desire for the full flourishing of each and every pupil within their school.

Vision

The National Society has a bold and ambitious goal – for every pupil and adult to experience ‘life in all its fullness’ (John 10 :10). This is rooted within the Christian belief that every child, young person and adult has ultimate worth 10 as a person created in the image of God and deeply loved by God. It recognises the persistent narrative throughout scripture of both the justice and mercy of God , which looks always to lift up the marginalised and protect the vulnerable. 11 We see Jesus in the gospels interacting with those branded ‘sinners’ and relentlessly 12 demonstrating kindness . He crosses cultural and societal divides, and dwells frequently in the margins. ‘Jesus embodies the love and compassion of God for each person, and Christians are called to follow him in this, and to join with others in demonstrating it. He paid special attention to the disadvantaged, excluded, despised and feared.’ 13 Following this example , we want to ensure that the most vulnerable and disadvantaged pupils in our schools are cared for and protected. To this end, we have identified five very specific needs which underpin the full flourishing that is needed , yet for some pupils and adults in our school s, is missing:

Church of England Education Office, Deeply Christian, Serving the Common Good: The Church of England's Vision for Education (London: Church of England, 2016), https://static1.squarespace.com/static/669e29466c5f4a0a5baa7936/t/66f411eb42056730d9df9027/1727271403898/CofE+Vis ion+for+Education+2016.pdf . 10 ibid page 7; Genesis 1:26-27 11 See for example: Psalm 146:9, Zechariah 7:9 -10, Isaiah 58:10, Micah 6:8, Matthew 25:35 -40 12 Matthew 9:10 –13, Mark 2:15 –17, Luke 7:36 –50 13 Church of England Education Office, Deeply Christian, Serving the Common Good: The Church of England's Vision for Education (London: Church of England, 2016), https://static1.squarespace.com/static/669e29466c5f4a0a5baa7936/t/66f411eb42056730d9df9027/1727271403898/CofE+Vis ion+for+Education+2016.pdf . Page 11

For pupils who are excluded from school, these key needs cannot easily be met. It is of particular concern that the evidence indicates that their trajectory from exclusion (especially permanent exclusion) is much less likely than 14 their peers to be hope -filled. It is also clear tha t pupils who experience exclusions are more likely to be 15 categorised after statutory school age as ‘Not in Education, Employment or Training’ (NEET). Pupils who are out of school cannot progress, belong or participate. For pupils who are already care -experienced or have social care involvement, the very foundations of their lives are shaped by a lack of safety and security , which is then only compounded by further exclusion. For many pupils, being out of school diminishes their actual safety, and a solution which holds them within a safe environment needs to be found wherever possible . We believe there is a clear moral and theological imperative to engage with the evidence around exclusion , for the sake of all pupils in Church schools, and especially the most vulnerable . We believe we should do all we can to build the kind of school cultures which prevent inequitable exclusion where possible, and to work with mercy and compassion where pupils’ behaviour threatens the flourishing of others. We have seen powerful examples of collaboration with alternative and specialist provision, for example, which centres the dignity of the excluded pupil at all times and seeks out a better future for them. ‘He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the

Lord require of you?

To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God.’ Micah 6:8

Hope Kent, Amanda Kirby, Lee Hogarth, George B. Leckie, Rosie P. Cornish, and Huw Williams, “School to Prison Pipelines: Associations between School Exclusion, Neurodisability and Age of First Conviction in Male Prisoners,” Forensic Science International: Mind and Law 4 (2023): 100123, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsiml.2023.100123. 15 Independent Review into Mental Health Conditions, ADHD and Autism: Interim Report (London: , June 10, 2026), accessed October 9, 2026, https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/independent -review -into -mental -health -conditions -adhd - and autism -interim - report/independent -review -into -mental -health -conditions -adhd -and -autism -interim -report

A Christian sense of justice reminds us of the need both to address harm robustly, and of fairness in applying sanctions, ensuring that no pupils are treated inequitably because of their ethnicity, culture, specific needs, or early life experiences. A Christian view of exclusion is also rooted i n the belief that as we have ourselves been shown mercy, so we 16 should extend mercy to others. This is not to ignore harm – and all approaches to exclusion must centre the harm ed and the vulnerable first. Rather, a balance must be found with the fact that exclusion can be a critical action to ensure that other pupils and adults are safe at school, and it is vital that victims of harm, discrimination and harassment are always protected . This report considers how we might reduce inequity in school exclusion, which shines a light perhaps on some deeper systemic and community issues for us to solve together, and absolutely not to stop school leaders from keeping their school communities safe. So, we weigh the deep implications of every decision made and consider the different pathways and approaches that might be possible for all involved. Lastly, as Church school leaders there is an additional responsibility to lead with humility. This means putting others first and considering their needs and perspectives. It involves being mindful of how the exclusion process is conducted, should an exclusion be deemed necessary, to avoid inducing shame in the pupil or family – recognising that shame rarely enables meaningful reflection on harm done. ‘Whether rejoicing in success or dealing with failure, [leaders] pursue love, around which everything turns and towards which everything should be drawn. This love “always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres. Love never fails. ”’17

2. What the evidence says can work in reducing exclusion Whilst w e do not yet have a significant body of UK evidence showing whether specific approaches to reducing exclusions work in the long term , we are committed to working with the best evidence available in ensuring that our schools are inclusive . To that end, we can draw on research from a range of organisations provide useful guidance on approaches that are associated with lower exclusion rates. In Who is Losing Learning? Finding 18 Solutions to the School Engagement Crisis , Harris et al. reinforce these findings through four principles for reducing exclusions and improving engagement across schools: inclusion is built from the universal up; inclusion is a culture led from the top; inclusion depends on community collaboratio n; and inclusion is measurable. The report argues that exclusions are most effectively reduced through a whole -school approach to inclusion, where leaders prioritise belonging, positive relationships, early identification of need and strong partnerships wi th families and external agencies. It concludes that keeping children engaged, supported and connected to learning is the most effective means of reducing suspensions and exclusions and improving outcomes for disadvantaged pupils.

2.1 Contextual adaptations While these strategies are supported by evidence, it is made clear they are most effective when adapted to the context, needs and culture of individual school s. Children and young people’s individual circumstances must be considered, alongside the social, local and demographic context of the school. Several studies indicate that pupils with SEND are disproportionately represented in exclusion rates

;19 this is also true of boys, Black

See , for example, 1 Timothy 1:15 -16 National Society for Education Called_Connected_Committed_ -_David_Ford_and_Andy_Wolfe.pdf page 36, quoting 1 Corinthians 13:7 18 E. Harris et al., Who Is Losing Learning? Finding Solutions to the School Engagement Crisis (London: IPPR and The Difference, 2025). 19 Department for Education, Suspensions and Permanent Exclusions in England, Academic Year 2023/24 (London: Department for Education, 2025), https://explore -education - statistics.service.gov.uk/find - statistics/suspensions -and -permanent -exclusions -inengland/2023 -24. 17

Caribbean, and Gypsy,

pupils .20 Schools can reduce racially disproportionate exclusions by

Roma and Traveller

ensuring that data is analysed for disproportionality and assigning oversight of this data to governing bodies where members have had appropriate training to avoid bias in decision making. Studies tell us that “flexible interventions that [are] adaptable to different contexts, classrooms, and individual students [are] also viewed positively.” 21 Phase context also matters.

The Timpson review highlights that many excluded pupils have

identifiable vulnerabilities and risk factors long before exclusion occurs, supporting the case for early intervention. 23 This is often cited as evidence for investing in primary -stage support to prevent later exclusion behaviours are less entrenched at earlier ages . Findings show that schools should be asking: what works here

and why? 24 and whether young people feel they belong. In order for staff to be more aware of ‘what works’ for specific communities in school , leaders can gather pupil /family and community voice, provid e access to training on anti -racist strategies, or recommend reading for staff on Gypsy, Roma and Traveller (GRT) communities .25

2.2 Whole school and targeted interventions Evidence also suggests that a combination of whole -school and targeted approaches towards reducing 26 exclusions is most effective. Universal strategies that promote inclusion, positive behaviour and belonging should be complemented by tailored interventions for pupils with additional needs. Effective whole school provision includes ensuring that behaviour, culture and routines are consistently upheld by well -trained and 27 invested staff. Research shows that investing in training for teachers can reduce exclusion rates. While studies are limited, this can work as a whole -school strategy in which teachers are supported to see their own behaviour management as a form of inclusivity, and to see how identifying and addressing needs early can prevent exclusions long term. Scho ols can also ensur e that there are role models for disadvantaged and marginalised students in the leadership structure ,28 29 or leaders who share their background , which can have positive effects in achievement a s they may function as role models to be emulated . This can serve to counteract negative stereotypes , particularly in the case of young Black Caribbean pupils. 30

Berni Graham, Clarissa White, Amy Edwards, Sylvia Potter, and Cathy Street, School Exclusions: A Literature Review on the Continued Disproportionate Exclusions of Certain Children (London: Department for Education, 2019) 21 Sara Valdebenito et al., “School -Based Interventions for Reducing Disciplinary School Exclusion: An Updated Systematic Review,” Campbell Systematic Reviews 21, no. 4 (2025): e70063, https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.70063. 22 Valdebenito et al., “School -Based Interventions,” e70063 23 Edward Timpson, Timpson Review of School Exclusion (London: Department for Education, 2019), https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/timpson -review -of -school -exclusion . 24 Organisation for Economic Co -operation and Development (OECD), PISA 2022 Results, Volume I and II: Country Note, United Kingdom (Paris: OECD, 2023), 6 https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/publications/reports/2023/11/pisa -2022 -results volume -i-and -ii-country -notes_2fca04b9/united -kingdom_b5071eb8/9c15db47 -en.pdf . 25 Maureen Finn, The Educational Experiences of Children and Adults from the Gypsy/Traveller Communities in Scotland (Edinburgh: STEP, Centre for Traditionally Nomadic Communities and Education, 2024), 6 , https://www.step.education.ed.ac.uk/wp content/uploads/2025/06/STEP_EducationalExperiencesReport_S.pdf 26 Education Endowment Foundation, Improving Behaviour in Schools (London: Education Endowment Foundation, 2019), https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/education -evidence/guidance -reports/behaviour . See also: Education Endowment Foundation, “Behaviour Interventions,” Teaching and Learning Toolkit (London: Education Endowment Foundation, 2025), https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/education -evidence/teaching -learning -toolkit/behaviour -interventions . 27 Valdebenito et al., “School -Based Interventions for Reducing Disciplinary School Exclusion.” 28 Claire Stewart - Hall, Lorraine Langham, and Paul Miller, “Preventing School Exclusions of Black Children in England: A Critical Review of Prevention Strategies and Interventions,” Equity in Education & Society 2, no. 3 (2023): 225 -242, https://doi.org/10.1177/27526461221149034 . 231 29 Timpson, Timpson Review of School Exclusion 30 Maylor U (2009)‘They do not relate to black people like us’: black teachers as black models for black pupils, Journal of educ ation policy 24(1): 2009, 1 –21.

31 Research consistently identifies early intervention as a key factor in reducing exclusions. Pupils at risk of disengagement, poor attendance or behavioural difficulties benefit from timely support before issues escalate. Early identification of need can prevent some exclusions and improve longer -term educational outcomes. Targeted interventions may take the form of counselling, mentorship and coaching programmes focused on individualised needs, as well as multi -agency interventions. Schools who engage in effective transition support during managed moves also report successf ul targeted interventions .

2.3 Relational practice A further finding is the importance of relational approaches as a tool to reduc e exclusions. 33 Strategies that prioritise positive relationships, emotional wellbeing and an understanding of trauma, attachment and resilience are associated with reduced exclusion risk. Such approaches focus on understanding the causes of behaviour and supporting pupi ls to remain engaged in learning. This might include attachment and trauma -informed support as well as social and emotional regulation programmes. Pupils who are better equipped to manage their emotions, respond appropriately to conflict, to build positive relationships and to engage successfully with 34 learning are less likely to be at risk of exclusion. Pupils who feel safe are less likely to have their fight/flight 35 response activated, as seen in neuroscientific research on the polyvagal system. These characteristics are deemed to be protective factors against exclusion and can be developed through targeted interventions. 36 It is important to note that relational approaches alone do not reduce exc lusions; schools must also have clear cultures of high expectations for behaviour and ensure there are boundaries for all pupils.

2.4 Effective use of Alternative Provision (AP) There is further evidence to suggest that effective and early use of Alternative Provision (AP) can also have positive outcomes for reducing exclusion.

Schools who work closely with external AP providers have a higher

long -term chance of reducing exclusions, particularly if there is extended collaboration with targeted support providers and parents/carers as part of the provision. Effective alternative provision combines high expectations with personalised support.

Effective alternative provision combines high expectations with personalised

support. Successful settings typically feature small classes, strong staff -student relationships, skilled and well supported staff, flexible curricula tailored to individual needs , access to counselling and mentoring, multi -agency collaboration, development of academic and social skills, and active family and community engagement.

Institute of Education (University of London) and National Foundation for Educational Research, School Exclusion Trial Evaluation (London: Department for Education, 2014) 32 Christos Panayiotopoulos and Michael Kerfoot, “Early Intervention and Prevention for Children Excluded from Primary Schools,” International Journal of Inclusive Education 11, no. 1 (2007): 59 -80, https://doi.org/10.1080/13603110500392882 . 33 Thames Valley Violence Prevention Partnership, The Effectiveness of Interventions to Reduce School Exclusion in the UK: Key Learning from a Systematic Review (Reading: Thames Valley Violence Prevention Partnership, 2025), 8 https://www.thamesvalley pcc.gov.uk/wp -content/uploads/2026/03/What -Works -to-Reduce -School -Exclusion -short -report -TVVPP -July -2025.pdf . 34 Education Endowment Foundation, “Social and Emotional Learning,” Teaching and Learning Toolkit (London: Education Endowment Foundation, 2025), https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/education -evidence/teaching -learning toolkit/social - and -emotional -learning . 35

Stephen W. Porges, The Pocket Guide to the Polyvagal Theory: The Transformative Power of Feeling Safe (New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2017), 36 Sara Valdebenito, Hannah Gaffney, Maria Jose Arosemena -Burbano, Sydney Hitchcock, Darrick Jolliffe, and Alex Sutherland, "School -Based Interventions for Reducing Disciplinary School Exclusion: An Updated Systematic Review,"

Campbell Systematic

Reviews 21, no. 4 (2025): e70063. 37 Institute of Education (University of London) and National Foundation for Educational Research, School Exclusion Trial Evaluation (London: Department for Education, 2014), https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/school -exclusion - trial -evaluation . 38 Paul Gutherson, Helen Davies, and Ted Daszkiewicz, Achieving Successful Outcomes through Alternative Education Provision: An International Literature Review

(Reading: CfBT Education Trust, 2011)

Alternative provision should be viewed as a stage in a pupil's journey rather than

a destination . Where

appropriate, AP should support pupils to return to mainstream education or progress to another suitable educational setting.

2.5 Parent/carer and community engagement A whole -school, multi -level strategy is associated with lower rates of exclusion. This means engaging with parents/carers effectively . Research shows that parents can have a difficulty navigating school systems, and that 39 communication/collaboration between schools, AP , and parents/carers is often lacking. Studies suggest that some schools can take a ‘deficit’ approach to parents, particularly those with low socio -economic status , considering intergenerational lack of engagement as a reason for poor attendance at parents’/carers’ evenings 40 and in in supporting behaviour interventions. Schools that communicate clearly with parents and provide targeted support for the family can have positive effects on reducing exclusions. This might mean contacting families at the first sign of behavioural concerns, holding solution -focused meetings or developing join support plans. There is limited e vidence on engaging parents/carers directly in behaviour management support classes, however, some evidence suggests that non -judgemental, empathetic support enables families to engage meaningfully with schools on reducing young people’s risk of exclusion. 41 Alongside this, schools should be aware of contextual safeguarding, an approach that encourages educators to consider the risk of harm to young people outside of their families. This might include risks in the local neighbourhood and online. 42

3.The Difference Inclusive Leadership Course Alice Bryant, Programme and Partnership Lead at The Difference

3 .1 A shared purpose The Difference and Church of England schools came together because our values are closely aligned. Both hold that every child should flourish, and that no child’s outcomes should be determined by disadvantage. Through this partnership, leaders from Church schools joined the Inclusive Leadership Course to build the practice and systems that reduce disadvantage in their own settings connecting a whole -school approach to inclusion with the Christian vision that already shapes their schools.

3.2 Aims The Difference believes that whole -school inclusion means all staff supporting the learning, wellbeing and safety needs of all children, so that they belong, achieve and thrive. The course gives senior, pastoral and inclusion leaders the expertise and stra tegic tools to make that a reality in their own settings: reducing exclusion and lost learning, improving attendance and strengthening belonging. Across six in -person cohort days, leaders: • •

build a shared language and framework for whole -school inclusion, including the tiered Inclusion Framework and the Lost Learning Continuum; develop expertise in trauma -informed, bias -informed, asset -based and restorative practice, contextual safeguarding and community voice;

Burtonshaw et al., Nothing Happens in Isolation, 53 Amy Bond, Graham Moore, and Jemma Hawkins, “Understanding Parental Involvement with Schools and Parental Engagement with Learning across Schools in Areas of Socioeconomic Deprivation in Wales,” Educational Review 77, no. 7 (2025): 2025 -2045, https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2024.2432255 . 41 Hannah Gaffney, David P. Farrington, and Howard White, Interventions to Prevent School Exclusion: Toolkit Technical Report (London: Youth Endowment Fund, 2021), https://youthendowmentfund.org.uk/wp -content/uploads/2021/06/School exclusions -technical - report -june.pdf . 42 Global Centre for Contextual Safeguarding, “About Us,” Contextual Safeguarding , accessed September 4, 2026, 40

https://www.contextualsafeguarding.org.uk/about

-us/.

• •

use implementation tools to diagnose their own provision, identify gaps and lead change; and learn alongside a regional network of peers spanning primary, secondary, special and alternative provision.

3 .3 General o utcomes from T he Difference course across all cohorts After twelve months on the course, 100% of schools report new developments and impact, 80% have reduced internal and external exclusion, 82% report improved de -escalation of incidents, and 100% of participants have led CPD to share course content with colleagues. Leaders describe impact in four areas: 1. 2. 3.

Systems and strategy : Schools and trusts are building whole -school and trust -wide inclusion frameworks, formalising tiers of support and clarifying the role every member of staff plays at each tier. Data and measurement : Tracking of lost learning and behaviour patterns, lesson -level attendance monitoring, expanded SEND and transition trackers, and baseline wellbeing surveys. Practice and professional development : Trauma -informed and de -escalation training, staff sessions on unconscious bias, and restorative conversation training; one leader has reached 600 education professionals. Children and families : Asset -based, positive -first contact with parents, redesigned pupil voice, and early gains in attendance, wellbeing and reduced removals from class.

3 .4 What leaders tell us Leaders consistently report that the course reframes inclusion as everyone’s responsibility rather than the preserve of a single department and gives them strategic breathing space to test how consistent their practice really is. Recurring themes include: •

the tiered Inclusion Framework as a diagnostic tool, revealing gaps and unnecessary overlap between teams;

•

lost learning as far broader than suspensions, prompting scrutiny of internal truancy and time out of lessons;

• • •

behaviour understood as two -way communication, with the adult as an active participant; unconscious bias as a driver of unequal outcomes, and the value of surfacing it with all staff; asset -based practice as the route to engaging families previously described as “hard to reach”; and

•

pupil voice that is genuinely representative, and acted upon as one leader put it, the “so what?” is key.

Leaders are candid about pace, citing capacity, competing priorities and staff resistance to change, and several reference the recognition that embedding real change takes eighteen months to three years. Many single out the benefits of the cohort model itself , giving leaders the chance to compare practice with colleagues across phases and trusts as among the most valuable elements of the course .

4.Learnings and reflections from Church school leaders on the Inclusive Leadership Course 4 .1 General feedback

from Church schools

The Difference 's Inclusive Leadership Course has provided school leaders with an opportunity to deepen their understanding of inclusion and reduce exclusion by developing more effective approaches to meeting the needs of all pupils. Feedback from participants in the Church of England invited group sp ans primary, secondary and all through schools . Participants represented a diverse range of roles, including executive headteachers, directors of inclusion, strategic behaviour leads and classroom practitioners, bringing rich perspectives on the challenges of inclusive education. They all valued the course as high -impact professional development and a catalyst for reflection and change of school practices.

4 .2 Reasons for joining the c ourse A common theme among participants was the desire to move beyond reactive approaches to proactive inclusion , and develop consistency with structured, intentional practices. Leaders reported concerns about increasing levels of SEND, challenging behaviour, lost learning and the needs of pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds. Schools also wanted to evaluate whether their existing practice reflected the highest standar inclusive education. S chool leaders identified strong alignment between the course and their Christian vision. Themes of compassion, belonging, dignity, restoration, equity and flourishing resonated closely with SIAMS expectations and Christian values. Participants reported that discussions about trauma, inclusion and pupil wellbeing rei nforced their commitment to ensuring that every child is valued and supported to flourish. While the was not explicitly faith -based, leaders consistently felt its principles complemented and strengthened the mission of Church schools.

ds of

course

4 .3 Impa c t on Professional Understanding and Practice Feedback consistently highlighted the quality of the course content. Participants particularly valued learning about trauma -informed practice, cognitive development, fight -or-flight responses, unconscious bias, belonging and relational approaches. These aspects helped leaders reframe their understanding of pupil b ehaviour and consider how school systems can either support or hinder inclusion. Many participants described being challenged to think differently. The course encouraged leaders to examine assumptions, reflect on how school culture influences pupil engagement, and reinforced the idea that inclusion should apply to all children rather than focusing solely on specific groups. Participants valued the practical nature of the training. Rather than simply presenting theory, there was continual reflection on how learning could be applied within each participant’s own setting. This approach helped leaders move from awareness to learn ing to action with immediacy. Whole -school change takes time, so participants could only provide early evidence of impact. Several leaders revised or strengthened pupil voice processes, ensuring that children were given more meaningful opportunities to express their views. Others revie wed approaches to behaviour management, focusing more intentionally on de -escalation, restorative practice, and understanding underlying need. Schools began developing inclusion frameworks which would clarify universal provision while identifying thresholds for escalating support. Some participants used learning from the course to redesign induction processes for transient pupils ,43 strengthen trauma -informed practice, and improve consistency across primary and secondary phases. One school reported a reduction in suspensions among pupils and improved reintegration practices following alternative provision placements. Participants repeatedly highlighted a broader cultural shift towards sustainable change. Planned approaches included SLT discussions, targeted staff training, trust -wide dissemination, twilight sessions, and the collaborative working groups across schools. Rather than simply using existing systems, staff increasingly considered what adjustments schools should make to better meet children's needs ahead of escalating punitive measures. This shift towards a more relational and inclusive mindset was viewed as one of the course's most significant outcomes.

Defined as pupils

“joining or leaving school at a point other than the normal age in which children start or finish their education at

that school, whether or not this involves a move of home.” Jane Dobson and Ken Henthorne,

Pupil Mobility in Schools

, DfEE

Research Report RR168 (London: Department for Education and Employment, 1999).

Facilitators were praised for their expertise, openness, and ability to create safe environments for discussion and reflection. A few leaders talked about seeking professional networks where they could continue sharing and refining practice.

4 .4 Case Study: Stefan Roos, Executive Headteacher, St Mary’s CE Primary School Stefan Roos is Executive Headteacher of three Church of England primary schools. He joined the Inclusive Leaders Course to deepen his understanding of inclusion and explore how a more systematic, proactive approach could be developed across his schools. Stefan noticed that discussions about inclusion shifted quickly towards a narrow focus on pupils with the most complex needs. While these children require significant support, he observed that this can unintentionally overshadow the wider range of safeguar ding, wellbeing and learning needs experienced by all pupils. He was keen to move beyond a reactive model of inclusion and towards a whole -school framework that would impact every child. Stefan describes T he Difference course as highly valuable and thought -provoking. The key principle that “ children have safeguarding, learning and wellbeing needs” supported his learning aims. He highly valued the content aimed at shifting the focus from individual diagnoses to a broader understanding of belonging, relationships, and pupil wellbeing.

all

Several sessions had a significant impact on his thinking and practice. Learning about brain development, trauma responses, and unconscious bias strengthened his understanding of pupil behaviour and reinforced the importance of relational approaches. Discussions around belonging allowed shared exploration of the balance between behaviour expectations, sanctions and compassionate support. Stefan particularly valued the practical activities, reflec tive exercises, and opportunities to hear diverse perspectives from colleagues working in different educational settings. T he course has already influenced practice across his schools. Conversations with staff have become more focused on understanding pupils’ needs, the quality of interactions between children has improved, and strategies for capturing pupil voice in an authentic sense have been strengthened. Decision making uses fresh lenses to look at what is best for children, rather than relying on existing systems or policies. Looking ahead, Stefan plans to use the course's learning to develop a shared inclusion framework across all three schools in his partnership . He believes The Difference ’s Inclusive Leadership Course provides an important foundation for schools seeking to move from responding to inclusion challenges towards creating cultures where inclusion is embedded proactively, consistently and compassionately for every child.

4 .5 Case Study : Fiona Brooks, Headteacher, Hope Hamilton CE Primary school As Headteacher of Hope Hamilton CE Primary School, Fiona Brooks joined T he Difference course to understand what the “gold standard” of inclusive practice looked like in schools. She sought to strengthen her school’s approach in an ambitious, evidence -informed way, while identifying new practices that would strengthen provision for all pupils. In Leicester, Hope Hamilton i s recognised as an inclusive school where pupils from diverse backgrounds and circumstances feel valued, happy and safe. Their Statutory Inspection of Anglican and Methodist Schools (SIAMs ) highlighted that their Christian vision to be “a place where every child feels special and loved by God for who they are and that every child leaves us feeling they have something special to offer the world” is deeply embedded. The Difference course provided both validation and challenge. Fiona described it as “a good challenge to thinking” through focus on belonging, restorative practice and pupil voice. The course ’s emphasis on ensuring that inclusion is “all of us, all the time, for everybody” resonated strongly with her vision for the school.

Drawing on ideas shared by peers on the course , Fiona refined the school’s inclusion systems to build a more structured induction pathway for new pupils. In a school community with high mobility and diversity, this has helped staff be more intentional when identifying pupils’ strengths, previous learn ing experiences and next steps from the moment they join. The course also strengthened leadership conversations around restorative practice, universal provision and equity in practice. Across the school, the learning from T he Difference course has been used to build staff consistency in thinking about equity when responding to student need. The result thus far has been a positive culture of reflection and improvement, rooted in the school’s Christian vision, that will allow every child to flourish, belong and achieve.

4 .6 Case Study: Philippa Cousins, Executive Headteacher, Travis St Lawrence Church of England Primary School and Rossington St Michael's CofE Primary School, Doncaster, South Yorkshire Travis St Lawrence Church of England Primary School and Rossington St Michael's CofE Primary School are two large Church schools serving an area of significant socioeconomic disadvantage. Their Executive Headteacher, Philippa Cousins, was concerned that pu pils facing “double disadvantage”, where SEND and Pupil Premium overlap, were those most likely to experience repeated time out from lessons, lost learning and were at higher risk of suspension. Turning this around was the main learning aim for attending T he Difference course sessions. The course's work on minimising learning loss while engaging with authentic pupil voice proved transformative. The training challenged school leaders to move beyond simply gathering pupil feedback and instead to consider whether all pupils could genuinely access and contribute their views. This prompted a wider cultural shift in the school, where leaders proactively though through systems from the perspective of impact on the most vulnerable learners. Philippa and her team made immediate changes including identifying key pupils at any risk of exclusion, strengthened the reintegration process for children returning to the mainstream setting from alternative provision through increased support for emotion al regulation across the school. In being more proactive, the number of pupils facing their first exclusion reduced significantly, as those who previously faced multiple exclusions, showed a more positive response to reintegration. Pupils had a stronger vo ice and felt more valued within the school community. Looking ahead, Philippa plans to renew policies to deepen restorative and inclusive practice. She also plans to share the key learning across the wider school trust. For her, T he Difference course is the catalyst for an ongoing shift in school culture towards equity, belonging and inclusion across both schools.

5. Key recommendations 5.1 Key Recommendations •

•

for Church Schools

To consider carefully which pupils within their particular school are not able to fully flourish due to safety, well being or relational needs, and to seek to address the full flourishing of all within a Christian framework. To take an intentionally proactive approach to inclusion, rather than reacting once an incident has occurred.

•

• •

To work on a whole -school and whole -community level, involving all stakeholders in seeking to create cultures which promote belonging and inclusion for all pupils. This might include employing a contextual 44 safeguarding approach. To utilise relational approaches and engage in high -quality trauma informed training for all staff, to support pupils in all aspects of school life. To develop a deep understanding of context, and of the particular communities and backgrounds the pupils come from. This should involve work with parents, carers and families wherever possible and an understanding of historical and cultural factors. To engage with dioceses and local partners on regional and contextual factors that support better inclusion strategies. To ensure that all actions taken to reduce inequity in exclusion emanate from a robust theologically rooted Christian vision, which is shared and understood by the whole community.

5 .2 Key Commitments from the NSE • • • •

To work with dioceses, schools and external partners to seek out best practice in the area of exclusion reduction and share this nationally. To provide resources and guidance for schools which support their theological engagement with the topic of exclusions. To engage in discussion at a policy level to support actions which address the inequity in exclusions nationally. To advocate for policies which support those most vulnerable to exclusion, in partnership with our stakeholders.

October 2026 With thanks to all the school leaders involved in the project, Allana Gay (racial justice consultant, NSE), Bennie Kara (Curriculum & Inclusion specialist , NSE) and the team at The Difference, particularly Sam Morrow and Alice Bryant.

Contextual Safeguarding, “School Assessment,”

Contextual Safeguarding

https://www.contextualsafeguarding.org.uk/toolkits/scale

, accessed September 4, 2026,

-up -toolkit/schools/school

-assessments/

Bibliography Bond, Amy, Graham Moore, and Jemma Hawkins. “Understanding Parental Involvement with Schools and Parental Engagement with Learning across Schools in Areas of Socioeconomic Deprivation in Wales.” (2025): 2025 -2045. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2024.2432255 . Burtonshaw, Sally, Ed Dorrell, Ben Murphy, Sunita Pfitzner, and Pete Whitehead.

Educational Review

77, no. 7

Nothing Happens in Isolation: Teacher, Young

People and Parent Perceptions of School Exclusion . London: Public First, 2024. Commissioned by Mission 44. Accessed July 16, 2026. https://preventingexclusions.com/src/assets/docs/Nothing_Happens_In_Isolation_Public_First%20Report_Nov%202024.pd f. Church of England Education Office.

Deeply Christian, Serving the Common Good: The Church of England’s Vision for

Education . London: Church of England, 2016. https://static1.squarespace.com/static/669e29466c5f4a0a5baa7936/t/66f411eb42056730d9df9027/1727271403898/C ofE+Vision+for+Education+2016.pdf

Coard, Bernard. How the West Indian Child Is Made Educationally Subnormal in the British School System: The Scandal of the Black Child in Schools in Britain . London: New Beacon for the Caribbean Education and Community Workers’ Association, 1971. Contextual Safeguarding. “School Assessment.” Contextual Safeguarding . Accessed September 4, 2026. https://www.contextualsafeguarding.org.uk/toolkits/scale -up -toolkit/schools/school -assessments/ . Department for Education.

School Exclusion Trial Evaluation

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/school

. London: Department for Education, 2014.

-exclusion -trial -evaluation .

Department for Education. Suspensions and Permanent Exclusions in England, Academic Year 2023/24 for Education, 2025. https://explore -education -statistics.service.gov.uk/find -statistics/suspensions

. London: Department -and -permanent -

exclusions -inengland/2023 -24 . Department for Education.

Statistics: Exclusions

. GOV.UK. Last modified July 9, 2026.

https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/statistics Dobson, Jane, and Ken Henthorne. Education and Employment, 1999.

-exclusions .

Pupil Mobility in Schools

. DfEE Research Report RR168. London: Department for

Education Endowment Foundation. Improving Behaviour in Schools . London: Education Endowment Foundation, 2019. https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/education -evidence/guidance -reports/behaviour . Education Endowment Foundation. “Behaviour Interventions.” Foundation, 2025.

Teaching and Learning Toolkit

https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/education

. London: Education Endowment

-evidence/teaching -learning -toolkit/behaviour -

interventions . Education Endowment Foundation. “Social and Emotional Learning.” Teaching and Learning Toolkit . London: Education Endowment Foundation, 2025. https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/education -evidence/teaching -learning toolkit/social -and -emotional -learning . Finn, Maureen. The Educational Experiences of Children and Adults from the Gypsy/Traveller Communities in Scotland Edinburgh: STEP, Centre for Traditionally Nomadic Communities and Education, 2024. https://www.step.education.ed.ac.uk/wp -content/uploads/2025/06/STEP_EducationalExperiencesReport_S.pdf

. .

Gaffney, Hannah, David P. Farrington, and Howard White. London: Youth Endowment Fund, 2021. exclusions -technical - report -june.pdf .

Interventions to Prevent School Exclusion: Toolkit Technical Report

https://youthendowmentfund.org.uk/wp

Global Centre for Contextual Safeguarding. “About Us.” Contextual Safeguarding https://www.contextualsafeguarding.org.uk/about -us/.

-content/uploads/2021/06/School

. Accessed September 4, 2026.

Graham, Berni, Clarissa White, Amy Edwards, Sylvia Potter, and Cathy Street. School Exclusions: A Literature Review on the Continued Disproportionate Exclusions of Certain Children . London: Department for Education, 2019. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5cd15de640f0b63329d700e5/Timpson_review_of_school_exclusion_literat ure_review.pdf . Gutherson, Paul, Helen Davies, and Ted Daszkiewicz. Provision: An International Literature Review

Achieving Successful Outcomes through Alternative Education

. Reading: CfBT Education Trust, 2011.

Harris, Eleanor, Cristín O’Brien, Kiran Gill, Loic Menzies, Efua Poku Learning? Finding Solutions to the School Engagement Crisis Difference, 2025. Hood, Simon, and Grace Preston. Runnymede Trust, 2026.

-Amanfo, Kirsten Rooney, and Jenny Graham.

Who Is Losing

. London: Institute for Public Policy Research and The

Excluded: Misrecognition, Control and the Roma Experience in Bradford Schools

Independent Review into Mental Health Conditions, ADHD and Autism: Interim Report

. London:

. London: , June 10, 2026. Accessed

October 9, 2026. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/independent -review -into -mental -health -conditions -adhd and -autism -interim -report/independent -review -into -mental -health -conditions -adhd -and -autism -interim -report. Kent, Hope, Amanda Kirby, Lee Hogarth, George B. Leckie, Rosie P. Cornish, and Huw Williams. “School to Prison Pipelines: Associations between School Exclusion, Neurodisability and Age of First Conviction in Male Prisoners.” Forensic Science International: Mind and Law 4 (2023): 100123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsiml.2023.100123 . Keppens , Gil, and Bram Spruyt. “The Impact of Interventions to Prevent Truancy: A Review of the Research Literature.” Studies in Educational Evaluation

65 (2020): 100840.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2020.100840

Maylor, Uvanney. “They Do Not Relate to Black People Like Us’: Black Teachers as Role Models for Black Pupils.” Education Policy 24, no. 1 (2009): 1 -21.

Journal of

Miller, Paul. Black Exclusion Taskforce Report: A Report on the Operations and Impact of the Taskforce on Black Exclusion and Black Achievement

. Institute for Equity, University Centre, 2024.

National Society for Education.

Called, Connected, Committed

National Society for Education.

Flourishing for All . London: National Society for Education.

National Society for Education.

Inclusion: Racial Justice

National Society for Education.

Leaders Like Us

Organisation for Economic Co Kingdom . Paris: OECD, 2023.

. London: National Society for Education.

https://www.nse.org.uk .

-operation and Development (OECD). PISA 2022 Results, Volume I and II: Country Note, United https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/publications/reports/2023/11/pisa -2022 -results -

volume -i-and -ii-country -notes_2fca04b9/united

-kingdom_b5071eb8/9c15db47

-en.pdf .

Panayiotopoulos, Christos, and Michael Kerfoot. “Early Intervention and Prevention for Children Excluded from Primary Schools.” International Journal of Inclusive Education 11, no. 1 (2007): 59 -80. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603110500392882

Porges, Stephen W.

The Pocket Guide to the Polyvagal Theory: The Transformative Power of Feeling Safe

. New York: W. W.

Norton & Company, 2017. Stewart -Hall, Claire, Lorraine Langham, and Paul Miller. “Preventing School Exclusions of Black Children in England: A Critical Review of Prevention Strategies and Interventions.” Equity in Education & Society 2, no. 3 (2023): 225 -242. https://doi.org/10.1177/27526461221149034 . Swaner, Lynn E., and Andy Wolfe. Flourishing Together: A Christian Vision for Students, Educators, and Schools MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2021. Thames Valley Violence Prevention Partnership.

. Grand Rapids,

The Effectiveness of Interventions to Reduce School Exclusion in the UK:

Key Learning from a Systematic Review . Reading: Thames Valley Violence Prevention Partnership, 2025. Accessed July 16, 2026. https://www.thamesvalley -pcc.gov.uk/wp -content/uploads/2026/03/What -Works -to -Reduce -School -Exclusion -short report -TVVPP -July -2025.pdf . Timpson, Edward.

Timpson Review of School Exclusion

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/timpson

. London: Department for Education, 2019. -review -of -school -exclusion .

University of Oxford, Department of Social Policy and Intervention. “Reducing School Exclusions: What School Interventions Can and Can't Achieve.” January 14, 2026. Accessed July 16, 2026. school -exclusions -what -school -based -interventions -can -and -cant -achieve . Valdebenito, Sara, Hannah Gaffney, Maria Jose Arosemena

-Based

https://www.spi.ox.ac.uk/article/reducing

-Burbano, Sydney Hitchcock, Darrick Jolliffe, and Alex Sutherland.

“School -Based Interventions for Reducing Disciplinary School Exclusion: An Updated Systematic Review.” Systematic Reviews 21, no. 4 (2025): e70063. https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.70063 .

Campbell