New guidance released last month by the Department for Education on inclusion bases is a welcome step, rightly positioning them as spaces that should increase, not replace, participation in mainstream education. Emphasis on access to the curriculum, collaboration with families and connection is also very promising. But there is an opportunity to go further. While the guidance tells us what inclusion bases should provide, it says less about how SEND students actually experience inclusion. I hear every day about how isolating mainstream school can be for neurodivergent children and young people. Inclusion is not defined solely by the presence of support or specialist provision. It is shaped by whether children feel psychologically safe, understood, valued and able to participate as themselves. An experience-sensitive approach grounded in agency, belonging and collaboration – also known as the ABC model – would help bridge this gap. It shifts the question from “what support does this child need?” to “what is this child experiencing?”, using children’s experiences to shape support, guide decision-making and measure whether inclusion is truly working. Here’s how. Being physically present in a classroom does not automatically mean a child is included. True inclusion means feeling psychologically safe, accepted, understood and connected. Foundation for participation Belonging is not an outcome of placement. It is the foundation for participation, learning and wellbeing. Our research shows no child wants to be included in a place where they do not feel they belong. The guidance’s continuum model asks schools to prioritise movement towards more mainstream time, helpfully recognising that transitions must be carefully planned so children feel safe and supported. The ABC model asks about the quality of that time, including whether connection has been deepened or eroded. A child moved into mainstream classes before they feel safe there is not more included, and for some children, belonging is built through the base, not despite it. We’d like to see progress along the continuum follow belonging, not substitute for it. An experience-sensitive approach recognises that many barriers to inclusion arise not from children themselves but from environments that overwhelm sensory, communication or emotional needs. The companion inclusive education estates guidance, published alongside the inclusive bases guidance, helpfully addresses the physical environment in mainstream settings – including acoustics, lighting, calmer corridors and quieter spaces. We would like to see equivalent attention paid to everyday classroom practice in mainstream lessons. Given the guidance’s focus on maximising mainstream time where possible, more on embedding experience-sensitive approaches – such as personalised and predictable routines, flexible teaching and communication-friendly practice – within mainstream classrooms would help reduce barriers to education before children reach crisis point. Pupil voice The guidance encourages partnership with parents and says pupil voice should inform decision-making, which is welcome. It also includes some promising examples as optional strategies, such as children co-designing spaces, creating their own targets and contributing their voice to quality assurance. To go a step further, we’d like to see these elevated to core expectations, with genuine, ongoing co-production that treats children and young people as experts in their own lives. This will ensure support is developed with them, not simply for them. This can be achieved by treating co-production as a continuous cycle rather than a consultation exercise. There should be standing mechanisms that give children a decision-making role in reviews and quality assurance, accessible participation for every communicator and clear evidence of how their input has shaped what happens next. If experience matters, it should also be measured. Schools should not only record factors such as attendance, but also understand whether children feel they belong, have meaningful agency over decisions affecting them, and whether collaboration with adults is genuinely shaping support. Yet the guidance doesn’t hold measures of experience to the same standard. Shaping practice It says schools should track academic outcomes, attendance and EHC plan targets, but might consider measuring belonging, confidence, and social relationships. Belonging is cited as an overarching aim of every base, yet without measuring it as rigorously as attendance, we will never know whether bases are delivering it. What gets measured shapes practice, so if these experiences matter, they should be measured with the same rigour as attendance and attainment. The best guidance will come to nothing if schools are not resourced to deliver it. With around a third of teachers leaving within five years and nearly nine in ten school leaders expecting cuts next year, sustained investment in staffing and professional development is essential. This will give schools the time, skills and confidence to create environments where children experience genuine belonging, agency and participation. Together, these steps would help ensure inclusion bases deliver what matters most: not just placement but belonging.