Neuro-inclusive teaching is vital to any skills revolution

The UK government’s Post-16 Education and Skills White Paper, published last month, promises to create a learning system that brings further and higher education closer together through modular learning, higher technical qualifications and employer partnerships. But amid new funding models and accountability reforms, one major dimension of skills development remains underdeveloped: a clear strategy for building neuro-inclusive teaching and learning in higher education.

It is estimated that about 15 per cent of the UK population – roughly one in seven – is neurodivergent. And, according to Ucas End of Cycle Data for 2023, the proportion of UK applicants declaring a disability rose by 34 per cent compared with the previous year to 103,000: and 77 per cent more than in 2019. That is a vast number of people to at least partially exclude from the opportunities higher education offers for personal advancement by failing to value the full variety of ways in which students think and learn.

And quite apart from the moral imperative of inclusivity, no skills strategy can possibly be complete without addressing this issue. In an economy increasingly dependent on creativity, problem-solving and collaboration, the ability to nurture neurodiverse talent is a national skills advantage, not only because it expands the size of the talent pool but also because it diversifies it in potentially fruitful ways; research by Deloitte in 2017 highlighted that neurodiverse teams outperform others by up to 30 per cent in creative and analytical tasks, for instance.

In addition, the Lifelong Learning Entitlement, applications for which open from September 2026, is expected to attract learners with diverse experiences and learning profiles into higher education, in search of flexible provision to help keep their skills and knowledge up to date.

Embedding neuro-inclusive practice would also improve belonging and retention, two major challenges the sector is facing. Universities with inclusive teaching strategies often report stronger engagement and reduced dropout rates. Catering to the needs of neurodiverse learners, then, makes sense for everyone.

However, this isn’t yet happening to the extent required. There is increased awareness that traditional teaching techniques, assessment structures and sensory environments can place neurodiverse learners at a disadvantage, and while universities have made progress in addressing that failing through disability services and reasonable adjustments, these remain largely reactive and dependent on students disclosing their neurodiversity – which they are sometimes reluctant to do.

Inclusion should not be reduced to compliance with equality law or reactive adjustments for individual students. It must be integrated in pedagogy, curriculum design and professional learning at every level. Scholars such as Lani Florian and Jennifer Spratt argue that inclusive pedagogy is not about adapting for a few but extending what is ordinarily available to everyone, and that idea is in line with the concept of universal design for learning, which promotes and encourages flexibility and accessibility to all from the outset.

Advance HE has laid the groundwork. It has updated its Professional Standards Framework to place inclusion at the forefront of teaching excellence, emphasising context, reflection and impact. Yet frameworks alone will not move us from a mindset of “accommodation” to one of “anticipation”, whereby diversity is expected instead of being seen as exceptional.

Research consistently shows that educator capability is imperative for inclusive outcomes, but many academics still see inclusion as secondary to their role. Universities need to embed inclusive pedagogy into probation, promotion and continuing professional development.

Academic leaders, too, have a crucial role. Of course, universities are facing financial strain and job losses, so large-scale investment in inclusion programmes may be unrealistic. Yet neuroinclusive practice relies more on commitment than cost. Modelling, embedding, championing and rewarding it can take us a very long way.

But leaders should also be conscious that if they are to build cultures of inclusion, they must apply the same principles to their staff. Staff cannot model inclusion if their own environments are exclusive or unsustainable. They must be permitted time to de-stress and reflect, as well as the opportunity to access mental-health support when needed.

Initiatives such as Universities UK’s Stepchange for Mentally Healthy Universities have highlighted how institutional well-being strategies are in line with inclusive pedagogy. Integrating these methods into leadership and HR policies would not just enhance morale but also strengthen the capacity for innovation in teaching.

The UK’s skills revolution will not succeed through structural reform alone. It will heavily rely on whether universities can create environments that value every learner’s cognitive diversity as a source of creativity and innovation. In that sense, a truly world-class skills system starts not with policy but with investment in people and a willingness to lead by example.

Imran Mir is a doctoral student in education at the University of Glasgow and campus head and programme lead at Apex College, a business college in London and Leicester. He is a senior fellow of the Higher Education Academy, a chartered manager with the Chartered Management Institute and a fellow of the Society for Education and Training and of the Royal Society of Arts.