Beyond Metrics: Why Relationships Matter More Than Results in Education
First appeared in Public Sector Focus Magazine (flickread.com/edition/html/index.php?pdf=6900e79403bc5#62)
By Dr Paty Paliokosta, Associate Professor in Special Educational Needs and Inclusion, Kingston University; National SENCO Advocacy Network co-lead; SEA NEC member; Standfirst
Introduction
The upcoming Schools White Paper signals a shift in UK education policy, broadening accountability to include attendance, behaviour, and inclusion alongside academic results. Campaigners like the Alliance for Inclusive Education (ALLFIE ) are urging stronger commitments to inclusive practices and an end to segregated education.
Transitions, especially from primary to secondary school, remain critical points of vulnerability, often marked by a loss of connection and increased pressure for neurodivergent pupils and those with SEND or trauma, this can be deeply exclusionary. The Solving the SEND Crisis report calls for a strong role for Special Educational Needs Co-ordinators (SENCOs), recognising their value in coordinating early support and restoring trust in a fragmented system.
While outcomes still dominate policy discourse, the 2025 APPG (All Party Parliamentary Group) Inquiry into the Loss of the Love of Learning highlights a deeper issue: widespread disengagement in certain educational contexts. It reinforces a long-standing truth in inclusive education: without belonging, learning cannot thrive.
The Pressure of Metrics and the Impact on Wellbeing
Current policy frameworks push schools to prioritise data over dialogue. Inspection regimes, attainment targets, and league tables shape decision-making, narrowing both curriculum and pedagogy. This often leaves limited space for inclusive practices, emotional development, or creative exploration, particularly when these cannot be easily quantified.
The APPG inquiry found that many students experience secondary school as a place of pressure and detachment, where compliance is valued more than connection. These systemic pressures also affect staff, whose ability to form trusting relationships is compromised by high workloads and limited professional autonomy.
The report’s emphasis on persistent absence, disengagement, and student voice adds weight to what educators and researchers have long observed: systems that neglect relational and emotional needs are actively undermining their own aims.
Relational Practice: An Inclusive and Trauma-Informed Approach
Relational teaching is not simply about being kind. It is a structured, evidence-informed practice that centres safety, trust, and co-regulation-particularly vital for students with experience of adversity or additional needs. As a former inclusion manager, local authority advisor and current teacher educator, I see relational pedagogical practice as a core component of school culture. This involves shifting from punitive responses to behaviour towards understanding it as communication, and ensuring that every child feels seen, heard, and valued.
Neurodivergent learners often face invisible barriers in everyday classroom interactions. Stapleton’s metaphor of the “capacity jug” captures how cumulative demands, however minor, can overwhelm a child’s ability to cope, especially when relational safety is absent. This highlights the need for emotionally regulated environments where students can thrive without fear of judgement or exclusion.
The above APPG report supports this shift by recommending trauma-informed, emotionally regulated behaviour policies and better training for staff on emotional literacy and relationship-building. These are not optional extras. They are core conditions for equity, engagement, and sustained progress.
Co-Production, Creativity, and Student Voice
A growing body of work, such as the Fighting for Our Rights project with its Disability Awareness Resource, demonstrates how co-produced curricula and creative pedagogies based on real life narratives can enable deeper student understanding and engagement. When students and teachers are involved in shaping what and how they learn, their sense of ownership and agency grows.
At the centre of this co-production shift is the SENCO, whose role is pivotal in embedding inclusive, student-led approaches. The National SENCo Advocacy Network’s survey findings calls for structural changes to enable this leadership: SLT membership, protected time, admin support, and a reinstated high-level qualification would empower SENCOs to lead co-production strategically. Embedding their role in accountability frameworks and investing in regional networks would further reduce isolation and build capacity.
With these supports, SENCOs can move from coordination to co-creation, driving inclusive change across schools.
The APPG inquiry strongly endorses co-production and student voice as key levers for re-engagement. Its findings indicate that students are more motivated when their learning is relevant, responsive, and reflective of their lived realities. Equally, neuroaffirming support systems that go beyond academic accommodations advocate for universal design principles, flexible learning environments, and collaborative planning-all of which foster relational learning and reduce the risk of marginalisation. Neuroinclusive learning environments can be supported through co-produced auditing that can lead to a culture of shared understanding of effective learning environments for all.
From Policy to Practice: What Needs to Change
Fixing the SEND system therefore requires fixing the conditions of practice: empowering SENCOs with time, status and resources; ensuring teachers are trained in inclusion and neurodiversity; more support for neurodivergent students have been promised by the Secretary of State for Education and through the PINS programme; we need a widespread university approach at equipping student teachers for neuroinclusion, through various transdisciplinary programmes like NeuroSense and reframing success to include every child’s wellbeing and agency. As urged by the APPG chair, we need a system that inspires pupils and excites teachers-one that serves all learners rather than narrow indicators. By acting on these research-backed recommendations now, policymakers can make the White Paper a turning point towards truly inclusive schools.
Conclusion
Education policy must stop treating relationships as incidental to learning. They are foundational. As attendance and wellbeing crises deepen, we must reframe success around inclusion, safety, connection and creativity-not just test results. Evidence reveals that many children are not disengaged because they lack aspiration, but because the system fails to meet their emotional and relational needs. As practitioners, researchers, and policymakers, we have a collective responsibility to change this. Investing in relationships is not a distraction from standards. It is how we achieve them and how we ensure every child has the chance to thrive.
About the author:
Dr Paty Paliokosta is Associate Professor in Inclusive Education at Kingston University. Her work champions disability activism, social justice, and neuro-inclusivity, challenging deficit-based approaches to SEND and promoting rights-based, equity-driven models that recognise neurodiversity. She leads the Inclusion and Social Justice Special Interest Group, fostering critical dialogue and co-produced research grounded in lived experience.
Paty collaborates with disability advocates, charities, and community organisations to drive systemic change and empower voices. With extensive experience in teacher education, professional development, and as a former local authority advisor, she has supported schools to strengthen inclusive practice. Her research spans inclusive pedagogy, leadership, and policy at national and international levels.
Paty co-leads the National SENCo Advocacy Network, and advises on SEND policy through roles on disability partnership boards and the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Education, championing strategic leadership for whole-school inclusion.
