Research Summary: Beyond neurodiversity and diagnostic capital: a biopsychosocial manifesto and ‘grammar’ for inclusion

This analysis focuses on the need for a coherent conceptual and operational framework for inclusive education, as identified by a paper in 'Frontiers in Education'. The paper argues that current approaches suffer from fragmentation due to over-reliance on diagnostic categorization and inconsistent definitions of inclusion. While acknowledging the value of the neurodiversity movement, it posits that this alone is insufficient for systemic design. The paper advocates for the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) and its biopsychosocial underpinnings as a robust 'grammar' to bridge conceptual gaps and align provision with outcomes.

Why it matters

The development and adoption of a unified conceptual framework for inclusion is critical for optimizing resource allocation, ensuring equitable access to support, and achieving desired outcomes in education and related sectors. A fragmented approach leads to inefficiencies and disparities, impacting the overall effectiveness and societal benefit of inclusion initiatives.

Key insights

• Inclusive education lacks a coherent conceptual and operational framework to align identification, provision, and outcomes across sectors.
• Contemporary Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND) theory and policy exhibit persistent fragmentation.
• Fragmentation is primarily attributed to reliance on diagnostic categorization and inconsistent definitions of inclusion.
• The neurodiversity movement reframes difference but does not, in isolation, provide a sufficiently specified framework for system design or resource allocation.
• The International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) is proposed as a comprehensive biopsychosocial framework to address these shortcomings.

Source

Frontiers in Education — https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/feduc.2026.1911703