In what seems to be a frenetic pursuit of educational reforms, we need to pause to consider what education is actually for – and for whom? If education is regarded as a means of developing understandings and capacities to live in the world with others, what kind of a world do we want to be a part of?
This statement is written in response to current government driven changes in education, which the Inclusive Education Action Group (IEAG) views as working against equity and inclusion for disabled students in Aotearoa.
Who we are
IEAG is a national advocacy group of disabled people, whānau, teachers, teacher educators, researchers and other professionals, who have a commitment to achieving disability equity, inclusion and excellence for all students in their local schools.
We promote changes in attitudes, policies and practices that will facilitate genuinely inclusive education so that ALL children, young people and adults have equitable opportunities to learn, belong, and flourish in their local schools and communities. Inclusive education in turn contributes to an inclusive and equitable society.
Our mahi is underpinned by commitment to Te Tiriti o Waitangi and to a human rights’ interpretation of disability, as informed by the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD), with a particular focus on Article 24, the Right to Inclusive Education.
Our advocacy is premised upon a wealth of rigorous national and international research that unequivocally supports the efficacy of inclusive education for all students in their local schools.
As a signatory to the UNCRPD, the New Zealand government has a legal obligation to implement the Articles of this international human rights’ treaty. In order to do so, it needs to know and understand its principles. There is little evidence of this in the recent and ongoing changes throughout the education system, as mandated by the Minister of Education. We therefore hope that the following excerpts from Article 24 General Comment No. 4 (2016) on the right to inclusive education are helpful in clarifying the Minister’s understanding of this right and the government’s duty to create, implement and sustain a genuinely inclusive education system.
10. Inclusive education is to be understood as:
(a) A fundamental human right of all learners. Notably, education is the right of the individual learner and not, in the case of children, the right of a parent or caregiver. Parental responsibilities in this regard are subordinate to the rights of the child;
(b) A principle that values the well-being of all students, respects their inherent dignity and autonomy, and acknowledges individuals’ requirements and their ability to effectively be included in and contribute to society;
(c) A means of realizing other human rights. It is the primary means by which persons with disabilities can lift themselves out of poverty, obtain the means to participate fully in their communities and be safeguarded from exploitation. It is also the primary means of achieving inclusive societies;
(d) The result of a process of continuing and proactive commitment to eliminating barriers impeding the right to education, together with changes to culture, policy and practice of regular schools to accommodate and effectively include all students.
11. The Committee highlights the importance of recognizing the differences between exclusion, segregation, integration and inclusion.
Exclusion occurs when students are directly or indirectly prevented from or denied access to education in any form.
Segregation occurs when the education of students with disabilities is provided in separate environments designed or used to respond to a particular impairment or to various impairments, in isolation from students without disabilities [e.g., special schools and classes].
Integration [mainstreaming] is the process of placing persons with disabilities in existing mainstream educational institutions with the understanding that they can adjust to the standardized requirements of such institutions.
Inclusion involves a process of systemic reform embodying changes and modifications in content, teaching methods, approaches, structures and strategies in education to overcome barriers with a vision serving to provide all students of the relevant age range with an equitable and participatory learning experience and the environment that best corresponds to their requirements and preferences.
Placing students with disabilities within mainstream classes without accompanying structural changes to, for example, organization, curriculum and teaching and learning strategies, does not constitute inclusion. Furthermore, integration does not automatically guarantee the transition from segregation to inclusion.
https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/1313836?ln=en&v=pdf
We respectfully suggest that the Minister of Education and her advisors read General Comment No. 4 (2016) in its entirety, to ensure that their thinking and actions are informed by and align with Article 24 inclusive education principles and practices. Naturally, within Aotearoa, these principles and practices must also reflect our unique bicultural context and responsibilities.
As is evident in the above reference to UNCRPD Article 24, the continued conflation of ‘special’ and inclusive education is nonsensical. Within a genuinely inclusive education system, ‘special’ and residential special schools would not exist. That the current government continues to allocate significant funding to segregated schools not only separates students from reciprocal learning, understanding of and befriending their peers in local schools but also diverts resourcing away from further developing ‘regular’ teachers’ understanding, responsiveness and capacity to teach ALL students competently and confidently in inclusive education contexts.
The October 2025 announcement by the Minister of Education of the development of an ‘expanded’ separate curriculum for disabled students is also problematic. Are segregated students to be denied access to the national body of knowledge that is deemed essential for so-called ‘normal’ students’ learning and development into adulthood? What will this mean for segregated students’ future life, employment and citizenship opportunities?
Inclusive education should not rely on the good will of particular teachers in particular schools. It relies on system-wide changes in education and policies that support teachers and schools to develop inclusively. The curriculum is a central policy document in this regard.
Te Mātaiaho, the refreshed curriculum framework draft (March 2023), was designed over three years by Māori, Pacific and Tangata Tiriti educators as a bicultural and inclusive curriculum that serves all children and young people. Te Mātaiaho explained equity and inclusion from a uniquely Aotearoa perspective, recognising the importance of students’ positive identities, their presence, participation, belonging and learning at school. A revised framework released on 27 October 2025 no longer has this focus; indeed, it diminishes inclusion by failing to mention or explain the term. While ‘inclusive’ is used three times to refer to environments, no further explanation is provided. Two references to inclusive teaching and learning are not explained, leaving the concept open to misinterpretation. Teachers are given no support to understand what inclusion means or can look like as they work with the curriculum. The latest curriculum marginalises disabled and other students by restricting their learning opportunities and introducing barriers that prevent their belonging at school and in the wider community.
Structured and prescriptive teaching approaches do not work for all students. There is no one approach that works for every student, yet the 2025 curriculum is based on ‘the science of learning’, the erroneous assumption that “all brains are the same” and the idea that “all children learn in the same way”. They do not. Such positioning erases the differences amongst humans and cultures that add richness to our schools and communities. It fails to take into consideration the complex effects of impairment and the experiences of disabled students as they navigate unnecessary and avoidable attitudinal, social and physical barriers to learning.
A narrow, ableist and Eurocentric ‘knowledge rich’ curriculum, where others decide what knowledge counts, is not what every child needs. In Te Mātaiaho (March 2023), mātauranga Māori and tauiwi knowledge coexisted and informed each other. Te Mātaiaho made clear that children’s positive cultural, gender, disability and other identities are central to their belonging and learning at school. Curriculum and learning should reflect who children are, where they come from, and the many ways they know and can express what they know.
Narrow, test-based approaches to assessment that view knowledge as “sequenced,” “explicit,” and “measurable” ignore the different ways that disabled and other marginalised students learn and can show their learning and capability. These approaches feed into deficit-based thinking that position disabled students as incapable, further restricting their learning and life opportunities.
The censoring of te reo Māori from Ready to Read Phonics Plus books, as well as the recent removal of Te Tiriti o Waitangi from Section 127 of the 2022 Education and Training Amendment Act further undermines support for inclusion. Section 127 influences what schools include in their strategic plans. Te Tiriti’s principles of Partnership, Participation, and Protection have resulted in increasing visibility of Te Ao Māori in schools and enhanced the inclusion of Māori and all children. Schools have become more welcoming and inclusive for everyone. This is evident in schools' overwhelming response to continue giving effect to Te Tiriti. IEAG urges this government to listen to schools, to recognise their commitment and provide leadership for inclusion.
The development of charter schools exacerbates the fracturing of a quality equitable education system for all students, promoting divisiveness and competition rather than equity and collaboration. As with ‘special’ schools, charter schools remove funding from quality public inclusive education, promote segregated education and operate under different parameters (and curricula) to local state schools.
We note with interest the October 2025 announcement by Associate Education Minister David Seymour that an Autism NZ Education Hub/charter school is due to open in 2026. How will this be different from extant ‘special’ schools? Two charter schools for autistic students are being established in Wellington and Auckland because local schools are under-resourced and under-supported to meet all students’ needs. Shouldn’t that public money be fairly and equitably allocated to ALL local schools to ensure that autistic students throughout Aotearoa can learn well and belong in their local community?
The above are but some of our concerns about the nature and pace of changes mandated at will by the Minister of Education. While some of the changes may be good for some students, they are not good for all. Indeed, they may be harmful to many, as amply evidenced in research, including that which captures the voices and experiences of students themselves, those upon whom changes are imposed. This is not good enough, nor is it fair.
In what seems to be a frenetic pursuit of educational reforms, we need to pause to consider what education is actually for – and for whom? If education is regarded as a means of developing understandings and capacities to live in the world with others, what kind of a world do we want to be a part of? The current system is increasingly characterised by division, competition, ableism, a narrow body of knowledge and assessment, ‘one size fits all’ pedagogy, legitimised segregation on the basis of human characteristics over which individuals have no control, diminishment of Te Tiriti o Waitangi and Te Ao Māori as well as other systemic inequities. It is an unjust system that will (re)produce an unjust world in which only some will thrive.
An alternative conceptualisation of the purpose of education is that it is a means of learning to be human and learning to serve as a citizen in a democracy. An inclusive education system that is premised on such beliefs is characterised by respect for the inherent worth of human and cultural diversity. It emphasises the power of respectful, collaborative student-teacher relationships in facilitating learning and teaching; a capacious and just curriculum that is responsive to all students, including the least privileged; and flexible and equitable pedagogies and assessments that are responsive to students’ unique ways of learning. Importantly, inclusive schools foster social engagement, belonging and care for one another. Such a system holds hope for a more humane, just world where there are opportunities for everybody to shine.
This prompts us to ask the Minister, “What kind of world do you want for our children and young people"?
Converted to HTML with WordToHTML.net | Document Converter for Windows