The Education Policy Institute’s 2025 Annual Report confirms what every previous edition has shown: the attainment gap remains “stubbornly persistent”. For decades, the UK has seen the same data with a different date stamp. SEND inequalities remain the largest; regional disparities are entrenched; and the early years gap is widening.

We aren’t failing for lack of data or insight. The attainment gap persists because of a pervasive social force that continues to treat inequity as an unfortunate side effect rather than a design choice. This leads to “unquestioned norms” where power hoarding and perfectionism feel normal, silencing the very voices needed to change the system. At Class 13, we don’t run our pilot because the findings are new. We run it because they are not.

None of this is new. However, that is exactly the problem.

These recurring findings aren’t signs of a system that lacks insight. They’re signs of a system that hasn’t shifted its ideology.

If you place the most recent EPI report alongside:

• House of Commons public committee report, Improving educational outcomes for disadvantaged children
• DfE’s SEND/AP Improvement Plan
• Digital Standards for Schools (2025)
• Previous EPI reports (2020–2024)
• Multiple Ofsted/thematic reviews

You’ll see near-identical conclusions:

• The disadvantage gap moves millimetres, not miles.
• SEND pupils remain the most marginalised group in the system.
• Attendance has become one of the strongest drivers of educational inequality.
• Access to early years provision is inconsistent and poorest where need is greatest.
• Schools in low-income or coastal areas face layered structural barriers.
• Digital inequity persists long after it should have been solved.

The language changes. The statistics shift. The headlines cycle. But the story is the same.

We haven’t failed for lack of intention. We’ve failed to shift the ideology.

Moving beyond ‘bandage’ solutions

The current system relies on intervention culture. The EPI data highlights the attainment gaps, and a “bolt-on” programme gets thrown at it. Moreover, these interventions are temporary and the structural barriers remain.

To shift the ideology, we must dismantle deficit ideology (attributing disparities to individual or cultural traits of children and young people, rather than to systemic failures of the institution). As Paul Gorski suggests, the goal isn’t just “asset-based” thinking; it’s an unbending commitment to identify and eliminate the actual causes of inequity.

If we’re not actively redressing the root causes, we’re maintaining the status quo.

“The educator has the duty of not being neutral.” – Paulo Freire

Language defines the world we build

The way we speak about our children and young people defines the world we build for them. Current educational language falls into a pathologising or dehumanising trap:

• Using coded language to label schools “challenging” to avoid naming systemic neglect
• Reducing children and young people to “data points,” treating them as objects to be managed, failing to recognise their full humanity
• Using unquestioned language like “non-academic,” which builds a hierarchy of human worth

At Class 13, we choose to name structural barriers and frame education as a “practice of freedom” rather than a practice of compliance.

From compensatory to foundational

Moving from interventions to embedded practice means equity becomes a foundational design principle. This requires actively challenging the cultural norms that perpetuate inequity, such as power hoarding and defensiveness, which have become unquestioned school norms. Instead, SEND support gets integrated into the daily rhythm of every classroom, not relegated to a siloed room down the hall. This is how we close the attainment gap – not through interventions, but through transformation. Every child is affirmed, supported to think critically, and considered a full human being (a non-negotiable standard that transcends temporary prevailing discourse). Who wouldn’t want to be part of that?

The future is embedded

The EPI report confirms that attendance drives outcomes as powerfully as teaching quality. Imagine a school where support is relational and community-based, not punitive. similarly, where digital access is a foundational right, and early years investment is targeted before the gaps first open.

“To build community requires vigilant awareness of the work we must do to endure and transform the world today.” – bell hooks

A more equitable future isn’t achieved by doing “more of the same.” It’s achieved by changing the ideology which underpins the work and through which every decision is made. At Class 13, we won’t be covering up the cracks; we are redesigning the foundations.

Activating the Threat: Your Call to Redress

The persistent attainment gap isn’t a consequence of insufficient data; it’s the design principle of a system gripped by a psychosis of whiteness and defined by power hoarding. Data is passive. True change requires you to be an active threat to inequity in your own school, team, or meeting.

therefore, start today by challenging the small, insidious norms that maintain the status quo.

Challenge the Language of Blame Intercept the use of coded or deficit language in your next conversation, email, or report. When you hear colleagues refer to students as “at-risk” or label communities as having “low aspiration,” politely interrupt. Reframe the statement to focus on systemic barriers instead.

Instead of: “The ‘at-risk’ group is falling behind.” Say: “Students are experiencing difficulty because of the persistent lack of foundational digital resources.”

Dismantle the Power Hoarding Norm Audit one meeting this week where decisions are made about resource allocation (time, budget, support). Ask who isn’t present (student voice, SEND specialists, staff from the most challenging departments) and actively invite them or bring their perspective forward. Refuse to make a decision until a marginalized perspective has genuinely shaped the outcome.

Embed, Don’t Compensate Identify one area of support currently treated as a siloed intervention (a specific tutoring program or SEND support) and ask how it can be integrated into core daily practice. If SEND learners are habitually pulled out for literacy work, challenge the norm: “How can we restructure the core literacy lesson so that these students receive the highest quality, differentiated support while remaining in the room?” Make inclusion the default, not the exception.

We’re seeking practitioners ready to become facilitators of this ideological shift. Would you like to receive information about how Class 13 can partner with your institution to train your team in Equity Literacy Abilities and establish these new design principles?