Reframing Disability: Inclusion, Equity and the Language We Choose 

Module 6, Unit 1 – Nature Nurture in Action 

This week in our Nature Nurture in Action course, we begin Module 6: Additional Support Needs in Nature Nurture. 

Over the next few weeks, our Nature Nurture Practitioners will explore ASN in depth — not simply as a category of provision, but as a way of thinking about children, difference, and belonging. 

We begin with something deceptively simple. 

Language. 

The Shadow of the Deficit Model 

The words deficit, impairment, disorder, and even the prefix “dis–” can sit heavily when we speak them aloud. Yet they are embedded in everyday professional language. 

Much of this terminology originates in what is often called the medical model of disability. The medical model locates the “problem” within the individual. It focuses on what is not functioning as expected. It frames difference as something to be corrected, treated or normalised. 

We hear this language everywhere: 

• “Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder” 

• “Autistic Spectrum Disorder” 

• “Triad of Impairments” 

• “Global developmental delay” 

Even the broader term “disability” implies an absence of ability. 

The medical model has played an important role in identifying need and securing support. Without diagnosis and categorisation, many children would not receive additional resources or recognition. 

But we must ask — at what cost? 

What Happens When Identity Is Framed as Deficit? 

How does it feel for your existence to be described primarily in terms of what you cannot do? 

How does it feel as a parent to be told your child has a disorder, an impairment, a deficit? 

Language shapes identity. 
Identity shapes self-esteem. 
Self-esteem shapes participation. 

When educational systems are built around testing what a child cannot yet do, rather than identifying strengths and supports, it reinforces a subtle but powerful narrative: the child is the problem. 

A child with a “deficit” can easily become the source of difficulty, rather than us examining: 

• The noise level in the classroom 

• The rigidity of routines 

• The sensory demands of the environment 

• The accessibility of the curriculum 

• The absence of a secure, trusting relationship 

This is where the social model of disability offers a powerful alternative. 

The Social Model: Shifting the Lens 

The social model does not locate the difficulty within the child. Instead, it asks: 

What barriers are created by the environment, culture or systems around this child? 

Rather than trying to “fix” the individual, the focus shifts to removing barriers. 

This might mean: 

• Adapting the environment 

• Adjusting expectations 

• Reframing behaviour as communication 

• Building relational safety 

• Offering flexible pathways to participation 

The social model prioritises inclusion, equity and systemic change. It aligns naturally with a strengths-based approach and with relational pedagogy. 

And this is not just relevant for targeted intervention. 

It matters for every school. 

Why This Matters Beyond ASN Provision 

Inclusion is not a department. 
It is not a room. 
It is not a label. 

It is a culture. 

When we frame children through deficit language, it shapes how teachers interpret behaviour, how peers understand difference, and how families experience school systems. 

When we shift our lens, something changes: 

• The “challenging” child becomes a child overwhelmed by noise. 

• The “disengaged” learner becomes a child whose curiosity has not yet been sparked. 

• The “non-compliant” pupil becomes a child protecting themselves. 

This reframing does not deny real need. It does not remove the necessity of diagnosis in a system that requires it. 

We need both models to function. 

We need the medical model to secure resources. But we need the social model to create dignity. 

The Outdoors as an Enabling Space 

I often say (only half jokingly) that being outdoors is not the answer to everything — just most things. 

Outdoor environments can act as a natural equaliser. 

Outside: 

• There is more room to move. 

• Noise disperses. 

• Sensory regulation happens more organically. 

• Learning can be co-created. 

• Strengths become visible. 

A child who struggles to sit still indoors may demonstrate leadership in building a den. 
A child who finds literacy overwhelming may thrive in practical enquiry. 
A child who feels “less than” in the classroom may feel competent and capable outdoors. 

When we co-create learning with children in natural spaces, we shift from control to collaboration. 

And collaboration builds belonging. 

Inclusion as Lived Experience 

In Module 6, we ask our Nature Nurture Practitioners to reflect deeply: 

• How does my language frame the child? 

• Where are the barriers in my setting? 

• What assumptions am I carrying? 

• Whose voice is centred in decision-making? 

Inclusion is not achieved by labels. It is experienced in moments. 

Moments of dignity. 
Moments of participation. 
Moments of being understood. 

Reframing disability is not about political correctness. It is about protecting identity. 

And identity matters. 

If you would like to explore how relational pedagogy, outdoor learning and strengths-based approaches can support inclusive practice in your setting, you can find out more about the Nature Nurture Approach and our new Nature Nurture in Practice course here.