L + ARCHITECTS

SEND Inclusion Bases in Secondary Schools: Whole-School Design, Scale and Environmental Strategy

What Are SEND Inclusion Bases in Secondary Schools?

The Department for Education has confirmed that secondary schools will introduce SEND inclusion bases within mainstream settings. Under Building Bulletin 104 (BB104), these inclusion bases must meet defined spatial standards for SEND provision. The policy direction is clear: more specialist support embedded within mainstream secondary school estates.

But the question for school leaders and academy trusts is larger: Is a SEND inclusion base simply a compliant room — or part of a wider secondary school design strategy?

Secondary schools are intense environments. Large. Loud. Fast-moving. Socially complex.

As practising education architects — and parents of secondary-aged children, including children with additional needs — we understand how profoundly secondary school environments shape daily experience.

Inclusion is not achieved by adding a room. It is achieved by designing the whole school to manage scale and sensory load.

Designing for Scale in Large Secondary Schools

Many UK secondary schools now accommodate 1,000–1,500 pupils or more.

At lesson change:

For some pupils, this scale is energising. For others — particularly those with sensory sensitivities — it can be overwhelming.

Effective secondary school masterplanning structures scale deliberately:

In masterplanning projects at Cheltenham Ladies’ College and King’s College Wimbledon (led by Pablo Lambrechts in his previous practice), large estates were organised to remain intelligible at scale.

As Pablo reflects: “A large secondary school is not inherently overwhelming. It becomes overwhelming when hierarchy is unclear and intensity is unmanaged.”

SEND inclusion bases cannot compensate for an unmanaged campus scale. They must sit within a coherent whole-school strategy.

Environmental Performance in Secondary School Design (BB93 & BB101)

SEND inclusion base design must align not only with BB104 area guidance but with wider environmental standards including:

Acoustics in Secondary Schools

BB93 sets minimum acoustic standards. However, compliance alone does not always equal sensory comfort. The World Health Organisation links chronic environmental noise exposure to increased stress and impaired concentration in children (WHO, 2018). Poor acoustic environments affect all pupils — not only those with SEND.

Ventilation, Air Quality and Cognitive Performance

BB101 provides technical guidance on ventilation and thermal comfort in schools. Harvard’s COGfx research demonstrated significantly improved cognitive performance in environments with better ventilation and lower CO₂ levels (Allen et al., 2016; 2017). Decision-making and information processing improved measurably.

If we accept that buildings influence physical health, we must also acknowledge their impact on mental load and cognitive fatigue.

Classroom Environment and Learning Outcomes

The University of Salford’s HEAD Project found that classroom design factors — including light, air quality and layout flexibility — could explain up to 16% of variation in pupil learning progress (Barrett et al., 2015).

Neurodivergent pupils often make environmental weaknesses visible sooner. But improvements benefit the entire secondary school cohort. Inclusion is therefore environmental performance — not only spatial allocation.

Interiors in SEND Inclusion Bases: Beyond Plastic Desks

Secondary school interiors shape behaviour at desk level. Many classrooms still rely on uniform plastic furniture and fixed seating layouts designed for durability and supervision.

While practical, this model does not always support:

Emerging best practice in inclusive secondary school design includes:

As Lindsey Webster notes: “In secondary schools, interiors are not finishing — they are behavioural infrastructure. Materiality, reflectivity and texture shape how pupils regulate throughout the day.”

Small interior upgrades can significantly improve inclusion without full estate redevelopment.

Wayfinding and Spatial Legibility in Secondary School Estates

Large secondary schools can be cognitively demanding. Unclear routes and inconsistent zoning create daily micro-stress. Effective wayfinding in school design is not simply signage — it is spatial clarity.

Clear circulation hierarchy:

SEND inclusion bases work best when embedded within legible campus planning.

Biophilic Design and Outdoor Regulation in Secondary Schools

Biophilic school design — integrating natural light, planting, sheltered outdoor space and visual connection to landscape — supports attention restoration and stress reduction (Browning et al., 2014).

Landscape in secondary school design should function as regulation infrastructure:

Lindsey adds: “A well-designed outdoor threshold can reset intensity levels in minutes. Landscape is part of the inclusion strategy — not a decorative afterthought.”

PAS 6463 and Neurodiversity in School Design

PAS 6463:2022 (Design for the Mind), published by the British Standards Institution and authored by Jean Hewitt, reframes the built environment through a neurodiversity lens.

As discussed in a forthcoming episode of The Hidden 20% podcast exploring design for neurodisabilities, designing around an assumed “average” learner risks overlooking the diversity already present within every secondary school.

Inclusion, therefore, becomes a structural design responsibility. Not an add-on.

Whole-School Strategy for SEND Inclusion Bases

SEND inclusion bases represent a significant opportunity for secondary school estates.

But they succeed when aligned with:

BB104 defines an area. BB93 and BB101 define performance baselines. Research defines impact.

Inclusion in secondary schools is achieved when the entire campus reduces unnecessary cognitive strain and supports participation. The question for school leaders and academy trusts is not only: “Where should the SEND inclusion base sit?” But: “How does our secondary school design support every learner?”

SEND Inclusion Base Feasibility Studies for Secondary Schools

At L+, we support academy trusts, governing bodies and independent schools with fixed-scope feasibility studies for SEND inclusion bases.

Our work includes:

We combine architecture, interiors and landscape to create deceptively simple secondary school environments that flow — spaces calibrated to support regulation, attention and wellbeing at scale.

If your secondary school is reviewing estate strategy for SEND inclusion bases, we would welcome a conversation. Contact us > office@lplusarchitects.com

References (Harvard Style)Allen, J.G. et al. (2016) Environmental Health Perspectives, 124(6), pp. 805–812.
Allen, J.G. et al. (2017) The 9 Foundations of a Healthy Building. Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health.
Barrett, P. et al. (2015) Building and Environment, 89, pp. 118–133.
World Health Organization (2018) Environmental Noise Guidelines for the European Region.
Browning, W.D. et al. (2014) 14 Patterns of Biophilic Design.

Cookie Notice

We use cookies and other technologies to make sure you have the best experience possible on this website. For more information, please see the Terms & Conditions of Use page.