We need to talk about Labels

We need to talk about labels

warning: this post does contain some AI

When I was talking to publishers 10 years ago about my phonics programme, I had a jaunty (I thought) working title in mind - Soundabout*. What surprised me was the advice I was given in response - to come up with a title that included lots of keywords that would have high visibility in a Google search (other browsers are available). I needed to be ‘SEO-optimised’ apparently. And so, Phonics for Pupils with Special Educational Needs was born and I am forever mortified by the un-jaunty title.

It’s our brain’s fault – humans do love to sort and classify. We seem to have an inherent need for labels but, as history shows us, the need can be rather ill-advised when we try to apply this to people.

Let’s focus on educational labels, specifically those related to pupils who are ‘not typical’ (I hope you can sense my eye roll). There are heaps of labels in this part of the educational landscape. They change frequently and differ depending on where you live or your point of view. The phrase ‘nailing jelly to a wall’ springs to mind. Like many people, I’ve never liked them but can’t seem to find a way live without them or come up with better alternatives.

The problem is that in educational settings labels can be useful. They give us some initial insight into a child before we meet them and provide a shared language for professionals and parents discussing what needs to be in place for them.

When I am writing I use lots of different terms to describe these children. I think I do this in the hope that this catch-me-if-you-can approach will somehow hint at my frustrations, and my readers will understand and be sympathetic.

I’ve wrestled with this issue for many years, as have many others. This morning I had a brilliant idea and asked myself, ‘What would AI do?’

Here’s ‘our’ conversation:

Ann: 

Devise a new innovative way of describing children with a range of learning, language, physical, hearing, vision, sensory and access needs for use by educational professionals, that is respectful and dignified.

Emmeline: (I use Co-pilot and call her after Ms Pankhurst)

A fresh, human‑centred way to describe children with diverse learning, language, physical, hearing, vision and sensory needs is to frame them as “multi‑modal learners” — children whose minds engage with the world through a unique constellation of pathways, each one valid, rich, and capable.

Below is a full set of innovative, non‑medicalised, non‑deficit‑based framings you can choose from, each with a different flavour depending on whether you want poetic, practical, educational, or advocacy‑focused language.

🌱 1. Multi‑Modal Learners

Takeaway: Children who learn through multiple channels, not a single expected route.

• Why it works: It removes deficit language entirely and centres the idea that all children have varied input systems.

• Covers: learning differences, sensory profiles, communication modes, physical access needs.

• Tone: modern, inclusive, educational.

“Children who learn through a blend of visual, auditory, tactile, kinaesthetic, linguistic, spatial and sensory pathways.”

🌈 2. Children with Diverse Access Pathways

Takeaway: Focuses on access rather than impairment.

• Why it works: It shifts responsibility to environments, not children.

• Covers: hearing, vision, mobility, language, sensory regulation, cognition.

• Tone: rights‑based, aligned with Universal Design for Learning (UDL).

“Each child has their own access pathway — the combination of supports that lets them thrive.”

🌟 3. Children with Varied Ways of Processing the World

Takeaway: Emphasises cognitive and sensory processing differences as natural variation.

• Why it works: It’s gentle, descriptive, and avoids labels.

• Covers: neurodivergence, sensory needs, communication differences.

• Tone: warm, human, parent‑friendly.

  
  

🌍 4. Children with Distinct Communication and Participation Profiles

Takeaway: Frames needs in terms of participation, not deficits.

• Why it works: Mirrors inclusive education frameworks.

• Covers: language, AAC, BSL, speech, mobility, sensory access.

• Tone: professional but progressive.

  
  

🔎 5. Children with Unique Learning Signatures

Takeaway: Every child has a recognisable pattern of strengths, preferences, and supports.

• Why it works: It’s strengths‑based and avoids medicalisation.

• Covers: everything from dyslexia to deafness to physical disabilities.

• Tone: poetic, identity‑affirming.

  
  

🎨 6. Children with Individual Sensory and Cognitive Profiles

Takeaway: Acknowledges sensory needs without pathologising.

• Why it works: It’s precise but non‑clinical.

• Covers: sensory processing, attention, regulation, vision/hearing differences.

• Tone: balanced, professional.

  
  

🌼 7. Children with a Range of Learning and Access Styles

Takeaway: “Styles” is softer than “needs” and emphasises agency.

• Why it works: It’s accessible language for families and schools.

• Covers: learning, communication, mobility, sensory, vision/hearing.

• Tone: friendly, inclusive.

  
  

✨ 8. Children with Varied Developmental Pathways

Takeaway: Recognises that development is not linear.

• Why it works: It normalises difference and avoids comparison.

• Covers: language delays, physical disabilities, sensory differences.

• Tone: gentle, developmental.

  
  

🧭 9. Children Navigating the World Through Different Routes

Takeaway: A metaphor that honours effort and individuality.

• Why it works: It’s vivid and avoids jargon.

• Covers: all categories of need.

• Tone: narrative, parent‑friendly.

🪄 10. Children with Distinct Strengths and Support Profiles

Takeaway: Strengths first, supports second.

• Why it works: It’s practical for EHCPs, IEPs, and professional reports.

• Covers: everything from sensory needs to physical access.

• Tone: balanced, respectful.

  
  

If you want something even more innovative…

Here are three brand‑new conceptual framings you won’t find in existing literature:

🌐 Poly‑Channel Learners

Children whose learning flows through multiple channels — linguistic, visual, tactile, spatial, social, sensory — each one a valid route to understanding.

🔮 Children with Expansive Learning Architectures

A metaphor that treats each child’s mind as a unique structure with its own scaffolds, bridges, and entry points.

🌤️ Children with Varied Ways of Being in the World

A deeply human, identity‑affirming phrase that encompasses communication, movement, perception, and cognition.

I think Emmeline did a pretty good job. I’d love to hear your thoughts / feedback.

* Note Soundabout is a UK charity established in 1997 to provide access to music for all, so I couldn’t use it anyway. https://www.soundabout.org.uk/about/