The Policy on Screening, Identification, Assessment and Support (SIAS) was introduced in South Africa to support the realisation of inclusive education by providing a structured process for identifying and addressing barriers to learning. Intended as a progressive shift from deficit-based models of learner support, SIAS aims to foreground contextual and systemic factors that impact learning, while promoting early intervention, collaborative problem-solving, and differentiated support strategies. However, despite its inclusive intent, the implementation and interpretation of SIAS in practice often reveal persistent tensions between inclusive education and residual special education paradigms.

This article critically explores the purpose, principles, and procedural framework of the SIAS policy, situating it within the broader inclusive education policy landscape of post-apartheid South Africa. Drawing on recent research, practitioner perspectives, and policy analysis, the article highlights how the use of SIAS, while offering a formal mechanism for support, may in some cases reinforce categorisation, gatekeeping, and a referral culture that mirrors special education framing. Instead of dismantling barriers within schools, the policy may be unintentionally misapplied to separate learners, reinforcing siloed and medicalised approaches to support.

The article argues that this misalignment is not necessarily a failure of the SIAS policy itself, but rather reflects ongoing conceptual and practical uncertainties about what inclusion means in the South African context. It identifies key areas where policy interpretation and implementation diverge from the original intent of SIAS, including over-reliance on psycho-educational assessment, narrow understandings of barriers to learning, and limited attention to systemic and classroom-level transformation.
In response, the article advocates for a reframing of SIAS implementation that is firmly grounded in inclusive pedagogical principles. It calls for capacity-building strategies that equip educators to use the SIAS process as a tool for inclusive planning and responsive teaching, rather than merely as a mechanism for referral. The article suggests that a more coherent integration of SIAS with other support strategies such as curriculum differentiation, universal design for learning (UDL), and school-based support teams could enhance its support provisioning role.

Ultimately, the article contributes to the ongoing debate on how South African policy can move beyond symbolic commitment to genuine systemic change. It positions SIAS not as a neutral administrative tool, but as a potential site of either inclusive transformation or exclusionary practice depending on how its values, assumptions, and processes are understood and enacted within schools.

Keywords: Inclusive Education, Support Provisioning, Screening, Identification, Assessment, Policy.