# data[].attributes.body
Quick way to see expected progression via objectives

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Search LGfL safeguarding and online safety resources | LGFL

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Registered Address: ​9th Floor, 10 Exchange Square, Primrose Street, London, EC2A 2BR. London Grid for Learning Trust - a charity whose mission is the advancement of Education. A company limited by guarantee registered in England no 4205579 Reg charity no 1090412.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
With the introduction of the National Curriculum for Computing at KS1 and KS2, we've had requests from many schools using iCompute's Primary Computing schemes of work to provide a model computing policy for them to adapt and use in their school.

About Liane O'Kane

Liane is a Computer Scientist (BSc (Hons)), Software Engineer & author of iCompute which supports schools with a computing curriculum and resources for teaching computing in the EYFS, Key Stage 1 and Key Stage 2. ERA Awards Finalist 2016-2021, BETT Awards 2014-2018. Featured on BBC Bitesize for Primary Computing and The Hour of Code (code.org)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Primary Computing - Model Computing Policy - iCompute

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Download iCompute's model computing policy for the primary computing curriculum.

# data[].attributes.headline
This document sets out the position of the Department for Education (DfE) on the use of generative artificial intelligence (AI), including large language models (LLMs) like ChatGPT or Google Bard, in the education sector.

# data[].attributes.subject
This document sets out the position of the Department for Education (DfE) on the use of generative artificial intelligence (AI), including large language models (LLMs) like ChatGPT or Google Bard, in the education sector.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Generative artificial intelligence (AI) in education

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Department for Education (DfE) is committed to supporting the AI Opportunities Action Plan. Generative artificial intelligence (AI) presents exciting opportunities to improve people’s lives, including by making our public services better. AI will support with the delivery of the Plan for Change and our opportunity mission.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Empowering Schools to Improve Online Safety

Schools need to keep children safe, but it can be difficult to know where your strengths and weaknesses are. The DfE's Keeping Children Safe in Education guidance sets out a number of online safety steps schools need to take to ensure that children stay safe online.

While schools and academies can pay for online safety reviews to be performed by other organisations, many lack the expertise to really help schools improve.

The self-review approach used in the 360 safe tool is more empowering, helping schools and academies to own their improvements themselves.

360 degree safe provides schools with free access to our online safety expertise, and helps school to both identify and demonstrate improvement in online safety provision.

In partnership with Education Scotland , we have created a version of the tool for schools in Scotland and in partnership with Welsh Government, , a dedicated 360 safe Cymru tool is available, accessed by logging in to Hwb.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.authors[].name
Designed and Developed by Will Earp, South West Grid for Learning Trust Ltd

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
360 Degree Safe - Online Safety Review Tool | SWGfL

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Discover 360 Degree Safe, a multi-award winning free online safety self-review tool for schools. Start reviewing your online safety today with 360 Degree Safe.

# data[].attributes.body
Digital Literacy in the Computing Curriculum

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.authors[].name
Designed and Developed by South West Grid for Learning (https://swgfl.org.uk/)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
ProjectEVOLVE resources each of the 330 statements from UK Council for Internet Safety's (UKCIS) framework "Education for a Connected World" with perspectives; research; activities; outcomes; supporting resources and professional development materials.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Simon Haughton's Computing Curriculum - Knowledge Organisers

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Effective pedagogy is at the heart of good teaching and learning; successful computing teachers combine their knowledge of the subject with evidence-based teaching practices. As computing is a relatively new discipline, evidence of effective teaching approaches continues to emerge and evolve.

How we teach computing

The work of the National Centre for Computing Education is underpinned by 12 principles of Computing Pedagogy, which are available to download as a poster (PDF, 234Kb). The materials on this page were created by the Raspberry Pi Foundation as part of the National Centre and are licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0.

Lead with concepts

Support pupils in the acquisition of knowledge, through the use of key concepts, terms, and vocabulary, providing opportunities to build a shared and consistent understanding. Glossaries, concept maps, and displays, along with regular recall and revision, can support this approach.

Work together

Encourage collaboration, specifically using pair programming and peer instruction, and also structured group tasks. Working together stimulates classroom dialogue, articulation of concepts, and development of shared understanding

Model everything

Model processes or practices - everything from debugging code to binary number conversions - using techniques such as worked examples and live coding. Modelling is particularly beneficial to novices, providing scaffolding that can be gradually taken away.

Challenge misconceptions

Use formative questioning to uncover misconceptions and adapt teaching to address them as they occur. Awareness of common misconceptions alongside discussion, concept mapping, peer instruction, or simple quizzes can help identify areas of confusion.

Structure lessons

Use supportive frameworks when planning lessons, such as PRIMM (Predict, Run, Investigate, Modify, Make) and Use-Modify-Create. These frameworks are based on research and ensure that differentiation can be built in at various stages of the lesson.

Read and explore code first

When teaching programming, focus first on code 'reading' activities, before code writing. With both block-based and text-based programming, encourage pupils to review and interpret blocks of code. Research has shown that being able to read, trace, and explain code augments pupils' ability to write code.

Pedagogy Quick Reads

These short monthly documents present a summary of a topic, the key points and considerations, as well as links to the original sources.

See all quick reads

Research Bytes Newsletter

Our half-termly newsletter provides a bite-sized summary of computing education research, insights from classroom teachers, as well as suggested reading.

Read the latest issue

Pedagogy Reports

Our teaching and learning reports take a deep dive into progression and pedagogy with the computing curriculum.

See our impact

Pedagogy Focused Courses

We offer a number of courses that specifically focus on exploring and developing effective pedagogical practices within computing.

View courses

Teach Computing Podcast

For 12 episodes our podcast examined different questions, challenges or practice relating to computing education through conversations with classroom teachers and other experts.

Listen to all 12 episodes

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Providing resources, training and support for teaching Computing in primary and secondary schools and colleges from Key Stage 1 through to A Level

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.authors[].name
Designed and Developed by South West Grid for Learning (https://swgfl.org.uk/)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
PDE 5 handout 2 - evaluating the resources

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
(optional) PDE 2 handout 3 - blank progression framework

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
Teaching London Computing: A RESOURCE HUB from CAS LONDON & CS4FN

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Teaching London Computing supports Computing teachers in London and beyond (we hope our resources help you where ever you are) providing workshops and free classroom resources . It is a resource Hub for : the Computing at School Regional Centre.

Our model of delivery is that we provide resources and workshops, and help teachers to do the same. Those who use them then share them with other teachers so spreading the understanding and reinforcing the learning. Other teachers can provide a supportive environment to improve your understanding.

The best way to learn is to teach other teachers!

What can I do?

Read, and share, the linked stories in our inspiring computer booklets.

Go to the meetings of your nearest CAS Hub. Find them using the postcode finder on the CAS website or contact us for help.

Get 1-1 support from a local CAS 'Master' Teacher. Find them using the postcode finder on the CAS website or contact us for help.

Demonstrate the activities and share what you have learnt with other teachers in your school (then tell us about it!). If you want help ask us.

Deliver one of our or to your local teachers.

Start a CAS Hub in your local area (contact us for advice).

Teaching London Computing is a partnership between Queen Mary University of London and King's College London.

We have funding through the London Schools Excellence Fund and the London Schools Excellence Legacy Fund from the Mayor of London and the Department for Education (2013-2017) and we work closely with Computing At School.

Google has provided extra support for our work through their CS4HS programme.

We are also working with Hertford College, University of Oxford on Interdisciplinary Computing resources.

A range of our resources have now been integrated in the national Tenderfoot programme training teachers.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Teaching London Computing supports Computing teachers in London and beyond (we hope our resources help you where ever you are) providing workshops and free classroom resources . It is a resource Hub for : the Computing at School Regional Centre. Our model of delivery is that we provide resources and workshops, and help teachers to do the same.

# data[].attributes.body
https://padlet.com/CCLC/ti489dn0fnmh
You can give children the direct link

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Please be aware that resources have been published on the website in the form that they were originally supplied. This means that procedures reflect general practice and standards applicable at the time resources were produced and cannot be assumed to be acceptable today. Website users are fully responsible for ensuring that any activity, including practical work, which they carry out is in accordance with current regulations related to health and safety and that an appropriate risk assessment has been carried out.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
These 'I can' statements support assessment of the new primary computing programme of study from Reception to Year Six. The strands covered are programming, e-safety, multimedia, data handling and technology in our lives and is based on Somerset's eLIM's progression plans. This resource has been produced by eLIM (e Learning and Information Management Service), Somerset County Council.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
researchEDHome 2020 Tom Sherrington: Rosenshine's Principles and Curriculum Design: Connection?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Summative and formative assessment are two ways to evaluate a student's learning. What kind of assessment strategy should you choose for your lesson or teaching? It all depends on the huge differences between them. So, what exactly are those differences?

Take a look at this infographic below to find out.

Definition of formative and summative assessment

The first difference is of course their definition.

Formative assessment is used to monitor student's learning to provide ongoing feedback that can be used by instructors or teachers to improve their teaching and by students to improve their learning.

Summative assessment, however, is used to evaluate student's learning at the end of an instructional unit by comparing it against some standard or benchmark.

You can tell from their definitions that those two evaluation strategies are not meant to evaluate in the same way. So let's take a look at the biggest differences between them.

Differences between formative and summative assessments

Difference 1

The first big difference is when the assessment takes place in a student's learning process.

As the definition already gave away, formative assessment is an ongoing activity. The evaluation takes place during the learning process. Not just one time, but several times.

A summative evaluation takes place at a complete other time. Not during the process, but after it. The evaluation takes place after a course or unit's completion.

Difference 2

There's also a big difference between the assessement strategies in getting the right information of the student's learning.

With formative assessments you try to figure out whether a student's doing well or needs help by monitoring the learning process.

When you use summative assessments, you assign grades. The grades tell you whether the student achieved the learning goal or not.

Difference 3

The purposes of both assessments lie miles apart. For formative assessment, the purpose is to improve student's learning. In order to do this you need to be able to give meaningful feedback. Check out this post about feedback.

For summative assessment, the purpose is to evaluate student's achievements.

So do you want your students to be the best at something, or do you want your students to transcend themselves each time over and over again?

Difference 4

Remember when I said that with formative assessment the evaluation takes place several times during the learning process en with summative assessment at the end of a chapter or course? This explains also the size of the evaluation packages.

Formative assessment includes little content areas. For example: 3 formative evaluations of 1 chapter.

Summative assessment includes complete chapters or content areas. For example: just 1 evaluation at the end of a chapter. The lesson material package is much larger now.

Difference 5

The last difference you may already have guessed. Formative assessment considers evaluation as a process. This way, the teacher can see a student grow and steer the student in an upwards direction.

With summative assessment it's harder for you to steer the student in the right direction. The evaluation is already done. That's why summative assessments or evaluations are considered to be more of a " product ".

Examples of formative assessments

Formative assessments can be classroom polls, exit tickets, early feedback, and so on. But you can make them more fun too. Take a look at these three examples.

1. In response to a question or topic inquiry, students write down 3 different summaries. 10-15 words long, 30-50 words long and 75-100 words long.

2. The 3-2-1 countdown exercise: Give your students cards to write on, or they can respond orally. Students have to respond to three separate statements: 3 things you didn't know before, 2 things that surprised you about this topic and 1 thing you want to start doing with what you've learned.

3. One minute papers are usually done at the end of the lesson. Students answer a brief question in writing. The question typically centers around the main point of the course, most surprising concept, most confusing area of the topic and what question from the topic might appear on the next test.

Examples of summative assessments

Most of you have been using summative assessments whole their teaching careers. And that's normal. Education is a slow learner and giving students grades is the easier thing to do.

Examples of summative assessments are midterm exams, end-of-unit or -chapter tests, final projects or papers, district benchmark and scores used for accountability for schools and students.

So, that was it for this post. I hope you now know the differences and know which assessment strategy you are going to use in your teaching. If you want to know more about implementing formative assessment you should really take a look at this interview of a school without grades and this post about the building blocks of formative assessment.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The differences between formative and summative assessment - Infographic

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Summative and formative assessment are two ways to evaluate a student's learning. What kind of assessment strategy should you choose for your lesson or teaching? It all depends on the huge differences between them. So, what exactly are those differences? Take a look at this infographic below to find out.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
PDE 6 handout 1 – creating a curriculum vision

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
PDE 6 handout 4 – Lewin_s Force Field Analysis Tool

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
PDE 6 handout 5 – implementing change plan

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
How does a school system with poor performance become good? And how does one with good performance become excellent? These were the questions policymakers and education leaders asked us in the wake of our 2007 report How the world's best performing school systems come out on top, in which we examined the common attributes of high-performing school systems.

In this new report, How the world's most improved school systems keep getting better (PDF-4.5MB), we attempt to answer these questions. We analyzed 20 systems from around the world, all with improving but differing levels of performance, examining how each has achieved significant, sustained, and widespread gains in student outcomes, as measured by international and national assessments. Based on over 200 interviews with system stakeholders and analysis of some 600 interventions carried out by these systems-together comprising what we believe is the most comprehensive database of global school system reform ever assembled-this report identifies the reform elements that are replicable for school systems elsewhere as they move from poor to fair to good to great to excellent performance.

The systems we studied were: Armenia, Aspire (a US charter school system), Boston (Massachusetts), Chile, England, Ghana, Hong Kong, Jordan, Latvia, Lithuania, Long Beach (California), Madhya Pradesh (India), Minas Gerais (Brazil), Ontario (Canada), Poland, Saxony (Germany), Singapore, Slovenia, South Korea, and Western Cape (South Africa).

Would you like to learn more about our Social Sector Practice?

The report's findings include the following eight highlights:

Rethinking 101: A new agenda for university and higher education system leaders?

1. A system can make significant gains from wherever it starts-and these gains can be achieved in six years or less. Student outcomes in a large number of systems have either stagnated or regressed over the last ten years. However, our sample shows that substantial improvement can be achieved relatively quickly. For instance, Latvian students in 2006 demonstrated performance that was half a school-year advanced to that of students in 2000. In Long Beach, six years of interventions increased student performance in grade four and five math by 50 percent and 75 percent respectively. Even systems starting from low levels of performance, such as Madhya Pradesh in India, Minas Gerais in Brazil, and Western Cape in South Africa, have significantly improved their literacy and numeracy levels within just two to four years, while making strides in narrowing the achievement gap between students from different socioeconomic backgrounds. Improvement can start from any student outcome level, whatever the geography, culture, or income.

2. There is too little focus on "process" in the debate today. Improving system performance ultimately comes down to improving the learning experience of students in their classrooms. School systems do three types of things to achieve this goal-they change their structure by establishing new institutions or school types, altering school years and levels, or decentralizing system responsibilities; they change their resources by adding more education staff to schools or by increasing system funding; and, they change their processes by modifying curriculum and improving the way that teachers instruct and principals lead. All three of these intervention types-structure, resources, and process-are important along the improvement journey. The public debate, however, often centers on structure and resource due to their stakeholder implications. However, we find that the vast majority of interventions made by the improving systems in our sample are "process" in nature; and, within this area, improving systems generally spend more of their activity on improving how instruction is delivered than on changing the content of what is delivered.

3. Each particular stage of the school system improvement journey is associated with a unique set of interventions. Our research suggests all improving systems implement similar sets of interventions to move from one particular performance level to the next, irrespective of culture, geography, politics, or history. For example, the interventions undertaken by Madhya Pradesh (India), Minas Gerais (Brazil), and Western Cape (South Africa) on the path from poor to fair performance have striking similarities. There is a consistent cluster of interventions that moves systems from poor performance to fair, a second cluster of interventions does the same from fair performance to good, a third cluster from good performance to great, and yet another from great performance to excellent. For example, systems moving from fair performance to good focused on establishing the foundations of data gathering, organization, finances, pedagogy, while systems on the path from good performance to great focused on shaping the teaching profession such that its requirements, practices, and career paths are as clearly defined as those in medicine and law. This suggests that systems would do well to learn from those at a similar stage of the journey, rather than from those that are at significantly different levels of performance. It also shows that systems cannot continue to improve by simply doing more of what brought them past success.

4. A system's context might not determine what needs to be done, but it does determine how it is done. Though each performance stage is associated with a common set of interventions, there is substantial variation in how a system implements these interventions with regard to their sequence, timing, and rollout-there is little or no evidence of a "one-size-fits-all" approach to reform implementation. Our interviews with system leaders suggests that one of the most important implementation decisions is the emphasis a system places on mandating versus persuading stakeholders to comply with reforms. For example, while all improving systems make substantial use of data to inform their reform programs, only a subset of our sample systems translate this into quantitative targets at both school and classroom level, and then share this information publicly (US, England, Canada, Madhya Pradesh, and Minas Gerais). In contrast, Asian and Eastern European systems refrain from target-setting and only make system-level data available publicly. Instead, they prefer to share performance data with individual schools, engaging them in a private dialogue about how they can improve. The systems we studied have adopted different combinations of mandating and persuading to implement the same set of interventions. For example, a system will tend towards persuasion when there are stark winners and losers as a result of the change, it can afford a longer implementation timeline, the desired change is not a precursor for other changes, the system and national leadership is at a tenuous moment of credibility and stability, and/or the historical legacy of the nation makes enforcement of top-down decisions difficult.

5. Six interventions occur equally at every performance stage for all systems. Our research suggests that six interventions are common to all performance stages across the entire improvement journey: building the instructional skills of teachers and management skills of principals, assessing students, improving data systems, facilitating improvement through the introduction of policy documents and education laws, revising standards and curriculum, and ensuring an appropriate reward and remuneration structure for teachers and principals. Though these interventions occur at all performance stages, they manifest differently at each stage. Taking the example of teacher training, for instance: while Armenia (on the journey from fair to good) relied on centrally-driven, cascaded teacher training programs, Singapore (on the journey from good to great) allowed teachers flexibility in selecting the topics that were most relevant to their development needs.

6. Systems further along the journey sustain improvement by balancing school autonomy with consistent teaching practice. While our study shows that systems in poor and fair performance achieve improvement through a center that increases and scripts instructional practice for schools and teachers, such an approach does not work for systems in "good" performance onwards. Rather, these systems achieve improvement by the center increasing the responsibilities and flexibilities of schools and teachers to shape instructional practice-one-third of the systems in the "good to great" journey and just less than two-thirds of the systems in the "great to excellent" journey decentralize pedagogical rights to the middle layer (e.g. districts) or schools. However, in parallel, the center mitigates the risk of these freedoms resulting in wide and uncontrolled performance variations across schools by establishing mechanisms that make teachers responsible to each other as professionals for both their own performance and that of their colleagues. For example, these systems establish teacher career paths whereby higher skill teachers increasingly take on responsibility for supporting their juniors to achieve instructional excellence first within the school, then across the system. These systems also establish collaborative practices between teachers within and across schools that emphasize making practice public-such as weekly lesson-planning for all teachers in the same subject, required lesson observations, and joint-teaching-that serve to perpetuate and further develop the established pedagogy. Although teachers receive 56 percent of all support interventions in our studied systems, they receive only 3 percent of accountability interventions. In other words, collaborative practice becomes the main mechanism both for improving teaching practice and making teachers accountable to each other.

7. Leaders take advantage of changed circumstances to ignite reforms. Across all the systems we studied, one or more of three circumstances produced the conditions that triggered reform: a socioeconomic crisis; a high profile, critical report of system performance; or a change in leadership. In 15 out of the 20 systems studied, two or more of these "ignition" events were present prior to the launch of the reform efforts. By far, the most common event to spark the drive to reform is a change in leadership: every system we studied relied upon the presence and energy of a new leader, either political or strategic, to jumpstart their reforms. New strategic leaders were present in all of our sample systems, and new political leaders present in half. Critically, being new in and of itself is insufficient for success-these new leaders tend to follow a consistent "playbook" of practices upon entering office to lay the foundations for their improvement journey.

8. Leadership continuity is essential. Leadership is essential not only in sparking reform but in sustaining it. Two things stand out about the leaders of improving systems. Firstly, their longevity: the median tenure of the new strategic leaders is six years and that of the new political leaders is seven years. This is in stark contrast to a norm: for example, the average tenure for superintendents of urban school districts in the US is just three years; the average tenure of education secretaries in England just two years; similarly, that of education ministers in France is two years. Secondly, improving systems actively cultivate the next generation of system leaders, ensuring a smooth transition of leadership and the longer-term continuity in reform goals. This second observation lies at the heart of how a handful of our studied systems (e.g. Armenia, Western Cape, Lithuania) have managed reform continuity despite regular changes of political leadership. The stability of reform direction is critical to achieving the quick gains in student outcomes outlined above.

The fundamental challenge school system leaders face is how to shepherd their system through a journey to higher student outcomes. This journey is all the more complex because system starting points are different, contextual realities vary, and system leaders face multiple choices and combinations of what to do along the way-a single misplaced step can result in system leaders inadvertently taking a path that cannot get them to their desired destination. While there is no single path to improving school system performance, the experiences of all the 20 improving school systems we studied show that strong commonalities exist in the nature of their journeys. This report outlines the aspects of these journeys that are universal, those that are context-specific, and how the two interact. We hope these experiences benefit school systems around the world in navigating their own path to improvement.

Download the full report on which this article is based, How the world's most improved school systems keep getting better (PDF-4.5MB).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How the world’s most improved school systems keep getting better

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
How does a school system with poor performance become good? And how does one with good performance become excellent? These were the questions policymakers and education leaders asked us in the wake of our 2007 report How the world's best performing school systems come out on top , in which we examined the common attributes of high-performing school systems. In this new report, How the world's most improved school systems keep getting better (PDF-4.5MB), we attempt to answer these questions.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
How to use the toolkit

The resources in this toolkit have been produced by school leaders, teachers and other sector experts in conjunction with the Department for Education ( DfE), and have been tested with a range of schools across England.

You can use these resources to:

identify workload issues in your school

address workload issues in your school (such as feedback and marking)

evaluate the impact of workload reduction measures

You can adapt these resources to fit your school context. They can help you start to reduce workload, or can complement what you're already doing to reduce workload. They were designed for schools, but can also be used in colleges and other settings.

Some of the resources explain how schools have developed and maintained a culture of openness and trust which has removed traditional monitoring approaches such as classroom observations. You can use other resources as they are, perhaps as a basis for a training session, while the example policies can be adapted for your own context.

We recommend that you undertake a review of workload in your school as a starting point. The zip folder identify workload issues in your school contains a simple-to-use survey to stimulate discussion, which can be included in your school improvement cycle.

You may wish to conduct a regular review, involving all staff. This will help you to identify the areas you need to prioritise. Schools which took part in a fully evaluated project using the toolkit made significant improvements in workload and wellbeing after focussing  on the issues they identified in their survey. In many cases, pupil outcomes also improved.

In the Wellbeing and workload folder you will find example wellbeing policies. These can be read alongside the Education staff wellbeing charter, which is a declaration of support and set of commitments to the wellbeing and mental health of everyone working in education.

You can find more information about how schools and colleges can sign up to the charter.

If you are a school leader, you can use this toolkit with teachers and staff in their directed time, for example:

as part of their INSET

in a staff or leadership team meeting

in a network session with other schools

as part of school improvement planning

Identify workload issues in your school

You can start by identifying what's causing the biggest workload issues, so you know what to prioritise. You may wish to conduct a regular review, involving all staff, to work alongside your school improvement review cycle.

For resources to help identify your school workload issues, download the zip file which contains:

an example of a staff workload survey

a practical tool - using software to conduct a workload survey (includes a link to an online survey you can duplicate to use in your school)

a workshop presentation - for staff to discuss the survey findings

a structured conversation template

an impact graph template

a workshop presentation - how to use an impact graph to identify workload issues

a practical example - using an INSET day to focus on 'what gets in the way of teaching'

You can run a workshop as a whole school activity or in teams to discuss your survey outcomes and actions.

Choose the resources you wish to use and adapt them for your school context. The folder contains options of tools to use so you don't have to use them all.

Wellbeing and workload

For resources to help with wellbeing and workload, download the zip file which contains examples of:

establishing a school wellbeing committee

a workload and wellbeing action plan

how to establish a school workload group

a programme of work to tackle workload and improve wellbeing

a whole school approach to wellbeing

an academy trust workload agreement

2 examples of staff wellbeing policies

an example staff wellbeing statement

You can choose the resources that you wish to use and adapt them for your school context.

Data management

For resources to help reduce data management workload, download the zip file which contains:

a workshop presentation - with facilitator notes

a summary sheet to accompany the workshop

an example of a data collection audit for use in the workshop

You can run the workshop as a whole school activity or in teams, and adapt the example for use in your school.

Feedback and marking

For resources to help reduce feedback and marking workload, download the zip file which contains:

a workshop presentation - with facilitator notes

a summary sheet to accompany the workshop

an example of an impact matrix to review and change current marking practice

an impact graph template

a workshop presentation - how to use an impact graph to identify workload issues

4 examples of feedback policies in primary and secondary schools

an example marking reflection exercise

You can run the workshop as a school activity or in teams, and adapt the examples for use in your school.

Curriculum planning and resources

For resources to help reduce curriculum planning workload, download the zip file which contains:

a workshop presentation on reviewing and streamlining lesson planning - with facilitator notes

a summary sheet to accompany the workshop

an impact graph template

a workshop presentation - how to use an impact graph to identify workload issues

an example of how to create a sustainable workload in a school

an example protocol for lesson observations

an example of how to support staff development through feedback

You can run the workshop as a whole school activity or in teams. You can choose the resources you wish to use and adapt them for your school context.

Behaviour management

For resources to help reduce behaviour management workload, download the zip file which contains:

a workshop presentation - with facilitator notes

a summary sheet to accompany the workshop

a discussion template

an example of a secondary school behaviour policy

an example of a secondary school central referral system for pupil behaviour

You can run the workshop as a whole school activity or in teams. and use the discussion template to help. You can adapt the examples for use in your school.

Communications

For resources to help reduce communications workload, download the zip file which contains:

a workshop presentation - with facilitator notes

a summary sheet to accompany the workshop

an impact graph template

a workshop presentation - how to use an impact graph to identify workload issues

an example of a secondary school communications policy for parental engagement

an example of a secondary school email protocol

an example protocol for parents' evenings

an example of how to streamline internal school communication with an email protocol

You can run the workshop as a whole school activity or in teams. You can choose the resources you want to use and adapt them for your school context.

Plan your yearly calendar

For resources to plan your yearly calendar, download the zip file which contains:

a calendar planning workshop presentation - with facilitator notes

a summary sheet to accompany the workshop

You can use the workshop with staff to help you plan your yearly calendar and avoid pinch points.

Support for governing boards and trustees

For resources to help governing boards and trustees reduce workload in their school, download the zip file which contains:

a workshop presentation - with facilitator notes

a summary sheet to accompany the workshop

a workshop discussion template

a practical example of a primary school governing board looking at reducing school workload

You can run the workshop during board meetings, as a whole school activity or in teams, using the discussion template to help, and adapt the example for use in your school.

Evaluate the impact

For resources to help evaluate the impact of workload reduction measures, download the zip file which contains:

a checklist - to help evaluate the impact of your actions to reduce workload

a template - to monitor action and impact

Background to the toolkit

This toolkit is part of DfE 's action to support schools to reduce workload and address the causes of excessive workload at a national level. It builds on the principles of:

DfE has also consulted and engaged with organisations to help reduce workload in schools, including:

Ofsted

the Association of School and College Leaders (ASCL)

Community, Education and Early Years (formerly Voice the Union)

the National Association of Head Teachers (NAHT)

NASUWT, The Teachers' Union

the National Education Union (NEU)

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank all the staff in the schools who contributed their time to write and share practical examples and case studies. The following people also helped to co-ordinate contributions in 2022:

Sarah Botchway, Associate Headteacher, Vauxhall Primary school

Dame Mo Brennan, CEO, Matrix Academy Trust

Sue Bull, Flying High TSA

Abby Deeks, Vice Principal, West Lakes Academy

Paul Goodman, Deputy CEO, Flying High TSA

Alison Gormally, Headteacher, Golborne High School

Lynn James, Executive Principal, Outwood Grange Academies Trust

Ryan Kelsall, Deputy CEO, Eastern Learning Alliance Trust

Jan Linsley, Teaching School Manager, Yorkshire Inclusive TSA

David Lowbridge-Ellis, Deputy Headteacher, Barr Beacon School

Jon Mason, NLE/Teaching School Head, Inspiring Futures Partnership Trust

Sarah McGill, Teaching School Co-ordinator, Morris Teaching School Alliance

Victoria Morris, Vice Principal, Chepping View Primary Academy

Diane Reynard, Principal, East SILC

Jill Sunter, English & Media Teacher, West Lakes Academy

Liz Whetham MBE, Executive Headteacher, Westminster Church of England Primary Academy

Alison Wilshaw, Director of Education, Bedfordshire School Trust

The Teaching School Hub Council and its Chair, Richard Gill, CEO, The Arthur Terry Learning Partnership

We would also like to acknowledge those who were involved in developing and testing the original toolkit:

We regularly review and update these resources, taking account of feedback.

Please tell us:

how you are using the toolkit

how you are managing workload

about any innovative and effective workload solutions you would like to see in the toolkit

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Practical resources for school leaders and teachers to help reduce workload, produced by school leaders, teachers and other sector experts together with DfE.

# data[].attributes.headline
Preparing for a Deep Dive - Presentation by Ofsted Inspector

# data[].attributes.subject
Preparing for a Deep Dive - Presentation by Ofsted Inspector

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Preparing Leaders for an Ofsted Deep Dive

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
CP008 Session 2 Developing your computing curriculum

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
CP008 Session 3 P3 Assessment of computing

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
CP008 Session 4 P4 Leading change in your school