03/12/2025
Leave a comment
Uncategorized

Where is the Love? The Moral Imperative in Educational Leadership

My favourite inquiry, “Where is the love?”, functions as a crucial cultural constant for any educational institution. This question moves beyond abstract definitions of vision and values to challenge leaders, educators, and subject specialists concerning the demonstrable, everyday expression of their core professional purpose. It seeks to ascertain how the profound dedication which drew professionals into education—specifically, the devotion to one’s academic discipline and the conviction regarding the empowerment of others—can be maintained visibly, systemically, and with resilience against the pressures of accountability and institutional change.

Given the forthcoming conclusion of the calendar year, the current juncture offers a significant opportunity for professional recalibration. This period traditionally encourages reflection, renewal, and the strengthening of community cohesion. Professionally, this orientation mirrors the precise requirements of effective educational governance: engaging in honest scrutiny of the inherent complexity of change, systematically enhancing both personal and collective capacity, and solidifying the relational bonds fundamental to the operation of educational institutions. The fundamental driver of institutional action, the moral purpose—the “love” that is sought—is the essential component that sustains the demanding trajectory of the academic cycle.

1. The Love for Subject: Transition from Content Delivery to Moral Purpose

The pedagogical foundation rests upon the teacher’s subject specialism. This professional attribute extends beyond mere academic competence; it constitutes the catalyst for the foundational rationale—the compelling imperative that drives professional engagement with curriculum design and methodological adoption. Absent this essential emotional connection, pedagogical activity risks becoming procedural, thereby reducing the curriculum to a perfunctory checklist of required topics.

Articulation and Coherence

A primary function of educational leadership involves assisting colleagues in elevating their practice from simple content delivery to the clear articulation of their moral purpose. This necessitates the establishment of a direct link between the intrinsic merit and utility of their academic discipline (be it the analytical rigour of Mathematics, the creative expression of Art, or the socio-historical context provided by History) and the demonstrable enhancement of pupil outcomes, cultural capital, and subsequent life opportunities. When a leader successfully aligns a teacher’s scholarly passion with this broader objective, a powerful and sustainable internal motivator is generated.

Within an environment governed by the new regulatory expectations of the Ofsted framework, which critically prioritises Curriculum Design and Implementation, the “love for subject” must translate into clear, high-quality coherence making. The professional commitment to enabling every pupil to access and thrive within that discipline is demonstrated by the clarity of the curriculum structure—specifically, what is taught, the rationale for its inclusion, and the methodology of its assessment. This structural clarity, spanning from Key Stage 3 sequencing through to Key Stage 5 mastery, represents the professional expression of institutional care. Compliance with the new statutory Relationships, Sex and Health Education (RSHE) guidance, for example, demands that leaders integrate sensitive material not as a matter of obligatory compliance, but as a genuine expansion of the curriculum’s commitment to pupil welfare and personal growth, equipping them with vital knowledge for adulthood. Consequently, the subject leader’s profound commitment must be evident in strategic, long-term planning, rather than being confined merely to the delivery of individual lessons.

2. The Love for People: Capacity Building, Recognition, and Empowerment

The second component of “love” is directed externally: towards the systematic empowerment of pupils and professional colleagues. This objective directly mandates the cultivation of a Culture of Collaboration and Shared Leadership, a framework which successfully elevates collective efficacy above individualistic endeavour. This communal strength assumes heightened significance during the demanding winter academic term.

Capacity Building and Recognition as Investment

The demonstration of regard for colleagues is synonymous with robust investment in their Capacity Building. In the context of substantial policy shifts—such as the new statutory linkage between Attendance and Safeguarding (as reinforced by KCSIE 2025 updates) or the heightened focus upon online risks such as disinformation and radicalisation—professional competence assumes an ethical dimension. A practitioner lacking the requisite preparation to address a complex safeguarding concern or to implement demanding sections of the statutory RSHE curriculum may find their professional motivation significantly undermined by the fear of procedural failure.

  • Love is Robust CPD: Authentic professional development does not constitute a superficial, isolated event. It aligns with the ‘Changing’ Stage in models of transformation, necessitating the sustained support, coaching, and resources required for educators to master new skills and embed new practices effectively. For leadership, this commitment is demonstrated by ensuring that training provision is comprehensive, appropriately differentiated by career stage and need, and focused specifically on practical implementation (the ‘how’), rather than merely initial theoretical awareness (the ‘what’). This provision must encompass protected time for collaborative planning and subject-specific peer review, thereby facilitating the sharing of expertise and the refinement of practice within a professionally secure environment.
  • Love is Praise: An integral facet of capacity building involves genuine praise and targeted recognition. This extends beyond generic commendation; it constitutes specific, constructive feedback that acknowledges the effort expended and the process of improvement, particularly when staff have successfully navigated the inherent complexity of a change initiative. By celebrating iterative professional progression—such as a successful curriculum modification, the judicious management of a pastoral challenge, or transparent communication delivered professionally—leaders affirm that they observe, value, and trust the professional judgement of their personnel. This focused recognition effectively fuels subsequent commitment.
  • Love is Transparency: When navigating the complex financial landscape—where the funding increase often obscures the challenge posed by grant consolidation into the core budget—Continuous and Transparent Communication is paramount. It represents a proactive act of trust that mitigates anxiety and counters unsubstantiated internal conjecture. Leaders must address staff concerns regarding resources and budget allocation in a forward-looking manner, thereby managing expectations and sustaining engagement despite the uncertainty inherent in the “messiness” of change. This requires communicating why specific budgetary decisions are executed and how they align demonstrably with the shared moral purpose, thereby ensuring personnel do not perceive decisions as arbitrary or concealed.

The Empowerment of Shared Responsibility

Shared leadership, which cultivates a collective sense of responsibility for both improvement and innovation, stands as the paramount expression of professional regard for colleagues. It acknowledges that expertise and problem-solving capabilities are distributed throughout departments and faculties, rather than being concentrated solely within the senior leadership echelon.

  • Love is Empowerment: Empowerment serves as the practical manifestation of institutional trust. It mandates the distribution of ownership for key improvement priorities, thereby granting subject leaders and teachers’ agency within their professional domain and affording them the voice required to influence strategic decision-making. This contrasts fundamentally with a management structure that merely delegates tasks. When a leader empowers a faculty head to pilot a novel pedagogical approach, they are unequivocally demonstrating faith in that individual’s professional acumen and their profound commitment to driving effective, distributed improvement across the entire organisation. This model supports a culture where initiative is rewarded and where professional setbacks are accurately reclassified as learning opportunities, thereby securing the systemic resilience of the institution.

3. The Love for the Journey: Commitment, Resilience, and the Relentless Cycle

The professional scope of the school leader, symbolically represented by the cyclical, demanding progression of Jacob’s Ladder, ( see Authentic Leader passim) necessitates the consistent demonstration of unreserved Commitment and Strategic Adaptability. The “love for the journey” is the resolute determination to maintain the trajectory, even when challenges appear daunting, and understanding that progress is often attained incrementally.

Commitment and Professional Integrity

Commitment functions as the internal driver of professional integrity. It represents the unwavering determination to honour the school’s moral purpose, particularly when external pressures threaten to divert critical resources or managerial attention.

  • Love is Sustained Commitment: Leaders demonstrate this commitment through their own sustained adherence to the strategic vision, ensuring that every policy decision and financial manoeuvre serves the central objective of pupil success. This involves managing the “descent”—the necessary engagement with complex compliance and financial realities (such as the detailed application of the new National Funding Formula (NFF) parameters, the management of Minimum Funding Guarantee (MFG) complexities, or the meticulous tracking required to avoid financial deductions)—without ever losing sight of the “ascent”—the moral purpose of upholding educational standards and fostering well-being. The resilient leader does not permit the technicalities of the descent to overshadow the human and educational imperative of the ascent.

The planned transition to a new, multi-dimensional Ofsted “report card” system exemplifies this resilience. By moving away from a high-stakes, single-word judgement, the framework actively encourages leaders to adopt a more nuanced, iterative approach to improvement. It requires the professional courage to undertake honest evaluation across potentially eleven areas and to continuously adjust strategy based upon rich, contextualised data, rather than being immobilised by the apprehension of a singular negative classification. This commitment to continuous, honest self-evaluation constitutes a fundamental expression of leadership integrity.

Iteration as Professional Integrity

To demonstrate adaptability and resilience is to formally acknowledge that change is frequently non-linear, as evidenced by the unforeseen variables encountered in practical change management models. The “love for the journey” necessitates the embrace of iteration: a willingness to derive lessons from experience, adjust strategies dynamically, and avoid rigid adherence to an initial plan when confronted by unexpected obstacles or policy fluctuations. This flexible, forward-thinking approach ensures that the primary focus remains fixed on the desired outcome—enhanced pupil attainment and professional flourishing—rather than on the institutional comfort of maintaining the status quo. Iteration, in this specific context, is the ongoing demonstration of professional integrity, confirming that the most effective leaders are those perpetually willing to refine their methodology based on real-world feedback and empirical data.

The Christmas Parallel: Reflection, Renewal, and Reaffirmation

The Christmas period represents a welcome procedural break, a communal occasion for rest and institutional re-centring. This recess should be conceptualised not merely as a pause, but as a defined moment to consciously exercise the Love for the Journey and the Love for People.

  • Reflection (The Descent): Parallel to personal reflection upon the preceding year, this is the designated time for professional leaders to undertake genuine, unpressured consideration of the process of change, extending beyond simple outcomes. Which unforeseen variables presented the greatest challenge? In which areas did collective capacity prove most susceptible to strain?
  • Renewal (Capacity Building): The essential benefit of the holiday period is the renewal of personal reserves—mental, emotional, and physical. Leaders who demonstrate regard for their staff ensure that this period is genuinely restorative, thereby cultivating the refreshed professional purpose necessary for navigating the challenges inherent in the spring term. This renewal constitutes the ultimate practice of professional sustainability and self-care.
  • Reaffirmation (Moral Purpose): Finally, the seasonal focus on goodwill and community provides an unparalleled opportunity for the formal reaffirmation of the moral purpose guiding the institution. It is a chance to articulate institutional gratitude and communicate the term’s successes, irrespective of their scale, reinforcing the communal bonds and reminding every colleague—from the newest practitioner to the most senior leader—of the profound significance of their sustained professional dedication.

Reflective Planning Framework for Aspiring Leaders

Integrating Professional Commitment and Ethos

This framework offers aspiring leaders a structured tool for personal and professional development, focusing on the active application of the moral imperative—the “love” in leadership—across four critical domains. It is designed to bridge the gap between aspirational ethos and demonstrable professional behaviour.

Leadership DomainDefinition & Link to “The Love”Reflection Questions (Current Practice)Development Action (Moving Forward)
1. Elevate IntentionalityRelates to: The Love for Subject (Moral Purpose and Coherence). Intentionality ensures that every action, decision, and communication directly serves the articulated moral purpose, preventing professional activity from becoming merely procedural compliance. It is the commitment to Clarity and Strategic Planning.How often are strategic decisions (e.g., resource allocation, timetable adjustments) explicitly linked back to the core moral purpose or the strategic vision? In my current role, how effectively do I communicate the rationale behind a change initiative, rather than simply the instruction for its implementation?A. Develop a “Purpose-Driven Decision Protocol”: Before initiating any project, formally document the anticipated impact on pupil outcomes and staff capacity.

B. Practice “Visible Thinking”: In meetings, articulate the ‘Why’ before the ‘What’ to demonstrate purposeful leadership and subject coherence.
2. Combat ComplacencyRelates to: The Love for the Journey (Resilience and Iteration). Complacency is the antithesis of professional integrity. Combatting it requires embracing the “messiness” of change, seeking continuous feedback, and maintaining the intellectual honesty needed for self-evaluation.In which areas of my current responsibility have I resisted feedback, or where is practice maintained purely because “that is how it has always been done”? How frequently do I solicit critical feedback on my own leadership style and decision-making process (managing the “descent”)?A. Implement a 360-Degree Feedback Cycle specifically on “Adaptability to Change” and “Transparency of Communication.”

B. Dedicate 30 minutes weekly to review a failed or challenging professional episode, documenting the lessons learned and identifying the necessary strategic iteration.
3. Champion GrowthRelates to: The Love for People (Capacity Building and Empowerment). Championing growth moves beyond providing mandatory training (CPD) to actively seeking out and facilitating opportunities for colleagues to develop agency and expand their professional scope.Who, beyond my immediate team, have I proactively identified and mentored to take on new responsibilities (Empowerment)? How specific and constructive is the Praise and Recognition I provide? Is it tied to observed professional growth or merely to final successful outcomes?A. Institute a “Distributed Leadership Project”: Identify one colleague per term to lead a minor improvement project entirely autonomously, providing resources but not micro-managing.

B. Adopt “Evidence-Based Recognition”: Ensure all commendations explicitly reference the effort, skill acquisition, or specific behavioural change demonstrated, thereby reinforcing the value of the growth process.
4. Inspire Deeper ConnectionsRelates to: The Love for People (Shared Leadership and Transparency). This domain focuses on building the social and relational capital necessary for collective efficacy and institutional resilience, particularly through open, trusting communication.When addressing complexity (e.g., budget constraints or high-stakes accountability), do I foster anxiety or confidence? How well do I utilise formal and informal opportunities to communicate gratitude and reinforce the value of shared purpose (Reaffirmation)?A. Develop a “Communication Charter”: Commit to communicating critical strategic updates proactively, even when full details are unavailable, to sustain Transparency and mitigate conjecture.

B. Lead a “Moral Purpose Dialogue” session within the team in the new year, requiring all members to articulate how their individual passion contributes to the collective mission.

The successful transition to senior leadership is not predicated solely on technical competence, but upon the demonstrable and consistent application of the moral purpose. By intentionally working to Elevate Intentionality, Combat Complacency, Champion Growth, and Inspire Deeper Connections, aspiring leaders actively embody the professional love that is essential for navigating complexity and ensuring the enduring health and efficacy of the educational institution.

So, before the many mince pies, carols sang off key and the usual end of the term shenanigans, this is me signing off until 2026. Thank you for reading, commenting, liking and suggesting – via blog, message or in person. It is all appreciated. And so are you. May your Christmas dreams come true.

Tagged , , ,
20/11/2025
Leave a comment
Authentic Leadership

The Authentic Leader’s Playbook: Learning from The Devil in the Details

If you were to hire a consultant to design the perfect villain for humanity, they would eventually invent Satan. His journey from a minor celestial bureaucrat to the Prince of Darkness is history’s most successful case study in what Steven Pinker calls “Common Knowledge.”

Pinker argues that social coordination requires a recursive state of awareness: I know X, you know X, and we both know that the other knows X. This public certainty is the “lubricant” for collective action. By viewing the history of Satan through this lens, we can extract profound and practical lessons on influence, communication, and the mechanics of social organisation that are essential for any authentic leader.

I. Strategic Lessons for the Authentic Leader

The evolution of the Devil is a masterclass in how to manage narrative, drive coordination, and ethically frame challenges. An authentic leader should apply these four principles:

1. Differentiate Shared Knowledge from Common Knowledge

The distinction between the Devil’s original version (ha-Satan) and his iconic rebrand (Lucifer) is Pinker’s critical lever.

• Shared Knowledge (Private Belief): Everyone knows the organisational values (they read the memo), but they do not know if their peers actually buy in. This leads to private scepticism and low engagement.

• Common Knowledge (Public Certainty): The leader must create situations where “everyone knows that everyone knows” the values and goals are real and non-negotiable. This is achieved through public signals (visible recognition, transparent decision-making, and consistent enforcement), which creates the binding awareness necessary for collective, coordinated action.

2. Frame Your Narrative Simply

The original ha-Satan was too nuanced—a cosmic judge and jury in the cupboard. This is the risk of an overly complex, internal-facing mission statement.

• Simplicity Scales: The successful Lucifer was simple: Prideful Rebel = Source of All Evil. Authentic leaders must distil their complex vision into a clear, concrete, and sticky message that can be effortlessly repeated and understood across all levels of the organisation. An authentic leader’s personal values are only as powerful as the shared, simple story the team tells about them.

3. Ethically Externalise the “Enemy”

The Devil’s success was as an externalised scapegoat that unified humanity. A leader must engage with the ethics of this strategy.

• Unify Against Problems, Not People: The leader’s equivalent of “Satan” should not be an internal department, a rival team member, or even a competitor. It must be an abstract, concrete, and shared problem—things like inefficiency, market stagnation, or lack of innovation. By unifying the team against a specific, externalised process or problem, the leader provides a powerful rallying point that fosters internal cohesion and reduces the risk of destructive in-fighting.

4. Understand the Endurance of Symbols

The modern use of Satan by non-theistic groups demonstrates the durability of a powerful symbol, even when the original belief is gone.

• Symbols Outlive Facts: The authentic leader must recognise that their actions, symbols, and core principles will resonate long after they are gone. A genuine commitment to principles like rebellion against arbitrary authority (the Miltonian Lucifer) can be leveraged by future generations. Authenticity—the consistent alignment of stated values and public actions—is the only way to ensure the legacy of the symbol remains positive.

II. The Core Mechanism: From Bureaucrat to Brand

To understand these lessons, we must first look at the theological necessity that drove the Devil’s rebranding.

The Bureaucrat vs. The Brand: The Existential Rebranding

In the Hebrew Bible, the entity known as ha-Satan (the Bureaucrat) was too nuanced to spark a mass movement. In Pinker’s terms, this version of Satan created “Shared Knowledge” (people privately knew suffering existed) but failed to establish “Common Knowledge.”

This created an Existential Problem for the emerging Christian Monotheism: If God is all-powerful and all-good, and ha-Satan is his employee, then God is directly responsible for all evil and testing. This is difficult to market to a population facing famine and plague. The Church needed an escape clause for divine responsibility.

The Great Rebranding: A Cognitive Cascade

The solution was the transition to Lucifer, the Fallen Angel. The Hebrew helel (shining one)—a poetic jab at the pompous King of Babylon in Isaiah 14:12—was translated into the Latin Lucifer. This “cosmic typo” became the spark.

This narrative was sticky. It moved the concept of evil from the abstract (a philosophical problem) to the concrete (a specific guy named Lucifer who hates you). This created the necessary Common Knowledge for a dualistic worldview: everyone knew that everyone else knew that the Devil was real and the sole source of temptation, suffering, and disorder. This externalisation preserved God’s goodness while providing a tangible enemy.

III. The Cognitive Lever of Hell: Standardising the Enemy

With the “Lucifer” archetype established, the machinery of Common Knowledge kicked into high gear during the Middle Ages.

• Visual Lexicon: By standardising the image of Satan—horns, hooves, eternal fire, often borrowing from pagan gods—the Church created a universal signal. This visual language, reinforced across cathedral art and morality plays, meant a peasant in France saw the same monster as a theologian in Rome.

• Aural Enforcement: Public rituals like the Exorcism Rite and the Sermon transformed private fear (Shared Knowledge) into public, undeniable fact (Common Knowledge).

This shared certainty coordinated social behaviour with terrifying efficiency. The use of the Devil as a scapegoat provided the “plausible deniability” Pinker describes, but it also became a Common Knowledge multiplier: the accusation that a rival was “in league with the Devil” was instantly plausible because everyone knew that everyone knew the Devil was actively seeking agents. This justified and accelerated witch trials and inquisitions, turning a theological concept into a machine for social compliance and political purges.

The Devil, it turns out, is in the recursive details. We built a hell of our own design, not necessarily out of fire and brimstone, but out of the powerful, binding belief that everyone else sees the same monster we do.

For the authentic leader, the ultimate takeaway is that effective influence is not just about sharing a vision; it is about creating a self-reinforcing, public reality where the team’s goals, and the problems standing in their way, are the unquestioned Common Knowledge.

Tagged , , ,
13/11/2025
1 Comment
Uncategorized

The Authentic School Leader’s Communication Conundrum: “Shaka, When the Walls Fell”

The modern school leader’s kryptonite isn’t budget strategy or curriculum mapping—it’s the calendar. Specifically, knowing when to hit “Send” and when to call an “All-Staff Meeting.” For authentic leaders, this is less about simple task management and more about an act of curation—an intentional choice rooted in respect, transparency, and intentionality. The authentic leader understands that every communication channel choice sends a message about how they value their team’s time and talent.

The core challenge is this: how do you foster the kind of deep, exceptional connection that emerges in synchronous conversation, while ruthlessly protecting the finite attention of your team from unnecessary interruptions? The answer lies in understanding the decoded metaphor of the leader’s door.

Tangent Alley

Arguments about what is the best Star Trek episode can get heated and go on late into the night – I should know, I’ve been there. Moreover, I can be easily swayed. “The City on the Edge of Forever?” “The Inner Light?” “Mirror Mirror?” “Yesterday’s Enterprise?” Yes, yes, yes! They’re all the best episode. But when it comes time to discuss what is the most profound episode, I think I have a clear pick.

“Darmok,” from The Next Generation‘s fifth season, edges out some of the competition (like TOS’ fiercely pacifist “Day of the Dove” or “A Taste of Armageddon”) with its odd specificity. In other words, a message about the futility of war isn’t something you’ll only get from Trek. But “Darmok”’s story about a group or an individual so determined to communicate with others that they are willing to sacrifice themselves to make that contact – that’s something more unusual, even if it isn’t any less universal.

“Darmok,” of course, is the episode where a Tamarian (also known as the Children of Tama) named Dathon realises that great risks must be taken if his people are ever going to reach outside their own clan. Because of their unique fashion of speech which used metaphoric descriptions based on their own mythology, the universal translator is unable to make the usual connections. We’ll eventually realize that “Shaka, when the walls fell” means “failure,” but with no reference to Shaka (or his wall-falling misfortune) the UT program is unable to do so.

 It is a metaphor, referencing a story from the Tamarian culture where a hero named Shaka fails to save his people from a disaster. The phrase is used to express a situation of disappointment, defeat, or a complete breakdown. 

Same as it ever was. Disappointing communication is key; deciding what is actually important, almost impossible at times, and coaching those around us into understanding this is sometimes the hardest road we travel as leaders.

I often recognise that there is a vital difference between an email and a meeting. So, here, I make an attempt to define and explain both, although, if you are short on time, a meeting should have biscuits.

I. The Cost of Synchronicity: Respect for Time

Authentic leaders recognise that a colleague’s attention is the single most valuable, finite asset they control. Wasting it is a breach of trust. This dictates the core difference between the choices:

The Email Choice (Low Cost: Information Ledger)

  • Purpose: Information transmission, formal decisions, final agreements, or critical instructions. Email is the foundation of institutional memory and operational compliance.
  • Value: It demonstrates profound respect for individual productivity, allowing staff to absorb information asynchronously—when it fits their deep-focus work. Crucially, it creates a permanent, searchable ledger that prevents future confusion or “misremembering” and underpins accountability.
  • The School Leader’s Dilemma (The Failure): Despite its utility for clarity, the email choice can often be bypassed or ignored by overwhelmed staff, leading to compliance risks or, in the micro-sense, staff hearing vital information second-hand—like OFSTED changes on Radio 2—or the embarrassing question, “Could I remind them of an email I sent two days ago, because they had forgotten?” It’s a failure of information absorption and procedural compliance, a tragedy where clarity and accountability are missed: “Shaka, when the walls fell” (signifying failure or great defeat). The lesson here is that effective leadership requires both sending and ensuring the receipt and retention of critical information.

The Meeting Choice (High Cost, High Value: Collective Cognition)

  • Purpose: When simultaneous, immediate, and iterative input is required. Calling a meeting is an implicit contract: the value gained from synchronous discussion must outweigh the cost of everyone’s time. It’s essential for high-value tasks like brainstorming, rapid ideation, or complex problem-solving where non-linear discussion is beneficial.
  • The School Leader’s Value (The Triumph): As experienced in the last two weeks—13 meetings about KS3 data and Y11 mock results that could not have been an email—the synchronous discussion fosters shared ownership and reveals the outstanding, unique, or exceptional qualities of a colleague. The real value is the serendipity of spontaneous contribution; the quick, essential debate that occurs in the moment and moves the entire group forward in ways a static email thread never could.

II. Trust, Tone, and the Non-Verbal Code

When the subject is sensitive, potentially emotional, or nuanced—like strategic shifts, conflict resolution, or delivering bad news—email is a terrible vessel for tone. It strips away context, allowing the reader’s mood to dictate interpretation. A face-to-face setting allows a leader to convey empathy, read non-verbal cues (the slumped shoulder, the furrowed brow), and ensure the message is received authentically—not misinterpreted through cold text.

This is where the Tamarian idioms perfectly explain the decoded metaphor of the school leader’s door, which is often a portal to either genuine collaboration or tragic distraction:

The choice of communication channel aligns directly with the value being sought:

  1. The Official Invite (Meeting) signifies a High-Value, High-Cost conversation. This is the forum for genuine input, immediate feedback, and emotional nuance—a requirement for collective problem-solving where a joint effort overcomes an obstacle. The successful execution of such a meeting is captured by the idiom “Darmok and Jalad at Tanagra,” meaning Cooperation through a shared challenge. These intentional conversations are the source of shared stories, building the relational capital required for true connection and future trust.
  2. The Pop-in (Unintentional Asynchronicity) represents a Low-Value Interruption and is the unfortunate symptom of a lack of process or the failure to utilize the low-cost, documenting power of email for clear communication. It forces an interruption for information that should have been self-serve, ultimately showing a lack of operational discipline and respect for the leader’s focused time. The result is the tragedy of missed information and collapsed attention: “Shaka, when the walls fell,” signifying Failure, tragedy, or great defeat. This is the moment a system—or an individual’s attention—is confirmed to have collapsed due to preventable miscommunication.

For authentic school leaders, the choice isn’t transactional; it’s an act of curation of both attention and culture. By intentionally choosing the right channel, the leader moves beyond simply communicating to actively enabling their team to work together effectively, with mutual respect, and focused on tasks that truly matter.

Tagged , , , , ,
06/11/2025
Leave a comment
Uncategorized

The Dawn of a Nuanced Accountability

The policy landscape, often a dense thicket of regulatory minutiae, has recently presented us with a vision of genuine clarity and strategic purpose in the form of the proposed Progress 8 reforms. For too long, the accountability metric, like an over-zealous accountant, valued the EBacc structure with an exclusionary zeal, subtly relegating the Arts to the sidelines of the academic pageant. Now, with the intended scrapping of the EBacc’s restrictive mandate  and the subsequent restructuring of P8, a necessary correction to the academic compass is at hand. This is not mere policy tinkering; it is a profound philosophical shift. It is the long-overdue assurance that our curriculum can be both robustly academic and truly reflective of the breadth of human endeavour.

The change to the subject slots, especially the guaranteed prominence given to Creative subjects on an equal footing with Languages and Humanities, finally dismantles the tyranny of the ‘EBacc core’. The fact that students’ subject choices will now be based on genuine interest and future opportunity rather than on the desperate calculus of historical league table drivers is a liberation for the soul of Key Stage 4. This proposed structure allows a student to weave a far richer tapestry of knowledge. The mandate for school leaders to proactively design options that promote true breadth in Arts, Languages, and Music  is a welcome pressure to ensure that a holistic education is the rule, not the exception.

Furthermore, the new accountability framework is a profound opportunity to tackle the systemic issue of complacency. The fact sheet wisely guides us to abandon long-established attainment patterns and instead focus on fluid accountability measures. By structurally guaranteeing the value of subjects like Art and Music within the new performance measure , the reforms necessitate a re-evaluation of resource allocation, staffing, and professional development. This is the necessary friction that sparks growth—a deliberate design for school leaders to move beyond mere compliance and into a period of strategic, intentional planning.

This bold restructuring, with its clear expectation for a “cutting-edge” curriculum and the championing of new enrichment benchmarks on civic engagement, life skills, and the arts, is the intellectual equivalent of reaching the summit of Jacob’s Ladder. It connects the academic enterprise directly to the external world and future opportunities. By aligning curriculum with high-value technical pathways like a post-16 Data Science and AI qualification, and formalising community partnerships, these changes ensure our schools are not simply factories for grades, but essential engines for relevant, tangible learning.

Authentic Leader Fact Sheet: Proposed Changes to Progress 8 Measures

Progress 8 is a key performance indicator used in secondary schools in England to measure the academic progress students make between Key Stage 2 (KS2 SATs) and their GCSE results. It compares a student’s progress in a set of eight subjects against that of other students nationwide with similar prior attainment.

A positive score means students at a school made more progress than expected; a negative score means they made less progress.

Current Progress 8 Structure

The current measure is based on a student’s performance across eight subjects, organised into three buckets:

  1. English (highest score from English Language and Literature): Double Weighted
  2. Mathematics: Double Weighted
  3. EBacc Subjects (three of the following: sciences, computer science, geography, history, or languages)
  4. Open Group (three subjects from the EBacc group or other approved arts, academic, or vocational qualifications)

Proposed Changes to Progress 8 Structure

The government is proposing a restructuring of the subject buckets to better balance a “strong academic core with breadth and student choice,” particularly aiming to boost the arts.

The total number of subjects remains eight, but the buckets are changing:

Slot NumberProposed Subject SlotWeightingNotes
1 & 2EnglishDoubleHighest score from English Language or Literature.
3 & 4MathematicsDoubleMaths is still double-weighted.
5 & 6Dedicated ScienceSingleTwo highest scores from: Combined Science (double award), Biology, Chemistry, Physics, Computer Science/Computing.
7 & 8Breadth SlotsSingleFour slots with specific requirements to ensure breadth.

How the Dedicated Science Slots (5 & 6) Work

These slots take the two highest scores from a selection of science subjects.

  • If a student takes Combined Science (a double award), the two-subject grade is averaged (e.g., a grade 5 and 6 averages to two scores of 5.5) and can fill one or both slots.
  • The options are: Combined Science, Biology, Chemistry, Physics, Computer Science, or Computing.

How the Breadth Slots (7, 8, 9, 10) Work

These slots are designed to ensure students study a wide range of subjects.

Breadth Slot NumberRequirementCategories to Choose From
7 & 8Must be filled by subjects from two of these three categories:1. Humanities: Geography, History, Religious Studies.
9 & 10Takes the two highest scores in any approved subjects.Any subject not already counted (including English language/literature if not used in slot 1 & 2), or other eligible subjects/technical awards.
2. Creative: Art and Design, Music, Drama, Dance, Design and Technology.
3. Languages: Modern Foreign Languages and Ancient Languages.

Key Technicalities

  • More than 8 Subjects: Only the highest grades relevant to the eight slots are counted.
  • Fewer than 8 Subjects: Students receive a zero score for any slots that are not filled, which negatively impacts the overall Progress 8 score.
  • Reasoning: The changes are intended to address criticism that the current system sidelined the arts and to put Creative subjects on an equal footing with Humanities and Languages.

When Will This Happen?

  • The government will hold a consultation on these proposals.
  • The final response is expected in the summer term of 2026.
  • The new structure is intended to be in place for schools to use when students make subject choices for the 2027-28 academic year.

Considerations for Future Curriculum and Assessment Planning

The proposed curriculum and assessment reforms, driven by the scrapping of the EBacc and the significant restructuring of Progress 8 (P8), demand immediate and intentional planning from school leaders. This involves moving beyond mere compliance to strategically integrating new subject priorities and adapting to revised accountability mechanics well before the 2028 implementation date.

Leaders must urgently audit the curriculum for new literacies, specifically mapping where topics like financial literacy and digital/AI misinformation can be woven into existing subjects like Maths, Computing, and PSHE. Furthermore, the removal of the EBacc’s restrictive structure offers a profound opportunity: Key Stage 4 (GCSE) subject options must be intentionally designed to promote true breadth in Arts, Languages, and Music, basing subject uptake on genuine student interest and future opportunity rather than historical league table drivers.

This intentionality must also address the logistical commitment of planning for a three-science pathway for all students, requiring proactive resource allocation, laboratory scheduling, and science staffing reviews.

A major risk during this transition period is complacency, especially concerning long-established attainment patterns and metrics. Leaders must actively anticipate and combat this by focusing intensely on diagnostic data and fluid accountability measures. The introduction of the statutory Year 8 reading test must be treated as a critical diagnostic tool, not just an assessment hurdle. Data from this test should immediately inform rapid intervention programs to tackle the known problem of widening attainment gaps during the first years of secondary school. Additionally, leaders must scrutinise the evolving accountability landscape; the promise to “reform” P8 means the goalposts are not static.

To combat complacency, a small working group should be tasked with tracking DfE announcements on the new P8 methodology, ensuring all subject leaders—particularly those in the Arts—understand that the value of their contribution is now structurally guaranteed to be viewed more equitably within the new performance measure.

Curriculum reform must be partnered with a commitment to championing growth in people and professional skills, ensuring staff are equipped to teach a “cutting-edge” curriculum. To effectively educate students on issues like spotting AI-generated content and misinformation, an immediate investment in digital CPD for all teaching staff is essential, focusing on the responsible use of AI in learning and assessment.

Another key area for growth is oracy and communication, which is being pushed to have the same status as reading and writing. This is not a departmental initiative; it requires embedding explicit instruction in speaking, listening, and debate across all subjects to build the critical communication skills valued by employers and universities.

This period of change also serves as an opportune moment to model reflective practice, prompting departments to review and better represent diversity and global contributions within their subject content while maintaining foundational knowledge.

Finally, the reforms require school leaders to inspire deeper connections between the curriculum and the external world, focusing on community and future opportunities. The new enrichment benchmarks on civic engagement, life skills, and the arts are now part of the accountability framework, making formal partnerships essential. Leaders should collaborate with local businesses, civic groups, and arts organisations to deliver these benchmarks meaningfully. For instance, lessons on financial skills like budgeting should be framed as a direct connection to financial wellbeing within the student’s community, making the learning relevant and tangible.

Furthermore, to ensure seamless progression, leaders must engage early with feeder colleges and sixth-form providers to discuss the proposed exploration of a post-16 qualification in data science and AI. By fostering these connections, the school’s curriculum is directly linked to the high-value technical and academic pathways that their students will ultimately progress to, giving the reforms maximum positive impact.

Authentic Checklist: Preparing for Progress 8 Reform

Immediate Actions (Next 6–12 Months)

  • Audit Curriculum
    • Map current KS4 subject offer against proposed Progress 8 buckets.
    • Identify gaps in Arts, Languages, and Humanities provision.
  • Form a Working Group
    • Assign responsibility for tracking DfE announcements and consultation outcomes.
    • Include subject leaders from Arts, Science, and Languages.
  • Plan for Science Pathways
    • Review feasibility of offering three separate sciences for all students.
    • Assess lab capacity, timetable implications, and staffing needs.

Medium-Term Actions (2026–2027)

  • Embed New Literacies
    • Integrate financial literacy and digital/AI misinformation into Maths, Computing, and PSHE.
  • Invest in CPD
    • Launch digital CPD for staff on AI use and misinformation detection.
    • Develop oracy training across all subjects.
  • Review Subject Diversity
    • Ensure curriculum reflects global contributions and diversity.

Long-Term Actions (2027–2028)

  • Redesign KS4 Options Process
    • Promote genuine breadth and student choice in Arts, Languages, and Music.
  • Strengthen Community Partnerships
    • Formalise links with local businesses, arts organisations, and civic groups for enrichment benchmarks.
  • Engage with Post-16 Providers
    • Discuss alignment with emerging qualifications (e.g., Data Science and AI).

Ongoing

  • Monitor Accountability Changes
    • Regularly update staff on evolving Progress 8 methodology.
  • Use Year 8 Reading Test Data
    • Implement rapid interventions for literacy gaps.
  • Champion Growth
    • Embed reflective practice and professional development across departments.

I said in my post yesterday it had just got interesting; and here we are. More interesting still.

Tagged , , , , , , ,
05/11/2025
Leave a comment
Uncategorized

A Green and Pleasant Curriculum: initial thoughts on the Francis Review outcomes.

Key Reforms in England’s National Curriculum:

The government has confirmed the most significant overhaul of the National Curriculum in over a decade, largely adopting recommendations from Professor Becky Francis’s Curriculum and Assessment Review. The reforms are aimed at equipping pupils with “skills for life and work” for the 21st century.

Implementation Timeline

  • Final Revised Curriculum Publication: Spring 2027.
  • Full Implementation (First Teaching): September 2028.
    New Compulsory Subject Content
    The changes focus on introducing essential life and digital skills:
  • Financial Literacy: Teaching on budgeting and concepts like mortgages, to be integrated into Maths or compulsory Primary Citizenship lessons.
  • Media and AI Literacy: Greater focus on identifying misinformation, disinformation, and AI-generated content.
  • Compulsory Primary Citizenship: Citizenship will become mandatory in primary schools, covering financial literacy, media literacy, law, and democracy.
  • Climate Change and Diversity: The curriculum will include more content on climate change and feature better representation of diversity.
    Major GCSE and Accountability Changes
    Substantial shifts are planned for secondary school examinations and performance measures:
  • Scrapping the EBacc: The English Baccalaureate (EBacc) accountability measure will be scrapped, with the aim of encouraging a greater breadth of GCSE study, particularly in the arts and creative subjects.
  • Guaranteeing Triple Science: Schools will be required to work towards offering the three separate science GCSEs (Biology, Chemistry, Physics) as standard.
  • Reducing Exam Time: The Department for Education (DfE) plans to cut overall GCSE exam time by up to three hours for each student on average.
  • Progress 8 (P8): The measure will be reformed, though specific details on its final structure are pending.
  • New Statutory Year 8 Reading Test: A new mandatory reading test for Year 8 pupils will be introduced, intended to identify and address reading difficulties.
    Wider School Experience
  • Oracy: Oracy (speaking, listening, and communication) is to be given the same status as reading and writing in the curriculum, supported by a new oracy framework.
  • Enrichment Benchmarks: Schools must offer and advertise to parents a new set of core enrichment activities, covering:
  • Civic engagement, Arts and culture, Nature and adventure, Sport and Life skills.

Progress 8 (P8) Accountability Reforms

The government has confirmed it will reform the Progress 8 (P8) school performance measure, although the specific details of the final structure are still pending.

• DfE Stance vs. Review Recommendation: This is a point of divergence from the Curriculum and Assessment Review, which recommended retaining Progress 8 largely unchanged (other than renaming the EBacc section). The DfE’s decision to reform it is explicitly linked to the scrapping of the EBacc measure.

• The Aim of Reform: The goal of the P8 reform is to ensure the accountability measure now encourages students to study a greater breadth of GCSE subjects, specifically aiming to give equal status to the arts alongside humanities and languages.

• Progress 8 currently divides a student’s best 8 grades into three ‘buckets’: English & Maths (double-weighted), three EBacc subjects, and three ‘Open Group’ subjects.

• What is Expected: Given the removal of the EBacc as a measure, the P8 reform is highly likely to involve changes to the ‘EBacc bucket’ to reflect the new priority of a broader curriculum. However, the exact mechanism—such as how many non-EBacc subjects will be allowed to count or whether the points structure will change—has not yet been finalised by the DfE.

The government is aiming to publish the final revised National Curriculum, including the full details of these assessment changes, by Spring 2027

GCSE Triple Science Entitlement

The government has confirmed it will introduce a statutory entitlement for all GCSE pupils to be able to study Triple Science (separate GCSEs in Biology, Chemistry, and Physics).

Goal: The primary aim is to address the socioeconomic gap in Triple Science uptake, ensuring that access to this STEM pathway is not curtailed by a student’s background or the school they attend. Currently, a significantly lower proportion of disadvantaged pupils take Triple Science.

Mechanism (Access, Not Compulsion): The reform is about access, not mandatory uptake. The change requires all secondary schools to offer the three separate science GCSEs as standard, meaning every child will have the option to choose them. This is a significant change, as many schools currently only offer ‘Combined Science’ (a double GCSE).

Implementation: The Department for Education (DfE) has stated that schools will be expected to work towards offering Triple Science as standard, ahead of the full statutory entitlement. This staggered approach acknowledges the practical challenge of recruiting or retraining specialist science teachers—a key concern raised by school leaders.

So what now?

Elevate Intentionality: Strategic Focus on the New Curriculum

The new curriculum, slated for first teaching in September 2028, requires immediate, high-level planning. Intentionality means moving beyond mere compliance to strategic integration.

• Audit for New Literacies: Do not wait until 2028. Elevate intentionality by immediately mapping where financial literacy and digital/AI misinformation can be woven into existing subjects (Maths, Computing, Citizenship, PSHE). Design a whole-school strategy now, rather than rushing a few isolated lessons later.

• Design for Breadth (Post-EBacc): The scrapping of the EBacc and the reform of Progress 8 creates an opportunity. Intentionally design your Key Stage 4 (GCSE) curriculum to reflect true value, not just accountability measures. Ensure your staffing and options structure genuinely promote uptake in Arts, Music, and Languages based on student interest and economic opportunity, not just league table mechanics.

• Plan the Three Sciences Pathway: The commitment to ensuring all students can take three science GCSEs as standard is a significant logistical change. Be intentional about resource allocation, laboratory time, and science staffing needs, particularly for students who might have previously been guided towards Combined Science.

Combat Complacency: Accountability and Attainment Gaps

Complacency—particularly around established attainment patterns—is a risk during any transition. Leaders must actively target areas of underperformance.

• Tackle Year 8 Head-On: The introduction of the statutory Year 8 reading test is a direct government action to combat complacency regarding secondary-level literacy. School leaders must treat the results of this test as a major diagnostic tool, not just an assessment.

• Advice: Develop rapid intervention programs for pupils who do not meet the expected standard, using the data to address the “problem pupils experience during the first years of secondary school”—a known factor in widening attainment gaps.

• Scrutinise Accountability Metrics: Do not assume the goalposts are static. The DfE has promised to “reform” Progress 8 and scrap the EBacc.

• Advice: Combat complacency by forming a small working group to track DfE announcements on the new P8 methodology. Ensure subject leaders understand that the value of their subject (e.g., Arts) is now guaranteed to be viewed more equitably in the new system.

Champion Growth: People, Skills, and Curriculum

Growth is not just about student attainment; it’s about the professional development required to teach a “cutting-edge” curriculum.

• Invest in Digital CPD: To teach students how to spot AI-generated content and misinformation, staff themselves must be experts. Champion growth by commissioning immediate, practical CPD for all teachers on digital literacy and the responsible use of AI in learning and assessment.

• Prioritise Oracy and Communication: The push for oracy to have the same status as reading and writing is a profound call for growth in classroom practice.

• Advice: Embed explicit instruction in speaking, listening, and debate across all subjects. This is not just an English department initiative; it’s a whole-school effort to build the communication skills valued by employers and university pathways.

• Model Reflective Practice: Use the new curriculum as a moment for all departments to ask: “How can we better represent diversity and global contributions in our subject content, while maintaining our core foundational knowledge?”

Inspire Deeper Connections: Community and Opportunity

The reforms emphasize moving beyond the exam hall to prepare children for society and the world of work. Inspiring deeper connections is essential to this mission.

• Integrate Enrichment and Community: The new enrichment benchmarks on civic engagement, life skills, and arts are now part of the accountability framework.

• Advice: Inspire deeper connections by formally partnering with local businesses, civic groups, and arts organisations to deliver these benchmarks. Frame lessons on budgeting and mortgages not as abstract concepts, but as direct connections to financial wellbeing in their community.

• Connect Post-16 Pathways: Ensure the proposed exploration of a post-16 qualification in data science and AI is discussed early with your feeder colleges and sixth-form providers.

• Advice: This fosters a deeper connection between your school’s curriculum and the high-value technical and academic pathways your students will progress to.

By using this framework, school leaders can view the curriculum review not as a burden of change, but as a clear mandate to create a relevant, robust, and modern education system for their students.

It just got a little more interesting, didn’t it?

Good luck and I hope this is of some use to you and what you do next.

Tagged , , , , , ,
29/10/2025
1 Comment
Uncategorized

The Pit and the Pendulum:  Turning Self-Awareness into Growth

Once upon a midnight dreary, while I pondered, weak and weary…

I sometimes have the huge capacity to get in my own way; we all have the capacity for self-sabotage; by using the mantra, the commitment to elevate intentionality, combat complacency, champion growth, and inspire deeper connections, I might have a way forward for me and possibly for you. Who knows?

The first half-term ended with some health matters, which was not the glorious conclusion that I was planning. Being open with you as well, it really played to my own anxiety of not being there at the point where everyone needs the help, or at least, as many boots on the ground, as possible. Guilt being the cement boots that drag us all down to the river bed.

Time away has allowed me to reflect; reflection creates a plan and this is what I feel that I have assessed about myself as a leader and how I will attempt to do better.

1. Running over people’s input because I’ve already decided the answer

The Problem: I ask for opinions constantly. In the main, I do it to challenge leaders at all levels about assumptions and hope it strengthens how they may well approach the situation. In my mind, it is about owning the issue, whatever it may be, and not having me or another ‘sage like’ leader deciding they don’t necessarily believe in and then have someone else to blame if things don’t go according to plan. I do recognise that sometimes I’m waiting for someone to validate my conclusions. I mentally catalogue why differing perspectives are “wrong” and explain why my logic is better. What I don’t want is any member of my team to stop bringing ideas.

The Action I Need to Take (Elevate Intentionality / Combat Complacency):

  • What specific steps will I take to truly listen before responding?
    • I will adopt the “2-second rule”: After someone finishes speaking, I will wait a full two seconds before I open my mouth. This prevents me from forming my rebuttal while they are still talking.
    • I will make the practice of restating: “So, what I hear you saying is [summarise their point]. Did I get that right?” before sharing my own perspective.
  • How will I track my own speaking time vs. listening time in the next meeting?
    • I will use a simple tally sheet or an app on my phone to track how many times I interrupt or dominate the discussion (aiming for less than 25% of the total time). I will reflect, learn and hopefully grow.

2. Treating emotions like malfunctions that slow down progress

The Problem: If someone is upset, sometimes my instinct is to use logic to explain why their feelings are based on a misunderstanding of the facts. Dismissing how people feel teaches my team that I don’t care about the human cost of my decisions. They may well call my “objectivity” cold. They might not tell me to my face, possibly because I will use logic to tell them they are wrong. No-one wants Spock when the dog has passed away.

The Action I Need to Take (Inspire Deeper Connections):

  • Instead of explaining, what is one validating phrase I can use next time someone shares a tough emotion?
    • “That sounds incredibly frustrating, and I can see why you feel that way. Thank you for bringing the human context into this.” (This prioritises empathy before problem-solving.)
  • How will I explicitly factor in the human impact of my next major decision?
    • I will add a mandatory final bullet point to my decision-making checklist: People Impact & Mitigation. I will list who will be most affected by the change and what resources (time, emotional support, training) I will dedicate to helping them adapt.

3. Confusing brutal honesty with leadership courage

The Problem: I pride myself on “telling people exactly what they need to hear,” but my directness can land like contempt. When I point out a mistake, I’m diminishing them instead of helping them improve. The cost of my efficiency is their confidence. My efficiency is long established; their professional growth must be paramount.

The Action I Need to Take (Champion Growth):

  • How can I reframe critical feedback to focus on the desired future state (growth) instead of the past mistake?
    • I will shift the language from: “The report was messy and late,” to: “I have high expectations for you. For our next deliverable, let’s focus specifically on a structure that allows for X impact and ensures we hit the deadline. What support do you need to achieve that?”
  • Who can I ask for feedback on the tone I use during these conversations?
    • I will ask my direct supervisor or a peer mentor to role-play a difficult coaching conversation with me, specifically asking them to critique my body language and vocal tone (not just my words). I spent 5 years as Head of Drama in the dim and distance; I do this so often, but I feel not as often as I should. The strike through is for anyone who might use this advice to grow themselves.

4. Moving so fast through my own certainty that I create silent resistance

The Problem: I see the path clearly and execute quickly. Anyone who needs more explanation feels like dead weight. Speed without alignment is just me charging ahead while my teams drag their feet. They are unconvinced, but they’ve learned questioning me is pointless.

The Action I Need to Take (Elevate Intentionality / Combat Complacency):

  • What is the critical point in the next project where I need to pause specifically for an alignment check?
    • Immediately after the kick off of a meeting and before the team begins executing tasks. I will schedule a separate, 30-minute “Challenge Session” focused only on identifying risks.
  • What are two specific questions I can ask to surface quiet concerns without inviting a debate?
    • “If this project failed, what would be the number one reason, and who here quietly suspects it?” Failure criteria is something I have tried before, and ironically, failed in establishing; I keep coming back to it, because I think it can work. Ask yourself, what is the ‘minimum failure cost’ of this project?
    • “If you had to put a bet on a hidden obstacle, where would you place your money?”

5. Doubling down on bad decisions because admitting mistakes feels like losing

The Problem: I have strong convictions, and changing my mind can feel like weakness. My refusal to acknowledge mistakes has the capacity to destroy my credibility.

The Action I Need to Take (Champion Growth / Inspire Deeper Connections):

  • What is one recent failure I can now openly own with my team this week?
    • I will choose a small, low-stakes decision from the last quarter where I stubbornly proceeded despite early warning signs. In our next meeting, I will say: “I want to circle back to [Specific Project]. I overlooked [Specific Data Point] because I was too committed to my initial idea. I was wrong, and I apologise. The takeaway for all of us is to always prioritise evidence over conviction.”
  • How can I make “What did we learn?” the first question in our next project retrospective, rather than “What went wrong?”
    • I will institute a “Lessons Learned Log” where, instead of assigning blame, every item must be formatted as: “As a result of X, we now understand Y.” I will personally contribute the first entry to model the behaviour.

Quoth The Raven Leader:

As you emerge from the terrible “pit” of self-doubt and anxious isolation, having survived the terrifying “pendulum” of your past habits, remember this truth: The most chilling horror is not the fear of the unknown, but the terror of the unexamined self.

You have peered into the abyss and catalogued the demons that held you captive—the instinct to logically dismiss emotion, the pride of brutal honesty, and the refusal to admit a mistake. By charting your path with the clear intentionality of the “2-second rule”, the empathy of “People Impact & Mitigation”, and the courage to say, “I was wrong, and I apologise”, you have seized control of the narrative.

Let the final dread be of the leader you might have been—and embrace the brighter, more connected leadership you are now determined to forge. Nevermore shall you allow the old patterns to return.

Happy Halloween.

Tagged , , , , , , ,
17/10/2025
Leave a comment
Uncategorized

Read Between the Lines: The Real Stakes of the Year 8 Reading Test

This article aims to provide a strategic analysis of the proposed Year 8 reading test in England, examining its stated purpose, underlying rationale, design features, and potential risks. While the test is presented as a diagnostic tool to identify literacy gaps and support classroom planning, concerns persist about its use as an accountability measure.

Drawing comparisons with the Welsh model and highlighting implications for schools, teachers, and students, the article offers practical recommendations for implementation, risk mitigation, and fostering a positive reading culture.

It aims to support school leaders in navigating the policy landscape with clarity and purpose. It was originally written on the back of the initial announcement about these coming into play on Monday 29th September 2025 and was updated in light of the Secretary of State’s statement on Friday 17th October 2025.

In many respects, I am glad I sat on it while developments took hold. What I offer here are my views, but I would also like to make sure that the reader knows is that context is key. What I would like to see in my own school may well vary both externally and internally. These are not my final thoughts; these are my opening gambits.

The analysis of the proposed Year 8 reading test in England can be structured into four strategic themes, covering the policy’s aims, the evidence supporting it, its intended practical benefits, and the significant risks it carries.

Key Points by Theme

1. Elevate Intentionality: Purpose and Accountability

  • Prohibit the publication of school-by-school results and to bar Ofsted from using the specific test scores as definitive criteria in inspection judgment
  • Policy aims to be diagnostic, but functions as an accountability tool.
  • Accountability creep likely due to data sharing with DfE and Ofsted.
  • Contrast with Welsh model, which prohibits accountability use.

2. Combat Complacency: Rationale and Target Groups

  • Addresses “wasted years” between KS2 and KS4.
  • Reading seen as gateway to curriculum.
  • Targets white working-class underachievement.

3. Champion Growth: Design and Instructional Utility

  • Likely computer-adaptive for accurate, actionable results.
  • Fills data void since Year 9 SATs ended in 2008.
  • Requires ring-fenced CPD investment for teachers.

4. Inspire Deeper Connections: Mitigating Systemic Risk

  • Risks: curriculum narrowing, teaching to the test, teacher stress, student disengagement.
  • Safeguard: legal firewalls to prevent accountability misuse

1. Elevate Intentionality: Purpose and Accountability

This theme explores the core conflict between the government’s stated purpose for the test and its expected real-world function as an accountability tool.

  • Policy Intent vs. Reality: The explicit, stated goal of the test is diagnostic—to efficiently identify specific literacy gaps in 13-year-olds and directly inform teachers’ planning. However, its functional purpose is widely expected to be as an accountability mechanism.
  • Accountability Creep: The crucial decision to share the standardised test data with the Department for Education (DfE) and Ofsted is seen by professional bodies as rendering initial low-stakes assurances “effectively meaningless”. Consequently, school leaders are expected to pre-emptively treat the assessment as high stakes due to the inherent fear of negative inspection outcomes.
  • The Structural Conflict: This approach contrasts sharply with the Welsh model, where mandatory Personalised Assessments (PAs) are explicitly mandated not to be used for school performance or accountability. The English policy instead prioritises centralised data oversight to compel institutional compliance.

2. Combat Complacency: Rationale and Target Groups

This theme focuses on the evidence base and the structural failings in the education system that the new test is designed to rectify.

•     Addressing the “Wasted Years”: The test is a direct response to the lack of centralised accountability between Key Stage 2 (KS2) and Key Stage 4 (KS4), which has historically contributed to a reading “slump” after pupils leave primary school. The government views this as a transition failure, believing secondary schools become “less enthusiastic” about improving struggling readers.

•     Literacy as a Gateway: The DfE frames robust reading skills as the “gateway to the entire curriculum”, arguing that weak literacy fundamentally limits a student’s ability to access all subject-specific content.

•     Targeting Attainment Gaps: A primary social justice imperative behind the policy is to tackle persistent under-achievement in reading among white working-class children. By mandating a check at Year 8, the policy aims to force systematic intervention before high stakes GCSE courses begin.

3. Champion Growth: Design and Instructional Utility

This theme highlights the assessment’s technical design and the necessary steps required to ensure it supports actual student progression in the classroom.

•     Diagnostic Design: The assessment is anticipated to use a computer-adaptive format. This design ensures the rapid delivery of accurate growth scores and actionable results, allowing instructional planning to be prioritised.

•     Filling the Data Void: The test aims to establish a crucial national baseline and a consistent metric of literacy standards at the midpoint of KS3, a metric that has been absent since the Year 9 SATs were abolished in 2008.

•     Policy Recommendation: For the test to champion genuine growth, the DfE should couple the assessment mandate with ring-fenced investment in high-quality Continuous Professional Development (CPD) for secondary teachers. The test’s value must be felt primarily at the classroom level, not simply for governmental data collection.

4. Inspire Deeper Connections: Mitigating Systemic Risk

This theme outlines the major risks identified by stakeholders and proposes a necessary safeguard to protect the broader educational environment.

•     Risk of Narrowing: Stakeholders warn that the centralised pressure will inevitably lead to a narrowing of the KS3 curriculum —or as we understand it, “teaching to the test”. This is argued to undermine the need for a “broad and balanced curriculum taught by teachers who are trusted”.

•     Undermining Professionalism: The introduction of another national test implicitly suggests that existing localised professional judgment and formative assessments are insufficient, thus adding significant stress and pressure to teachers and staff.

•     Student Engagement: There is a fear that introducing another high-stakes test risks exacerbating disengagement and making the assessment counterproductive, especially since pupils’ enjoyment of reading has already fallen to its lowest level in two decades.

•     The Crucial Safeguard: To mitigate these systemic risks, the primary recommendation is to Mandate Legal Firewalls Against Accountability Creep. This requires clear, statutory legislation to explicitly prohibit the publication of school-by-school results and to bar Ofsted from using the specific test scores as definitive criteria in inspection judgments.

Recommendations for Our Academy

(edited to add: it is all about context…)

The proposed test must be viewed as an opportunity for targeted intervention rather than solely a compliance exercise, especially in a context where persistent attainment gaps are critical.

1. Strategic Policy and Purpose (Managing Accountability Creep)

We must establish a clear internal firewall to shield instructional practice from external pressure.

•     Prioritise Diagnostic Use: Explicitly treat the Year 8 test internally as a diagnostic tool—its stated purpose —rather than a high-stakes accountability check. Use the resulting data to efficiently identify literacy gaps and inform instructional planning for individual students.

•     Decouple from Staff Performance: Provide assurances to staff that the test data (shared with the DfE and Ofsted) will not be used as a definitive criterion for internal teacher or departmental performance judgments. This is crucial to prevent the test from adding “stress and pressure” to teachers and to encourage trust in existing professional judgment.

•     Lobby for the “Crucial Safeguard”: Actively support calls from professional bodies to Mandate Legal Firewalls Against Accountability Creep. This includes advocating for legislation to prohibit the publication of school-by-school results.

2. Instructional Implementation (Combating Complacency)

The school should leverage the test’s format to address the “reading slump” prevalent in Key Stage 3 (KS3).

•     Target the “Wasted Years”: Initiate or reinforce a systematic, whole-school literacy strategy across Years 7 and 8 to actively combat the perceived lack of centralised accountability after primary school. This is the direct structural problem the government aims to rectify.

•     Utilise Adaptive Data: Fully exploit the computer-adaptive format of the assessment. Use the rapid delivery of accurate growth scores and actionable results to drive specific, small-group intervention, particularly for students identified as falling behind.

•     Literacy as a Gateway: Train staff across all subjects (not just English) to understand their role in reading instruction. Literacy is the “gateway to the entire curriculum”, and intervention must ensure students can access the subject-specific content in Science, History, and Maths.

•     Invest in CPD: Dedicate funds to ring-fenced investment in high-quality Continuous Professional Development (CPD) focused on effective secondary literacy instruction and how to interpret and act on adaptive assessment data.

3. Student Engagement and Risk Mitigation

Given that student enjoyment of reading has fallen to its lowest level in two decades, the school must protect the curriculum from the worst effects of testing.

•     Protect the Broad Curriculum: Actively resist any pressure to allow the test to lead to a narrowing of the KS3 curriculum—the phenomenon known as “teaching to the test”. The school should commit to maintaining a “broad and balanced curriculum”.

•     Counter Disengagement: Recognise the risk that introducing another high-stakes test risks exacerbating student disengagement. Implement or expand non-assessed reading-for-pleasure initiatives, such as silent reading time, library access, and book clubs, to foster a positive reading culture separate from assessment pressure.

•     Focus on Attainment Gaps: Directly address the social justice imperative of the policy: tackling persistent under-achievement in reading among specific groups, such as white working-class children, who may be disproportionately represented in the inner-city school’s cohort

Edited to add:

The DfE statement on Friday 17th October from the secretary of state aligns with and directly addresses several key themes and rationales detailed in this analysis of the proposed Year 8 reading test, while also using language that attempts to mitigate the risks identified. I am not claiming foresight or wisdom, but I do wonder whether Bridgit has been reading over my shoulder…

Areas of Alignment and Direct Support:

•     Policy Intent (Diagnostic Use): The statement explicitly emphasises the test’s diagnostic purpose. It stresses that the assessment is intended to “give you the tools and data you need to identify where children need additional help” and provide “invaluable data for schools – giving you insights to ensure no child needing additional support slips through the cracks.”

•     Addressing the “Wasted Years”: The statement addresses the structural failure identified in the original article by mentioning the “gap where too many children slip further behind” between the “crucial staging posts at the end of year 6 and year 11”. This is the government’s direct response to the “lack of centralised accountability between Key Stage 2 (KS2) and Key Stage 4 (KS4)

•     Literacy as a Gateway: The statement frames the policy with the rationale that a child “must first be able to read” before they can “engage in everything their school offers,” which aligns with the DfE’s framing of robust reading skills as the “gateway to the entire curriculum”

•     Targeting Attainment Gaps: The concern about “disadvantaged children” being less able to read is mentioned in the statement, echoing the original articles theme that the policy has a “social justice imperative” to tackle persistent under-achievement

Areas of Contrast and Risk Mitigation:

•     Accountability vs. Low-Stakes: The government’s statement repeatedly attempts to reassure teachers that the test is not an accountability measure, saying, “it is not about putting you… under the microscope” and is “without being onerous or adding unnecessary pressure onto pupils.” This is a direct attempt to pre-empt and mitigate the major systemic risk identified in the document: Accountability Creep

The original article however, warns that this low-stakes assurance is “effectively meaningless” because sharing standardised data with the DfE and Ofsted means school leaders are expected to pre-emptively treat the assessment as high stakes

•     Teacher Stress and Professionalism: The statement aims to counter the risk of “Undermining Professionalism” and “teacher stress” by saying, “I know your expertise will help them feel confident,” and “Your expertise and dedication are among our education system’s greatest strengths.” The original article warns that introducing another national test implicitly suggests that existing professional judgment is “insufficient”.

So, let us revisit in the coming weeks. Today saw the first official statement; tomorrow may show us the dull or bright reality.

Tagged , , ,
16/10/2025
1 Comment
Uncategorized

Inspiring Deeper Connections: The True Test of Senior Leadership

Approaching October half term is always an important time for our senior leaders to focus on fixing behaviour. The new intake, hormonal battles and plans in the summer that seemed so sweet are now in action as we descend into darkness. The challenge is joining up two big, different ideas. To get it right, they need to Elevate Intentionality, fight against being settled (Combating Complacency), keep pushing people to improve (Championing Growth), and Inspire Deeper Connections across the school team.

Inspiring Deeper Connections: Agency Versus Authority

The biggest challenge for our senior school leaders is figuring out how to Inspire Deeper Connections between two very different plans that represent two different types of leadership. On one side, we have the vital, detailed work—the kind often done by operational leaders—of making sure all our rules and systems (like the detailed checklist offered for children’s files and using data analysis) are working perfectly. This work puts children and colleague agency first.

On the other side is the big, expensive new idea: the Behaviour Hub and the focus on detentions as a key area of development. This model risks being seen as the traditional, middle-aged approach of command-and-control authority.

Leaders must join these two ideas together. If they don’t, the simple but important fixes—the little things that empower staff—will get ignored because everyone will be focused on the high-profile, costly project, letting authority overshadow agency. This is about making sure everyone is working on the same team, with a clear link between how we manage small problems and how we handle big ones.

Elevating Intentionality: Justifying the £250,000 Crossroads

Great school leadership starts with Elevating Intentionality—meaning leaders must think very carefully and on purpose about where every penny goes. The desire to fix things ourselves shows a real impetus to focus on strong internal processes.

But then there’s the Behaviour Hub, which is a special, full-day provision for students, mainly Years 7 and 8. It is set to cost about £250,000 every single year to run. This is a massive amount of money. Leaders need to be very intentional when they look closely at this cost and ask: Will spending all this money just reinforce a powerful, male-coded disciplinary structure, making us complacent about the vital work of operational leadership?

Elevating Intentionality means making sure that the resources are shared; fixing the simple things—the checks, balances, and children’s trails. Leaders must prove that the Hub is truly needed because the system-level fixes alone weren’t enough, not just because the powerful intervention model is easier to demonstrate action is being taken.

Championing Growth by Combating Complacency

The way we decide to handle poor behaviour shows if we truly want to Champion Growth. The plan to focus heavily on detentions as a key area of development is simple to enforce. But this easy punishment route, often seen as a quick fix from the top, risks making staff Complacent because it stops them from asking the challenging question: why did the student behave that way?

The Behaviour Hub suggests a better way to Champion Growth. It requires reflective practice, uses behaviour passports and praise on exit, and must be curriculum aligned. This approach, focused on teaching and understanding, sees poor behaviour as a chance to teach something new. Leaders must Champion Growth by making sure this reflective attitude, which values collaboration over consequence, is used by all teachers, not just the Hub staff. They must use the data driven approach to selection from the Hub to help the whole school learn how to better teach students self-control, which is a better goal than just giving out a detention. Behaviour is a curriculum model. Would not resources be better used to adapt and develop the curriculum in such a way that enhances the opportunities for children to learn and develop rather than knit pom-poms and bake cakes? Is this allowing our children to be able to adapt and thrive?

What Happens Next? The Unresolved Questions

These two sets of ideas—the detailed rule-making and the expensive new room—are both important. But the biggest challenge is making sure they work together. As senior leaders look at this plan, they need to be honest and Elevate Intentionality to solve the following problems:

  • Why is the high-cost, high-control Hub model being pushed forward so quickly? Does it risk marginalising the less visible, but vital, work of developing internal processes that empower colleagues agency?
  • How can leaders Inspire Deeper Connections so that the different ideas—like the collaborative reflective practice in the Hub and the strict use of SLT detentions—actually make sense together without one feeling like a defeat for the other?
  • Are we simply Combating Complacency by spending a massive £250,000 on a new room, or are we truly trying to Champion Growth across the entire school with our daily actions and our respect for different styles of leadership?
  • Will the pressure to get the new Hub up and running cause the equally vital work of systemic reform to be tabled for wider discussion and just forgotten about later, thus quashing the agency-focused approach?

The systematic, curriculum approach, one that spreads responsibility, offers potency to all colleagues and creating a dynamic for children in which to develop and grow is the actual champion. Better to tackle these matters collectively than to shift towards an out of sight, out of mind model. There’s a reason that the dunces cap and standing in the corner facing the wall went the way of the cane.

09/10/2025
1 Comment
Uncategorized

The Moral Imperative: Cultivating Authentic Professional Growth in Teaching

I know I have been quiet. It means I have been noisy elsewhere. For me, this blog is a therapy; an expression of the soul of what I am doing. For those that read this and know me, this is a peek behind the curtain. For everyone else, I hope that this might offer an inspiration.

Professional growth must not be a managerial, tick box exercise. We are teachers; we are in a graduate profession. We must feed and grow ourselves to achieve something.

Professional growth in education is more than a required administrative process; it is, fundamentally, a commitment to moral purpose. For teachers, authentic development is the engine that drives student success and shapes the next generation. This journey requires intentionality, a refusal to stand still, a dedication to supporting colleagues, and a relentless focus on the human connections that underpin great teaching.

The Foundation of Authenticity

Authentic professional growth begins with deep reflection. It is the starting point of a meaningful, impactful conversation with a coach, transforming an administrative task into a deeply personal framework. Teachers are encouraged to view their development not as a mere checklist, but as an opportunity to align their individual ambitions with their professional journey. This requires honesty about practice, a willingness to receive peer feedback, and a commitment to modelling high standards for both students and colleagues alike. This developmental process is deliberately designed to help colleagues align their current role and goals with potential career progression, identifying the stepping stones toward roles like a Middle Leader or a Trust Development Team member; in short, influence the whole, not just the corner you are in.

Elevating Intention and Combating Complacency

A growth plan achieves its potential when it blends individual ambition with collective purpose. Every professional goal should directly connect to the school’s or Trust’s strategic mission, such as creating a community of empowered citizens. For teachers, this means constantly articulating and evidencing curriculum intent, implementation, and impact. This proactive approach actively combats complacency by upholding the notion that “It’s not enough to beat the odds, we must change the odds.” Intention is refined by applying high-level standards to daily practice; for example, Upper Pay Scale (UPS) Teachers are expected to actively lead and mentor colleagues, championing innovation and contributing to whole-school improvement. Even leadership targets are framed as leading initiatives that promote key qualities like sustainability or citizenship, ensuring personal growth directly serves the wider educational vision. This commitment to continuous improvement is further evidenced by using data-informed self-evaluation—turning academic data into actionable insights to refine teaching—and engaging in curriculum deep dives to ensure professional mastery and clear articulation of curriculum impact.

Championing Growth and Inspiring Deeper Connections

Sustained growth is institutionalised through supportive structures, promoting a culture where experience is shared and expertise is cultivated. Growth is championed by implementing formal structures, such as designing and leading a coaching programme for middle leaders, and actively identifying and mentoring future UPS candidates. Furthermore, UPS teachers are explicitly tasked with leading Continuous Professional Development, coaching colleagues, and setting the tone for a culture of high expectations and equity. This is a critical move from simply growing to generating growth in others. Professional growth is inherently a collaborative endeavour, which supports the wider goal of fostering citizens with agency by prioritising inter-staff collaboration. Teachers are expected to show unity, co-plan, and support faculty-wide standardisation by sharing good practice and participating in marking moderation for professional development. Colleagues are also expected to Live the Culture and Lead the Culture by taking initiative in shaping routines and upholding professional standards, as outlined in the principles of ‘The Mirror’. Finally, inspiring deeper connections means that targets must extend beyond the classroom into the real world, including developing partnerships with local businesses to enhance careers education and leading cross-curricular projects that promote global citizenship, while also fostering positive relationships with students and encouraging positive parental engagement.

Uploads of documents used over the past few days will be available to download.

I hope to not be silent for a few weeks, but we are in the midst of the longest term and the hardest work. Authenticity occasionally means going the extra mile and not seeking the immediate rewards.

Tagged , , ,
17/09/2025
Leave a comment
Uncategorized

The UK’s School Funding Crisis: A Call to Action: The “Hit Rock Bottom” Reality

I have never been a fan of donning the hi-vis. Admittedly, part of it is a matter of vanity; a dislike for man-made fibres and my compulsion to remind colleagues and others that teaching is a graduate profession and not a glorified babysitting service. However, from a safeguarding point of view, it makes perfect sense. Balance this against that across the UK, senior leaders are increasingly taking on responsibilities that were once handled by support staff, such as acting as caretakers or even lollipop people makes you consider how funding for education really has hit rock bottom.

This isn’t just an anecdote; it’s a symptom of a system where budgets are so stretched that schools are making what they call “impossible choices.” For example, some schools have had to cut back on support staff and services like language and mental health support, relying on parent-teacher associations for basic equipment like reading books and playground equipment.

The National Education Union (NEU) and the National Association of Head Teachers (NAHT) have stated this is what their members are saying where they are. They report that school staff are overstretched, morale is low, and school buildings are falling into disrepair. This is leading to larger class sizes, which are now among the highest in Europe.

The core of the problem lies in “real-terms cuts.” This means that while some government funding for schools may have increased in cash terms, it has not kept pace with inflation and the rising costs schools face.

Research by the “Stop School Cuts” Coalition, which includes major education unions, found that 74% of schools in England have less funding in real terms than they did in 2010. This figure represents 14,112 schools that cannot afford the same staffing and resources they could 15 years ago. The research also revealed that over 1,000 schools have suffered cumulative real-terms cuts exceeding £1 million each.

The coalition calculates that core funding for mainstream schools per pupil fell by a further £127 in 2024/25, leaving schools with £558 less per pupil compared to 2010-11 in real terms.

The consequences of these funding cuts go far beyond a senior leaders’ job description. They are having a direct and negative impact on the quality of education:

Staffing Crisis: The crisis is a major driver of the recruitment and retention crisis in education. The value of teacher and school leader pay has been cut by around a fifth since 2010. This, combined with high workload and burnout, leads to a significant number of teachers leaving the profession within their first few years.

Reduced Curriculum: As schools are forced to make savings, subjects like arts, music, and sports are being lost, narrowing the educational opportunities available to children.

SEND Provision: The lack of funding is a major contributor to the crisis in special educational needs and disabilities provision. Many local authorities are spending more on SEND than they receive from the government, and teachers report a lack of confidence that a referral for a special needs assessment will result in a child getting the help they need.

Crumbling Infrastructure: Capital spending on school buildings has also seen a significant real-terms decline since 2010, leading to a situation where schools are struggling to maintain and repair their buildings.

In a realm that I am not expert in, outside of my experiences as an authentic, senior leader, here is my view on what this or any government need to implement when it comes to funding for schools.

Elevate Intentionality

The UK’s educational funding crisis is a complex issue requiring a strategic, intentional approach. Rather than relying on temporary solutions or reactive measures, the government must adopt a long-term, cross-departmental strategy to ensure every child has access to quality education. This means a shift from ad hoc funding injections to a sustainable, ring-fenced budget for schools that accounts for inflation and rising costs. We need to prioritise spending on what truly matters: a well-supported teaching workforce, up-to-date resources, and safe, well-maintained school buildings. An intentional approach also means being transparent with the public about where funding is going and the impact it’s having, building trust and accountability into the system. It’s about designing a system that works for all students, not just some. If the next initiative from the DfE is led by a sporting hero or D list celebrity, we know we are in real trouble. We need something sustainable.

Combat Complacency

For too long, the UK’s education system has operated under a veil of complacency, where the growing crisis has been met with insufficient action. The anecdotal evidence—headteachers taking on caretaker duties, crumbling school buildings, and teachers leaving the profession in droves—is not just a warning sign; it’s a call to action. We must reject the notion that “good enough” is an acceptable standard for our children’s future. The government must acknowledge the severity of the real-terms cuts to school budgets since 2010 and the devastating impact this has had on staffing, curriculum, and infrastructure. This requires an honest, open dialogue with unions, teachers, and parents to develop and implement effective solutions, moving beyond rhetoric and into decisive policy changes. This needs to be a proper dialogue and not one with apocryphal claims that every teacher in the land has agreed to ideas. In short, not a new, OFSTED framework re-launch.

Champion Growth

A thriving education system is the bedrock of a prosperous society. To champion growth, we must invest in the future by properly funding schools and the educators within them. This means addressing the recruitment and retention crisis by offering competitive pay and manageable workloads that reflect the value of the teaching profession. We also need to reverse the narrowing of the curriculum by ensuring schools have the resources to offer a rich and varied education in subjects like arts, music, and physical education. Furthermore, championing growth means fully funding and reforming the Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND) provision, ensuring that every child, regardless of their needs, receives the support they require to flourish. By investing in our schools, we are investing in the economic and social potential of the next generation. And hopefully generations to come.

Inspire Deeper Connections

The funding crisis has highlighted a disconnect between policy and practice, between government promises and the reality on the ground. To solve this, we must inspire deeper connections across the education ecosystem. This means fostering stronger partnerships between schools, local authorities, and communities. For instance, creating more accessible and efficient channels for communication and collaboration can ensure that funding decisions are made with the direct input of those on the front lines. Additionally, it means rebuilding the relationship between the government and teaching unions, moving from adversarial posturing to collaborative problem-solving. By uniting all stakeholders—teachers, parents, unions, and policymakers—we can work together to build a shared vision for an education system that is not only well-funded but also equitable, innovative, and a source of national pride.

Tagged , , , , , , , ,
← Older posts