Workload Review Groups: Recommendations and next steps for school leaders The Workload Challenge launched by the then Secretary of State in 2014, received responses from over 10,000 teachers who identified three areas as major causes of unnecessary teacher workload: marking, lesson planning, and data management. In July 2015, three review groups were set up, commissioned by the DfE, to consider how to alleviate workload pressures on teachers and school leaders in relation to these areas, and each group produced a report. The reports consider what is wrong with the current situation and offer recommendations to reduce workload which are aimed at different groups throughout the education system. School leaders need to consider the recommendations in the reports and work with their staff and governors to review current policies and practices in light of these. Removing unnecessary workload allows teachers and school leaders to spend their time more effectively in supporting learning outcomes for their students, as well as helping them to achieve a proper work-life balance. Working more hours does not equate to working more effectively and the development of a better culture in schools needs to be encouraged. This guidance summarises the recommendations of each of the workload challenge groups for school leaders, provides some questions to support reflection on current practice and offers practical strategies which school leaders might employ to implement changes. Marking Policy Review Group This group looked at the workload implications of certain practices, with a specific focus on deep marking and considered whether guidance on effective practice and/or case studies about what works in schools might be necessary. They developed a set of principles for marking in schools and made recommendations about marking policies and practice. You can view the full report here. The group concluded that three principles underpin effective marking: it should be meaningful, manageable and motivating.
Meaningful: marking varies by age group, subject, and what works best for the pupil and teacher in relation to any particular piece of work. Teachers are encouraged to adjust their approach as necessary and trusted to incorporate the outcomes into subsequent planning and teaching. Manageable: marking practice is proportionate and considers the frequency and complexity of written feedback, as well as the cost and time-effectiveness of marking in relation to the overall workload of teachers. This is written into any assessment policy. Motivating: Marking should help to motivate pupils to progress. This does not mean always writing in-depth comments or being universally positive: sometimes short, challenging comments or oral feedback are more effective. If the teacher is doing more work than their pupils, this can become a disincentive for pupils to accept challenges and take responsibility for improving their work. The report makes the following recommendations for school leaders: Use the three principles set out above to review the school s marking practice as part of an overall and proportionate assessment policy in partnership with their teachers and governors. Evaluate the time implications of any whole school marking and assessment policy for all teachers to ensure that the school policy does not make unreasonable demands on any particular members of staff. In partnership with their teachers and governing boards, monitor their marking practice as part of their regular monitoring cycle and evaluate its effectiveness on pupil progress. Challenge emerging fads that indirectly impose excessive marking practices on schools. When reflecting on these in light of your school context, it may be useful to consider the following: Ensure marking is part of your assessment policy rather than a standalone policy. Refer to feedback in your assessment policy, with marking one part of this but giving weight to a range of feedback including verbal. Involve all staff in a review of current assessment policy. Listen to your staff about what your current policy on assessment means in practice. Organise small scale trials of proposed changes and gain feedback from staff, pupils and parents before implementing them across the school. Be wary of setting an expectation as to the frequency of marking expected. If this is essential, be realistic about expectations. Allow appropriate variations of the policy to reflect the age of the pupils or the subject being taught. Equip staff with the tools to use a variety of types of feedback to pupils.
Question the implementation of practices which require teachers to provide evidence of feedback, for example, verbal feedback stamps. Provide CPD to staff on how to give high quality and impactful verbal feedback. Encourage staff to feedback verbally on common errors and misconceptions to the whole class or a group of pupils, avoiding repetitive marking. Introduce plans to improve the quality of peer and self-marking. Encourage staff or departments to develop innovative ways to save time when giving written feedback. For example, the use of marking codes and stickers can be effective for pupils and assist in managing workload for staff. Focus monitoring of the policy on consistency of its application, the quality of the feedback given (in all its forms) and the impact it has on pupil learning and progress. Communicate any changes to marking practice and assessment policy clearly to parents. Explain why it has changed and what the change will look like. Planning and Resources Review Group This group developed a set of principles for planning and use of resources in schools and considered whether guidance on effective practice about what works in schools might be necessary. It also made recommendations about planning policies and practice. You can read the full report here. Five principles were outlined to test practice and expectations in schools: 1. Planning a sequence of lessons is more important than writing individual lesson plans. 2. Fully resourced schemes of work should be in place for all teachers to use each term. 3. Planning should not be done simply to please outside organisations. 4. Planning should take place in purposeful and well defined blocks of time. 5. Effective planning makes use of high quality resources. The report makes the following recommendations for school leaders: Ensure there is ongoing work to develop a shared understanding of effective teaching to inform planning, underpinned by effective continuous professional development. Do not automatically require the same planning format across the school. Review demands made on teachers in relation to planning to ensure that minimum requirements to be effective are made. Where more intensive plans are needed for pedagogical reasons, a review date is set. Ensure, as a default expectation that a fully resourced, collaboratively produced, scheme of work is in place for all teachers for the start of each term. Make clear who will be planning new schemes of work and associated resources, what time they will have available to do so, and how this will be
made available to all staff in a timely fashion. Ensure that the highest quality resources are available, valuing professionally produced resources as much as those created in-house. Consider aggregating PPA into units of time which allow for substantial planning. Identify alternative ways to evidence effective teaching and planning, emphasising teacher development. Encourage subject and phase leaders to lead discussions on quality assurance with SLT/governors to help them understand where a subject- or phase-specific approach may be most appropriate and why the volume of paper plans may be an inadequate proxy. When reflecting on what action needs to be taken in your school as a result of these recommendations, the following may be useful: Develop a clear rationale with your staff about the purpose of planning. Be flexible in terms of planning documentation and expectations all staff using the same proforma. Instead, collaboratively decide on which headings must be in any lesson plan and the reasons why these are important, then allow staff to adapt this to suit their own, and their pupils, needs. Recognise the importance of the quality of teaching and learning and pupil progress, rather than the written planning. Make it clear that detailed written planning does not necessarily equate to high quality teaching and learning. Do not request individual lesson plans on an ongoing basis, unless there is an exceptional reason to justify this. Even Ofsted do not require these. Make sure your school has effective IT systems in place so that schemes of work, plans and resources can be shared and updated. Allocate time throughout the year so that staff can discuss curriculum and qualification changes and can then organise any changes to their schemes of work, plans and resources. Liaise with other local schools to allocate time throughout the year for staff to plan collaboratively and share resources. Encourage the use of a wide range of resources, including high quality text books. Accept that different ages and subjects may need a different approach to planning. Data Management Review Group This group considered how and why data is collected to enable more efficient and effective practices and gathered evidence on effective data management practices. It also developed a set of principles for data management in schools and made recommendations about data management practices and processes. You can read the full report here.
The report considered the principles of effective data management and states that any person or organisation involved in the production and use of data should start by having clear answers to three questions: Am I clear on the purpose? Why is this data being collected, and how will it help improve the quality of provision? Is this the most efficient process? Have the workload implications been properly considered and is there a less burdensome way to collect, enter, analyse, interpret, and present the information? Is the data valid? Does the data actually provide a reliable and defensible measure of educational attainment? The report recommends that everybody involved in data management: Collect data that are purposeful, valid, and reliable. Use the principles in the review group report to decide what to collect and how to collect it. Be prepared to stop collecting data if the burden of collection outweighs their use. Do not reward gold plating. Excessive data collection and processing takes teachers, school leaders, and officials away from more productive tasks. Use data in the format available. Do not ask for or duplicate collection of data collected elsewhere collect once, use many times. Take measures to understand the cumulative impact on workload of new initiatives and guidance before rolling them out and make proportionate and pragmatic demands. For school leaders, the report further recommends: Use software which adheres to common definitions and standards. Conduct a regular audit of in-school data management procedures to ensure they remain robust, valid and effective, and manageable for staff. Do not routinely collect formative assessment data. Summative data should be collected only as frequently as essential to ensure appropriate action can be taken in between collections. Unless there are issues of performance to address and monitor, summative data should not normally be collected more than three times a year per pupil. Review assessment which leads to data generation and consider a range of approaches (including standardised tasks/test items). Make data accessible to all stakeholders in an appropriate form. Do not collect data outside of agreed data collection points. Take a strategic view of the assessment demands throughout the school year and implement an assessment and data management calendar. When considering these recommendations and how they might be taken forwards in your school, the report identifies a series of useful questions which should be considered by governors, leaders and teachers to challenge themselves and their current practice in terms of both for purpose and process.
Purpose: Does our data management system align with our values and ethos? Are we focusing on the right things for our school? What do we want to measure and why? What are our key issues? How does the data help us progress as a school? What are we expecting to find, and how would it enable us to change practice? What will we do with the data and when? What would happen what could we not decide - without it? Will it be accurate, and what other sources should we use to give a rounded picture of our pupils? Will the way we present our data make sense to those people who need to use it? Process: Does this, or similar data, already exist? Can we use an existing process? Are we getting the right data, to the right people, at the right time to make the right decisions? Can we provide assurance of the accuracy of our measurement is the data valid? Can we stop collecting any data? What is the opportunity cost (time that could be spent on another task)? What training is required? What can we learn from others? Over what time period will we collect it? When will we stop collecting it? How can we collect data to avoid the need for reinterpretation or excessive work to present information? In addition, school leaders might also consider the following questions and actions: Frequently ask whether the data you collect has an impact on learning and progress. Develop data collection which serves multiple purposes. Give staff sufficient notice and time to collect and input required data. A maximum of three collection points of summative data per year should be sufficient. If there are more, be clear about why this is necessary. Conduct a review of the data your school presents to staff, governors, parents and pupils. Ask for honest feedback about whether it is understood and whether it is useful and use this to inform changes. Put data collection points into your school calendar. Review your data software with honest feedback from all users.