Assessing English as an Additional Language Fairly
Use low‑floor tasks tied to curriculum and sample progress fortnightly.
Challenge
As‑is processes were heavy or misaligned to classroom change.
Result
Lightweight cycles tied to live priorities created visible movement in rooms within weeks.
Outcome
Trust grew, decisions sped up and impact became easier to see and evidence.
Innovation
Two‑page operating system, coached rehearsal, artefact reviews, humane short‑form measurement.
Brief overview
Fair assessment respects what pupils can do and ties support to the unit they are learning now, not a generic level.
Mechanisms that move practice
Leaders visited short slices; departments codified models; artefacts stayed next to numbers so discussion stayed concrete.
Human moments that matter
Colleagues practised aloud, mentors stood beside them and families received plain English communications that explained what would happen next.
Keeping workload net zero
Templates replaced reinvention; calendars aligned deadlines; any process that did not improve teaching time was retired.
Evidence and alignment
Signals were simple and believable - time to settled work, clarity of models, retrieval movement and short viva checks.
Impact
Calmer rooms, clearer modelling and steadier workload produced better retention and more minutes spent thinking about quality ideas.
Lessons for leaders and investors
- Publish decision rights so accountability feels fair and fast.
- Review artefacts with measures; prefer evidence close to the work.
- Protect rehearsal time, especially in EYFS and key stage 1 where foundations compound.
- Retire low‑value tasks to keep workload net‑zero.
Full Article
What this means for school leaders and investors
Assessing English as an Additional Language Fairly is a reminder that generative AI is already in pupils' pockets and teachers' workflows. The surface story is familiar: leaders are asked to improve outcomes, protect wellbeing and keep the organisation financially credible, all at once. The deeper issue is whether a school can turn big ideas into small, repeatable acts that pupils experience every day.
For leaders, this means choosing fewer priorities, defining the classroom behaviours that show those priorities are real, and then protecting staff time so the work is sustainable. A plan that reads well but cannot be enacted in a normal week creates cynicism, and cynicism spreads quickly.
For boards and investors, the best question is not 'Do we have a strategy?' but 'Do we have a routine?'. Evidence should include artefacts such as model lessons, common resources, coaching logs and clear decision points, not only narrative updates.
Full narrative expansion
In practice, successful schools describe the problem with precision before they reach for a programme. They agree what will improve, for whom, and how they will know. This avoids the common trap of launching a new initiative that feels busy but does not change teaching.
The strongest narratives are not heroic. They are operational. Leaders build routines for modelling, rehearsal and follow up, and they create simple artefacts that make quality easier to repeat. They also define non-negotiables so staff are not left guessing what matters most.
This is where a practical lens is helpful. It asks: what does the teacher do at 8.55 on a wet Tuesday? What do pupils do? What do leaders look at in the first five minutes of a visit? If those answers are clear, the rest of the story is likely to hold.
What changed in practice
AI decisions are rarely technical first. They are safeguarding, data protection and workload concerns dressed in technical language. This insight turned the conversation to artefacts that showed change in rooms: model tasks with low floors and no ceiling, retrieval prompts adjusted to support production as well as recognition, and brief fortnightly samples that respected both curriculum progression and language development.
The practical act was to publish the assessment approach in a single page parents could read, then train staff on the first three tasks so everyone understood the intent. Departments met briefly to calibrate using real work, and leaders sampled progress in five-minute slices alongside teachers.
Human moments that built culture
A teacher practiced aloud how she would explain the assessment routine to a worried parent. A mentor sat beside a new colleague as they interpreted pupil work together. Families received updates in clear language that respected their child's dignity and celebrated visible progress, not deficits.
Results
Within half a term, assessment conversations became calmer and more focused on curriculum strength. Staff reported reduced anxiety and families expressed clearer understanding. Pupils received more precise support tied to the unit they were learning.
Workload
The shift saved time because assessments were tied to live teaching, not bolted on. Templates and calibration meetings replaced individual invention, and the fortnightly rhythm kept workload steady rather than creating end-of-term surges.
Evidence and scale
Tracked signals included clarity of task design, accuracy of moderation, time to intervention and parent feedback. These were simple, believable and close to the work. Patterns held across year groups and subject areas, suggesting the approach scaled reliably within the school context.
Sources and further reading
Selected links to expand on the themes in this article.