Teaching

ADHD Heads: How can we utilise neurodiversity in shaping the future of schools?

Written by Nadia Hewstone

Nadia is a certified executive school leadership coach. She left headship to start Destino Coaching and now supports school leaders with their own development as well as development of their teams.

Below is what I shared at the ‘Breaking the Mould 2’ in Cambridge for #IWD2024. I would love to hear from you with your thoughts and reflections on the themes I explore:

I am Nadia, founder of Destino Coaching – an organisation that supports Headteachers to remain strategic while tackling the enormous amount of operational challenges in schools.

I want headteachers to increase their influence over policy.

Usually, I’m invited to speak about ways to stay on track with your big goals in headship. Over many years I have developed several planning strategies to help me stay focussed and on track. The main principles are now tools I teach the headteachers I work with.

Looking back over my career I see that I became hyper focussed on finding ways to overcome the challenges I faced associated with being neurodivergent. This is what I want to explore with you today.

Over the next 10 minutes, I want to make a case for the need for neurodivergent leaders in schools as one of the key ways we will address the multiple systemwide issues schools are now facing.

My story

Like many parents of neurodivergent children, I started to look at some of my own behaviours through the lens of my developing understanding of autism and ADHD about 10 years ago, when I was a headteacher. Both of my children have autism and ADHD and my own assessment of ADHD raised a question about potential ASD too – I have yet to find the time and space to investigate this but I have ADHD and while I am just one person with ADHD, I have now worked with many neurodivergent headteachers and have thought long and hard about what we bring to schools as a group.

As a woman with ADHD I face several struggles and I also experience a freedom I believe is unique to neurodivergent women. Here are some things about me that can appear strange to others:

I stand up for meetings or regularly leave my seat if I am required to be seated.
I often put tasks off until the last minute
I find it difficult to follow people when they give long explanations or instructions. I can appear to be bored – and often I am!
I have to try very hard not to finish other people’s sentences and speak over them in an attempt to speed them up
I have to work extremely hard at relaxing and being calm – even though I know it is essential to my well-being
I need others around me to attend to details as I find detail painfully difficult and race forward
I break rules – especially when they don’t make sense to me
I do not proofread my documents

The first time I went on a road trip with my deputy Steff, we stopped at a service station and her standout memory of this day was me getting out of the car before she’d finished parking. She still laughs at this memory now. While I see the funny side I also stand by the decision to do this – she is a stickler for doing things correctly, accurately, by the book – I am not. I saw an opportunity to get our Starbucks order in while she finished her perfect bay parking exercise – therefore cutting down lost time.

Steff and I were a match made in heaven! She was accepting of my pace and challenging about my shortcomings – she gave me space to lead my way and facilitated my growth through her attention to detail. I will love her for this forever.

Now that I recognise many of my behaviours as part of my ADHD, I am learning to work with them, quieten my inner critic and communicate more effectively so that others do not take offense.

As a headteacher, I implemented change very quickly and my high energy meant I took my team with me – they told me I was full of purpose and great fun to work with. I also disregarded things I saw as unnecessary restrictions. This was sometimes significantly risky but meant we cut through challenges and achieved things more quickly.

I’ll leave it up to you to imagine the downsides of all this for my school business manager!

I have had 12 female coaching clients over the past 5 years who have a diagnosis of ADHD and all of them report frustration with the restrictions placed on them by the education system.

Neurotypical heads undoubtedly experience this too – the difference is that people with ADHD view this as intensely impossible to work around.

Coaching women with ADHD is generally focussed on how to achieve their massive, exciting, propositus goals despite external barriers such as Ofsted, the National Curriculum and prescriptive working practices. Mostly they are successful once we work out how to embrace the difference.

People with ADHD are 60% more likely to be dismissed from a job, and three times more likely to quit a job impulsively (Barkley, 2008). This is a great loss to society and I hope we can reverse this in schools so that we can secure a way forward that serves young people.

2. Broken system – needs radical change

If you work in a school, I don’t need to tell you the system is broken:

A widening gap between rich and poor educational outcomes
Fewer resources
Greater mental health needs in our young people
Fewer services to support children and families

I believe that we need a different type of school leadership, a different kind of teacher.

Teachers and leaders are still trapped by the exam treadmill, still unable to have in-depth curriculum discussions or spend proper time collaborating.

Imagine if we flipped the story and leaders and teachers were designing the curriculum, to better match modern societal needs with an intelligent approach to assessment alongside it.

I suggest that neurodivergent thinking is a great way to flip any story.

3. Creative thinking

Take impulsivity, one of the main symptoms of ADHD. The studies suggest it might lead people to have more original ideas. That’s because people with ADHD often lack inner inhibition. This means they have trouble holding back when they want to say or do something.

Many of my neurodivergent clients have found a new voice and new priorities, including giving attention to staff wellbeing and rethinking the micro-management that characterises so many schools. But achieving this small-scale will not have the impact we need it to have and they often do this at the cost of risking their career.

Women with ADHD, in my experience, tend not to fear the truth and make brilliant cases for what new approaches might look like when systems are broken. More importantly, they often have the drive to see it through. This can appear radical, stubborn even, but for us it’s just about doing what makes sense.

In my book, the Unhappy Headteacher, I explore ways we can still have influence and find joy in the role – because I believe we can. I also believe the system needs drastic change with an uncompromising model of implementation. To me, it is clear that neurodivergent women have a valuable part to play in this.

And gender does matter here. According to Association for Adult ADHD (AAD) men with ADHD are likely to develop aggressive and defensive behaviours in response to being misunderstood, Whereas women with ADHD are more likely to mask and experience self-doubt. This self-doubt can be a gift in headship as with support, it is the place where growth and empowerment can be found.

What all adults with ADHD do have in common, in my experience is inner steel. We find EVERYTHING hard and to find fulfillment and do the stuff that lights us up – like pursuing excellence for a school – we have to accept that we will face tremendous amounts of challenge. Mostly because others often misunderstand our intentions. We share a bounce-backability that is unique to neurodivergent leaders and has prepared us well for the current state of affairs. When everything is hard anyway, dealing with the funding crisis seems surmountable somehow – leaders with ADHD believe there is a way to do the impossible, we just need to find it and we know we can

4. Representation

And let’s not forget the importance of representation in all of this. I have a client who has a diagnosis for autism and fears being open about this with her seniors because of her perceived risk of not being considered for promotion. This saddens me when I think about how far we still have to go in exposing our students to the talent and capability of people with ADHD. Our young people deserve to see examples of adults like them leading schools successfully yet as a culture we still shy away from celebrating the gifts of ADHD – these ‘gifts’ scare us rather than inspire us – what message does that give our young people with ADHD and what potential are we stunting?

Neurodivergent students need opportunities to learn ways to manage the challenges associated with serial rushing and extreme procrastination – what better way to do this than having high-performing leaders with ADHD modelling this around them.

My son has an EHCP and was recently interviewed by an Ofsted inspector in his college who asked him why he thought he’d been so successful at 6th Form, after performing below average at all other stop-off points. Lucas cited the single most important factor as being taught by a maths teacher who is autistic and comfortable with it. Could it be true that to become a mathematician, Lucas needed to see someone like him in the role first? And if so, what does this say about representation among our teachers and leaders in schools?

So how can we utilise neurodiversity in shaping the future of schools?

Create a climate where neurodivergent school leaders feel free to be unapologetically themselves
Celebrate neurodiversity in schools and society
Recognise behaviours associated with ADHD and get excited about them as a sign that creative thinking is taking place
Follow women with ADHD – they have survival mechanism we need right now in schools

'Coaches Like Us': You Have to See It To Be It

Written by Hannah Wilson

Founder of Diverse Educators

‘You have to see it to be it,’ the quote from Billy Jean King, is a phrase we hear used a lot to challenge the lack of visible role models in society but also in our profession.

It is widely agreed that diverse representation is needed in every layer of the school system.

Our trust boards and governing bodies, our CEOs and Headteachers, our Senior Leader Teams are all people spaces that need diversifying. Alongside reviewing representation in our curriculum and in our libraries, for our learners, we also need to review it for our staff. (This is why we host a #DiverseEd World Book Day event each year to amplify authors from our network).

There is a lot of continuing work to be done to disrupt, to dismantle, to diversify these different spaces and to review who gets to occupy them.

But there are other educational spaces for us to also review:

Who recruits, develops and mentors our trainee teachers?

Who recruits, develops and mentors our early career teachers?

Who recruits, develops and mentors our aspiring leaders?

Who recruits, develops and coaches our existing leaders?

When you review these spaces you will often find a homogenous team, a team who mainly hold majority identities.

So how are the trainers, the mentors and the coaches being trained to become conscious of their own identity, to become confident in addressing their own privilege and to become confident in disrupting bias in the many forms through which it can manifest?

How trauma-informed are the trainers, the mentors and the coaches in supporting individuals who have experienced identity-based harm?

The Church of England Foundation for Educational Leadership launched a brilliant pipeline programme to nurture leaders from a global majority background called Leaders Like Us a couple of years ago, in partnership with Aspiring Heads and the Institute for Educational & Social Equity. This programme is a gamechanger for our education system and our future workforce.

So let’s all consider what Trainers… Mentors… Coaches … ‘Like Us’ would look like.

If we put a spotlight on ‘Coaches Like Us’ as a school, college, trust, SCITT, Teaching School Hub and localities we need to ask ourselves:

Who gets to be coached?

Who gets to be The Coach?

Who gets invested in?

Who gets nurtured to flourish?

Who gets supported to progress?

And most importantly, do people get to choose their coach? Or what has become a common phenomenon – does a coach get chosen for them?

Coaching is about creating a safe space. About having a confidential conversation. About exploring how one is feeling. About being vulnerable and open. If your coach is your line manager or someone you work closely with – someone who might appraise your performance or sit on a promotion panel – we are in muddy waters.

What difference would it make for an aspiring leader to self-select a coach who resonates with them? A coach who shares their identity? A coach who has walked their walk?

Some final thoughts:

How might being coached or becoming a coach help diverse educators stay in the system?

How might being coached or becoming a coach help diverse leaders climb up the leadership ladder?

How might being coached or becoming a coach help us tackle the glass ceiling and the concrete ceiling in the education system?

To help our clients, who have asked for our support in diversifying their coaching pools, we have created a #DiverseEd Coaching Directory:

You can find 25+ coaching profiles here.
You can meet our coaches through our video gallery here.
Get in touch if you are a coach who would like to be added or if you are looking for a coach and would like to be connected here.

Open-mindedness: The most important thing we can teach young people

Written by Liselle Sheard

Liselle is an experienced Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion professional, driving change in organisations of all sizes including global ftse 100 companies. Liselle is passionate about having a positive influence and encouraging others to do the same.

In a study by Mind UK (2021), 78% of young people said that school had made their mental health worse. 70% of young people who experienced racism in school said that it had negatively impacted their wellbeing. These stats are expected to increase further for minoritised young people. At such a critical age, children are internalising negative beliefs about their differences, and are questioning their place in society. Can we expect young people to achieve top grades and sail through school when the environment is excluding underrepresented groups and shaving their confidence at the very beginning of their journey into adulthood?

Complex data analysis and strategic models have a necessary place in the fight to drive systemic change, but are we overlooking the power of fundamental traits such as curiosity and open-mindedness? Can educational institutions model these traits to drive inclusion, and teach young people to follow suit?

Open-mindedness is the willingness to actively search for a diverse range of information, perspectives, and solutions when navigating through life. It’s the ability to admit that we always have more to learn, and that our experiences shape our perspectives.

In the education industry, open-mindedness can drive an inclusive environment for young people, whilst also encouraging them to be a catalyst for change themselves. In this sense, open-mindedness is about encouraging individuality whilst forging togetherness in the process.

Open-mindedness and finding identity:

Navigating the education system as a young person can bring about complex emotions. Systemically, individual differences and needs have been left out of the conversation, with a holistic service delivered in the same way to everyone. Young generations have expressed feeling stripped of their individuality and self-expression, making it difficult for students to find out who they really are, and grow confidence in their own identity.

To overcome this, self-exploration must be encouraged and welcomed wherever possible, and students should be given the power to consider what is important to them. When this culture is embedded into schools and colleges, it’s embedded into the outlook that young people have on life, increasing their respect and empathy for those around them.

An open-minded education system would fuel a culture of acknowledging the positives of our differences, giving young people the tools they need to support one another.

Open-mindedness can break down the stigma and shame attached to diversity and begin to replace this with pride. However, achieving this culture shift requires commitment from everyone, from industry bodies to individual teachers.

On one hand, it’s crucial that we take steps to increase the diversity of leaders in the education system so that representation is visible to young people during their childhood. On the other hand, we also need to be working to diversify the content covered in the curriculum so that young people are educated on different cultures and perspectives. Students should be able to learn about their own histories in school, as well as uncovering the histories of people with different identities to themselves.

Open-mindedness and finding purpose:

A wealth of research highlights the link between happiness, success, and purpose (Harvard Business Review, 2022). Rather than mapping out young people’s lives for them and pushing them to follow a rigid process, students should be taught the importance of finding their own purpose.

Young people should be supported in finding a purpose that will give meaning to whatever they do. By adopting this mindset, we can encourage students to create their own opportunities, and be ready to explore anything that comes their way.

With an open-minded outlook, young people are more likely to engage in information from a diverse range of creators, encouraging them to build connections with those who have different backgrounds to themselves, and expanding the opportunities that become available to them. Young people should be encouraged to remain curious and enjoy the journey of growing older. This journey is inevitably more educational and colourful when diversity is embraced.

Open-mindedness and its impact on others:

Being open-minded not only helps individuals to increase their understanding of the world and access opportunities, but it also helps young people to make more well-rounded and empathetic decisions that support others.

Open-minded young people bring a future of more inclusive friends, colleagues, innovators, and leaders. As the future of the planet and society becomes ever more uncertain, it’s fundamental that we support young people to build a future where everyone can thrive together.

If we look at many of the most widely recognised thought leaders across the world – from storytellers to artists, to activists – a key trait shared amongst them is their own open-mindedness, and their ability to open other minds to new ways of thinking. The most influential art, music, films, books, and speeches are those that stimulate; blurring societal boundaries and questioning norms.

As younger generations become increasingly more attached to the mission of driving wellbeing and inclusion, they themselves should be empowered in the education system to offer reverse-mentoring and share their ideas for change. Welcoming diverse young perspectives will build the confidence of students and teach them how to find their own power. Opening opportunities for students to be the ‘teachers’ would help to highlight how young people feel, where improvements can be made, and what actions can be taken to drive a more inclusive education system.

Observations on the implementation of Relationships, Sex, and Health Education (RSE) in an English Primary School

Written by Alex Baird

they/them

Before moving to the Higher Educator sector seven years ago, I worked in various schools for over twelve years, latterly as Director of Sport. At the University of Bedfordshire I am a Senior Lecturer in Sport and Physical Education, an EDI Lead, and the Vice Chair of the LGBTQ+ Alliance staff network. I have just finished an EdD at UCL and the research I write about here constituted my EdD thesis.

My research took place in a primary school in Greater London during the summer term of 2021, just as Relationships and Health Education (including the new LGBT content) had become mandatory. At this time, Covid-19 restrictions were lessening though some protocols were still in place and the effect of lockdowns on both pupils and staff was evident. The school has no religious affiliation but the majority of pupils are Muslim, with a high proportion of English as an additional language (EAL) learners and higher than (the national) average of pupils receiving free school meals (FSM). The research was designed to appreciate how teachers feel positioned and work alongside them to create and teach an inclusive and effective RSE curriculum. Participants included five (non-LGBT identifying) females from the school who held a range of positions, roles, and experience but had all previously taught RSE and were currently teaching in Key Stage 2. Participants were asked to reflect upon RSE and the school culture via semi-structured online interviews. RSE lessons and other subject lessons were observed. Teachers’ reflections of lessons were gathered after observation through an informal discussion.

In interviews teachers expressed a commitment to a rights-based approach in RSE and highlighted the value lessons offered to facilitate dialogue with pupils. Lesson observations revealed a cautious approach to the age at which certain topics (e.g. puberty and conception) were covered and when these topics were covered, dialogue did not deviate from the purchased curriculum PowerPoint slides. The culture and routines of RSE lessons closely resembled other subject lessons observed, that is pupils engaged and valuing the subject, generally sitting in their allocated class seats but the authority and attention remaining on the teacher at the front of the class. Teachers wanted to offer fixed, clear and definitive truths, reinforcing good behaviour and deeming some pupils’ questions as inappropriate. Teachers remained uncertain about what personal opinions they could express whilst still adhering to professional conduct. Lessons which were only 45 minutes in length, shorter than Mathematics and English lessons observed, left teachers often hurrying the pace to try to cover the content. Lesson observations highlighted that gender norms are still being powerfully reinforced including the use of gender stereotypes in scenarios and segregated sex education lessons which send these messages overtly and covertly to pupils.

In light of the current heated and polarising debates surrounding LGBT lives in the UK, I would like to stress my call to rethink how RSE is taught should not be taken to mean it should not be taught. A fuller range of pedagogical approaches that include a critical and postmodern orientation are required to recognise pupils’ agency, their pre-existing knowledge, their emotions, and to the likely presence of pupils in LGBT families and pupils who are or may come to identify as LGBT. Effective RSE remains dependent upon schools providing sufficient training for staff, listening to pupils, and communicating effectively with all parents/carers to address misconceptions or issues. Actualising and normalising LGBT themes needs to go beyond merely a bullying discourse to seek to critique broader school culture and practices.

A portrait of the teaching of the British Empire, migration and belonging in English secondary schools

Written by Dr Jason Todd

Jason is a Departmental Lecturer at the Department of Education at the University of Oxford and currently leads the PGCE History programme. Before joining the University of Oxford, he taught history for 19 years in various London state schools, including time as an Assistant Headteacher in a Special Needs school.

I am working on a research project aiming to provide an empirical portrait of current teaching and learning around the interconnected themes of empire, migration and belonging in England’s secondary schools. This project’s aim is a simple one: to support teachers with the teaching of the British Empire, migration and belonging.

Histories of empire and migration are fundamental to understanding modern Britain including how we make sense of issues of belonging and identity. Recent events, from Brexit in 2016, to the Windrush Scandal in 2018 and the Black Lives Matter activism of 2020, have drawn attention to the interplay between the past and the present in dramatic ways, highlighting not only the salience of these histories but also their contested nature.

Despite its importance, there is a shared acknowledgement at the heart not only of recent campaigns from organisations such as the Runnymede Trust and Black Curriculum Project but also emphasised within the Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities report, that there is currently no credible, comprehensive evidence base from which to reliably judge the extent to which today’s secondary students are being taught about the history and legacies of the British empire at all, let alone what they are being taught, in what manner and why. There is however evidence that teachers themselves have identified the need for targeted professional development support and training in this area.

It is precisely in response to this demand that I, as lead author of a letter to the Times in 2020, reiterated the TIDE-Runnymede recommendation that the government invests in better supporting teachers to confidently tackle these complex and potentially contentious themes. Both the Times letter and TIDE-Runnymede campaign made explicit reference to work from the UCL Centre for Holocaust Education’s internationally renowned and distinctively research-led approach to transformative teacher professional development. The Portrait of the teaching of the British Empire, migration and belonging research project was thus conceived as a crucially important intervention towards ultimately supporting teachers by first providing a much needed, robust and comprehensive, empirical evidence base. Our survey is one tool we are using to examine issues associated with teaching the British Empire, migration and belonging in schools and we encourage teachers of all subjects to complete it. https://redcap.idhs.ucl.ac.uk/surveys/?s=L33D9YEX7KRET3EX

We think that this project represents a tremendous opportunity to understand and shape the way young people engage with the enduring legacies, and ongoing debates, regarding the British Empire. Given the complexity of the topics, and the contested nature of many current debates, our desire is to offer nuance and illumination.  

You can find out more about this project on our website https://portraitemb.co.uk/

These potent legacies shape the lives of millions, deeply affecting our sense of identity and belonging. It is critical that we forge paths towards better collective understanding of these subjects, however controversial. Confident and informed teachers are, of course, central to this. 

Jason Todd is Co-Lead Investigator on a collaborative research project “A portrait of the teaching of the British Empire, migration and belonging in English secondary schools.” which brings together scholars from IOE, UCL’s Faculty of Education and Society and the University of Oxford’s Department of Education.

Beyond the Wall of Diversity

Written by Jonathan Lansley-Gordon

Jon studied theoretical physics at Imperial College London, before embarking on a teaching career in secondary and further education. Co-founder of The Blackett Lab Family – a national network of UK based Black physicists – he is passionate about widening access to STEM for traditionally excluded and underrepresented young people. He is a writer and series editor for Oxford University Press, authoring the Teacher Workbook for AQA GCSE Physics. A former Assistant Headteacher and school governor, he now runs Physics Forward – an organisation that provides support for schools, trusts and higher education institutions on all things science, curriculum, and DEI strategy.

Scenario: the head of physics wants to celebrate diversity in the curriculum. They create a ‘wall of diversity’ for the department, showcasing various historic and current black and brown physicists.

I sometimes give keynotes that get the audience to discuss this scenario. More often than not, there’ll be a few nervous stares back at me – almost expecting to be told that this is something terrible and ignorant.

I quickly reassure my fellow science educators that this particular case study, IMO, is by no means an example of something ‘bad’. Actually, I think – as a starting point – raising the profile and visibility of racially diverse physicists is positive for a host of reasons; black and brown people are typically absent from science curricula (as is the case across many other subjects), which can reinforce the implicit notion that science – and especially physics – is reserved exclusively for people who are [insert dominating characteristics here].

The following questions provoke some deeper thought around this scenario:

Is the intention behind this ‘wall of diversity’ clear to the students?
Does the wall showcase the achievements and contributions of the featured scientists, alongside (and contextualised by) their ethnicity?
Is this project the only reference to diversity, or the only mechanism by which conversations about diversity is introduced in the classroom?
Who contributed to the design and people featured?
How / when will the project be revisited and refreshed?
In what ways is diversity related to gender / age / sexual orientation / neurodivergence / disability acknowledged and celebrated elsewhere?
Does this sit within a wider departmental strategy to incorporate diversity and inclusion?

I won’t pretend that the secondary physics curriculum lends itself to easy and natural opportunities to explore themes related to identity and representation. There is a lot of content to get through: energy, forces, waves, gases and electricity don’t immediately conjure inspiration of thought related to human identity. So, in some ways, it’s understandable that we might turn to “curriculum accessories” – people posters – at the risk of students sussing out our tokenistic nods to inclusion.

This is not to say there is no way to go about doing it authentically. Subject content is one of multiple lenses we can use when thinking about diversifying a physics curriculum – and indeed, the wider curriculum. How the content is delivered (teaching, learning and assessment techniques), and student voice (surveying their attitudes, values and beliefs with respect to physics) are a couple of other lenses that can help frame approaches to weaving inclusive themes through the curriculum.

At Physics Forward, we give physics and science educators the thinking tools to develop strategic approaches and practical resources to creating a diverse and inclusive curriculum through these and other lenses. Get in touch to have a chat about how we can support you and your team do the same!

Is there a hierarchy of protected characteristics?

Written by Hannah Wilson

Founder of Diverse Educators

One of the questions we regularly ask in our DEI training for schools, colleges and trusts is which of the protected characteristics are visible within your context.

This question is deliberately wide and can be interpreted in a couple of different ways:

Which of the 9 PCs are visible? i.e. which ones can we see as some are hidden/ invisible.
Which of the 9 PCs are visible? i.e. which are present in our community and thereby which are missing or do we not have/ know the data to confirm they are present.
Which of the 9 PCs are visible? i.e. which are being spoken about, invested in, have we received training on.

Often people ask do we not mean – which is a priority? And we emphasise to focus on visibility and explain the gap between intention and impact as there is likely to be some dissonance between what is happening and how it lands.

The reflections and discussions across a full staff will surface some of the disparities of what is being paid attention to. Moreover, it will also highlight the difference in perspectives across different groups of staff – groups by role/ function and groups by identity.

A key thing for us to reflect on, to discuss and to challenge ourselves to consider is that there are nine protected characteristics – so are we thinking about, talking about, paying attention to all of them simultaneously? Are we balancing our approach to create equity across the different identities? Are we taking an intersectional lens to consider who might be experiencing multiple layers of marginalisation and inequity?

We encourage schools to lean into DEI work in a holistic and in an intersectional way, as opposed to taking a single-issue approach as our identities are not that clean cut. We worry that some organisations are focusing on one protected characteristic per year, which means that some people will wait for 8-9 years for their identity to be considered and for their needs to be met. This is also a problem as we generally spend 7 years in a primary context and 7 years in a secondary context so all 9 would not be covered in everyone’s educational journey.

Trust boards, Governing bodies, Senior leader teams do not sit around the table and decide that some of the protected characteristics are more important than others, but there will be a perception from outside of these strategic meeting spaces that there is a hierarchy. i.e. different stakeholders will have differing opinions that in this school we think about/ speak about/ pay attention to/ deal with XYZ but we do not think about/ speak about/ pay attention to/ deal with ABC.

Another thing to consider about the perceived hierarchy is regarding which of the protected characteristics we are expected to log. If all 9 of the protected characteristics are equal, why do schools only need to log and report on two of them for the pupils’ behaviour and safety – we are expected to track prejudiced-based behavioural incidents of racism and homophobia? Does this mean that transphobia, islamophobia, ableism and misogyny are less important? Does this mean we are holding the student to account but not the staff?

One solution to this specific imbalance is to move from a racist log and a homophobia log to a prejudice log. A log that captures all prejudice, discrimination and hate. A log that captures all of the isms. A school can then filter the homophobia and racism to report upwards and outwards of the organisation as required, but the organisation’s data will be richer and fuller to inform patterns of behaviour and intervention needs.

CPOMs and other safeguarding and behaviour software systems enable you to tailor your fields so see what capacity yours has to add in extra fields. You can then log all prejudice and track for trends but also target the interventions. We have been working with a number of pastoral leaders and teams this year to grow their consciousness, confidence and competence in challenging language and behaviour which is not inclusive and not safe. We are supporting them in making their processes and policies more robust and more consistent to reduce prejudice-based/ identity-based harm in their schools.

Another consideration alongside the student behaviour logging and tracking is to also consider the logging of adult incidents. Do our people systems capture the behaviours e.g. microaggressions and gaslighting that the staff are enacting so that these patterns can also be explored? Do our training offers for all staff, but especially leaders and line managers empower and equip them to address these behaviours?

So as we reflect on the question: Is there a hierarchy of protected characteristics?

Consider how different people in your organisation might answer it based on their unique perspective and their own lived experience. And then go and ask them, to see how they actually respond so that you become more aware of the perception gap – if we do not know it exists, we cannot do anything about it – and the learning is in the listening after all.

"How do we decide when to teach the names of private parts in Primary School?"

Written by Ian Timbrell

Ian is an education consultant and trainer, supporting schools develop their provision for LGBT+ pupils and their RSE curriculum. He has worked in education for 15 years; including as a class teacher and a deputy head teacher.

Debating whether to teach the names of genitals in Foundation Phase/Stage education (ages 3-7) is a nuanced discussion that encompasses considerations of child development, cultural norms, parental preferences, and educational goals. Making this discussion more complex is that in most countries (England and Wales included), when to introduce the names of genitals in Relationships and Sexuality Education (RSE) is not specified to a single age, but within a range (generally 3-11). In both England and Wales, schools are expected to teach the names of body parts, but which body parts, in which order and at what age, are not referenced. This is needed to provide schools flexibility to teach children at a stage appropriate to them, but has also resulted in a wide range of interpretations with some schools introducing the terms as young as 3, with other schools only teaching them when introducing lessons on puberty in upper KS2. I get regular questions about a particular RSE providers who provide lesson plans on the names of genitals in year 1. The rationale given by the organisation is not based in research, but in their own experience and through conversations with practitioners and so although a scheme has this lesson in, there are considerations that need to be made when deciding when to follow this guidance.

One of the reasons that it is difficult to make firm decisions about when to introduce terminology is the difficulty of finding peer-reviewed research in this area. For the most part, schools are led by either out of date research or guidance from organisations that is based on opinion and experience, rather than corroborated research. Introducing vocabulary in RSE and in areas of diversity is part of many studies and research projects and it is expected that in years to come, we’ll have more clarity in this area.

So with these difficulties in mind, what should schools do and how can we make decisions that is best for our pupils?

Arguments for Teaching Genital Names in the Foundation Phase/Stage:

Promoting Body Positivity and Autonomy: Teaching children accurate anatomical terms for genitals fosters a healthy understanding and acceptance of their bodies. By using correct terminology, some believe that children develop a sense of body positivity and autonomy, enabling them to communicate effectively about their bodies and recognise inappropriate touch.
Facilitating Safety and Awareness: Knowledge of proper anatomical names empowers children to articulate discomfort or instances of abuse more accurately. It is suggested that learning the correct names for genitals, like any other body part, have names helps break down taboos surrounding discussions of sexuality and promotes a culture of safety and awareness.
Preventing Misinformation: Using euphemisms or avoiding discussions about genital names may lead to confusion and misinformation. Children are naturally curious and may seek answers from unreliable sources if not provided with accurate information in a safe and supportive environment.
Normalizing Discussions about Sexuality: Introducing genital names in early education may usualise discussions about sexuality and reproductive health. When presented in an age-appropriate manner, such conversations may lay the foundation for future learning and promote healthy attitudes towards sexuality and relationships.

Arguments against Teaching Genital Names in the Foundation Phase/Stage:

Cultural Sensitivities and Parental Preferences: Some parents may feel uncomfortable with the idea of their young children learning genital names in an educational setting. Cultural norms, religious beliefs, and personal values vary widely, influencing parental preferences regarding what and how topics related to sexuality are addressed in early education. Introducing the genital names without the support of parents and guardians could cause conflicts with and between home and school.
Developmental Appropriateness: Critics argue that introducing genital names at too young an age may be developmentally inappropriate and potentially confusing for children. They suggest that focusing on broader concepts such as body boundaries, personal safety, and self-respect may be more suitable for early childhood education. There is also the risk that it may not be appropriate for pupils with certain ALN/SEND at a certain time, or that the resources don’t take into account their individual needs.
Respecting Family Dynamics: Education systems must respect the diversity of family structures and dynamics. Some parents prefer to address topics related to sexuality and anatomy within the family unit, tailoring discussions to their child’s individual readiness and comfort level.
Risk of Misinterpretation: Critics caution that discussing genital names in early education may inadvertently sensationalise or overemphasize the significance of genitals, potentially leading to misunderstandings or discomfort among children and parents.

Finding a Middle Ground:

In navigating this issue, finding a middle ground that respects diverse perspectives while prioritizing children’s well-being is essential. Educators and policymakers can consider the following approaches:

Consult with parents and experts: Engage parents, carers, and experts in child development, psychology, and education to gather insights and perspectives on the issue. Work with the community to develop an approach that works for your school, not because a scheme dictates it.
Plan for individuals: Do not take a blanket approach to teaching. Consider whether every pupil is ready and what reasonable adjustments need to be put into place for certain pupils.
Provide opt-out options: When permitted by the curriculum, offer parents the opportunity to opt their children out of specific lessons or discussions related to genital names, respecting their autonomy and preferences.
Emphasise sensitivity and inclusivity: Approach discussions about genital names with sensitivity, inclusivity, and cultural awareness, acknowledging diverse perspectives and beliefs within the community.

The debate over whether to teach genital names in early childhood education reflects the broader discourse surrounding sexuality education, child development, and cultural sensitivities. The review of RSE in England may provide additional transparency around this issue, but until then, we have to use our professional judgement and work with all stakeholders to ensure that our children get quality RSE and are safeguarded against harm.

Empowering PSHE Leadership: Leading with DEI Principles

Written by Malarvilie Krishnasamy

Malarvilie is a seasoned leadership consultant, coach, and trainer with over 20 years of experience in education. As a former history teacher and senior leader, she passionately advocates for coaching as a catalyst for transforming school cultures. Malarvilie offers accredited courses, endorsed by The Institute of Leadership, which develop emotional intelligence and assertive leadership skills. Her reflective and supportive programmes enhance staff morale and well-being, promoting humanity in leadership. A vocal proponent of equity, diversity, and inclusion, she actively engages as an ally through speaking engagements, workshops, and amplifying the work of others. Malarvilie is also deeply committed to promoting Personal, Social, Health, and Economic (PSHE) education, recognising its pivotal role in nurturing well-rounded individuals.

I’m excited to tackle a topic that’s not just important but essential in education: leading PSHE with a DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) lens. As educators, we know that PSHE isn’t just about teaching facts; it’s about nurturing well-rounded individuals who are equipped to navigate the complexities of life. That’s why it’s crucial to infuse DEI principles into our PSHE curriculum, acknowledging and respecting the diverse cultural backgrounds and experiences of our students. Join me as we explore how embracing DEI principles can transform PSHE education and create a more inclusive learning environment for all.

In many cultures, discussions about puberty, relationships, and sexual education may not happen at home. This leaves young people to rely solely on their friends or inaccurate information from the internet. This highlights the importance of PSHE education as a reliable source of accurate information. By providing comprehensive and inclusive PSHE/RSE in schools, we can ensure that all young people have access to the correct information, regardless of their background or cultural context.

Moreover, fostering an inclusive environment in PSHE lessons creates a safe space where students feel comfortable discussing their experiences and asking questions. This helps break down barriers and ensures that every student feels valued and supported in their journey through puberty and relationships, not just in terms of biological changes but also emotional and social aspects.

But leading PSHE isn’t just about delivering lessons; it’s about cultivating a whole-school approach to well-being and inclusivity. This involves considering staff values and providing them with comprehensive training sessions to navigate sensitive topics effectively, ensuring alignment with the values of the school, the curriculum, and the 2010 Equality Act. Staff members, while bringing their own values, must understand and adhere to the principles outlined in the Act, which mandates the promotion of equality and diversity within educational settings.

Additionally, understanding local and national statistics regarding teenage health issues, such as drug use, alcohol misuse, underage sex, lack of condom use for teenagers, and teenage pregnancies, equips educators with evidence to emphasise the importance of PSHE education. By sharing this information and ensuring staff awareness of their duty as PSHE teachers within the British curriculum, we can empower them to confidently and effectively deliver PSHE education, thereby supporting the well-being of our students.

But PSHE leaders often get left out in the cold. Schools know PSHE is important, but they don’t always give leaders training to lead effectively.

The challenges faced by PSHE leaders extend beyond traditional teaching roles. Effective communication with staff, parents, and students is paramount, but the support in developing these skills often falls through the cracks. PSHE is a whole school subject. Unlike other subjects, it’s rare to have dedicated PSHE teachers, and leaders must coordinate a diverse group of educators, each with their primary subject expertise. This aspect is often underappreciated, with a mere 1 management point failing to reflect the intricacies of PSHE leadership.

Additionally, the unique pedagogy required for PSHE is often overlooked in training programs, preventing the ability to deliver PSHE effectively. It’s time to invest in the professional development of our PSHE leaders.

That’s where the Level 5 Inclusive and Progressive Leadership of PSHE Course comes in—a comprehensive solution to bridge these gaps. This course equips PSHE leaders with the skills, knowledge, and awareness needed to excel in their roles. From diplomacy and communication to the unique pedagogy of PSHE, this program addresses every facet of effective PSHE leadership.

Conclusion

Leading PSHE with a DEI lens is not just a responsibility; it’s a commitment to creating a safe, inclusive, and empowering learning environment for all students. By incorporating diversity, equity, and inclusion into our approach to PSHE, we ensure that every young person receives the support and education they need to navigate the challenges of puberty, relationships, and well-being.

Equipping staff with the necessary training and awareness of their duties under the 2010 Equality Act empowers them to deliver PSHE education effectively, promoting the health and well-being of our students. Let’s continue to champion a holistic approach to PSHE leadership, where every student feels valued, respected, and supported in their journey toward adulthood.

Click HERE to download your free PSHE DEI self-assessment!

Click HERE to download your free KS2 or KS3 Diverse Perspectives self-assessment!

Also for further resources have a look at the The Diverse Educators’ Inclusive RSHE Toolkit – Inclusive RSHE Toolkit | Diverse Educators We are collating a growing bank of resources to help you to review and develop how inclusive the RSHE provision is in your school.