News and guidance

Working on your behalf to influence government policy

Key areas of focus 

ASCL Council has agreed the following key areas of focus for our policy influencing in 2018–19:

• funding 
• accountability, and its effect on the curriculum and mental health and wellbeing of pupils and staff 
• teacher recruitment, retention and workload 
• ethical leadership 
• the fragmentation of the system, including the role of different ‘middle-tier’ bodies 

Consultation responses 

We have responded over the last few months to consultations and reports on the following subjects: 

• education funding in Northern Ireland 
• the availability of fee information, purchasing decisions and securing value for money 
• the Secretary of State’s response to the latest report of the School Teachers’ Review Body (STRB) 
• Ofqual’s approach to regulating technical qualifications 

Our consultation responses are all available on the ASCL website at: www.ascl.org.uk/policy/consultation-responses 

Funding 

We submitted a pre-budget response to the Treasury, challenging the government’s un-evidenced claims concerning education funding, and making clear the impact that real-terms budget cuts are having on our schools and colleges. 

We have been successful in achieving a change in the 2019/20 National Funding Formula to the minimum per pupil funding level for middle and upper schools. This will be £4,600 for Key Stage 3 pupils in middle schools, and £5,100 for Key Stage 4 only schools. For secondary schools with both Key Stage 3 and Key Stage 4, the figure will be £4,800, as planned. 

Accountability 

We are in regular dialogue with Ofsted about the emerging 2019 inspection framework, and the research underlying this. HMCI Amanda Spielman attended ASCL Council in February to share the direction of travel on the new framework and to seek our views. 

Inspections and Accountability Specialist Stephen Rollett has worked with FFT Education Datalab to produce an analysis of the relationship between Progress 8 and Ofsted judgements. 

We have worked with SMID report to crowdsource transition matrices for 2018 subject results. Schools have uploaded their data checking files and hence contributed to a national data collaboration. The toolkit encourages schools to evaluate subjects correctly by comparing against other pupils nationally who took the same subject. Schools can continue to upload their data at www.ascl.smidreport.com 

Curriculum and assessment 

Curriculum and Assessment Specialist Suzanne O’Farrell has provided evidence to support Ofqual’s work on inter-subject comparability. We are also hosting an ASCL roundtable on languages this term, to further inform thinking in this area. 

Suzanne is also part of a Joint Council for Qualifications (JCQ) commission into malpractice led by Sir John Dunford. The commission aims to have released basic findings in time to inform JCQ’s 2019–20 academic year publications. 

Post-16 education 

Post-16 and Colleges Specialist Kevin Gilmartin has been asked to join DfE groups focusing on both T level funding and curriculum implementation, ensuring that ASCL members will have a strong voice in these developments. 

ASCL has been awarded the contract to run a series of T level awareness events in conjunction with DfE and Gatsby Foundation – and has managed to ensure that they are free events for delegates (book your place at: www.ascl.org.uk/TLevelSeminars). 

Kevin has also joined the post-16 maths pathways group under the auspices of the Royal Society, exploring ways to improve maths funding and teaching for 16–19 year-olds. 

Finally, we worked with the SFCA to design and launch the ‘#RaiseTheRate’ 16–19 funding campaign, which went live in October. 

Ethics and inclusion 

ASCL’s Ethical Leadership Commission held its final meeting in October. The work of the commission will be showcased at a launch conference in January and will find a permanent home within a new Ethics Forum being created within the Chartered College of Teaching. Parliamentary and Inclusion Specialist Anna Cole is involved in a number of influential groups and projects, including: 

• A whole-school SEND project to support school leaders in demonstrating how their inclusive practices are supporting all learners to make good progress, based on a broad notion of outcomes. 
• The Contextual Safeguarding Scale Up project, a four-year programme to create contextual safeguarding systems in three local authorities in England and Wales. 
• The Royal Society for the encouragement of Arts, Manufactures and Commerce (RSA) ‘Pinball Kids’ project, exploring the systemic factors contributing to rising exclusions, and examining how policy and practice can support the groups of young people most likely to be excluded. 
• Proposed new guidance from the Equality and Human Rights Commission on supporting transgender and genderquestioning children.

Collapse

In October, GCSE performance statistics were published including data that showed the percentage of pupils achieving a Grade 5 ‘strong pass’ or above in English and maths (see: https://tinyurl.com/y74o7o6j). Commenting on the figures in our press release, Geoff Barton, ASCL General Secretary, said: 

“Today’s figures show us that 57% of pupils in state-funded schools did not achieve the government’s new measure of a ‘strong pass’ or above in GCSE English and maths. 

“As a society, we must surely question a system which sends out such a negative message to so many young people. While we understand that the government is making a distinction between Grade 5 as a measure of school performance and Grade 4 as the standard required for onward progression for students, we fear that this is an extremely confusing message for young people, their parents and employers. 

“The result is that many young people will have felt deflated and uncertain after taking this summer’s exams despite having worked their hardest. Those who did not achieve a Grade 4 also face the grind of compulsory resits. 

“What the public perhaps doesn’t realise is that it is predestined that about one third of young people will fail to achieve at least a Grade 4. This is because the percentage of pupils attaining each grade is more or less fixed by a system known as comparable outcomes, in which the distribution of grades is guided by what cohorts of similar ability achieved in previous years. 

“This system has the virtue of ensuring that pupils don’t lose out from one year to the next by changes in exams, but it ensures we will always have a forgotten third. We have to do better for these young people. It cannot be right that we have a system which leaves so many students feeling crushed rather than proud. We have to find a way of better recognising their abilities. 

“ASCL has launched a commission of inquiry which will initially focus on English, and which will look at how we might better reflect the achievements of all our young people. 

“The commission is made up largely of practising English teachers and school and college leaders, and is chaired by educationist and writer Roy Blatchford. It has held an initial meeting and will submit a final report in 2019, which we will discuss with the Department for Education and with exams regulator Ofqual.”

Collapse

At the time of writing this issue of Leader, we had hoped the funding crisis in schools and colleges would be given due recognition, and the under funding of early years, post-16 and high needs education be addressed. Those hopes were dashed, when the Chancellor’s Budget failed to recognise the seriousness of the education funding crisis. Like us, many of you must have felt incensed and patronised by the Chancellor’s comment about money for “little extras”. 

In our press release, commenting on the Chancellor’s Budget statement, ASCL General Secretary Geoff Barton, said: “While we welcome any increased investment in schools, the £400 million ‘bonus’ announced today hardly scratches the surface of what is needed. The Chancellor’s comment that this money will help schools to ‘buy the little extras they need’ shows a complete misunderstanding of the prevailing funding pressures. Many schools don’t have enough money to provide a full curriculum or individual support to pupils, let alone provide ‘little extras’. What they desperately need is improved core funding. It is a sign of the government’s priorities that it is spending more on fixing potholes than on fixing the school funding crisis.” 

We will continue putting pressure on the Chancellor and the government in the run-up to the forthcoming comprehensive spending review, highlighting that unless urgent action is taken to provide sufficient funding, the vital work that schools and colleges do will be increasingly eroded along with the life chances of all our children and young people.

Collapse

In June, the DfE published a new Academies Financial Handbook (AFH) that took effect from 1 September (https://tinyurl.com/y9qpb85v). Through an academy’s funding agreement, the trust must follow the requirements of the AFH. Breaching the requirements of the AFH will result in a breach of the funding agreement itself. 

The new AFH builds on the previous one, making changes to the previous wording. While many of the changes are relatively minor there are some changes that are more significant. 

The first significant change is that relating to the requirements of related party transactions. Over time, the ESFA has sought through the AFH to tighten up the requirements of related party transactions (or connected party transactions as they were previously known) with related parties defined as including members, trustees, local governors and employees. Academy trusts will have to notify the ESFA, via an online form, of all related party transactions that the trust makes after 1 April 2019, in advance of the transaction taking place. 

In addition to this, the ESFA’s approval will have to be obtained before entering into a contract for goods or services by a related party after 1 April where:

• that would exceed a value of £20,000 
• a number of contracts with the same related party, in the same academy financial year, would go beyond a total of £20,000 
• it is proposed to enter into additional contracts for any value where contracts exceeding a total of £20,000 have already been entered into in that financial year 

These cost limits do not include any amounts that would be paid to an employee under a contract of employment through payroll. 

The new AFH has also strengthened the requirements in relation to executive pay, with the new AFH stating that boards must ensure that decisions on executive pay are transparent, proportionate and justifiable. This specifically includes that the process for determining pay must be agreed in advance, the factors determining pay must be clear and that pay is defensible relative to the public sector market. The AFH also introduces the assumption that non-teaching pay should not increase at a faster rate than that of teachers, in individual years or in the longer-term.

Collapse

The DfE has published a statement of intent on teacher diversity to which ASCL is a signatory (see https://tinyurl.com/ybrt3v4z). The purpose of the statement is to help increase the proportion of public sector leaders from an ethnic minority background, so that the public sector workforce is fully representative of the communities it serves. In support of this ASCL has pledged to: 

• work closely with the DfE and other partners on the delivery of the Equalities and Diversities agenda 
• put in place, from October 2018, a new Committee of ASCL Council (ASCL’s policy-making body formed from a group of elected ASCL members) dedicated to equalities and inclusion 
• continue to chair a group of key education stakeholders on increasing the diversity of school and college leaders 
• endorse and encourage flexible working options to our members and develop case studies of successful working practices to share with the sector 
• continue to promote equalities and showcase the diversity of our membership on our website and in our Leader magazine 

Anna Cole, ASCL Parliamentary and Inclusion Specialist and Policy Lead for Equalities and Diversity, said: 

“ASCL is committed to supporting and promoting equality and diversity in the teacher and school leader workforce. 

“We wholeheartedly welcome today’s announcement and we are already working with the DfE and others in a variety of ways to promote equalities in the education workforce, particularly in education leadership.”

Collapse

It has been a year since employment tribunal issue fees were effectively abolished by the Supreme Court. The amount payable to initiate a tribunal claim differed according to the type of claim, ranging from £160 to £250. 

The fees had been in place since 2013 for a number of reasons, including to purportedly deter claims that were vexatious. Following their introduction, there was a dramatic decline in the number of claims being lodged. It was notable that the proportion of claims being successful in this period did not drop, which suggests that the fee regime was not deterring vexatious litigation as intended. 

Statistics for April to June 2018 have now been published, so a direct comparison can be made against the corresponding time period before fees were abolished. Headlines include:

• The number of single claims lodged increased by 165% compared with the same quarter last year. 
• The number of single claims outstanding rose by 130% compared with the same quarter last year. 
• The average award for unfair dismissal was £15,007. 
• Disability discrimination claims had the largest average award of £30,700. 
• Discrimination on grounds of religious belief had the lowest average award of £5,700. 
• In the region of £10 million of fee refunds (12,400 in total) have been made since the fee refund scheme was introduced. The overall expected refund is believed to be £33 million. 

While the Supreme Court’s decision has opened up access to justice for claimants deterred from bringing claims by the prospect of paying a fee, the HM Courts & Tribunals Service itself is now suffering from delays as staff and judges endeavour to deal with the influx of claims. The delays are being addressed in the medium to long term, but, in the interim, schools will need to actively build in these additional delays when planning their defence strategy. As has always been the case, proactive management of school staffing issues in addition to ensuring that employment concerns are handled appropriately and documented fully, will aid a school in defending itself in the tribunal.

Collapse

We hope that you will agree that, for the service and support provided, ASCL membership represents excellent value for money. Over the last academic year, we dealt with an unprecedented number of enquiries from members: 

ASCL Hotline: Key figures Sept 2017 – Sept 2018 

• Our Hotline dealt with 6,847 enquiries from members. 
• That’s 30–40 calls a day on average. 
• More than 43% of enquiries from members (2,971) were about that member’s specific situation such as redundancy, and discipline and capability issues. 
• A total of 1,840 members were supported for ongoing individual professional issues. 

Over the past year, ASCL has again expanded its field staff across the UK to ensure that the highest level of support for members can be maintained. In addition, our reserve fund now stands at approximately £2.4 million and is there to draw on should ASCL need to support members facing significant legal challenges. We continually look for opportunities for efficiency savings without compromising our service to members and we ensure that our procurement policy optimises value for money. 

As we are experiencing record demands on our resources and after freezing member subscriptions across all categories for 2018, we have decided to only increase subscriptions for 2019 by just £1 per month for executive heads, heads, professional associate and international members, and by just £3 per annum for associate and overseas associate members. We have again retained subscriptions at the same levels for all of our other main categories of membership. 

Membership fees for assistant heads and business leaders have not increased in the past nine years. 

2017 expenditure 

Approximately 76% of ASCL’s income in 2017 was derived from members’ subscriptions. The largest proportion of our expenditure (more than 60%) was spent directly on supporting our members. This includes regional, field and hotline officers; in-house solicitors and legal support staff; publications; legal fees; dealing with pensions and pay and conditions issues; and training and support for our local representatives. The chart above shows how we used your subs in 2017 to provide you with support and guidance. 

Don’t forget that if you pay your subscription personally, 85% is tax deductible. You can find out more about this at: www.ascl.org.uk/tax-benefits

If you have any questions about your membership or if you would like to notify us of any changes to your role or payment details, please contact the Membership Team on 0116 299 1122 or email: membership@ascl.org.uk 

Support when you need it 

If you need any help or advice about any leadership issues, please call our Hotline on 0116 299 1122 or email: hotline@ascl.org.uk

Collapse

The new Keeping Children Safe in Education guidance (https://tinyurl.com/p9cxb7e) came in September and there are a number of changes that leaders need to know. Here are the top four: 

1. Peer-on-peer abuse

This is a hot topic and one that we expect inspectors to test. As well as having to reference peer-on-peer abuse in your Child Protection policy (see paras 94–95), the 2018 version contains a Part 5 that helps you manage child-on-child sexual violence and harassment. This is a complex area, and a review of the suggested approach is recommended now, before you have to manage it in reality. 

2. DSL and file transfer

A new addition to this iteration of the guidance reflects good practice already evidenced in many schools and colleges (see paras 79–80). Designated safeguarding leads (DSLs) are now expected to have a conversation with their counterpart at a child’s new school in advance of that child moving on, if required. A child with complex and/or ongoing safeguarding needs would be a good example of where such a conversation should take place. 

3. Referring to the DBS

Beware of para 159 where it says that you should refer to the DBS when someone is removed from regulated activity, including being suspended. Suspension is most often used in a safeguarding setting to allow for an investigation into an allegation to take place. Deciding to refer to the DBS when someone is suspended is risky because you have not concluded your investigation and therefore cannot have reached a conclusion that harm was caused. An employee may well react to that by saying you have predetermined the outcome of the ongoing investigation. That’s not a position in which you want to find yourself. 

4. New safeguarding categories

Annex A of the guidance lists some new areas of risk, including homelessness, domestic violence and children being used to traffic and sell drugs around the area (county lines). Make sure you are aware of these new issues and that your staff are trained in them.

Collapse

Related Party Transactions (RPTs) have been a cause for concern for some time. When these finance and governance issues go wrong, they can go badly wrong. 

RPTs are those where payments are made to companies associated with trusts and their members or trustees (or even one of their family members). Trusts should be aware that these transactions, by their nature alone, will attract greater public scrutiny. The Academies Financial Handbook covers reporting requirements concerning RPTs and what is expected of trusts going forwards. 

The Education and Skills Funding Agency (ESFA) pre-authorisation requirements for RPTs are due to be implemented in April 2019. The aim is to help trusts take a proactive approach to these transactions rather than being reactive to issues flagged in year-end accounts. 

Even the £20,000 pre-authorisation threshold is seen by some as not enough to protect trusts and their use of public money. Some sector leaders are calling for a total ban. Whether a trust was considering a small supply contract, or a large-scale construction deal, it would make no difference. This would mean that if you are in some way involved with the trust, you would not be able to benefit in any way. This would be a huge change for some trusts, which rely on the knowledge and expertise of contacts to assist in finding best deals and making savings where possible. 

The position is that as long as these services are provided ‘at cost’ and agreements are properly procured, people are comfortable with RPTs. However, trying to work out the ‘at-cost’ price for a service is often complex and thought by some to be all too easily manipulated, hence the call for an outright ban. 

Breaches of funding rules for trusts are serious and can lead to penalties and significant reputational damage. The impact of mishandling of public funds in this way can damage the academies programme as a whole in the eyes of the public and lead to even more cumbersome rules on financial management in trusts.

Collapse

ASCL’s Post-16 and Colleges Specialist Kevin Gilmartin has been working with the Association of Employment and Learning Practitioners (AELP) to produce a guidance paper that provides an overview of The Baker Clause and its implications for schools and colleges. It is designed to help schools, providers, young people and their parents/carers find out about alternative options for post-16 education. Download the new paper at www.ascl.org.uk/BakerClause

Collapse

Sponsors should be aware of the recent guidance released by the DfE in connection to the transfer of surplus on sponsored academy conversions. 

Section 5 of the DfE guidance on surplus and deficit balances (https://tinyurl.com/y9xe9jkk) states that where the sponsored school has a surplus, such surplus will remain with the LA, unless the LA agrees otherwise. The surplus would only remain with the sponsor if the governing body or Interim Executive Board of the sponsored school has itself applied for the academy order. 

While it is recognised that a sponsored school is more likely to be in deficit than surplus (and the DfE guidance confirms that deficits remain with LAs), the position on surpluses goes against the general perceived understanding about how deficits should be dealt with. We are aware of a number of sponsors who had agreed to sponsor schools on the basis that they would retain a surplus and have now been forced to rethink their plans, on the basis that the school would be in a significantly worse financial position. 

We recommend that sponsors seek clarity as early as possible about the treatment of the surplus on any new project. Additionally, there is also scope for disagreement about how a sponsored school’s budget should be managed in the time between the granting of the order and conversion. We would therefore recommend that sponsors agree principles in writing with the LA to ensure that a school’s finances are managed in a fair and appropriate manner in this period.

Collapse

The DfE has recently amended its guidance on school attendance. The changes relate to children at risk of missing education and aim to reinforce a joined-up approach to attendance and safeguarding. 

The attendance guidance now specifically refers to Keeping Children Safe in Education (https://tinyurl.com/p9cxb7e), the key safeguarding guidance for schools, which itself explains how poor attendance can be an indicator of child protection issues. 

Governing bodies and proprietors are expected to have effective procedures in place to identify children at risk of missing education, which all staff should be familiar with. Where a pupil has been identified as missing from education, the school needs to consider what safeguarding response has been taken to ensure that the child is not at risk of harm. 

On a practical level, the attendance guidance now sets out the good practice approach to emergency contact details, which should form part of those arrangements. Schools’ responsibilities in this area and further advice around particular groups who are vulnerable are contained in the separate statutory guidance for local authorities, Children Missing Education (https://tinyurl.com/ppyuuar), which schools may also wish to refer to when reviewing their policies and procedures in this area. 

The attendance guidance, as updated in September, applies to all schools and continues to cover attendance codes and requirements concerning the school day and year.

Collapse

Given the ongoing scrutiny given to the admissions policies of schools, the autumn term provides an opportunity for reflection on how the policy operated in practice during the previous admissions round and whether any complaints arose, whether through the Office of the Schools Adjudicator (OSA) or otherwise. If a school wishes to make amendments to the admissions policy, the School Admissions Code 2014 provides a timescale for changes to be made. A school wishing to make changes to the policy must consult for a minimum of six weeks from 1 October to 31 January and then make a decision on the admissions policy by 28 February. That policy will be the one used for admissions for September entry the year after. 

Consultation must include more than just placing the draft policy on the school’s website. Schools must find a way, and retain evidence of, attempts to bring the consultation to the attention of parents of children aged from 2 to 18, other local schools and the local authority. In addition, faith schools will need to consult their religious body. 

While it is important to adhere to the code’s guidance on admissions policies, a key consideration must be the degree to which the policies are fair, objective, clear and easily understandable by parents. These broad criteria are often the areas on which school adjudicators uphold complaints about admissions policies and it is therefore important that any review of admissions policies takes a critical look at the policy to ensure it meets those criteria.

Collapse

ASCL’s partner Browne Jacobson LLP has been supporting clients with numerous General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) breaches over the past four months and having taken a step back to analyse their cause and the most effective action to take, here the law firm shares its experience with you:

It is clear that the causes of breaches are varied and have ranged from hacks, data and hardware theft, software changes and upgrades, misdirected email and lack of password protection to staff going off-piste, and genuine (and perhaps unavoidable) human error.

There is certainly a theme running through most, if not all, of these breaches. Ensuring the right level of importance is attached to GDPR and data management, getting training right and evidencing outcomes of that training, and investing time and effort in changing your culture is crucial. All three go hand in hand, and you need to think about them as part of the same theme – ensuring strong GDPR compliance in your setting. Get this right and you will significantly reduce your risk of breach and, importantly, create the evidence you need to support any report you need to make to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) following a breach.

Finally, ensure that you understand the capabilities of your IT system. It is likely that it can do a lot more to support you with strong data security and compliance, so speak with your IT ‘guru’ now to make sure you are using your IT to its full capability.

Collapse

Leader contains general guidance on the law that has been supplied by our Premier Partner for legal and HR services, Browne Jacobson LLP. If you would like to seek advice from a legal professional please contact Browne Jacobson at 0370 270 6000. ASCL members can also call the ASCL Hotline on 0116 2991122 for support on legal issues relating specifically to their own employment.

Collapse

ASCL has been quoted widely in the media over the recent period on a range of issues.

ASCL General Secretary Geoff Barton’s comments about the Chancellor’s £400 million for “little extras” announced in the Budget, were widely reported, including on the BBC News website, the Daily Mirror, Evening Standard, TES, Schools Week, Metro, The Times, and iNews. You can read Geoff’s comment in the Budget update below.

TES published the results of a joint survey with ASCL on capital funding in which 70% of respondents said the condition of their school buildings was not fit-for-purpose. Geoff said: “There is a clear and urgent need for a more substantial phased capital programme to replace, refurbish and repair school buildings and ensure that all school premises are fit for purpose.” Our thanks to all those who took part in the survey.

The DfE’s misuse of statistics over school funding came under the media spotlight in October. Geoff wrote a blog for TES which can be read here https://tinyurl.com/y9apl5rq and he was interviewed for BBC News at Ten, and BBC Radio 4 Six O’Clock News.

Collapse

As staff are your most valuable asset, successful training and induction of new teachers is paramount for your school or college and for the profession. Getting induction right ensures that staff are confident in their practice, effective in their performance and have a positive impact on learners. You can do this by:

staggering the induction process to personalise the role and avoid overwhelming new staff with information l providing a clear expectation of the position, with necessary training available to ensure consistency, and so that concerns can be addressed as soon as they arise

having support and a baseline review in place, so you can agree appropriate professional objectives or targets and identify any immediate professional learning needs

having a structured induction programme, with regular reviews with a mentor or coach, providing the opportunity to review the impact on initial professional learning and plan further personalised CPL activities

ensuring a systematic quality assurance process is in place to track the impact of the induction process

By using BlueSky, this whole process can easily be tracked, monitored and reviewed through its market leading online solution. BlueSky is an ASCL Premier Partner and is the only product of its kind endorsed by the Association. www.blueskyeducation.co.uk

Collapse

eTeach’s annual research from more than 3,000 schools and teachers provides a valuable insight into what schools can do to adopt a proactive approach to recruitment. See the research at: https://tinyurl.com/ybmoadml Here are three tips to help you sharpen up your recruitment strategy:

Stop making it difficult to apply! A total of 60% of eTeach jobseekers are now searching and applying via their phone, so you should offer that choice. An application of more than 30 questions leads to 50% fewer applicants, so try cutting the length.

Establish and market your school’s ‘Employer Brand’ Schools should have a dedicated career site and an active social media presence. A total of 60% of job-seeking teachers said a dedicated career site would make them more likely to apply to you.

Build Talent Pools – for permanent and supply Just imagine if you had a constant pool of candidates already interested in working at your school. This is exactly what a Talent Pool offers – see: www.eteach.com/talent-pools-homepage Advertise ‘vacancies’ in your Talent Pool year-round and create a waiting list.

All these tools are included as standard with eTeach, the most powerful suite of tools in the education sector by far. Call now on 0845 226 1906 or request a call back online at: https://tinyurl.com/y9b8fe9p

Collapse

ASCL is excited to announce a new partnership with FlashAcademy® EAL. We are aware that schools across the country are challenged by English as an additional language (EAL), which is why we have selected the award-winning FlashAcademy® EAL platform as a recommended resource to support with EAL provision. FlashAcademy® EAL:

• teaches curriculum English from more than 30 home languages
• works across smartphone, tablet and PC
• uses highly engaging lessons, games and challenges
• accelerates attainment and supports pupil wellbeing
• provides full pupil progress reporting through a comprehensive teacher dashboard

“As far as I’m concerned, FlashAcademy® EAL has revolutionised my department.”
Hollie O’Sullivan, Great Barr Academy

FlashAcademy® can be used for any school language need, across EAL, modern foreign languages (MFL) and whole-school literacy. Read more and watch school case studies at: flashacademy.com/educators For a school demonstration, please contact: hello@flashacademy.com or call 08432 897 447.

Member benefit

ASCL members receive an exclusive 5% discount towards a FlashAcademy® school licence, when quoting promo code: ASCL.

Collapse