Supreme Court Ruling - Key Information for Educators
Written by DiverseEd
Diverse Educators started as a grassroots network in 2018 to create a space for a coherent and cohesive conversation about DEI. We have evolved into a training provider and event organiser for all things DEI.
Introduction
On Wednesday 16th April the UK Supreme Court shared their ruling on the case For Women Scotland Ltd v The Scottish Minister, which interprets the legal definition of the word ‘sex’, as used in the context of The Equality Act 2010.
Since the court handed down, the ruling has been spoken about extensively in the regulated media, unregulated social media, and in Parliament.
We have read and listened to much of the coverage from diverse sources, and responses to the ruling have ranged widely. Some have exaggerating, misinterpreting or misrepresenting the details of the case, and others have expressed strong emotional reactions, which may act to exacerbate the fear that many trans people are currently experiencing.
Our intention in this piece is to present the details as accurately and clearly as we can. In order to do so, we have tried to avoid presenting our own opinions in much of the following piece. However, we think it is important to be transparent before we begin. We know trans people, we love them, we live our lives alongside them, and we are deeply concerned about the way this ruling is already impacting their lives. We believe that it is the duty of our government to enact laws which provide workable and inclusive protection from discrimination, and ensure dignity and respect for all people – including transgender people. With that clear, let’s begin.
Background
In 2018 the Scottish Government presented a new law, which aimed to get more women on public boards. The Scottish Government included trans women who had obtained a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC) within this aim, which they felt was in-line with The Equality Act 2010, and the Gender Recognition Act 2004. However, the group For Women Scotland disagreed – they felt The Equality Act 2010’s protected characteristic of ‘sex’, and specifically its use of the word ‘woman’, was not intended when written to include trans women.
For Women Scotland therefore brought a judicial review to the UK Supreme Court, requesting they review the lawfulness of the Scottish Government’s position in relation to The Equality Act 2010. Therefore, it was the job of the UK Supreme Court to provide a statutory interpretation of the meaning of ‘man’, ‘woman’, and ‘sex’ as used in The Equality Act 2010, and specifically whether that definition includes trans women who have a GRC.
The Ruling
The UK Supreme Court unanimously agreed that, for the purposes of interpreting the word ‘sex’ under the Equality Act 2010, Parliament’s intention was to refer to ‘biological sex’ (a term which neither the law or the court defines clearly) rather than legal gender acquired through a GRC. This means that legal protections associated with the characteristic of ‘sex’ may not apply to trans women in most contexts. The decision was made because to include transgender people who have a GRC within The Equality Act 2010 definition would make the law unworkable.
There are some details of the ruling which we think are important.
Firstly, the ruling is specifically addressing the definitions as used in The Equality Act 2010. The judge, when handing down the ruling, explained that the origins of the language used in The Equality Act 2010 is the Sex Discrimination Act 1975, which the judge stated, ‘adopted a biological interpretation of the terms men and women’. Note the wording here – the Acts have adopted an interpretation. This ruling does not define what a woman is – it interprets what it means in the specific context of a 15-year-old Act, which pulls on an interpretation used in 1975.
Secondly, this ruling does not justify the discrimination of trans people. The court clarified several times during their hand down that trans people are still protected from discrimination under The Equality Act 2010, which includes ‘Gender Reassignment’ as a protected characteristic. The judge explained that this protection extends to cover trans people whether they have a GRC, or not. Furthermore, there is some legal precedent that non-binary people may also be protected under this characteristic – although this is legal precedent and not case law. The judge also clarified that transgender women can still be protected under the characteristic of ‘sex’ through associated or perceived protections of women. We think it is also important to note that the language used by the judge presenting the ruling was mostly respectful, and used correctly gendered language at all times when talking about trans people – stating clearly that this ruling should not be seen as a triumph for any one group over another.
Finally, we think it is contextually important to understand that the court system in the UK interprets the laws which are enacted by Parliament. This ruling is thus an interpretation of law, and our current government can clarify this interpretation, or change the law to make it workable and inclusive, should they wish to.
What does this mean for society, and for schools?
The legal implication of this ruling is that single-sex spaces may now exclude trans men and women.
Our understanding is that the Supreme Court ruling itself does not state that they have to, but they may now legally choose to if they can demonstrate that this choice is a ‘proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim’. In society, this may impact: workplaces; services open to the public such as hospitals, shops, restaurants, leisure facilities, refuges, and counselling services; sporting bodies; schools; and associations (groups or clubs of more than 25 people which have rules of membership). The Equality Human Rights Commission (EHRC) has released an interim update on practical implications of the ruling, in which they suggest that it is compulsory to provide sufficient single-sex toilets in workplaces, and changing and washing facilities where these are needed – this is not compulsory for services that are open to the public. The EHRC interim update suggests that such spaces should be separated based on the Supreme Court interpretation of the Equality Act 2010, meaning that “trans women (biological men) should not be permitted to use the women’s facilities and trans men (biological women) should not be permitted to use the men’s facilities” (please note this is a direct quote of the EHRC guidance, and not language we would choose to use). The guidance goes on to explain that “trans people should not be put in a position where there are no facilities for them to use”, and that “where possible, mixed-sex toilet, washing or changing facilities in addition to sufficient single-sex facilities should be provided”, or facilities in “lockable rooms (not cubicles) which are intended for the use of one person at a time” – these can be used by anybody. The details set out in the EHRC regarding single-sex spaces were not mandated by the Supreme Court Ruling, which itself did not state that trans people have to be excluded from all single sex spaces. Our understanding of the ruling was that this is not legally necessary, but is legally possible if it can be demonstrated as ‘proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim’.
In schools, it has never been possible for young people to obtain a GRC, but this ruling may still impact: single-sex schools; school toilets and changing spaces; physical education and sport; and residential accommodation. In each of these areas, a school may now legally choose to exclude trans young people (or trans staff) from single-sex spaces if they can demonstrate that this choice is a proportionate means to achieving a legitimate aim. The EHRC interim guidance introduced above suggests that schools “must provide separate single-sex toilets for boys and girls over the age of 8” and “single-sex changing facilities for boys and girls over the age of 11”. Following the Supreme Court ruling, the guidance suggests that “pupils who identify as trans girls (biological boys) should not be permitted to use the girls’ toilet or changing facilities, and pupils who identify as trans boys (biological girls) should not be permitted to use the boys’ toilet or changing facilities”. They clarify that “suitable alternative provisions may be required”. Again, please note this is a direct quote of the EHRC guidance, and not language we would choose to use – and the details set out in the EHRC regarding single-sex spaces in schools were not mandated by the Supreme Court Ruling itself – our understanding of the ruling is that single sex-spaces do not have to exclude trans people, but they may now legally choose to if they can demonstrate that this choice is a ‘proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim’. For example, it would now be legal for a school single sex sports groups to exclude trans young people – or for schools to prevent trans young people from accessing the toilet aligned with their gender. Again, our current understanding of the ruling is that these decisions are not legally necessary – but they are now legally possible.
Although this is currently the only legal implication of this ruling, we are already seeing the misrepresentation of this ruling creating social implications beyond the legal bounds of the case. Transgender discrimination is increasing, and cis-gender people are already being discriminated against because of false assumptions about their gender. Although trans-exclusionary single-sex provision is now legal in certain circumstances, and encouraged by the interim EHRC guidance, it is difficult to enforce or police without making assumptions which could be false. Furthermore, we are already hearing from teachers that this ruling has created further uncertainty, particularly around staff confidence in discussing trans identities and the protected characteristic of ‘Gender Reassignment’, which could impact the inclusive quality of Relationships, Sex, and Health Education (RSHE) and Personal, Social, Health Economics (PSHE).
There is a lot of misinformation, which is leading to worsening, and at times unlawful, discriminatory language and behaviour. Government Ministers have stated the ruling requires transgender people to use toilets related to their sex assigned at birth, which is also set out in the EHRC interim guidance – this is not stated in the ruling. The Prime Minister has claimed the ruling offers clarity by defining women as biological women – this is misleading as the court judgement only pertains to an interpretation of what was meant by Parliament in The Equality Act 2010, and as clarified above it is parliament who enact and change law. Our current government could clarify or change law to make it workable and inclusive, should they wish to – the courts do not dictate definitions to Parliament.
Actions you may wish to consider taking
We hope that reading this piece has helped you to feel more informed about the Supreme Court ruling. Below are some actions you may wish to undertake as a result of what you have read:
- Please challenge mis-characterisations of this ruling and clarify that transgender people are still legally protected from discrimination, and that any decision to exclude them from single-sex spaces, whilst legal and encouraged in the EHRC interim guidance, were not mandated by the court ruling. It is important that the ruling is spoken about with as much accuracy as possible.
- Revisit policies – this ruling may require more accurate and thought-out language in policies which reference men and women, boys and girls, or The Equality Act 2010 protected characteristics of Sex and Gender Reassignment.
- If you are concerned about this ruling, then you may wish to take the time to write to your local MP and express your concerns. Remember, Parliament makes the laws, and the courts can only interpret them – our current government can change The Equality Act to include more clear and inclusive definitions which provide workable protections and dignity to all people – including transgender people.
- If you are concerned about the EHRC interim guidance, then they have stated that a consultation will launch in mid-May and last for two weeks. You may wish to use this consultation to share your view.
- Read and share our Diverse Educators Resources to support you and your school community. Here is our Transgender Rights’ Toolkit and here is our Growing Trans and Non-Binary Awareness Training.
This piece was written by members of the Diverse Educators’ team and is intended for informational purposes only; it does not constitute legal advice nor a formal legal interpretation. This blog was published on 26/4/25, and all information was to the best of our understanding at the time of publishing.
Further Resources
- A clear and accurate legal explanation from Kalina Hagen – Click Here
- Trans Actual Response – Click Here
- An interim update on practical implications from the EHRC – Click Here
Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Belonging in Leadership: Shaping the Future of the Teaching Workforce
Written by Susi Waters
Susi Waters, Operations Manager at Norfolk Research School; the Research Schools Network (RSN) Regional EDI Link (East of England and East Midlands); and Operations Manager and ITT Strategic Lead at the Julian Teaching School Hub.
In today’s educational landscape, fostering diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging (DEIB) feels essential for creating a supportive and effective teaching workforce that reflects the lived experiences of the students we serve. This blog post offers some thoughts on the importance of DEIB in educational leadership and highlights the challenges and opportunities for improvement.
Understanding Intersectionality and Privilege in Leadership
One of the key considerations in promoting DEIB in education is recognising intersectionality — the overlapping and interconnected nature of social categorisations such as race and ethnicity, gender, disability, and socioeconomic status. Leadership roles in education have historically been dominated by white cisgender individuals without disabilities, but there’s a growing call for more inclusive representation.
Many of us are familiar with the concept of “checking our privilege,” which can sometimes trigger defensiveness. It’s helpful to remember that, in this context, “privilege” refers to an absence of disadvantage. Having “white privilege” doesn’t equate to guaranteed success; it means that one’s skin colour hasn’t posed societal barriers.
Chris Hildrew, a headteacher in Somerset, articulates this experience well:
“I am usually in the majority. I joke about how I have the privilege full house: White. Male. English. Straight. Cisgender. Middle class. […] When I speak, people listen. They always have. I expect them to.“
Data from Edurio(2021) and NFER (2024) reveal that the representation of non-white educators, disabled individuals, and LGBTQIA+ educators remains low in leadership positions. Addressing these disparities calls for thoughtful recruitment, retention, and career development strategies.
The Role of ITT Recruitment in Teacher Diversity
Recruiting a diverse teaching workforce starts with how we market initial teacher training (ITT) programmes. While people of colour are overrepresented among applicants for ITT, they are significantly underrepresented in the teaching workforce overall. In fact, 60% of schools in England had an all-white teaching staff in 2021 – 22, with 86% having an all-white senior leadership team.
Research by Dr. Gabriella Beckles-Raymond (2020) underlines the importance of targeted recruitment strategies aimed at attracting African, Caribbean, and Asian teachers. Schools and training providers might benefit from adopting inclusive messaging and outreach initiatives to encourage individuals from underrepresented backgrounds to explore teaching careers.
Recruitment should be thoughtful. For instance, we could consider:
- Do providers offer pre-application support, like explaining the English school system to those who didn’t grow up here?
- Are interview processes truly inclusive? Do they provide interview questions in advance or offer online options?
- Is the interview panel diverse in terms of race, gender, and age?
Making sure that trainee teachers have the right support means addressing barriers that can impede career progression. Access to mentorship, leadership training, and workplace policies that foster inclusion are all important aspects to think about.
Making Teaching a Sustainable Career for All
For many educators, especially those from marginalised groups, remaining in the profession long-term can be tough. Research from BERA (2019) on LGBTQIA+ teachers and the “Missing Mothers” project (2024) highlights how workplace culture, lack of support, and discrimination can push talented educators away from the profession.
To encourage sustainability in teaching careers, schools should implement policies that accommodate diverse needs, such as:
- Support for teachers going through menopause.
- Flexible work arrangements for primary caregivers.
Anti-discrimination policies that protect neurodivergent and LGBTQIA+ individuals.
Leadership: Breaking Barriers and Creating Opportunities
Leadership in education needs to evolve to better reflect the communities it serves. Disparities persist; for instance, men are twice as likely to take on leadership positions as women, even though women comprise the majority of the teaching workforce. Gaps remain in representation among racial and ethnic minorities, disabled individuals, and LGBTQIA+ professionals.
Educational leaders can play a significant role in advocating for equity by:
- Sponsoring and mentoring diverse talent.
- Implementing transparent hiring and promotion practices.
- Encouraging conversations about privilege and systemic barriers.
- Revisiting senior leadership recruitment processes to ensure job descriptions and interview processes don’t unintentionally place women, disabled individuals, or caregivers at a disadvantage.
Moving Forward
We should ask ourselves: are we really setting up all teachers to enjoy a sustainable and fulfilling career?
Rethinking our approach to leadership is key — not just at senior levels but also in shaping the next generation of educators. There are alternative pathways to leadership in education beyond headteacher roles, such as Teaching School Hubs, Research Schools, and ITT leadership. These roles often offer flexibility, hybrid options, and meaningful opportunities to affect educational policy.
Ultimately, if we don’t act, the next generation of teachers will mirror those who currently remain in the system. Without deliberate attention and change, we risk perpetuating a cycle where leadership remains uniform. However, by embracing diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging, we have the potential to create a teaching workforce where all educators feel valued and every child sees themselves reflected in their role models.
To cultivate a more inclusive educational system, leaders should commit to ongoing education and implementing best practices. By embracing these principles, we can nurture a teaching workforce where diversity is celebrated, equity is upheld, inclusion is practised, and belonging is experienced by all. The future of education rests on leaders willing to challenge the status quo and promote DEIB at every level.
This blog is a summary of a session that Susi delivered as part of Derby Research School’s Change Champions conference in autumn 2024; it forms part of the RSN and Norfolk Research School’s ongoing work around EDI and developing diverse voices.
All sources and recommended reading can be found here and you can watch the full session here.
Decolonising the curriculum
Written by Shashi Knott
Shashi Knott is an English teacher and former Deputy Head of Sixth Form, with 16 years of experience teaching in state secondary schools across North London. After earning her MSc in Education, Power, and Change, she transitioned from her role as a full-time English teacher to focus on driving change within education. She is interested in working with other professionals to see how we can create more compassionate environments in schools. She is currently an outreach English teacher and Associate Trainer with KCA Training.
Decolonising the curriculum is like finding new love—it’s hard work, often requiring us to let go of what we’ve cherished. It’s a struggle, and one that calls for understanding and acknowledgment of the emotions involved.
The department meeting went silent. A chair scraped awkwardly as we shifted at tables. It was nearly 4.30pm. Everyone had marking to do. Was this about to get tricky?
In London, where I work as an English teacher, 46.2% of residents identify as non-white. It’s not a difficult context to make an argument that the texts we teach our students should be more representative. And yet, somehow, we don’t seem to make it happen.
We could absolutely have spent some of our fast- vanishing department budget on a new set of texts for Year 9. Amazingly, we all agreed that Elizabeth Acevedo’s ‘The Poet X’ would be an excellent choice for the spring term. However, when one of us asked, “What about George Orwell?” I know they were not the only ones thinking this. The silence in the room might have suggested otherwise, and we all knew what we should say next. So when our Head of Department was conciliatory, coming up with the comfort of delay, we were all secretly relieved. “We’ll revisit the discussion at the end of the term.” “ We’ll review again in our gained time.” “We’ll assess our existing schemes of work for diversity. ”
We know what we should be advocating for, but there are so many reasons why teaching ‘Animal Farm’ feels more comfortable, and it’s not just because we already have established schemes of work.
As English teachers and often English graduates, we have all internalised an idea of what constitutes the canon. Literary critic Harold Bloom describes canonical texts as works of ‘aesthetic beauty’ (1994) and therefore, he suggests, to question these texts is to question the merit of art itself. Bloom describes the ‘idealistic resenters’ who ‘denounce competition’ and want to focus on marginalised voices, as missing the point of art and culture. (1994) Whilst Bloom’s ideas have been convincingly challenged and are now certainly out of fashion, they are ideas that we cannot fail to have internalised. Many of us grew up with these views being the dominant narrative in the study of English Literature and speaking for myself, I did much work to embrace the canon. I certainly did not want to be seen as someone who missed the point of art.
We have to acknowledge that decolonising our minds is uncomfortable. It involves acknowledging that some of the texts we loved, we might need to let go. A bit like the way a song from our youth, however rubbish, will always evoke strong feelings, those first occasions of literary love will do the same. The first time you felt seen, grown up, clever, understood. That first moment of connection with the canon. Mine was Keats, the perfect poet for the
misunderstood teen. Decolonising the curriculum involves a deconstruction of the canon, of beloved texts, and that can mean a painful epistemic discomfort. We picked apart those texts. We invested meaning in them. We succeeded at them. That’s why we’re English teachers.
Decolonising the English curriculum is as much about interrogating our own relationship with literature as it is about buying new books or creating schemes of work. It is about being willing to forge new relationships with texts and giving our students those special moments of connection, potentially with texts that are not our one true love. It’s not just about representation for global majority students, it’s about a more inclusive literary canon for everyone.
Maybe as English teachers we need to go forth and find new literary loves. New characters to fall for. New writers to make students feel understood, and to voice, in new ways, all the age old feelings. Not a new canon. Just new names to add in. New, gritty, glittering, literary loves for students of English to come.
References
Bloom, H. (2014) The western canon: The books and school of the ages. New York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
What Is the Point of Dialogue?
Written by Sharon Booth
Founder & Director, Solutions Not Sides. Sharon has an MA from Cambridge University in Theology and Religious Studies. She taught English at Amideast in Tunisia and then went on to work in Amman, Jordan as a Productions Manager. She was employed as PA to the Defence Attaché at the British Embassy, then returned to the UK and began work in Israeli-Palestinian conflict resolution, founding the Solutions Not Sides Education Programme in 2010. Sharon speaks Arabic and French and has studied ancient Hebrew. In January 2016, she was awarded a master’s degree with distinction from King's College London, specialising in nationalism and religion.
Dialogue is fundamental to building relationships and resolving differences. It is a crucial tool for addressing conflicts, yet when pain and injustice run deep, the idea of engaging in dialogue can feel futile—or even wrong.
When faced with deep moral disagreements, people may question whether dialogue is worthwhile. Engaging with opposing viewpoints can feel uncomfortable and even counterproductive. In such moments, the instinct may be to advocate solely for what feels right. Yet, it is precisely during these times that dialogue becomes most valuable—not necessarily to achieve agreement but to foster greater empathy, reflection, and mutual understanding.
Dialogue in a Polarised World
These challenges are heightened in times of deep societal division. When issues are viewed in black-and-white terms, conflicts become entrenched, and meaningful conversations break down. This dynamic has been evident in Britain in recent years on topics like Brexit, immigration, and the Israel-Palestine conflict. Though often framed as binary, these issues are complex and multi-layered. Recognising this complexity is key to breaking through entrenched positions—but it can feel overwhelming, particularly for educators navigating these discussions in schools.
In England, the Department for Education requires teachers to maintain political impartiality in the classroom. While this guidance is intended to prevent partisan bias, it has also led to uncertainty about how to approach difficult topics. Some educators, lacking expertise in areas like the Middle East conflict, may choose to avoid these discussions altogether. However, shutting down conversations about political and social issues does a disservice to young people.
Without education on these topics and training in how to engage in difficult conversations, students miss out on opportunities to develop a nuanced understanding of the world. Worse, they may grow up ill-equipped to engage thoughtfully with societal challenges.
Dialogue as a Tool for Empowerment
This is where dialogue finds its true purpose—not as an end in itself but as a means to empower young people. At Solutions Not Sides (SNS), we developed the Olive Branch Award for schools, colleges, and community institutions as a framework for discussing Israel-Palestine. Rooted in values of non-violence, equality, and the rejection of hate, the programme takes a “win-win” approach to contentious issues. Within this structure, dialogue becomes a tool for critical thinking, helping students articulate their beliefs while respecting others’ perspectives.
The Olive Branch Award is not about reconciling opposing views or forcing agreement. Instead, its purpose is to foster understanding—of social dynamics, emotional experiences, and conceptual frameworks—so that students can make informed decisions about how to act. By engaging in dialogue within this framework, young people learn how to stand up for their beliefs while recognising that others may hold different views. Crucially, they also learn that hatred has no place in a diverse, compassionate, and fair society.
To be effective, dialogue must be approached with care and supported by specific tools that become embedded in school culture over time. Skills such as active listening, effective communication, and empathy are cultivated over a three-year period through the Olive Branch programme.
One common concern is that engaging with differing perspectives could be seen as endorsing them. However, dialogue is not about validating all views equally but about understanding why different perspectives exist. This allows students to reflect critically without feeling pressured to accept or condone harmful viewpoints.
At SNS, we emphasise that education is not about excusing or justifying views but about understanding why people hold them. This approach enables students to develop both intellectual rigour and emotional intelligence—essential qualities for active citizenship.
Supporting Schools Through the Olive Branch Award
Schools and colleges that participate in the Olive Branch Award benefit from a range of activities and resources designed to foster dialogue. We support staff and students through training, networking, an annual conference for staff, ambassador programmes, priority places on our residential courses for students, and opportunities to engage with peacebuilders from Israel-Palestine.
This summer, the first cohort of Olive Branch schools will complete the three-year programme and receive accreditation. Some of the initiatives we’ve seen include:
- Lunchtime and after-school clubs exploring conflict-related topics like journalism
- School murals dedicated to peace and justice
- Students founding interfaith initiatives in their schools
- Peer-to-peer learning projects following SNS workshops
These initiatives show that, when given the tools to navigate complex discussions, students become empowered to address difficult topics with inclusivity and empathy.
The Bigger Picture: Why Dialogue Matters
In today’s polarised world, it’s easy to feel disillusioned about dialogue, especially when faced with deep-seated divisions. But avoiding difficult conversations only fuels misunderstanding and hostility. Through structured dialogue, we can equip young people with the skills to engage with complexity with confidence and compassion.
The point of dialogue isn’t just to resolve differences; it’s to empower individuals to think critically, act ethically, and engage constructively—even with those they disagree with. In doing so, we prepare the next generation not just to lead but to build a society rooted in mutual respect and shared humanity.
At its core, dialogue is about more than talking—it’s about listening with purpose and acting with integrity. Within a framework that prioritises education over division and understanding over hate, it becomes one of the most powerful tools for creating a better future.
What can we learn about masculinity and misogyny from the Netflix drama 'Adolescence'?
Written by Bold Voices
Bold Voices is an award-winning social enterprise preparing and empowering school communities to recognise and tackle gender inequality and gender-based violence through the delivery of educational talks, workshops, training and resources for young people, teachers and parents.
Originally published here: https://www.boldvoices.co.uk/blog/2025/3/20/what-can-we-learn-about-masculinity-and-misogyny-from-the-netflix-drama-adolescence
On March 13 Adolescence premiered on Netflix, a week on and the show has a 98% rating on Rotten Tomatoes and has sent waves across media, starting conversations about themes of masculinity, the ‘manosphere’, incel culture and gender-based violence more widely. It is a show that has driven home the fear of what happens when harmful attitudes and beliefs develop into extreme violence.
If you’re looking to understand some of the key terms used in the series take a read of this article first: https://www.standard.co.uk/lifestyle/andrew-tate-incel-meaning-adolescence-netflix-b1217106.html
The question of ‘why’ runs throughout the four-part series. What made this 13 year old boy brutally stab and murder his school mate, Katie. Where did his behaviour come from? Was it the ‘masculinity’ modelled by his father? A generally kind man who displays a couple of emotional and physical outbursts throughout the show (including physically intimidating and handling a child who vandalised his work van)? Was it his friends at school who ultimately provided him with the murder weapon? Was it the misogyny influencers and their ideas? Or the social media sites platforming these influencers and offering young people the impunity which allows them to say harmful and destructive things to and about each other?
Throughout the show we are trying to understand if Jamie is a good kid at heart who was ultimately misguided and has done something devastating, but out of character. Or whether he is a bad kid that has been able to manipulate and hide his darkness from his parents, and even us as viewers. But then again how bad of a kid can you really be with planet wallpaper and stickers of tiny astronauts? These minor and seemingly unremarkable, but ultimately essential, details about Jamie’s room make up the final scenes of this powerful show. They are a reminder that Jamie could be any young boy in any family. It is just how unremarkable he is as a character that makes this story so poignant.
So what themes about masculinity, and adolescence, can we draw out from the show?
Masculinity, the ‘manosphere’ and ‘incel’ communities
Jamie is a boy who we come to understand has been spending time online, getting drawn into ‘manosphere’ and ‘incel’ communities. During the second episode that takes a look at Jamie’s school, we learn about the “call to action by the manosphere”, the meaning behind ‘red pills’ and ‘blue pills’ and the 80/20 rule (that 80% of women are attracted to 20% of men).
“Red pill is like I see the truth, it’s a call to action by the manosphere. Which is where the 100 comes in, the 80/20 rule. 80% of women are attracted to 20% of men. Women, you must trick them because you will never get them in a normal way… she’s saying he’s an Incel dad” – Episode 2 | 29:50 – 31:00
When we hear from Jamie about this, he acknowledges that he knows about these ideas and that “he had a look but didn’t like it” although in talking about the 80/20 rule he says “I do think they’re right about that though”.
The writer, Jack Thorne, is very honest about the fact that through his research he realised that “there was a logic to this and how they see the world”. It is through Thorne’s vulnerability in admitting this that we are reminded of an uncomfortable truth, that the attitudes and beliefs displayed by many of these online forums and communities are attractive to boys and young men and resonate with a vulnerability they actually feel.
In the third episode Jamie is asked about what he thinks about men, about masculinity. In particular, he’s asked about his dad and grandad, what he thinks about them and what type of men they are. We get insights into the stereotypes that pervade about masculinity; his dad as a hard worker who provides for his family, who can get angry and lose his temper, who loves his wife and is good to women, but doesn’t have any female friends. None of this is positioned as ‘good’ or ‘bad’, but it holds a mirror up to the expectations we have of men and masculinity that continue to frame a ‘real man’ as someone who is physically and emotionally strong and dominant, who protects and provides for loved ones and who sees women as objects of love and affection, but not necessarily giving space for relationships to women that exist outside of caregiver, nurturer or romantic partner.
These questions are vital, and they connect back to the extreme views many boys and young men are consuming online. Rhetoric that is based on the inherent idea that a ‘real man’ doesn’t show vulnerability or weakness, protects and provides for those around him, is successful at ‘getting women’, and gains status through money, physical strength, women and material markers of success such as fast cars and displays of wealth.
Jamie couldn’t necessarily clearly articulate what makes someone ‘a man’ but he knew exactly what makes someone ‘not manly’ and his visceral rejection of those ideas were far more natural for him to display, when asked if he was friends with women he says “no” and “I’m not a twt though*”. His disdain for feminine traits and femininity is far clearer than his ‘love’ for ‘manliness’, a nuance that is powerfully captured in the show.
Femininity, objectification, power and misogyny
Not only do we get insight into how Jamie feels about himself, we are able to understand a little of how he views girls and women. The fact that he sees girls as objects and that viewing explicit images of girls that he knows (and girls and women he doesn’t know) is not something that he questions; when asked about whether he thinks the girls would be happy about him seeing explicit images of them he responds, “everyone else did”. The normalisation of girls as objects, and the non-consensual sharing and viewing of explicit images of girls, is so normal it is not worth denying or lying about.
It becomes further apparent that Jamie’s relationship to girls is far from healthy. He lies about having had sexual experiences with girls, he shrugs off the fact that he doesn’t have any friends that are girls, when asked about whether he was attracted to Katie after seeing an explicit image of her he makes an objectifying and dismissive comment about her body, saying, “no” and that “she was flat”. Jamie articulates a desire to have a girlfriend however he doesn’t seem able to articulate, or even understand, what that dynamic might look like aside from him owning or receiving sexual gratification or pleasure from a girlfriend. In the fourth episode we are presented with a stark contrast to this when Jamie’s parents are reminiscing about their first date as 13 year olds at the school disco, we hear about teenagers in the first moments of genuine connection, something that feels completely inaccessible to Jamie.
Despite answering “no” to the question of whether he feels powerful viewing explicit images of girls he knows, there are subtler insights into how Jamie feels about power and women. In one moment he stands over the psychologist and shouts in her face, a male member of staff comes to the door but she indicates that she’s okay. In response, Jamie says “what was that? hey? what the fk was that? signalling him away like a fking queen yeah?”. He is angry and riled up when faced with a woman in control.
We also get insight when Jamie reveals the impact that rejection has on him. We hear that Jamie had previously asked Katie out to the fair but that she wasn’t interested and said no to him. Although he insists multiple times that he did not “fancy” her and that he was not attracted to Katie because she’s not “his type”, Jamie shares that he assumed she would be feeling weak after explicit images of her had been shared round the school. Jamie wanted to take advantage of this vulnerability and ask her out, which meant when she rejected him, he was left feeling all the more insulted and angry.
“I just thought she might be weak after all that, cus everyone was calling her a slag or flat or whatever so I thought if she was that weak she might like me. It’s clever, don’t you think. I said I was sorry and that the guy who shared her picture was a wanker and that I’d take her to the fair if she liked… she just laughed and said – I’m not that desperate.” – Episode 3 | 42:00 – 44:00
A culture of misogyny and gender-based violence
A common reaction I’ve heard from parents and adults in response to Adolescence is fear. In particular, a fear that is centred around the online world and the harmful content that children and teenagers may be consuming without us realising. While this fear is incredibly valid and understandable, we must also be wary of not letting this fear distract us from the roots of this problem that exist far beyond the internet and the communities found there.
It is in the subtler moments in the show that we see these roots and an acknowledgement that it isn’t just the online world that led to Jamie’s actions, it is a wider ‘culture’ of gender inequality:
- Jamie does not address his mum or sister at all – exclusively reaching for the support and validation of his father.
- Jamie implies that having female friends makes someone a “twat”.
- Jamie exaggerates and lies about having had sexual experiences with girls to the psychologist and then immediately takes this back and reveals the true extent of those sexual experiences.
- Jamie feels confident enough to shout and scare the female psychologist, someone in a position of authority who is at least 15 years his senior.
- Jamie shares his awareness of his dads disappointment/shame at the fact that he wasn’t ‘sporty’.
- The school teacher only introduces the male police officer and then has to quickly introduce the female police officer when she realises her omission a few seconds later.
- The treatment of female staff members in the school where we hear male students shouting “Shut up miss!”
- The response to Ryan after he is punched by Jade (Katie’s best friend) in the playground – when another student says “You just got banged by a girl you sausage”.
- The way the female psychologist is made to feel uncomfortable by the male CCTV operator.
What happens if we watch the show without focusing on investigating the crime itself, but instead, understanding the culture all around it? The show perfectly presents the subtleness of gender stereotypes and gender attitudes that are pervasive in society. How they are shaping the way we talk to and about each other based on gender, what we expect from ourselves and each other based on gender and how we treat ourselves and others when those expectations are not fulfilled.
Adolescence confronts us with the truth that acts of gender-based violence are not committed by ‘bad apples’. Jamie is a 13 year old child who has been indoctrinated and who has had gender-based violence normalised and even glorified. There are moments that we feel deep empathy for Jamie and moments where we are scared of him, moments that ranged from the casualness with which he displayed misogynistic attitudes to the outbursts of anger and rage. But Adolescence raises the questions rather than providing the answers. The answers lie in the communities around young people coming together to prioritise education that gets to the root of the issue and addresses the gender stereotypes and attitudes that seem harmless in isolation, but together contribute to a culture that normalises gender-based violence and misogyny.
Questions to start conversations based on Adolescence:
- Why is being able to get girls or female attention so important to being seen as ‘manly’?
- Are all young boys as likely to be influenced by these messages as each other? If not – why?
- When Jamie calls himself “ugly” we get an insight into how he views himself and his self-esteem, how does this connect to his actions?
- We know many of these ideas are consumed online, where else do we learn these ideas?
- Why did the boy who received the photo of Katie spread it round? What did he gain by doing this?
- Why did Jamie think Katie was “easier to get” after the photos were leaked? How do you feel about that?
- What did Jamie feel when Katie rejected him? Why might he have felt that way?
Resources and places to learn more about these issues:
Toolkit: School of Sexuality Education – ‘A Look Into the Incel Movement: A Guide to Tackling Online Cultures of Misogyny for Schools, Colleges and Universities’
Book: Laura Bates – Men Who Hate Women
Ted Talk: Jackson Katz at TEDxFiDiWomen – ‘Violence against women—it’s a men’s issue’
Why Every Child Deserves to Hear Their Own Song
Written by Matthew Dix
Matthew Dix is a primary school teacher of 17 years. He continues to work as a teacher whilst working as a primary reading consultant across Nottinghamshire. He is the Founder of resource website Manic Street Teachers and has recently launched 'Musician of the Month' to create a culture of musical appreciation and understanding across schools, with a focus on diversity and inclusion.
Growing up, music wasn’t just background noise – it was how I made sense of the world. It was my mum playing the piano, it was watching her dance to ABBA and playing, of all things, a mandolin! It was my dad blasting heavy metal one minute and Vivaldi the next. Nothing quite says ‘peaceful Sunday morning’ like Iron Maiden shaking the windows!
As I reached adolescence, my heroes ranged from Tupac Shakur to Freddie Mercury, from John Lennon to Annie Lennox. Following their lives taught me that struggles were universal and at the end of a struggle, there can still be success. Behind every composition, every lyric, every guitar solo was a person with a story – often one of resilience against all odds.
Music took centre stage when I formed an indie band in the early 2000s. It wrote songs, often with the children’s help, for primary school subjects when I began my career as a teacher. It was a focus of mine when I created the music resources for ‘Manic Street Teachers’. Music has always been in the foreground of whatever I do.
A decade ago, I took a job in an inner-city school in Nottingham with 98% of children having English as an additional language. In fact, there were 52 different languages spoken in total. And yet, the music curriculum offered very few mirrors of themselves or windows to other worlds. A colleague and I decided to introduce a new musician every month in the hope of engaging children who seemed vacant during singing assemblies, and often unable to discuss and share their likes and dislikes in music lessons.
It wasn’t until we chose Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan as a musician one month that parents started to leave emails, children started to talk and a buzz started to make its way through school. I remember a child telling me that their parents listened to him at home. We shared his life, his trials and tribulations, his achievements and videos of his performances. Children could explain his words and what they meant. They were fascinated to learn that he had come to England in 1985 and brought Qawwali music (a form of Sufi Islamic devotional singing originating in India) with him. Children finally saw themselves and their families in our curriculum.
👉 Free Sample (Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan) – sign in required
It got us thinking. What if a girl thought that she could never be a classical musician because she looked nothing like Mozart, Beethoven or Bach? Well, we created resources all about Florence Price, whose compositions were forgotten until, just 16 years ago, when a whole collection of her work was rediscovered in a dilapidated house on the outskirts of St. Anne, Illinois.
What about a child who believes music is impossible with a disability? We shared Stevie Wonder’s story, Jacqueline du Pré’s story, and we shared how Joni Mitchell had to detune her guitar to learn to play another way after polio affected her hand. Let’s show them how these artists found ways to keep playing, no matter what. The show must go on, as Freddie Mercury said!
We live in a global world – our music curriculum should reflect that. Instead of saying, “Let’s learn African drumming,” let’s say, “Let’s learn about Babatunde Olatunji, a Nigerian drummer who learned by immersing himself in the culture and following the master drummers in his village, eventually being given a cowbell and then various Yoruba drums, took his craft to America, became an important friend to Martin Luther King Jr., and became a world-wide sensation!”
If a child thinks you can’t play music when you’re old, then share the story of The Buena Vista Social Club – how Ry Cooder, a producer from the US, had a twist of fate when musicians from Mali had their visas delayed so he ended up in Cuba, reuniting forgotten musicians like Ibrahim Ferrer, who was still shining shoes to make ends meet. The musicians, most of whom were over 70 years old, finally had a chance to tour the world with their music.
👉 Read our EYFS eBook (Ibrahim’s Song)
Context is always king, and every child loves a story. I believe the person behind the music is as important as the music itself, and becomes the bridge to another world. Teaching children to empathise helps them feel less detached from the music they are studying. Music bridges cultures, generations, and experiences in ways that words alone sometimes cannot.
That’s why I created Musician of the Month – a simple, accessible way for teachers to bring diverse musical stories into their classrooms. It’s directly linked to The Model Music Curriculum and the 9 Protected Characteristics and, as the site develops, we hope it will help schools show every child that they too can be a musician. To a child in school, the right musician, with the right song, at the right moment could well hit the right notes!
👉 Musician of the Month + Free Sample (David Bowie)
Using drama to drive empathy in schools
Written by Rachel Crowther
Rachel is a trained actor, coach and founder of Squash. She started working in L&D over 10 years ago and experimented with using drama to bring training to life. She created Squash to address some of the harmful workplace behaviours that were accepted as the status-quo and to offer an engaging antidote to traditional, tick-box DEI training. She’s designed and delivered impactful training experiences for global organisations, charities and young people.
Empathy is an important skill for young people (and adults) to develop. It helps them build relationships, resolve disagreements and create more inclusive environments – in the classroom and in the office. A powerful way to encourage empathy, is through drama..
I run corporate workshops for adults, using actors to spotlight behaviours and perspectives and to start meaningful conversations. Something our workshops enable, is for participants to step into someone else’s shoes.
A phrase we often hear in discussions is “We don’t know what we don’t know.” There is so much we don’t know about those around us, classmates and colleagues, the challenges and barriers they face. We often make assumptions and generalisations, to fill in the blanks, but this is where unconscious bias creeps in. Instead, learning the importance of curiosity and perspective-taking from a young age, prevents us making assumptions and helps us to create genuine, connections.
Storytelling and role-playing are simple ways for students to experience situations from multiple perspectives and are effective tools to start objective conversations on important topics like friendships, bullying, cultural differences. It builds an awareness of the unseen challenges faced by those around them, strengthening the muscle for empathy.
It’s a way for young people to experience feelings in a safe environment. For instance, acting out a scenario in which they are excluded from a playground activity. Feeling this kind of experience, in a safe, facilitated environment, is going to be far more impactful than just being told about it.
Empathy isn’t just about understanding someone else’s feelings – it’s also about how we respond. Drama helps young people to ‘rehearse’ difficult social situations. Practicing the ability to actively listen, express themselves clearly and respond with sensitivity. Improvisation is a great way to develop communications skills and the ability to think on their feet.
The benefits of developing empathy at a young age are clear. It helps young people to stand up for others and create inclusive, and welcoming school cultures and communities. Using drama is a way to not only understand empathy but to feel it and it’s that emotional connection that they’ll remember throughout their education and beyond.
True Inclusion Starts with Seeing Students for Who They Are
Written by Purvi Gandhi
Purvi Gandhi, MA MBA FCCT CPsychol is a psychologist, educator, and advocate for student wellbeing, leadership, and equity in education. With a career spanning clinical psychology, secondary and post-secondary education, and educational leadership, she bridges mental health and education through evidence-informed practice. She is the author of A Little Guide for Teachers: Student Mental Health, a practical resource for educators.
Imagine stepping into a new environment where your name is mispronounced or shortened to something more “convenient.” It’s a minor inconvenience, perhaps, but one that over time chips away at your sense of belonging. Now imagine this happening every day, in a place where you are supposed to grow, learn, and thrive.
For many students, particularly those from ethnic minority backgrounds, this is not hypothetical—it is their daily reality. And yet, within the walls of our classrooms, the power of a name is often underestimated. Names are not just labels; they carry history, identity, and cultural heritage. To overlook them is to overlook the student. To get them right is to affirm who they are.
Beyond Good Intentions: Why Inclusion Must Be Active
In a recent workshop with early career teachers, we explored what it really means to create inclusive classrooms—beyond policies, beyond slogans, and into the lived experiences of students. The session began with a simple but revealing exercise: storytelling.
One African tale set the tone. A great flood sweeps through the land, and every animal finds a way to escape—even the mighty crocodile. High up in the trees, the monkeys spot a fish struggling in the floodwaters. Moved by compassion, they “rescue” it, placing it safely on a branch. Of course, the fish begins to suffocate.
The lesson is clear: good intentions do not equate to good outcomes. In education, a one-size-fits-all approach can be just as ineffective as the monkeys’ well-meaning mistake. Every student has unique needs, shaped by culture, background, and identity. The question is, are we paying attention?
Consider this: A teacher, in an off-the-cuff remark during a classroom discussion on relationships, casually states that arranged marriages are “backward” or “unfair.” It’s not intended to harm, just a spontaneous reaction based on personal beliefs. But what if a student from a culture where arranged marriages are the norm is sitting there, quietly absorbing that statement?
Perhaps this student has spent years trying to navigate the space between two worlds—balancing the values of their family with the expectations of the society they are growing up in. Now, in a single moment, they are made to feel that their culture is lesser. They may go home carrying this conflict, questioning their parents, their upbringing, and where they truly belong. Suddenly, they feel like an outsider in both places—neither fully at home at school nor at home with their family.
This is the impact of uninformed assumptions. Educators do not just teach subjects; they shape perspectives. A thoughtless comment can widen the gap between a young person and their identity, making them feel alienated rather than empowered.
To be truly inclusive, we must move beyond our own perceptions and seek to understand the lived experiences of others. We must create spaces where students don’t feel forced to choose between their heritage and their education, but rather see their identities reflected and respected within the school environment.
Because, just like the fish in the flood, what a student truly needs may not be what we assume is best for them. Listening, learning, and adapting is the key to meaningful inclusion.
Rethinking What It Means to ‘See’ Our Students
An alternative version of the tale drove the point home. In this retelling, the animals hold a competition to see who can see the farthest. The eagle soars and surveys the horizon, the giraffe gazes across the savanna, and the monkey takes in the view from the treetops. When it’s the fish’s turn, it can only see the immediate waters around it. The other animals laugh—until the fish explains that while they focus on the distance, it detects subtle currents, hidden dangers, and movements they cannot perceive.
Here lies a second lesson: students should not be judged against a singular definition of success. The education system, often fixated on rigid measures of ability, risks missing the unique strengths that lie beneath the surface. A student who struggles with traditional assessments may have an extraordinary ability to lead, innovate, or empathize—if only we are willing to recognize it.
The Power of a Name
Of all the discussions that day, one stood out: the impact of names. Inspired by Bennie Kara’s work on diversity in education, we asked teachers to explore their own names—their meanings, origins, and the personal stories behind them. What followed was a conversation about identity, belonging, and the small but significant ways that schools can either affirm or erode a student’s sense of self.
One student shared how her intended name was “Yah Yah,” meaning “gift from God,” but her parents, wanting to make life easier in an English-speaking country, renamed her Ysabella. She was seated alongside another student, Anjali, whose name means “gift to God.” Here were two students, from different cultures, bound by the same idea: they were gifts.
Imagine the impact of recognising that connection—not as a coincidence, but as an intentional act of inclusion. When we take the time to pronounce a name correctly, to understand its meaning, or even to ask about it, we are sending a powerful message: You belong here.
Moving From Awareness to Action
It is easy to talk about inclusion in broad terms. It is harder—but far more necessary—to embed it into daily teaching practice. The workshop concluded with three core reflections for teachers:
- Cultural Competence: How much do I really know about my students’ backgrounds? Where are the gaps? What steps can I take to learn more?
- Equity Over Equality: Do I recognize the unique needs of my students? How can I tailor my support to meet them where they are?
- Celebrating Identity: What cultural capital do my students bring into the classroom? How can I acknowledge and honour it?
Education is not just about imparting knowledge; it is about shaping identities. A student who feels unseen will struggle to engage. A student who feels valued will thrive.
The work of inclusion is not grandiose. It does not require a total overhaul of curriculum or sweeping policy changes. It starts with the smallest of acts: a correctly pronounced name, a thoughtful seating plan, a recognition that success looks different for everyone.
And perhaps, that is the greatest takeaway of all—belonging is built in the details.
References:
Fernando-Smith,L and Aow, A, (2024), ‘Letting go of imposter syndrome: writing herstory.’ In Disruptive Women – A Guide for Equitable Action in Education, Corwin
Kara, B., 2020. A little guide for teachers: Diversity in schools, Corwin
Pierson, R., 2013. Every kid needs a champion. TED Talks Education.
You can’t just teach a child out of poverty
Written by Sean Harris and Katrina Morley
Sean Harris – Co-author and Director of PLACE (People, Learning and Community Engagement) at Tees Valley Education. Katrina Morley OBE – Co-author and CEO of Tees Valley Education.
One of the most urgent and complex issues schools face today is the deep-rooted impact of poverty on the communities they serve. For school leaders and educators, this isn’t just about data, it’s about real lives, and the daily reality of hardship affecting pupils and families.
The challenges of poverty extend well beyond the school gates. It influences everything from children’s learning experiences to their long-term life chances, often reinforcing cycles of inequality that are difficult to break.
But poverty and inequality do not have to be an inevitable part of the story we write in schools and communities.
Practice to Page
In Tackling Poverty and Disadvantage in Schools, we set out to create more than just another education book.
This is a collaborative guide, designed to support busy educators and stretched school leaders with practical tools and real-world strategies to help dismantle the complexity of inequality.
It reflects the voices of those working at the frontline, educators, leaders, and organisations who know what it means to walk within communities facing adversity.
This book is built on shared experience. It’s by the sector, for the sector, and with the sector.
It also challenges the rhetoric that the only or best way to tackle inequality is through excellent teaching alone.
‘While research consistently highlights the importance of high-quality teaching, policy and practice too often lean on this narrative to imply that a great teacher alone can overcome deep-rooted inequality. In reality, the schools making meaningful strides in addressing disadvantage recognise that delivering education in their communities requires a far more nuanced and holistic approach.’
Sean Harris: co-author
Director of PLACE (People, Learning and Community Engagement) at Tees Valley Education
No egos, no silos
What makes this project distinct is its collective approach. We brought together perspectives from across the UK and beyond: educators, researchers, policymakers, and thought leaders who are tackling educational inequality every day.
Each contributor brings school-based insight, evidence-informed thinking, and grounded practices. From making classrooms more inclusive and curriculum more equitable, to fostering a culture of social justice across whole-school systems, the book is packed with adaptable and proven strategies.
‘Schools alone are not the solution to tackling inequality, but they are an essential part of it. That’s why it was vital for this book to be shaped by the expertise and lived experiences of schools and organisations that are actively driving change. True progress comes through collaboration. Only by working together can we begin to understand and address the complex, enduring nature of disadvantage.’
Katrina Morley OBE
Co-author and CEO of Tees Valley Education
And let us be clear: while schools play a vital role in addressing disadvantage, they cannot do it alone. Education is only one component part of system change.
Optimism included
This book arrives at a critical moment.
Schools are contending with the lingering effects of COVID-19, the rising cost of living, and increasing poverty-related barriers to learning. We wanted to offer something constructive: a resource that doesn’t just highlight the issues, but offers a roadmap for making a difference.
The book has been written with busy leaders and educators in mind. We wanted to help educators foster environments where every child feels seen, supported, and capable of thriving, no matter their background.
Using the book
We know there’s no one-size-fits-all solution. Schools are diverse, complex places where staff face many competing demands. That’s why we designed this book to be both accessible and flexible.
The content is organised around three core themes:
- Whole-school approaches (e.g. leadership and school culture)
- Classroom practices (e.g. including teaching methods and curriculum design)
- Wider interventions (e.g. mentoring, family support, and industry partnerships)
These strands provide different entry points, depending on where your school is in its journey. Whether you’re a new or established teacher looking for classroom ideas or a senior leader seeking systemic change, we hope this book meets you where you are.
Each chapter follows a consistent and easy-to-navigate format:
Research Recap: We summarise key studies and evidence that help contextualise the topic. It’s rigorous but digestible, with signposts for further reading if you want to go deeper.
Case Studies: Real examples from schools and organisations that have put theory into action. These are not silver-bullets but grounded insights from practitioners who’ve tested and refined their approaches.
Reflection: Tools and activities for applying the ideas in your own setting. These can be used individually or with your team. Plus, we’ve included access to an online hub with templates, planning guides, and reflection exercises to keep the work going beyond the page.
Each chapter also ends with concise takeaway points—perfect for sharing over a quick chat with a colleague (caffeine optional, but encouraged!).
Professional generosity
What truly sets this project apart is the generosity and dedication of our contributors. Everyone involved has donated their time and waived royalties. Profits from the book will go directly to supporting initiatives that benefit children and young people living in poverty, through our work with Tees Valley Education.
This spirit of collaboration and shared purpose is at the heart of everything we’ve created here.
We didn’t want to produce another title that simply restates how hard things are or overcomplicates the problem. Instead, we focused on creating a useful, empowering, and hopeful resource for professionals in education.
Importantly, we’ve also been careful to approach the topic with dignity and respect. Children and young people facing poverty are not “problems” to be fixed. The real challenge lies in the systems and structures that make life harder for them. It’s those systems we must work to change—and we believe schools can be powerful agents in that process.
We hope Tackling Poverty and Disadvantage in Schools contributes something meaningful to the ongoing conversation about equity and education. Our thanks go to every school, leader, and educator who continues to show up, innovate, and stand with their communities.
Leaders Engagement in Mothers’ Matters
Written by Emma Sheppard
Emma founded The MTPT Project, the UK's charity for parent teachers, in 2016 when on maternity leave with her first child. She has 12 years experience as an English teacher, Lead Practitioner and ITT Lead, and now runs The MTPT Project full time.
At The MTPT Project, we take our commitment to inclusion seriously. As Founder, I love reviewing our data annually for our Diversity and Inclusion report, the way that this informs our strategies as a small charity and the impact this then goes on to have.
One of these strategies to come out of our 2023-24 report was to improve engagement tracking at events directed to leaders in our sector. We are curious to know whether our work is perceived – in broad terms – as workforce and retention or diversity and mothers.
It makes sense that our programmes aimed at staff who are parents attract an overwhelmingly female audience. Because of our national and sector parenting policies, mothers are still afforded more paid time on birthing maternity leave than fathers and non-birthing partners, and this is when gendered routines around parenting take root and influence the division of domestic and professional labour in the long term – particularly in heterosexual couples.
Our leadership work, however, is aimed at senior leaders and above. Statistically, these are positions where men are over-represented at both primary and secondary level. If our work is (correctly) seen as workforce and retention, then up to 60% of our audience at these events should be men.
At this mid-point in the year, then, how far do school leaders still consider the retention, progression and wellbeing of parent-teachers as a ‘mothers matter’?
We’ve tracked data over 15 events – most of which have been optional to attend – aimed at school and systems leaders, and this is what we’ve found:
- On average, just 17% of attendees at these events have been men
- On three occasions, there has not been a single male face in the room
- Three events have hit our starter target of 24% male representation (the proportion of men in the wider teacher workforce, not at leadership level) and these were events billed as retention, flexible working, or an obligatory meeting for local headteachers
We count a number of men within our professional network who show up regularly to champion the work that we do. They sign off funding, make introductions, speak up on behalf of our community, work on research and data projects, platform our work on social media and speak at our events.
But men are not showing up enough as audience members to learn about the daily, and systems-wide practice that can be implemented to support working mothers for the overall health of our workforce and – ultimately – the schools they are leading.
An acute example of this disconnect: 22% of the speakers at The MTPT Project’s Missing Mothers conference are fathers and leaders from our community, but – two weeks ahead of the event – not one of the 135 ticket holders are men.
When organisations are considered who is “best placed” to attend MTPT events, the data suggests that they are still sending leaders with first-hand experience of motherhood. Clearly, the view is that these mothers’ matters are best handled between mothers and by mothers.
Statistically, however, these mothers, sorting things out between themselves, are less likely to be in leadership positions than men. They are less likely to wield decision-making power and they are less able to role model effective allyship to other men.
If we really want to make a sustainable difference to the teacher retention crisis, our male leaders need to stop seeing mothers as a diversity group, and instead know that mothers are workforce.