Teaching quality across the school is uneven. Some subject areas demonstrate strong instructional practice, clear explanations, and well-sequenced learning, while others rely heavily on individual teacher style rather than shared approaches.

This inconsistency is limiting academic progress. Pupils experience variable expectations around explanation, modelling, practice, and feedback, and leaders find it difficult to articulate what “good teaching” looks like beyond general principles.

The risk is not underperformance across the board, but fragmentation. Without a shared instructional language, improvement efforts become diffuse, professional development lacks focus, and coaching conversations struggle to move beyond surface feedback.

Year 1 focus: strengthening instructional leadership and coherence

Phase 0. Senior leaders set direction (May to early June)

Senior leaders complete the Leadership Behaviour Review first and use it alongside attainment data, work scrutiny, lesson visits, and professional dialogue.

The evidence points to a leadership gap rather than a capability gap:

• teaching expertise exists, but is not consistently leveraged,
• expectations for instructional practice vary by department,
• leaders lack a shared language for improving teaching.

Using the five-step decision process, senior leaders agree that improving teaching and learning requires a sharper focus on how leaders shape, communicate, and reinforce instructional practice, not the introduction of new pedagogical initiatives.

Foundational leadership behaviours

These behaviours are treated as non-negotiable. Where they are not yet secure, they also become an explicit focus.

• L1: Lead by example Leaders must model clarity, curiosity, and instructional discipline in their own practice.
• S5: Establish collective goals Improving teaching requires shared priorities, not parallel interpretations of improvement.
• L8: Don’t drop the ball Inconsistent follow-up on teaching and learning work has previously undermined credibility.

These behaviours underpin all subsequent work and are reinforced consistently throughout the year.

Whole-school focus behaviours (Year 1)

Senior leaders select two additional behaviours that directly support teaching and learning improvement.

• S1: Set direction To articulate a clear, shared understanding of what high-quality teaching looks like in this context.
• T2: Develop others To ensure leaders are actively building instructional capacity, not just evaluating performance.

These behaviours are chosen to strengthen leadership practice around teaching, rather than adding new teaching frameworks.

How Year 1 unfolds in practice

Phase 1 and Phase 2. Build shared understanding before change (June to September)

Leaders deepen their understanding of the chosen behaviours before being asked to plan or evaluate change.

They use the book to understand the intent behind each behaviour and how it connects to instructional leadership.

They work through the workbook to reflect on questions such as:

• how do I currently talk about teaching quality,
• where am I clear and where am I vague,
• what signals do my actions send to staff?

They use the leadership behaviour toolkits to break each behaviour down into concrete leadership actions, particularly in contexts such as lesson feedback, department reviews, and professional learning conversations.

They also use the Coach and Practice sheets to rehearse realistic scenarios, practise instructional conversations, and receive feedback on clarity, precision, and impact.

Discussion during this phase focuses on:

• what effective teaching looks like in this school,
• how leaders influence teaching through everyday interactions,
• where leadership actions unintentionally reinforce inconsistency.

What leaders practise

• articulating clear instructional expectations (S1: Set direction)
• modelling curiosity and instructional discipline (L1: Lead by example)
• coaching teachers through deliberate practice rather than advice (T2: Develop others)
• following through on agreed teaching priorities (L8: Don’t drop the ball)

There are no diagnostics, plans, or targets at this stage. The priority is shared understanding and professional judgement.

Phase 3. Senior leaders model instructional leadership (September to October)

Senior leaders deliberately model the chosen behaviours in every aspect of their role, including:

• teaching and learning briefings,
• lesson feedback and review meetings,
• coaching conversations,
• departmental discussions,
• informal professional dialogue,
• decision-making about priorities and CPD.

Leaders demonstrate what instructional leadership looks like in practice, particularly when:

• teaching conversations become complex,
• staff feel vulnerable,
• time pressures increase.

This phase establishes trust and credibility. Leaders see that expectations apply consistently and that improvement work is taken seriously at senior level.

Phase 4. Diagnostics and deeper sense-making (October to November)

With lived experience in place, diagnostics now have meaning.

Leaders complete:

• the self diagnostic,
• the 360 diagnostic,
• the combined report.

Leaders interpret results alongside recent experience, revisiting relevant workbook sections, toolkits, and Coach and Practice sheets to deepen understanding of behaviours highlighted by the data.

The focus is on insight:

• where leadership actions are strengthening teaching,
• where clarity or follow-through is still weak,
• how individual leadership practice aligns with whole-school priorities.

Phase 5. First personalised 90-day development cycle (December to March)

Leaders identify a real instructional leadership challenge they are currently facing and clarify:

• the improvement they want to see in teaching,
• the behaviours that will most help them achieve it.

From this, leaders select a small number of relevant leadership behaviours and build a focused 90-day plan that includes:

• specific leadership actions,
• opportunities to practise instructional conversations,
• agreed lead measures,
• structured reflection and review.

What leaders practise

• planning and rehearsing coaching conversations,
• giving precise, instructional feedback,
• aligning department improvement work to shared teaching priorities,
• seeking feedback on clarity, impact, and consistency.

Leadership behaviour toolkits and Coach and Practice sheets now become the primary vehicles for action, supporting rehearsal, feedback, and habit formation.

Looking ahead: Year 2 and Year 3

Year 2 focus: embedding consistency across teams

By the end of Year 1, expectations for teaching are clearer, but variation remains in how consistently they are enacted.

Likely focus behaviours include:

• T4: Create a team, to strengthen shared responsibility for teaching quality,
• L10: Pass the baton, to build instructional leadership beyond senior roles.

Year 3 focus: refining impact and precision

With coherence established, the focus shifts to improving impact.

Likely focus behaviours include:

• S8: Find the lead measures, to sharpen evaluation of teaching improvement,
• S9: Think long, act daily, to sustain instructional improvement over time.

Each year builds deliberately on the last. Nothing is reset.

Common mistakes in this scenario

• Treating teaching improvement as a training issue rather than a leadership practice.
• Introducing new pedagogical frameworks before leadership habits are secure.
• Over-relying on evaluation rather than coaching and rehearsal.

Why this approach works

This model:

• strengthens leadership practice before instructional change,
• builds shared language before accountability,
• develops leaders through deliberate practice, not observation alone,
• and sustains teaching improvement over time.

Improving teaching and learning begins with how leaders think, talk, and act. The behaviours make that work visible, practicable, and repeatable.