Schools are now being asked to see the whole child in a way they haven’t had to - officially - before.
Policy and inspection are increasingly aligned around the idea of an omniscient view of every pupil; Ofsted is emphasising the importance of context, while government priorities around early intervention in special educational needs and disabilities, safeguarding and behaviour suggest that warning signs should be identified and acted on early.
On paper, this is a coherent shift, but in practice, it raises an uncomfortable question: are schools actually set up to think in this way?
Single view of pupils
Most schools have evolved around functional specialisms. Pastoral teams oversee safeguarding and welfare. Heads of department focus on curriculum and attainment. SEND departments coordinate provision. Behaviour systems operate with their own thresholds and processes.
Each domain generates valuable information, but often in isolation from the others. The issue is not a lack of data, but the fragmentation of it.
This fragmentation creates predictable blind spots.
A dip in attainment may be interpreted as a curriculum issue or a lack of effort, rather than a signal of something more complex. Low-level disruption from a high-attaining pupil can be overlooked because it does not threaten outcomes. Safeguarding concerns can remain below formal thresholds and therefore fail to shape classroom practice.
Connected systems
None of this reflects poor intent. It reflects professionals working within clearly defined roles.
Moving beyond this requires two fundamental shifts: one is technological, and the other is cultural.
While large-scale trusts may have the resource to build bespoke technological systems in-house to pool data and make it meaningful, the vast majority of the sector does not.
And while the government talks a good game on AI and IT infrastructure, the reality of tight budgets and sensitive data means that building technological change can feel - and often is - intimidating and risky.
The government and the edtech sector need to help here: how do we build cost-effective infrastructure to create a technological foundation from which a single view of the child can be built?
Cultural shifts
Integrated dashboards and data systems may make it easier to see connections, but they do not in themselves create understanding. So the second foundational shift will need to be cultural.
Firstly, this is about the tension between expertise and integration.
Schools depend on deep professional knowledge.
Subject teachers and heads of department develop expertise in curriculum, assessment and pedagogy. Pastoral and safeguarding leads develop expertise in family context and pupil welfare. These are not interchangeable forms of knowledge.
Yet a contextual model of the child requires some shared understanding across them. A subject leader may need to interpret patterns in attendance or behaviour. A pastoral lead may need to recognise how difficulties are manifesting in subject-specific learning. The challenge is to broaden professional vision without diluting expertise.
Pattern spotting
A second tension is between thresholds and trajectories. School systems tend to act when something crosses a defined line: a number of behaviour points; a safeguarding disclosure; a grade falling below expectation.
A contextual approach asks staff to notice patterns over time and to intervene earlier, often before these thresholds are met. This is a more ambiguous and cognitively demanding task. It requires staff to interpret trends, not just react to events.
And a third tension is time and attention. Even where schools recognise the need for a more holistic view, there are limits to how much any teacher or leader can hold in mind. The risk is that “knowing the child” becomes an aspiration rather than a reality.
Without deliberate structures, the day-to-day pressures of teaching, marking and administration will continue to prioritise immediate demands over deeper synthesis.
Professional change
We can tackle these issues through professional habits. How are meetings structured? Do they routinely bring together different perspectives on the same pupil? Are staff supported to ask better questions about what they see in the data? Are they encouraged to look for patterns across domains, rather than within them?
So the direction of travel is clear: schools are being asked to move from a collection of partial views to a more coherent understanding of each pupil.
But this is not simply a technical problem to be solved through better systems. It is a cultural and organisational challenge. If schools are to meet it, they will need to rethink not just what they know about pupils, but how they come to know it.
Mark Enser is a former Ofsted inspector, senior school leader and teacher
Tes has recently launched Tes 360; to find out more, visit: tes.com/tes360
