We were pleased to see the White Paper signal a material shift in the role of pupil engagement as a school improvement lever, with TEP highlighted as a case study:
 
"Schools are taking new approaches to measure pupil, employee and family engagement. One example is The Engagement Platform (TEP). TEP works with schools, local authorities and trusts nationwide to generate data insights on their performance, to target their practice and improve outcomes.
 
TEP data, now drawing from 300,000 children, indicates that low engagement is often linked to low attainment outcomes and poor attendance. Secondary school pupils with lower engagement scores are around three times more likely to be persistently absent than pupils with high engagement scores.
 
Equipping schools with data on pupil engagement enables them to target interventions and improve practice. Schools focusing on activities such as improving transition support, actively listening to pupil and employee groups, and using inclusive routines, have been able to achieve engagement scores that are better than the national average."

In response to the publication of the White Paper, Professor John Jerrim, Research Director at The Engagement Platform, has published the background literature and evidence-base underpinning TEP's engagement framework (see "Background and development of TEP measure of pupil engagement").

What the Research Tells Us
Engagement is what researchers call a "meta-construct": not a single trait, but an umbrella concept combining cognitive engagement (what pupils think about school), emotional engagement (what they feel about school and their relationships within it), and behavioural engagement (how they act). TEP's framework captures eleven distinct drivers across these three domains, including agency, peer relationships, safety and inclusion.
 
TEP’s latest February 2026 findings, drawn from 165,000 pupils across 263 schools, provides evidence that this framework maps onto measurable outcomes. Persistent absence rates differ substantially by engagement level: in primary schools, the gap between the lowest and highest engagement thirds is eleven percentage points; in secondary, nineteen. On attainment, schools in the top third for engagement average nearly ten Attainment 8 points higher than those in the bottom third - roughly a full GCSE grade per subject. At primary, schools in the highest quartile for the agency driver see 45% more pupils achieving the higher standard in RWM at KS2.-

​he data also points to staff engagement as an independent predictor of pupil outcomes, distinct from school intake or local deprivation levels. Within the higher-disadvantage half of the sample, schools in the top third for staff engagement had persistent absence rates 9.4 percentage points lower and Attainment 8 scores 6.5 points higher than the bottom third. This shows us that staff engagement is not a parallel concern to pupil engagement. It is a predictor of it, and one that schools can actively influence.  
 
Taken together, the findings suggest that engagement data, when measured rigorously and benchmarked with precision, functions as a lead indicator: pointing to where outcomes are heading before they arrive, and where the conditions for improvement might most usefully be examined.

We are pleased to announce that the Colyton Foundation has secured a 50% subsidy this academic year for all Colyton Foundation partner schools — with a 40% subsidy also available to all other schools.

Report by Agnes Fitzpatrick, Regional Director, The Engagement Platform 

“If people could really understand engagement, where it comes from and what drives it,
I think we would see significant improvements in areas we traditionally measure, such as attendance, persistent absence and outcomes.”

Jess Easton is Director at The Engagement Platform (TEP), where she leads the insights work, supporting Schools, Trusts and Partners to understand how engagement shapes outcomes for pupils, employees and families.
 
Previously, as Director of CPD, Jess worked with hundreds of schools nationally and internationally to design and deliver professional development that makes a lasting impact in classrooms.
 
SWIFT member schools have the opportunity to work with TEP as an engagement monitoring platform and partnership, including training and ongoing support. Following the publication last week of new research on reading age and perceived control, we spoke to Jess to learn more about her role and the work of TEP. 

1. What personal skills and experience do you bring to your role as Director at The Engagement Platform (TEP)?
I am most proud of having spent over 15 years in education, beginning my career as a Secondary Teacher of Mathematics in 2010 and investing a great deal of time in developing my craft. I progressed through leadership roles, including Head of Department and School Improvement Lead across a trust, before becoming part of the group that founded White Rose Education.
 
In my role as Director of CPD, I found it incredibly empowering to support Schools, Trusts and teachers to deepen their pedagogical knowledge of Mathematics. However, one of the most important lessons I learned was that improving practice in classrooms only goes so far if the wider culture is not moving in the same direction.
 
Often, the limiting factors were not about pedagogy itself, but about culture, buy-in and shared direction across the organisation. That experience is what ultimately led me to TEP, where the focus is on understanding culture, engagement and the conditions that enable improvement to stick.
 
Both TEP and White Rose are deeply mission-led organisations, and that has stayed with me throughout my career. It is genuinely empowering to work with people who are committed to improving education for everyone.

2. What do you find to be most rewarding about working for TEP?
One of the things I have always enjoyed most is building networks and communities. TEP is about connecting people and amplifying the work of those doing incredible things in education.
 
The partnerships we build with schools and trusts, and the sense of community that develops through that work, is hugely rewarding. Hearing the stories of how organisations are using engagement insight to improve culture, buy-in, attendance and outcomes is what really drives us forward.
 
3. With TEP’s emphasis on rigorous research and trustworthy data, can you share an example of which
It might be helpful to start by explaining how we develop our question sets. Our Directors of Research, including Professor John Jerrim from UCL and the ImpactEd Group, draw directly on established research and psychometrically test each question after each of our census windows to ensure it is valid, reliable and meaningful to the sector. We are very deliberate about not asking questions that do not serve a clear purpose.
 
Over time, we refine and evolve these questions. For example, issues around safety have been explored in more depth recently because of how that data was behaving and because of its growing importance across the education sector. Seeing the question set respond to sector needs is incredibly powerful.
 
A good example of the impact of this approach comes from a Trust that joined TEP after running internal surveys using tools such as Google Forms. While those surveys were cost-effective, they did not allow leaders to understand how their results compared to the wider national picture.
 
The Trust believed they had a wellbeing and workload issue, as these scores appeared low in their internal survey. When they engaged with TEP, they discovered that while wellbeing and workload scores were lower relative to other internal drivers, they were actually above the national benchmark. Leadership and line management, however, were below benchmark, despite leaders believing this was a strength.
 
By benchmarking nationally and then drilling into contextualised data, the Trust realised that Middle Leaders in particular were struggling with buy-in to strategy. This prompted a shift in focus towards leadership culture and CPD, rather than continuing to invest heavily in wellbeing initiatives that were already performing well.
 
Uncovering and challenging those assumptions enabled the trust to target its resources more effectively and take a more strategic approach to cultural improvement.
 
4. How is working with Schools and Trusts through SWIFT’s offer benefiting your work at TEP?
We are really pleased to be working with SWIFT in partnership. It enables Schools and Trusts to understand not only the national picture, but also what is happening regionally.

In the South West, for example, TEP supports organisations to see where things are going well compared to national benchmarks and where there may be opportunities for improvement. That combination of reflection, challenge and context is incredibly powerful for leaders.
The region is also benefiting from growing momentum around engagement work in rural and coastal areas, where funding can be limited and insight is particularly valuable in targeting effort and resources effectively.

5. What is your greatest hope for improving engagement in schools and classrooms?
As a relatively young organisation founded post-COVID, my greatest hope for TEP is that engagement becomes better understood across the sector.

We break engagement down into emotional, cognitive and behavioural drivers, from wellbeing, inclusion and workload, to how people think about school and how they act within it. When leaders truly understand these drivers and where they are coming from, engagement becomes a powerful lever for improvement.

If we can help Schools and Trusts get to grips with engagement in this way, I believe we will see significant improvements in the outcomes we traditionally measure, such as attendance, persistent absence and attainment. Ultimately, my ambition is for engagement to be recognised as central to improving education across the sector.

We thank Jess for sharing her insights into engagement and the work of TEP.

Interview by Jude Baylis, SWIFT Executive Assistant