We expect to see a motivation for change in the capability and capacity of leading school improvement, creating an embedded culture of mutual trust and shared responsibility for outcomes, and developing open and transparent ways of working across the partnership and within schools.

Key findings: 

Building trust and collaboration

• Increased trust and transparency across schools.
• Peer review fostered openness, shared responsibility and mutual support.
• Shared priorities - especially around SEND - enabled focused collaboration and collective impact.

Challenges Identified
• Staggered peer review schedules hindered alignment; tighter timeframes were recommended.
• Small schools faced capacity challenges; external collaboration was key to sustaining engagement.

Strategic alignment and maturity
• Partnerships are evolving from coordination to deeper collaboration.
• Peer review is being embedded into improvement cycles and governance structures.
• Clusters expressed interest in cross-cluster learning to share progress and strategies.

Key learning points
• Shared priorities drive collective impact.
• Timing matters - concentrated review periods improve coherence.
• Collaboration builds capacity, especially for small schools.

Similarly, change is expected at this third level as the maturity of the partnership leads to increased deeper understanding and effective practice in peer review for all staff. This leads to genuine and deep collaboration between practitioners within and between schools towards shared goals.

Key findings: 

Leadership development and confidence
• Leaders reported increased confidence in articulating school improvement work.
• Distributed leadership emerged, with middle leaders and ICs taking more strategic roles.

Challenges identified
• 90-day check-ins were seen as too delayed and caused a dip in momentum.
• Small schools struggled to train additional ICs due to limited staffing.

Strategic alignment
• Need to align peer review outcomes with School Development Plans (SDPs).
• Role rotation (e.g., ICs becoming PRs) was suggested to build capacity.

Key learning points
• Mid-cycle check-ins to improve accountability.
• Distributed leadership strengthens sustainability.
• Role rotation builds leadership capacity.

Similarly, change is expected at this third level as the maturity of the partnership leads to increased deeper understanding and effective practice in peer review for all staff. This leads to genuine and deep collaboration between practitioners within and between schools towards shared goals.

Key findings: 

Professional growth and leadership development
• IC’s led workshops and contributed to school improvement planning - which fostered stronger ownership outside of Senior Leadership Team (SLT).
• Non-SLT staff gained leadership experience and visibility.

Collaboration and lateral trust:
• Teachers built cross-school relationships and shared learning.
• Peer collaboration fostered professional dialogue and reflection.

Inclusive and supportive practices
• Efforts were made to include all staff, including support staff, in the process.
• Peer-led training and tools like working walls promoted transparency and engagement.

Key learning points
• Leadership opportunities enhance teacher engagement.
• Peer collaboration builds confidence and shared learning.
• Inclusive practices strengthen school culture.

Ultimately, we expect to see an impact at a pupil level too. This could be varied in nature and will be related specifically to the line of enquiry taken during the peer review cycles - therefore, how this is measured can vary greatly. Schools are shown how to use data to evidence their decision-making but also to evidence the impact. Qualitative feedback is often the most immediate source of impact evidence on pupil outcomes.

Key findings:

Early indicators of positive change
• Peer review findings influenced teaching strategies, especially in continuous provision and assessment.
• Staff made responsive adjustments based on review insights.

Consistency and whole-school alignment
• Pupils experienced a more coherent and structured learning environment.

Challenges Identified
• Too early to measure direct pupil outcomes.
• Need to include student voice in future evaluations.

Key learning points
• Practice shifts precede measurable outcomes.
• Consistency builds a positive school culture.
• Student voice is essential for future evaluations.
• Long-term view is needed to assess pupil impact.