When Ofsted introduced the three Is – intent, implementation, impact – it asked leaders to get strategic; to move beyond lists of content and into deliberate decisions about what knowledge matters most, when and why.
In English, that challenge is more urgent than ever. Across writing curriculums, unit plans are still often a checklist of text types.
Year 1: instructions, recounts, stories.
Year 2: letters, newspapers, explanations.
Year 3: reports, balanced arguments, leaflets.
There’s plenty of coverage. But what’s the intent? What are children actually learning?
Why this? Why now? Why will this help pupils become better writers, not just this term, but for the long haul? These are not rhetorical questions. They are the heart of curriculum design.
Intent is not a list of genres
Genres matter. They give relevance, variety, inspiration and real-world application. They provide purpose and meaning. Children should produce work they are proud of.
But genre is not the outcome. The outcome is deep, transferable writing development: sentence control, grammatical fluency, vocabulary depth and the confidence to communicate clearly. Genre is a vehicle – the journey is what matters.
Too often, that distinction is blurred. Focus shifts from what children are learning to what they are producing. The foundational knowledge gets lost.
Coverage ≠ Control
When schools prioritise text types over learning, children move too quickly from unit to unit. They encounter new genres before mastering the core skills that make writing work.
The result: wide but shallow learning. There’s little time to rehearse, revisit or secure what matters. The impact is clear:
- Feature-spotting without application
- Checklists without understanding
Mimicry without meaning
Most concerning, pupils with limited language experience, emerging fluency or additional needs are left trying to navigate complex formats without the tools to build a single coherent sentence.
This isn’t low expectation. It’s clarity.
Writing isn’t a performance
Through no fault of individual teachers, we’ve created systems where pupils are expected to perform writing before they’ve truly learned it.
They produce persuasive leaflets, newspaper reports, balanced arguments – but beneath the surface, scaffolds and prompts do the heavy lifting. Fluency, control and stamina aren’t yet in place. And knowledge doesn’t always transfer.
Scaffolds are not the problem – overemphasis on genres is. Scaffolds are essential tools – they build access, show possibility and provide entry. But they must support deeply taught writing skills, not replace them.
Real strategic intent asks different questions
We don’t need more genres. We need clarity.
- What knowledge do pupils need at this stage to become confident, fluent writers?
- How will this unit build towards that?
- Which core skills are we deliberately choosing to deepen and secure?
This is curriculum intent, not content for content’s sake.
The most strategic leaders are making different decisions: fewer genres, taught more deeply; sentence instruction sequenced over time; grammar aligned to purpose; fluency built before output.
They’re not asking, “What will this writing look like on display?”. They’re asking, “What knowledge will children retain and re-use next term – and next year?” That’s real intent.
5 checks for intent-led writing
These five questions can help refocus your writing curriculum around strategic, equitable development:
- Can every teacher articulate the why behind each unit? Not just what children will write, but what knowledge they’ll develop, and how it builds over time.
- Are genres serving development or driving it? Are they vehicles for practice, or outcomes in themselves? Are we overloading, or building fluency?
- Is sentence construction taught, rehearsed and refined? Strong sentences are the foundation of strong writing in any genre.
- Do grammar and vocabulary connect to real writing choices? Are pupils applying language for purpose and effect, or completing disconnected tasks?
- Is there enough repetition to secure long-term learning? Fluency comes from doing less, more often – not constant novelty. Micro-writing, oral rehearsal and sentence-based routines are key.
The sentence is the strategy
If pupils can’t write a strong sentence, they can’t write a strong anything. That’s not limiting. It’s liberating. The sentence is where voice begins, control is built and knowledge transfers. Make the sentence your curriculum spine and writing outcomes will follow.
How Leading English can help
At Leading English, we design writing curriculums that puts strategic intent first. That means:
- A mapped progression of sentence types and skills
- Grammar in context, not isolation
- Vocabulary taught for use, not display
- Micro-writing and oral rehearsal as daily practice
Text types used meaningfully, never excessively
We work with schools to strengthen foundations, build teacher confidence and ensure every pupil – especially those with barriers – gets the clarity, control and fluency they need to write well.
