In many schools, writing has had a lot of attention. There are more writing opportunities, extended outcomes and chances for pupils to draft, edit and publish.
Books can look productive. Pupils can be writing regularly. Teachers can be working hard to ensure that writing has a clear place in the curriculum.
However, outcomes do not always move in the way schools expect.
That is a difficult place to be, because it can feel counterintuitive. If pupils are writing more, surely they should be getting better at writing? Sometimes they are, but sometimes they’re simply doing more writing. That distinction matters.
The problem is not effort
When writing is not improving, it’s rarely because teachers are not trying hard enough. In fact, the opposite is often true. Teachers are planning carefully, finding texts, preparing scaffolds, giving feedback, supporting pupils and trying to create meaningful outcomes.
The issue is more often about precision.
Pupils may be completing writing tasks, but not securing the specific knowledge and skills that would make their writing stronger.
They may be producing a paragraph, but still not controlling sentence boundaries. They may be writing at length, but still struggling with handwriting, spelling, punctuation or vocabulary choices.
The page is fuller, but the learning has not necessarily deepened. This is one reason why the phrase “more writing” can be unhelpful. It can make us look at quantity first. How much have pupils written? How often are they writing? How many extended pieces are there?
Those are useful questions, but they are not the most important ones. Better questions are:
- What has improved?
- What did pupils learn about writing that they did not know before?
- Which errors have been addressed?
- Which habits are becoming more secure?
- Where are pupils becoming more independent?
Writing is not one thing
Writing is complex. It asks a lot of pupils all at once. They have to think about ideas, vocabulary, sentence structure, grammar, punctuation, spelling, handwriting, organisation, audience and purpose.
For some pupils, particularly in KS1 and LKS2, that is an enormous cognitive load. This is why volume can sometimes mask the problem.
A child may write a lot, but if the foundations are fragile, the writing can simply become a place where errors are practised repeatedly.
This is particularly important in Y1. Pupils may appear to be producing an impressive amount, but if there’s not enough time to practise sentence construction, handwriting, oral rehearsal, spelling and transcription, then they may not yet have the building blocks they need.
In these cases, asking for more writing is not the answer. The answer is better practice.
From doing the task to learning the craft
A key shift in strong writing practice is moving from task completion to deliberate improvement.
This means being very clear about what pupils are learning within a lesson or sequence. Not just “write a character description” or “write a setting description”, but what aspect of writing you’re actually teaching pupils. For example:
- How do we build a sentence that makes sense?
- How do we choose precise vocabulary?
- How do we use a conjunction to extend an idea?
- How do we use a model to improve our own writing?
- How do we edit for accuracy, not just neatness?
- How do we publish in a way that shows refinement?
When the learning is precise, pupils have a better chance of improving. Teachers also have a better chance of checking whether learning is happening within the lesson, not just whether the task has been completed.
Writing lessons can look busy. Pupils can be engaged, using word banks, widgets, sentence stems, dictionaries and displays.
All of these can be useful. But the key question is whether those scaffolds are helping pupils to think more clearly, write more accurately and become more independent.
A scaffold should support learning, not simply help pupils get through the task.
The role of modelling
Modelling is central to this. Pupils need to see the process of writing, not just the product. A polished model can be helpful, but it’s not enough on its own.
Pupils need to hear the teacher think aloud. They need to see choices being made, changed and improved.
- Why is this word better than that one?
- Why does this sentence not quite work yet?
- What happens if we move this phrase?
- Where does the punctuation need to go?
- How can we make this clearer for the reader?
The “we do” phase is especially important. This is where pupils can rehearse the thinking with support before being asked to apply it independently.
Without this, some pupils move too quickly from watching to doing, and the gap between the model and their own writing remains too wide. Strong modelling slows the process down. It makes the invisible visible.
Publishing should mean improvement
Another area worth reflecting on is publishing. In some classrooms, publishing is powerful. Pupils draft, receive feedback, edit, improve and produce a final version that is genuinely stronger. They begin to understand that writing is a process of refinement.
But publishing can also become misunderstood. It can become a neater or longer version – a best copy.
If the published piece still contains the same transcription errors, unclear sentences or weak vocabulary choices as the draft, then the process has not done enough learning work.
Publishing should not be about presentation alone, but about improvement.
This means pupils need to know what they are improving and why. It also means feedback needs to be manageable and focused. Trying to correct everything can overwhelm pupils and teachers. Focusing on the intended learning can make improvement more likely.
What schools should consider
For leaders, the priority is not simply to ask whether writing is happening. It’s to look closely at what writing is helping pupils learn.
Book looks, pupil voice and learning walks can be especially useful when they focus on the right questions:
- Are pupils improving from draft to final outcome?
- Are the same errors appearing again and again?
- Are learning objectives precise enough?
- Are pupils getting enough practice in sentence construction?
- Are scaffolds matched to the learning, or just to the task?
- Is vocabulary being taught, revisited and applied in context?
- Is transcription being approached systematically and relentlessly?
- Do pupils understand editing and publishing as improvement?
These questions help move the conversation away from compliance and towards impact.
The Leading English approach
Leading English supports schools to strengthen writing through clarity, consistency and careful implementation.
This doesn’t mean giving schools a script. It means working with leaders and teachers to understand what is happening in their context, what pupils need next, and how the teaching sequence can be refined so that writing improves over time.
Often, the work is about sharpening what is already in place, such as making learning objectives more precise, strengthening modelling and improving the use of scaffolds.
Above all, it is about keeping the focus on learning. More writing does not automatically improve outcomes, but what does is more precise teaching, deliberate practice and focused feedback.
When pupils know what they are learning to improve, writing becomes more than output. It becomes a process of growth.
If writing is a priority in your school or trust, Leading English can support you to review current practice, strengthen implementation and build a more precise, sustainable approach to improving outcomes.
