How would you describe the culture for improvement at your school? Is there a constant flow of new initiatives that generate more and more paperwork? Maybe you feel that you are spending too much time justifying yourself and “checking up” on colleagues and not enough time inspiring students.

Alternatively, perhaps workload at your school is fine, but the trade-off is a stagnant culture of mediocrity that sells students short.

Maintaining a productive balance between excellent progress and the healthy work-life relationships of staff and students is hugely important, especially in the uncertain times we are all currently living through. But how do you go about achieving that?

One place to turn for an answer is the field of economics, specifically the work of Kate Raworth, the author of Doughnut Economics.

I believe that Raworth’s theories hold the key to a model for sustainable school improvement; let’s call it “The Doughnut School”. But what do doughnuts have to do with school leadership? Or, for that matter, with economics?

In her book, Raworth explains that economic growth has been the dominant goal of economic policy throughout the 20th and early 21st centuries. Governments, companies and even individuals have judged their success on the annual growth of their wealth. 

However, Raworth points out that this mindset fails to take into account any damage that is done to the environment or society in the process of achieving this growth, and assumes that growth can continue indefinitely without encountering a limiting ceiling. 

With education adopting accountability measures from the business world, it is now in danger of making the same mistakes: chasing a narrow set of performance criteria that may be at odds with the wellbeing of students and staff, and assuming that there is no ceiling on school improvement.

But Raworth offers a solution. Her doughnut model is underpinned by the “Goldilocks Principle”. This involves identifying conditions that are “just right”, rather than “too hot” or “too cold”.

The diagram she uses to illustrate is shaped like a doughnut. There is an empty core, within which basic social foundations, such as education, jobs and equality, are not met (too cold). Then, on the outside, is Earth’s environmental ceiling, where continued development causes environmental damage to climate, oceans and biodiversity (too hot). 

Between these two areas, there is a ring of space (the doughnut), which Raworth calls the “safe space for humanity”, where we can comfortably balance social and environmental needs with economic growth. The balance here is “just right”.

How can we apply these principles to schools? In the same way that British education adopted the economic mantra of “growth is good”, I believe we now have the opportunity to adopt this new approach. 

It is time to create a doughnut model for schools that will be kinder and more sustainably successful. We can think of this in terms of three different types of school.

The ‘mired’ school: the doughnut hole

Most schools understand the dangers of performance that is “too cold”. Schools with this kind of performance are mired in the middle of the doughnut ring and will fail because of complacency and doing too little. Perhaps they are existing on past glories or word of mouth and slick marketing that no longer reflects the truth. It may be that good relationships between staff and students create a pleasant atmosphere that masks a lack of aspiration. For whatever reason, a school that is too cold operates below what Raworth terms the “foundation”, leaving potential unfulfilled and aspirations unmet.

The ‘manic’ school: beyond the ring

However, if a school is running “too hot” and operating at “manic” levels, then progress will be at the detriment of the mental health and wellbeing of staff and students. These schools may be characterised by multiple initiatives, conflicting goals and unrealistically ambitious targets and time frames. They lie beyond the outer ring of the doughnut, where the consequences will be worsening attendance, mental health issues, low morale and, paradoxically, reduced performance.

The ‘motivated’ school: a delicious doughnut

The ideal is for a school to operate in the “just right” or “motivated” zone, where staff and students are strongly challenged but carefully supported in achieving these challenges. Motivated schools are characterised by high levels of discretionary effort from staff and students. Staff feel valued and able to be open in critiquing and suggesting improvements to systems and strategy. Students are aware of how to regulate their studies and where to get support when they need it. These schools should achieve consistently well in performance measures but also have high levels of staff and student confidence and satisfaction.

The doughnut school model is a helpful way of thinking about the balance that leaders should be seeking to achieve, but it can also be used as a practical tool for school improvement. Here’s how:

1. Share your doughnut 

No two schools are the same, so every school’s doughnut should be different. Ask for input from your staff about how you can customise the model for your situation. The professional conversations that you have here will give you priceless insights into how well your school is doing. 

2. Slice your doughnut 

One way to visually represent your school’s improvement priorities is to divide your doughnut into “slices”, with each slice representing a different priority. These might include general slices: those elements of performance that are priorities for all schools and are required by Ofsted. For instance, the Ofsted handbook talks about the impact of curriculum “as reflected in results from national tests and examinations”. National results may, therefore, be one of your general slices. However, it is important to note that in the doughnut model, national results are just one of many slices, rather than the whole doughnut.

In addition to these general slices, you can then think about the specific improvement priorities for your context.

Set your floors and ceilings 

Once your slices have been agreed, the next stage is to decide the floor and ceiling markers that represent the “just right” zone for each of these priorities. For some categories, these will be numerical, objective measures (attendance, behaviour points, extracurricular participation rates), while for others, the evidence could be more subjective (bullying, student voice). 

Again, the debate around what the markers should be is at least as important as the end result.

The diagram that you end up with should be an image that will stick in people’s minds. It can form the basis of improvement planning and self-evaluation cycles. And, unlike the real thing, this doughnut should be easy to digest and satisfying for the long term, with no unhealthy side effects. 

Jo Clemmet is a secondary geography and economics teacher and senior leader

This article originally appeared in the 13 November 2020 issue