Curriculum, assessment, attendance, SEND provision and teaching observation on one pupil record — so evidence for a report card evaluation area comes from a report, not an afternoon.
Single-word judgements are gone. Schools now receive a report card with a grade and a narrative across six evaluation areas, on a five-point scale, plus a separate met / not met decision on safeguarding. Ofsted has also moved from best fit to secure fit — every standard within a grade must be met, so consistency now matters more than isolated excellence.
If your self-evaluation is still written around intent, implementation and impact, it is written against a superseded framework. Read what changed →
EDVES UK connects pedagogy, assessment, inclusion, attendance, family engagement and CPD into one record — so the questions the 2025 framework actually asks have answers.
Planning drafted against a named curriculum objective and an explicit instructional model, which the teacher edits, owns and signs off — with the approval recorded.
How Pedagogy with AI works →Self-evaluation structured by the six evaluation areas, with the weakest criterion in each surfaced rather than buried — which is what secure fit actually requires.
How report cards work →Persistent and severe absence flagged automatically, emerging patterns detected before a threshold is crossed, and every intervention recorded with its outcome.
How attendance works →*Figures marked with an asterisk come from pilot deployments and simulations rather than the full customer base, and have not been independently evaluated. Methodology and sample available on request — see Edves facts.
Designed around what UK schools and multi-academy trusts actually have to evidence.
A planning engine that drafts against a named National Curriculum objective and a stated instructional model, then hands the decision back to the teacher.
Short, frequent observation where every rating requires evidence from the lesson, hedged feedback is flagged and replaced with a specific action, and the teacher holds a documented right of reply. Mapped to the curriculum and teaching and leadership and governance evaluation areas and the Teachers' Standards.
Curriculum-referenced assessment with disaggregation by pupil premium, SEND, EAL and any group you define — and intervention records with pre- and post-assessment on the same references.
Persistent and severe absence flagged automatically and disaggregated by group, with emerging patterns detected before a threshold is crossed — and the documented support trail statutory guidance expects.
SEND provision mapping that records what was delivered rather than only what was planned, participation tracking that shows who is taking part in nothing, and positive recognition recorded alongside sanctions.
Three connected studios for universities and colleges, and a new answer to an old problem: assessment that still means something in the age of AI.
Recall exams and take-home essays were always a weak proxy for what a graduate can actually do. Generative AI has broken the proxy entirely, a mark now certifies what a model produced, not what a student is capable of. Detection is not the answer; false positive rates make it unsafe as evidence. Higher education needs assessment that demands original contribution, evidences the process, and stands up to scrutiny.
AI drafts lesson plans, slide decks and teaching content for university modules, mapped to learning outcomes, Bloom's levels and the FHEQ, which the lecturer or professor edits, owns and signs off. Constructive alignment, built in.
Short, evidence-anchored teaching observations scored on a transparent rubric. Every rating demands proof from the room and hedging is stripped out, so the feedback grows practice rather than policing it.
A revolution in student assessment. Instead of testing recall, students take on authentic, team-based challenges that demand original contribution and external validation, producing portfolio-grade, CV-ready proof of capability that no model can fake on their behalf.
Every challenge ships with a 4-band rubric, scaffolded milestones and CV bullet specifications — so assessment measures what graduates can do, and employers can trust the record.
15-minute briefing, see all three studios run on your own modules. Or read the full higher education overview.
EDVES operationalises proven instructional models rather than treating pedagogy as a free-text field. Each carries its own task shapes, scaffold logic and rubric structure.
Each model is operationalised rather than named: the AI auto-tags resources, recommends supports and generates coaching prompts specific to that model. Read how Pedagogy with AI works →
Reference pages written to be useful and citable, whether or not you ever buy anything from us. Policy accurate as at July 2026 and dated throughout.
Report cards, six evaluation areas, the five-point scale, and why secure fit changes what a good self-evaluation looks like.
What a report card contains, the context panel, and the data behind each evaluation area.
The genuinely new area, and the four questions about SEND provision that expose most schools.
What the 2026 Schools White Paper proposes, the timeline to 2029, and what has actually changed in law so far. (Nothing.)
The proposed digital ISP duty, why it is a systems question, and what to record now regardless of the final detail.
What it means, how it differs from AI tutoring and chatbot planning, and an honest account of the workload case.
The standards as a procurement checklist, the free-form versus closed-loop question, and how Edves is assessed.
The policy timeline, where evidence is thinner than the marketing, five risks, and an adoption sequence that survives scrutiny.
Naming the problem before choosing a product, migration risk, three-year cost, evidence fit and exit terms.
Pilots and simulations with schools in the UK and internationally show improvements on the metrics senior leadership teams and governors prioritise.
Average uplift from adaptive pedagogy and AI-supported feedback in pilots.
Improved professional development tracking and job-embedded coaching insight.
Reduced through pattern detection, early contact and family engagement workflows.
These figures come from pilot deployments and simulations rather than the full customer base, and have not been independently evaluated. Pilot settings typically receive concentrated implementation support that affects these measures independently of the platform. Methodology and sample are available on request during procurement — see Edves facts.
Reporting is structured around the six evaluation areas on the report card. Because curriculum, assessment, attendance, SEND provision and participation sit on one pupil record, evidence for each area comes from a report rather than being assembled after the notification call. The 2025 framework →
From 10 November 2025, a report card with a grade and narrative across six evaluation areas on a five-point scale — exceptional, strong standard, expected standard, needs attention, urgent improvement — plus safeguarding met or not met. Ofsted has stated the new grades are not comparable to the old ones. Report cards →
Yes. Schools operate independently while core definitions are set centrally, so trust-level data is genuinely comparable rather than an aggregation of differently recorded figures. Multi-academy trusts →
Provision mapping records what was specified and what was actually delivered, with small-step progress against a pupil's own targets and structured plan records aligned to the proposed ISP model. Current SEND law and EHCPs are unchanged; ISPs are indicated as statutory from September 2029. Individual Support Plans →
EDVES acts as processor on your documented instructions; your school remains the controller. Access is role-scoped to field level with safeguarding behind separate permissions, every access is logged, retention follows your schedule, and DPIA documentation is provided. UK GDPR →
EDVES provides written answers against the current published standards during procurement. Generative components are teacher-facing by default, every AI-drafted artefact records the human who approved it, and pupil data is not used to train general-purpose models. DfE AI standards →
Your school or trust owns its data, stated in contract. Full export including academic and attendance history is available in a usable format at any time and at termination, at no cost, followed by deletion on your instruction. Access to your own data is never contingent on renewal — a question worth putting to every supplier on your shortlist. Evaluation framework →
Book a pilot, request pricing for your school or trust, or ask about data protection and integration with your existing MIS.
We work with schools, academies and multi-academy trusts across England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.