Tackling misogyny: the test is what happens beyond the RSHE lesson

01 / The public development

An announced support package is not a completed local response

On 26 September, DfE announced a whole-school approach with practical guides, teacher training and parent support. It also described prevention pilots and future work. That establishes the government’s stated direction; it does not demonstrate that every promised resource has reached every school or impose a universal completion date in this feature.1

The revised RSHE statutory guidance came into effect on 1 September 2026. Its current status should be distinguished from the later support announcement. Leaders need to identify the guidance relevant to their phase and setting, then use forthcoming support to strengthen an existing responsibility rather than wait for a programme label.2

Give the review an accountable lead with input from safeguarding, curriculum and pastoral colleagues. Agree what question it is trying to answer: whether pupils understand reporting, whether staff respond consistently, or whether a particular curriculum connection is weak. A defined question is more useful than a broad instruction to demonstrate that the school takes the issue seriously.

02 / Everyday practice

Test the first adult response, not only the written policy

KCSIE’s current guidance warns against minimising abusive behaviour as ordinary banter and makes clear that a lack of reports does not establish an absence of harm. Child-on-child abuse needs an appropriate safeguarding response, with the relevant children’s needs considered. The local DSL and procedures determine action on an actual concern.4

Use a carefully designed staff discussion to test the route from a concern to the right help. Who listens, who records, who is informed and how does the pupil know what happens next? Include the colleague who is covering an unfamiliar duty and the member of staff who does not normally teach RSHE.

The exercise must not become an informal investigation of identifiable pupils. Use non-identifiable scenarios and protect confidential records. Where a live concern emerges, stop treating it as a training example and follow the school’s safeguarding arrangements. A discussion can identify uncertainty; it does not certify that every future response will be appropriate.

03 / Curriculum and language

Challenge the idea while keeping pupils in the conversation

The RSHE guidance addresses everyday sexism, misogyny and stereotypes. It says harmful ideas expressed in school should be challenged, while avoiding stigmatising boys or directly signposting pupils to harmful content and producers. Those boundaries matter when planning discussion or choosing examples.3

Review how lessons connect with the language and conduct pupils encounter elsewhere in school. Staff need an intelligible explanation of the concepts and a consistent way to challenge inappropriate conduct. That does not require every colleague to deliver the same script or turn a spontaneous question into a public confrontation.

Avoid amplifying material simply to show that the school understands an online trend. A name, image or clip can become an invitation to seek out content. Teachers should use suitable, reviewed materials and age-appropriate approaches, with professional support for sensitive questions. The aim is understanding and safety, not a dramatic demonstration.

04 / Pupil experience

Ask whether reporting feels possible and useful

A reporting channel may exist while pupils remain uncertain about who will see a concern or whether it will be taken seriously. Ask how the school explains the route and what alternatives exist for someone who cannot use the usual method. Consider communication and accessibility needs without assuming that one form suits every pupil.

Seek feedback through appropriate, safe methods. Do not invite public disclosure of personal experiences in a classroom discussion or imply that a pupil must share a story to improve the school’s evidence. Colleagues need to know how to respond if someone does disclose harm, including the limits of confidentiality.

Interpret changes in reporting carefully. More reports may indicate greater confidence, more harm, better recognition or a combination of factors. Fewer reports can also have several explanations. Combine the record with professional assessment and feedback about the response, rather than selecting a direction of travel as an automatic success measure.

05 / A connected response

Families need clarity, and staff need support

Explain the relevant teaching, the school’s expectations and how concerns are handled in language families can understand. Keep that communication distinct from discussion of an individual case. A general briefing should not disclose confidential information or invite families to determine another child’s circumstances.

Staff confidence requires more than receiving a link. Ask which conversations feel difficult, what specialist support is available and where uncertainty should be escalated. School leaders should also examine the pressures on colleagues asked to manage sensitive teaching and pastoral work alongside other responsibilities.

Digital, behavioural and safeguarding records may reveal connected questions, but access should remain purposeful and authorised. A concerning online alert needs the appropriate human assessment; it is not a verdict about a pupil’s beliefs or intentions. Our earlier alert-to-action feature provides the wider operational context for that handoff.

06 / A practical review

Governors need evidence of the response, with its limits

A proportionate assurance conversation can examine how teaching is planned, whether staff understand the route, how concerns are followed through and what pupil feedback reveals about confidence. Governors should receive suitable aggregate information and significant risks, not unrestricted access to sensitive case details.

Over the next month, a school could review its reporting explanation, test one staff scenario and identify a curriculum or support gap. These are suggested steps, not a newly announced regulatory timetable. Prioritise action where the review identifies a real weakness rather than commission another large audit without a defined purpose.

Return to the question after the change. Did the route become clearer? Was a recurring misunderstanding resolved? What remains difficult? Record both progress and uncertainty. The strongest whole-school response is one in which pupils encounter a consistent standard and appropriate help across the ordinary day, with leaders willing to examine where that consistency breaks down.

Leadership questions

Questions that turn the development into a governing conversation.

School Connection intelligence lens

What the national Observatory can add, and where it must stop.

This is a gap-filling continuation between our safeguarding, belonging and digital-safety coverage. Primary publications establish the chronology. The proposed review questions are editorial analysis, with no fabricated pupil accounts or claim of original field reporting.

What we are monitoring next

Publication is the beginning of the watch.

• Publication and evaluation of the announced support and prevention work.
• Verified practical learning about reporting and responses, with privacy and permission protected.

Continue the evidence trail

How this develops our earlier coverage

• Earlier digital safety coverage: trace the alert to action ↗
• Safeguarding information sharing needs a working handoff ↗
• Belonging and the pupil’s experience of school ↗