Have you ever sat through an INSET day feeling your valuable time slipping away, knowing that Monday morning’s teaching will remain unchanged? You’re not alone. Research indicates that traditional training days rarely translate into meaningful classroom improvements, creating a frustrating cycle of wasted resources and missed opportunities.
As a MAT Chair, during six years we’ve run dozens of INSET days across our schools. The pattern is dishearteningly predictable: enthusiastic presentations followed by minimal impact where it matters most – in classrooms with pupils.
The uncomfortable reality
Let’s be honest about why most INSET days fall short:
- They’re disconnected one-off events rather than part of sustained developmental journeys
- Content is typically generic rather than subject-specific
- Training rarely includes modelling of actual classroom techniques
- There’s limited opportunity for teacher collaboration or practice
- Follow-up coaching and implementation support is minimal or non-existent
When I ask our teachers what they’ve implemented from recent training the responses are telling: vague recollections, good intentions, but minimal concrete changes to practice.
The evidence is clear
According to research from the Education Endowment Foundation, professional development that actually improves classroom practice shares several essential characteristics that most INSET days simply don’t deliver.
Effective teacher development requires:
- Focus on subject-specific content and pedagogy
- Opportunities for practice, feedback and reflection
- Sustained support through coaching over time
- Collaboration between teachers on implementation
As noted in research: “In England, for more than two decades, teachers have been required to participate in five in-service training days per year. The research evidence demonstrates that these are rarely well organised, are seen as of little use by participating teachers and represent a wasted resource.”
The problem isn’t teacher resistance – it’s flawed design. One-day training sessions are fundamentally limited in their ability to create lasting change. Even the most inspirational speaker can’t transform practice without systems that support implementation.
My discovery journey
Two years ago, I faced this challenge directly. During learning walks across our trust schools, I witnessed the same pattern repeatedly – pockets of teaching excellence that weren’t being effectively shared, and INSET days that generated initial enthusiasm but little sustained change.
Together with our CEO, we’d review CPD expenditure against impact and face the uncomfortable truth: we were investing significant resources with minimal return. Something had to change.
I began researching alternatives, looking beyond education to how other sectors approach professional development. The most effective models all shared common elements: they were iterative, evidence-based, and embedded in daily practice rather than isolated events.
From frustration to solution
This journey led to the development of Aristotal.ai – a platform designed specifically to overcome the limitations of traditional INSET days. Rather than replacing teacher development sessions, it transforms how they function by creating continuous learning cycles.
Here’s how it can work in practice:
Mrs Johnson, a Year 4 teacher, attended an INSET session on questioning techniques. Instead of this being a one-off event, she recorded her implementation attempts using Aristotal.ai. The system provided immediate, evidence-based feedback on her questioning patterns and suggested specific improvements.
Over the following weeks, she practised these techniques, receiving ongoing coaching through the platform. She can share her progress with her department who can offer support, and identify patterns across the team to inform future development needs.
The difference is dramatic: from isolated training to continuous coaching.
Beyond the quick fix
Traditional INSET days often fail because they try to shortcut the complex process of teacher development. Research shows that “sustained coaching improves both classroom teaching and pupil achievement” – yet most schools invest heavily in one-off sessions rather than ongoing support.
We need to rethink not just the content of INSET days, but their entire structure and purpose. Rather than standalone events, they should be launch points for sustained developmental journeys, supported by technology that enables practice, feedback and collaboration.
What’s your experience? Have INSET days changed your classroom practice, or just filled your notebook with good intentions?
The path forward
For MAT CEOs and headteachers serious about improving classroom practice, the implications are clear:
- Redesign INSET days as part of coherent, evidence-based developmental pathways
- Create systems for implementation support between training sessions
- Prioritise subject-specific rather than generic training
- Build in observation, feedback and coaching elements
- Use technology to sustain momentum between face-to-face sessions
Your next steps
If you’re responsible for teacher development in your school or trust, I encourage you to audit your current INSET approach against these evidence-based principles. Are you investing in isolated events or sustained journeys? Are teachers receiving the ongoing support needed to embed new approaches?
I’d welcome conversations with fellow education leaders about how we can collectively reimagine teacher development to create lasting classroom impact. Let’s stop accepting the status quo of ineffective INSET days and start building systems that truly develop teaching excellence.
What’s your biggest frustration with current INSET approaches? What’s working in your context? I’d love to hear your experiences.
#SchoolImprovement #TeacherDevelopment #CPD #EducationalLeadership
