Back

Should I make my own resources?

5 October 2026

A trainee teacher recently asked a thoughtful question during a training session, “Should I be making my own resources?” It is a question that many teachers ask whether they are new to the profession or experienced and preparing for a new curriculum. The answer is rarely binary.

Why this question matters

Teaching has always been demanding. New teachers quickly discover that lesson planning, behaviour management, assessment, pastoral responsibilities and professional development compete for attention every day. It can often make you feel inadequate.

Sam Gibbs, Curriculum and development lead at Greater Manchester Education Trust captures this well:

“If the job feels difficult, this shouldn’t be taken as evidence that you’re terrible at teaching. That difficulty doesn’t ever really go away, which should be reassuring, because I think teaching is about embracing complexity and difficulty and finding your way through it.”

Teaching is a profession built on continuous improvement. There is always another lesson to refine, another explanation to strengthen and another approach to try. The challenge is not eliminating this complexity but managing it wisely. Remembering that what matters most is helping pupils learn.

The case for creating your own resources

Designing resources remains an important professional skill. When teachers create or adapt materials, they think carefully about sequencing and the needs of a particular class. The process encourages deeper subject knowledge and a stronger understanding of curriculum design. It also allows learning to be tailored to local contexts, current events and student interests.

Creating resources can be particularly valuable early in a teaching career. Building lessons from the ground up helps teachers understand how learning develops over time. It encourages reflection on why activities work, or don’t, and how each supports progress.

However, there is a cost. Developing high-quality resources takes considerable time. Many teachers discover that lessons are never truly finished. Small improvements become constant revisions, and a scheme of learning can absorb far more evenings, weekends and holidays than intended.

The benefits of off-the-shelf resources

Commercial resources exist because they solve a genuine problem. A high-quality resource can save hours of preparation time. Subject specialists, experienced teachers, designers and curriculum experts often contribute to published materials, producing resources that are often both visually appealing and more importantly, carefully structured.

Departments also benefit from consistency. Shared resources help ensure that classes receive comparable experiences and that curriculum coverage remains coherent across year groups. For teachers working outside their specialism, published materials can be particularly valuable. Few teachers would willingly spend hours designing lessons in an unfamiliar area when expert resources already exist.

Good resources also expose teachers to new ideas. An activity, explanation or sequence that works well elsewhere can spark improvements in your own classroom practice. The challenge is recognising that attractive resources do not automatically lead to effective learning. Some packages appear impressive but offer little pedagogical value beneath the design. Others may work well in one context but require significant adaptation in another.

Why extremes rarely work

Debates about resources often become unnecessarily polarised. One view suggests that teachers should create everything themselves because nobody understands their pupils better. Another assumes that purchasing a complete package removes the need for planning.

Neither position reflects reality. Teachers who create everything themselves risk spending enormous amounts of time reinventing materials that already exist. The pursuit of perfection can become endless, with resources continuously revised in search of marginal gains.

At the opposite extreme, teaching directly from a purchased resource without prior thought doesn’t always produce the best outcomes. Not because the resource itself is poor, but because implementation and delivery are equally important. Every class is different and even the time of day can make a big difference. Excellent resources still benefit from adaptation.

Planning matters more than ownership

A useful question is, “How well does this resource support learning, the approach and the outcomes I’m aiming to achieve?”

Students rarely care whether a slideshow, worksheet or activity originated from a classroom teacher, a publisher or a colleague. What matters is whether the material is clear, engaging and appropriate for the task.

A carefully selected resource that has been adapted thoughtfully often provides greater value than a completely original resource produced under severe time pressure. Many experienced teachers develop a practical workflow. They begin with a strong existing resource, then modify examples, add context, adjust explanations and build in scaffolding or differentiation. The result retains the efficiency of an off-the-shelf product while meeting the needs of a specific class.

In this sense, adaptation may be the most important skill of all.

Where AI fits into the picture

Artificial intelligence has added a new dimension to the discussion. AI lesson builders can generate presentations, worksheets and activities within minutes. The speed is impressive, but speed alone does not guarantee quality. Many AI-generated lessons look convincing at first glance. Closer inspection often reveals serious weaknesses. Explanations may not hit the mark, activities may lack practical classroom realism, and presentation choices may do little to support learning.

The issue is not that AI produces poor ideas. In fact, AI can be extremely useful for brainstorming activities, identifying misconceptions, suggesting examples, refactoring and developing ideas or acting as a critical friend during planning.

The real value comes from dialogue and reflection. Used well, AI can challenge assumptions and subject knowledge. Offer alternatives and help teachers think more deeply about lesson design. Used poorly, it can encourage teachers to accept generic materials without sufficient professional judgement. AI works best as an assistant rather than a replacement for expertise.

Collaboration is the hidden advantage

One of the most effective ways to improve resources is to stop working in isolation. Departmental collaboration and local networking allow teachers to share successful activities, test ideas and refine approaches collectively. Resources become stronger when colleagues contribute different perspectives and challenge each other’s assumptions.

No single teacher produces the perfect lesson. Collaboration allows resources to evolve through discussion, adaptation and classroom experience. For trainee teachers in particular, this should be reassuring. Creating resources does not mean starting with a blank page. Existing departmental materials, mentor feedback and shared planning all provide valuable foundations. Teaching is a collaborative profession. Resource development should reflect that reality.

A balanced conclusion

The question is not whether teachers should make their own resources or buy them. The better question is which resources are worth creating, which are worth purchasing and which are worth adapting.

Buy resources when they save substantial time, provide specialist expertise, have unique activities, fit a pedagogy you want to adopt or support consistency across a department. Create or heavily adapt resources when local context and differentiation require it.

Most importantly, avoid confusing workload with effectiveness. Spending every weekend creating lessons from scratch does not automatically make someone a better teacher. Strong planning remains essential, but sustainable planning is even more important. The goal is to deliver excellent learning experiences in the classroom while maintaining the capacity to do that well, day after day, year after year.

The strongest resource is rarely one that is entirely homemade or entirely purchased. More often, it is a well-chosen foundation shaped by professional judgement and thoughtful adaptation.

Want to know more? Check out our ‘At the chalk face’ video HERE.

A strong foundation for your classroom

Did you know we’ve created a whole range of Computer Science resources designed to make life easier for teachers? We’ve built them with real classrooms in mind, drawing on our own teaching experience to create clear, engaging and practical resources that are ready to use and easy to adapt.

From fully editable lessons and structured schemes of learning to engaging activities, extension tasks and resources to support different learners, our aim is simple: to save you time while helping you deliver great Computer Science lessons.

So, if you’re a trainee teacher starting out, an experienced teacher looking to reduce your workload, or a non-specialist looking for some extra support, you don’t have to start from a blank page.

Take a look at the Craig’n’Dave resources and see how they could work for you: Explore our resources

Looking for something else?

Have any questions?

Visit our Helpdesk to get answers!

Visit page

Explore our full range of Study Tools

Visit page

Back

How does age verification technology work?

28 September 2026

From ticking a box to AI-powered age checks

We’ve all seen it: you visit a website, it asks whether you’re over 18, and you confidently click “yes”. But these days, simply taking someone’s word for it isn’t always enough.
As online age restrictions become more important, age verification technology is becoming increasingly sophisticated. From databases and identity documents to artificial intelligence and facial recognition, there are several ways technology can determine whether someone is old enough to access online content.

Database checks: searching for your digital footprint

One of the simplest approaches is a database age check. You provide details such as your name, address or date of birth, and the system cross-references them against sources such as electoral registers, credit reference agencies or mobile phone records.
Rather than proving exactly who you are, the technology is essentially checking whether your details match a real person who meets the required age.
It can work well, but only if there is enough accurate information available. If you’ve recently moved house or have a limited digital footprint, things can become more complicated.

Document verification and OCR

Another method is document verification. You may be asked to upload a passport or driving licence, which software then analyses for security features, layouts and machine-readable information.
Optical character recognition (OCR) can extract information such as your date of birth, while liveness detection can help establish that you’re a real person rather than someone simply holding up a photograph.
This technology is already widely used by banks and other organisations for online identity checks.

Can AI really guess your age?

One of the more controversial methods is facial age estimation. A camera captures your face and a neural network estimates your age based on patterns learned from large datasets.
However, factors such as lighting, camera quality, facial hair, makeup and other characteristics can affect the result. This raises important questions about accuracy, bias and privacy.

The benefits and the concerns

For websites, automated age verification offers speed and scale. Systems can process huge numbers of users without requiring people to manually check identification.
But there are trade-offs, including false positives, data privacy and security concerns. Asking users to provide documents or facial information also raises questions about how much personal data should be required to access online content.
Age verification technology may be getting smarter, but it highlights an important computer science question: just because technology can verify something, does that mean we should always use it?

Want to see age verification technology in action? Watch our Lesson Hacker video to explore how these systems work and the computer science behind them.

Discover more computer science videos, resources and teaching materials at Craig’n’Dave.org

Looking for something else?

Have any questions?

Visit our Helpdesk to get answers!

Visit page

Explore our full range of Study Tools

Visit page

Back

UTF-8 is witchcraft, right?

How computers learned to speak every language

22 September 2026

Ever wondered how your computer can happily store a simple English letter, an emoji, a pound sign and characters from ancient languages – all without everything descending into complete chaos?
It might feel like witchcraft, but there’s some seriously clever computer science behind it.

It all started with ASCII

Back in the day, computers used ASCII (American Standard Code for Information Interchange). ASCII used 7 bits to represent 128 different characters, including English letters, numbers, punctuation and control codes.
Simple, right?
The problem came when people wanted to use characters that weren’t included in the original ASCII character set. Try typing an é, a £ symbol or characters from another language and things quickly became complicated. Various versions of “extended ASCII” appeared, but the same byte could represent different characters on different systems.
Cue: computer chaos.

Enter Unicode

The solution was Unicode, which aimed to give every character a unique number, known as a code point.
For example, the letter A is U+0041, while the pound symbol is U+00A3. Emojis and characters from languages around the world have their own code points too.
Unicode solved the problem of giving characters a consistent identity.

But there was still one important question: How do we actually store those code points as bytes?

UTF-8 does the clever bit

That’s where UTF-8 comes in. UTF-8 is a variable-length character encoding. A character can use between one and four bytes, depending on which character it is.
The really clever part is its backwards compatibility with ASCII. Characters in the original ASCII range (0–127) still use exactly one byte, just as they always did.

Characters outside that range use multiple bytes, with specific bit patterns indicating how many bytes belong to the character. This allows computers to recognise whether a byte starts a new character or continues an existing one.
It sounds complicated, but the result is beautifully efficient.

So, is UTF-8 actually witchcraft?

Thankfully, no.
UTF-8 is simply an incredibly elegant piece of computer science. It manages to remain compact for English text, support languages and symbols from around the world, handle emojis and remain compatible with decades of existing technology.

Not bad for a system that, at first glance, looks like someone made a deal with a very organised demon.

Want to see UTF-8 in action? Watch the full video to explore how character encoding really works.

And for more Computer Science resources, videos and teaching materials, visit the Craig’n’Dave website and discover more ways to bring Computer Science to life.

Looking for something else?

Have any questions?

Visit our Helpdesk to get answers!

Visit page

Explore our full range of Study Tools

Visit page

Back

Why teaching models keep returning

18 September 2026

Every few years, a familiar pattern emerges. A new book captures attention; a framework gains momentum and schools begin discussing a different way to think about teaching. Yet many of these approaches share more similarities than differences.

Assessment for Learning promoted clear objectives and success criteria. Allison and Tharby’s Making Every Lesson Count highlighted challenge, explanation, modelling, practice, feedback and questioning. Rosenshine’s principles emphasised review, modelling, guided practice, questioning and checking understanding. More recently, Chiltern Learning Trust’s Great Teaching Framework has focused attention on securing attention, communicating meaning, driving hard thinking, scaffolding practice, utilising memory and checking for understanding.

Despite their different language, each model attempts to answer the same question: what do effective teachers do that helps pupils learn?

The recurring nature of these ideas should not be surprising. Strong teaching has always involved explaining clearly, helping pupils practise, checking understanding and building knowledge over time. New frameworks often reorganise established principles rather than replace them.

The real challenge is not deciding whether teaching models have value. It is deciding how schools should use them.

The three approaches schools tend to adopt

Schools often sit somewhere between three broad positions.

The first is formulaic. A particular model becomes the expected way to teach. Lessons follow prescribed routines and leaders look for specific techniques during observations and learning walks. Consistency becomes the priority.

The second is a framework approach. Teachers are encouraged to use evidence-informed principles, but they retain professional discretion over how those principles appear in different subjects, classes and contexts.

The third is freedom. Teachers choose their own methods with minimal reference to a whole-school teaching model.

Each position has strengths and weaknesses. Formulaic approaches can help schools where teaching quality varies widely. They provide a shared language and can establish minimum expectations quickly. Freedom allows experienced teachers to adapt their practice and develop approaches that suit their expertise. Frameworks attempt to balance both aims, providing direction without prescribing every decision.

In practice, the most effective schools often avoid the extremes. They offer enough structure to support teachers while leaving sufficient room for professional judgement.

Why technique alone is not enough

One of the most important insights from the Chiltern Learning Trust framework is that teaching is driven by purpose rather than technique.

A teacher may use cold calling to regain attention, check understanding or stimulate thinking. Another may use modelling to communicate ideas or scaffold practice. The technique remains the same, but the purpose changes.

This distinction matters because effective teaching rarely comes from following a script. It comes from understanding why a particular approach is needed at a particular moment.

A classroom is a complex environment. Teachers respond constantly to pupils’ misconceptions, levels of confidence, prior knowledge and engagement. These decisions happen quickly and often instinctively. Over time, experienced teachers build a repertoire of approaches and learn when each is most effective. A framework can support that decision-making. A formula can replace it.

When consistency becomes conformity

Schools understandably seek consistency. Pupils should receive a high-quality experience regardless of which class they join. Departments need common standards. New teachers benefit from clear guidance, but problems arise when consistency becomes conformity.

When every lesson must follow the same sequence, teachers can begin focusing on compliance rather than learning. The question shifts from “What do these pupils need?” to “Does this lesson fit the model?” That shift risks reducing teaching to a checklist.

Professional expertise develops through reflection, experimentation and adaptation. Teachers refine explanations, alter questioning techniques and modify activities as they learn more about their pupils. If every decision is predetermined, opportunities for professional growth become limited. The goal should not be identical lessons. The goal should be consistently effective lessons.

Looking beyond “I do, we do, you do”

The popular “I do, we do, you do” structure illustrates this challenge well. Used thoughtfully, it provides a powerful sequence for introducing new knowledge. Teachers model a process, guide practice and then release responsibility to pupils.

However, it should not become the only route through a lesson. In some situations, greater impact comes from reversing the sequence. Allowing pupils to attempt a task before direct instruction can reveal misconceptions, generate curiosity and create a stronger need for explanation. Struggle, when carefully managed, can become a valuable part of learning.

The most effective teachers understand the principle behind the model rather than treating the model as a fixed recipe. The question is not whether “I do, we do, you do” works. The question is when it works best and when another approach may work better.

Innovation often works because it is different

Many successful teaching approaches succeed because they offer something distinctive.

Time2Code provides an interesting example. Pupils learn through video instruction and progress at different rates. There are no traditional lesson objectives displayed at the start of each lesson and no requirement for every pupil to move through content simultaneously. The approach challenges several assumptions found in more conventional models, yet it has proved highly successful for many learners.

This highlights an important point. Effective teaching cannot always be predicted by asking whether a strategy conforms to a particular framework. Sometimes innovation emerges when teachers identify a problem and design a solution that breaks established patterns.

The same principle applies at whole-school level. An initiative that works brilliantly in one department may lose its effectiveness when copied everywhere. Context matters. Subject disciplines differ. Pupil groups differ. Teachers differ. An idea can be effective partly because it fills a unique need within a particular setting.

Avoiding the trap of educational fashions

Education continually generates new areas of interest, from Blooms and solo taxonomy, from Rosenshine to semantic waves. Most bring valuable insights. The mistake is not studying these ideas. The mistake is assuming that any single idea provides the answer to every teaching challenge.

Research should inform professional judgement rather than replace it. A teacher who understands cognitive load can make better decisions. A teacher who understands retrieval practice can strengthen memory. A teacher who understands modelling can improve explanations.

However, effective teaching remains more than the application of individual theories. It depends on the ability to combine principles, respond to context and make thoughtful decisions in real time.

The framework that supports professionalism

The strongest teaching models act as maps rather than satnavs. They identify important territory. They help teachers understand key principles. They provide common language for professional discussion. They support development, especially for those early in their careers.

What they should not do is dictate every turn. Effective teaching models help teachers think more deeply about their decisions. Ineffective teaching formulas remove the need to think at all.

That distinction may be the most useful test of any new initiative. If a model develops professional judgement, it is likely to improve teaching. If it demands unquestioning compliance, it risks becoming teaching by numbers.

The aim is not to create identical classrooms. It is to create classrooms where effective principles guide skilled professionals who understand when to follow a model, when to adapt it and when to do something completely different. That is where great teaching is most likely to be found.

Want to know more? Watch our latest video on ‘At the chalk face’ where Craig & Dave tackle a question that will probably make a few teachers nod, smile… and perhaps roll their eyes!

How much should schools dictate how teachers teach? Is it better to have a formula that everyone follows, a framework that provides guidance, or complete freedom to let teachers use their professional judgement?

They also get stuck into some bigger questions around pedagogy, cognitive load theory, semantic waves, teaching strategies and the science of learning. When does useful research become an overly prescriptive teaching formula? And are we sometimes so focused on ticking the right boxes that we forget the most important people in the classroom – the students?

Watch the video here.

Looking for resources to help make the new academic year easier? Explore our Craig’n’Dave Resource Centre for ready-to-use Computer Science teaching resources, or use Smart Revise to support effective revision and reduce workload.

Looking for something else?

Have any questions?

Visit our Helpdesk to get answers!

Visit page

Explore our full range of Study Tools

Visit page

Back

Do GCSEs doom students to fail?

11 September 2026

The start of a new school year brings a familiar ritual. Staff gather in the hall, coffee in hand, while senior leaders present the latest examination outcomes. Departments compare performance against predictions. School leaders consider the implications for accountability. Everyone asks the same question: did we do enough?

Behind those conversations lies a bigger puzzle. If teaching has improved so much over the last thirty years, why do headline GCSE outcomes now seem stubbornly resistant to further gains?

The answer is more complicated than many headlines suggest.

A long-term success story that is often overlooked

It is easy to look at recent GCSE results and conclude that little has changed. Yet the long-term picture tells a different story.

In 1993, around 54% of GCSE entries achieved a grade C or above, the equivalent benchmark used before the move to numerical grades. By the late 2000s that figure had risen above 70%. By the mid-2010s it was around 76%.

That represents a substantial improvement in attainment over two decades.

Those gains did not happen by accident. Schools became better at curriculum planning. Teachers gained access to research-informed approaches. Data analysis improved. Intervention programmes became more targeted. In short, the education system became significantly more effective at helping students succeed.

The real question is not why results have failed to improve. It is why improvement has become so much harder.

Understanding the grade 4 benchmark

Part of the confusion comes from the status of grade 4 itself. Technically, grades 1 to 3 are not failures. They represent a level 1 qualification. Students only fail a GCSE if they receive an unclassified grade. However, the practical reality feels very different.

Grade 4 is defined as a standard pass and grade 5 as a strong pass. Most employers expect a grade 4 in English and maths. Many post-16 routes depend upon it. Students who do not achieve a grade 4 in English and maths must continue studying those subjects after age 16.

As a result, grades 1 to 3 occupy an uncomfortable position. They are passes in qualification terms yet often fail to unlock the opportunities that students need. That distinction matters. A student with a grade 3 has achieved something meaningful, but the consequences of falling short of grade 4 can still be significant.

The resit dilemma

Only a relatively small proportion of resit students go on to secure the grade 4 they missed at school. For many young people, the experience becomes a cycle of repeated attempts with little improvement in outcomes.

This creates a difficult question for educators. If a student has spent eleven years in compulsory education without reaching the benchmark, is simply repeating the same qualification the most effective solution?

There are no easy answers, but it is increasingly clear that the debate extends beyond examination performance alone.

No, GCSEs are not designed to make a third of students fail

One of the most persistent myths in education is that GCSE grading deliberately limits the number of students who can achieve a grade 4. Even the Secretary of State for Education didn’t appear to understand this in a recent BBC Four interview.

The misconception usually lies in comparable outcomes. Because national results remain relatively stable from year to year, many people assume that a fixed proportion of students are doomed to fail. That is not how the system works.

GCSEs are primarily criterion-referenced qualifications. Students are assessed against a standard. There is no official quota that reserves grades for a certain percentage of candidates. In theory, if every student demonstrated the knowledge and skills required for grade 4, every student could receive grade 4 or above.

Comparable outcomes only exist to maintain consistency between exam papers sat in different years, not to impose a pass cap. If student attainment genuinely improves across the country, national outcomes rise.

The fact that roughly one-third of students consistently fall below grade 4 reflects patterns of attainment, not an administrative limit on success.

Why further improvement becomes harder

A useful way to think about educational improvement is through the idea of diminishing returns. Moving from 54% achieving the benchmark to 64% represents a major gain. Moving from 64% to 74% is harder. Moving from 74% to 84% is harder still.

The students who benefit most readily from improvements in teaching have largely already benefited from them. The remaining gap increasingly consists of students facing substantial barriers that schools cannot solve. These barriers might include:

Persistent absence
Low literacy on entry to secondary school
Special educational needs
Mental health difficulties
Housing instability
Caring responsibilities
Language barriers
Economic disadvantage

Excellent teaching remains essential. It can reduce the impact of these challenges, but it cannot remove them entirely. As schools have become better at teaching, external pressures have become more significant factors in determining outcomes.

The tug-of-war facing schools

Perhaps the best way to understand recent results is as a tug-of-war. On one side, schools continue to improve. Teachers have stronger subject knowledge, better resources and better approaches. On the other side sit factors beyond the classroom. Rising disadvantage, attendance challenges, literacy gaps and increasing levels of need all pull in the opposite direction.

The result is a system where enormous effort often produces modest gains. This does not mean teaching has stopped improving. It simply means that teaching is no longer the main factor limiting attainment for a significant proportion of students.

That distinction is important. A flat headline figure can hide years of genuine improvement in classroom practice.

Rethinking what success looks like

The persistence of the grade 4 barrier raises an important question: are we measuring the right thing?

Educators agree that every young person should leave school literate and numerate. The debate centres on how that should be assessed, and how students can be supported with limited assets.

One possible approach would be to separate essential literacy and numeracy skills from the wider GCSE English and maths specifications. A baseline qualification could focus on the practical skills needed for everyday life and employment, with students given multiple opportunities to demonstrate competence.

GCSE English and GCSE Maths could then become optional academic qualifications for students, much like French and Physics now, for those who wish to pursue deeper study.

Whether that model is desirable remains open to debate. Yet it reflects a growing concern that a single threshold currently carries too much weight for too many young people.

Looking beyond the numbers

The annual discussion about GCSE results often focuses on percentages, league tables and accountability measures. Those figures matter, but they can also obscure a more important reality.

The rise from 54% to around 67% over the past three decades represents genuine progress. Schools have become better at helping students succeed. Teachers have become more effective. Educational research has improved classroom practice.

At the same time, the final stretch of improvement is proving far more difficult than the first. The challenge facing education today is not simply how to teach better lessons. It is how to support the students whose barriers to success sit largely outside the classroom. Until that question is addressed, the annual September presentation is likely to end with the same uncomfortable conclusion: teachers move the dial, but it cannot solve every problem.

Want to know more? Watch our latest video on ‘At the chalk face’ where Craig & Dave unpack the reality behind GCSE results, comparable outcomes, grade boundaries and the way schools are judged on performance data. They explore why grade boundaries change, whether standards really are rising, and why the idea that a fixed percentage of students must fail is a major misconception.

We also get personal, sharing Dave’s experience supporting his own son through GCSE maths and the lengths parents sometimes have to go to when the system isn’t working for every learner. Its a great watch and one not to miss!

Looking for resources to help make the new academic year easier? Explore our Craig’n’Dave Resource Centre for ready-to-use Computer Science teaching resources, or use Smart Revise to support effective revision and reduce workload.

Looking for something else?

Have any questions?

Visit our Helpdesk to get answers!

Visit page

Explore our full range of Study Tools

Visit page

Back

Will Quantum Computers Break Encryption?

7 September 2026

The Truth Behind the Hype

Quantum computers are all over the headlines, and one question keeps cybersecurity experts (and curious Reddit users) awake at night: will they break encryption? Let’s unpack this complex topic in a way that’s informative, a little fun, and very relevant for computer science enthusiasts.

What Makes Quantum Computers Different?

A standard computer thinks in bits – ones and zeroes, on or off. Quantum computers, however, use qubits, which can exist as one, zero, and everything in between simultaneously. This phenomenon, called superposition, allows quantum computers to explore multiple possibilities at once. Imagine trying every combination of a password simultaneously – it’s like a student’s excuse for not doing homework, but way more powerful.

Shor’s Algorithm: Why Experts Worry

The panic around quantum computing often centres on Shor’s Algorithm. This quantum method can factor extremely large numbers at lightning speed. Most modern encryption, such as RSA, relies on the difficulty of breaking these numbers into prime factors – essentially trying to un-mix a smoothie. With Shor’s Algorithm, those numbers could be split back into their ingredients in seconds. If a sufficiently powerful quantum computer existed, today’s encryption could be compromised.

The Reality Check: We’re Not There Yet

Here’s the reassuring bit: current quantum computers have only a few hundred noisy qubits prone to mistakes, like a Year 10 coding project. To break modern encryption, we’d need millions of perfectly stable qubits with near-perfect error correction. This is decades away, requires extreme cooling near absolute zero, and a level of engineering that makes the Large Hadron Collider look like a Lego set.

Post-Quantum Encryption: Staying Ahead of the Curve

By the time quantum computers are powerful enough to threaten encryption, post-quantum encryption will likely be in place. These new cryptographic methods are designed to withstand quantum attacks, keeping your data safe. In short, quantum computing is exciting but not yet a cyber apocalypse.
Until then, your passwords are safe, unless you’re still using “password123”. In that case, your cat on the keyboard is a bigger threat.

Want to learn more about quantum computing and cyber security? Watch the full Lesson Hacker video on our YouTube channel.

For more tech tips, computer science insights, and classroom-friendly explanations, visit our Craig’n’Dave website and explore our resources.

Looking for something else?

Have any questions?

Visit our Helpdesk to get answers!

Visit page

Explore our full range of Study Tools

Visit page

Back

Is AI a panacea?

4 September 2026

From experimentation to evidence

Artificial intelligence has moved beyond the early adopter stage in schools. Many teachers already use AI to make help with planning, assessment and communication. Students increasingly use AI for homework, revision, coding and independent study. The challenge is no longer whether AI belongs in education. The challenge is deciding how to use it well.

That is why the Department for Education‘s decision to fund the development of national AI benchmarks for schools is significant. Educate Ventures Research has been awarded a £300,000 contract to create a digital and data skills pathway that will establish minimum and aspirational standards for the use of technology and AI across education.

The aim is not just to encourage more AI use. The aim is to help schools identify what effective, safe and educationally valuable use looks like. In a fast-moving market full of competing claims, that clarity is badly needed.

For teachers, this marks an important shift. The conversation is moving away from excitement about new tools and towards professional standards, evidence and accountability.

Workload relief remains the biggest opportunity

Few issues have shaped education in recent years as much as workload. Planning, assessment, administration and communication place constant pressure on teachers’ time. AI offers genuine opportunities to reduce some of that burden.

Many schools already use AI to:

Draft lesson materials and worksheets.
Produce differentiated resources.
Generate reports and parent communications.
Support formative assessment.

These applications often save time, particularly when dealing with repetitive tasks. However, the most effective use of AI is not replacing professional judgement but strengthening it.

A useful approach is to treat AI as a critical friend rather than a content generator. Instead of asking it to write an entire lesson, ask it to review part of a lesson you have already designed. Ask it to identify misconceptions that may arise. Ask it to suggest alternative explanations. Ask it to challenge assumptions in a sequence of learning.

This distinction matters. AI works best when it improves teacher thinking rather than replacing it.

The danger of the shortcut mindset

The promise of workload reduction can sometimes create unrealistic expectations. It is easy to assume that generating a lesson, presentation or worksheet in seconds automatically improves efficiency and quality. Experience suggests otherwise.

Generic AI-generated resources often resemble work produced by an inexperienced teacher. They may contain accurate information, but they rarely reflect the personality, expertise and classroom awareness that make teaching effective. They tend to lack the examples, explanations, diagrams, humour and carefully structured activities that experienced teachers develop over years of practice.

Students are becoming surprisingly adept at recognising AI-generated content. When a resource appears generic or formulaic, engagement can suffer. Learners often respond best when materials clearly reflect the expertise and effort of the teacher standing in front of them.

The most successful teachers therefore use AI to enhance their professional practice rather than outsource it. The technology can accelerate preparation, but it cannot replace the human element that turns information into learning.

AI as a learning partner

The government’s long-term vision includes AI tutoring systems that strengthen teaching and provide better information about pupil progress. At first glance, this can sound ambitious. Yet there are already examples of AI supporting learning in productive ways.

When designed carefully, AI tutors can provide instant explanations, offer additional practice questions, check understanding and help students overcome learning barriers at the moment they occur. A pupil working on programming at home no longer needs to wait until the next lesson to ask a question. They can seek clarification immediately and continue learning.

This is particularly valuable in Computing. Many concepts become difficult because misconceptions go unaddressed for too long. An AI system that provides timely feedback can help students stay engaged and maintain momentum.

Crucially, the most effective AI tutoring tools do not simply provide answers. They encourage thinking. They prompt students to explain their reasoning, justify decisions and refine their understanding.

The goal should never be faster answers. The goal should be deeper learning.

When easier learning becomes weaker learning

The greatest educational risk is not that AI gets answers wrong. It is that AI makes learning feel complete when understanding remains shallow.

Students can now receive an explanation, a summary, a piece of code or a completed paragraph within seconds. While this improves productivity, it can also remove much of the struggle that builds long-term understanding.

Learning depends on effort. Retrieval practice, problem-solving and productive challenge remain essential components of successful education. If students habitually rely on AI to perform tasks for them, they may develop the appearance of competence without developing the underlying knowledge and skills. They can produce work that looks impressive while remaining unable to explain, evaluate or apply what they have submitted.

This concern is particularly relevant in Computing, where mastering programming, algorithms and problem-solving depends on sustained practice. AI can make learning easier without making learners better.

Schools therefore need clear expectations around when AI supports learning and when independent thinking must take priority.

Accuracy still requires human judgement

Another common misconception is that AI can be trusted simply because it sounds confident. It cannot.

Generative AI systems continue to produce factual errors, misleading explanations and fabricated references. The most effective users of AI adopt a questioning mindset. They challenge responses, seek verification and ask the system to critique its own output. They treat AI as a knowledgeable but fallible assistant rather than an unquestionable authority. Students need to be taught this explicitly and teachers need to be mindful not to diminish their own art of reflection.

This approach mirrors good teaching practice. Critical thinking remains essential whether the source is a textbook, a website or an AI model. The responsibility for accuracy still sits firmly with the teacher.

Safety, safeguarding and data protection

As AI adoption increases, safeguarding and data protection become even more important.

Schools should be particularly cautious about entering pupil data into AI systems. Information relating to individual students, SEND needs or behavioural records require careful handling and appropriate safeguards.

The temptation to use free AI tools can create unnecessary risk. In many cases, free services generate revenue by collecting data or using user interactions to improve future models. For schools, the principle should be straightforward: understand where data goes, who has access to it and how it is used.

A strong AI policy should sit alongside existing safeguarding, behaviour and data protection policies. The government’s planned benchmarks will prove especially valuable here. Many schools do not need more AI products. They need greater confidence that the products they use are safe, appropriate and educationally sound.

Teachers remain at the centre

One message appears consistently across government policy, school guidance and classroom experience: teachers remain central to education. AI can provide feedback. AI can suggest explanations. AI can generate resources. AI can support tutoring. What it cannot do is replace professional judgement, relationships and expertise.

Great teaching depends on understanding learners, responding to misconceptions, building confidence and creating meaningful learning experiences. Those are fundamentally human skills. The future of AI in education is therefore unlikely to be about replacement. It is more likely to be about amplification.

The schools that benefit most will not be those that automate everything. They will be the schools that use AI to multiply the impact of effective teachers. The new national benchmarks offer an opportunity to move beyond the current Wild West of AI adoption and towards a more thoughtful approach, where innovation is balanced by evidence, safety and sound educational practice.

Want to know more? Watch our latest video on ‘At the chalk face’ where Dave is joined by Kat Morgan (our Lesson Hacker), an edtech and AI expert, to take a closer look at how AI is really being used in schools right now. From lesson planning and fact-checking to AI tutoring, assessment and personalised learning, they explore what AI can genuinely offer teachers and students – and where we need to be much more careful.

Looking for resources to help make the new academic year easier? Explore our Craig’n’Dave Resource Centre for ready-to-use Computer Science teaching resources, or use Smart Revise to support effective revision and reduce workload.

Looking for something else?

Have any questions?

Visit our Helpdesk to get answers!

Visit page

Explore our full range of Study Tools

Visit page

Back

Digital ID cards: The future of work or a privacy nightmare?

31 August 2026

Digital ID cards might sound like something straight out of 1984, but they’re very much part of the UK’s current political conversation. In this blog, we unpack the big debate featured in our latest Craig ’n’ Dave video — from the promise of smarter identity checks to the fear of slipping into a surveillance society.

What are digital ID cards?

Prime Minister Keir Starmer had proposed introducing digital ID cards across the UK. Instead of a physical card, your identity would live in a gov.uk Wallet app on your smartphone — proving who you are and your right to work or access services.
The idea stems from concerns about illegal working and the UK’s fragmented systems. Supporters claim it’s a modern solution to outdated processes. Critics say it’s political theatre.
Think of it as a “VIP badge”, but instead of wearing it on your shirt, it’s tucked inside your phone. Sleek in concept — but potentially powerful in ways that have raised eyebrows.

The benefits: efficiency, integration, and ease of use

On paper, digital IDs look like a tech upgrade we never asked for but could definitely use. They promise:

Faster access to services
Less paperwork
One digital place for everything — tax returns, healthcare, age checks, passport verification

For anyone who’s battled the NHS login system or spent weeks proving their identity (guilty), this sounds like a dream. No more scavenger hunts for forgotten documents. No more overstuffed wallets. Just a smartphone and a secure login.

The big concerns: privacy, surveillance & cyber threats

Here’s where the plot thickens.
A key criticism is the fear of creating a “checkpoint society”, where identity checks become the norm everywhere you go. Nobody wants to ping facial recognition just to buy a train ticket or open a bank account.

Then there’s cybersecurity. Recent high-profile hacks at major UK companies like M&S and Jaguar Land Rover remind us that no system is untouchable. If huge corporations can fall victim to digital breaches, how safe will a centralised identity system really be?
And with government contracts often awarded to the lowest bidder, can we genuinely trust that the system will be as secure as it needs to be?

How does this link to the Online Safety Act?

The Online Safety Act aims to make digital spaces safer — and a national digital ID system could help combat fraud, bots, and anonymous abuse.
But there’s a fine line between protection and restriction. Some worry this combination could lead to tighter control, restricted freedoms, or a feeling of digital censorship — the ice-cream-brain-freeze version of tech regulation.

Public pushback and political turbulence

Over 760,000 people have signed a petition opposing the plans. Critics argue it’s a quick fix for deeper issues, comparing it to “tidying your room by shoving everything under the bed”.
The idea sounds simple. The execution? Potentially as complicated as building HS2… digitally.

So, is this the future or a digital disaster?

Digital ID cards sit at the crossroads of innovation and intrusion. They could revolutionise how we prove our identity — or open the door to bigger problems around privacy and surveillance.
The key question now is whether the UK can strike a balance between security, efficiency, and civil liberties. Only time (and probably several government pilots) will tell.

Want to know more? Watch the full Lesson Hacker video on our YouTube channel.

For more tech tips, computer science insights, and classroom-friendly explanations, visit our Craig’n’Dave website and explore our resources.

Looking for something else?

Have any questions?

Visit our Helpdesk to get answers!

Visit page

Explore our full range of Study Tools

Visit page

Back

Why does your phone get dimmer in the sun?

28 August 2026

Have you ever been outside on a bright, sunny day, trying to check your phone, only to find the screen suddenly going dim? It feels completely backwards—you want more brightness, and your phone seems to be taking a nap instead. But there’s actually a clever reason behind this “moody” behaviour.

Heat: Your phone’s biggest nemesis

Your phone’s screen isn’t just a simple piece of glass with light behind it. It’s an intricate electrical sandwich. Crank up the brightness, and you’re pushing more current through the display, generating extra heat. Now, add direct sunlight literally cooking your device, and suddenly your sleek smartphone is teetering on the edge of becoming a pocket panini press.

To prevent overheating, phones have built-in self-preservation systems. The operating system constantly monitors internal temperature and, when things get too toasty, it dials down the brightness. This helps protect not only the screen but also the internal chips and battery. Think of it like an athlete in the sun—if they’re overheating, they slow down to stay safe rather than sprint into trouble.

OLED screens and burn-in

If your phone has an OLED screen, there’s another reason for dimming. Running OLEDs at maximum brightness for extended periods can cause burn-in, where ghostly outlines of your last app linger on the screen. By dimming, your phone is actively protecting the pixels and prolonging the life of your display.

Extreme measures

In really hot conditions, dimming is just the start. Your phone might throttle performance, slow down charging, or even display a “temperature warning” before shutting off entirely. It’s all about keeping your device safe.

How to keep your phone cool

So, what can you do? The simplest solution is shade. Avoid using high-performance apps or games while in direct sunlight, and give your phone time to cool down. Much like you on holiday, your phone doesn’t tan well!

Understanding why your phone dims in the sun not only satisfies curiosity but also helps you take better care of your device.

Want to know more? Watch the full Lesson Hacker video on our YouTube channel.

For more tech tips, computer science insights, and classroom-friendly explanations, visit our Craig’n’Dave website and explore our resources.

Looking for something else?

Have any questions?

Visit our Helpdesk to get answers!

Visit page

Explore our full range of Study Tools

Visit page

Back

Do we really use database normalisation in the real world?

If you learned databases at school, you might remember normalisation as a rigid set of rules: First Normal Form, Second Normal Form, Third Normal Form—like Pokémon evolutions, but with fewer Pikachu moments.

The goal is simple: split your data into smaller, related tables to avoid duplication and inconsistency.

What is database normalisation?

In theory, normalisation keeps your data clean. Update a record in one place, and everything stays consistent. No messy anomalies, no duplicated information floating around. For transactional systems like banking, this is critical.

Imagine if your account balance was stored in three different tables—eventually, you’d lose track of where that tenner went!

The trade-off: Speed vs. accuracy

Here’s the catch: normalisation is excellent for correctness but not for speed. Highly normalised databases rely on JOINs to piece data back together. And JOINs? They’re like that colleague who hits “reply-all” on every email—technically correct, but painfully slow.

Analytical systems, reporting platforms, and social media often bend these rules. Take Twitter as an example. A fully normalised feed would query every account you follow to fetch their latest tweets on the fly. Sounds neat, right? But it would be catastrophically slow.

Instead, Twitter denormalises: each tweet is inserted directly into a large table for your timeline, ready to display instantly. Sure, it uses more storage, but your feed loads lightning fast.

Normalisation in the real world

So, do we actually use normalisation? Absolutely—but selectively. It’s not some sacred law etched in stone; it’s a toolkit. Most production databases are a pragmatic mix: normalised enough to maintain consistency, denormalised where speed and scalability demand it.

After all, a perfectly elegant database schema won’t help if your app takes ten minutes to load a cat meme.

Understanding this balance is crucial for computer science students, developers, and anyone working with data at scale. Knowing when and where to apply normalisation can make all the difference between a slow, cumbersome system and a sleek, responsive one.

Want to know more? Watch the Full Lesson Hacker video on our YouTube channel for a detailed, visual breakdown.

For more tech tips, computer science insights, and classroom-friendly explanations, visit our Craig’n’Dave website and explore our resources.

Looking for something else?

Have any questions?

Visit our Helpdesk to get answers!

Visit page

Explore our full range of Study Tools

Visit page

Back

Why do batteries get worse over time?

The science behind your fading charge

24 August 2026

Understanding battery degradation: How lithium-ion batteries age

If you’ve ever noticed your phone or laptop battery holding less charge than it used to, you’re not imagining it. Lithium-ion batteries, the powerhouse behind most modern devices, gradually lose capacity over time. But why does this happen? Let’s break it down.

Batteries are like sponges for electricity

Inside a lithium-ion battery, there’s an anode, a cathode, and an electrolyte in between. When you charge your device, lithium ions move into the anode. When you use it, those ions migrate to the cathode, creating a flow of electrons that powers your tech. Think of it like a sponge being soaked and squeezed repeatedly. Over time, the materials inside the battery become stressed. Tiny cracks form, parts of the electrode lose contact, and some lithium gets trapped in chemical reactions, leaving it permanently unavailable. The result? A battery that just can’t hold as much charge as it once did.

Heat and the SEI layer—battery villains

Heat is a major factor in battery ageing. Charging quickly or leaving your device in direct sunlight makes the battery hotter, accelerating chemical reactions and structural changes. On top of that, the electrode surface gradually develops a thin layer called the SEI (solid electrolyte interphase), similar to plaque on teeth. Each charge cycle thickens this layer, making it harder for ions to move efficiently and further reducing battery performance.

Practical tips for extending battery life

Manufacturers often suggest keeping batteries between 20% and 80% charge, avoiding deep discharges, and steering clear of high-temperature charging. While this isn’t always practical, gentle care goes a long way. Keep your devices cool, avoid extreme charging habits, and remember: all batteries age. The good news? Unlike us, batteries can be replaced.

Curious to see exactly how batteries degrade and why heat is the hidden villain?

Watch the full Lesson Hacker video on our YouTube channel.

For more tech tips, computer science insights, and classroom-friendly explanations, visit our Craig’n’Dave website and explore our resources.

Looking for something else?

Have any questions?

Visit our Helpdesk to get answers!

Visit page

Explore our full range of Study Tools

Visit page

Back

Why does a weak signal drain your phone battery so fast?

21 August 2026

Your phone’s desperate drama

Ever noticed your phone battery disappearing faster than snacks at a party when the signal is weak? It’s not just bad luck, your handset is basically having a panic attack. The moment it senses a slipping signal, it starts shouting at every mobile tower in range: “ARE YOU STILL THERE?!” The weaker the signal, the louder your phone screams, blasting its transmitter at full power to cling onto any connection. And all that shouting? That’s your battery paying the price.

The endless cycle of screaming and searching

It doesn’t stop there. Your phone keeps shouting while frantically scanning for other towers, like someone running around a city with a megaphone while checking every street corner for friends. This repeated effort burns energy. Electrons in this case and leaves your battery drained faster than you’d expect.

Even if your phone does manage to reach a tower, weak signals can garble data. Phones send information in small chunks called packets. When packets get lost, the tower politely asks your phone to repeat itself. So your handset retransmits the same data again and again, like posting the same meme multiple times because no one liked it the first two.

Why your phone gets hot

All that frantic communication makes your handset heat up. Your phone’s radio chips are working overtime, like a runner sprinting uphill while juggling eggs. The worse the signal, the harder your phone has to work, leading to increased battery consumption and heat. Ironically, streaming a 4K video over a full 5G connection uses less battery than trying to check a couple of emails with a single lonely bar of signal.

Keep your battery alive

Next time your phone feels like it’s roasting your palm in the middle of nowhere, don’t blame the battery—it’s just doing its best to keep the conversation alive. Understanding how signal strength impacts battery life can help you manage your usage and expectations, especially when you’re off the beaten track

Want to know more? Check out our Lesson Hacker’s YouTube video.

For more Lesson Hacker Videos, check out the Craig’n’Dave YouTube playlist HERE.
Be sure to visit our website for more insights into the world of technology and the best teaching resources for computer science and business studies.
Stay informed, stay curious!

Looking for something else?

Have any questions?

Visit our Helpdesk to get answers!

Visit page

Explore our full range of Study Tools

Visit page

Back

Why September nerves can be a good thing.

21 August 2026

For many teachers, the final week of the summer holiday brings a mixture of excitement and apprehension. Results day has passed, new ideas are ready to be implemented, and a fresh academic year is waiting just around the corner. Yet even experienced teachers often feel a sense of nervousness as September approaches.

That feeling can be surprising. After all, if you have taught for years, led departments or mentored trainee teachers, surely you should feel completely confident by now. The reality is very different. Many teachers still wonder whether they have forgotten their rhythm in the classroom or whether their carefully planned lessons will work as intended.

Rather than seeing those nerves as a weakness, it may be more helpful to view them as evidence that you care. Teachers who want to do well are naturally concerned about getting the year off to a strong start. The goal is not to eliminate those feelings completely. Instead, it is to put systems in place that reduce avoidable stress and create a sense of control.

Start with the year, not the lessons

Many teachers spend part of the summer preparing resources and refining lesson materials. While lesson planning is important, it is often the practical demands of the school year that create the greatest pressure.

A useful starting point is to review the school calendar and identify the events that will matter to you. Parents’ evenings, assessment windows, data collection deadlines, mock examinations and school trips all have the potential to create workload spikes later in the term. One question can help guide your preparation: what will cause me stress in six weeks if I ignore it now?

Adding important dates to your diary at the beginning of the year provides a much clearer picture of what lies ahead. Teachers who stay on top of workload rarely possess a secret productivity trick. More often, they simply know what is coming before it arrives.

Think of it as laying railway tracks before the train starts moving. Once term begins, events come quickly and relentlessly. Planning ahead makes it much easier to stay in control.

Create one system and trust it

Organisation looks different for every teacher. Some prefer a paper planner. Others rely on digital calendars and spreadsheets. The specific tool matters less than having a system that you use consistently.

Maintaining your own personal planning system rather than relying entirely on multiple school platforms can reduce confusion and save time. Many experienced teachers keep their timetable, class lists, assessment records and key reminders in one place.

Colour coding can be particularly effective. Assigning colours to classes and using those same colours throughout your timetable, planner and mark book makes it easier to identify classes quickly and avoids mistaking one class for another in the same year group.

The same principle applies to student information. Having one personal mark book that contains all the information you use regularly creates a single point of reference. Instead of searching through several different systems, everything you need is immediately available.

The best organisational systems are often the simplest. If a system becomes complicated or time-consuming to maintain, it quickly becomes another problem rather than a solution. Craig and Dave both favour a spreadsheet, with one colour-coded worksheet for each class. Entering student names by hand can help you learn them more quickly at the start of the year. It is also worth adding any relevant student data but remember that pupils can surprise you. Use data to support your planning, not to create a self-fulfilling prophecy about what a student can or cannot achieve.

Protect planning time from administration

Few things disappear faster than a free period. A teacher might sit down intending to plan lessons, only to spend the entire time answering emails. One message becomes three. Three become ten. By the end of the period, no preparation has been completed.

Planning time works best when it is treated as protected time rather than spare time. Lesson preparation, curriculum planning and assessment tasks should take priority over administrative distractions whenever possible.

That does not mean ignoring emails altogether. It simply means handling them deliberately. Many experienced teachers find it more effective to process emails at specific points during the day rather than checking them constantly.

Teaching is already a profession driven by deadlines. Allowing every incoming message to dictate how you spend your time only adds to the pressure.

Establish routines from day one

The opening weeks of term often determine how much effort will be needed for behaviour management later in the year.

Clear routines provide structure for both teachers and students. Entry routines, seating plans, equipment checks, homework procedures and lesson endings all benefit from consistency.

Students rarely remember expectations simply because they were explained once. They need reminders, repetition and reinforcement. If a routine feels slow or awkward at first, resist the temptation to abandon it. Consistency is what makes routines effective.

This is especially important for ECTs. It can be tempting to focus on creative activities and exciting lesson ideas, but routines provide the foundation that allows those activities to succeed.

Students generally respond well when expectations are predictable. They know where the boundaries are, understand what is expected of them and can focus more effectively on learning.

Let consistency beat creativity

Teachers are naturally creative people. Summer often provides time to rethink schemes of learning, redesign lessons and experiment with new approaches. While that creativity is valuable, the first few weeks of term are not always the best time to prioritise it.

A highly consistent classroom is usually more effective in September than a highly creative one. Students benefit from familiar structures and predictable expectations. Once those habits become established, creative activities often have a greater impact because they take place within a well-managed environment.

This does not mean lessons should be dull. It simply means that consistency should come first. A powerful principle for the start of the academic year is this: consistency beats creativity in the opening weeks.

Mark strategically, not endlessly

Workload discussions often return to marking, and with good reason. Marking can quickly become one of the biggest sources of stress for teachers.

The temptation is to treat every piece of work as equally important. Unfortunately, that approach often leads to growing backlogs and increasing pressure.

Strategic marking is far more sustainable. Focus detailed marking on work that genuinely requires it. Use verbal and whole-class feedback whenever they can achieve the same outcome more efficiently.

Students need feedback. They need recognition when they produce strong work. They need guidance when they make mistakes. However, that does not always require lengthy written comments.

The most effective feedback is often immediate and personal. A short conversation during a lesson can have far more impact than a paragraph written in an exercise book days later.

The goal is not to mark more. The goal is to help students improve while maintaining a manageable workload.

Remember that everyone feels it

Perhaps the most reassuring lesson from experienced teachers is that nervousness never completely disappears.

Teachers at every stage of their career can feel uncertain before a new academic year begins. ECTs worry about teaching independently for the first time. Experienced teachers wonder whether they still have what it takes. Department leaders think about results, staffing and curriculum changes.

Those feelings are normal.

The difference is that experienced teachers learn to channel their nervous energy into preparation. They build systems, organise their workload and establish routines before students arrive.

The Scout motto offers a simple reminder that remains as relevant to teaching as ever: Be prepared.

You survived last year. With the right preparation, there is every reason to believe you will thrive this year too.

Want to know more? Watch our latest video on ‘At the chalk face’ where we both talk about our individual experience as teachers and returning to school after the summer break.

Looking for resources to help make the new academic year easier? Explore our Craig’n’Dave Resource Centre for ready-to-use Computer Science teaching resources, or use Smart Revise to support effective revision and reduce workload.

Looking for something else?

Have any questions?

Visit our Helpdesk to get answers!

Visit page

Explore our full range of Study Tools

Visit page

Back

What is refactoring?

And why every programmer secretly loves it

19 August 2026

Refactoring: spring cleaning for your code

Refactoring is the art of improving your code without changing what it actually does. Think of it as tidying up your room – you’re not buying new furniture, just rearranging things so you can move around without tripping over yesterday’s “temporary” fixes. The end result? Cleaner, easier-to-read code that’s simpler to maintain and far less likely to give future you a headache.

Here’s the funny thing: you won’t find “refactor your code” written into your GCSE or A level computer science syllabus. Your assignments usually stop at “make it work and submit it before midnight.” But in the real world? Refactoring is a developer’s dream. It’s their version of a spa day. Many professional programmers love taking messy, old code and transforming it into something elegant – even if they pretend it’s all about “optimising architecture.”

Why refactoring matters

Over time, all code starts to decay. Those little shortcuts, quick fixes, and “I’ll sort it later” moments build up into what’s known as technical debt. The bigger your project gets, the more this debt grows – until it starts slowing everything down or breaking things entirely.
Refactoring tackles that build-up. It turns your tangled ball of code spaghetti back into neat, structured linguine – still the same code, just beautifully organised.

More than pressing a button

Sure, your IDE might have a handy “Refactor” button, but real refactoring goes far beyond renaming variables. It’s about rethinking the structure of your program: breaking down giant functions, reorganising classes, and deleting ancient comments that should’ve been gone years ago.
AI tools can even help with refactoring nowadays, but here’s the catch – you still need the programming knowledge to spot when the AI’s “fix” is actually nonsense.

The bottom line

Refactoring is about making internal improvements to your code – cleaner, more efficient, and more aligned with its purpose. It’s the quiet, behind-the-scenes work that makes great programmers stand out.

Want to dive deeper into how to improve your coding skills?

Watch the full Lesson Hacker video on our YouTube channel to see refactoring in action.

And for more resources, lessons, and insights for computer science teachers and students, visit craigndave.org.

Looking for something else?

Have any questions?

Visit our Helpdesk to get answers!

Visit page

Explore our full range of Study Tools

Visit page

Back

Every teacher has a superpower, but do you know yours?

17 August 2026

“The average teacher explains complexity; the gifted teacher reveals simplicity.” – Robert Brault

Teaching is a curious profession. On the one hand, it is incredibly visible. Every lesson is played out in front of thirty young people who are often more than happy to tell you how well it is going. On the other hand, some of the most important aspects of great teaching are almost invisible, even to the teachers performing them.

A recent article by Sufian Sadiq in TES explored this challenge. Drawing on the work around didagogy, Sadiq argues that expert teachers frequently struggle to articulate exactly how they make decisions in the classroom. They are not consciously weighing up options moment by moment. Instead, they act through a combination of purpose, experience, professional identity and instinct.

That observation will ring true for many teachers. Most of us can think of colleagues whose lessons seem effortless. The students are engaged, the classroom feels purposeful and learning happens. Yet if you ask those teachers precisely how they achieve it, the answer is often far less clear than expected. Perhaps the reason is simple. The secret is not a particular technique. It is a superpower.

The teachers we never forget

Most teachers can immediately recall someone who inspired them early in their career. It might have been a head of year who combined empathy with absolute authority. A teacher whose classroom behaviour management appeared almost magical. A colleague who somehow knew every student in the school, along with their interests, aspirations and challenges.

What stands out about these people is that they are rarely identical. Their methods differ. Their personalities differ. Their subject knowledge, routines and classroom styles differ. Yet they often achieve similar outcomes. The common factor appears to be their ability to connect.

Whether describing highly effective classroom practitioners, successful pastoral leaders or outstanding mentors, the same theme surfaces again and again. The teachers who make the greatest impact were those who built genuine connections with young people while maintaining clear expectations and professional boundaries.

This goes beyond simply being liked. Students do not need teachers to be their friends. They need teachers who are fair, consistent and genuinely interested in them as individuals. When those foundations are in place, every other teaching strategy becomes more powerful.

Expertise is more than technique

One of the most interesting points in Sadiq’s article is the warning against “teaching by numbers”. Over the past decade, education has rightly benefited from a greater understanding of cognitive science and evidence-informed practice. Shared language around techniques such as retrieval practice, cold calling and scaffolding has undoubtedly helped professional conversations.

However, there is a danger in assuming that successful teaching is simply the correct application of a set of techniques. Any experienced teacher knows this is not true. Two teachers can use the same strategy in the same lesson with vastly different results. One generates enthusiasm and deep thinking. The other sees limited impact. The difference is often found in factors that are harder to quantify. Relationships. Credibility. Consistency. Authenticity. These are not alternatives to good teaching techniques. They are what make those techniques work.

Discovering your own superpower

If every effective teacher is different, perhaps professional development should focus less on creating identical practitioners and more on helping teachers identify and develop their unique strengths.

Ask a group of experienced teachers what their classroom superpower is and the answers are rarely the same. One teacher may excel at bringing industry experience into the classroom. Complex programming concepts become meaningful because they are connected to real applications in software development, banking, cybersecurity or engineering. Students begin to understand not only how something works, but why it matters.

Another teacher’s strength may be relentless reflection. They constantly ask themselves uncomfortable questions:

Why am I teaching this topic in this way?
Is it producing the outcomes I want?
What would happen if I tried something different?

This mindset turns teaching into an ongoing process of experimentation and improvement. Rather than accepting established practice at face value, reflective teachers continually look for better solutions. Both approaches can be enormously effective, despite appearing completely different on the surface. The important lesson is that neither teacher is trying to copy someone else. They are building upon their own strengths.

Why questioning the orthodox matters

Computing has always been a subject that rewards innovation, and perhaps the same should be true of Computing education. Many of the most successful developments in classroom practice have emerged because teachers were prepared to challenge assumptions.

Consider flipped learning. Traditionally, homework has been used to reinforce content already taught in lessons. The flipped classroom reverses this sequence, allowing students to encounter core knowledge before arriving in class and freeing lesson time for discussion, application and problem-solving.

Or consider retrieval practice. The goal is not simply to test knowledge but to strengthen memory by repeatedly revisiting key concepts over time. Students often encounter the same questions again and again because remembering is the point.

Programming education provides another example. Many teachers introduce subprograms relatively late because they are perceived as difficult. Yet some practitioners have found considerable success by teaching them early. The reasoning is straightforward: concepts that appear difficult become easier with sustained practice. Students who regularly work with subprograms from the beginning may stop viewing them as difficult altogether.

None of these approaches emerged because someone accepted conventional wisdom. They emerged because someone asked, “Why do we do it this way?”

The Computing teacher advantage

Computing teachers possess a unique opportunity in this regard because the subject naturally connects classroom learning with the wider world. Students often ask questions that begin with “When will I ever use this?” The strongest Computing teachers rarely struggle to answer.

Whether discussing algorithms, networking, databases or programming, they can connect learning to careers, industries and real-world applications. Students begin to see themselves not simply learning about technology but becoming creators, problem-solvers and innovators. Young people are more likely to engage when they understand how the skills they are developing relate to the wider world beyond the classroom.

Finding your unique selling point

Sadiq argues that professional development should help teachers understand their own decision-making more deeply. That is an important goal. Yet perhaps there is another question worth asking alongside it. What is your superpower?

Not the strategy that appears on a lesson observation template. Not the initiative currently being discussed in staff meetings. Not the technique everyone is talking about online.

What is the thing that students and colleagues remember about you?

Whatever it is, it is worth recognising and developing because great teaching rarely comes from becoming a copy of somebody else. It comes from understanding what makes you unique and using it to make a difference. If teaching is your product, then your superpower is your unique selling point. The challenge is making sure you know what it is.

Want to know more? Watch the latest ‘At the chalk face’ video where we go into more detail!

Looking for something else?

Have any questions?

Visit our Helpdesk to get answers!

Visit page

Explore our full range of Study Tools

Visit page

Back

A new direction for Key Stage 3 Computing

17 August 2026

For years, Craig’n’Dave have been associated primarily with GCSE and A-level Computing. Many teachers have repeatedly asked the same question: when will there be a Key Stage 3 offer? The answer has finally arrived with the launch of a new KS3 Resource Centre, available for £299+VAT for 12 months’ access to downloadable resources. More significantly, however, this is not simply another scheme of work. It represents a deliberate response to a changing curriculum landscape and a growing debate about what Computing should look like in the years leading up to GCSE.

Why KS3, and why now?

With national curriculum reform underway and growing attention being given to artificial intelligence, digital citizenship and digital literacy, there was an opportunity to rethink what a modern computing curriculum might look like. Rather than waiting for every detail of future reforms to be finalised, we felt schools needed support now, particularly given the likelihood that today’s Year 7 students could be among the first to experience reformed qualifications.

This reflects a challenge many Computing teachers recognise. Curriculum design cannot simply stop while waiting for official documents. Departments still need coherent plans, engaging lessons and a clear vision for progression.

Starting with principles, not lesson resources

Perhaps the most revealing part of the development process is what happened before a single lesson was written. Instead of immediately creating teaching materials, we spent months developing an intent, implementation and impact framework. This resulted in 58 guiding principles that would shape every subsequent decision.

For experienced classroom teachers, this approach will sound familiar. The most successful curricula are rarely built around activities. They are built around beliefs about learning.

The discussion highlights an important lesson for departments undertaking their own curriculum reviews. Before deciding what students will learn, it is worth agreeing why they are learning it and how that learning should take place. The framework became a reference point whenever design decisions became difficult, helping maintain consistency across units and avoiding the gradual drift that often occurs when resources are developed over time.

What will feel familiar?

Despite the emphasis on innovation, there was a conscious decision not to reinvent classroom practice. The resulting structure will look reassuringly familiar to most Computing teachers:

Teacher-led lessons with discussion, modelling and guided exploration.
Clear lesson objectives and learning outcomes.
Six-lesson units with possibilities to expand to longer terms.
A blend of online, unplugged, individual, paired and group activities.
Fully editable resources.

We were particularly conscious that many KS3 lessons are taught by non-specialist teachers. Rather than creating a framework that required extensive training to understand, we wanted something that could be picked up and taught with confidence from the outset.

That decision reflects a reality often overlooked in curriculum discussions. A brilliant curriculum that demands significant preparation time is not always a practical curriculum.

What makes this different?

While the structure may feel familiar, several features stand out.

The most distinctive is the decision to organise every unit around a career. Students are not simply learning about fake news, cybersecurity or image recognition. Instead, they adopt professional identities such as investigative journalist, cyber security consultant or computer vision engineer.

This is more than a cosmetic change. Each unit begins with a career-focused introduction, includes examples of people working in related fields and concludes with students receiving a career-themed outcome linked to their work.

Many Computing teachers will recognise the question that this approach attempts to answer: “Why are we learning this?”

Rather than treating careers education as an add-on, the curriculum weaves career relevance directly into the learning journey. Importantly, the focus is not on persuading every child to pursue a particular profession. Instead, it helps students understand where computing knowledge is applied in the real world.

Reducing workload without reducing expectations

Another notable feature is the focus on assessment.

One of the design principles was that marking should be meaningful rather than constant. Instead of generating assessable work in every lesson, students spend four lessons learning and exploring concepts before producing a final outcome in lesson five.

That final product becomes the piece of assessed work.

This reflects a concern shared by many teachers: the pressure to generate evidence can sometimes overshadow the learning itself. By concentrating assessment at key points, the scheme attempts to maintain accountability while reducing unnecessary workload.

Lesson six is then dedicated to reflection and improvement (DIRT). Students complete a knowledge quiz, review their work (or the work of a peer), identify areas for development and make improvements. The approach gives dedicated space to processes that are often squeezed into the final minutes of a lesson.

Teaching for curiosity and resilience

Rather than relying heavily on the traditional “I do, we do, you do” structure, many activities begin with exploration. Students are encouraged to investigate, discuss patterns and develop ideas before the teacher consolidates learning and addresses misconceptions.

The aim is not discovery learning for its own sake. Instead, it reflects a belief that students develop greater resilience when they are given opportunities to grapple with ideas before receiving formal explanations.

This is particularly relevant in Computing, where perseverance, debugging and problem-solving are central disciplinary habits. Teachers frequently talk about wanting students to become independent thinkers, yet curriculum design does not always create space for that independence to develop.

Literacy, vocabulary and inclusion

The scheme also places significant emphasis on literacy. Subject-specific vocabulary is explicitly identified and revisited throughout a unit, while knowledge retrieval forms an important part of the start of every lesson and the review process.

Equally noteworthy is the decision to avoid differentiation by task. Instead, the curriculum adopts an adaptive teaching approach. All students work towards the same objectives, with scaffolding and teacher intervention providing additional support where needed.

Whether teachers agree with that position or not, the decision is linked to a clearly articulated educational rationale rather than being included simply because it is fashionable.

Looking ahead

At launch, eight units are available, with further development planned over the coming years. The longer-term ambition is a comprehensive library from which schools can either follow a suggested pathway or construct their own bespoke curriculum.

Perhaps the most reassuring message for teachers is that we do not view the published materials as finished products. Curriculum reform will require adjustments, and we are committed to revisiting units as the national picture becomes clearer.

In a period when Computing education continues to evolve rapidly, that willingness to adapt may prove just as valuable as the resources themselves.

Finding out more

Teachers wishing to explore the new Key Stage 3 offer can find details, curriculum pathways and the accompanying intent, implementation and impact framework on the Craig’n’Dave website (craigndave.org). The KS3 Resource Centre currently provides access to the first eight units, with additional content planned.

Want to know more? Watch our video on ‘At the chalk face’ where we go over all the details.

Looking for something else?

Have any questions?

Visit our Helpdesk to get answers!

Visit page

Explore our full range of Study Tools

Visit page

Should I make my own resources?

Why this question matters

The case for creating your own resources

The benefits of off-the-shelf resources

Why extremes rarely work

Planning matters more than ownership

Where AI fits into the picture

Collaboration is the hidden advantage

A balanced conclusion

A strong foundation for your classroom

Related posts

How does age verification technology work?

UTF-8 is witchcraft, right?

Why teaching models keep returning

Do GCSEs doom students to fail?

Will Quantum Computers Break Encryption?

Is AI a panacea?

Digital ID cards: The future of work or a privacy nightmare?

Why does your phone get dimmer in the sun?

Do we really use database normalisation in the real world?

Looking for something else?

Have any questions?

Explore our full range of Study Tools

How does age verification technology work?

From ticking a box to AI-powered age checks

Database checks: searching for your digital footprint

Document verification and OCR

Can AI really guess your age?

The benefits and the concerns

Related posts