The problem with 'problems' in education
I recently attended the latest Incubating Innovation session with the Fair Education Alliance (FEA) and my fellow Innovation Award winners. It was far from your typical sit-and-listen event. Instead, it was a deep dive into practical strategies aimed at tackling inequalities head-on, focusing on the challenges we face in education. Two key themes stood out: Theory of Change (ToC) and Problem Analysis (PA). These are not just abstract ideas—they are powerful tools that can cut through the complexity of deeply ingrained issues and create lasting change.
Too often I’ve been a firefighter in the education sector. Rolling up my sleeves to move from one heated problem to the next in an attempt to extinguish it. If we are serious about closing attainment gaps, reducing exclusions, or breaking down poverty-related barriers to opportunity, then ToC and PA can be game changers. However, many school leaders are unfamiliar with these frameworks, despite their immense potential to deliver real impact where it's most needed, in our communities.
Turning from big ideas to big problems
Every school has ambitious goals. These might include closing the achievement gap, boosting student engagement, or introducing community support initiatives like PLACE (People, Learning and Community Engagement). Whatever the target, Theory of Change is the key to turning these ambitions into actionable steps. ToC is about reverse-engineering success: starting with the end goal and then working backwards to figure out exactly what needs to happen to get there.
(Image source: Sidney Harris)
Think of it like a road map that links vision to reality. In the day-to-day busyness of schools, big ideas can often get lost in the grind. ToC helps to clarify the path ahead, making it easier to prioritise initiatives, allocate resources, and measure progress effectively. Too often, I’ve seen schools with great intentions produce little more than a strategic document, because implementation was poor. An effective ToC keeps focus on the actions that will create measurable change (if done well!)
In our incubator session, we discussed how this framework helps leaders and organisations approach problems with a cohesive understanding. It provides a sense of direction and purpose, guiding everyone towards the right steps to enact change. While I’ve used ToC across various sectors, its value became particularly clear when applied alongside other innovators in education.
Note: good example of a simplified/clear ToC here from Child Poverty Action Group (CPAG)
Getting to the root of it
One hard truth is this: tackling inequality isn’t just about addressing the surface-level issues—it’s about going deeper. This isn’t to diminish the important work that schools and charities do in providing welfare support, such as free uniforms or food banks. These services matter greatly to families in hardship. But to truly challenge inequality on a large scale, we need to move beyond treating the symptoms and a well intentioned bandage on an open wound of hardship.
This is where Problem Analysis comes into play. PA is all about forensically diagnosing the real issue, not just responding to the symptoms. Schools often act quickly, rolling out interventions to address immediate concerns like absenteeism or low academic performance. But what if these are merely the surface-level manifestations of a much deeper, more complex problem? For instance, Square Peg, an organisation focusing on inequality in attendance, rightly notes that attendance issues are symptoms, not the root problem.
Problem Analysis helps to peel back the layers of the issue. It’s a difficult but necessary process. It encourages leaders to ask why a problem exists, not just what it is. For instance, is low academic performance a result of disengagement, or is it connected to more significant socioeconomic barriers? Are so-called ‘low aspirations’ the issue, or is the real problem a lack of visible pathways to success? Far too often, schools, charities, and policymakers blame low aspirations for poor outcomes, when in reality, it’s more about limited access to opportunities. If you want a good example of a Trust that has framed an understanding of barriers that they know exist for pupils and how to tackle them at scale - see this case study from NEAT.
I’ve written before about some of the tools that can be used in teams and schools to make use of problem analysis.
In our incubator session, we stressed the importance of moving from a reactive approach—constantly responding to individual problems as they arise—to a preventative approach that tackles the root causes. Problem Analysis can help to give teams the clarity needed to see beyond the obvious and create interventions that address the deeper issues.
Shifting problems to change
Here’s where a fusion happens: when you combine Theory of Change with Problem Analysis, you can approach problem-solving in a way that doesn’t just paper over the cracks—it lays the foundations for meaningful change. Instead of jumping from one initiative to another leaders can be strategic, proactive, and effective.
Let’s take an example. Suppose your school identifies that students from low-income backgrounds are consistently underachieving. Instead of assuming that the problem is a lack of aspiration and pushing for more revision sessions, Problem Analysis might reveal deeper causes—such as unmet needs at home or a curriculum that feels disconnected from students’ experiences. Supported with this understanding, you can use ToC to design tailored interventions, such as partnering with community organisations to offer wraparound support or rethinking the curriculum to engage these students more effective.
The brilliant educationalist ‘the real’ David Cameron (not that other guy!) often speaks about how schools and education policies can fall into the habit of “painting over wet paint”—layering new initiatives on top of one another without fully understanding the underlying issues; unaided by the fact that education reform/policy has historically not always been implemented well. By using Theory of Change and Problem Analysis together, education leaders can avoid this trap. These tools help schools build sustainable, long-term improvements instead of constantly chasing after quick fixes.
Why bother?
Why does all this matter? School leadership is tough, and addressing inequality is even tougher. Leaders are constantly balancing competing priorities, and inequality is a complex, multi-faceted issue. But the good news is that by applying Theory of Change and Problem Analysis, schools can move beyond simply reacting to problems. Instead, they can start moving towards real, sustainable solutions.
At Tees Valley Education, we used these frameworks to develop PLACE and to help write our Innovation Award bid. These tools aren’t just theoretical—they are practical, actionable approaches that align a school’s efforts with a clear, evidence-based strategy. They can help everyone—from leaders to support staff—focus on the same goal. As a leader, this clarity helps you stay focused on the big picture, rather than getting lost in the day-to-day firefighting.
There are no silver bullets for tackling inequality in education. But there are some shiny tools—like Theory of Change and Problem Analysis—that can help us create real, lasting change in and through the sector. I am increasingly convinced that a commitment to ‘place-based’ and lasting change relies on it.
Further reading
John Smith (Director of Partnerships at RGS, Newcastle) has written a fantastic chapter about the value of ToC and partnership development in schools and in tackling inequality. You’ll be able to read it in this book coming soon!
The Center for Theory of Change is a non-profit organisation established to champion best practices for the development and implementation of Theory of Change, with a particular focus on its use and application in the areas of international development, sustainability, education, human rights and social change.
This free article by me shares two tools that can used in leadership teams to support and develop problem analysis.