Here you will find the case study with Stoke Primary School exploring their continuous provision approach in Year 2. You can download the PDF or read the full text below.

Title: Flexible Routes and Flourishing Learners. A year long case study of continuous provision in Year 2 at Stoke Primary School.

Authors:
Emma Lewry - External Project Lead, Educational Consultant
Ellen Parker - Assistant Headteacher & Curriculum Lead, Stoke Primary School

School: Stoke Primary School, Coventry

Publication: September 2025

Acknowledgements: Thank you to the staff, children and families at Stoke Primary School for their involvement in the ase study. Working with leaders, teachers and support staff was refreshing and hopeful, as they share a deep belief in the power of play, joy and belonging as a vital part of school life for all children. Working alongside a group of independent, confident and joyful children was an absolute pleasure. Thank you Ellen Parker and Mat Ascroft for bringing this Case Study to life by trusting in the power of continuous provision for your Key Stage One children, and beyond.

Contents:

1. Executive summary

2. Introduction 

3. Background and Rationale                                                                                                             

4. Methodology 

5. Findings 

• 5.1 Well-being and involvement 
• 5.2 Flexible Routes to Learning 
• 5.3 Physical Movement and Engagement 
• 5.4 Peer Interaction and Opportunities to develop learning through talk 
• 5.5 Social and Emotional Development: Belonging, Behaviour and Inclusion 
• 5.6 Skills Retention and the Role of ‘Must Dos’ 
• 5.7 Implementation Factors 
• 5.8 Additional Outcome

6. Discussion 

7. Conclusion 

8. Next Steps

9. References 26

10. Appendixes 

1. Executive Summary

This case study presents the findings from a year-long action research project at Stoke Primary School, exploring the impact of a continuous provision approach in Year 2 on pupils’ well-being, involvement, and skill retention, and identifying the conditions for successful implementation.

Prompted by cohort needs, leadership passion for play based learning throughout Key Stage one, and an Ofsted inspection comment questioning the value of play for some pupils, the school extended its continuous provision approach from Year 1 into Year 2. Working in partnership with an external project lead, the research aimed to move beyond anecdotal observations to gather concrete evidence about the outcomes of this pedagogical model.

Data was gathered through the Leuven Scale for well-being and involvement, skill retention tracking, classroom observations, staff and pupil interviews, and survey responses. The research also captured qualitative evidence on how pupils navigate their learning through “flexible routes” meaning multiple pathways from teacher input to pupil outcomes, allowing for autonomy, movement, and personalised challenge.

Key findings include:

• High levels of engagement sustained for up to 45–60 minutes, supported by increased choice and autonomy.

• Enhanced well-being as indicated by Leuven Scale scores and pupil voice, with low behaviour incidents and a strong sense of belonging.

• Improved inclusion for pupils with SEND, EAL, and varied learning needs through adaptable provision and peer collaboration.

• Positive skill retention supported by varied opportunities to revisit and apply knowledge over time.

• Implementation success factors including strong leadership vision, intentional environment design, and ongoing staff dialogue.

The study concludes that continuous provision in Key Stage 1, when well-planned and supported, can deliver academic rigour alongside deep engagement and inclusivity. Recommendations are provided for schools considering adopting or extending this approach.

2. Introduction

Research Question

What is the impact of a continuous provision pedagogical and curricular approach on well-being, involvement, and skill retention for Year 2 pupils, and what factors influence its successful implementation?

Project Objectives

The case study was designed to:

• Review levels of well-being, involvement, and skill application across Year 2, tracking change from the study starting point, end of Year 1, through to the end of the academic year.

• Explore the specific impact of continuous provision on Year 2 learners at Stoke Primary School.

• Identify the conditions that enable or hinder successful implementation in a Key Stage 1 context.

Rationale for the Case Study

Formal, desk-based learning has become the dominant model in many Key Stage 1 classrooms in England, often prioritising early literacy and numeracy skills through structured whole-class teaching. While effective in some respects, this model may not fully address the developmental, social, and emotional needs of all children, particularly in diverse school contexts where pupils have a wide range of starting points.

Stoke Primary School serves a richly diverse community, with high proportions of pupils eligible for Pupil Premium, pupils for whom English is an additional language (EAL), and pupils who join the school mid-year. Leaders had already introduced continuous provision into Year 1 and were seeing promising results when, during an Ofsted inspection, an inspector posed the question: “But what about the children who no longer need play?”

Rather than retreating from play-based approaches, school leaders extended continuous provision into Year 2, seeking to test its impact through the case study process. This decision aligned with the school’s commitment to nurture confident, resilient lifelong learners, to bring childhood into the heart of schooling, and to support the holistic development of every child - academically, socially, and personally.

The project ran for a full academic year, starting in July 2024, and was co-led by Assistant Headteacher Ellen Parker and external consultant Emma Lewry. It was grounded in the belief that well-being and involvement are not secondary to academic achievement, but essential foundations for deep learning and skill retention and that well planned continuous provision as a pedagogical tool is highly impactful for all learners.

School Snapshot – Stoke Primary School

• Location: Urban, culturally diverse community.

• Pupil Demographics:

  • Above-average proportion of pupils eligible for Pupil Premium.

  • High proportion of pupils with EAL.

  • Significant pupil mobility during the school year.

• Vision: Belonging, curiosity, high expectations and joy for every child.

• Curriculum: Integrated approach in year 1 and 2, combining subject rigour with play, exploration, and child-led learning opportunities.

• Staff Ethos: Committed to meeting pupils where they are, valuing personal development alongside academic progress.

3. Background and Rationale

The continuous provision project at Stoke Primary School sits within a wider conversation, both research-led and policy-driven, about the role of play, autonomy and joy in Key Stage 1 learning. While many primary schools in England have moved towards more formalised teaching earlier in the curriculum, there is a growing body of evidence suggesting that a balance of structure and play-based approaches can have significant benefits for pupil engagement, inclusion, and long-term outcomes.

The Ofsted Trigger

The impetus for this research came during an Ofsted inspection of Stoke Primary’s Year 1 provision. Inspectors observed the continuous provision model and asked: “But what about the children who no longer need play?” For leaders at Stoke, this question crystallised a challenge: can play be no longer needed for any child, and what evidence do we have to guide that decision? Having seen the positive impact continuous provision had for the learners in year 1 and a deep seated belief that the approach was impactful, leaders wanted to dig deeper. Rather than scaling back, the school extended continuous provision into Year 2, committing to a full year of structured research into its impact.

Research Foundation: The Leuven Scale and the Blackpool Transition Project

A cornerstone of the project was the Leuven Scale, developed by Professor Ferre Laevers, which measures well-being and involvement on a five-point scale. These indicators have been shown to correlate with deeper learning, higher motivation, and improved social outcomes (Laevers, F. 1994).

Stoke’s approach was inspired in part by the Blackpool Transition Project (2018), which used the Leuven Scale to track children’s well-being and involvement through their transition from Reception to Year 1. While the Blackpool project focused on early transition, Stoke applied the same principles at a later stage, measuring pupils at the end of Year 1 and tracking change throughout Year 2.

A National Curriculum Under Review

This case study also takes place at a time of significant policy reflection in England. The ongoing National Curriculum review has already highlighted concerns about a ‘crammed’ primary curriculum, raising questions about breadth, depth, and the balance between academic rigour and developmental readiness. Alongside this, national data shows a sharp rise in Year 1 suspensions over the past two years, with many linked to unmet needs and challenges in adjusting to more formal learning structures.

These trends intersect with the broader SEND crisis and growing concerns about inclusion, particularly for children who do not thrive in highly formal, one-size-fits-all classroom models. For schools like Stoke, continuous provision offers an alternative approach that may better meet the needs of diverse cohorts.

The National Play Conversation

Interest in the role of play within statutory education has intensified. In June 2025, the National Play Commission released its Everything to Play For report described as a national wake-up call on play with one key recommendation being to “support schools to harness the power of play for learning.” (National Play Commission, 2025). At the same time, a public petition calling for continuous provision to be made statutory in Key Stage 1 has gained significant traction, reaching over 70,000 signatures at the time of writing.

These developments reflect a shift in public and professional sentiment, recognising that play is not simply a prelude to ‘real’ learning, but a powerful pedagogical tool in its own right. Stoke’s Year 2 project offers a timely, evidence-rich contribution to this debate.

4. Methodology

Research Design

This project was designed as a year-long action research case study, combining quantitative and qualitative approaches to provide a rich, multi-layered understanding of the continuous provision model in Year 2. The study ran from July 2024 to July 2025 and involved a selection of 35 pupils across the two Year 2 classes at Stoke Primary School. Carers signed permission and ethical consideration forms for pupil participation. Two teachers, two teaching assistants, one Headteacher and five members of the Leadership Team were involved in the study.

The aim was to track changes in pupils’ well-being, involvement, and skill retention over the year, while also exploring the conditions that supported or challenged the approach. The research was deliberately embedded into the life of the school, allowing evidence to be gathered in authentic classroom contexts.

Data Collection Methods

A range of complementary methods were used to build a detailed picture of the approach in action.

Well-being and involvement were measured using the Leuven Scale at three key points during the year at the start, mid-point, and end. Observations were focused on a representative sample of pupils, providing both a broad overview and insights into individual learning journeys.

Skill retention tracking focused on ensuring that core skills were continually revisited and applied. Core skills were retained through weekly ‘must dos’ – activities designed for children to retrieve previously taught skills across subjects. Each week, children completed maths, writing, and wider curriculum ‘must dos’. Having already been explicitly taught, these skills were then retrieved and applied by pupils in self-directed contexts across the learning environment removed from the point of teaching by at least two weeks. Evidence of this process was captured in children’s ‘must do’ journals and Seesaw.

Classroom observations formed a significant part of the data set. These included tracking individual pupils’ movement, engagement, positioning and task-switching during continuous provision sessions, and noting patterns in peer collaboration, independence, and the use of different learning spaces.

Staff and pupil voice were central to the project. Semi-structured interviews were held with Year 2 teachers, teaching assistants, and subject leaders, while informal conversations with pupils provided authentic, first-hand perspectives. Surveys were also conducted mid-year and at the end of the project, combining quantitative ratings with open-ended comments.

Leadership perspectives were gathered through four structured reflection meetings across the year, involving the Headteacher, Assistant Headteacher, and subject leads. These sessions explored implementation challenges, strategic decision-making, and the alignment of the approach with the school’s wider vision.

Data Analysis

Quantitative data from the Leuven Scales and skill retention assessments was analysed to identify trends over time, both for the cohort as a whole and for individual pupils. Qualitative data from observations, interviews, and surveys was thematically coded, allowing recurring themes such as flexible routes, autonomy, and movement to emerge and be explored in depth.

5. Findings

5.1 Well-being and Involvement

From the earliest baseline observations in July, Year 2 pupils (in year 1 when baseline observations took place) demonstrated consistently high levels of well-being and involvement in their learning. Leuven Scale scores across the cohort were strong at the start of the year, averaging 3.58 for well-being and 3.55 for involvement reflecting the continuity of approach from Year 1, and rose further for many pupils as the year progressed. By the final round of observations in July, scores had risen to 3.97 for well-being and 3.85 involvement. The key outcome here is that well-being and involvement increased across the year 2 academic year with gains across the group of 0.39 for well-being and 0.3 for involvement. Reflecting on the Blackpool transition project which showed a decrease in wellbeing and involvement figures across transition and moving into more formal teaching methods, the Stoke data shows this can be combatted by using the continuous provision approach.

The qualitative evidence supported these scores. Pupils were seen engaging deeply with activities for extended periods, in some cases sustaining independent focus on one particular aspect of learning for 45 to 60 minutes. This level of involvement was particularly striking in a Key Stage 1 context, where shorter attention spans are often assumed to be the norm.

A key factor appeared to be the alignment between children’s interests, the freedom to make choices, and the range of accessible, well-designed provision areas. Pupils spoke positively about their enjoyment of learning, and about feeling comfortable, confident, and able to take risks.

Teachers also observed the impact on emotional regulation. Incidents requiring behaviour support were rare, and the learning environment was described by staff as calm, purposeful, and inclusive. The combination of choice, movement, and meaningful challenge appeared to support both individual regulation and group dynamics.

Pupil: “I like that I can choose how to do my work. It makes me feel happy because I can do it my way and still show my teacher.”

Teacher: “The children are just settled here. They’re focused, they’re talking about their learning, and they’re confident to try even if they’re not sure they’ll get it right the first time.”

These high levels of well-being translated into a tangible sense of ‘belonging’ in the classroom, with pupils demonstrating not only engagement in learning but also mutual respect and care for one another. One teacher reported “children's engagement in their learning, their passion for school, topics and thinking” being the best part of using the continuous provision approach.

5.2 Flexible Routes to Learning

One of the strongest and most distinctive findings from the case study was the way Stoke’s continuous provision model allowed for flexible routes between teacher input and pupil outcomes. Rather than a single, predetermined path, pupils had multiple ways to engage with new knowledge and skills, and to demonstrate their understanding.

This concept was perhaps best summed up through the ballroom dance analogy reference from the Birth to 5 document: learning is “dancing around a ballroom than climbing a ladder,” (Birth to 5 matters, 2021) with steps forward, sideways, and back and multiple possible routes to a shared destination.

In practical terms, after a shared input for example, a mathematics lesson on arrays pupils could choose from a range of activities and media to explore the concept. In one observed session some opted to draw arrays on paper, others used loose parts to construct them physically, while others recreated them digitally on tablets or explained them verbally to a peer. Similarly, in art lessons about weaving, children explored fabric in collage creations, practised weaving with ‘finish me’ provocations and developed 3D constructions made from classroom resources.

This flexibility had several clear benefits:

• Autonomy and Ownership: Pupils made active choices about their learning journey, increasing motivation and engagement.

• Personalised Challenge: Children who needed more processing time could explore at their own pace, while others extended their learning independently.

• Inclusion: Pupils with SEND could access tasks in ways that suited their learning profile, without being singled out for adaptations.

• Creativity and Depth: Multiple modalities encouraged deeper thinking and cross-curricular links.

Importantly, these flexible routes operated not just within a single lesson, but across units of learning. Pupils revisited concepts weeks later in different contexts, supporting retention and mastery. Teachers noted that this ongoing access to provision areas allowed knowledge and skills to be reinforced organically, rather than being taught and forgotten.

Pupils:

“If we play, that lets our mind go wild and we can learn more than sitting on the carpet.”

“If I don’t get it one way, I can try a different way. Sometimes I try all of them.”

Teacher: “They have real agency here. If a child wants to show their understanding through building, painting, or talking, they can, and the quality of their thinking often surprises us.”

Teaching assistant: “Learning outcomes can be reached in more than 1 way so children can access the learning in a way that’s meaningful to them.”

From an inclusivity perspective, this flexibility was transformative. Observations showed that pupils who might otherwise have struggled with a fixed, formal task were thriving, finding a route to success that worked for them, whether that meant using movement, collaboration, or extended exploration. This contributed to the very low levels of off-task behaviour and the strong sense of shared responsibility for learning evident in both Year 2 classes.

5.3 Physical Movement and Engagement

Observation data gathered revealed a striking pattern: pupils in Year 2’s continuous provision classrooms changed their working position an average of four to six times in a single session. These changes ranged from sitting at a table to standing at a worktop, moving to a carpet area, or relocating to a provision zone such as construction or role play.

Compared to the more limited movement typically seen in formal, desk-based lessons, often only shifting from carpet to table, this freedom of movement was a notable differentiator. Teachers observed that for many pupils, particularly those with higher physical activity needs or challenges with sustained sitting, these movement opportunities were vital for maintaining focus and engagement.

Movement was not random or disruptive; rather, it was purposeful and often linked to the task at hand. For example, a child might begin a writing task at a table, then move to the creative area to make a model representing their story, before returning to the table to add details inspired by their construction. This fluidity allowed for natural breaks in concentration and gave children the autonomy to self-regulate their learning process.

Staff also noted the positive impact on social dynamics. As pupils moved between spaces, they engaged with different peers, sparking collaborative discussions and cross-pollination of ideas. Movement also facilitated peer teaching moments, as children stopped to observe or join others’ work before returning to their own tasks.

Pupils:

“Sometimes I need to move so I can think. When I go to another space, I get more ideas.”

“When I have to sit still for a long time my legs hurt”

Teacher: “It’s not fidgeting, it’s purposeful movement. You can see them making decisions about where they’ll work best for each part of the task.”

Leader: “The children get to learn in the way that is best for them and move around the classroom keeping them engaged.”

The link between movement and focus was especially pronounced for pupils with SEND or attention regulation needs. By embedding movement into the natural rhythm of the lesson, teachers reduced the need for formal breaks or behaviour interventions, keeping all pupils engaged in learning for longer stretches of time.

5.4 Peer Interaction and Opportunities to develop learning through talk.

One of the most consistent observations across the year was the sheer volume and quality of pupil talk in the Year 2 continuous provision classrooms. Tracking showed that pupils spent approximately 75% of their session time engaged in discussion - with peers, with adults, and in small group collaborations.

This talk was purposeful and often layered: children asked questions, explained their thinking, reflected on what they had done so far, and even taught each other new skills or facts. Peer-to-peer instruction was particularly evident in subjects like maths, where a child who had mastered a method would model it for others, and in creative subjects, where techniques or ideas were shared freely.

Teachers noted that this high level of interaction was not incidental, but built into the structure of the classroom. Provision areas encouraged paired and group work, and the flexibility of the learning environment meant pupils could easily join or leave a group as their task evolved. This fluidity prevented the kind of fixed groupings that can limit cross-peer learning opportunities.

The collaborative atmosphere also fostered social skills and empathy. Pupils regularly negotiated the use of resources, resolved minor disagreements independently, and adapted their plans based on the input of others. Adults intervened minimally in these moments, allowing children to develop self-regulation and conflict resolution skills in real time.

Pupil: “If I don’t know what to do next, I can ask my friend and they might have a good idea.”

Leader: “Their development of language and the contextual use of that language has been amazing.”

Teachers:

“They’re learning from each other constantly. You’ll hear them explaining concepts in their own words, and that’s when you know they’ve understood it deeply.”

“There is more opportunity for them to talk and use their voice, more chances to be independent and make decisions about their day.”

These findings align with research suggesting that talk-rich classrooms not only deepen subject understanding but also strengthen social and emotional learning (Millar and Menzies, 2019). In Stoke’s Year 2 model, collaboration was not an add-on or occasional strategy, but a continuous thread running through the learning day.

5.5 Social and Emotional Development: Belonging, Behaviour, and Inclusion

A recurring theme in both observation data and staff survey responses was the profound impact of continuous provision on pupils’ social and emotional development. Staff consistently described Year 2 pupils as happier, calmer, and more settled compared to what they anticipated in a more formal learning environment. One teacher noted simply that without continuous provision the classroom would feel “sad”, while another reflected that traditional structures would “squish their creativity and they wouldn’t feel like themselves.”

Survey responses highlighted the role of choice and autonomy in fostering a sense of belonging and emotional security. Pupils with SEND were seen to thrive because they could “learn the way that is right for them” and “access at any level.” This inclusivity reduced the visibility of difference, creating classrooms where all children could succeed together.

Teachers also pointed to improvements in behaviour. Children were described as “active and developing on a daily basis” with minimal need for behaviour interventions. Observations confirmed this: pupils showed high levels of respect for peers and resources, resolved disagreements independently, and required little adult mediation.

Leader: “Choice, enjoyment, progress, language development — it all links together. They are engaged and they want to be here.”

Teachers:

“The way the children relate to one another, converse their needs and articulate what they have learned is incredible. They are such a well-rounded, mature, curious bunch and that's all thanks to continuous provision.”

“This is not a class where you see behaviour issues. The environment meets their needs before those behaviours arise.”

Inclusion was another clear strength. Staff reflected that continuous provision enabled all children, regardless of background or learning profile, to experience success. This aligns with wider research linking belonging to improved motivation, attendance, and well-being. At Stoke, belonging was not just a value written on the wall but a daily lived experience, supported by the flexibility and responsiveness of provision.

5.6 Skills Retention and the Role of ‘Must Dos’

Skill retention was a core strand of the case study, with a particular focus on the “must dos” — weekly non-negotiable tasks carefully designed to revisit and consolidate previously taught objectives. These were embedded within the continuous provision model, ensuring pupils had regular opportunities to practise and apply key knowledge over time.

Teachers reported that the must dos were highly effective in sustaining progress. They provided structure within the freedom of provision, creating a balance between autonomy and accountability. Staff noted that pupils were motivated to complete them because they were woven into the rhythm of the classroom rather than imposed as isolated or disconnected tasks.

Teacher: “The must dos mean children go back over what they’ve learned, but in ways that don’t feel repetitive. They build confidence each time.”

Project lead: “Pupils frequently chose to extend their must do tasks beyond the minimum expectation, demonstrating ownership of their learning and pride in their progress.”

Pupils:

“We have must dos, they help us with our Maths, Science and English”

“The must dos help us to remember, we have to try our best”.

Survey responses also indicated that this approach supported independence: “It gives them processing time after teacher input and lets them apply it when they’re ready.” The result was not just better recall, but deeper understanding, as children explored concepts in multiple formats across provision areas.

From an assessment perspective, must dos also offered teachers valuable insight into retention. By monitoring how pupils approached and completed these tasks, teachers could identify gaps, tailor support, and ensure objectives were revisited until secure.

In sum, the must dos acted as a bridge between the exploratory nature of provision and the rigour of curriculum expectations, making retention intentional and measurable while still preserving autonomy.

5.7 Implementation Factors

The success of Stoke’s Year 2 continuous provision approach was not the product of chance, but the result of deliberate, sustained leadership and careful planning. From the outset, school leaders articulated a clear vision rooted in the belief that children need play based pedagogy in order to succeed. As with all projects there were successes and challenges. As part of discussion and survey responses with teachers and leaders, the enablers of success and barriers and challenges were explored.

Enablers of Success:

Strong Leadership Alignment
The Assistant Headteacher is passionate, knowledgeable and committed to the approach, she provided both strategic direction and visible day-to-day support throughout the research. She was trusted and encouraged to implement the approach by the Headteacher, and this alignment filtered through to subject leaders and classroom staff. While not all leaders and staff had deep understanding and belief in the approach from the start, they were committed to learning through the research process and engaged in the core messages and reflection.

Environment Design
Learning spaces were carefully planned to maximise flexibility and accessibility. Year 2 classrooms offered a balance of direct instruction spaces and provision zones stocked with high-quality, open-ended resources. Changes to the physical environment, such as increasing light, improving airflow, and opening up floor space, supported both comfort and movement. The classrooms at Stoke are very small even when opened up to one room and a real challenge to cater for 60 children. Teachers reported feeling more confident using the continuous provision in this space as less tables and chairs were needed creating more space for purposeful learning. The success in this space is a testament to the staff dedication and proof that it can work in the smallest of classrooms.

Curriculum design

Careful organisation and balance of teaching and learning opportunities was vital to the success of the approach. There is a significant amount of content to be covered in a typical year 2 class working towards the National Curriculum expectations. Teachers were skilled at designing short and impactful direct inputs for the whole class and small groups, balanced with the scaffolded support for children to explore and learn within the continuous provision environments. Teachers designed ‘must-do’ challenges with guidance from the Assistant Headteacher to give pupils key learning challenges each week. These cleverly focussed on a mixture of retrieval practise for core subjects and more open ended prompts for non-core subjects. Teachers found these challenges to be helpful in ensuring coverage of the curriculum and opportunities for children to show their knowledge through teacher directed tasks.

Ongoing Professional Dialogue
Regular reflection meetings and informal conversations between staff allowed for rapid identification of what was working and where adjustments were needed. The openness to adapt for example, modifying resource availability based on pupil interests kept the provision dynamic and responsive.

Staff Skill in Scaffolding Autonomy

Teachers skilfully balanced giving pupils freedom with maintaining high expectations for outcomes. Adults were present to challenge, extend, and support without dominating the learning process, which reinforced independence and self-regulation.

Barriers and Challenges:

Balancing Academic and Developmental Priorities
While the approach supported strong engagement and inclusion, some leaders and staff initially expressed concern about whether sufficient emphasis was being placed on attainment and progress in core subjects. This required ongoing discussion to agree on evidence-informed priorities and to identify ways of monitoring academic outcomes alongside well-being and involvement.

Differing Staff Perspectives
Not all staff were equally confident in delivering learning through continuous provision. For some leaders, particularly those with experience in more formal models, it took time to adjust to the idea of stepping back and allowing pupils more control over their learning journey.

Resource Management
Maintaining high-quality, varied provision areas demanded ongoing resourcing both in materials and in time to organise and refresh spaces. Without this investment, leaders noted the risk of provision becoming static or less engaging.

External Perceptions
As seen during the Ofsted inspection that sparked the project, there remains scepticism in some quarters about the appropriateness of play-based learning beyond the early years. Leaders recognised the need to present robust evidence to external stakeholders, including governors and inspectors, to validate the approach.

Leader: “It’s not enough to say it feels right, we have to show why it works, for every child, in ways that are clear to anyone walking in.”

Teacher: “It’s a shift in mindset. You have to trust the children and the process, and that trust grows when you see the impact.”

Overall, the enabling factors outweighed the challenges, but the barriers highlighted the importance of sustained leadership advocacy, professional development, and a willingness to communicate the purpose and impact of continuous provision with all stakeholders.

5.8 Additional Outcome

One unplanned but significant outcome of the project has been Stoke’s decision to explore how the core principles of continuous provision, autonomy, movement, and flexible routes to learning, can be carried forward into Year 3. As a part of discussions with teachers, leaders and children, it emerged that to move to formal instruction following such a successful year would not be in the best interests of the learners, academically, socially or emotionally.

Pupil quotes discussing perceived year 3 learning without play:

“I would be sad”

“It would be boring, there’s no craft area”

“I want it to be fun, fun is important because it gives you more energy”

“It would be stressful”

“When we are playing, we learn better”

“I would miss the construction area because I love building”

“Sitting on chairs all day would make our bottoms hurt!”

Teacher quotes discussing formal learning approach with no play:

“Stifling. The children who I see thrive the most in a CP setting would not just 'make do' in a formal setting, they would be actively hindered by it.”

“Especially for a cohort with many SEND children, high tariff behaviours, and EAL learners, it could feel rigid, overwhelming, and disengaging. Children may struggle to access learning at the same, ‘one size fits all’ pace or style, leading to frustration, low self-esteem, and increased behavioural challenges. Without opportunities for sensory regulation, choice, or practical, contextual learning, many would find it hard to stay focused or retain information.”

Teaching Assistants:

“It would squish their creativity and they would not have as many opportunities to develop their communication skills.”

“I don't think the children would get along as well as they do and there would be more behaviour issues.”

Leader:

“There would be more behaviour challenges on a regular basis. There would be a reduced overall skillset, but there would be more work samples in books. Teachers would know far less about the children as learners and individuals”.

In response to these findings, the leadership team, with the support of the project lead, are working to embed these principles so pupils experience them as they begin Key Stage 2. While the Year 3 approach will not replicate Year 2 provision exactly, this outcome reflects the depth of impact the model has had, prompting the school to ensure the ethos of independence, engagement, and inclusion extends beyond Key Stage 1.

6. Discussion

The Stoke Primary Year 2 case study offers a timely contribution to the national conversation about how Key Stage 1 education can best serve all children. Against the backdrop of a national curriculum review, rising suspensions in Primary Schools (Gov.uk, 2025), and ongoing concerns about inclusion and the SEND crisis, Stoke’s experience provides both evidence and inspiration for alternative pedagogical models.

The findings here align strongly with the Blackpool Transition Project and wider research from Ferre Laevers and the EPPSE study (2015), which consistently link high well-being and involvement to improved cognitive and social outcomes. At Stoke, this was not only visible in Leuven Scale data but reinforced by the qualitative richness of classroom observations, children were not just ‘on task’, they were animated, curious, and persistently engaged in their own learning.

The concept of flexible routes to learning, echoes current thinking around learner agency and personalised pathways. In a policy climate where ‘progress’ is often still imagined as a straight line from input to output, the ballroom dance analogy offers a refreshing reminder that learning is complex, non-linear, and often best served by multiple points of entry and exit.

Stoke’s approach also underscores the practical value of integrating movement, collaboration, and autonomy into everyday classroom life. These are not ‘extras’ or occasional enrichment activities; they are structural features of the learning model. For children with SEND, EAL, or varied processing needs, this inclusivity was not something bolted on through separate interventions, but embedded in the shared classroom experience.

The implementation journey was not without its challenges. Balancing developmental priorities with accountability pressures remains a live tension, both in Stoke and nationally. The scepticism from some external observers reflects the wider challenge of shifting entrenched ideas about when play ‘should’ end. Yet the leadership at Stoke responded to these challenges with evidence, open dialogue, and a commitment to refining practice rather than retreating from it.

In many ways, Stoke’s work mirrors the recommendations of the Everything to Play For report from the National Play Commission (2025), particularly the call for schools to “harness the power of play for learning.” By embedding continuous provision into Year 2, the school has demonstrated that play and rigour are not opposing forces, they can, in fact, be mutually reinforcing when approached with intentionality and skill.

This reflective process also raises questions for the wider system:

• How can schools be supported to track and evidence the full range of outcomes; academic, social, and emotional, in ways that satisfy both internal and external stakeholders?

• What professional development is needed to build staff confidence in less formal, more autonomous learning models?

• How can curriculum design allow the time and space needed for these approaches to flourish, without being constrained by the ‘crammed’ nature of current statutory curriculum requirements?

Stoke’s case study illustrates that a well-led, research-informed continuous provision model can not only deliver strong engagement and inclusion, but can also meet the diverse needs of a 21st-century classroom. It is a model that warrants further exploration, not as a niche or exceptional choice, but as a credible, evidence-based approach for mainstream KS1 education.

7. Conclusion

The Stoke Primary Year 2 continuous provision project set out to explore the impact of a pedagogy that prioritised well-being, involvement, and skill retention while offering pupils greater autonomy and flexibility in their learning. Over the course of the year, the findings have been consistent and compelling.

Pupils thrived in an environment where they could choose how to approach their learning, move freely between spaces, and work collaboratively with peers. This autonomy did not lead to loss of focus; instead, it deepened engagement, supported self-regulation, and fostered a strong sense of belonging. The Leuven Scale data confirmed high levels of well-being and involvement across the cohort, while qualitative evidence highlighted the inclusivity and accessibility of the approach for pupils with a wide range of needs.

The concept of flexible routes to learning proved central to the model’s success. By offering multiple ways for pupils to demonstrate understanding and revisit concepts, the approach enabled both consolidation and challenge. Skills and knowledge were reinforced not through repetition alone, but through varied, meaningful applications across the curriculum.

While challenges were encountered, including balancing academic and developmental priorities, supporting staff confidence, and managing resources, these were addressed through strong leadership, purposeful environment design, and a culture of ongoing professional dialogue. The case study also highlights the need to articulate and evidence the impact of continuous provision in ways that are persuasive to external stakeholders, including inspectors and governors.

Recommendations for Schools:

Drawing on Stoke’s experience, the following recommendations may support other schools considering a similar approach in Key Stage 1:

1. Start with a Clear Vision

   • Anchor the approach in your school’s values and communicate this consistently to staff, pupils, and families.
     
     

2. Prioritise Environment Design

   • Create well-resourced, flexible spaces that invite exploration, collaboration, and independent learning.
     
     

3. Embed Assessment for Learning

   • Use tools like the Leuven Scale alongside skill tracking to capture a broad picture of pupil progress linked to school values.
     
     

4. Invest in Professional Development

   • Support staff in developing confidence with scaffolding autonomy, managing flexible provision, and balancing choice with challenge.
     
     

5. Plan for Communication

   • Be prepared to explain and evidence the approach to external audiences, using data, pupil voice, and observation records.
     
     

6. Invest time

   • Allow time for the approach to embed and for outcomes, both academic and social, to become visible.

In a national landscape grappling with curriculum overload, rising exclusions, and questions about inclusion, Stoke’s model offers a practical, evidence-informed alternative. It demonstrates that continuous provision in Key Stage 1 can deliver rigour and joy, structure and flexibility, academic progress and personal growth, all within the same classroom.

This is not a call to replicate Stoke’s model wholesale, but an invitation for schools to reflect on their own contexts and consider how elements of flexible, play-informed practice could enhance the learning and well-being of their pupils. With careful planning, strong leadership, and a commitment to professional reflection, the benefits seen at Stoke can be realised more widely, offering children a school experience that is not only effective, but deeply engaging and inclusive.

8. Next Steps

The completion of this year-long case study marks not the end of Stoke’s journey with continuous provision, but an important milestone in its evolution. The insights gained, from Leuven Scale tracking to the lived experiences of pupils and staff, will inform refinements to practice in Year 2 and across the school.

In the coming year, Stoke plans to:

• Share the findings with staff through in-house training, ensuring the learning from this project shapes provision in all year groups.
  
  

• Present the case study at regional and national education conferences to contribute to the wider debate on Key Stage 1 pedagogy.
  
  

• Explore opportunities for peer-to-peer collaboration with other schools trialling or embedding continuous provision.

• Continue longitudinal tracking to assess the sustained impact of this approach as pupils move into Key Stage 2.
  
  

The work undertaken at Stoke shows what is possible when schools are willing to challenge assumptions, trust their professional judgment, and put children’s well-being and engagement at the heart of their curriculum. The next steps will build on this foundation, ensuring that the benefits of flexible, inclusive, and joyful learning continue to grow, both for Stoke’s pupils and for the wider education community.

9. References

Baker. S, Le Courtois. S, Eberhart. J. (2023) Making Space for children’s agency with playful learning. International Journal of Early Years Education, 31(2): 372-384. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669760.2021.1997726

Deci. E.L, and Ryan, R.M (2020) Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation from a self-determination theory perspective: Definitions, theory, practices, and future directions https://stial.ie/resources/Ryan%20and%20Deci%202020%20self%20determination%20theory.pdf

Ebbinghaus, H. (1913). Memory: A Contribution to Experimental Psychology (H.A. Ruger & C.E. Bussenius, Trans.). New York: Teachers College, Columbia University.

Edwards, C., Gandini, L. & Forman, G. (eds.) (1998) The Hundred Languages of Children: The Reggio Emilia Approach — Advanced Reflections (2nd edn). Westport, CT: Ablex Publishing.

EEF (2023) Cognitive Science Approaches in the Classroom : A review of the evidence. https://d2tic4wvo1iusb.cloudfront.net/production/documents/guidance/Cognitive_science_approaches_in_the_classroom_-_A_review_of_the_evidence.pdf?v=1749028691

Early Years Coalition (2021) Birth to 5 Matters: Non-statutory guidance for the Early Years Foundation Stage. Retrieved from: https://birthto5matters.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Birthto5Matters-download.pdf

Gov.uk (2025) Suspensions and Permanent Exclusions in England, Retrieved from: https://explore-education-statistics.service.gov.uk/find-statistics/suspensions-and-permanent-exclusions-in-england/2023-24

Laevers, F. (1994). The Leuven Involvement Scale for Young Children (LIS-YC). Centre for Experiential Education, University of Leuven.

Mavilidi MF, Lubans DR and Morgan PJ (2019) Integrating physical activity into the primary school curriculum: rationale and study protocol for the “Thinking while Moving in English” cluster randomized controlled trial. BMC Public Health 19: 379. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-019-6635-2

McClelland MM, Cameron CE, Duncan R, Bowles RP, Acock AC, Miao A and Pratt ME (2014) ‘Predictors of early growth in academic achievement: The head-toes-knees-shoulders task’, Frontiers in Psychology, 5. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00599.

Melhuish, E., Sammons, P., Siraj-Blatchford, I., Taggart, B., Sylva, K., & Elliott, K. (2004). The Effective Provision of Pre-School Education (EPPE) Project: Findings from Pre-school to end of Key Stage 1. DfES.

Millard, W. and Menzies, L. (2019) Oracy. The State of Speaking in Our Schools. Retrieved from: https://voice21.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Voice-21-State-of-speaking-in-our-schools.pdf

National Play Commission. (2025). Everything to Play For: A National Wake-Up Call on Play. Play England. Retrieved from: https://www.playengland.org.uk/newsblog/play-commission-report-everything-to-play-for-a-national-wake-up-call-on-play

Real play coalition (2018) Value of Play report, https://education.theiet.org/media/5562/the-real-play-coalition-value-of-play-report-pdf-1-455kb.pdf

Riley, K., Allen, K., & Coates, J. (2020). Place and Belonging in School: Why it Matters Today. London: UCL Institute of Education Press.

Sherrington, T. (2023). Teaching for Effective Learning: Principles and Practice. Woodard Education.

Sylva, K., Melhuish, E., Sammons, P., Siraj, I., & Taggart, B. (2014). The Effective Pre-School, Primary and Secondary Education Project (EPPSE): Final Report. DfE.

The Blackpool Transition Project. (2018). Measuring the Impact of Transition from Early Years to Primary School on Well-being and Involvement. Retrieved from https://abcdoes.typepad.com/files/transition_document.pdf

Willingham, D (2003) Ask the Cognitive Scientist: Students Remember...What They Think About https://www.aft.org/ae/summer2003/willingham 

10. Appendixes

10.1 Leuven Scale overview and descriptions used in the case study.

Leuven Scales Overview

The Leuven Scale is a form of assessment created by Belgian researcher Ferre Laevers. The Leuven Scale is a five-point scale that allows teachers, child care experts, and nursery practitioners to measure children's emotional well-being and involvement.

Wellbeing refers to being spontaneous, feeling at ease, and free of emotional uncertainties and is crucial to boosting mental health. Well-being is correlated to self-confidence, a higher level of resilience and self-esteem. Comfortable children are eager and confident to explore and experiment. On the other hand, those with lower levels of well-being mostly appear anxious, dependent and frightened, making it difficult for them to unleash their potential and show deep level learning in a sustainable way.

High levels of involvement show 'deep-level' meaningful learning, which is characterised by fascination, curiosity, deep satisfaction and profound interest in whatever children are doing. Involvement generally refers to being intensely engrossed in activities and is considered to be crucial for a deeper level of learning and development. These indications of a child's 'involvement’ are also directly connected to the elements of effective learning and teaching as laid out by the Early Years Foundation Stage (EYFS).

Both well-being and involvement are scored using a 1-5 scale with simple descriptors for each level. The observation method is easy and can be compared to ‘scanning.’ The adult carries out a 2-minute observation to demonstrate the general levels of involvement and wellbeing using the Leuven scale. The observation can be performed on individual children or groups of children. Learning is thought to be limited if a child is operating at moderate, low or extremely low levels of Leuven Scales. But, it is important to note that children may not be able to remain at high or extremely high levels all the time. Their levels of involvement and wellbeing may fluctuate all through the day. It may be useful to repeat the observation at different times in the day/ week to gather a broader perspective and understanding of a child’s or a group of children’s well-being and involvement.

2 minute observation overview

We would love your thoughts and reflections on this work. Do leave us a comment below...