Across many multi-academy trusts, leaders continue to explore how writing assessment can be interpreted and applied more consistently between schools.
Schools may be working from the same assessment frameworks and, of course, the same statutory assessment criteria. However, shared criteria alone do not automatically create shared understanding. Writing assessment depends heavily on professional judgement, and the quality of moderation can vary significantly depending on how confidently teachers and leaders are able to discuss evidence, explore standards and articulate the reasoning behind assessment decisions.
Effective moderation is a professional skill in itself. It requires careful facilitation, a secure understanding of the assessment framework and meaningful professional dialogue that goes beyond simply reviewing pieces of writing together. Even where AI-supported marking and feedback tools are being used effectively to support assessment processes, teachers and leaders still need opportunities to discuss evidence collaboratively, develop shared understanding and explore how standards are being interpreted in practice. Without this, variation can still emerge in how evidence is interpreted, how independence is understood and how confidently judgements are applied across different schools and contexts.
Unlike many other areas of assessment, writing assessment relies on far more than what can immediately be seen on the page. Teachers are not simply reviewing a final written outcome. They are drawing on professional knowledge of how independently the writing was produced, what support or scaffolding may have been provided, how securely skills are applied over time and whether pupils can sustain those decisions across different writing contexts.
Importantly, independence in writing is rarely all or nothing. Within a single piece, some decisions and skills may be applied highly independently, while others may still reflect high levels of support or directed prompting. Only the teacher fully understands this nuance, including which aspects genuinely reflect secure independent application and which may still require further development or guided support. This is one of the reasons professional moderation discussions remain so important in developing shared understanding and consistency across schools.
As a result, the teacher often holds important professional knowledge that cannot always be fully seen within the writing alone. This is also why developing a shared professional understanding of independence is so important within and across schools. If teachers and leaders are interpreting independence differently, variation in assessment judgements can emerge even when the same frameworks and statutory criteria are being used.
High-quality moderation helps make these discussions visible. It creates opportunities for teachers to explore where support becomes over-support, what secure, independent application looks like over time and how evidence should be weighed consistently across different contexts and classrooms.
Laura Bailey, Head of Moderation and Assessment at Pobble, believes this is one of the reasons moderation remains such an important part of effective writing assessment.
“The final written piece only ever tells part of the story. Teachers understand the wider context behind the writing, how independently it was produced, the journey that led to the outcome and whether those skills are genuinely secure over time.
That is why professional moderation discussions matter so much. They create opportunities for teachers to explain, test and strengthen assessment judgements collaboratively, helping develop greater shared understanding and confidence across schools.”
For Pobble, one of the most important aspects of effective moderation is ensuring the process feels professionally meaningful and rooted in celebration, rather than compliance.
Laura believes the strongest moderation cultures are those where teachers feel confident discussing their writers, reflecting openly on evidence and celebrating what pupils can do, while still engaging rigorously with national standards and assessment expectations. Within these discussions, moderation becomes far more than a process of checking whether criteria have been met. It becomes a professional conversation about the writer, the decisions they are making and how securely those skills are being applied independently over time.
According to Pobble, this is particularly important within MATs, where leaders are often trying to build consistent professional understanding across multiple schools, teams and local contexts.
“Consistency does not come from everyone simply using the same documents or attending the same meetings,” Laura Bailey explained.
“It comes from creating regular opportunities for rich professional dialogue where teachers can share evidence, discuss independence, challenge thinking and build confidence together. The best moderation sessions are rigorous, but they are also professionally affirming. Teachers should leave feeling clearer, more confident and more secure in their understanding of standards.”
Pobble also believes there is growing value in schools exploring how AI-supported assessment and marking tools can support aspects of assessment practice when used carefully and professionally. However, the organisation is clear that the teacher must always retain ownership of the final judgement, particularly in writing assessment where context, independence and professional understanding remain essential.
“We should absolutely be celebrating effective use of AI within assessment,” Laura Bailey added.
“Technology can support teachers brilliantly and help make aspects of assessment more efficient and manageable. But consistency in writing assessment still depends on strong moderation cultures, skilled facilitation and confident professional understanding across teams. AI can support the process, but it cannot replace the professional dialogue that sits behind secure assessment practice.”
These wider sector conversations have shaped Pobble’s newly launched moderation and external validation support for trusts and school groups. The offer has been designed to help MAT leaders reflect more strategically on moderation culture, facilitator expertise and trust-wide consistency in writing assessment, while giving teachers richer opportunities to articulate, test and strengthen assessment judgements through professional discussion.
The support includes Writing Assessment Strategy Calls for trust leaders, alongside External Validation Sessions designed to strengthen professional dialogue and provide opportunities for teachers to articulate and discuss assessment decisions collaboratively.
Alongside the launch, Pobble has also developed a free moderation self-assessment tool for trusts and school groups. The resource is intended to help leaders reflect on the strength and consistency of moderation processes currently in place across their schools, including areas such as facilitator confidence, trust-wide alignment and how effectively moderation is supporting accurate assessment practice.
Pobble says the wider aim is to contribute to a sector conversation where moderation is viewed not simply as a statutory process, but as an important mechanism for strengthening consistency, professional confidence and shared understanding across schools, one that is rigorous, professionally meaningful and rooted in celebration.
