Headteacher interview questions

A vision rooted in this school's context and evidence, with a credible, sequenced path — not slogans. Strong candidates name what they would examine first (pupils' work, attendance and behaviour patterns, staff and family views) and what they would leave alone until they understood it. Ask what they would act on straight away: safeguarding concerns do not wait for a listening phase.

Ownership beyond the DSL and a curiosity about what you might not be seeing. Look for case sampling, asking staff what they would do, and checking that records separate observed concerns from opinion and history. The candidate should know this duty sits with the headteacher (KCSIE 2026, paragraph 84), that the DSL needs the time and authority to do the job (paragraph 128), and that schools now need robust cover when the DSL is unavailable (paragraph 129).

The headteacher is normally case manager and considers whether to refer to the LADO; the DSL makes sure the child is safe (KCSIE 2026, paragraphs 78, 440 and 442). An allegation about the headteacher goes to the chair of governors (paragraph 78). Strong answers avoid investigating before taking LADO advice, keep factual records and consider support for both the child and the member of staff. Ask how a low-level concern would be handled differently (paragraph 516).

KCSIE 2026 Part three in practice: references obtained before interview where possible and open references not accepted (paragraphs 302–303); gaps and frequent moves probed at interview (paragraph 306); shortlisted candidates told that online searches may be done (paragraph 301); concerns resolved before the appointment is confirmed, with the offer conditional on pre-appointment checks (paragraphs 303 and 313); and the information and decision recorded (paragraph 310). Ask who on the panel has completed safer recruitment training; in a maintained school at least one interviewer must have (paragraph 289).

A concrete improvement example showing what changed for pupils, what stopped to make time, how staff were supported and whether improvement lasted.

Visibility, honesty, listening, and early credible actions that demonstrate change.

Moral courage, care for people, and reflective learning rather than a tidy success story.

A principled, inclusive view of curriculum and a way of checking impact for all groups: pupils' work, talking to pupils, and how teaching is adapted rather than the curriculum narrowed. Ask what the candidate would expect to change after seeing that evidence.

A realistic options discussion with the business leader and governors or trustees, including staffing, cash, provision and risks. The candidate should know the framework that applies: a maintained school submits the SFVS and a three-year forecast to its local authority; an academy trust's budget forecast return must be approved by the board, and DfE must be told within 14 days of a meeting that proposes an uncovered revenue deficit (Academy trust handbook 2026, paragraphs 2.15–2.17). Ask how the candidate would communicate a difficult decision.

Transparency, good information, and welcoming challenge rather than managing it away. The governing body must hold the headteacher to account, agrees with leaders how data is provided and looks for ways to validate it (Maintained schools: governance guide, sections 3.1–3.2). Ask what the candidate would want governors to check independently.

A culture of development, workload awareness, and succession planning. Look for a coherent professional learning programme rather than one-off courses, and protected time for ECT induction tutors and mentors (the headteacher must make sure they have it). Inspectors consider whether ECTs and trainees get the support they need under leadership and governance.

Moral commitment matched with practical provision, staff capacity, and honest conversations. Look for a SENCO with the leadership status to lead whole-school improvement (one of the things inspectors consider under inclusion) and, where the school receives the inclusive mainstream fund, an inclusion strategy statement published by 31 December 2026.

Knowledge of the school’s actual strengths and weaknesses, honest evaluation and routine evidence of improvement. The candidate should know that report cards grade each evaluation area (inclusion, curriculum and teaching, achievement, attendance and behaviour, personal development and wellbeing, leadership and governance, and early years or post-16 where they apply) on a five-point scale from exceptional to urgent improvement, with safeguarding met or not met. The school inspection toolkit (June 2026) says inspectors do not need documents produced specifically for inspection. Ask which area the candidate would expect this school to be weakest in, and why.

Self-awareness, boundaries, distributed leadership, and attention to collective wellbeing. The candidate may mention that inspectors now consider whether the responsible body takes account of leaders' workload and wellbeing, and leaders in turn their staff's. Ask what the candidate stopped doing in their last role to make space.