Quality Assurance Report

Peer-review evidence (live figures)

1. Independent specialist peer review

• Every module is allocated to practising professionals (SENCOs, specialist and advisory teachers, SEN teaching assistants, occupational therapy) through a structured reviewer programme, matched to their profession.
• Each reviewer rates the module against four fixed criteria: factual accuracy, currency against the SEND Code of Practice, whether quiz answers are defensible, and whether anything risks unsafe practice.
• Reviewers sign off each review as their professional view, and every review is tied to the content version they reviewed.

2. Closed-loop action on every piece of feedback

• Every review is logged and tracked to a decision: changed, or no change needed with a reason recorded.
• Any review marked 'not current' or 'risks unsafe practice' is treated as a priority and the content is revised before the next version is released.
• Reviewers are told when changes made in response to their feedback go live.

3. Policy currency

• Content is checked against the SEND Code of Practice 2015, which is still the operative statutory framework.
• The February 2026 schools white paper (Every Child Achieving and Thriving) is acknowledged openly as proposed reform with no statutory force yet. Content will be updated if any of it becomes law.
• Each release carries a version number, a last-reviewed date and a scheduled next-review date, shown to learners at the start of every module.

4. Evidence and sources

• Modules give their sources, and add caveats where the research evidence is limited, mixed or contested, so practice is not overstated.
• Strategies are presented as starting points to be tested and reviewed under the graduated approach (assess, plan, do, review), not as guaranteed fixes.
• Learners are told throughout to follow their school's policies and the guidance of qualified professionals.

5. Robust assessment

• Each standard module ends with a quiz that must be passed before a certificate is issued.
• Answer options are shuffled on every attempt so learners cannot pass by remembering positions.
• Feedback explains why each answer is right or wrong. Capstones are scenario-based: the learner's choices through a realistic case are the assessment.

6. Certificate integrity

• A certificate needs a pass, a signed learner declaration that the work is their own, and the learner's real name. Certificates cannot be issued unnamed.
• Every certificate carries a unique reference that anyone can check on a public verification page.
• Certificates state notional CPD learning time and the assessment completed. Time spent on the module is kept on record for verification.
• Wording makes clear this is provider-certified, awareness-level CPD and does not claim external accreditation.

7. Accessibility and clarity

• Every module has a plain-English summary, stated learning outcomes and a key-terms glossary.
• Narration and read-aloud are available, and interactive elements can be used with a keyboard.
• UK spelling and terminology throughout.

8. Use of AI and human oversight

• AI tools were used openly as a quality-assurance aid alongside, never instead of, human review. They were used to draft and edit content, to check consistency and spelling across modules, and to run simulated reviews of every module from three specialist perspectives: a SENCO, a speech and language therapist (SaLT) and an occupational therapist (OT).
• Those simulated reviews were used to look for possible inaccuracies, outdated policy references, quiz answers that could be argued either way, and wording that could lead to unsafe practice. Every issue they raised was checked and decided on by the author.
• Simulated reviews are NOT counted as peer review. All peer-review figures in this report come only from signed-off reviews by real, named practitioners.
• Module narration uses AI-generated voices from scripts approved by a person. Interactive features such as quiz shuffling and certificate checks are built into the software, not left to AI judgement.
• Every module was written and is maintained by an experienced SEND practitioner, who takes final responsibility for its content. Nothing reaches learners without human approval.