KHDA Framework Training — Track A (All Teachers)
**How it works:** this is a single course on the training platform, like Iqra. A teacher signs in with their school email — @elspvtdubai.com or @the school's platform — and the course automatically shows that teacher their own school's report findings wherever a lesson uses school evidence. Everything not inside a school box below is identical for every teacher. The school teachers additionally receive Lesson 9 (Reading in Every Subject), which their school's report specifically mandates.
**Sources:** all framework text is quoted verbatim from the UAE School Inspection Framework (scale and quantifiers pp. 19–20; teaching descriptors pp. 48–49 and the 3.2 pages — extraction receipts on record). All school findings are quoted verbatim from that school's DSIB Inspection Report 2023-24. Nothing is invented.
---
Lesson 1 — How Your School Is Judged
Why this lesson exists
The structure: 6 standards, 17 indicators
The six-level scale — and the two sentences to internalise
| Level | Framework definition (verbatim) |
|---|---|
| Outstanding | "Quality of performance substantially exceeds the expectation of the UAE" |
| Very Good | "Quality of performance exceeds the expectation of the UAE" |
| Good | "Quality of performance meets the expectation of the UAE — *This is the expected level for every school in the UAE*" |
| Acceptable | "Quality of performance meets the minimum level of quality required in the UAE — *This is the minimum level for every school in the UAE*" |
| Weak | "Quality of performance is below the expectation of the UAE" |
| Very Weak | "Quality of performance is significantly below the expectation of the UAE" |
**Good is not an ambition — it is the expected level for every school in the UAE. Acceptable is not a safe place — it is the minimum.** Both our schools are currently rated Acceptable. This course supports the journey from the minimum to the expected.
The quantifier table — the words every descriptor hangs on
| Term | Meaning (verbatim) |
|---|---|
| Almost all | Greater than 90% |
| Most | 75% – 90% |
| Large majority | 61% – 74% |
| Majority | 50% – 60% |
| Large minority | 31% – 49% |
| Minority | 16% – 30% |
| Few | Up to 15% |
The difference between Good and Acceptable is often the difference between "most students" and "the majority of students." In a class of 28, *most* means at least 21; *majority* means 15. An inspector in your lesson is silently counting. So should you.
> ### 🟩 the school teachers see here:
> In January 2024 our school was judged **Acceptable** overall, with three recommendations — the first thing the next team will check:
> 1. "Raise students' achievement in all subjects and phases."
> 2. "Improve the quality of teaching and teachers' use of assessment information to plan learning activities that meet the needs of all groups of students."
> 3. "Improve the accuracy of school self-evaluation and the effectiveness of improvement planning."
>
> And the proof the expected level is reachable, from the same report: in **Post-16, teaching for effective learning and assessment were both judged Good** — the standard this course teaches is already met inside our own building.
> ### 🟦 the school teachers see here:
> In October 2023 our school was judged **Acceptable** overall, with five recommendations — the first thing the next team will check:
> 1. "Ensure that the increasing amount of data and of information from assessments directly informs the planning of lessons and the quality of teaching."
> 2. "Create professional training opportunities to ensure that the KG curriculum also informs teaching practices in Grade 1."
> 3. "Improve the consistency of the school's self-evaluation process so that it accurately reflects the school's strengths and weaknesses."
> 4. "Ensure that the appropriate use of digital technologies supports and adds value to learning."
> 5. "Take measures to improve attendance."
>
> And the proof the expected level is reachable, from the same report: in **KG, teaching for effective learning and assessment were both judged Good** — the standard this course teaches is already met inside our own building.
Checkpoint (identical for both schools)
---
Lesson 2 — The Observed Lesson (3.1.2)
Why this lesson exists
The standard (framework, verbatim)
> ### 🟩 the school teachers see here:
> Our report, verbatim: "Teachers' lesson planning ensures a consistent approach. They mostly manage time well but, in Primary, activities are sometimes rushed, and students cannot consolidate learning."
> The diagnosis is free: planning is consistent — the gap is **time serving consolidation**. A rushed activity is one the plan finished but the learning didn't.
> ### 🟦 the school teachers see here:
> Our report, verbatim: "Lesson plans follow a detailed format that specifies the activities to be provided. At times, lesson plans are too focused on the acquisition of knowledge rather than on deepening students' conceptual understanding or on developing specific skills."
> The diagnosis is free: the plans exist and are detailed — the gap is **what the plan aims at**. A lesson that covers content has met the plan; a lesson where students can use the idea in a new situation has met the standard.
The practice (both schools)
Checkpoint
---
Lesson 3 — Questioning and Dialogue (3.1.3)
Why this lesson exists
The standard (framework, verbatim)
> ### 🟩 the school teachers see here:
> Our report, verbatim: "Teachers, especially in Post-16, often ask probing questions to encourage extended responses, but this is inconsistent in the other phases. Consequent superficial dialogue limits students' opportunities to develop their ideas." Development point: "Encourage teachers to use the full range of questioning techniques to maximise students' learning and progress."
> Read the first sentence again: **the Good practice already exists in our building — in Post-16.** The model is down the corridor.
> ### 🟦 the school teachers see here:
> Our report, verbatim: "The effectiveness of teachers' questioning varies in a majority of lessons. Questions are sometimes open, challenging and prompt students to reflect on their learning. However, they rarely encourage critical thinking." Development point: "Ensure that teachers develop their questioning so that students' critical thinking skills improve."
> Note the framework quantifier hiding in our own report: questioning varies in a **majority** of lessons — 50–60%. Halving that is a visible, countable change. And the Good practice already exists in our building — **in KG**, where teaching was judged Good.
The practice (both schools)
Checkpoint
---
Lesson 4 — Teaching to the Data (3.1.4 + 3.2.4)
Why this lesson exists
The standard (framework, verbatim)
> ### 🟩 the school teachers see here:
> Recommendation 2, verbatim: "Improve the quality of teaching and teachers' use of assessment information to plan learning activities that meet the needs of all groups of students." The mechanism, in the report's words: teachers "have yet to use assessment information to ensure that learning activities consistently meet the needs of all groups of students, particularly in Primary and Secondary." And the in-house Good: "In Post-16, assessment information is used well to plan learning activities. The information informs the provision of effective short-term interventions."
> **Your instruments:** the EYA workbook gives every class its distribution. One minute of reading answers three planning questions — Q1 (lower quartile): who needs support today, and what will they get? Median: is the main task pitched where the middle actually is? Q3 (upper quartile): what stretches the top 25%, since "more able students are not always challenged sufficiently" is our named gap? The LO Tracker's four quadrants (recall → inference → application → creation) turn those answers into tasks.
> ### 🟦 the school teachers see here:
> Recommendation 1, verbatim: "Ensure that the increasing amount of data and of information from assessments directly informs the planning of lessons and the quality of teaching." The mechanism, in the report's words: "information from assessments is used to guide lesson planning and teaching inconsistently," while "Data from external assessments are analysed and identify strengths and weaknesses in students' learning. Teachers use this information to inform their lesson plans and to identify students who need additional support. However, leaders analyse the progress of only some students."
> And the in-house Good: "Students' attainment and progress are strongest in KG, where teachers use assessment information well to plan activities that meet the children's learning needs."
> **Your practice:** for each class, know three things from your latest assessment — who is below standard and what they get today; where the middle truly is; and what stretches the top, since "Provision for those with gifts and talents is inadequately developed" is our named gap. Write those three answers into the plan; that single habit is Recommendation 1 made daily.
Checkpoint
---
Lesson 5 — Critical Thinking and Independent Learning (3.1.5 + 1.3)
The standard (framework, verbatim)
> ### 🟩 the school teachers see here:
> Our report, verbatim: "Initiatives to develop independent learning and innovation skills are positive but have had limited impact." "Critical thinking is less strong, especially in Primary and lower Secondary." "Students use technology to search for information but are less confident in carrying out extended research. Teachers' skills in enabling students to develop as independent learners are inconsistent."
> "Limited impact" and "inconsistent" are the report's way of saying *sometimes*. Note our strength: learning skills (1.3) are already **Good in all four phases** — the students are ready; the teaching element is what must become systematic.
> ### 🟦 the school teachers see here:
> Our report, verbatim: questions "rarely encourage critical thinking"; "apart from in KG, they are insufficiently challenged to take full responsibility for learning and to become independent. This is especially the case in Primary and Middle"; and "Students use digital technologies, where available, to extend their research and critical thinking skills." Development points: "Ensure that learning tasks challenge students and consistently promote the development of higher-order thinking skills" and "Enable students to make more use of digital technologies to explore, research and draw conclusions."
> Note our anchors: learning skills are already **Good in KG and High** — the systematic habit exists at both ends of the school; the middle is where it must spread.
The practice (both schools)
Checkpoint
---
Lesson 6 — Every Group Counts (3.1.4 + 5.2.3/5.2.4 + inclusion)
Why this lesson exists
> ### 🟩 the school teachers see here:
> On students of determination, verbatim: "Individual education plans (IEPs) focus clearly on students' prime needs. They include clear measurable goals and updates on progress. These are not always referred to by teachers when planning lessons or the modifications necessary to meet specific requirements."
> On the gifted and talented: "Students who are gifted and talented are recognised, but in some lessons, tasks do not sufficiently challenge them."
> Development points: "Ensure that all teachers take account of individual needs when planning and delivering lessons, particularly for students of determination and those who are gifted and talented" and "Ensure that all lesson plans contain goals for students of determination, clear expectations and measurable outcomes."
> Note the nuance: the report does **not** say the IEPs are poor — it says they are clear and measurable **and not opened at planning time**. The document exists; the habit doesn't. That is within your power to fix this week.
> ### 🟦 the school teachers see here:
> On students of determination, verbatim: "Teachers are knowledgeable about their students. Effective systems are in place to promote communication between class teachers and specialist members of staff. Only some teachers make appropriate reference to their students' IEPs."
> On the gifted and talented: "Students with gifts and talents are identified. Support for them is being developed. A thorough strategic approach for supporting students of all abilities is lacking." And: "Provision for those with gifts and talents is inadequately developed."
> Development points: "Provide further training, especially to new teachers, in the use of IEPs and the accompanying teaching strategies" and "Ensure that all students with gifts and talents are identified and their learning fully supported."
> Note the nuance: the systems and the identification exist — the report's phrase is "only **some** teachers" open the IEPs. Moving *some* to *most* is the framework's own quantifier ladder, and it is a planning habit, not a purchase.
The practice (both schools)
Checkpoint
---
Lesson 7 — Good vs Acceptable: The Recognition Gym
Why this lesson exists
The six pairs (framework, verbatim — identical for both schools)
**Pair 1 — Questioning (3.1.3).** Good: "engaged learners... promotes thought and considered responses... discussions **and reflection**." Acceptable: "**willing** learners... meaningful discussions." *Willing* students answer when asked; *engaged* students think, justify, reflect.
**Pair 2 — Needs of individuals and groups (3.1.4).** Good: "effective in meeting the **individual** needs... appropriate levels of challenge and support." Acceptable: "adequately meet the needs of **groups**... challenge and support generally but this is not always sufficiently personalised." Groups vs individuals: a top/middle/bottom worksheet vs knowing which named students need which challenge today.
**Pair 3 — Critical thinking (3.1.5).** Good: "**systematically** develop." Acceptable: "**sometimes** develop." One word.
**Pair 4 — Planning, environment, time (3.1.2).** Good: "**purposeful** lessons... **interesting** environments... effectively to enable students to be **successful learners**." Acceptable: "plan lessons, manage time and use resources appropriately... where students **can meet learning expectations**." At Acceptable the lesson happens; at Good every part has a purpose the students could name.
**Pair 5 — Subject knowledge (3.1.1).** Good: "most teachers **consistently apply** their knowledge." Acceptable: "most teachers **demonstrate secure knowledge**." Having knowledge vs applying it in every explanation and task.
**Pair 6 — Using assessment information (3.2.4).** Good: "used effectively to **influence** teaching... **all groups**... and enhance their progress." Acceptable: "used adequately to **inform** teaching... groups." Data beside the plan vs data changing the plan.
> ### 🟩 the school teachers see here:
> Pair 6 is our Recommendation 2, word for word — and the Good column is our own Post-16 practice, where the report found assessment information "used well to plan learning activities."
> ### 🟦 the school teachers see here:
> Pair 6 is our Recommendation 1, word for word — and the Good column is our own KG practice, where "teachers use assessment information well to plan activities that meet the children's learning needs."
Checkpoint
---
Lesson 8 — The Inspector Conversation
Why this lesson exists
What inspectors ask teachers (both schools)
What inspectors ask your students
The fluency method: point, place, proof
> ### 🟩 the school teachers see here:
> **Where your proof lives:** the Teacher Tracker (weekly observations against the framework elements), the LO Tracker (four-quadrant task design), the EYA workbook (your class distributions).
> **The question to be readiest for:** "How do you use assessment information to plan learning activities that meet the needs of all groups?" — Recommendation 2, almost word for word.
> ### 🟦 the school teachers see here:
> **Where your proof lives:** your markbook and assessment records, moderated student work, and your IEP planning lines — with school instruments to be added as they are adopted.
> **The questions to be readiest for:** "How does assessment data directly inform your lesson planning?" — Recommendation 1, almost word for word — and "How do you develop reading in your subject?" (see Lesson 9).
Checkpoint
---
Lesson 9 — Reading in Every Subject
Why this lesson exists
What the report found (verbatim)
The practice — reading moves for any subject
Checkpoint
---
What happens after the lessons (both schools, identical)
---
*Complete Track A training, both schools, 2 August 2026. Source rule honoured throughout: framework text from the supplied UAE School Inspection Framework; the school findings from the the school DSIB Inspection Report 2023-24; the school findings from the the school DSIB Inspection Report 2023-24; the school workbook references from the school's EYA Result Analysis 2025-26 deck. Nothing invented, nothing from model memory.*