A judgement whose source and limits remain clear
Current-cycle mission, evidence and narrative retain their population, dates and missing voices before staff interpret quality.
Back to Lead
Everything included: £4.25 per pupil/year before volume discounts of 5% to 20%, £250 minimum/year, excluding VAT. See pricing
Lead / CSI / Section 48
CSI Section 48 evidence and Catholic self-evaluation
Student Radar helps Catholic school leaders review mission, CSI evidence and working self-evaluation alongside RE-time inputs and previous improvement areas. Staff prepare a reviewed CSED for its audience while keeping the school’s judgement distinct from an inspector’s decision.
The school’s authorised staff make and review its working judgements. Evidence coverage, software roll-ups, completed work and a downloaded CSED do not become an inspector’s decision.
Check context, record the decision, review the result
Connect the Catholic mission, evidence and a considered working self-evaluation.
Review the CSI judgement areas alongside evidence, RE-time and directive inputs, previous areas for improvement and parent/staff views, then prepare a reviewed CSED for its intended audience.
01
Read a source before making the judgement
The fictional pupil discussion states its limited sample rather than claiming to represent the whole school.
02
Record the interpretation and missing voices
The narrative distinguishes one pupil discussion from unchecked staff and family perspectives.
03
Return to the retained current-area reflection
The fictional manual narrative is retained after reopening; it is not an inspector’s judgement.
CSI / Section 48
Read a source before making the judgement
The fictional pupil discussion states its limited sample rather than claiming to represent the whole school.
CSI / Section 48
Record the interpretation and missing voices
The narrative distinguishes one pupil discussion from unchecked staff and family perspectives.
CSI / Section 48
Return to the retained current-area reflection
The fictional manual narrative is retained after reopening; it is not an inspector’s judgement.
CSI / Section 48
Keep missing curriculum inputs visible
The fictional RE-time row has no recorded RE minutes, so no completed percentage check can be inferred.
CSI / Section 48
Review the actual response to a prior inspection area
The fictional prior AFI remains Partially addressed, distinct from a new self-identified priority.
CSI / Section 48
Preserve the mission’s recorded context
Mission versions and review dates remain historical context rather than a new inspection outcome.
CSI / Section 48
Read mission history on a phone
The same fictional CSI history remains readable at phone width.
A clear record for the responsible team
The school’s authorised staff make and review its working judgements. Evidence coverage, software roll-ups, completed work and a downloaded CSED do not become an inspector’s decision.
A response that does not hide unresolved inputs
RE-time missingness, directives and previous-AFI status remain explicit alongside the software’s working-grade limits.
A CSED prepared for a deliberate audience
Reviewed Word staging, parent/staff survey denominators and explicit export/adviser choices keep preparation distinct from external submission.
Questions about CSI / Section 48
Can we review previous CSI improvement areas with current evidence?
Yes. CSI history and current evidence support review of the response to previous areas for improvement.
Can the workspace support preparation of a CSED?
Yes. Review the judgement areas, evidence and relevant inputs before preparing the Catholic Self-Evaluation Document for its intended audience.
Related help guides
See how to carry out these tasks in Student Radar, with step-by-step product help for the people using them.
The value of a connected school
School priorities with the evidence underneath.
Connected reporting gives leaders a route from the whole-school picture to a question, a named action and its review.
AttendanceSchool, cohort & session records
SENDProvision, costs & outcomes
SafeguardingAssurance & aggregated evidence
Lead
Context for the next step
Student RadarFollow a connection to see what it makes possible
Relevant context, with access set by each staff member’s role and responsibilities. Staff decide the response.
Attendance + Lead
Follow the cohort behind the headline
Move from school attendance into year groups, pupil groups and sessions. Use the detail to focus the leadership conversation and decide what needs investigating.
Explore attendanceSEND + Lead
Review provision, delivery and the evidence of progress
Bring SEND reporting into the improvement cycle so leaders can review provision and costs alongside recorded outcomes and the gaps still needing attention.
Explore SENDSafeguarding + Lead
Keep oversight appropriate to the audience
Use safeguarding assurance and aggregated evidence for leadership oversight, while case detail stays within authorised safeguarding workflows.
Explore safeguarding
Agree the next step with the responsible staff
Review the CSI judgement areas alongside evidence, RE-time and directive inputs, previous areas for improvement and parent/staff views, then prepare a reviewed CSED for its intended audience. The school’s authorised staff make and review its working judgements. Evidence coverage, software roll-ups, completed work and a downloaded CSED do not become an inspector’s decision.