Educational Visits Coordinator Training

Educational visits involve decisions about leadership, risks, staff capability and external providers. A school should appoint an educational visits co-ordinator and ensure that the person has the training needed for the role. The appointment gives the school a named person who can help colleagues assess and manage visit-related risks and can provide informed advice when visits are considered for approval. The co-ordinator should have enough standing in the school to guide the working practices of other staff. This is a role for supporting and advising the school; it is not simply an administrative title.

If the school has not appointed an educational visits co-ordinator, the headteacher assumes that duty. This means the headteacher must understand that the responsibilities do not disappear because there is no named co-ordinator. The headteacher should consider whether they have, or can obtain, the relevant experience, competence, training, advice and guidance needed to carry out the role safely and effectively.

Hypothetical example: A secondary school has no appointed educational visits co-ordinator. A department begins planning a visit and assumes that the lack of an appointment means each department can make its own arrangements without central support. That assumption is incorrect. The headteacher has assumed the co-ordinator duty and should provide, or arrange access to, the relevant oversight and advice. A better approach is for the department to involve the headteacher in the co-ordinator capacity and identify any advice or training needed before relying on the proposed arrangements.

The co-ordinator works with colleagues to help them assess and manage risks. The co-ordinator also advises headteachers and governors when they are considering whether visits should be approved. This does not mean that the co-ordinator replaces the decision-maker or invents a local approval process. Instead, the co-ordinator helps those responsible for approval understand relevant information, including the proposed leadership arrangements, risk considerations, staff capability and provider arrangements.

A likely mistake is to treat the co-ordinator as a form-checker who only collects paperwork. The correction is to view the role as one requiring experience, judgement and sufficient status to guide colleagues. Another likely mistake is to assume that a headteacher is exempt because a separate co-ordinator has not been appointed. The correction is to recognise that the headteacher assumes the duty when no co-ordinator is appointed.

The educational visits co-ordinator should be an experienced visits leader. The role also requires confidence in risk assessment and in helping colleagues assess and manage risks. These expectations matter because the co-ordinator may need to recognise whether proposed arrangements are realistic, whether risks have been considered appropriately and whether further advice is needed. This lesson identifies the capability areas; it does not provide practical competence sign-off or a detailed method for carrying out assessments.

The capability areas named for the role include: experience in leading visits; suitable status to guide the working practices of other staff; confidence in assessing the ability of staff to lead visits; confidence in assessing outside activity providers; and competence related to assessing and managing risks. These areas are connected. For example, assessing whether a member of staff can lead a particular visit requires attention to the nature of the visit, the staff member's relevant ability and experience, and the risks involved.

Hypothetical example: A school is considering a visit that uses an outside activity provider. The proposed school leader has led routine local visits but has not previously led a visit involving the planned activity. A co-ordinator applying the capability expectations would not rely only on the person's general enthusiasm or job title. The co-ordinator would recognise that staff ability and provider suitability both need informed consideration, and would seek appropriate role-specific advice or training if the required judgement was beyond their own competence.

A likely mistake is to assume that being an experienced teacher, senior employee or frequent traveller automatically demonstrates all the capabilities required. The correction is to consider the specific role expectations separately: visit leadership, risk assessment, staff assessment and provider assessment. If the co-ordinator is not confident in one of these areas, they should use appropriate training, advice and guidance rather than making an unsupported judgement.

Before making site-specific decisions, identify the authorised guidance that applies to the school and the type of visit. Look for the school's, local authority's or academy trust's relevant educational-visits guidance, and identify the authorised outdoor education advice route. These sources may explain local expectations that this course deliberately does not prescribe. Use them to determine what evidence, advice or further training is needed for the particular visit.

The co-ordinator should have access to training, advice and guidance. This access is important because the role covers a range of judgements and may involve visits, activities or providers that are unfamiliar to the co-ordinator. Access to support helps the co-ordinator recognise the limits of their own knowledge, obtain relevant advice and help colleagues manage risks appropriately.

The co-ordinator works with the relevant outdoor education adviser to help colleagues assess and manage risks. Depending on the school's arrangements, this may be an adviser provided through the local authority or academy trust. The exact advice route is site-specific, so identify the authorised route used by your school before planning to rely on it. Do not assume that an informal contact, an internet search or a previous visit provides the necessary current guidance.

Hypothetical example: A newly appointed co-ordinator is asked to advise on a visit involving an activity they have not previously assessed. They recognise that their general school experience is not enough to answer confidently. They check the school's authorised guidance, identify the relevant local-authority or academy-trust outdoor education advice route, and seek appropriate training or advice before advising the school. This is a stronger approach than presenting an unsupported personal opinion as approval advice.

A likely mistake is to treat training as a one-off event that removes the need for advice. The guidance expects access to training, advice and guidance, so the co-ordinator should know how to obtain support when a situation is unfamiliar or beyond their current confidence. This course does not set a refresher interval. Instead, follow the authorised arrangements applicable to your school and seek further support when the role or visit requires it.

A useful next step is to identify, before the next visit is planned, who provides authorised educational-visits advice to your school and where the relevant guidance can be accessed. Then consider whether your current experience and training cover the types of visits, activities, staff assessments and provider assessments you may be asked to advise on. If not, raise the need for appropriate training or advice with the person responsible for supporting the role in your school or organisation.