Jim Nicholson is CEO of The Honeycomb Education Trust and was previously Headteacher of Mellor Primary School for 18 years. Having been a guest speaker at the launch of the Lessons4Life whitepaper, The cycle of missed opportunities (and what we need to do about it), we met Jim to discuss the campaign, his professional experiences of personal development education, and how we can deliver meaningful change.
Jim, what attracted you to support the Lessons4Life campaign, and how does it reflect your perspectives as a school/MAT leader?
“Personal development is the key to so many aspects of the world our young people are existing or living within. What struck me about the campaign is the strength of the analytical data supporting the fact that young people are not able to make the right decisions at the right time in their lives. Why is that? Well, it is the principal drivers that are happening in society. Childhood has changed, and the speed of change in the past 15 years is more than ever before. We know the impact of technologies and it is having a significant influence on not just their everyday experience, but also with things like online access to drugs, and children’s lived understanding of societal norms is not what societal norms were. So what resonated with me, really, is the impact of change upon wellbeing and decision making. Our youngsters are making decisions based a new world emerging and creating at great speed, and they have not got the cognitive development to be able to make reasoned decisions because of it. Right now, although it is referenced in the national curriculum, there is no statutory responsibility to prioritise this kind of learning, and yet it is arguably more relevant than ever. If it became a core element of the curriculum and schools were actually assessed on how well they support personal development, rather than just SATs results or phonics scores, we might see a shift towards more holistic person-centred education outcomes.”
In which case, does the updated statutory RSHE guidance in July 2025 go far enough?
“I think my first response is no, I don’t think it does go far enough. At the moment we have got a system that is not really addressing what society’s issues are. We are facing a future we can barely predict, and it is certainly not going to get any easier for young people to navigate the minefield they now live in. I was watching something recently about how easy it is to purchase illegal substances through apps. And with the way technology moves, we are seeing the rise of things such as VPN-based apps that allow people to bypass safeguards – especially since new legislation around online protection came into effect. The response? A surge in users finding ways around it. So, every time we bring in something to try to protect our young people, the digital world moves faster and finds a loophole. Our children quickly learn about what they think should be the right answer to say but being put into real-life situations they may not necessarily action to take that. Which is why actually having a personal development programme that is absolutely tightened up as a curriculum for everybody would at least be able to immerse our teaching staff as to how we go about that even more efficiently. There lies the real issue that the curriculum does not address: the needs of our youngsters to really understand the impact upon their actions.”
On Mellor Primary School’s website you talk about the “ultimate aim to prepare our children for an ever changing world and to be a good citizen in society”. Tell us about your approach as a school, and as a Trust.
“When I started leading a single academy trust, and especially just before the Covid pandemic, I became interested in Martin Seligman’s PERMA (Positive Emotion, Engagement, Relationships, Meaning, and Accomplishment) model of positive psychology – which has since evolved into PERMA-V, with the ‘V’ standing for Vitality. I was particularly drawn to the idea of positive education, which is rooted in helping children build resilience, grit and determination. We explored international research on this, and partnered with psychologist Julie Hurst. As a result, we became the first recognised positive education school in the country. We have implemented techniques such as breathing exercises and emotional regulation strategies to help children understand there is a space between stimulus and response where they can choose how to react. This supports the development of self-awareness and mutual respect. In our curriculum, we embed the five principles of wellbeing – giving, connecting, being active, taking notice, and learning. For example, the ‘taking notice’ element led us to adopt Forest School, which I personally trained in, in both Trust schools. Forest School gives children the chance to take risks, such as using tools safely, and to develop respect for their environment and each other. A lot of this is about subliminal learning becoming conscious practice – we connect physical education to physiological wellbeing and aim to build a strong sense of identity in children. I believe the evidence suggests that if you have got a stronger sense of identity and wellbeing, then you are less likely to actually go down the road of knife crime, drug abuse, and so on. Our curriculum also includes community engagement, for example tending to local parks, charity work, and even running a refill shop – this not only builds economic understanding but also a sense of contribution. In 2019, I organised the first children’s climate summit in Stockport in partnership with the University of Manchester. We brought in councillors and MPs, and this led to an opportunity for pupils to debate climate issues in the Council Chamber. Thanks to Councillor Malcolm Allen, child-led motions now become Council policy. So, in terms of their personal development, all our children are being given opportunities to undertake particular adult roles to demonstrate their knowledge and understanding of the world they are going to create in the future. If you feel you have that ability to make the world a better place, then as young adults they are surely going to be better equipped to make the right decisions.”
How can we make more time in the curriculum for personal development education?
“There are two parts to this. Firstly, we have tried to develop a culture that supports the whole child within our organisation. We have been involved in collaborative networks linking different schools – urban, rural, ethnically and socially diverse – because we want our children to understand and appreciate diversity. A good example of this is the One Voice celebration we organised in Stockport, held at the Bridgewater Hall, which showcased cultural and spiritual diversity. We have also worked hard to adopt a holistic approach within the limits of the curriculum. For instance, we use Forest School to connect outdoor learning with subjects like the Stone Age, and there is strong empirical evidence that this benefits young people significantly. Similarly, PERMA shows that wellbeing-focused approaches improved academic outcomes by around 11% in the region. The second part of my response is about the increasing academic pressures in the primary curriculum. Some parts, I believe, could be reduced. Take geography, my own subject – I would not remove it, especially with the planetary changes we are facing. Our children may witness mass migration driven by environmental issues like water scarcity. It is crucial they understand these realities. History, too, is incredibly important for helping children learn from past mistakes. But the curriculum needs to be more relevant. Do we really need to focus on things like Henry VIII’s six wives? I would argue that it is more important to explore the political consequences of decisions – like how Henry VIII reshaped religion for personal power. Slavery should be far more significant in the curriculum. We do not need a bigger curriculum – we just need to be smarter and more purposeful about what we teach within it.”
Of the four recommendations in the Lessons4Life whitepaper, what is your view on the suggested actions and where government should really be listening to the sector?
“When I first received the four key areas, I was encouraged to critique them right away. So, I started going through each one. The idea of a unified framework for personal development stood out to me, especially when paired with comprehensive training for educators and empowering teachers for impact. These two seem to be at the core. Eventually, it comes down to whether these frameworks genuinely influence teacher outcomes or simply serve school accountability measures – for example, being assessed on personal development targets. But honestly, I think this approach can sometimes undervalue the teaching profession. Over my 34 years in education, I have seen that most teachers are deeply motivated by their commitment to young people. Unfortunately, this passion often gets buried under layers of metrics, performance management, and appraisals. It starts to feel overly target-driven. Yet, the true motivation for most teachers has always been to support and achieve good outcomes for students. So, having a consistent and clear national framework – no matter what school or area you are in – really matters. It gives clarity on our goals around personal development and ensures teachers are trained effectively to meet them.”
As you have said, technology, social media, and smartphones are huge challenges. How are you approaching this particular issue?
“For us, it all starts first thing in the morning. No smartphones allowed on the school playground. That applies to everyone, adults included. We introduced that policy years ago, well before Covid, and there were several reasons behind it. I did not have hard data at the time, just observations and a strong feeling, but what I saw was a noticeable drop in engagement from the parental community. Parents were often on their phones when children were coming out of class. It did not sit right with me. Of course, there is always that unthinkable concern about someone using a device to take inappropriate photos, but for us, the bigger issue was around missed opportunities for genuine social interaction – between parents, between children, and between parents and children. We wanted our children to see adults talking to one another. To see conversations happening. That is what we do as social beings. But nowadays, it feels like adults are not talking to adults. Children are not talking to children. And worse – adults are not talking to children. These devices are getting in the way of all that. Another really important driver behind the policy came from thinking about what it means when a child walks out of school. That moment of reconnection – when they are greeted by a warm, open-armed parent or carer – actually reinforces oxytocin in the child’s system. That sense of safety, of belonging, and we did not want anything interfering with that attachment, that bond. So, for us, it became a no-brainer. As for inside the school day – particularly with our Year 5 and 6 pupils, who may have smartphones – we have made it clear those devices do not have a role in everyday school life. Not at playtime, not at lunchtime, and not in the classroom unless the teacher is using it as a deliberate teaching point, perhaps to explore how to use them safely or responsibly. Otherwise, they are simply not needed.”
How would you summarise where we are today with personal development education, and where we need to get to?
“What we have come to value most in our education system right now is whatever can be measured – whatever fits neatly into a metric. And I get it – that is the straightforward part. It is easy to track, easy to compare. But I do not think we are valuing enough the deeper responsibility we hold. We are not just educators, we are custodians of a young person’s development. We are shaping someone’s future. As an organisation, we should be striving for something more meaningful. I genuinely believe that if the Ofsted inspection framework was centred first and foremost on personal development – not just academic outcomes – we would start to see a real cultural shift. A shift in how we view what it means to truly develop a child. Imagine if we had the flexibility in our curriculum to respond to the actual needs of our communities. That could be incredibly powerful. Because ultimately, as a Trust, what we really want is to champion young people – to prepare them, holistically, for life. We want to give them resilience, the tools to face the inevitable challenges ahead. We want them to be able to work well with others, to understand that their actions matter – that their behaviours can lift others up or bring them down. That, to me, is one of the most important purposes of education. I often refer to something Lord Richard Layard said – he is a remarkable figure, instrumental in expanding university access through his work at the London School of Economics back in the ’60s. When asked about the purpose of education, he said: ‘The sole purpose of education should be to increase the happiness of the learner – whether that’s a child or an adult – and thereby increase the happiness of society’. And I think if we really embraced that philosophy, we would raise more resilient, compassionate young people, better equipped to handle conflict and challenge. Maybe then, when faced with issues like violence, aggression, or a lack of respect, they would have the emotional intelligence and compassion to respond differently. We just don’t spend enough time in schools developing compassion and understanding it.”
