Who can update the school website when the usual person is off?
%20(1).avif)
Written by Derrick KityoAn editable school site can still depend on one person. Make the recurring jobs, approved sources, permissions and cover arrangements clear before they’re needed.
A school website can be easy to edit and still depend entirely on one person. They know where the documents live, which version is current and who needs to approve a change.
When that person is away, a simple update becomes a search through inboxes and shared folders. Buying a different CMS won’t necessarily fix it.
I’d start by making the ordinary publishing jobs visible, then giving a second person a realistic way to carry them out.
Choose the changes that can’t wait
Ask staff which website updates cause the most disruption when nobody can make them. That might include a closure notice, a changed contact, an event update or a corrected document.
Separate those urgent tasks from planned publishing. A homepage announcement may need a different approval route from a new policy. Both need an owner, but they don’t have to share an elaborate workflow.
Include the places outside the main page where the information appears. A date might be in an event record, a downloadable letter and a banner. The person covering the update needs to know whether those are connected or maintained separately.
The aim is a short account of how the website is run. It shouldn’t take a new member of staff a full strategy document to change a phone number.
Match publishing obligations to the actual setting
Before creating a list of required information, confirm the organisation type and jurisdiction. A nursery, maintained school, academy and university don’t share one universal publishing checklist.
In England, the Department for Education publishes separate guidance for maintained schools and academies and further education colleges. Use the guidance that applies, with the school or trust responsible for checking its obligations.
Turn the relevant requirements into owned records. Each record should identify the public location, person responsible, source of the approved information and next review. Don’t assume a CMS template or a supplier’s badge establishes that the school meets every requirement.
Keeping the legal source attached also helps when guidance changes. Staff can review the relevant record instead of wondering where an old spreadsheet rule came from.
Give documents a publication process
For each important document, identify the approved source and the page that introduces it. Record whether it replaces an earlier edition and what should happen to links to that edition.
A filename such as policy-final-new-2.pdf won’t help the next editor. Use a clear public title and version information that means something to staff and readers.
Check the format as part of the job. The government’s accessible-document guidance explains the value of HTML and the work needed for non-HTML documents. The organisation should decide its appropriate formats and requirements, rather than assuming that any uploaded PDF is usable.
For a busy site, a document collection can keep titles, dates, files and related pages together. A smaller site may need a simpler arrangement. The important point is that the cover person can identify the current approved material.
Keep access simple enough to use
Three staff members may genuinely need the same editing permissions. That can be a sensible starting point. Give people their own accounts where the platform supports them and agree how access is removed when responsibilities change.
Only add extra approval stages where they serve a real need. Routine event edits may be straightforward. Policy wording or content about individual pupils may need a different authorised reviewer.
Confirm who can recover access, manage the domain and contact the supplier. A handover that covers page editing but leaves those responsibilities unknown is incomplete.
Here’s a fictional responsibility note for a school team:
Task: Event date
Person preparing it: Office editor
Check before publication: Confirm against the agreed calendar
Cover arrangement: Second named editor
Task: Policy replacement
Person preparing it: Assigned policy owner
Check before publication: Confirm approved edition and public format
Cover arrangement: Agreed senior reviewer
Task: Temporary notice
Person preparing it: Authorised staff member
Check before publication: Confirm wording, audience and removal time
Cover arrangement: Named authorised deputy
The role names are examples. Replace them with the people and decisions your school actually uses.
Want to apply this to your own website or app?
Tell me what you are working on and where it is getting stuck. I will help you turn the useful ideas into shipped work.
Practise with a task, not a tour of the buttons
Ask the cover person to update a fictional event in a safe preview or test area. Have them find the source, make the change, check it on a phone and explain how they would get it approved.
Then ask them to replace a test document and correct an error. Watch where they need help. If the process only works when the usual editor gives verbal instructions, those instructions belong in the handover.
Include keyboard use, descriptive links and clear headings in the review. W3C’s heading guidance explains why a page’s structure matters beyond how the text looks.
Remove the test material afterwards. The rehearsal should leave a useful note about the process, rather than a forgotten dummy event on the public site.
Make ongoing support about the work that changes
My work for Glasgow School of Art includes ongoing maintenance, template improvements and content rollouts. That’s different from handing over a finished site and assuming it won’t need attention.
For a school, support might focus on the recurring changes staff struggle with, a clearer document library or an unreliable enquiry route. Start with those jobs before deciding a full redesign is necessary.
The education website planning sheet asks about the sites involved, content owners and who will maintain the result. Fill it in with rough answers from the people doing the work. It’s more useful to know that two staff members need the same access than to invent a complicated permissions model for them.
For a first discussion, bring one update that is currently difficult and the route staff follow to publish it. We can use that to decide whether the problem is the CMS, the process or something smaller.
Frequently asked questions
Do all school website editors need different permissions?
No. Several people may need the same routine editing access. Agree which changes require a separate reviewer, then check what the platform supports. Keep individual account ownership and access recovery clear.
Can we use one statutory publishing checklist for every education site?
No. Establish the setting and jurisdiction first. England’s maintained-school guidance differs from guidance for academies and further education colleges. Nurseries, universities and organisations elsewhere need the sources applicable to them.
What should a school website handover include?
Include real editing tasks, approved content sources, document versions, publication responsibilities, access recovery and the support route. Have the cover editor carry out a representative task so missing instructions become visible before they are needed.
.jpg)
