Structuring school websites for clarity and compliance | Lillian purge

Structuring school websites for clarity and compliance

From experience, a school website is one of the most important and most underestimated tools a school has. It is not just a marketing asset, and it is not just a noticeboard. It is a public-facing record, a compliance document, a safeguarding reference point, and often the first place parents go when they are anxious, uncertain, or making decisions that feel heavy. In my opinion, the structure of a school website matters far more than its design, because structure determines whether information can be found, understood, and trusted.

I have worked with primary schools, secondary schools, academies, and multi-academy trusts across the UK, and one pattern comes up repeatedly. Schools rarely struggle because they lack information. They struggle because that information is buried, duplicated, out of date, or structured in a way that makes sense internally but not to parents, inspectors, or search engines.

This article explains how schools should structure their websites for clarity and compliance, why structure is the foundation of responsible SEO, how Google interprets school website architecture, and how clear structure supports safeguarding, transparency, and trust. Everything here is based on hands-on work with school websites, statutory compliance audits, and long-term observation of what helps schools communicate effectively online.

Why structure matters more than design for school websites

Design attracts attention, but structure supports understanding.

From experience, many schools invest time and budget into visual redesigns, new colour schemes, or homepage layouts, while leaving the underlying structure unchanged. The result is often a site that looks modern but still feels confusing.

Structure determines how content is grouped, how easily it can be found, and how clearly responsibilities are communicated. Parents rarely care whether a site looks modern if they cannot quickly find admissions criteria, safeguarding contacts, or term dates.

In my opinion, structure is the difference between a website that reassures and one that frustrates.

A school website serves multiple audiences at once

One of the unique challenges of school websites is that they serve many audiences simultaneously.

From experience, these include parents, carers, pupils, staff, governors, inspectors, prospective families, and sometimes the wider community. Each group has different priorities and levels of familiarity.

Good structure does not try to please everyone with one page. It creates clear pathways so each audience can find what they need without wading through irrelevant content.

Clarity comes from separation, not from compression.

Compliance is about accessibility, not just presence

Many schools treat compliance as a checklist.

From experience, schools often ensure required documents exist somewhere on the site, but do not consider whether they are easy to find or understand. This creates risk.

Compliance is not just about having information online, it is about making it accessible. Inspectors, parents, and regulators should be able to locate statutory information quickly without guessing.

Website structure plays a central role in whether compliance information is actually compliant in practice.

Why Google cares about school website structure

Google evaluates structure as a signal of quality.

From experience, Google treats school websites closer to public service sites than commercial ones. It expects clarity, hierarchy, and logical organisation.

When content is buried several clicks deep, duplicated across multiple menus, or inconsistently labelled, Google struggles to understand relevance. This reduces visibility even for important pages.

In my opinion, good structure supports both human understanding and search trust simultaneously.

The importance of a clear top-level navigation

Top-level navigation sets expectations.

From experience, the main menu should reflect the primary needs of the audience, not internal departments or legacy labels. Terms like Information, Policies, or Documents often hide critical content rather than reveal it.

Clear top-level sections such as About the School, Admissions, Safeguarding, Curriculum, Parents, and Contact are easier for users to understand and for search engines to interpret.

Ambiguous navigation is one of the biggest sources of confusion I see in school websites.

Why safeguarding should never be buried

Safeguarding is one of the most critical areas of a school website.

From experience, safeguarding information is often buried under policies, footer links, or PDF folders. This is a serious issue.

Safeguarding content should be visible, clearly labelled, and accessible from the main navigation or footer at all times. Parents and inspectors should never have to search for it.

Clear safeguarding structure signals responsibility and builds trust instantly.

Structuring statutory information for clarity

Statutory information is often treated as an afterthought.

From experience, schools group all statutory documents into a single page or folder, which becomes overwhelming and difficult to navigate.

A better approach is to structure statutory information by theme, governance, policies, performance, admissions, and finance, with clear headings and brief explanations.

Structure helps users understand what they are looking at, not just download it.

Why plain language improves compliance understanding

Compliance language can be complex.

From experience, schools often publish statutory documents without any context or explanation. This leaves parents confused and frustrated.

Adding short summaries or introductions does not change the content but dramatically improves understanding.

Google also benefits from this context because it can interpret the purpose of the page more clearly.

Structuring admissions content responsibly

Admissions pages attract high-intent traffic.

From experience, parents rely heavily on admissions content when making decisions. These pages must be clear, accurate, and up to date.

Good structure separates admissions overview, criteria, catchment information, application process, and key dates.

Lumping everything into one long page often creates confusion and increases enquiries driven by misunderstanding.

Why admissions structure affects trust

Admissions decisions are emotional.

From experience, unclear or poorly structured admissions content creates anxiety and suspicion, even if the criteria are fair.

Clear structure reassures parents that the school is transparent and organised.

Google observes how users interact with these pages and uses that behaviour to assess quality.

Structuring curriculum content for different audiences

Curriculum content serves multiple purposes.

From experience, parents want an overview, inspectors want detail, and pupils want relevance. A single page cannot serve all of these needs.

Good structure uses overview pages with links to subject-specific pages. Each subject page explains intent, implementation, and impact in accessible language.

This layered approach supports clarity without overwhelming.

Why curriculum structure supports SEO naturally

Curriculum pages are rich in relevant language.

From experience, well-structured curriculum content naturally ranks for searches about subjects, year groups, and learning approaches.

Google prefers structured subject pages over generic curriculum PDFs because they are easier to interpret and navigate.

Structure turns curriculum content into a discoverable asset.

The role of policies in website structure

Policies are necessary, but they should not dominate navigation.

From experience, schools often give policies too much prominence without context, which can feel cold or bureaucratic.

A better structure groups policies under a clear section with explanations about why they matter and how they are applied.

This improves understanding and reduces fear-based interpretation.

Why downloadable PDFs should not replace web pages

PDFs are still common in school websites.

From experience, relying solely on PDFs creates accessibility and SEO issues. PDFs are harder to navigate, harder to update, and less friendly on mobile.

Where possible, key information should exist as web pages, with PDFs as supporting documents.

This improves clarity and compliance simultaneously.

Structuring information for parents versus staff

Parents and staff have different needs.

From experience, mixing internal staff content with parent-facing information creates confusion.

Clear separation through structure helps both groups find what they need quickly.

Staff portals or intranet links should not interfere with public navigation.

Why contact information must be obvious

Contact pages are often overlooked.

From experience, unclear contact information creates frustration and unnecessary calls or emails.

Contact details, office hours, and key contacts should be easy to find and consistent across the site.

This is both a usability and a trust issue.

Structuring news and updates responsibly

School news pages can easily become cluttered.

From experience, outdated news creates the impression of inactivity, even if the school is busy.

Clear structure that archives older content and highlights current updates maintains confidence.

News structure should support relevance, not accumulate noise.

The importance of consistent naming and labels

Consistency builds trust.

From experience, schools often use different names for the same concept across pages, such as safeguarding, child protection, or wellbeing.

This inconsistency confuses users and search engines.

Choosing clear labels and using them consistently improves clarity and authority.

Structuring content for accessibility compliance

Accessibility is both a legal and ethical responsibility.

From experience, good structure supports accessibility by enabling screen readers, logical navigation, and clear hierarchy.

Headings, lists, and page layout matter far more than visual design for accessibility.

Responsible structure supports inclusion.

How structure affects mobile usability

Most parents access school websites on mobile.

From experience, poor structure becomes more obvious on smaller screens. Long menus, nested links, and hidden content frustrate users.

Simple, logical structure improves mobile experience dramatically.

Google prioritises mobile usability when evaluating school websites.

Avoiding duplication through better structure

Duplicate content is common in school websites.

From experience, the same information often appears in multiple places with slight variations. This creates confusion and maintenance risk.

Clear structure reduces duplication by giving each piece of information a defined home.

Google prefers clarity over repetition.

Structuring trust-building content

Trust-building content includes ethos, values, pastoral care, and wellbeing support.

From experience, these pages should be easy to find and written clearly, not buried under generic labels.

Parents look for reassurance as much as information.

Structure determines whether reassurance is accessible.

How structure supports Ofsted readiness

Inspectors use school websites extensively.

From experience, a well-structured website reduces inspection stress by making evidence easy to locate.

Clear navigation, accurate content, and logical grouping demonstrate organisation and transparency.

Website structure can support inspection readiness indirectly.

Structuring multi-academy trust websites

Trust websites add complexity.

From experience, MAT websites must balance central information with individual school pages.

Clear structure that distinguishes trust-level governance from school-level content prevents confusion.

Poor structure creates duplication and compliance risk.

Why schools should avoid marketing-style landing pages

Marketing-style landing pages often conflict with responsibility.

From experience, pages designed to convert rather than inform undermine trust in education contexts.

Structure should support explanation rather than persuasion.

SEO for schools works best when it is informational and transparent.

How structure supports long-term maintenance

School websites are maintained by multiple people over time.

From experience, poor structure makes updates risky and inconsistent.

Clear structure reduces errors, ensures compliance, and simplifies training.

Maintenance is easier when structure is logical.

Structuring for future growth and change

Schools change.

From experience, leadership, policies, curriculum, and staffing evolve. Structure should accommodate this change without breaking.

Flexible, clear structure allows content to be updated without disruption.

Rigid or messy structure creates long-term problems.

Measuring success beyond traffic

Success for school websites is not traffic volume.

From experience, success looks like fewer confused enquiries, easier access to information, and positive feedback from parents and inspectors.

Structure plays a central role in these outcomes.

SEO metrics should support communication goals, not override them.

Common structural mistakes schools make

Common mistakes include burying key information, using internal language, overloading menus, and relying on PDFs.

From experience, these issues persist because structure is rarely reviewed holistically.

Fixing structure often produces immediate improvements in clarity and trust.

Why structure is a leadership responsibility

Website structure is strategic.

From experience, leaving structure decisions entirely to designers or third parties increases risk.

Leadership involvement ensures alignment with values, compliance, and communication priorities.

Structure reflects organisational thinking.

Structuring content with empathy

Empathy matters.

From experience, structuring content around what parents are worried about rather than what schools want to say improves trust.

Clear structure reduces anxiety and confusion.

This is a responsible approach to digital communication.

Final reflections from experience

From experience, structuring school websites for clarity and compliance is not a technical exercise, it is a responsibility.

Structure determines whether a school feels open or opaque, reassuring or confusing, organised or careless.

In my opinion, schools that invest time in thoughtful website structure protect themselves legally, support their communities better, and build trust that extends far beyond SEO.

Responsible structure makes information easier to find, easier to understand, and easier to trust, and when that happens, search visibility improves naturally as a by-product.

For schools, clarity is not just good design, it is good governance, and website structure is where that clarity begins.