How to Start an Esports Program at Your School

The starting principle is simple: define the educational purpose before choosing games or buying equipment. A school esports programme should be designed as a supervised learning and participation environment, not as an expensive gaming room waiting for a purpose.

Introduction

Esports can provide schools with a familiar, team-based context in which students practise communication, planning, leadership, digital production and responsible participation. It can also provide a structured place for students who may not see themselves in traditional activities. None of those outcomes happens automatically because students are playing a game. They depend on adult ownership, clear objectives, appropriate game choices, safeguarding, reflection and a programme structure that makes learning visible.

This guide is designed for a school moving from initial interest to a responsible launch. It does not assume a large budget, specialist gaming expertise or an immediate competitive league. A school can begin with existing devices, a small supervised club and a narrow pilot. The important decision is not how impressive the room looks; it is whether students, staff and parents understand what the programme is for and how it will operate.

Safeguarding, privacy, game-rating, employment, data-protection and technology requirements vary by jurisdiction and school policy. Use this guide as a planning framework, then have the relevant school leaders validate the programme against current local requirements. Examples from national bodies are illustrative, not universally binding. This guide is not legal, medical or safeguarding advice.

1. What a school esports programme actually is

The word “esports” is often used for several different activities. Being precise helps a school avoid mismatched expectations.

1. Unstructured gaming: students have access to games with limited educational design beyond recreation. This may be enjoyable, but it is not automatically a programme.
2. A competitive esports team: a selected roster trains for fixtures or tournaments under published rules. The emphasis is performance, teamwork and representing the school.
3. A structured educational esports programme: gaming and competition are used as contexts for planned learning, student roles, reflection, projects and observable outcomes. Students may contribute as players, coaches, analysts, broadcasters, event organisers, designers, journalists or wellbeing leads.

A strong school programme can include all three experiences at different times, but it should label them honestly. A social club should not claim curriculum outcomes it does not teach or assess. A curriculum programme should not become an exclusive team for only the strongest players. Competition can motivate students, but it should support the educational purpose rather than define the entire programme. See Squid Academy’s esports education glossary for unfamiliar programme and platform terms.

2. Define the school’s objectives first

Begin with two or three priority outcomes that fit the school’s strategy and student needs. Too many goals make the programme difficult to design and difficult to evaluate.

• Student engagement: create a consistent reason to attend, contribute and complete meaningful work.
• Belonging and inclusion: offer supervised roles for students with different interests, abilities and confidence levels.
• Teamwork and communication: provide a context for practising role clarity, feedback, preparation and shared decision-making.
• Leadership: give students defined responsibilities such as captain, producer, event lead or peer mentor.
• Digital skills: develop practical experience in broadcasting, media, analytics, design, content and platform use.
• Wellbeing and responsible gaming: teach routines around breaks, sleep, focus, emotional regulation and balanced participation.
• Career exploration: show that esports includes production, technology, coaching, business, marketing, events and community roles.
• STEM or STEAM connections: link projects to computing, networking, data, design, media, entrepreneurship or research.
• Extracurricular competition: represent the school in an appropriately governed league or event.

Turn each selected objective into a sentence that can guide decisions. “Students will rotate through team and production roles and present evidence of what they learned at the end of the term” is more useful than “We want an esports team.” It influences staffing, session design, game choice, inclusion and evaluation.

3. Who should own the programme?

One accountable programme lead is essential, but delivery should be shared. The exact job titles vary by school; the responsibilities should not.

For a small pilot, one teacher may hold several roles, but the school should still document who decides what. Student leaders can help run routines; they should not replace adult supervision, moderate serious incidents alone or control access to sensitive accounts. Educators who want a structured development route can review Squid’s Esports Educator Certificate Program.

A practical meeting rhythm is a short operational check before launch, a review after the first two sessions, and formal 30-, 60- and 90-day reviews involving the programme lead, IT and safeguarding or wellbeing representative.

4. Safeguarding and responsible gaming

Treat online play and communications as part of the school’s existing safeguarding environment. One current UK example is the UK Department for Education’s filtering and monitoring standard, which emphasises clear responsibilities across senior leadership, safeguarding and IT. Its online-safety guidance also frames safe and responsible online participation as part of education. These are useful reference points, not globally binding standards; schools should apply equivalent local requirements.

• Age-appropriate games: check the rating category, content descriptors and interactive elements used in your region. A rating is an input, not a complete school suitability decision.
• Student accounts: prefer school-managed or appropriately configured student accounts. Document who creates, owns, recovers and closes them.
• Online communications: decide whether students may use voice chat, text chat, direct messages or external community servers. Default to the least exposure needed.
• Known participants: where practical, restrict early sessions to classmates, approved opponents and staff-managed spaces.
• Behaviour: publish a code of conduct covering respectful language, discrimination, harassment, cheating, rage behaviour and treatment of opponents.
• Moderation and reporting: teach mute, block and report tools, and give students a clear route to report concerns to a trusted adult.
• Privacy: prohibit sharing personal contact details, locations, schedules, passwords or identifying information in public gaming spaces.
• Screen-time structure: use a start briefing, planned breaks, movement, hydration and an end reflection. Avoid using “more hours” as the main route to improvement.
• Wellbeing: watch for distress, exclusion, conflict, fatigue or participation that interferes with school expectations. Escalate through existing school procedures.
• Parent communication: explain the activity, game, communication features, schedule, supervision and reporting route before launch.

UNICEF’s cyberbullying guidance notes that bullying can occur on gaming and messaging platforms as well as social media. Schools should preserve relevant evidence, follow their existing incident process and avoid treating online conduct as separate from school culture. UNICEF also provides broader guidance on keeping children safe online. No filtering or monitoring system removes the need for supervision, student education and trusted reporting routes.

The Australian eSafety Commissioner and the European Commission’s Better Internet for Kids online gaming resource also offer educator-facing material. Treat them as jurisdiction-specific reference points. Squid’s Mind Your Game programme can support structured responsible-gaming and wellbeing learning, but it does not replace a school’s safeguarding procedures.

5. Equipment and technical requirements

Start with the programme model and chosen games, then specify technology. Some titles run on existing school PCs, laptops, tablets or consoles; others require dedicated hardware. A small reliable pilot is more useful than a large room that cannot be maintained.

• Devices: inventory existing hardware and test the exact game, account and update process. Standardise where practical, but do not replace working equipment only for appearance.
• Internet and network: test simultaneous play under school conditions. Check latency, stability, content filtering, firewall rules, ports, downloads and event-day traffic with IT.
• Peripherals: use durable keyboards, mice or controllers appropriate to the title, with spares for common failure points.
• Audio: choose headsets that allow clear communication without excessive volume or leakage, and establish hygiene and storage routines.
• Room setup: prioritise supervision sightlines, ventilation, lighting, cable management, accessible seating, safe movement and space for briefings or reflection.
• Accounts and software: map licences, launchers, student identities, parental controls, privacy settings, patching and recovery. Avoid shared passwords.
• Restrictions and updates: run a full test on the same student network and permissions used in sessions. Consumer software may behave differently behind school controls.
• Operations: document startup, shutdown, updates, equipment sign-out, fault reporting and who may change settings.

Do not rely on a universal bandwidth figure. Game traffic, updates, video streaming, school infrastructure and simultaneous users vary. The practical standard is a supervised load test with all intended devices, services and communication tools before launch. If students will run events, evaluate the school’s needs before selecting a tournament platform.

6. Budget: plan categories, not a mythical universal price

A starter budget should show what the school already owns, what is essential for the pilot, and what can wait. Separate one-time purchases from recurring operating costs.

Starter-budget checklist

• Define the maximum number of simultaneous participants.
• List existing usable equipment before requesting purchases.
• Separate must-have launch costs from phase-two improvements.
• Include staff time and IT support, not only hardware.
• Allow for spares, maintenance, replacements and renewals.
• Check whether travel or production costs are necessary in the first term.
• Record the approval owner and the date the budget will be reviewed.

7. Choosing games

Choose titles through a documented school decision, not simply by student popularity or staff preference. Use the rating authority and school policy appropriate to the school’s jurisdiction. The ESRB ratings guide, for example, distinguishes rating categories, content descriptors and interactive elements; its Family Gaming Guide also covers controls, accounts, privacy and communication. Review each title against the same criteria.

• Age and content rating: consider rating category, content descriptors and school policy.
• Interactive features: identify voice and text chat, user-generated content, public matchmaking, in-game purchases and external communities.
• Accessibility: consider controls, visual and audio settings, pace, language, disability access and the range of available roles.
• Team structure: check roster size, substitution, match length, spectating and meaningful roles beyond the starting players.
• Educational suitability: identify what students will practise or produce beyond gameplay.
• Competitive ecosystem: confirm that leagues have suitable rules, schedules, safeguarding and opponent expectations.
• Hardware and operations: test device requirements, patch size, account model, network access and ongoing support.
• Community and safeguarding: review moderation tools, reporting, toxicity risk and whether the school can control required communications.

Use a small approved title list for the pilot. Reassess titles when ratings, platform features, policies or competition rules change. A game suitable for a supervised older-student team may not suit a mixed-age lunchtime club.

8. Curriculum vs club vs team

Schools can combine the models. One practical design is an inclusive weekly club, a competition squad that trains within clear limits, and a structured learning strand in which students rotate through production, analysis, coaching, journalism, event operations or wellbeing roles. The boundaries should be visible so students understand selection, expectations and progression. Squid’s structured school esports curriculum is one example of how schools can make learning roles and outcomes explicit. Schools considering organised play can also review school and university competitions.

10. Parent communication

Before students participate, parents and carers should receive a short, plain-language explanation covering:

• The programme’s educational and extracurricular purpose.
• The games and platforms used, including relevant ratings and interactive features.
• The timetable, supervision, location and expected time commitment.
• Whether students communicate with classmates, known opponents or public players.
• How accounts, names, privacy and in-game purchases are managed.
• The behaviour code, moderation and consequences.
• Breaks, wellbeing expectations and how concerns are handled.
• Selection or roster rules and opportunities for non-player roles.
• What data, photos, streams or student work may be shared, and the school’s consent process.
• The named school contact and reporting route.

Avoid framing parent communication as a defence of gaming. Explain the structure, acknowledge reasonable concerns and show where the school has placed boundaries. Invite questions before the first event rather than after a problem.

11. Measuring success

Measure the objectives chosen in section 2. Use a modest baseline and several forms of evidence; avoid claiming that esports caused changes that may have other explanations.

• Attendance and retention: who attends, returns and completes the pilot.
• Engagement: participation in sessions, projects, reflection and team responsibilities.
• Teamwork and leadership: observable behaviours against a simple rubric, not only self-report.
• Participation diversity: who has access to player and non-player roles, and who is being excluded.
• Wellbeing: student feedback, adherence to routines and incidents or concerns requiring action.
• Competition participation: fixtures completed, conduct, reliability and learning from review, not only wins.
• Student projects: broadcasts, event plans, portfolios, analysis, media, coaching plans or presentations.
• Career awareness: ability to identify roles, pathways and transferable skills beyond professional play.
• Operational quality: technical reliability, staff workload, safeguarding actions and parent confidence.

Report a small dashboard at 30, 60 and 90 days. Include what did not work. Honest operational evidence is more useful to school leaders than a promotional success story.

12. Common mistakes

• Buying equipment before defining the programme: the room becomes the strategy, and staff inherit costs without a delivery model.
• Treating esports only as competition: most students lose meaningful roles and educational value becomes difficult to show.
• Ignoring safeguarding and online communication: voice chat, accounts and public matchmaking create foreseeable risks.
• Choosing games without policy review: ratings, interactive features, community behaviour or hardware may conflict with the school context.
• No clear staff owner: sessions rely on enthusiasm but fail when scheduling, incidents or maintenance require decisions.
• No parent communication: families receive an incomplete picture and concerns arrive late.
• Focusing only on highly skilled players: the programme misses students interested in production, technology, leadership, media or events.
• Confusing screen time with learning time: unstructured practice replaces briefing, reflection, projects and healthy routines.
• Entering leagues too early: deadlines drive rushed decisions before accounts, rules, staffing and technology are ready.
• Failing to connect activity to outcomes: the school cannot explain what students are developing or whether the programme should continue.

How Squid Academy supports schools

Squid Academy supports schools with structured esports curriculum, educator development, wellbeing and responsible-gaming learning through Mind Your Game, competition opportunities, and learning and tournament platforms. Its education-first approach treats esports as a context for teamwork, communication, leadership, digital production and career exploration rather than as gameplay alone.

Schools can review Squid’s school curriculum framework, educator certification, Mind Your Game and competition opportunities, as well as its learning platform and tournament platform. Schools can also use this guide independently of any Squid product or service.

Sources and references

These sources informed the planning framework. Schools should check them again when applying local policy or reviewing platform features.

• UK Department for Education: Filtering and monitoring standards for schools and colleges
• UK Department for Education: Teaching online safety in schools
• UNICEF: How to stop cyberbullying
• UNICEF: Keeping children safe online
• ESRB: Ratings guide and interactive elements
• ESRB: Family Gaming Guide
• Australian eSafety Commissioner: online-safety and educator resources
• European Commission Better Internet for Kids: Online gaming