Transcript Document

CONTENTS
The Department
Science Dept Self Assessment
Student Consultation
The Department – Unofficial SAR
My view of the main issues for the science department:
 Few administrative procedures (or even policies) in place across the department such as
student consultation, lateness and homework
 Little QA across the department (i.e. checking by CL’s & HOD)
 Little sharing of good practice across the department
 Staff acceptance of average or slightly below average
 Staff still adapting to courses and the lack of support from college
 2 members of staff on unreasonable timetables
 Some courses lacking good student exam preparation materials
My Aims
 Improve ALIS
 Improve Retention and Results *
* I thought about placing Results above Retention – but the danger there is that I
could end up promoting a get rid culture. I’m happy with getting rid when it’s the
best thing but not simply to improve our results.
Science Dept Self Assessment
The following slides give an overview of the courses in the
department and draft copies of the department summary and
development plan.
Self assessment of Mark Rothery: Key points
• Standardised ALIS residual (n=61) for AS & A2 is +0.21
(statistically significantly +ve)
• GCSE (n=6), higher pass = 0%, increase 1 grade = 2/6
• External lesson obs. grade = 3. Feedback basically sound
but a lack of pace and challenge
• Student feedback was mainly positive (see later item on
consultation) but highlighted points for action such as this
comment; “The worst things are that whenever I come to
revise for a test the notes seem to be either just in picture
form or bullet points. Fuller explanations need to be written
down next to these”
Biology
Strengths
High levels of recruitment
High levels of student progression to
related HE courses
Weaknesses
Evidence
High no. admitted to course. High A2 takeup.
AS results A-C
Exam results
Destinations information (Oxbridge, Medical Schools, Veterinary Schools and Dental Schools)
Evidence
Poor AS Retention
Grade of provision: 3
Development Plan:
 Prescription of learning support for students in danger of dropping out. Each subject teacher to select a minimum of 3 students (using
college target setting information) and enrol them for a series of 5 support lessons. MIS to place these students on timetable for the
support slots.
 Continue to develop collation centrally of practical requirements and student handouts.
 MR to develop after hours revision classes
Numerical Targets:
COURSE
Pass Rate
(%)
AS
A2
85
96
TARGET
Higher
Retention
Pass Rate
(%)
(%)
18
85
30
96
Attendance
(%)
87
Chemistry
Strengths
Good AS and A2 results, comparing favourably with national figures year on year.
Attendance better than sixth form figures.
Good attitude of students towards the subject.
Good laboratory facilities and a high standard of equipment. Links with ICI have
ensured this. For example the college has a infra red spectrometer.
Teaching and learning variety and usefulness
Weaknesses
Some class sizes of 20 and above are too big, so laboratory skills can be difficult to
teach on occasion.
Evidence
Results
ALIS, chart 1.2. and page 8 of ALIS.
Range of equipment
Questionnaire
Evidence
Grade of Provision: 2
Development Plan:
 Revamp revision guides and post to college intranet by July 2003
 Support A2 students after hours
Numerical Targets
COURSE
Pass Rate
(%)
AS
A2
92
96
TARGET
Higher
Retention
Pass Rate
(%)
(%)
30
90
36
95
Attendance
(%)
90
Design
Strengths
Teacher has 2 Degrees in Design, 14 years teaching
experience and is a Chief Examiner for OCR
Regular practical sessions
High take up of learning support
Weaknesses
Little experience in working at A level design
Little experience in working in the further education system.
Therefore still learning new aspects of college teaching
Poor AS pass rates
Evidence
C.V
Questionnaire
Questionnaire
Evidence
Grade of Provision: 4
Development Plan:
 Introduce and encourage use of ILT by December 2002
 Provide accessible course materials including past exam papers by July 2003
Numerical Targets:
COURSE
Pass Rate
(%)
AS
A2
94
100
TARGET
Higher
Retention
Pass Rate
(%)
(%)
6
90
0
100
Attendance
(%)
85
PE
Strengths
Teaching that is good and often outstanding
Students’ work which is appropriately set and assessed
The substantial number of students who progress to
sports-related courses in higher education
Weaknesses
Poor attendance particularly at A2
Poor results
Low retention
Evidence
External lesson
observations
Moderator report
Student destinations on
leaving St Mary’s
Evidence
Attendance data
Examination results data
Grade of Provision: 4
Development Plan:
 Target poorly attending students and invite parents in by December 2002.
 Continue to produce exam targeted resources by July 2003
Numerical Targets:
COURSE
Pass Rate
(%)
AS
A2
80
94
TARGET
Higher
Retention
Pass Rate
(%)
(%)
8
75
30
94
Attendance
(%)
80
Physics
Strengths
A2 pass rate for A-E was above the national
standard.
G&T and WP students both exceeded their ALIS
Weaknesses
AS pass rates were below national rates
Evidence
96.9%. National A-E rate 93.1%
Evidence
78.6% A-E. National rate 84.6%
33.3% A-C. National rate 58.3%
Computing and data-logging are inadequate in the There are two computers in 210, and these still use Windows 3.1. This
department.
operating system cannot support modern data logging software.
Grade of Provision: 3
Development Plan:
 Upgrade IT equipment to include updated datalogging provision by July 2003
 Increase take up of student support by December 2002 measure using student consultation questionnaire
Numerical Targets:
COURSE
Pass Rate
(%)
AS
A2
85
95
TARGET
Higher
Retention
Pass Rate
(%)
(%)
25
92
20
100
Attendance
(%)
88
Sciences SAR Academic Year 2001-2002
Overall provision in this area is Satisfactory (grade 3)
Strengths
•good pass rates in AS and GCE A Level chemistry and geology, GCE A Level
physics and GCE A Level design
•good attitude of students towards department
•good effective teaching in many lessons
•high levels of recruitment and student progression to related HE courses
Weaknesses
• some poor accommodation
•poor retention in AS biology, design and PE
•poor pass rates in AS level design and AS and GCE A level PE
•large classes of 20+ in some practical lessons
•poor achievement in GCSE biology
Development Plan
Individual subject courses across the department have their own individual development
plans, that are to be monitored by the HOD
Action






Global department homework and
marking policy to be developed and
subjects to develop individual details
Subjects to develop strategies to
increase take-up of student support
Increase incidence of sharing good
practice
Include issues such as dealing with
lateness, effective questioning and
production of revision guides at dept.
meetings
Ensure all newly produced learning
materials (e.g. revision guides, h/o etc)
are posted to the intranet
Introduce AS environmental science for
September 2003 (subject to demand)
Persons
Responsible
Monitoring
Arrangements
HOD, CL’s
HOD
Individuals
teachers, CL’s
HOD
HOD
HOD, questionnaire
of all science staff
Jun2003
Individuals
teachers, CL’s,
HOD
HOD, CS
LP, JW, HOD
HOD, AJ
Student Consultation
As I outlined in the memo prior to this meeting I was very
aware of two things:
• The reliance on AJ’s teaching standards questionnaire in
writing SAR’s.
• The lack of a clear policy on student consultation across
courses within the department
We need to develop a system which collects good data which
can inform change
THE BEST & WORST THINGS ABOUT BEING TAUGHT BIOLOGY BY MR ROTHERY (A2 2002)
BEST THINGS

“The best things about being taught Biology with Mr Rothery is that he always makes lessons fun with his humour
which makes a relaxed atmosphere in the class, this makes it easier to learn and also makes me want to come to the
lesson. Also he tells you where your downfalls are which makes it easier to know which things you need to go over. He
is also very enthusiastic about his teaching and doesn’t just sit there and make us copy notes. The revision notes
(booklets) are class. Get excited to look over them (sad). He is always there to help you when you need it.”
“Lively/entertaining teaching approach- usually holds interest for the lesson – well done!”
“Lessons are never boring, he uses a variety of techniques such as notetaking, OHP computers, practicals, diagrams to make the lesson more
interesting! He provides detailed notes and labelled diagrams which he interprets his ‘own way’ (sometimes going off on a tangent) but it does
simplify the complicated aspects! I enjoy and benefit more from active learning (writing notes) as all the information goes in!! (I hate listening and not
writing)”
WORST THINGS

“The worst things are that whenever I come to revise for a test the notes seem to be either just in picture form or bullet
points. Fuller explanations need to be written down next to these. Also I don’t like it when I have to draw an eye or leg
etc because I am a terrible drawer and when I look over it, it looks unrealistic and I don’t know exactly where the
labels are pointing to which makes me make mistakes. Practicals ALWAYS go wrong, he might as well just do one
beforehand to make sure that it actually works before we waste time.”
“Notes sometimes difficult to understand when revising topics. Sometimes in confusing order.”
“When drawing diagrams he tends to keep adding and adding more labels and rubbing out others which makes it (sometimes) difficult to follow. The
notes, although they are detailed they are sometimes a bit confusing in that they don’t have a sequence to them, this makes it difficult when its time to
revise. (Do love the revision notes though).
H/o given in class
Videos shown in class
Textbooks
My teaching (I.e. me, exposition
- not resources
Past exam q's for Mod. 4 (given
out at intervals during lessons)
The booklet of past exam q's
for Mod. 8
My website
The booklets I've handed out
for Mods 4 & 5
Cumulative
scores given
Chart showing student scores responding to the question "score 1 to 10 , with
1 the least and 10 the best, how helpful you found the following in preparing
you for the A2 exams." (n=11)
110
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
Strategy
6
5.5
4
3.5
4
4.5
5
4.5
5
5.5
Teachers daf t litt le st ories
past Q's
8
6.5
6
6.5
7
I ndividual help
7.5
8
8.5
List ening t o t he t eacher
not es (f rom board)
Talking t o others
Teacher Q's (oral)
Class discus
Demos
8.5
Dictat ion
Reading
Group work
7
Pract icals
7.5
Research
Videos
Percieved effectiveness as a learning activity
Frequency and effectiveness of various learning activities (n=14)
9
9.5
Frequency of use in lessons
Form 1
Form 2
Form 3