Transcript St Paul’s C of E Primary Tipton, Sandwell L.A.

St Paul’s C of E Primary
Tipton, Sandwell L.A.
SIA – Bill Thompson
Chair of Governing Body - Siddique Hussain
School Context
St Paul’s C of E Primary is one form entry, average sized primary
school.(233 pupils) .
Nearly all pupils come from White British families ( school 86%
national 74%), with the remainder from a wide range of ethnic
heritage. It draws its pupils from an area which is considerably less
advantaged than average. (School deprivation indicator 0.38 –
National 0.24 ) An above average proportion of pupils are entitled
to free school meals. (School 24% National is 19%) When children
start in the Nursery, their level of skills and knowledge is very low,
especially in their social and language.
Ofsted Judgements
January 2008
November 2010
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Overall effectiveness – 3
Achievement and standards – 3
Personal development – 2
T&L – 3
Curriculum – 3
Care , guidance &support – 3
L&M – 3
Governors – 4
• Self Evaluation – 4
• Capacity to improve - 3
Overall effectiveness – 2
Achievement and standards – 2
Personal development – 2
T&L – 2
Curriculum – 2
Care , guidance &support – 1
L&M – 2
Governors – 2
Self Evaluation – 2
Capacity to improve – 2
2008 - What the school should do to
improve further
• ■ Improve the quality of teaching so that it is
consistently good for all ages and ability groups in
order to accelerate progress, especially in Key
Stage 1.
• ■ Improve the teaching of writing to ensure
pupils make better progress in English.
• ■ Make sure tracking and monitoring systems are
used to identify key areas for improvement.
• ■ Improve the capacity of the governing body to
hold the school to account.
What happened ?
March 2009 – New Adviser appointed
March 2009 – New Chair of GB appointed
January 2010- New Headteacher appointed.
Previous head retired.
March 2010 – New DHT appointed. Previous
DHT retired.
3 new staff appointed. All other staff have
remained.
St Paul’s - School Performance
2009
2010
2011
English& Maths
L4+
43% NA – 72%
67%
NA – 73%
93% NA – 74%
2 levels Eng
81% NA – 86%
90%
NA – 81%
91% NA – 87%
2 levels Maths
67%
79%
NA – 83%
93% NA – 86%
APS
25.6 NA - 27.9
26.3
NA – 27.5
30.1 NA – 27.5
Value added
100.1
101.2
103.4
Percentile Rank
44th
17th
1st
What I found ?
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Teachers often dominated the lessons; they talked knowledgeably
and kindly but without expecting the students to contribute or think
sufficiently for themselves.
Assessment information was not well used or matched to pupils’
levels, therefore the level of challenge was weak, especially for the
more able.
Assessment for learning strategies were under-developed or not
consistently applied, especially questioning skills and feedback.
Senior leaders did not demand enough from their middle leaders
regarding accountability for standards, rigour and the consistency in
monitoring and evaluation.
The best staff were not used well enough to coach the weakest so
that they can learn from them.
Governors did not know how to challenge the headteacher
regarding the raising of standards in relation to national
expectations. They were more concerned about pupils’ well being.
Behaviour
In a few instances, it would appear that teachers
were too uncertain about classroom
management to risk varying their teaching
methods – thus becoming caught in the trap of
dull teaching being met with negative attitudes
leading to a fear of varying the pattern.
‘Where teachers worry about students’ behaviour,
they shy away from giving opportunities for
students to work in groups or independently and
to take responsibility for their own learning.’
Being too kind !
Previous senior leaders had a reasonably accurate
view of the strengths and weaknesses of
teaching. However, their evaluation of the overall
quality of teaching and learning was
overgenerous because there was insufficient
focus during lesson observations on the progress
in learning made by pupils. Until the new
headteacher was appointed leaders did not
correlate their judgements on the quality of
teaching with the data which measures pupils’
attainment and progress.
Sharp, measurable targets please!
Whole-school development plans were not sharp
enough and did not have measurable success
criteria which can be used at regular intervals to
check on how well improvements are progressing
against national benchmarks in all year groups.
Staff were not held accountable for progress
through effective performance management
systems. Governors needed good examples of
sharp actions plans to compare and contrast so
that they could challenge effectively.
Challenging Middle Leaders
Monitoring and evaluation lacked rigour or
was inconsistently practised, often because
individual middle managers had not been
challenged, especially in respect of driving
forward the quality of teaching and learning.
Previous senior leaders had policies but lacked
the strategies to ensure their widespread
application; this often affected issues such as
the planning of lessons or management of
behaviour.
How did the school move
forward?
Introduced ...
• Assessing Pupils Progress – teachers’ were trained to
know the R/W/M levels extremely well and therefore
they could match their teaching very accurately to
different groups within the class.
• Assessment for Learning strategies.
• High levels of accountability for all staff – every year
counts!
• Relentless and rigorous monitoring and evaluation
systems, especially standardising and moderating
standards.
• High quality CPD focusing on pedagogy
• High quality CPD for the Governing Body, esp, data and
tracking.
Learning from the best
The issue of how schools cascade best practice or deal
with weaknesses in teaching is the responsibility of
leadership and management.
The two over-riding management conundrums often
appear to be: how to improve generally satisfactory
teaching to good; and how to tackle a minority of poor
teaching.
The school introduced a coaching model to ensure that
all teachers learned from the good and outstanding
teaching that existed in the school.
This led to :
• Teachers using assessment information to
plan work of appropriate challenge for the
range of students’ needs.
• Providing clarity for teachers about what
constitutes good practice.
• Making sure teachers planned active and
varied learning tasks.
• Involving leaders at all levels, including
governors, in monitoring provision and
driving improvement.
Timeline Overview
Use pupil tracking and qualitative information to:
4. Identify possible factors that would need to be addressed
to ensure good progress for identified underachieving
groups/individuals and plan appropriate actions
Through periodic informed teacher assessments and termly
pupil progress meetings:
10. Review progress of groups and individuals against
achievement of curricular focus/targets, age-related
expectations and NC levels, making use of Assessing
Pupil Progress processes and materials from Primary
Framework. Update school class tracker
11. Establish the factors which still need to be addressed
to ensure appropriate progress for all children and
amend and refine plans
Autumn Term
In partnership with previous practitioner/class teacher use all
available data to:
1. Map attainment and compile class tracker, taking account of
prior attainment at EYFS and KS1 and national expectations.
How many children are on track? Who is ‘slow moving’, ‘stuck’,
‘falling behind’ or at risk of not making good progress?
2. Analyse transitional/periodic assessments, examples
of children’s work and discuss with children to establish
key aspects of literacy and mathematics that need to be
developed further? Consider curriculum implications for
whole school/year group/class/ability groups identified
underachieving groups and vulnerable individuals
3. Map out possible wave 2 and 3 interventions for next year/term
Spring Term
Through day-to-day and periodic assessments, planning and teaching and taking
account of the outcomes from termly pupil progress meetings:
5. Review and set age-related curricular focus/targets for reading/writing
and/or mathematics for class/groups or individuals, as appropriate
6. Layer the curricular focus/targets for higher and lower attaining children
and/or personalise to meet specific needs of individuals e.g. children with
EAL, as appropriate
7. Discuss curricular focus/targets with all additional adults and share with
families and children
8. Amend and refine medium/short-term planning to ensure achievement
of the curricular focus/targets through quality first teaching
9. Plan all additional interventions to support the accelerated progress of
groups/individuals, including the use of guided approaches, additional
interventions and one-to-one support, where appropriate
Summer Term
Summer Term
12. Carry out transitional assessments,
if appropriate
13. Work in partnership with next class teacher/
school (See 1 to 3)
14. Plan and deliver appropriate units to support
effective transition to next class teacher/ school
15. Provide families and next class teacher/school
with appropriate data and qualitative information
Back to contents
Example Whole School
Mapping Attainment
Year
1
2
Below
L1
Which
children
are entitled
to
How
can
the
school
plan
and
manage
Do
all
class
teachers
know
and
Level 1
Levelchild
2
Levelthey
3
Level be
4 based
Level 5
Is each
where
should
Free
School
Meals?
appropriate
for
the
L What
S understand
H allLthe
H prior
Lneed
S interventions
L
Sfor
Hthe
L
S
H
does
the
school
toHprovide
national
expectations
onStheir
attainment
at
KS1?
children
that
need to to
make
acceleratedto
children working
above
age-related
expectations
children’s
entitlement
achieve
Are there significant
underachieving groups
progress?
Whatensure
does the
school
need
toprogress?
provide
they
make
great
combined
attainment
at
L4+
the School
children
securing
level 3 or
emerging?Are
Forall
example
byat
Free
for the
children
working
significantly
endMeals,
of KS2 gender
and
make
atinleast
2ethnic
levels
above
reading,
writing
and
or minority
group?
below age-related
expectations
to end of Year 4?
progress mathematics
through
KS2?by
ensure they make good progress?
3
4
5
6
Are all children securing level 4 or
Areabove
all children
securing
leveland
2 or
in reading,
writing
above in reading,
writing
and6?
mathematics
by end
of Year
mathematics by end of Year 2?
Level 6
L
S
H
Children falling within this
band should be considered
for intervention at the
beginning of the year
The green boxes indicate minimum attainment by the
END OF YEAR 4
Secure
P8
1low
1secure
1high
2 low
National age-related
expectation for beginning
of Year 4
2 secure
2 high
3 low
National age-related
expectation for end of
Year 4
3 secure
3 high
Chan
Secure P8
1C
Bill
Tia
1A
2C
Callum
2B
2A
3C
3B
3A
Children working at high levels at Key Stage 1 need to maintain this
progress across Key Stage 2
End of Key Stage 1 assessment
1B
Children with no matched
records
Bilal
Peter
Paulo
Dani
Angelina
The boxes edged in red indicate one
level of progress from the end of Key
Stage 1
4 low
4 secure
4 high
Example assessment guideline – reading
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
How a teacher provides evidence for child’s reading
level during a pupil progress meeting
Before using APP
• Peter’s reading is going well.
He’s reading much more by
himself and he enjoys the
books we’ve given him. His
reading age is quite low and
we need to work harder to
improve this, although he
reads happily in the book
corner with his friends.
After using APP
•
•
Peter’s oral responses demonstrate that
he is operating at a high level 2 for AF1.
He is able to decode unfamiliar words
and is beginning to use expression. For
Peter to progress into level 3, he needs
to develop his fluency of expression,
which is planned for in future guided
and one -to –one sessions.
Peter is confident within AF4 and the
evidence gathered demonstrates a high
level 2. He is familiar with the features
of text types, particularly non-fiction.
His preference is to read non-fiction
texts, particularly at home, but further
evidence from reading narrative texts
would support this assessment. This is
what I’m also planning for now.
Governors and the school’s data
You should have a good knowledge of ...
• National benchmarks –
Floor targets, national expectations for FS, KS1 and KS2,
APS, 2 levels progress medians.
• Raise online headlines - The school’s (CVA) and new value
added score over the last three years.
• The English and maths combined L4+ attainment and
progress over last 3 years.
• In School data - End of year expectations and attainment
levels for each year group.
• The school’s current performance targets and current
progress rates – APS or sub level improvement.
• The quality of teaching and learning in each Key Stage .
Floor Standards
Compare schools’ performance over the last three years
against the figures below for primary schools.
• less than 60% of pupils at the end of Key Stage 2 (KS2)
achieving level 4 or above in English and maths; and
• below average % of pupils at the end of KS2 making
expected progress in English (national median = 87%);
and
• below average % of pupils at the end of KS2 making
expected progress in maths (national median = 86%)
National averages for key indicators
How does our school
compare?
Early years and Foundation stage profile
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
78points& 6+ in
PSE&CLL (NI72)
46
49
52
56
59
What are the school’s
key priorities?
Key Stage 1 profile
Level 2B or above
Level 3 or above
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Reading
71
71
72
72
74
26
25
26
26
26
Writing
59
58
60
60
60
13
12
12
12
13
Mathematics
74
74
74
74
73
22
21
21
21
20
Key Stage 2 profile
Level 4 or above
Level 5 or above
2007 2008 2009 2010* 2011
2007 2008 2009 2010
English & mathematics
71
73
72
73
74
22
20
20
23
21
English
80
81
80
81
81
34
30
29
33
29
Maths
77
79
79
80
80
32
31
35
34
35
85
85
86
85
85
38
38
38
37
35
Science (TA)
`
Does the school
improvement plan
have precise,
measurable targets?
2 levels progress between KS1 and KS2
How are leaders
defining the CPD to
raise the quality of
teaching and learning?
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
English
81
83
84
Based on 2011 methodolodgy
Mathematics
80
82
83
Based on 2011 methodolodgy
SEN English
SEN mathematics
75
74
61
62
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Attendance
Persistent Absence
94.82 94.74 94.70 94.79
1.8
1.7
* based on the schools that took the test
1.5
1.4
What more can
governors do?
The crucial need is to ensure leaders focus on improving the
quality of teaching. Good assessment is the bridge between
teaching and learning.
• Take a group of 50 teachers:
– Students taught by the most effective teacher in that
group of 50 teachers learn in six months what those taught
by the average teacher learn in a year
– Students taught by the least effective teacher in that group
of 50 teachers will take two years to achieve the same
learning (Hanushek & Rivkin, 2006)
• And furthermore:
– In the classrooms of the most effective teachers, students
from disadvantaged backgrounds learn at the same rate as
those from advantaged backgrounds (Hamre & Pianta,
2005).
26
Thank you for listening
Are there any questions ?