Transcript Slide 1

NAIGS Conference
6 July 2006
Stratford upon Avon
Ian Richardson HMI
Specialist Adviser for Science
[email protected]
Overview
Section 5 inspections
Subject inspections
The state of science
Section 5 Inspections
Section 5 Inspections
Inspections occur at a greatly increased rate.
All maintained schools inspected every 3 years
instead of every 6.
More up to date reports for parents.
Focus on Every child matters
Be healthy: for example, helping learners to
adopt healthy lifestyles, build their selfesteem, eat and drink well and lead active
lives
Stay safe: for example, keeping learners
safe from bullying, harassment and other
dangers
Focus on Every child matters
Enjoy and achieve: for example, enabling
learners to make good progress in their work
and personal development and to enjoy their
education
Make a positive contribution: for example,
ensuring that learners understand their rights
and responsibilities, are listened to, and
participate in the life of the community
Focus on Every child matters
Achieve economic well-being: for example,
helping pupils to gain the skills and knowledge
needed for future employment.
Process of Section 5 Inspections
Starting point – School Self Evaluation
How well does the school know itself and what
is the school doing to improve its performance
further?
A SEF ‘a summative document intended to
record the outcomes of an on-going process of
rigorous self-evaluation…’
Self-Evaluation
 An accurate diagnostic document with
conclusions fully supported by the evidence.
 An indication of strengths and weaknesses.
 What is required to effect improvement.
 A SEF is not your self evaluation, it is a
summary of it.
Self-Evaluation
What do we know so far?
 Schools have spent a significant amount of
time in completing them.
 Major exercise in bringing together school
evidence into one document.
Self-Evaluation
 Provides schools with an opportunity to
reflect on performance and clarify
improvement issues.
 Provides invaluable evidence for inspection
teams.
 Gives valuable insight into how well schools
know themselves
Good Self Evaluation Forms
 Clear, precise and evaluative – accurately
capture the performance of the school.
 Set the school’s improvement agenda based
appropriately on areas which require
improvement.
 Widely participative, accurately capture the
knowledge of the school’s workforce
Least effective Evaluation Forms
 Overly descriptive, too often lacking a clear
evaluation of the school’s performance.
 Tend to be lengthy.
 Grades not matching the text.
Least effective Evaluation Forms
 Balance of grades do not match sufficiently
without adequate explanation.
 Insufficient recognition about what is
‘achievement’ as distinct from what are
‘standards.’
Section 5 Feedback
How was it?
 Schools prefer the lighter touch but consider
judgements to be rigorous.
 Reaction to shorter notice is positive (98%).
 94% of schools in autumn term completed a
SEF and this has increased further in spring
term.
Section 5 Feedback
 Headteachers consider that inspection teams
have used SEF well.
 Whilst headteachers consider SEF challenging
and time consuming consider is has been
helpful and they have learned.
 Dialogue between staff and inspectors useful
although intensive and challenging.
Section 5 Feedback
 Inspection judgements considered fair and
accurate (95%).
 7/10ths of headteachers found letters to
pupils helpful.
 4 point judgement scale causing much
debate.
The Future of Inspection
Proportionality
Rationale
 Concentrating limited inspection resources
where they are most needed.
 Trials of proportionate inspections now
ending.
 Planned implementation in September 2006.
Feedback from proportionate
inspection pilot
 Very rigorous
 Meticulous preparation
 On-site observations
 Focused meetings
 Listening to children
 Accurate reports
 Secure basis for improvement
Subject Inspections
Why a subject inspection
programme?
No systematic data on subject quality and
standards from new school inspections
HMCI will still want to report on subjects and
subjects are a DfES priority
Improvement in standards requires a focus on
subject teaching, learning and assessment
What is a Subject Inspection?
It gathers information and evaluate subject
provision and will focus on a specific issue.
It starts from the school’s self evaluation.
Each visit also addresses ‘Every Child Matters’
and inclusion issues, but through subject.
What Can Schools Expect?
Visits begin with the school’s own self
evaluation. This will help to focus the inspection.
Typically one inspector for one day in a
primary school, two days in a secondary school.
What Can Schools Expect?
In discussion with the school, a programme
will be agreed, usually:
Lesson/ session observation,
Discussion with learners,
What Can Schools Expect?
Scrutiny of work,
Discussion with teachers and subject
leaders
Reading relevant plans and other
documents.
Self evaluation
Self evaluation needs to address the same key
questions.
How well do learners achieve?
How effective are teaching, training and
learning?
Self evaluation
How well do the curriculum, programmes and
activities meet the needs and interests of
learners?
How effective are leadership and management
in raising achievement and supporting all
learners?
Outcomes of the Inspection
A feedback letter or short report to:
Record the findings on the specified
subject issue and survey theme,
Outline strengths and weaknesses and
points for development, using Framework
headings & criteria.
Outcomes of the Inspection
Institutions receive this for their own use,
Are encouraged to share it with all
partners in improvement (SIP, LEAI,
Strategy staff etc),
From September 2006 will be published on
Ofsted website.
The subject programme will
need to:
Produce reports available to the subsequent
institutional inspection team.
Be a major element of general subject
monitoring.
Identify ‘issues’ as well as explore them
Complement the new institutional
inspections.
The State of Science
SECONDARY SCIENCE
Science in secondary schools is going through
a significant period of review and
consequential change.
The government has published ‘Science and
innovation investment framework 2004 –
2014’, which sets out the challenge of
ensuring a strong supply of scientists,
engineers and technologists to support the
higher levels of research and development.
Schools are faced with a tremendous
opportunity to provide courses of study that
meet pupils’ needs, and raise their
engagement in and enjoyment of science.
The first opportunity is offered by the new
range of GCSEs implemented from
September 2006 which are designed to meet
the full range of pupils’ interests and needs.
At the heart of change needs to be a clear
continuum of learning from primary school
through to post-16 learning. At no point on
their learning journey should pupils
encounter a science education that does not
pay regard to their prior learning.
Good teaching builds upon pupils’
achievements and involves planning courses
of study that meet their individual needs.
Too often pupils face the experience of
repeating work from earlier in their education
with insufficient challenge to promote further
learning.
Science and Innovation
Investment Framework 2004-2014
 It is recognised that standards in Key Stage 3 need
to rise such that there should be a continual
improvement in the number of pupils attaining level
6 in the National Curriculum.
 From 2008 there should be an entitlement for all
pupils attaining level 6 to study three separate
sciences in order to increase progression to and
attainment at ‘A’ level science.
Science and Innovation
Investment Framework 2004-2014
 The Key stage 4 programme of study has already
been revised and the specifications for new science
GCSEs have been produced for implementation in
September 2006. These include specifications
describing more vocational qualification routes and
those focussed on science for public understanding.
 The Key Stage 3 programme of study is currently
being revised as are the specifications for ‘A’ levels
both for implementation in September 2008.
Investment Framework 2004-2014:
Next Steps.
 Achieve year on year increases in the numbers of
young people taking A levels in physics, chemistry
and mathematics so that by 2014 entries to A level
physics are 35,000 (currently 24,094); chemistry A
level entries are 37,000 (currently 33,164); and
mathematics A level entries are 56,000 (currently
46,037).
Investment Framework 2004-2014:
Next Steps.
 Continually improve the number of pupils getting at
least level 6 at the end of Key Stage 3 (11-14 year
olds).
 Continually improve the number of pupils achieving
A*-B and A*-C grades in two science GCSEs.
Investment Framework 2004-2014:
Next Steps.
 Step up recruitment, retraining and retention of
physics, chemistry and mathematics specialist
teachers so that by 2014 25 per cent of science
teachers have a physics specialism (compared to 19
per cent currently), 31 per cent of science teachers
have a chemistry specialism (compared to 25 per
cent currently)
Strengths in the subject
 Good collaboration between agencies concerned with
science
 Revision of programmes of study at Key Stages 3 and
4 to promote engagement and enjoyment of pupils
 Clear advice and support to teachers in preparation
for curriculum change
 A strongly developing culture in science that
encourages focus on the needs of individuals and on
successful learning.
Strengths in the subject
 Effective planning for progression including the
development of science enquiry
 Thorough monitoring and evaluation of teaching and
learning used to inform planning
 Lively and energetic teaching guided by clear
learning objectives that provide appropriate
challenge for all pupils
 Involvement of pupils in decision making and
assessment leading to effective feedback to pupils
Weaknesses and barriers to
be overcome
 Inadequate analysis of the impact of teaching on the
achievement of pupils
 Resistance to change in which schools are not taking
the opportunity to select courses appropriate to the
needs of their pupils.
Weaknesses and barriers to
be overcome
 High levels of staff turn over and difficulties in
recruiting appropriately qualified staff; science has
the largest number of unfilled teacher vacancies
(2001 – 1.6%; 2006 – 0.9%; 2006 – 210 vacancies)
 Subject leaders and teachers who are insufficiently
engaged in self evaluation and the effective
monitoring of the impact they are having on pupils’
learning
Weaknesses and barriers to
be overcome
 Poor accommodation and resources in some schools
restricting the range of science activities in which
pupils can engage. (1/6 judged inadequate)
PRIMARY SCIENCE
Strengths in science
 Planning for science that makes good
connections with other subject areas and
develops cross-curricular themes effectively
 Science activities that include a good range
of learning opportunities and styles, and have
at their heart the active engagement of
pupils in scientific enquiry (Sc1)
Strengths in science
 Thorough evaluation of teaching and analysis
of available data to evaluate the success of
teaching, identify needs for CPD and to
inform planning
 Assessment systems that have an impact on
learning by identifying knowledge and
understanding of individual pupils and
informing them of what they need to do to
improve
Strengths in science
 Enjoyment of pupils and their active
engagement in science activities, where they
research topics, come up with their own
ideas, exchange views with other pupils and
teacher, plan and carry out investigations and
evaluate their work and the work of others.
Weaknesses and barriers to be
overcome
 The scientific knowledge and understanding
of teachers and co-ordinators are not well
evaluated or supported, and teachers do not
have ready access to materials to use to
carry out self-evaluation
 Insufficient professional development to help
teachers develop better knowledge and
understanding and to promote effective ways
of teaching science
Weaknesses and barriers to be
overcome
 Weak leadership of science by co-ordinators
who are often not subject specialists and do
not receive appropriate training and support
to promote their effectiveness
 Lack of monitoring and evaluation to ensure
good standards, identify weaknesses for the
focus CPD
The elements coming together to make
science engaging and enjoyable include:
effective planning
good subject knowledge
science enquiry
clear objectives
lively and energetic teaching
good classroom management
a variety of activities including ICT
appropriate pace
challenge and differentiation
involvement of pupils in decisions
effective feedback to pupils
National Curriculum tests have shown
standards at the end of Key Stage 2 to
have stayed the same since 2001, with
around 86% of pupils attaining Level 4
Two thirds of teaching is now good or
better and there is little difference
between the quality of teaching seen in
different key stages
Teachers’ command of the subject, lesson
planning and teaching methods continue
to be good or better in two thirds of
schools but are well below other core
subjects.
A recent study "Primary Horizons, Starting Out
in Science" (Wellcome Trust, 2005) sought to
research teachers' views about primary science.
The findings of the report show that teachers
are less confident about teaching science than
English and Mathematics.
Primary Strategy INSET and support has
focussed strongly on the teaching of literacy
and numeracy.
Science INSET provision is patchy, depending on
whether a local authority has anyone who can
deliver this, and upon the location of Science
Learning Centres and other establishments
offering CPD.
The target-setting process in schools is
statutory only for English and Mathematics at
Key Stage 2, targets being optional for science.
Thus the focus of school improvement plans,
and hence the funding for teachers' CPD, is
often around literacy and numeracy.
The Wellcome report also cites lack of
knowledge, expertise and training in science as
the main issue facing the primary teachers
questioned.
This is backed up by the true/false quiz:
Whilst primary teachers scored better
than their teaching assistants, there was
still an alarming frequency of lack of
understanding of basic science concepts.
For example:
Approximately one third of the teachers
questioned believed that plant material is
made from substances found in the soil,
because plants get their food, via their
roots, from the soil.
A small number of teachers, but
nevertheless a worrying number, thought
that rain comes from holes in clouds (9%)
or that it is because of clouds sweating
(6%).
Misconceptions about physical processes
figured highly, as one might expect:
29% of teachers thinking that batteries
have electricity inside them,
14% thinking that no forces act on an
object at rest,
14% believing that light travels from your eyes
to an object to enable you to see it.
There was confusion about pitch and volume of
sounds, and much confusion about the cause of
seasons and the phases of the moon.
6% of teachers thought the Earth is at the
centre of the solar system.
Teachers have lower expectations of what
pupils can achieve in science than in other
core subjects
There has been little attention to the
development of literacy and numeracy
through science
Assessment is less thorough and
constructive than in other core subjects;
only one third of pupils show a good
understanding of how they can improve in
science compared with half in English
There is improved planning for and
incorporation of scientific enquiry
Leadership and management in science
are good or better in just over half of
schools, a proportion lower than in
mathematics and English that has not
changed significantly since 1998.
Please contact Ian Richardson with any
comments or queries:
[email protected]