npqsl final assessment submission form for participants€¦ · npqsl final assessment submission...

Confidential (September 18)

1 © NPQonline

NPQSL Final Assessment Submission Form for participants

Please complete the white boxes below. Please write in Calibri point 11.

Participant Name Olivia McNeil

Provider Name Alliance Academy Trust

Date of first day of NPQSL programme 9th October 2017

Teacher reference number (TRN) 1234567

Assessor Name or Code A366

Submission Score 28 Pass = 20 Maximum = 28

Date of assessment: 15.10.18 If moderated, date:

Overall Judgement: Pass

Assessor’s overall feedback statement You provide compelling evidence of your ability to lead school improvement with commendable commitment to the pupils, staff and stakeholders in your school. Strategy and improvement You demonstrate attention to detail when identifying an appropriate improvement for your project. The decision to address attainment for Prior Middle Attaining pupils was aligned with the aspiration to further enhance the teaching of reading in your school. This was achieved by initially focussing on inference and decoding skills. You evaluate relevant tools such as NCA to support the implementation of change. The Assessing School Performance tool was successfully utilised. Teaching and curriculum excellence Based on clear evidence, you successfully deployed a range of relevant techniques, for example, book scrutinies, pupil voice and planning scrutinies. Your sponsor testifies to your effective leadership having a positive impact on outcomes for teaching and learning. You demonstrate a thorough understanding of leading change, using research such as Fullan and Boyle and Kotter’s 8 steps change, applying the models to support most effective change. You robustly evaluated the project using the information you gathered and the new information which emerged. Effective implementation of pupil intervention and the utilisation of year leaders to supervise the quality of teaching to grow the curriculum provides strong evidence of your commitment to optimise the quality of teaching learning. Leading with impact You demonstrate a positive and high level of understanding of how to successfully lead a team to implement improvements. For example, your understanding of thinking styles, which highlighted your personal challenge of leading unpredictability, strengthened your effectiveness, showing how you are able


2 © NPQonline

to apply research findings to your leadership behaviours. A suitable and clear Communication Plan provides relevant evidence of promoting the need for improving the teaching and learning of reading, for example, by adopting Simon Pottens’ ideas for effective communication steps. Working in partnership Your sponsor testifies to your astute forging of partnerships which were selected to maximise the benefit to the pupils and the wider school. As a result, you embedded sustainable changes to the teaching and learning of reading. You established positive partnership with, for example, the governors, the infant feeder school and the PTA. Managing resources and risks You have a clear understanding of the importance of measuring risk. Your Business Case shows consideration of efficiency and effectiveness and subsequent implementation of, for example, the external training provider. The impact of this arrangement was highly positive and cost effective. You suitably assess risk. You designed a Risk Management Plan which minimises the risk of wasted funds and subsequent impact on teaching and learning. For example, you recorded the English lead’s training sessions so the content could be revisited and any absent staff could hear the same message at another time. Increasing capability You are fully aware of the potential impact of effective CPD for yourself and others. You exploited Lucy Adam’s performance review process to optimise your effectiveness as a leader of improvement. Your Action Plan is clearly designed from analyses outcomes, concluding the decision to empower and engage staff in the implementation of a new structure for teaching reading. You demonstrate an understanding of the importance of modifying established plans to meet changing needs; making suitable adaptations such as Lesson Study to sustain the changes. The English CPD is embedded as a result of your strong interactions with stakeholders and feedback from staff.

You present robust evidence of a successful project which has resulted in positive and sustainable improvements to outcomes for pupils and staff in your school.

Judgements and scores for assessed sections

Pass: The participant successfully demonstrates all of the criteria, and attains at least 70% (20) of the available marks. Fail: The participant has not provided relevant evidence for one or more criteria or has scored 19 marks or less.

Borderline: The participant falls just below the pass mark by no more than 5% of the available marks (scores 18 or 19, and scores 1 or 2 in each of the criteria). Submission will be re-assessed.

To meet the standard, the participant must be assessed as 1 or 2 ‘criterion successfully demonstrated’ in each of the fourteen criteria, and overall, to score 20 or more.

NPQSL Participant

score

SAI TCE LWI WiP MRR IC Total

4 8 4 4 4 4 28

Maximum marks

4 8 4 4 4 4 28

Criterion scores: 0 = no relevant evidence 1 = partially demonstrated 2 = fully demonstrated


3 © NPQonline

Section A: Contextual Statement

In this section, list the titles of your school improvement project, which has taken at least two terms, Working across the school to a) reduce variation in pupil progress and attainment b) improve the efficiency and effectiveness of teaching. Briefly describe the nature of the variation in pupil progress and attainment your project was designed to improve, and the improvement in the efficiency and effectiveness of teaching your task was designed to improve. List where the assessor will find the key supporting documents; This page is contextual and is not assessed. Words written on this page do not count towards the limit of 5,000 words overall, however, please restrict what you write to this page only.

Title of your school improvement project: To explore and improve inference and decoding skills in reading for prior middle attaining children.

The area in which your school improvement reduced variation in pupil progress and attainment:

Reading skills for middle prior attaining children.

The efficiency and effectiveness of teaching your school improvement project was designed to address:

The teaching of reading in years 3 to 6.

Supporting document Location: page no.; position on page; reference/ title

Raw data analysis Page 18 and 19

Pupil performance data Page 22

Sponsor comments 1 & 2

Communications plan Page 23 and 24

Business case Page 25

Risk management plan Page 26

Optional additional information

Your role Leader of LKS2

Your school type Size, phase, state/ independent, etc.

Waterside Community School is a 2-form entry Junior School which is rated as outstanding by Ofsted. Certainly, in terms of end of Key Stage 2 outcomes, Waterside is performing at above national average and our results are consistently high with minimal significant pupil variation in progress and attainment. There are approximately 260 children on roll and 9 class teachers, as well as a focus group teacher for each year group who provides targeted intervention to the 8 or 9 weakest children, in that year group, for maths and English.

Role of sponsor (whose comments are below)

Assistant head, Acting head teacher.

Word count: maximum 5,000 not including appendices or sponsor comments

Overview SAI TCE LWI WiP MRR IC Total

496 1007 1289 499 895 310 487 4983


4 © NPQonline

Sponsor comments 1 & 2

Please ask your sponsor to comment in the box below on these two assessment criteria: 3.2.1 Evaluates research into, and examples of, leadership and motivation and/or influence and applies findings to motivate or influence others across the school. 4.2.1 Establishes and sustains partnerships that build capability and/or improve performance in priority areas for the school

How has the participant used the information they found, and the examples they have seen, of good leadership, motivation and influence to motivate and influence others across the school? How has the participant created partnerships which are improving school capability and performance? Sponsor to write comments in this expandable box. Motivates and influences others Delete or use as in-section headings Olivia has been pro-active in researching, and evaluating, various models of leadership, and has discussed these with me on numerous occasions. She has also taken good advantage of the breadth and depth of leadership experience within the school’s senior team and has frequently sought advice and counsel about her project. Olivia recognised early on in her project that, in order to bring about whole-school improvements to the teaching of reading, she would need to engage and motivate all stakeholders. Through staff meetings, surveys, group and 1:1 discussion, Olivia has taken care to ensure that pupil and staff voices have been heard at all stages of her project. She formed a very strong partnership with a colleague who was leading an NPQSL project on improving writing, and with the school’s English lead. In partnership with these colleagues, Olivia secured very high-quality CPD from an outstanding external English specialist, which has greatly deepened teachers’ understanding as to how to plan effectively to improve children’s higher-order reading skills. Olivia and the above colleagues have ensured that the training, which is still ongoing, has been continually adapted and crafted according to emerging needs. Staff have appreciated this and, as a result, have been keen to engage. This means that the significant changes which have resulted from Olivia’s NPQSL project will be sustainable. Partnerships which improve performance In addition to the above partnerships, Olivia successfully used the partnership links we have with our main infant feeder school and the year 7 team in our local secondary school, to look at how reading is taught in years 2 and 7. As a result, she has fed their best practice into the development of how we teach reading here at Waterside. She has also worked in partnership with the PTA to secure funding for new reading books. In addition, she has reported to governors about her project. Olivia has been appointed as the school’s English co-lead for the 2018-19 academic year, so that she can continue to build on her whole-school leadership of reading.


5 © NPQonline

Section B: Submission

Please write your final assessment submission in the white boxes below (Overview plus six leadership curriculum content areas), and then add appendices, or extracts at the end of the document. The seven boxes in this section do not need to each be the same length, but you must not exceed an overall word count of 5,000 words, excluding appendices. You should provide evidence for every numbered criterion. Failure to provide relevant evidence for even one criterion will result in a fail. Please write the word count for each assessed area at the end of Section B.

Section B

Ove

rvie

w

Write a summary overview of your project and the impact this had on pupil outcomes.

Recently, Outcomes at Waterside Community School (WCS) have been consistently, significantly above national averages. (e.g. 2017, 98% of pupils achieved Expected Standard (ES) in reading (34% greater depth - GD), 94% in writing, 96% in GPS and 97% in maths). Closer analysis of key pupil groups confirmed no variation between them, i.e. disadvantaged and SEN pupils did as well as their peers. However, our aspirational staff felt that middle prior attaining pupils (MPAs) had the potential to achieve GD in reading. Analysis on NCA Tools, revealed that our pupils were effective in answering literal questions, but less so with those requiring inference. Interestingly, a survey showed, teachers felt they taught inferential skills very effectively, however, pupil voice, book and planning scrutiny indicated otherwise. Improving the efficiency and effectiveness of teaching higher order reading skills and supporting MPAs to achieve GD, became my focus. Beginning by delivering a staff meeting, I shared the rationale for the project and encouraged teachers to use this opportunity to further develop their skills. To gain buy-in from all teachers, I got approval from the Executive Headteacher to employ the services of an external English specialist (James Green-JG). Having briefed him on my focus, he delivered 2 training sessions developing GD reading skills. Teachers reported feeling inspired by JG’s input; I encouraged them to try out some of his strategies in new planning and then feedback on the impact. During drop-ins, I noticed some teachers had utilised these new teaching skills more easily so I encouraged them to become part of my English working party (EWP) and to supervise and support others. At the next staff meeting, teachers spoke enthusiastically about the positive impact these strategies had made on pupil learning. The given time to plan and feedback had empowered teams to evaluate what worked well and to share pupil progress. Staff also reported increased engagement and up-levelling of their own knowledge and skills.


6 © NPQonline

Contrastingly, staff explained that, although MPAs were improving in inferring details, this was reliant on the text being read to them. Feedback provided evidence that the barrier to reading was their decoding. Consequently, whilst progress in inference had been made, overall reading progress and ability to answer questions independently still required improvement. My project had made a positive impact on children’s thinking skills but could be adapted to focus on decoding, to increase progress. I have begun to make these changes, but this will be a longer-term project. Changes include:

• Interventions for weak spellers and decoders (dyslexia action)

• Increasing home reading (Only 42.93 % of pupils reported that they either read every

day or most days at home)

• Adaptation of homework to allow for more home-reading.

• Whole class teaching of phonics and spelling rules.

The impact of my project can be evidenced in this year’s SATS results and in the teacher assessment progress of the MPAs. The improvement in the effectiveness and efficiency of teaching can be seen in the planning and up-levelling of questioning (Appendix 1).

PART A Reduce variation in pupil progress and attainment Supporting documents

required

Stra

tegy

an

d Im

pro

vem

en

t

SAI Final assessment criteria 1.2.1 Deploys statistical and/or data analysis concepts to identify variation in pupil performance and contributing factors, applying the findings to design of own plans 1.2.2 Evaluates research into, and examples of, implementing change successfully and applies findings to the design and implementation of own plans

Score

Raw Data Analysis

2

2

How have you analysed data and statistics to identify variation in pupil performance, and the reasons for this, drawing up plans to implement change and improve current practice across the school?

I have used a range of research methods. Quantitative methods included analysing the school’s outcomes and assessment information on the Assessing School Performance (ASP) and NCA Tools websites. Also, scrutinising Target-Tracker (TT) teacher assessment (WCS’s assessment system). Qualitative research methods included staff surveys, pupil voice and drop-ins.

To find a focus for my project, I discussed the priorities in the coming year with the Senior Leadership Team (SLT). They discussed teachers’ concerns on poor reading skills: this was a key point on the School’s Development plan. To look for data to support these concerns, I analysed WCS’s historic outcomes on ASP. My scrutiny confirmed that outcomes in all areas have been


7 © NPQonline

frequently, significantly, above national averages. I looked at comparisons between WCS and national benchmarks and considered all pupil groups (Appendix 1).

Identify variation in pupil performance However, it is important not to focus on a veneer of success but to drill down into the truth of these results. Looking at the DfE comparing schools website, I compared our pupils’ prior attainment with their end of KS2 results. Our MPAs were all meeting the ES, however, only 12% were reaching GD (Appendix 1). This is minimally different from national benchmarks but being aspirational, I wanted to encourage MPAs to reach for GD. I looked for a correlation in these results, across other cohorts. Analysis of TT (Appendix 3) showed that there was a whole school pattern of MPAs reaching “working within” (equivalent of ES) and not reaching for the higher “secure” (equivalent of GD). However, I questioned whether our MPAs had the cognitive ability to access this GD thinking, so looked at their non-verbal assessments to see whether they had the capacity to improve (Appendix 1). Clearly some did have this capacity. From my analyses I concluded that, although there was no significant variation between pupil groups, there was scope to increase progress with our MPAs. Consequently, I searched for contributing factors hindering this progression, firstly investigating the areas of reading where our MPAs were less successful. Using NCA tools I looked at the question level analysis from the SATS paper. This showed that our cohort exceeded national expectations in all areas except 2:

1. Making and justifying inferences from the text. 2. Explaining how information is related and contributes to meaning.

Although this is only applicable to one cohort, this information correlates with:

• qualitative feedback I have gained from other year groups (Appendix 1 and 2).

• 2016-17 moderation of writing from external moderators (who suggested pupils needed a greater awareness of their readers and needed to spend more time analysing author choices for effect).

• what WCS teachers were reporting on current pupils in day to day lessons.

• liaison with a local secondary school, who commented that pupils were less competent in verbalising inferential thoughts than they would have liked.

Looking for the contributing factors for this, I looked at the structure of our English teaching: the weekly change in topics did not allow for immersion in a text and therefore hindered understanding of the literature at a deeper level. It was clear that the structure needed to change to allow children more time to comprehend inferential details. Next, I collected raw data about questioning in reading lessons (Appendix 1): teacher questioning was focused on information retrieval and writing in full sentences, neither of which impact upon a child’s ability to infer details from a text. Questions that were deductive in nature were directed at the high prior attainers: clearly a contributing factor for poor comprehension amongst MPAs was lack of exposure to GD thinking. Additionally, pupil voice (Appendix 2) revealed that comprehension lessons didn’t have much explicit teaching and pupils were left to work independently. Another contributing factor was clearly teacher knowledge on teaching these skills in an engaging and differentiated way.


8 © NPQonline

Implements change To lead staff successfully, it was important to have a change model to refer to, therefore I researched many models of change. Fullan and Boyle created a “Change leadership in practice” framework and this was useful for me as it began at the bottom of the pyramid with “professional learning”. I believe leaders becoming learners is a key school improvement principal. School leaders cannot make worthwhile changes if they do not strive to continuously learn and develop. However, I felt the structure of Kotter’s “8 step change model” was more intuitive and therefore would be better applied to my project. Kotter’s model, in combination with various case studies, allowed me to understand some barriers to change that I could face. Specifically the case study on improving writing skills (Changing colleagues' practice - Helen, small primary -National College for Teaching and Learning) which demonstrated the need to “increase urgency” (Kotter’s step 1) and give everyone a reason to change whilst also sharing the responsibility, so that nobody feels they are at fault. Reflecting on WCS’s success in many areas, I did not want teachers to feel that their immense workload was being disregarded nor their success unrecognised. Therefore, I decided that building guiding teams, to lead and support others as well as having clear communication for buy in, would be key (Step 2). To design my plans, it was important to gauge current levels of staff understanding. I created a survey that focused on knowledge of key terms, staff confidence levels and barriers to good teaching of reading (Appendix 1). This raw data showed me that staff had serious misconceptions about inference and although the average score for confidence in teaching inference was 3.5 (1 not at all confident, 5 very confident), I determined this was not a true reflection of staff abilities through a book scrutiny. Also, the frequency of reading comprehension lessons was limited, and the quality of questioning was unchallenging (Appendix 1). After gathering evidence on areas to improve, I developed a vision (Step 3) in collaboration with all stakeholders so that everyone would be engaged and buy in to this change (Step 3). The evidence and discussions with all stakeholders, along with Kotter’s structure, enabled me to design and implement a clear action and communications plan. Assessor use only

1. SAI Questions to aid assessment Has this participant:

• Used a range of statistical analysis methods to identify variations in pupil performance?

• Used a range of analytical concepts to draw conclusions from available data which identify and explain variations in pupil performance?

• Identified the contributing factors to the variations they have found?

• Found out about research into implementing change?

• Used examples of implementing change successfully to inform their own plans for improvement?

Teac

hin

g

and

C

urr

icu

lum

Ex

celle

nce

TCE Final assessment criteria 2.2.1 Evaluates teaching quality across a school accurately, exploiting appropriate techniques to gather evidence 2.2.2 Analyses different leadership/management

Score

Pupil Performance data

2

2

https://www.npqonline.co.uk/pluginfile.php/16959/mod_folder/content/0/NPQSL/SAI/Case_study_3-Changing_colleagues_practice_-_Helen_-_small%20primary_%28NCTL%29.pdf?forcedownload=1


9 © NPQonline

strategies aimed at improving pupil progress, attainment and behaviour and applies findings to own plans. 2.2.3 Designs, implements and evaluates an improvement project that reduces variation in pupil progress and/or attainment across the school 2.2.4 Exploits opportunities to develop and grow the school curriculum

2

2

How have you used suitable techniques to accurately evaluate teaching quality across the school? How have you used examples of successful leadership to plan your improvement project which improves the curriculum and reduces variation in pupil progress and attainment? Evaluates teaching quality McKinsey (2007), explained that “The single most important determinant of pupil outcomes is the quality of teaching.” Therefore, it was vital to accurately assess the quality of teaching at WCS. I gathered this evidence using a variety of techniques:

• Pupil voice

• Drop-ins

• Planning scrutinies

• Book scrutinies

• Teacher voice

WCS previously taught English in a 5-day structure:

• Mondays: Comprehension on new text.

• Tuesdays: Grammar.

• Wednesdays: Planning

• Thursdays: ‘Big-write’

• Fridays: Edit and improve. This structure contributed to lower-level reading skills in MPAs (See SAI). To ascertain pupils’ views on this, I administered a pupil-voice questionnaire (Appendix 2). Pupils’ responses were overwhelmingly negative. Some reported that when an answer was wrong they didn’t know why and were never given the chance to improve. This format required change if we wanted pupils to develop in these skills. An EEF report (2017-Teacher Observation) found that formal observations made no positive impact on teaching or pupil outcomes (perhaps due to the forced nature of these situations). I therefore decided to conduct informal drop-ins to observe an every-day example of how effectively reading was taught. I focused on the questioning taking place and found overwhelming evidence that most questioning was at the lower end of Bloom’s Taxonomy (2001). As a result, pupils were not being given opportunities to infer, reflect or analyse.

My subsequent planning and book scrutiny (Appendix 1) confirmed there was insufficient evidence of higher-order questioning. This raised doubts about whether teachers had the necessary knowledge to teach GD reading, despite that they had expressed confidence that they did (see SAI).


10 © NPQonline

I discussed these findings with SLT: we agreed that there was potential to improve planning and teaching. I then had to consider what specific changes needed to be made, and how best to elicit these. I knew that change is most effective when all stakeholders are involved. This view is supported by the three main change management models of Lewin, McKinsey and Kotter. Therefore, I wrote a communications plan which included all stakeholders. In his study of the world’s best performing school systems McKinsey (2007) concluded that “The only way to improve outcomes is to improve instruction”. This research and evidence-based report suggested practical ways that schools could improve pupils’ outcomes

• Placing coaches in schools to support teachers

• Enabling teachers to learn from each other

• Setting higher expectations of student outcomes

Ultimately, teachers are at the heart of pupil outcomes and for maximum impact it would be the teachers in whom I needed to motivate change. I needed to utilise leadership strategies to change practice in a positive and structured way. Successful leadership strategies rely on partnership and so, I decided it would be prudent to utilise year leaders as a way of supervising the quality of teaching. As a national teaching school, I knew the leaders at our school had great strengths and would lead their teams effectively. Leadership strategies Completing Anthony Gregorc’s Thinking styles questionnaire, I established that I was a concrete sequential thinker. This enabled me to reflect on aspects of leadership that may pose a personal challenge, such as working with unpredictable or disorganised people. Understanding my weaknesses allowed me to prepare for them. Referring to Kotter’s model, I established a sense of urgency by using our SATS data and the question analysis to demonstrate the area in which we could make rapid improvement. Secondly, I asked JG to be our expert. He was already known to our staff as he had previously conducted WCS’s SATS writing moderation. After discussing JG’s impact with our year 6 staff, I took my ideas to our SLT, believing that JG could have a wider impact with our staff. In agreement, we employed JG who gave two INSETs on the importance of immersion in quality texts. Identifying those who took JG’s ideas on-board in lessons, I created my English Working Party (EWP) whose own expertise and credibility within each year team would enable successful change. I wanted to change the structure of the English planning to give our MPAs a greater chance to immerse themselves in a text, so I communicated my vision to SLT. This was received well and so I shared my ideas with my colleagues through a staff meeting. This was the hardest part of the process: the first training session was met with confusion. I was ambiguous in what I wanted to achieve, and staff couldn’t see how this applied to them. I met with my EWP and discussed how I could be clearer in communicating our vision. Discussions led to creating exemplar planning which would clarify my vision for the new planning. After the next staff meeting, teachers reported feeling motivated and empowered. Drop-ins and planning evidenced that teachers had developed their own skills, which led to reduced variation in children’s understanding of inference (Appendix 3). This was our first short term win: In a mid-point discussion about impact, teachers articulated the positive impact this new fluid planning structure had on pupils’ ability to


11 © NPQonline

articulate inferential thoughts, upon pupils’ work and teachers cited evidence from books that GD skills among MPAs were improving. Teachers also reported improvement in their own understanding of GD. What I hadn’t anticipated was the impact upon other areas of the curriculum. Teachers reported that pupils were transferring their inferential skills to foundation subjects. Another pupil voice revealed that pupils felt more confident completing comprehensions due to the increased time on each text. However, an unforeseen barrier was identified. Teachers reported that when a text was read to the pupils they could apply this new deeper thinking but when left to read a text themselves, pupils were unable to access the learning in the same way. It was clear there was no automaticity or fluency in reading and their working memories were so focused on decoding the text there was incapacity to simultaneously fully understand the meaning. This issue had not previously been identified as the literal questions required a surface level text understanding. When pupils were asked to dig deeper into the text it was clear that they had not understand the language being used. This issue meant that, whilst I had reduced variation in ability to answer inferential questions, a new strategy was required to increase decoding ability and understand the text meaning. This was a turning point in my project; my original focus required expansion to include basic decoding and phonological awareness. And so the process of change continued at the point of creating a new vision, focused around phonics and decoding - this will be continued into the next academic year. I believe that, without this model of change, I may have missed key steps in my leadership project and been unable to support my colleagues in improving teaching and learning. Develop curriculum The biggest change to the curriculum was the introduction of a more fluid planning which has provided a greater profile for reading skills. The resulting increased opportunities for inference skills alongside reduced variation in ability to verbally answer these questions, has also increased staff knowledge and confidence as higher order questioning is required for planning. The other whole school change has been homework. This has now been reduced in favour of expecting children to read 5 times a week. This aimed to increase the profile of reading amongst children and their parents. Due to the identified lack of decoding skills and understanding of vocabulary, I began to adapt the teaching of reading, spelling and phonics. This is a longer-term goal, but I have begun by introducing a word rule of the week linked to daily spellings, extended reading times for children both independently and listening to a class book read by the teacher. Additionally, I have increased the profile of ‘Word Aware’, a programme to develop semantic links with new vocabulary.


12 © NPQonline

Assessor use only

2. TCE Questions to aid assessment Has this participant:

• Used a range of appropriate techniques to evaluate teaching quality across the school?

• Used a range of leadership and management strategies in their own plans which have proved successful elsewhere?

• Reflected on successful leadership strategies which improve pupil progress, attainment and behaviour?

• Designed, implemented and evaluated a project which has reduced variation in pupil progress or attainment across the school?

• Developed or improved the school curriculum?

Lead

ing

wit

h Im

pac

t

LWI Final assessment criteria 3.2.1 Evaluates research into, and examples of, leadership and motivation and/or influence and applies findings to motivate or influence others across the school 3.2.2 Designs and implements a communications plan to promote and/or defend plans, drawing on campaigns and techniques used by other schools

Score (Sponsor comments 1 – included in Section A) & Communications Plan

2

2

How have you found out about leadership, motivation and influence, using what you have discovered to motivate and influence others across the school? How have you used the experiences of other schools to promote and defend the project you planned? Motivates and influences John Kotter (Leading change) explains that “Successful transformation is 70-90% leadership and only 10 – 30% management.” This distinction was a difficult concept to understand, however through research and discussions with SLT, I discovered that leadership is about creating a vision for improvement and communicating this to motivate others. Whereas, management is the organisation: understanding and controlling policies, procedures, timetables and budgets. The people who will encounter the change and their attitudes towards said change are the key to any success. I needed to communicate my vision effectively to motivate the teachers effectively. Chanelle Kay (Harbour Oak School) explained that that there were several key aspects of communication that were crucial to success: Raising the profile of your project with all stakeholders, creating aspiring champions of the project (people who will fight for your project) and clear signalling of aims and pupil groups. I took these ideas and tried to incorporate them into my own communications plan. I wanted to reach all stakeholders and ensure everyone shared my vision but also created my EWP to be my champions. It was important to focus everyone on the aim of reducing variation for MPAs. (Appendix 4). Personally, I know that change can be uncomfortable and that teachers are hugely overworked and there is currently a national debate about teacher workload. Therefore, I knew that my biggest hurdle would be bringing people on board with my vision (not making them feel what they were doing was wrong, but allowing them to see that, with minimal change, we could increase efficiency and effectiveness). To be successful in motivating and influencing others, I followed Geoff Southworth’s advice (Modelling, monitoring and dialogue). He discussed that to


13 © NPQonline

successfully lead others you must model the desired behaviour. In my case, I produced exemplar lesson plans and asked my EWP to model high-quality lessons to their teams. Another aspect was expecting leaders to model willingness to become learners themselves. I never presumed to know all the answers or criticise others, I did however suggest there were ways for everyone to improve and worked with others to make this happen. I knew that communication is only effective when there is a 2-way-dialogue. I had to listen to staff feedback and adapt my project as necessary. Using JG as an expert, this allowed me to put myself in the position of learner alongside my colleagues and demonstrated that I was willing to learn new strategies, creating a community of learners. The monitoring part of leadership was something already securely in place at WCS. I used processes that were already in place (book scrutinies, drop ins, pupil voice and staff questionnaires) to monitor progress. However, the most valuable feedback came through dialogue. This took many forms: feedback after drop ins and observations, questions about how to improve or what was working well, 1:1 coaching based on improving practice. Ultimately, the project has positively influenced staff practice as can be seen from the change in questioning and the improved reading SATS results (Appendix 1).

Assessor use only

3. LWI Questions to aid assessment Has this participant:

• Researched and found examples of leadership, motivation and influence?

• Motivated and influenced others across the school?

• Found out about the communication campaigns and techniques used by other schools?

• Planned suitable methods of communication to promote and defend their project?

Wo

rkin

g in

Par

tner

ship

WIP Final assessment criteria 4.2.1 Establishes and sustains partnerships that build capability and/or improve performance in priority areas for the school 4.2.2 Evaluates the effectiveness of partnerships in terms of pupil progress and/or attainment

Score (Sponsor comments 2 – included in section A)

2

2

How have you established effective partnerships which improve capability and performance across the school, consequently improving pupil achievement? Establishes partnerships

I have established effective partnerships within WCS and externally to improve teacher capability and performance. I recognise the importance of creating these partnerships, but it is crucial that for long term impact, they are sustainable. Thankfully, I am able to do this, as I have been made leader for English for 2018/19. Initially, I was able to liaise with the local secondary school. Through a transition meeting, they gave their opinions on the abilities of our pupils. I was able to observe their lessons and understand the skills our pupils would need, going forwards. Ultimately, this partnership has proved powerful in up-levelling teacher skills and has meant our pupils have benefitted from improved teacher knowledge of GD reading into KS3. Within WCS, the most impactful partnership was with SLT: We met regularly for updates and support. They are the driving force of school initiatives and there is a wealth of knowledge among them, therefore, their experience meant that they were able to support my understanding of leading change and give me to access different stakeholders (e.g. PTA/governors).


14 © NPQonline

To up-level teachers’ skills, I engaged my EWP, who were teachers who had demonstrated great practice in my drop-ins. I listened to their feedback on teaching and asked them to reflect on what their colleagues did well. This meant we now shared a vision on improvement. The EWP planned the English for their teams and so could oversee the implementation on new initiatives. Some colleagues needed more support and modelling and these needs were met through 1:1 coaching by myself and the EWP. I also made sure to liaise with the year leaders so that they understood the need for a change and that their teams were not necessarily being given extra work: they were very quickly on board with my changes. Feedback from EWP and year leaders led to improved teaching of GD skills. On reflection, the EWP were effective but some teachers, who were not actively engaged in the regular meetings made minimal changes to their practice. If I was able to re-organise my project, I believe a structure whereby teachers met in their PPA to re-plan English together would have been more effective, as all teachers would have input into the planning. As the pupils were the target for change, I created partnerships with them through pupil voice and discussions about their work. They were able to give honest, unbiased opinions about the impact of my project. Moving forwards, I will gain opinions from a wider range of children (I only used a random sample of 6 children per year group and these opinions may not have been reflective of the entire cohort). To improve the quality of texts at school, I built a partnership with the PTA. I took my concerns to them about the limited number of quality texts in the library and reading scheme. Initially, they were hesitant to provide financial assistance in this area as they were keen for the school budget to cover this. Eventually, they agreed to raise £3000 to update these books. I hope to update the reading scheme books in the same way. My external partnership was with JG (see TCE). As a highly qualified and inspiring speaker, staff were more amenable to his suggestions and quickly put his techniques into place. E.g. initiating a 20-minute class reading slot, creating a backstory for characters as a tool for inference. These techniques were successful in making the children use GD reading skills (Appendix 3). Employing JG incurred a high-cost; therefore, it was important that I evaluated how his interaction with staff was improving practice and capability. After 2 staff-training sessions, staff reported that they had gained valuable insight into GD reading but were struggling to apply this to their planning. Therefore, I altered our arrangement with JG and asked him to run a planning session for lower and then upper school. This incurred another expense as it meant 6 teachers at a time were out of class to participate in a targeted planning session with JG but all parties reported a greater understanding in how to apply GD knowledge to planning. To improve capability, I felt it would be valuable to see how JG would teach his style of planning. Each year group had JG teach a lesson from the series of planning they had created with him. Ultimately, the drop-ins I conducted after the planning with JG were far more successful and there was a vast improvement in higher order questioning, both in input and in written work. Children now understood how to read for meaning and could discuss why authors had made certain choices: they had even started mimicking some of these choices in their own writing. The reduction of disparities in attainment were not immediately obvious as this process of changing planning and teaching took some time but the evidence in books allowed for qualitative evidence


15 © NPQonline

of improved progress. Going forwards, it would be beneficial for each team to plan a non-fiction unit so that they have a more rounded view of how these reading techniques can be applied to any topic. Cumulatively, these changes have meant that pupils have exposure to a greater variety of texts, longer time to delve deeply into texts and teachers who have a better understanding of GD reading. This has led to an improvement in pupil achievement (Appendix 3) Assessor use only

4. WIP Questions to aid assessment Has this participant:

• Established and sustained partnerships which build school capacity or improve school performance in important areas for the school?

• Evaluated the effectiveness of the partnerships through improvements in pupil achievement?

PART B Improve the efficiency and effectiveness of teaching

Man

agin

g R

eso

urc

es

and

Ris

ks

MRR Final assessment criteria 5.2.1 Analyses the value for money/cost effectiveness of different options and designs a business case for recommended approach 5.2.2 Implements a risk management plan that systematically assesses, monitors, mitigates and contingency plans for risks

Score

Business case &

Risk Management Plan

2

2

How have you checked the cost-effectiveness of your ideas and anticipated risks in order to draw up a business plan and budget which set out a recommended approach for improvement?

To analyse the value for money of my project I designed a business case (Appendix 5). I checked the cost effectiveness through continuous feedback with all stakeholders: weighing the benefits and impacts of spending against the cost and adjusting as necessary. I implemented a risk management plan to assess and monitor risks (Appendix 6): using a risk matrix to analyse the severity of risks and an appropriate response or contingency plan. The greatest risk was employing JG to provide our training: it relied upon his availability to improve the teaching across the school and also incurred a very high cost. Ultimately, there were no issues with JG’s availability and he provided 4 training sessions which were all well received. In today’s financial pressures, I knew that paying for training for all teachers would be a risk to the school budget. I had to weigh up the cost versus impact. Through the evidence of drop ins and book scrutinies there is a clear improvement in in the effectiveness of teaching inference and therefore I can prove that this training had impact. The data also shows a reduction in variation between prior middle and high attainers achieving GD. To mitigate some of the costs, I was able to offer places in JG’s training sessions to other schools, this meant that of the £1648 cost we were able to earn back £200. Also, to mitigate the risk of sustainability, all teachers attended training. If one teacher was sent on training, this would incur a cost of approximately £150-300 and this impact would rely on one individual cascading knowledge and remaining at the school long enough to make changes. Also, I recorded JG’s training sessions so that any new staff can hear the same messages. Ultimately, the planning changes will mean that the staff are able to continue to work in this new way.


16 © NPQonline

Assessor use only

5. MRR Questions to aid assessment Has this participant:

• Considered various options and analysed the value for money and cost-effectiveness of each?

• Designed a business case for a recommended approach?

• Systematically assessed and monitored risks?

• Drawn up contingency plans to mitigate risks in a risk management plan?

Incr

eas

ing

Cap

abili

ty

IC Final assessment criteria 6.2.1 Analyses key research into and examples of effective professional development and talent management in schools and applies findings to own plans 6.2.2 Analyses how professional development provision may need to change over time and applies findings to own plans

Score No

supporting document required

2

2

What professional development did you plan for to support your project, and how did this change over time? How did you use the talents of staff in the school?

Talent management is a topical debate given the current recruitment crisis. Lucy Adams (Disruptive HR) discusses the lack of faith in leaders due, in part, to parent style performance reviews being conducted: there is no equality in professional development. As staff are the greatest asset to a school and ultimately have the greatest impact on outcomes for pupils, I was aware that I needed to design my improvement plans using Adam’s good performance review processes:

Status – valued as equals Certainty – regularity and commitment to PR Autonomy - trusting people to achieve goals and self-manage Relatedness - shared investment in successes Fairness - the entitlement to professional respect and dialogue I ensured that all observations were coaching sessions rather than overly critical one way feedback discussions (see TCE and LWI) and also ensured that staff could share views on the improvement and that these were taken into consideration in adapting the vision. I trusted individual teams to self-manage their own changes in planning and to feedback, therefore proving that I trusted them to achieve their own goals. When considering professional development (PD), I knew there were several different routes that could be taken: lecture style, working groups, research, lesson studies, etc. I considered the different pros and cons for each of these styles. Prior to my project most PD took a lecture style -staff listened and engaged through organised discussion. This format was familiar and so I began my training in this style (2 staff meetings and a twilight session). These were successful, but staff could not see how to apply the new knowledge into their own practice. Therefore, I moved towards a combination of working groups and lesson studies. According to Peter Dudley (Lesson study UK) “Lesson Study is a highly specified form of classroom action research focusing on the development of teacher practice knowledge.” It not only gives teachers new knowledge but involves them in the process of observing, analysing, learning and teaching. Each teaching group takes responsibility for their own cohort and responds to the needs they identify through observation.


17 © NPQonline

I liked that the focus was on pupil’s learning rather than the teacher’s teaching. I wanted to promote the Fairness that Adams talked about. Ultimately, this strategy allowed the teachers’ pedagogy to improve while also improving the learning of the pupils. Plan to change professional development In the coming years, the training from JG will end but I had concerns about maintaining this influence. I needed to ensure the planning changes and resources were maintained as a record for new staff and that they could access the PD to understand why we have changed our pedagogy and lesson structures for reading. I believe it is important to continue to keep feedback at the forefront of our minds as each new cohort will need individual consideration. It is important to keep these lesson study teams in the process of observing and adjusting to keep striving for reduced variation and effective teaching. Assessor use only

6. IC Questions to aid assessment Has this participant:

• Considered research into effective professional development and talent management?

• Used research and examples of professional development to enhance their own plans for improvement?

• Work out how the professional development they have planned will need to change as time progresses?

Signatures

Please copy and paste scanned signatures and print names below.

I confirm that this submission and supporting documents are a true and accurate account of the work carried out by the participant during their NPQSL programme.

Date

Participant Olivia McNeil 24/10/18

Sponsor Orville Moran 27.10.2018

Headteacher Suriya Kumar 29th October 2018

Section C: Appendices (including supporting documents)


18 © NPQonline

Please copy and paste your supporting documents and other appendices below. a) Please label each appendix with the assessment criteria number it relates to. b) Supporting documents and appendices should not be above two sides in length each; no

additional appendices are required other than the supporting documents, but if you wish to, a maximum of two are allowed; appendices and supporting documents (or extracts) together should be a maximum of 2,000 words in total in addition to the submission word limit; they should be easily readable. (see final assessment participant handbook, page 2).

Appendix 1–SAI – data analysis SATS KS2 Reading attainment

Breakdown Cohort Achieving expected School %

Achieving expected National benchmark %

Achieving GD School %

Achieving GD National benchmark %

All pupils 86 98 71 34 25

Male 47 96 68 36 21

Female 39 100 75 31 28

Disadvantaged 14 100 77 21 29

Ever 6 FSM 13 100 77 23 29

SEN support 12 92 71 42 25

EAL 11 100 71 18 25

Prior low attainers in reading 5 80 19 20 2

Prior middle attainers in reading 42 98 71 12 14

Prior high attainers in reading 38 100 98 61 58

Data highlighted is all just below national average. However, each percentage difference is representative of 1 child. To choose one of these groups I looked at teacher assessment. The greatest variation was amongst MPAs

Pupil group Cohort (Year 3 – 5)

% of children reaching “working within” at the end of last year

% of children reaching “secure” at the end of last year

Disadvantaged 82 90 12

Ever 6 FSM 70 93 16

EAL 27 87 13

MPAs 145 89 7

Non-verbal screening Data showed capacity for MPAs to reach GD e.g. Year 3: 33% of MPAs scored over 100. In Year 6: 51% of MPAs scored over 110.

Cognitively able MPA 90-110

Significantly Cognitively able >110


19 © NPQonline

Question analysis Drop-ins and book scrutiny data.

Date Input key questions Comprehension questions LI- literal/ I – Inference/ O – own opinions/ A – Author choices/ LA – Layout/ V – vocabulary/ C - context

Marking/ Feedback focus

16/10/17 3B

LI-9 LA-3 C-2

LI-7 I-2 O-1 Questions got progressively harder

Less Able – spelling Core – spelling/ full sentences More able –full sentences but some evidence of asking children to justify opinions.

20/11/17 4H

LI-8 V-3 LA-3

Less able – LI-8 O-2 Core – LI-6 I-2 O-2 More Able – LI-5 I-3 A-2

Some literal questioning of incorrect answers.

Significant improvement in questioning at end of project

4/6/18 5R

V-5 C-3 I-4

I-5 O-3

Justification of answers with evidence from text. Asked for alternative view.

13/6/18 6H

V-6 A-3 I-4

A-3 I-4 2 creating own variation of author’s choices

Justification. Evidence that the next lesson built on misconceptions or areas of weakness.

Staff Questionnaire analysis

1. What do you understand by the term inference?

• “Using knowledge of the world and the text to make sensible assumptions,”

• “Reading between the lines,”

• “What the reader understands/ gathers from the text,”

• “Not sure!”

On a scale of 1 (not at all) to 5 (very) 2. 8 teachers stated they felt confident in assessing inference; these teachers were among those

whose understanding of inference was vague and misunderstood. The average response was

3.5.

3. The average response to “How effectively are you teaching inference?” was 3.63.

There were no teachers who could clearly explain what inference was in comparison to deduction and having looked at these reflections on confidence in teaching and assessing inference, it was important for me to clarify these misconceptions among staff and to support them in how to teach these skills more effectively.


20 © NPQonline

Appendix 2–TCE – Pupil voice survey. Start/End

1. How frequent are comprehension lessons?

Never 2

< weekly 8

weekly 12

> weekly 2

2. What do you do in these lessons?

• “We read through the text and check we know what the words mean. We get on with it

on our own.”

• “We just answer questions, the teacher works with a group and talks to them about the

answer but normally that’s the group that finds English hard.”

3. Do you enjoy them? Why/Why not?

Yes - 7

• They’re usually quite quiet lessons and we can just get on with it.

• Some of the stuff we read is interesting.

• It’s quite easy.

No - 17

• Reading is boring.

• We just have to get on with it on our own.

• It’s boring and too easy.

• I don’t really see the point in it.

4. How hard are comprehension lessons? Why?

• “It’s tricky to understand what the questions are asking but when we do it just talking, it

makes more sense.”

• “The questions are quite easy, but they get a bit harder at the end.”

• “Sometimes we have hard or easy questions to choose from but usually we all just have

the same questions and they’re quite easy.”

How frequent are comprehension lessons?

Never 0

<weekly 0

weekly 11

>weekly 13

1. What do you do in these lessons?

• “We work on understanding the text and then talk about what we think about it”

• “Sometimes we do drama so we understand it better”

• “We always go through the answers at the end and we say why the answers are good or

bad”.

2. Do you enjoy them? Why/ Why not?

Yes - 15

• Sometimes they’re fun

• Some of the stuff we read is interesting.

• I feel like it helps me write better

No - 9

• They’re hard

• Sometimes the books aren’t interesting


21 © NPQonline

Appendix 3- TCE – Pupil performance data SATS data 2017 v2018 for Reading.

% reaching ES 2017 % reaching GD 2017 % reaching ES 2018 % reaching GD 2017

98 34 93 50

Start of year: MPAs reaching ES but not GD

% reaching ES % reaching GD

Year 3 85 7

Year 4 93 12

Year 5 94 20

Year 6 98 34

Y4cohort2017/18: greater progress than any previous year.

In all year groups, there was reduced variation in MPAs attaining GD in end of year teacher assessments (TA).

Year group Number of children KS1-ES

Number of children 2018/TA-ES

Number of children KS1-GD

Number of children 2018/TA-GD

3 38 40 32 43

4 64 35 12 45

5 36 37 45 52

6 23 28 61 64

Increase


22 © NPQonline

Appendix 4-LWI – Communications plan

WHO WHAT HOW WHEN Concerns and ideas

SLT/governors • Need for the project –evidence and planned improvements.

• Purpose of the project –areas I hope to improve.

• Timescale

• Business case Resources and costs that will be involved (continuous discussion).

Face-to-face meetings/ updates Presentations – updates on project and feedback from staff. Email – updates and requests.

Start of project Monthly updates Discussion of new costs and time needed with staff. Meeting with governors - 11/12/18 introduction to project 25/6/18 update on outcomes and progression

Cost of any training or resources will take away from other possible spending. – prove there is a real need for project and show levels of staff confidence and skills will improve and improved learning opportunities and progression for children. Initial meeting well received and they could understand the need for improvement in due to the slight variation in reading results. Governors pleased with progress in teaching (evidenced through planning and staff survey) they agreed to alter homework for next academic year to increase home reading.

Year Leaders

• Purpose of the project – discuss data and planned improvements.

• Vision and the impact on their workload and teams.

• Assigned tasks/roles to delegate responsibilities

• Timescale and operational plan

Face to face - staff meetings, monitoring meetings. Drop-in feedback from their teams Email – updates and support.

Regular meetings (every few weeks/ half term)

Workload –show impact on workload so that they can factor this in to other projects/ pieces of work that are taking place in their year group. Too many other projects to monitor – I will support them but also ensure they buy in to the need of this project.

JG (CPD provider)

• Areas of development for staff and children.

• Negotiate work needed and timings for provision.

Follow ups after staff feedback.

Emails Face to face. Training workshops.

September then followed up with training in October. Regularly throughout year to organise or feedback.

Cost – need to review the cost v impact throughout project and ensure staff feel that training is beneficial.

Teachers • Ask for feedback/ concerns/ ideas so they feel they are

Face to face - staff meetings/

Start of project (year leaders will

Workload – help them to understand the necessity of the project and therefore want to support it.


23 © NPQonline

valued and can buy in to vision.

• Purpose – give overview of what project entails and why it is necessary.

• Assign tasks and roles Discuss progress/ feedback on different aspects of the project.

monitoring and progress meetings. Email – reminders of tasks and support.

catch up regularly with them) Half termly meetings with me. Drop in observation feedback.

Not understanding the purpose of the task – I need to encourage reflection on their own practice so that they can see what can be improved.

Assistant Teachers

• General overview

• Discuss questioning when reading with children (importance of allowing children to discover answers -not given)

Face to face - introductory staff meeting. Face to face with own year leaders if there are any difficulties.

Start of project (year leaders will catch up regularly with them)

Lack of enthusiasm – if it is modelled by teachers hopefully the questioning and reading awareness will become more regular and comfortable.

Pupils • Understanding that lessons and interventions are changing and why

Teachers to give small introduction to new style of lessons and explain expectations.

Once the change in planning has taken place

Discouraged due to increased difficulty - teachers to mitigate through working with children and demonstrating positive work through modelling.


24 © NPQonline

Appendix 5–MRR – Business Case

Aim Action to be taken Responsibility Time line Training Resources (costed)

Monitoring/ evaluation

More time for comprehension

Reorganise structure to run a topic over 2/3 weeks.

Year group planner. OM to oversee

All planning altered by July 2018

Rationale. Planning change. Exemplars provided.

Time for: - creating exemplars. - training. - updating planning. Approx: £15per/hour

Check ins with teams to gauge buy in and effectiveness of planning. Impact of new planning on learning and teaching.

Improved teacher knowledge of inference and deduction

Staff training in strategies and knowledge. 2 x twilights 2 x team planning.

OM Ongoing training throughout year.

JG £1648

Feedback all positive: requests made for more non-fiction training booked for November 2018

Improved reading skills for MPAs

Planning including more opportunities for inference and deduction.

Team planner for each year group. OM to oversee

2018 SATS results to show improvement in GD levels in reading. End of year TA for year 3-5 to show improvement in S+ levels.

OM to support teams with new planning. Training children in how to dig deeper in to text.

Time to alter planning and train assistant teachers in using these skills. Approx: £15per/hour

Drop ins and book scrutinies to assess impact. Evidence of impact in teacher assessments/ SATS and comprehension lessons.


25 © NPQonline

Appendix 6 – MRR – Risk Management Plan This shows the likelihood and impact of an event in a scaled way to give a numerical value to each possible risk.

> 10 indicates a high risk. < 9 indicates a low or medium risk.

Risk Type of risk Likelihood

Impact Numerical value

Response

Control procedures Person responsible

External training may not cause substantial improvement

financial 2 4 8 treat Ensure feedback after each training.

OM

Snow day meant training was rearranged

logistical 1 3 3 transfer Move staff meeting. OM

Other projects running at the same time, means staff may not give substantial attention to reading.

personnel 3 3 9 treat Collaborate with NPQSL colleagues to ensure projects do not require workload increase at the same time.

OM, OMo, SW

Staff not having enough time to do enough work to have impact

logistical 3 3 9 treat Give specific tasks in given time frames. Ensure these do not occur in very busy times.

OM/ SLT

Data not showing improvement due to cohort differences.

educational 3 2 6 tolerate Data may not show impact but pupil voice and book scrutinies will show improvement and reduced variation.

OM/ Year leaders.

LIK

ELIH

OO

D

CERTAIN 5

5

10 15 20 25

PROBABLE 4

4

8 12 16 20

POSSIBLE 3

3

6 9 12 15

UNLIKELY 2

2 4 6 8 10

HIGHLY UNLIKELY

1

1 2 3 4 5

NEGLIGIBLE 1

SMALL 2

NOTICEABLE 3

SERIOUS + SIGNIFICANT

4

CRITICAL + CONSIDERABLE

5

IMPACT

npqsl final assessment submission form for participants€¦ · npqsl final assessment submission...

Documents