AtoL school story – 2005
St Mary's School is a decile 5 full primary school, with approximately 440 students, and a staff of 16 full-time teachers. Teachers have been making good use of standardised and school-based tests to provide diagnostic information about student performance, which helps them identify children with special needs and abilities. These tests are also used to in most classroom programmes to group students according to learning needs and assist class teachers to provide students with good quality programmes that recognise individual needs. Portfolios and school wide summative assessment templates in the Classroom Manager program are used to document individual student progress.
In 2003 the lead teachers were involved in a school wide AtoL professional development contract, which aimed to help teachers deepen their understanding about the purposes of assessment and extend their knowledge about good assessment practice.
Recent changes in assessment practice and professional development
Guided action plan
Ruth Hammond, from Evaluation Associates, started working with the previous principal, Anthony Noble-Campbell, and senior staff members in 2003 to develop a schoolwide AtoL professional development programme. They played a key role in motivating teachers and setting expectations of how teaching and learning at St Mary's would change as teachers deepened their understanding of assessment.
Ruth maintained regular contact with the school over the three years and made regular visits.
Year 1
In the first year the focus of the programme was on the systems and structures used to support assessment of the school's curriculum delivery. Ruth met with the management team for half a day, twice each term. As a result the management team constructed a two-year overview of the assessments they considered necessary in order to improve teaching and learning, covering the eight year levels of the school, across the curriculum.
Organisation for curriculum delivery and development was also changed so that staff had more input into, and had deeper understanding of assessment processes and this enabled them to share their curriculum expertise better with one another.
Ruth kept things moving at a measured pace, building on staff enthusiasm, and making sure everyone walked with confidence before running with the new assessment processes. Whole staff meetings were held once a term to inform staff of progress.
Back to top Year 2
In the second year of the programme, the focus changed to how teachers were using assessment as a part of their teaching strategies within the classroom. Ruth worked most closely with the five lead teachers who had undertaken to support their colleagues in building assessment for learning (AfL) strategies in every classroom over a two-year period.
The Evaluation Associates programme is centred around building teacher understanding and classroom practice of assessment for learning through six AfL 'competencies' that they have developed as a way of supporting teachers.
The programme depends on gathering reliable data about actual teacher practice, providing teachers with an opportunity to reflect on this data in comparison with a set of indicators of 'best' practice for each of the competencies, and sustained supported opportunities to reduce the gap.
These opportunities came from; observation and feedback/feedforward from Ruth and peers, modelling by Ruth, and from fortnightly Quality Learning Circles (QLCs) where the lead teachers examined aspects of each other's practice. These opportunities were especially important in keeping teachers focused on finding ways to enable targeted students to learn better.
Baseline data (videoing classroom practice, teacher interviews, student interviews) and assessment of students' written language was collected in the first month of the first term for each lead teacher.
The school provided a release teacher for each of the two visits made each term. During these visits, Ruth observed the lead teachers practising a particular competency of the programme with their own class. The release teacher then continued with the lesson while the lead teacher received feedback and feed forward as a result of the observations.
These sessions were a time of shared reflection. The relationship between the facilitator and each of the lead teachers was a key factor in this process. After school, on each of these visits, Ruth led a staff meeting that focused on the next competency to be practised by the lead teachers and other teachers who wished to try the ideas out prior to the next visit.
This provided all staff with a sense of what was happening for the lead teachers and a 'taste' of what they would experience the following year. At the end of each staff meeting she made sure that the work to be done before the next meeting was identified, deadlines set and time/budget implications discussed.
Time was also spent in discussion with the principal and the two programme managers about the progress being made as a result of the steady implementation of the programme. At the end of the year another round of data collection was undertaken to examine changes in teaching and learning by the lead teachers.
Back to top Year 3
The third year, 2005, Barbara-Anne Alexander was appointed as programme manager. The deputy principal, Mark Boagey, was acting principal for two terms. A new principal, David Tennent, took up his appointment at the beginning of term 4, 2005.
The process undertaken by staff in 2004 was repeated but with the lead teachers working with a group of teachers and with Ruth observing and supporting the lead teachers in their facilitation. The programme manager ensured the programme was implemented in every classroom. This included inducting new teachers, leading staff meetings and keeping up the regular QLC meetings.
Ruth continued to visit twice a term. On these occasions the school employed two release teachers; one to take a lead teacher's class and one to be present for the part of the lesson being observed by that lead teacher. At the end of the observation, the teacher, the lead teacher and Ruth withdrew to reflect on the observation.
On these occasions, Ruth's role was to observe the lead teacher giving feedback and feed forward to the teacher who had just been observed. After that, a reflective discussion was held with the lead teacher during which feedback/feed forward was included about the feedback/feed forward process she had just observed.
For the final visit for the year, Ruth spent a day observing in each classroom throughout the school. She gave brief feedback to each teacher. This was a quick snapshot to identify areas to focus on for staff development sessions in 2006 and to provide quality assurance to the school about the impact of the intervention in each classroom.
Resources
Professional readings based on current research informed the planning process and helped teachers to focus on what they wanted to achieve. These included:
Black, P. and D. Wiliam. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment, Phi Delta Kappan, 80 (2) , 139–144, 146–148.
Clarke, S., H. Timperley, et al. (2003). Unlocking formative assessment: Practical strategies for enhancing students' learning in the primary and intermediate classroom, Wellington: Hodder Moa Beckett.
Guskey, T. R. (2002). Does it make a difference? Evaluating professional development. Educational Leadership. (March 2002), 45–51.
Hattie, J. (1999). Influences on student learning. Inaugural lecture: Professor of Education, Auckland University.
McCallum, B. (2000). Formative Assessment – Implications for Classroom Practice: 14.
Ministry of Education (2001). Curriculum Update. (47): 16. Ministry of Education, Wellington.
Ministry of Education (2003). Planning for Better Student Outcomes. (November): 16. Ministry of Education, Wellington.
Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (2002). Assessment for Learning: 4. Accessed at http://www.capita.co.uk/Group/CustomerCentre/ KnowledgeHub/CaseStudies/QualificationsCurriculumAuthority.htm
Sadler, D. R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science. 18, 119–144.
Back to top Goals and targets
The Assessment for Learning programme provided a way to enrich both student learning and teachers' teaching. Staff saw that they needed to move from assessing for accountability to using assessment to enrich and deepen student learning.
Planning goals and targets were identified through collaborative discussion between the management team and the facilitator. To create assessment systems and structures throughout the school they discussed what was assessed, how it was assessed and then how the ensuing information was used. The focused was on how useful the information was in guiding teachers to plan what the students needed to learn next.
Written Language was chosen as the target curriculum area across all levels of the school.
Tools to identify student progress
Prior to working on the contract the school used simple assessment tools:
- 6-year nets and running records throughout the school for assessing reading for every year level
- Basic facts throughout the school for assessing mathematics from year 3–8
- Schonell spelling test for year 3–8
- A summative checklist system (including pre and post tests) in most curriculum areas for all year levels.
Teachers and the board had not set specific written expectations of standards of student achievement. Through the testing used, they were aware of the distribution of reading ages and spelling ages. Data was used to identify students who needed extra help in reading.
Professional development implementation
During 2003 the management team created an overview of curriculum coverage.
The process of putting in place schoolwide assessment systems and structures took a year. At the beginning of the second year, whole staff training in Assessment for Learning started. Two programme managers and three extra lead teachers were appointed. The programme managers also took on the role of lead teachers as they each had a class of their own.
Working a term ahead, curriculum teams planned units to start in 2004 that incorporated the Learning Intentions and Success Criteria as well as the appropriate Learning Indicator matrices. Teachers used these tools to create levelled assessment tasks.
The introduction to the full staff took place at a Teacher Only Day, held off-site, during the January holidays. With the first term's planning (including Learning Intentions and Success Criteria) in place, the whole staff were prepared to start immediately. The expectation was that they would start in one curriculum area only (Written Language) and as they gained confidence they would move into other curriculum areas at their own pace.
At the beginning of the second year, the computer program, Classroom Manager was set in place and by mid-year all staff were using it for the mid-year reports.
At mid-year, second year, portfolios were used as part of the reporting process. The portfolios included assessment documentation and parents were invited to the school to have discussions with their children about the learning they had done so far that year. This experience was very positive for the students, parents and teachers.
Back to top
Observation and feedback
The facilitator took baseline data (videoed teaching practice, interviewed teacher and students) with each lead teacher. A copy of the data was given to each teacher and feedback was given against the use of the pre-established criteria.
Each teacher was assessed against each of the criteria in Evaluation Associates' teacher competencies (in a collaborative process).
The facilitator visited each lead teacher twice a term to observe and give feedback as well as co-construct feed forward for practice prior to the next visit and observation. Staff meetings were also held at the end of each observation day to teach the next competency/facet of the programme.
In addition, in 2004, lead teachers collected beginning, mid-, and end-year data in Written Language for their own students. At the beginning of the year, they also predicted the level they thought each of their students would be working at by the end of the year. This data was then processed by Evaluation Associates.
The facilitator also observed the rest of the teachers on one occasion in order to give feedback and ascertain any schoolwide patterns that needed attention.
2005
At the beginning of the third year (2005), a programme manager, Barbara-Anne Alexander, was appointed (one management unit). She was responsible for organising ongoing Assessment for Learning (AfL) staff meetings, developing a Quality Learning Circle schedule, providing in-house support, and setting up AfL Teacher Only Days for professional development.
Evaluation Associates continued to provide facilitation each term on a consultancy basis. This usually took the form of a two-day visit during which the facilitator's time was spent in reflective discussion with the programme manager and in observing and giving feedback/feed forward to lead teachers after they had given feedback/feed forward to teachers they had just observed.
The facilitator would observe a class teacher taking a lesson. At the same time, a lead teacher was also observing the same lesson. The facilitator and the lead teacher would withdraw, with the classroom teacher, and the lead teacher would give feedback/ feed forward to the classroom teacher. Once the teacher had returned to class, the facilitator gave the lead teacher feedback and feed forward on his/her feedback/feed forward. The focus of each of these lessons was an Assessment for Learning competency.
All staff repeated the process of teacher and student data collection that the lead teachers had undertaken in 2004.
Back to top
New teaching and learning, planning and management strategies
New strategies are addressed at the eight seminars Evaluation Associates takes each year for schools involved on the programme. The competencies cover:
(a) Partnerships for learning
(b) Clarity about what is to be learnt
(c) Assessment literacy
(d) Promoting further learning
(e) Active reflection
(f) Clarity about next learning steps
Planning and management strategies, cascading to other teachers, budgeting of time and money, and induction of new teachers are also major components of the seminars.
Evidence of enhanced teaching practice
The school has been keeping data (Written language levels/ Recount Writing) for each child in the lead teachers' classes. This is collected at the beginning of the year, mid-year and end-year. The same data is kept across the school and can be used for comparative purposes. The facilitator and each lead teacher co-assess progress made against teacher competencies (Evaluation Associates' matrix) on a regular basis.
- Students' attitudes have changed. They are taking more responsibility for their own learning and are more reflective with one another. They are much more on-task and have learnt to celebrate their successes with their peers and parents.
- Teaching programmes and learning objectives are clear to everyone.
- The main measure of impact on student achievement decided on by the school was the extent to which students had improved their standard of recount writing over 2005. Effect size methodology was used to estimate this.
An effect size (ES) of 0.0 indicates that there has been no improvement in standards. An effect size of 1.0 is considered very large. Most education interventions achieve an ES of 0.4 on average.
This table shows the variation between classes and demonstrates that, on average, the teachers were able to use AfL strategies to good effect. The teachers who had small or negative ES had in fact not bought-in to the programme. No ES was calculated for the classes in year 0–2 as no agreement could be reached as to what a reasonable expectation might be for these students. However it is clear that they have made reasonable progress.
Click here to view the results table (Word, 48KB)
Back to top Home-school partnership
Syndicate letters informed caregivers of how teachers were building competencies to improve student achievement.
Example of a letter to the parents of children in one lead teacher's syndicate:
We have planned a full and interesting academic programme for this term. Whilst the topics and subjects taught follow the yearly plans, what has changed is our teaching approach. Professional development of the teaching staff has helped us to focus more closely on the learners' needs. We have been learning how to structure and provide strategies in our teaching that will empower students as learners. Some of our goals as teachers this term include:-
- Sharing the Learning Intention so students know exactly what it is that they will learn.
- Develop Success Criteria for the Learning Intentions. The Success Criteria states what the students will do to demonstrate that they have mastered a skill or strategy.
- Plenary. This is the discussion that the class has at the end of sessions. It is based around questions such as "What was the Learning Intention?" "Did we achieve the Success Criteria?" "Why?" "Why not?" "What helped you learn?" "What could I do as a teacher to help you next time?" "What is the next step?"
Whilst we are still in the early stages of a two-year course, staff have already witnessed the improved quality of teaching and learning in our classes. We look forward to an increased sense of industry and student engagement across a range of curriculum and topics. Parents have an opportunity to discover more about this powerful change to our style of teaching and assessment at 5.00pm on Tuesday 18 May.
School newsletters and a parent portfolio evening (this was highly successful…students, parents and teachers were buzzing after this) also helped to build closer connects between home and school.
Maintaining the Atol goals and vision
The previous principal, Anthony Noble-Campbell, maintained enthusiasm for the programme and helped teachers raise their awareness of how assessment can improve teaching and learning.
The school has established an ongoing relationship with the facilitator, who ran a teacher only day during the holidays at the beginning of 2003, 2004, and 2005. At the beginning of 2005 the principal presented a video clip of students', teachers', and parents' responses to the programme.
Quality Learning Circles are held with the whole staff on a weekly basis. The staff requested that they be held weekly, rather than fortnightly.
Currently, the programme manager reports that teachers are enthusiastically implementing the new assessment plan. In-class observations have continued, as have staff meetings that have focused on teacher competencies with observations being linked to the targeted competencies. The programme manager has also organised in-class videos to support the teaching of the competencies.
Back to top
|
