Ladder of Support

Ladder of Support, Challenge and Intervention: September 2015

This copy is based on the latest version September 2015. Any amendments will be kept to a minimum, but following feedback any necessary improvements will be added to the online version available at www.erw.cymru Version 1

07.07.2015

1

Section 1 • Managing Director Foreword • Introduction

Section 2

• Categorisation

Section 3 • • • •

ERW : Entitlement and Expectation Reducing the Impact of Poverty on Attainment Building on Self Improving Systems Support, Challenge and Intervention

Section 4

• Menu of Support • Introduction • Support Themes

Section 5

• Guidance for Spring Visit 2016 Appendix 1: Guidance for Autumn Visit 2015 Appendix 2: Autumn Term Core Visit Templates (letters and forms) Appendix 3: Headteacher Feedback Forms Appendix 4: Appeals Procedure Appendix 5: Rare Exceptions Guidance Appendix 6: Menu of Support Appendix 7: ERW Ladder of Support, Challenge and Intervention Visits 2015 – 2016 Appendix 8: Progress Descriptors

2

SECTION 1 Managing Director Foreword Dear all, Thank you for your work last academic year. We have successfully embedded the new National Categorisation system and our core visits into one streamlined process. As we move towards a self improving system of support for schools, accurate knowledge of schools and appropriate levels of support will be key. This process is pivotal to securing that knowledge on an ongoing basis. This document aims to set out clearly the entitlement of support to schools and the arrangements for undertaking our core work for the coming year. Sincerely Betsan O’Connor Managing Director ERW

3

Introduction ERW strives to delivers a single consistent and integrated professional school improvement service for children and young people aged 3-19 in a range of settings within the six Local Authorities. ERW’s vision is for a consistently high performing school network across the region with every school a good school offering high standards of teaching with all learners achieving their maximum potential. The aim of the Ladder of Support is to provide a single clear point of reference for ERW’s core functions. Its purpose is to support ERW’s aim of building school capacity through support, challenge and intervention to become self improving, resilient organisations which continually improve outcomes for learners. The ERW Ladder of Support is well established across the region, and the guidance document has been refined annually to reflect national and local priorities and expectations. This document will set out the arrangements for: • • •

the categorisation of Schools following the national categorisation system and identifying their support category; identifying and brokering the appropriate support, challenge and intervention to schools and between schools according to need and entitlement; thematic and targeted core visits for 2015 – 2016;

In addition, it will provide a framework for schools and advisers to work within and enable a focus on key regional, local and national priorities. In order to enable all learners to achieve their potential in this region, we need to ensure that we provide support for good schools to become excellent and build capacity for schools to improve themselves. We also need a collective agreement to support and intervene in underperforming schools. This includes a continuum of support and intervention that ranges from informal sharing of practice to formal notices of collaboration. Increasingly in ERW, as we develop a self improving school system, we will provide facilitated and brokered support between schools and support an infrastructure based on collaboration. It is envisaged that more support between schools will be included as part of the support menu in coming years. The purpose of this document is to articulate as clearly as possible, the level of support facilitated for those schools placed in the agreed four national support categories. However, it must be noted that each case will be considered on its merits and individual school improvement will be brokered accordingly, informed by school selfevaluation and development planning. The levels of support and identified resource will inform a focussed brokered programme of action to raise school standards across the region and according to the needs of each individual school. Our challenge is to accelerate improvement for all schools and to ensure that underperforming schools make the necessary changes as early as possible and affect the improvement of all schools. In strengthening school led improvement in and by other schools, we recognise that the capacity to engage in such activities can be difficult on occasion. Our challenge will be to manage capacity with portability of practice and expertise, and support innovation and technology based solutions.

4

SECTION 2 Categorisation The scope and level of support and intervention for each school is determined by the National School Improvement and Categorisation System. In order to drive improvement for learners, and to recognise the schools which raise standards and those who do not quickly and consistently, key representatives of WG and regional consortia have co- refined the categorisation model. During the Autumn Core Visit, each school in ERW will be engaged in a dialogue with the Challenge Adviser to come to an agreed judgement on capacity to improve (letter) and a support category (colour). This will be combined with the judgement on standards (number) produced centrally by WG. The current model and details can be found HERE – hyper link to all WG guidance The categorisation system leads ambitious transformational change, and drives school improvement from the inside out. The aim of the national school improvement and categorisation system is: • • • • • • • •

to enable consortia to identify quickly the support, challenge and intervention required to raise standards for learners; to be a reliable, intelligent data driven and objective profile of schools across Wales; to be an improvement tool for schools and consortia to measure performance and improvement; to make sure that the right, timely challenge and intervention secures improvement in outcomes for all learners; to build the capacity and resilience of the school to improve itself and to facilitate school to school support through a partnership approach; to empower schools to become more resilient with the capacity for self-improvement; to ensure the effective, efficient and economical use and deployment of resources; to be a transparent, easily understood method of discussing overall school performance and its capacity to improve.

The core principles are: • • • • • • •

to be a jointly constructed and collaborative process starting with the school’s self-evaluation; to be based on comprehensive current performance data – both end of key stage and in year progress; to be an effective tool for improving standards of achievement and attainment; to be a diagnostic tool to improve leadership, learning and teaching; to be based on an early-action intervention where required; and to have clear accountability arrangements at all levels – school, consortia and local authority. to have a common categorisation, common diagnosis, with regional flexibility on the use of resources to bring about improvement to maximise innovation, take appropriate risks and meet local needs.

In order to enable all learners to achieve their potential in this region, we need to ensure that we provide support for good schools to become excellent and build capacity for schools to improve themselves. We also need a collective agreement between schools to support each other – especially underperforming schools. This includes a continuum of support and intervention that ranges from informal sharing of practice to formal notices of collaboration.

5

The purpose of this document is to articulate as clearly as possible, the level of support directed to those schools placed in the agreed four national support categories. However, it must be noted that each case will be considered on its merits and individual school improvement will be planned accordingly, informed by school selfevaluation and development planning. The levels of support and intervention and identified resource will inform a focussed brokered programme of action to raise school standards across the region and according to the needs of each individual school. Our challenge is to accelerate improvement for all schools and to ensure that underperforming schools make the necessary changes as early as possible and affect the improvement of all schools. In strengthening school led improvement in and by other schools, we recognise that the capacity to engage in such activities can be difficult in small schools. Our challenge will be to manage capacity with portability of practice and expertise. National categorisation serves two complementary purposes. Firstly, it ensures an agreed point in a school’s improvement journey based on a consistent and nationally agreed assessment of a school’s performance and a judgement of a school’s capacity to improve according to nationally agreed criteria. This assessment should be agreed between the adviser and the school leaders 1. Secondly, it allows the region, LA and senior school leaders to prioritise actions and resources to secure improvement. While we will broker and tailor support and intervention on an individual, school by school basis, nationally, there is an expected requirement of Challenge Adviser days against each support category. All ERW’s schools can expect a negotiated programme of support and intervention according to need. A bespoke programme built and brokered by the Challenge Adviser in collaboration with the school should follow the identified need. Based on a continuum of a school’s capacity to self improve, there will be an increased responsibility on schools to lead their own support and this will be aligned with accountability. This is a move away from a common entitlement to a bespoke and focused use of resources to raise standards. Each school will be categorised annually and the information published on My Local School. Regionally we will also provide a support category for Schools will not be able to move to higher categories unless outcomes improve – judgements for leadership will be closely linked to improving outcomes for learners. The new system is based on three steps: 1. Intelligent data driven categorisation •

Reduces and eventually removes subjective nature of initial judgement



Is clear and consistent



Makes sure that the focus is on standards for learners

2. Further analysis of areas for improvement based on the ability of school to bring about improvement •

Leadership



Learning and teaching

The following factors will influence the judgement on leadership: • self-knowledge and self-evaluation, intelligent use of data • effectiveness/ track record in addressing underperformance in outcomes for learners and staff • leadership ensuring quality provision of literacy, numeracy and inclusion 1

*If in exceptional cases negotiation does not result in agreement, the LA and or the region reserves the right to categorise a school according to its judgement.

6

middle leadership readiness, resilience and capacity to engage in school to school support • safeguarding • governance • •

The following factors will influence the judgement on learning and teaching: • • • •

learning – in class progress, scrutiny of pupils’ work, feedback for learners to bring about improvement quality of teaching, including lesson observations, joint lesson observations (Challenge Advisers and school leaders) quality of provision for the development of literacy and numeracy consistency and accuracy of teacher assessment, consistent with national reading and numeracy tests

Regions have existing intelligence on the school’s ability to bring about improvement, and will be able to act quickly to provide appropriate support, challenge and intervention whilst strengthening their knowledge. Other risks may trigger a change of support, challenge or intervention • • • • • 3.

New Head teacher School reorganisation Financial arrangements Estyn inspection Lack of confidence in school

Bespoke support, challenge and intervention to ensure maximum yield •

Moving away from entitlement and days allocation without focus



Brokering the best intervention for the situation



Regional flexibility for innovation



Deploy resources to achieve the best outcomes for the greatest number of learners

The finding on standards combined with the judgement on the ability to bring about improvement determines the category (colour) of the school and most importantly the character and extent of support, challenge and intervention. The first step and guidance on implementing both the second and third step will be common across all regions. However, the implementation methodology of the third step will be devised and implemented at a regional level. Regional consistency and quality assurance for these steps are critical to the success of the model. A national moderation group for the National School Improvement and Categorisation System has been established in order to secure consistency across Wales and to standardise the use of the model. Schools will be categorised by colour. The colour signifies the quantity of support but its use and content bespoke and made up from a possible menu of support and intervention available locally. It is envisaged that for the schools with mature arrangements for self-knowledge and evaluation, the nature of the support and intervention will be jointly agreed. However, there is likely to be an increasing level of non-negotiable aspects for those schools which underperform.

7

The colours of the categories should not be attributed directly to Estyn judgments or language. The colours signify a level of support. During the Autumn Core Visit, each school in ERW will be engaged in a dialogue with the Challenge Adviser to come to an agreed judgement on capacity to improve (letter) and a support category (colour). Schools in the 4 support categories will have the following characteristics. Green Schools Schools in a green support category are likely to have the following characteristics: • • • • • • • •

• •

a very clear strategy and vision that has improved outcomes for all learners leaders with a very strong capacity to plan and implement change successfully and to sustain improvement robust, systematic and well established self evaluation highly effective in their use of all available performance data and evidence about the quality of learning and teaching a very good track record in raising the achievement of all groups of pupils leaders and staff work very successfully with other schools and partners to enhance significantly their own and others’ capacity to bring about improvement and build resilience governors have an excellent understanding of the school’s strengths and areas for improvement and are highly effective in supporting and challenging the school’s performance the school’s leaders give a high priority to developing the workforce: performance management and professional development are highly successful in fostering effective practice and in dealing with underperformance all staff have a shared understanding of the characteristics of excellent and good teaching teacher assessment is consistent and accurate

Yellow Schools Schools in a yellow support category are likely to have the following characteristics: • • • • • • • •

• •

a shared vision and a clear strategy that has improved outcomes for most learners leaders who plan and implement change and sustain improvement successfully in most respects self evaluation is regular and thorough in most areas good use of performance data evidence about the quality of learning and teaching a good track record in raising the achievement of most pupils, including vulnerable learners collaboration is developing well and opportunities to work with schools are used effectively governors have a good understanding of the school’s strengths and areas for improvement performance management and professional development make a strong contribution to improving practice and raising standards. The school challenges underperformance effectively and are largely successful in securing improvement most staff have a shared understanding of the characteristics of excellent and good teaching teacher assessment is consistent and accurate in the main

8

Amber Schools Schools in an amber support category are likely to have the following characteristics: • • • • •

• •

there are inconsistencies in how a vision and strategic objectives are shared leaders manage change successfully in few areas processes for monitoring and evaluating the work of the school are not implemented consistently school improvement activity with other schools and partners does not fully impact on standards and provision performance management and professional development are not always linked closely enough to priorities. The impact on improving performance varies. The school does not always challenge underperformance effectively the characteristics of good and excellent teaching are well defined but applied inconsistently there are some inconsistencies in the reliability and accuracy of teacher assessment

Red schools Schools in a red support category are likely to have the following characteristics: • • • • • • • • •

work to establish an agreed vision is underdeveloped and there is a lack of clarity in the school’s strategic direction leaders do not demonstrate sufficient capacity to plan and implement change successfully a few processes for monitoring and evaluating the work of the school have been developed but these lack rigour and breadth there are wide variations in how performance data and evidence about the quality of learning and teaching and pupils’ work are used to secure improvement does not have a strong track record in improving outcomes including for vulnerable learners leaders and staff have limited involvement in worthwhile collaborative activity with schools performance management and professional development have limited impact on improving performance. The school does not challenge underperformance effectively there is little shared understanding of the characteristics of excellent and good teaching there are significant inconsistencies in the reliability and accuracy of teacher assessment

further detail on the categorisation arrangements can be found here ...... hyper link

The national continuum for judging capacity to improve is on the following pages: (please note changes since last year)

9

A

B

C

D

Leaders and all staff have developed a shared vision and there is a very clear strategy that has improved outcomes for all learners.

Leaders and all staff have a shared vision and a clear strategy that has improved outcomes for most learners.

The school’s leaders have established a vision and strategic objectives. However, there are inconsistencies in how these are shared and understood and their impact on the outcomes learners achieve.

Work to establish an agreed vision is underdeveloped. As result there is a lack of clarity in the school’s strategic direction and in how this is understood and insufficient impact on improving learners’ outcomes.

Leaders demonstrate a very strong capacity to plan and implement change successfully and to sustain improvement as a result. They engage all staff and other partners very effectively in the change process.

Leaders plan and implement change and sustain improvement successfully in most respects. They enable staff and other partners to participate well in the change process.

Leaders manage change successfully in a few areas. In other areas change is not embedded successfully and so does not lead to sustained improvement. The change process does not always engage staff and other partners sufficiently.

Leaders do not demonstrate sufficient capacity to plan and implement change successfully. Management of the change process does not engage staff and other stakeholders effectively.

Self- evaluation is robust, systematic and well established.

Self- evaluation is regular and thorough in most areas.

Leaders have developed processes for monitoring and evaluating the work of the school but these are not implemented consistently.

Leaders have developed a few processes for monitoring and evaluating the work of the school but these lack rigour and breadth.

All leaders and staff are highly effective in their use of all available performance data and evidence about the quality of learning and teaching and pupils’ work to identify strengths and set improvement priorities.

Most leaders and staff make good use of performance data, evidence about the quality of learning and teaching and pupils’ work to identify strengths and improvement priorities.

The evaluation of performance data and evidence about the quality of learning and teaching and pupils’ work is not always used well enough to inform planning for improvement.

There are wide variations in how performance data and evidence about the quality of learning and teaching and pupils’ work are used to secure improvement.

10

A

B

C

D

Leaders and all staff have a relentless focus on raising standards. Targets reflect high expectations for the achievement of all pupils and these are met consistently.

There is a clear emphasis on raising standards. Through its targets the school has high expectations for the achievement of its pupils.

There is a clear understanding of the need to improve outcomes but expectations and targets are not always challenging enough.

There is an acknowledgement of the need to improve outcomes but expectations and targets are too low and leaders are not always open to challenge or to taking action required as a result.

The school has a very good track record in raising the achievement of all groups of pupils.

The school has good track record in raising the achievement of most pupils, including vulnerable learners.

The school is successful in improving pupils’ outcomes in some areas but this is not consistent across the school as a whole.

The school does not have a strong track record in improving outcomes including for vulnerable learners.

Improvement planning at all levels is highly effective in addressing the areas in need of most improvement. Action, including the use of all resources, has led to sustained improvement in outcomes on all key indicators and for all groups of learners, including those eligible for free school meals.

Leaders and staff are clear about the priorities that need to be addressed in the school’s improvement plan. Action, and the use of resources, are effective in securing improvement in key areas including for pupils eligible for free school meals and other vulnerable groups.

Leaders and staff make suitable links between the outcomes of selfevaluation and improvement priorities in a few areas. Planning and the use of resources have greater impact in some areas but less in others, such as the attainment of pupils eligible for free school meals and other vulnerable groups.

Planning lacks detail and does not address clearly enough the specific aspects that require improvement. The pace of improvement is often too slow.

11

Implementation, including the use of resources, has insufficient impact on improving pupils’ outcomes in key areas, such as on the attainment of pupils eligible for free school meals and other vulnerable groups. There is an over-reliance on external support.

A

B

C

D

The school has a very strong track record in implementing successfully national and local priorities.

The school gives good attention to national and local priorities and in general implements these effectively.

The school’s leaders take account of national and local priorities but planning does not always have sufficient impact on standards, learning and teaching.

Although account is taken of national and local priorities planning to improve standards, learning and teaching is of too variable a quality and has insufficient impact.

Leaders and staff work very successfully with schools and other partners to enhance significantly their own and others’ capacity to bring about improvement.

Leaders and staff take advantage of opportunities to work with schools and other partners. Collaboration is developing well and makes an important contribution to capacity building and improvement.

Leaders and staff participate in school improvement activity with schools and other partners but the impact of collaboration on standards and provision requires further development.

Leaders and staff have limited involvement in worthwhile collaborative activity with schools and other partners and the capacity to benefit from partnership working is underdeveloped.

Governors have an excellent understanding of the school’s strengths and areas for improvement and are highly effective in supporting and challenging the school’s performance.

Governors have a good understanding of the school’s strengths and areas for improvement. Their work to support and challenge the school’s performance is strong.

Governors support the school. They receive relevant information but require support to be fully effective in how they challenge the school to make improvements.

Whilst governors are supportive of the school as a body they do not have sufficient capacity to challenge the school to make improvements with the urgency needed.

Leaders and staff have well defined roles and responsibilities and exhibit high professional standards.

The roles and responsibilities of leaders and staff are defined and communicated clearly and professional standards are met successfully in the main.

The roles and responsibilities of leaders and staff are defined clearly for the most part but there are some inconsistencies in the extent to which professional standards are met and accountability exercised in practice.

The requirements of roles are responsibilities are not defined clearly enough. The school’s leaders do not hold staff to account effectively and there are wide inconsistencies in the extent to which professional standards are met and accountability fulfilled.

12

A

B

C

The school’s leaders give a high priority to developing the workforce: performance management and professional development are highly successful in fostering effective practice and in dealing with underperformance.

Performance management and professional development make a strong contribution to improving practice and raising standards. The school’s leaders and governors challenge underperformance effectively and are largely successful in securing the required improvement.

Performance management and professional development are not always linked closely enough to priorities. The impact on improving performance varies. The school’s leaders and governors do not always challenge underperformance effectively.

Performance management and professional development have limited impact on improving performance. The school’s leaders and governors do not challenge underperformance effectively.

The quality of teaching across the school and the impact on pupils’ learning and progress is consistently good and often excellent.

Most of the teaching, and its impact on pupils’ learning and progress, is consistently good.

Systems to lead and improve teaching and learning are developing but are not fully embedded. Variations in the quality of teaching limit pupils’ learning and progress in a few areas.

Work to lead and improve teaching and learning is not planned effectively and lacks coherence. There are significant variations in the quality of teaching that limit pupils’ learning and progress in key areas.

All staff have a shared understanding of the characteristics of excellent and good teaching.

Most staff have a shared understanding of the characteristics of excellent and good teaching.

The characteristics of good and excellent teaching are well defined but applied inconsistently.

There is little shared understanding of the characteristics of excellent and good teaching.

Processes to lead, identify, validate and share effective practice achieve continuous improvement.

Strategies to identify and share effective practice are generally successful in improving learning and teaching across the school as a whole.

The identification and sharing of effective practice is not yet systematic enough.

Good practice is not identified effectively or used to improve teaching across the school as a whole.

13

D

A

B

C

D

There are robust and effective processes to track pupils’ progress.

Processes to track pupils’ progress are effective in most cases.

Tracking lacks rigour in some areas and so does not always have sufficient impact on the progress pupils make.

Tracking is of very variable quality and has little impact on the progress pupils make.

Teacher assessment is consistent and accurate.

Teacher assessment is consistent and accurate in the main.

There are some inconsistencies in the reliability and accuracy of teacher assessment.

There are significant inconsistencies in the reliability and accuracy of teacher assessment.

14

SECTION 3 ERW Entitlement and Expectation Support Category As set out in the previous section, each school is allocated a basic level of support, challenge and intervention. This is monitored regularly and based on an analysis of need. The core support days to schools as described in the National Categorisation guidance notes that schools should receive a maximum of days support from the Challenge Adviser. Green support category A school in this category may receive up to 4 days of Challenge Adviser time.

Yellow Support Category A school in this category may receive up to 10 days of Challenge Adviser time.

Amber Support Category A school in this category may receive up to 15 days of Challenge Adviser time.

Red Support Category A school in this category may receive up to 25 days of Challenge Adviser time. The school will automatically receive a letter from the Local Authority where appropriate statutory powers may be invoked. In ERW, the support may exceed or be less than the allocation noted but will include support from other staff in LAs, ERW or other schools. This will include a proportionate response according to school need and size. In line with national and regional priorities, we will focus support on: • • • •

building a self improving system; reducing the impact of poverty on attainment; capacity to respond to Successful Futures and new curricular and pedagogy including literacy, numeracy and digital competence; and leadership.

15

Building a Self Improving System ERW will focus support on building reliance and capacity on schools to build a self improving system. This may on occasion be perceived as additional requirements on schools. Nevertheless, as we increase the resources available for school to school work and reduce the capacity of specialist advisers – schools will need to build the capacity to respond to pupil needs and drive self improving organisations.

Reducing the Impact of Poverty on Attainment Each school in ERW should receive the same level of challenge and analysis on the performance and progress of FSM pupils and other vulnerable pupils. The professional discussion between the school and the adviser should always analyse the impact of poverty on attainment and achievement. In reviewing the impact of poverty on attainment advisers should judge the extent to which schools:



mitigate the impact of deprivation in the early years and throughout their school careers so that learners are ‘school ready’ and have well developed early language skills



engage families effectively in children’s learning and school life so as to impact on their outcomes



better equip the school’s workforce to understand and overcome the challenges faced by learners from deprived backgrounds



ensure that learners from deprived backgrounds access the highest quality learning and teaching consistently and benefit from targeted interventions according to need



provide high quality digital learning experiences for learners to ensure they are equipped with skills to excel



engender high aspirations



raise expectations for learners from deprived backgrounds

All schools in ERW should:



place tackling the underachievement of learners from deprived backgrounds at the heart of school development planning, thinking about how to use resources and how to develop the workforce to meet the challenge



plan effectively for the use of the PDG in the context of taking a whole school approach to tackling disadvantage. The PDG should be targeted at learners, so as to reduce the impact of poverty on attainment interventions and programmes should be sustainable and have an impact in both the short and long term



set the highest expectations for all learners and be clear with learners that they can achieve high outcomes and realise their ambitions. Ensure learners know how they are progressing, their targets and what they need to do to achieve those targets. Use effective tracking to monitor progress against targets and provide feedback



teach children to plan, monitor and evaluate their own learning. This has been shown to result in between seven and nine months’ additional progress. It is particularly effective for lower achieving learners and those from deprived backgrounds. The Welsh Government has published resource materials on the Learning Wales website to support schools to use metacognition in the classroom http://learning.wales.gov.uk/learningpacks/pisa/introduction-to-metacognition/?lang=en



consider how digital learning may be used to support learning in school and at home for all learners 16

Primary schools / challenge schools and special schools also: • establish provision for, and promote take-up, of free breakfast, particularly for learners from deprived backgrounds. Hungry children have lower concentration and are more likely to display poor behaviour. Universal breakfast provision has been found to disproportionately improve dietary behaviours of children from lower socio-economic status schools and families. Free breakfast in primary schools is intended to help improve the health and concentration of children to assist in raising the standards of learning and attainment, by providing children with a healthy start to the school day. All primary schools that request it should receive funding to provide all learners of primary school age registered in maintained primary schools in Wales with a free, healthy breakfast at school each day Non-maintained settings and all schools should: • plan for effective transition. Poor transition can damage progress and confidence



work in partnership with parents / carers, families, early years settings, Flying Start and other schools to plan transition between settings / schools into Foundation Phase, and onto Key Stage 2



form good links between schools and monitor the ongoing progress of learners



key features of good transition may include: o

sharing information about achievement and specific needs

o

joint curriculum planning and or teaching across Key Stage 2 and 3

o

joint moderation of standards in cluster groups of primary / secondary schools at the end of Key Stage 2

The effective use of PDG and the value for money demonstrated in impact on outcomes should be noted in every core visit.

Synopsis of Estyn PDG Guidance Using the PDG to reduce the impact of poverty on educational attainment Schools must: • •

Use PDG funding primarily to improve attainment for eFSM or LAC learners; other learners may benefit also from PDG-funded provision but they should not be the primary target for the provision Publish their plans for the use of PDG either on their own website, on the consortium website or on paper

Schools should not: • •

Use PDG funding to support the procurement of ICT infrastructure or connectivity costs Use PDG funding to sustain permanent roles in respect of a school's core activity or use PDG funding to cover the cost of redundancies

The PDG may be used for whole-school initiatives that will particularly benefit learners who are e-FSM and LAC. (This needs careful consideration as it does give a little wriggle room if interpreted incorrectly and could lead to the same issues as RAISE funding, i.e. the benefits to eFSM pupils become lost in the overall RAISE-funded provision).

17

The grant does not have to be tracked to individual learners. Impact In order for the school to claim positive outcomes/impact in relation to the PDG, the school should be able to demonstrate in one or more of the following areas that: • • •

The gap in attainment between eFSM pupils and other pupils has decreased over the 3 year period; The gap in attainment between LAC and all pupils has decreased over the 3 year period: The attendance levels of eFSM and LAC Ieamers supported by the grant have improved;

Provision Schools should be able to provide evidence that the following practices are in place and that leaders and managers know the impact that they have had on outcomes for pupils. Adopted a whole-school, strategic approach to tackling disadvantage, which may include using CPD to improve specific approaches to teaching that will benefit eFSM and LAC pupils (the grant can be used for this) Made effective use of data tracking systems to identify eFSM learners’ needs, to target interventions and to monitor impact Adopted strategies that involve parents/carers in learners‘education; Engaged communities in the life of the school and the school in the life of the community through effective partnership working, especially in particular in Communities First areas Worked in partnership with each other and with other organisations; Employed interventions that have had a positive effect on the standards and/or wellbeing of eFSM pupils Practicalities Ensure that the school provide you with evidence to show what difference the money is making for each area of the school's spend and is included in the SDP. The evidence base for 3.4.2 Below are two examples of good quality evidence bases with regard to the PDG spend. The first shows how a school is spending its money well and the second shows poor practice.

Use of PDG funding: Funding, such as PDG and SEG has been utilised well to improve standards and PDG money in particular has helped close the gap between FSM and Non-FSM by the end of Key Stage 2. Effective use is made of PDG money to support pupils entitled to FSM who are underachieving in basic skills or who have social and emotional needs. The school has an effective and comprehensive PDG plan. This ensures: intervention programmes led by TAs, teachers; TA & teacher collaboration time as well as collaboration between Flying Start and nursery to ensure smooth transition; visits to other schools for staff to view good practice in addressing the poverty gap; collaboration and meetings with EWOs to target attendance / punctuality of FSM pupils; also educational visits to enrich deprived pupils’ learning experiences as well as visitors in class e.g. artists, poets and scientists; practical solutions such as daytime consultations so that parents who work evenings have an 18

opportunity to discuss with teachers; numerous training sessions for parents on literacy/numeracy and ICT subsidised after school clubs for FSM pupils. As a result although FSM pupils generally perform below their peers the gap is reducing by the end of KS2. FSM pupils’ performance also compares favourably to family, LA and Wales averages. The school tracks the performance of FSM pupils conscientiously and targets this group of pupils well with a range of intervention activities. However no FSM pupils have gained Outcome 6 in all three areas of learning. At the end of KS2, 92.3% of FSM pupils (12/13 J achieved the CSI, while 94.7 of non-FSM pupils (19/20) achieved the CSi. This is the smallest differential recorded between the two groups since the school opened (7 years). Three FSM pupils achieved Levels in all three areas, while four non—FSM pupils had a similar achievement. The gap between FSM and others clearly narrows by end of KS2.

PDG plan for 2013-14 and 2014-15 is weak. The current 14-15 plan has only one entry and that is under intervention Programmes — the whole £22,032 grant is spent on two PPA teachers, one for 2 days a week and one for 1.5 days a week. This plan lacks rigour and sufficient detail. The previous grant was spent on ensuring ”each child in KS2 will have their own iPad to enhance and improve numeracy and literacy standards”. This seems to use PDG money for non-FSM pupils. No review of the impact of this grant. The activities have not had a sufficiently positive impact on the outcomes of FSM pupils in the school. The acting headteacher school could not show that the school measures the impact of the PDG on improving outcomes for pupils eligible for FSM. The 1314 grant was not targeted sufficiently clearly on targeting FSM pupils. The PDG plan is not clear on the school's approach to deploying resources to meet the needs of pupils eligible for FSM. Neither is it clear that the leaders have developed the knowledge and expertise of staff on strategies to meet the needs of disadvantaged pupils and their families

Capacity to Respond to Successful Futures As we broker support to schools, we should consider how we support them to build sustainable capacity to respond to the needs of Successful Futures. http://gov.wales/docs/dcells/publications/150317-successful-futures-en.pdf Our commitment to securing effective leadership, teaching and learning and support for learning is clear in our plans and menu of support, and as we establish sustainable arrangements to change curriculum and pedagogy for the future we will respond proactively to the principles of Qualified for Life and the Furlong report. We are committed to leading a changing climate in education. Enabling the concept of an all through education system for learners 3-16 or 3-19 is key to facilitating a learning continuum for all learners. The aim of reducing the impact of unnecessary transitions in delivery styles and pedagogy at age 11 means that schools will need to work more closely together. Teachers will need to teach across traditional boundaries and learn new methods and pedagogy to respond to digital learning needs of learners and a skills based curriculum. Learners should progress through a continuum of learning, gaining skills in literacy, numeracy, digital competence and the Welsh language. Ultimately, gaining detailed subject specific knowledge on top of a solid foundation in the expressive arts; health and wellbeing; humanities; languages, literacy and communication; maths and numeracy; science and technology.

19

Teachers will need professional learning and development as they embrace new system change. For most, this will be welcomed and will build on work in the Foundation Phase and in embedded cross curricular work in digital competence, literacy and numeracy. As we broker support for identified Pioneer Schools and others, we envisage that the effective practice we see in curriculum design in some of our most effective schools will lead us to building evidence based practice. ERW is confident in tackling identified challenges and building on our strengths. Responding proactively to the objectives set out in Qualified for Life and the curricular changes ahead post Donaldson will require a significant focus on workforce support and development. The New Deal and the Furlong recommendations are welcomed. These key drivers of education in Wales currently, reflect well the direction in which ERW has been steered in recent years. As a region we are strengthening existing partnerships with higher education and supporting school staff to rebuild confidence and morale whilst re-skilling for a digital future. Improving our digital competency across all areas of delivery is key to more efficient and effective working. The role of technology in pedagogy becomes increasingly essential and developing effective methodologies will be key to success in schools. Curriculum planning and developing an evolving new and innovative pedagogy which is fit for a new curriculum will be a national challenge. Regionally, we are committed to seeking solutions and enable opportunities to plan and learn together. The self improving system for education will require strategic partnerships between schools to work together creatively so that the system shapes its own dextrous workforce. Raising standards of teaching for all will be a key priority for the region. We strive for every teacher to be a good teacher over time, and for pupils to receive good or better teaching every day in every lesson. Supporting and delivering the Minister’s New Deal to develop teachers and school leaders will dovetail with our work on improving teaching. ERW will support teachers to strive for excellence and implement and deliver new areas of work and curricular changes. We know that most of our teachers are good, and teach well consistently, but we continue to offer support in our drive for excellence. The potential New Deal Pioneer schools are already working with us and others as enablers of professional learning within the school community.

Leadership, Development and Professional Learning Building leadership capacity and further developing skills, knowledge and experience within school leaders is a critical aspect of our future. Sustainable schools in a self improving system will need leaders throughout the school. ERW’s support for governors can be seen online, with additional local support delivered at cluster level. http://www.erw.wales/ Professional learning opportunities for aspiring, middle and senior leaders can also be accessed. Continuous Professional Development for teachers is also available through the Outstanding and Improving Teacher Programme and through supporting work between schools as lead practitioners or leaders of learning. The current Masters modules http://www.erw.wales/professional-learning/school-leadership-developmentprogrammes/ are available for staff to access. As the Ministers New Deal for the teaching profession evolves over the coming year, additional support developments will become available.

20

21

Support, Challenge and Intervention This section outlines the basic expectation. Support will cascade from one colour to the next with all schools being able to expect what is described for higher categories. School support category - Green Level of support

Level of intervention / brokered support

Two annual Challenge adviser visits (as per core entitlement of LSCI) comprising of Autumn core monitoring visit (and HT Performance Management) and a second visit to review provision according to the regional focus (e.g. teaching and learning)

Jointly agreed brokered support according to SER and SDP where necessary.

Support 4 core support days: Core entitlement, including preparation and recording of: • Autumn core visit (in most cases this will be a full day since the challenge adviser will also be part of the head teacher’s Performance Management panel which is normally scheduled on the same day);

Schools submit SER, SDP and other relevant documents to LA. Challenge adviser scrutinises relevant documentation and provides written response.

• Review of provision; • Review of relevant school documentation; • Bespoke support according to need

22

The Way forward Schools may be commissioned to support schools in the other categories as appropriate. Schools will be expected to and encouraged to become engaged in aspects of and provide school-to-school support. In addition, schools may be in a position to release staff to support developments, such as lead practitioner or leaders of learning.

School support category - Yellow Level of intervention/ Level of support brokered support Schools will be advised and supported on key priorities for improvement. Schools submit SER, SDP and other relevant documents to LA. Challenge Adviser reviews the documentation and provides feedback to the school’s SLT and Chair of Governors as appropriate. Specific areas for improvement are agreed.

Support

School improvement 10 support days, to planning will be monitored to include: ensure that it identifies • the core entitlement as actions and resources that outlined for green will lead to improved schools; and standards and / or leadership and provision as appropriate • an agreed programme Jointly agreed brokered of follow-up support, challenge and support according to SER and intervention work SIP where necessary. which is focussed on improving pupil outcomes and / or leadership and provision as appropriate.

Improvement planning to include LA minimum support and, where necessary, additional commissioned support from existing school resource.

NOTE Where there is a mismatch between the first and second judgements (standards and capacity to improve respectively), the programme of support must be planned according to the main areas that need to be improved, i.e. the weakest judgement.

A bespoke programme of support agreed between the school and Challenge Adviser according to areas for development identified in the Autumn Term Review.

23

Way forward Schools will be challenged to become self-improving schools and move into the green category. These schools may be used to provide schoolto-school support. In some cases, these schools may receive school-to-school support from schools in the green category to support their ongoing improvement.

School category: Amber Schools at risk of causing concern Level of support Schools will be advised on key priorities for improvement where they are not accurately identified. Schools submit SER, SDP and other relevant documents to LA; Challenge adviser reviews the documentation and provides feedback to the school’s SLT and Chair of Governors as appropriate. Improvement planning to include LA minimum support and where necessary, additional commissioned support from existing school resource.

Level of intervention

Support

School improvement 15 support days, to planning will be monitored to include: ensure that it identifies • the core entitlement actions and resources that as outlined for green will lead to improved and yellow schools; standards. and • follow-up support, SEG and PDG funding may be challenge and withheld until the LA is intervention work satisfied that school which is focussed on improving standards improvement plans identify and /or the quality actions and direct resources and impact of appropriately. leadership and/or provision. Mid-cycle or leadership review may be required; LA maintains the right to instigate a school review as required at any point in the inspection cycle.

NOTE

An accelerated improvement board may be utilised to support the pace of improvement in the school

Dedicated leadership support and challenge will be provided as necessary. This is likely to include governors and wider leadership group. Support and/or intervention to be provided for underperforming teachers.

24

Where there is a mismatch between the first and second judgements (standards and capacity to improve respectively), the programme of support must be planned according to the main areas that need to be improved, i.e. the weakest judgement.

Way forward Schools that are unable to improve over a reasonable period, or who fail to manage their improvement effectively, will by default become schools causing concern. In such instances, the Director of Education may consider issuing a statutory warning notice under the provisions of the School Standards and Organisation (Wales) Act 2013.

School support category – Red: Schools causing concern Level of support In addition to the support provided for the other categories: Headteacher and Chair of Governors meet with Education Directorate / Learning Service’s SMT and relevant members of the School Improvement Team to discuss performance and improvement. LA intervention to support improvement is confirmed. A LA action plan of coordinated support is drawn up, detailing the nature and level of support, timetable for action and expected outcomes. The programme will dovetail with the school’s own improvement programme. Half-termly evaluation on progress provided to the Director of Education or equivalent.

Level of intervention

Support 25 support days, to include:

Intensive: Two day SCC visit. Recommendations must be included in the SDP The Director of Education or equivalent will consider issuing a warning notice under the provisions of the School Standards and Organisation (Wales) Act 2013. Only in exceptional circumstances will this not be actioned. Warning notices will include: • the grounds for intervention; • the reasons why the authority is satisfied that the grounds exist; • the action which the governing body is required to take in order to deal with the grounds for intervention; • the period in which the action is to be taken by the governing body ('the compliance period’); and • the action the local authority is minded to take if the governing body does not take the required action. All schools causing concern will be required to receive additional days from challenge advisers to support and accelerate improvement.

25

• the core entitlement; • follow-up support, challenge and intervention work which is focussed on improving pupil outcomes, the quality of leadership and/or provision; • regular visits, e.g. half termly to monitor action plan and collect evidence to report to the Director of Education or equivalent; and • mandatory challenge adviser support days

Way forward The LA will closely monitor to ensure that sufficient progress is being made to bring about a rapid improvement in outcomes, leadership and provision. A key indicator of this will be the urgency and rigour with which the head, SLT and governing body implement actions for improvement.

If urgent intervention is required, the local authority can action. Intervention may include: Requirement to secure advice or collaborate The appointment of additional governors The appointment of an IEB - a specially constituted governing body which replaces a school's existing governing body. The suspension of delegated authority for the governing body to manage a school’s budget Power to give directions and take steps.

Where it is deemed necessary further specific leadership support will be considered on a case by case basis. This is likely to include an accelerated improvement board.

Note

Failure to secure improvement will result in further intervention processes being applied, including, where necessary, application to Welsh Ministers to direct the federation of a school causing concern or that a school in special measures be closed.

Headteacher performance management

This allocation will include the following support for Headteacher performance management. Green schools

1 session

Yellow schools

1 session

Amber schools

1session + 1 monitoring visit + Governing Body discussion

Red schools

1session + 2 monitoring visits + Governing Body discussion

Minimum Entitlement Visit 1

Green

x

Visit 2

Visit 3

Review

Automatic letter

Consider and use statutory powers

x

Headteacher Performance Management

1 session

*** Yellow

Amber

Red

x

x

x

x

x

x

?

1 session

x

x

1session + 1 monitoring visit + Governing Body discussion

x

1session + 2 monitoring visits + Governing Body discussion

x

x

xx

x

26

SECTION 4 Menu of Support Introduction The Menu of Support must reflect closely and explicitly the support, challenge and intervention required in the school. This should be reflected in the schools’ improvement / development plan and self-evaluation. The ‘menu’ should be negotiated and agreed with the school’s leadership team. The principles of building a regional self improving system should be remembered when engaging in the dialogue to agree the Menu of Support, Challenge and Intervention. The role of the menu is to support resilience in the school and facilitate and broker the required support for the school.

1. Literacy and Numeracy 2. Leadership 3. Digital Learning 4. Teaching and Learning 5. Support, Challenge and Intervention for Governors 6. GCSE 7. Welsh in Education 8. Schools Causing Concern 9. Support for Learning 10. School to School Support

27

Support Themes Literacy and Numeracy Any school identified as still requiring critical intervention or challenge with regards to implementing the Literacy and Numeracy Framework should be identified early (Christmas 2015). Specific support will be packaged so that these schools do not disadvantage learners. The type of support required to deliver the LNF should be specific and very focused. Where schools have received considerable support, training and guidance for LNF, this should be highlighted so that directed and structured interventions can be put in place to enable sustainability. The menu highlights support for specific requirements. In addition lead practitioners of literacy and numeracy are available to support individual teachers where necessary. Leadership Professional learning and leadership support is identified as a key element of the menu. Schools with new leaders or staff requiring support can be referred to our regional catalogue of professional learning. In addition, support for planning, self evaluation, data analysis, performance management.

Digital Learning We will have capacity to provide specific support to schools to develop ICT across the curriculum as well as digital competence for staff and pupils regionally. In addition, local authorities will have officers to support schools. Both Challenge Advisers and schools need to be clear about what is required and its focus. Support can be provided from ERW’s Head of Digital Learning for these aspects in particular.

Teaching and Learning

Support, Challenge and Intervention for Governors When planning the ACV meeting with the school, the adviser should, wherever possible, include governors in the dialogue. All categorisation judgements on leadership should include explicit comments on the capacity of governors to help the school improve. Each governing body should be judged against the regional expectations / national categorisation. Where governors require support, this should be noted in the Core Visit form.

GCSE

28

Welsh in Education

Schools Causing Concern The type of support and intervention for these schools may include – accelerated improvement boards, support from another school leader, statutory intervention for governing body, Leadership reviews with action plan, targeted departmental supported intervention.

Support for Learning

School to School Support Support between schools, teachers and departments is included in all aspects. However, self identified additional support can be sought in addition to the above. This may include using Deialog.

29

SECTION 5 Guidance for Spring Visit 2016

Spring and Summer Terms 2016

The Quality of Teaching and Learning Additional Briefing for Schools and Challenge Advisers

30

Introduction The ERW Delivery Board and local authority Directors have agreed that the focus of the second core visit across the region during the spring and summer terms 2016 - 18 will be on supporting and developing teaching and learning. The feedback from the activitie in 2014 and 2015 has been positive and schools report a positive legacy and impact on standads of teaching as a consequence. Teachers want to share their best practice, and therefore will include sampled observation of classroom practice. The purpose of this visit will be to support schools to strengthen and further develop their systems and processes for improving the quality of teaching and learning in their schools. This year (2016) we will focus on sharing and collaboration between schools and show how it is impacting on standards.It will also support teachers to identify stregnths and areas for development in their teaching. The aim of this work with schools is to enable all schools to establish systems which are effective in identifying and sharing best practice and in supporting improvement. This guidance has been prepared for schools and Challenge Advisers to ensure consistency across the region, and enable us to identify the development needs of Schools, LAs and the region. Core Content for All Schools The following are aspects should be integrated into all visits. Individual Local Authorities (LAs) can incorporate other aspects in accordance with their individual priorities and to meet the school’s need Any school exempt from the visits must be agreed with the Head of Hub and reasons for the exemption will be open to challenge by the Managing Director. Reasons for these rare exemptions could include recent or impending Estyn inspection etc. Schools will be visited according to risk e.g. yellow and green schools could be visited during the summer term. Headteachers of green and yellow schools may be invited to provide additional capacity to the LA teams. Green schools will receive a ‘light touch’ monitoring exercise. Membership of the teams will be proportionate to the size of the school and the category the school is placed in, e.g. more officers will visit schools in red or amber categories. Visits to these schools will be prioritised to take place earliest in the cycle of visits. Schools should plan ahead for these visits at the beginning of the academic year, and build them into their improvement activities for the year. This will allow all schools to schedule joint observations with advisers, consider their practice worth sharing and support self evaluation. Principles and Protocols •



The main focus will be on evaluating the school’s own self-evaluation and quality assurance processes. Identifying areas of excellence, practice to share within and beyond the school. Lesson observation will be a part of the core activity. Consequently the school will be expected to provide the team with its own evaluation of the quality of teaching and learning and present evidence of internal lesson observations and related activities. It is not envisaged that this will be additional to current information held at the school as part of its self-evaluation arrangements. The overall feedback by the school’s Challenge Adviser will include an overview of the strengths and areas for improvement in teaching and learning and will discuss the accuracy of the school’s own evaluation and the quality of its processes. Learning / pupil progress will be informed by an analysis of the relevant data, by the progress made by pupils in the lesson and looking at the pupils’ work over time in their books or other relevant work.

31

• •

• • •

• •

In particular we will be looking for preparedness to deliver Successful Futures, and the teaching and learning capacity within the school to engage with a new curriculum with different expectations. This will include the scope detailed in Section 3. ERW will follow a set protocol for lesson observation and use a standard lesson observation tool. This is intended to ensure consistency across the region which will be further supplemented by regional training. This will allow us to monitor the standards of teaching in the sample each year. Update and refinements will be shared with schools a available; Ensuring that teaching strategies support vulnerable learners and work to reduce the impact of poverty on attainment will be a common focus. The school may need to draw our attention to relevant interventions within and outside the classroom. Where Headteachers have continued to use the software as part of their approach to improving teaching and learning, we will look at any progress data available; Schools will be expected to identify a member of the senior management team or equivalent to join the team so that joint observations with school leaders are carried out whenever possible to moderate judgements on the quality of teaching and learning by school leaders. Teams will include Challenge Advisers, other LA officers with responsibility for particular subjects and areas of learning, headteachers and / or nominated school-based practitioners; The visit will be scaled according to the school’s categorisation; School leaders should brief staff on that the two core visits are custom and practice in the region and part of the statutory monitoring role of the LA. It should be made clear that this is a supportive process. Information will be provided for headteachers to share with staff prior to the visit.

Points to emphasise: • • • • • • • •

This is a developmental process; The main focus is the quality of teaching in the school as a whole rather than that of individual teachers. Nevertheless, the observer may, as appropriate and if agreed beforehand, identify what support is needed by individual teachers; We will agree with schools that this visit will not take any teacher beyond three lesson observations per year (unless the teacher is part of a formal process / competency); At the discretion of the school and the teacher, the lesson observation can serve multiple purposes, e.g. joint observation with line manager for the purpose of Performance Management; Oral formative feedback will be offered immediately or shortly after the lesson. No summative judgement on the quality of teaching and learning will be shared during the feedback; We will invite, but cannot insist on, written lesson plans. However, if teachers choose not to provide written plans, we will need to discuss the learning objectives beforehand so that we can evaluate how well they are met in the lesson; All persons carrying out observations will have QTS and will have received recent training on lesson observation; The visit will identify and promote the sharing of excellent practice.

32

Prior to the Visit Challenge Adviser will liaise with the headteacher and agree the date and arrangements for the visit which will include the schedule of lesson observations. (Observations will include a range of quality of teaching as judged by the school.) Local Authority Familiarise with: •





Visit 1 Report including AWCDS and National Test Data. Challenge Adviser/ person leading the visit will collect the relevant performance data e.g: benchmarked data over three years in the relevant subject areas / % A* -- C GCSE etc. against National / LA averages



Note any recommendations focused on teaching or written feedback for learners from the work scrutiny visit and ACV 1.



Note any Estyn recommendations from the previous inspection regarding teaching.



Plan and agree on specific timetable for the visit with school including the lesson observations and interviews with headteacher and /or school lead for teaching and learning



Agree with schools that this will not take any teacher beyond the three lesson observations per year



Organise and brief additional officers, if relevant.

School Provide schedule of lesson observations including a range of standards



Provide copies of school’s own lesson observation records



Provide copy of schools own system and processes for improving teaching



Teaching and Learning Policy



Marking and feedback policy



Share aim of the visit and timetable with all school staff.



Head, member of SMT or other relevant person will be encouraged to be a part of lesson observations and feedback.

During the visit Challenge Adviser and the designated team (including the headteacher or other SMT member) will follow the agreed schedule for lesson observations, interviews with headteacher and senior managers and conduct scrutiny of relevant documentation. Documentation to be made available during the visit •

All relevant pupil books or work to be made available to the observer during the lesson and the overall comments for teaching will be set in the context of pupil progress;

33



• • •

Any documents relating to the school’s self-evaluation of teaching and learning, e.g. lesson observation schedule, Lesson observation reports produced by the school during in-school monitoring together with any evidence of subsequent improvement / impact, training schedule, etc. The range and type of documentation will inevitably vary from school to school; How the school shares best practice and how it supports teachers to improve; The school’s policy on providing written feedback to learners; The school’s Teaching and Learning Policy.

Interviews and Meetings to be agreed beforehand between the school and Challenge Adviser • •

Interview with the Head/SMT/co-ordinators about the process of monitoring and evaluating the quality of teaching as part of the self-evaluation process Meeting with coordinators / middle leaders to discuss their role in improving teaching

Questions to pose to Headteacher / SMT: How well do leaders manage the performance of staff in order to help them improve their practice? Does performance management address whole school training and development needs? Does CPD support teachers to improve and is it related to their performance management targets? How does the available support help you prepare for the curricular changes ahead? Do you have the capacity to respond effectively to expectations? Questions to ask when evaluating school processes in relation to improving teaching and learning 1. 2.

Is there a shared culture of improvement, self-evaluation and professional learning in your school? Do leaders in your school communicate a clear vision for the achievement of high pupil standards and the quality of teaching and learning they wish to see? Is classroom observation seen as an entitlement by staff in your school? Is the teaching and learning policy explicit about the purposes and timings of classroom observations? Are leadership roles distributed so that responsibilities are shared and understood by all staff? Do observations focus clearly on the extent to which teaching helps pupils to learn, make progress and achieve? Specifically is there appropriate differentiation and support for vulnerable pupils? Do observations draw on a wide range of evidence about pupils’ learning, such as scrutiny of written work, listening to learners? Are observers trained? Does moderation take place to ensure fairness and consistency? Are there programmed opportunities for professional dialogue between the observer and the observer? How do teachers and observers make sure that all learners, are supported well and that the climate set for learning supports reduce the impact of poverty on attainment? When assessing pupils’ work, how is this moderated?

3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10.

Verbal feedback will be given at the end of the visit and will include: •

Overall feedback by the Challenge Advisor will include an overall evaluation of the quality of teaching and learning, an overview of strengths and areas for improvements in teaching, an evaluation of how accurate the school’s own evaluation is for the quality of teaching

34

• • • • • •

The quality of teaching and learning including the overall whole school analysis arising from the collation of information gathered using the software for lesson observations Standards of provision in terms of the quality of written feedback to learners The effectiveness of systems and processes for improving teaching The effectiveness of sharing best practice The effectiveness of leadership and management in terms of monitoring systems The quality and accuracy of the school’s process of lesson observations and the impact on raising standards.

Feedback will: • • •

Summarise the strengths in terms of learners’ standards, the provision and leadership and management. Summarise possible areas for improvement in order to raise standards and improve the provision and leadership and management. Suggest further support or guidance including working with another similar school.

Following the visit A written report should follow within 10 working days of the visit. The report should be sent to the Headteacher. All Local Authorities will keep a copy of all school reports. These reports will be the basis for a local summative report by the end of the core visit 2 cycle. The findings of this summative report will be shared with all schools. In turn, each of the six local authority reports will feed into a regional report. Follow-up actions will be agreed by the ERW Delivery Board and Teaching and Learning Priority Board Supporting documentation: Effective Classroom observation in primary and secondary schools The Future Delivery of Education Services in Wales A self evaluation manual for primary/secondary schools Guidance for inspecting schools Successful Futures

Estyn Oct 2014 Robert Hill 2013 Estyn 2014 Estyn 2014 WG 2015

APPENDICES Appendix 1 Appendix 2 Appendix 3 Appendix 4 Appendix 5

Welsh Government protocols for lesson observation How do we evaluate teaching? (CIF 2.2) Questions to consider on the quality of marking and feedback Further guidance Listening to Learners

35

APPENDIX 1: Welsh Government protocols for classroom observation Classroom observation – Purpose and protocols Classroom observation can be an important tool in raising standards through supporting practitioners in sharing and developing their skills and so improving outcomes for learners. While there is no upper limit placed on the number of occasions in which observation may take place, it is essential that the emphasis is firmly placed on the quality of experience rather than quantity. To ensure that observation is purposeful, supportive and developmental, all those involved in arranging, carrying out, or participating in observation should observe the following guidance which sets out the purpose and protocols that characterise effective practice. Scope and purpose What is meant by ‘Classroom observation’? ‘Classroom observation’ refers to all occasions when learning and/or teaching activities are observed for a specific purpose someone other than the class teacher and support staff normally attached to the class. Principles and protocols Classroom observation should observe the following principles: •

• • • • • • •



All those involved in each observation should have a shared understanding of its specific purpose. Disputes about observation procedures, etc., should be deal with through the school’s established resolution processes and/or recognised collective issue resolution issue processes where applicable. Where practicable and appropriate, efforts should be made to combine observations for different purposes so that the most efficient use is made of opportunities for classroom observation. Careful choice should be given to the observer so it reflects the purpose of the observation. Observation should support and develop learning and teaching – there should be limited disruption to normal classroom activity. Observations should be planned in advance so that those involved have adequate notice. Observation should be objective, developmental and supportive and conducted with professionalism, integrity and courtesy. Successful observation requires preparation and appropriate consideration. As part of the school’s overall arrangements for classroom observation those involved in observation should seek to agree in advance the nature and any timing of any feedback to be provided and with whom it is to be shared. Planning and feedback arrangements should take account of directed time and statutory terms and conditions of employment.

36

APPENDIX 2 How do we evaluate teaching? (CIF 2.2) High-quality teaching is the foundation on which effective educational performance is built, enabling pupils to acquire knowledge, understanding and skills. Monitoring and evaluation of the quality of teaching are central to judging the effectiveness of the quality of education and training. This process needs to centre on classroom observation. Evaluation of the information on standards may lead to judgements about what is going well and not so well, but it is only through classroom observation that a school will find out the reasons why. The observation and evaluation of teaching should be based on clear and well-understood criteria. The key task in judging the quality of teaching is the impact it has on the standards achieved. It should not focus on the use of a particular process in isolation from its impact. Similarly, when scrutinising assessment, the focus should be on what impact it has on learning. How well do we evaluate the range and quality of teaching approaches? (CIF 2.2.1) Questions we should consider about the range and quality of teaching approaches • Do we have high enough expectations of all pupils? • Do our teachers have good, up-to-date subject knowledge? • Do teachers plan effectively and have clear objectives for taught sessions and other learning experiences? • Do teachers have a range of teaching and training methods and resources to interest pupils and to stimulate and to challenge them to achieve highly? • Are we successful in providing demanding work to meet the needs of all pupils, for example those with ALN? • Do we provide good language models for pupils? • Do we establish good working relationships that foster learning? • Do we manage pupils’ behaviour effectively? • Do we use learning support staff effectively? How well do we raise pupils’ achievement through assessment of and for learning? (CIF 2.2.2) Questions we should consider about how well we assess • • • • • • •

Do pupils regularly review their own learning, understand their progress and contribute to setting their own learning targets? Do we use different forms of feedback effectively to inform pupils about their learning? Are we consistent in the quality and amount of feedback given to pupils? Do we encourage pupils to take note of feedback? Do we make sure that assessments are valid and reliable? How well does the assessment process inform future planning? How well do we analyse assessment findings, including National Curriculum assessments and the outcomes of the national reading and numeracy tests?

Good teaching: Most teaching ensures that pupils are motivated and engaged and secures pupils’ good progress and learning. Teachers and other adults have wide and detailed subject knowledge and use a range of approaches and activities to inspire and challenge most pupils. Teachers make thorough, skilful and imaginative use of resources, including technology to enhance learning. Adult support is well focused and makes a significant contribution to the quality of pupils’ learning. Detailed feedback to pupils, both orally and through marking, enables them to know how well they are doing and what they need to do to maintain good progress. Pupils’ progress and wellbeing are tracked effectively across the school at individual, group and subject levels or areas of learning, where appropriate. As a result, teachers 37

and other adults plan lessons well to meet pupils’ learning needs. Parents/carers are kept well informed about their children’s achievements, wellbeing and development. Unsatisfactory teaching: Teaching does not enable pupils to learn well. Too much teaching fails to engage and stimulate pupils or promote their learning and progress. Teachers and other adults do not manage pupils’ behaviour well enough. A significant minority of teachers have inadequate subject knowledge and/or a poor understanding of how to meet pupils’ learning needs. The work of teachers and other adults lacks focus and fails to support the needs of pupils. Assessment takes too little account of pupils’ prior learning and teachers and adults do not have a clear enough understanding of pupils’ needs. Pupils’ progress and wellbeing are not tracked effectively across the school at individual, group and subject levels or areas of learning. The school does not provide pupils with enough information about their progress and/or how they can improve. Many parents/carers do not receive enough information about their child’s progress and development.

38

APPENDIX 3 Questions to consider on the quality of marking and feedback • •

Are teachers differentiating appropriately? Are work sheets overused? Judge whether learners are over-reliant on support (writing frameworks, worksheets, too much copying of information, over-reliance on calculators and multiplication charts), that prevents them from developing their independent skills.

What is the quality of the feedback? • Is it in line with the school policy? • Does it refer to the Learning Objective and Success Criteria? • Does the feedback/marking close the gap? • Does feedback/marking address punctuation spelling and grammar? • Is there time given for pupils to respond to the feedback? • Is there evidence of peer and self-assessment? Marking and assessment: • Is marking up-to-date? • Is there a consistent approach to marking? • Are comments on pupils’ books diagnostic and do they show pupils how to improve? • Where appropriate, does feedback relate specifically to skills development? • Do pupils and teachers follow up on comments? • Is there self or peer marking and self or peer assessment? • Are there many gaps in pupils’ books, or missing work? Possible Types of Feedback to Pupils (for information only – ERW doesn’t advocate one type of feedback over another. The key issue is the quality and usefulness of feedback to inform learners of their performance and provide information on how to improve) Feedback Using Comments Only What is it? The only type of marking that has any effect on learning is “comment only”. Learning happens when the learner has strengths and weaknesses identified, and is given clear advice on how to improve. This technique could be combined with peer assessment so that learners feedback to peers about how improvements could be made. Targets of how to improve What is it? Learners are given targets but more importantly are shown how to reach those targets. Teachers then check that targets have been reached.

39

Closing the gap comments What is it? Whatever the task, feedback should first focus on the learning objective of the task. The emphasis when marking should be on both success against the learning objective and improvements made against the learning objective. Use focused comments to help the learner in “closing the gap” between what they have achieved and what they could have achieved. Useful “closing the gap” comments are  Reminder prompt (“What else could you say here?”)  Scaffolded prompt (“What was the boy doing?”, “The boy was so angry he……”, “Describe the expression on the boy’s face.”)  Example prompt (“Choose one of these or one of your own: He ran around in circles looking for the rabbit/The dog couldn’t believe his eyes.) Two Stars and a wish What is it? A tool to make sure that there are always positive comments on work with a target. Use “two stars and a wish” when feedback is two positive comments (the stars!) on the work and one specific improvement to make as soon as the comment is received (the wish!). Instant Feedback What is it? Feedback should be as immediate to the task as possible. It should also be related to the learning intention; otherwise learners’ expectations will be that the learning intention is of secondary importance to other issues e.g. spelling, presentation etc. The use of peer and self-assessment can help to make feedback immediate. Allow Time What is it? When work has been distance-marked, allow learners to read and then make one focused improvement based on the improvement suggestion. In order for the marking to be formative, this information must be used and acted upon by the learners. Self-assessment What is it? Where possible, allow learners to self-assess work. This involves sharing learning intentions with learners and agreeing on success criteria. Learners will also benefit from looking at work of good quality before they start their task. Temporary comments What is it? Ensure that correction of work and comments about work are temporary. Use pencil or post-it notes for learners to remove once they have acted upon the comments.

40

Self-Marking What is it? Learners mark their own work using a mark scheme or assessment criteria. It is most effective if learners understand the assessment procedure and look for ways to improve future work. Peer Marking What is it? Learners mark or comment on others’ work. Can be very effective after group or individual presentations, especially if the assessment criteria are clear and have been discussed before the work begins.

41

APPENDIX 4 Standards • • • •

Consider any analysis of standardised literacy and numeracy scores and/or reading ages of particular groups; Look at pupils’ work to judge how well pupils apply them across the curriculum. Is the quality of presentation/ standards of achievement in line with year group expectations? Lesson observations must be supported with evidence from pupils work.

You should scrutinise samples of work to judge pupils’ literacy and numeracy skills (where appropriate) are at a level that is appropriate to the task and their ability. Judge whether learners are over-reliant on support (writing frameworks, worksheets, too much copying of information, over-reliance on calculators and multiplication charts), that prevents them from developing their independent skills. Provision Consider: • • • • • • •

How well schools are implementing the LNF and embedding literacy and numeracy skills into learning experiences across all subjects and/or areas of learning; Whether pupils have opportunities to write for different purposes and in a range of forms using paper and information and communication technology (ICT) for composition; Whether pupils have opportunities to gain a range of strategies to help them spell and punctuate accurately; and Whether opportunities are maximised for pupils to apply their numeracy skills and tasks set are matched appropriately to pupils’ developing needs and abilities; There is planning for progression so that pupils are given increasingly challenging tasks and benefit from teaching methods matched appropriately to their learning; Planning for the development of pupils’ thinking, planning, creative and problem-solving skills. Differentiation work to progressively increase the level of challenge/support provided to learners.

Leadership and Management You should consider: •

Whether leaders and managers make certain that there are high expectations for pupils’ achievement, expressed as challenging individual, class and whole school targets;

• • •

Whether the school has a robust and regular timetable for lesson observation? Who is involved in this process? Does it include a range of leaders/ stakeholders, including pupils? Is there evidence that lesson observation has led to improvements in pupils’ work? Are areas for improvement identified in work scrutiny followed up in subsequent scrutiny? Do leaders address underperformance robustly and directly where necessary? Do reports following lesson observations focus clearly on STANDARDS and PROVISION (planning and feedback)?

• •

42



Whether the headteacher and SLT is well-informed about strengths and areas for improvement in terms of the quality of teaching and provides strong leadership and conveys high expectations about teaching and learning.



How well leaders and managers focus on raising standards through lesson observation and if they know how well pupils are progressing, including those receiving targeted support or extension;



How well coordinators, particularly the English/Welsh and mathematics co-ordinators help other teachers with their planning and whether they actively monitor and evaluate the standards and quality of literacy and numeracy throughout the school;



How well co-ordinators for other subjects are alert to the opportunities that exist within those subjects for improving pupils’ skills in literacy and numeracy.

43

APPENDIX 5 Listening to Learners (possible questions to be considered during lesson observation) •

Are pupils able to discuss their work?



Can they discuss individual targets and say what they have done to try to achieve them?



Can they discuss how they self and peer assess?



Do they understand how their work is marked, e.g. grammar, punctuation and spelling?



Do they feel that their work is challenging?



How well do they feel they are doing?



What happens if they’re having problems with their work?



Who do they talk to if they’re having problems?

44

Appendix 1: Guidance for Autumn Visit 2015 This guidance aims to compliment the Ladder of Support and it sets out the detail of the core visit to schools. Schools can expect that the visit will take place from the third week of September. Schools causing concern, or at risk of causing concern, will be prioritised. Some schools should therefore expect to wait longer for their visit. Nevertheless, all schools should have normally received their visit by early December at the very latest. Challenge Advisers should make arrangements for these visits as early as possible in an academic year so as not to disrupt school schedules. As the model is based on all schools having the capacity to improve itself ultimately, the initial steps of this process are based on effective analysis and evaluation by the school of its own performance data and strengths/weaknesses in other areas. The school will receive a common template into which the data analysis fits neatly (see version attached). The current SER and SDP should be shared with the ERW Challenge Adviser as soon as possible. Schools will have received a letter noting their indicative categories in advance of the meeting. The autumn visit must focus on a range of priorities and should follow the common ERW agenda.

45

Autumn Core Visit Agenda 2015 (précis) Standing Agenda Items

Indicative Timing

Progress since last visit

45 mins

• Follow up on targets in last year’s SIP • Position on Estyn recommendations Data – analysis, discussion and interrogation of themes emerging from performance and attendance data Morning

• • •

Discussion on use of test data Target setting – challenge and discuss Other lines of enquiry that have been issued to the school in advance

1.5 hrs

Leadership • • • •

Leadership of learning Quality of documentation to support school improvement Challenge on the use of SEG/ PDG to improve outcomes Self knowledge and evaluation

1.5 hr

Indicative category discussion Afternoon

4 p.m.

Bespoke menu of support discussion and agreement

45 mins

Formal review of Headteacher’s performance management with the relevant Governors in attendance

1 hr



GOV

46

2015 Autumn Term Core Visit – timetable (Primary Schools) Section A: PRIOR TO THE VISIT A1

Adviser contacts the school to organise date of contact visit – prioritising schools according to risk – highest risk schools to be visited first.

Beginning of term

A2 A3

Adviser to forward meeting agenda 2015 Ladder of Support to the Headteacher Adviser to explain to the Headteacher what documents are needed prior to the meeting, agreeing on a timescale (no less than 5 working days prior to the meeting):

Agenda and Ladder of Support to be sent to school 10 working days before the visit

A4

A5

A8

1. Current school Self-Evaluation including self analysis of 2015 data (form * if required) 2. Current school Development Plan Adviser to explain to the Headteacher what documents are needed during the meeting: 1. Headteacher’s Reports to Governing Body for the last academic year 2014-2015 2. Quality Assurance file, including lesson observations and evidence of book scrutiny to be made available during the day, along with evidence of impact on standards and quality • Headteacher to invite Chair of Governors to the meeting for the whole day – categorisation item • Headteacher to be responsible for ensuring that arrangements have been made for the Performance Management meeting – panel informed, documents sent to Panel within agreed timescale Adviser to ensure that the Headteacher has access to the data pack and data analysis form to enable the Headteacher to note comments. Agree that Headteacher will return self evaluation to the Adviser 5 days before the visit. Adviser to prepare and note areas that need further discussion with regard to aspects of the data on the data commentary sheet and return to the Headteacher 3 days before the visit.

47

Ensure that Data Pack for Visit 1, commentary sheet and Target Setting sheet are with Headteacher. School to receive the commentary sheet with additional questions from Adviser 3 days before the meeting.

Section B: DURING THE VISIT B1

Progress since the last visit

Morning – 45 minutes (9.15-10.00yb)

B2

• Update and evaluation of 2014 progress targets • Update and evaluation against Estyn’s latest recommendations to the school Data – analyse, discuss and enquire about themes highlighted in the performance and attendance data

(10.00-11.00yp)

B3

• Discussion on the use of national test data (May 2015) • Set targets – challenge and discuss • Other lines of enquiry set for the school beforehand Leadership

Afternoon - 2 hours



B4

Quality of school improvement documentation – feedback on the quality of Self-Evaluation documents, School Development Plan and reports to Governing Body • Discuss Quality Assurance processes and impact • Challenge effective use of Education Improvement Grant and Pupil Deprivation Grant to improve outcomes • Performance management of staff • Impact of interventions on outcomes Indicative category discussion • • •

B5

Morning 1 hours

Re-visit 2014-2015 category and criteria for judgement as set out in 2014-15 categorisation letter Discuss criteria for categorisation (as set out in Ladder of Support) Discuss and agree the Support Category for the school for 2015-2016. If there is disagreement, refer the Head and Chair of Governors to the national appeals process • Discussion and agreement regarding a purposeful menu of support, including support from other schools • If the school is in the amber or red category, the date of the next full Governors’ meeting is needed to enable the Adviser to attend. Formal review of the headteacher’s management performance attended by the relevant Governors.

48

(12.00-2.00yp)

Afternoon – 1 hour (2.30-3.30yp)

4 pm for 1 hour

Section C: POST VISIT C1

Compile the report using the template provided within 6 working days of the visit, and return to Senior Challenge Adviser / Head of Hub

Report to Senior Challenge Adviser / Head of Hub within 6 working days

C2

Senior Challenge Adviser / Head of Hub to provide comments on the report and return it to the Adviser within 3 days

Feedback on the report with Adviser in following 3 days

C3



Report to Headteacher and Chair of Governors within 10 working days of visit

C4

Adviser to amend report if necessary and return it to the Headteacher, along with a copy for the Chair of Governors. • Upload the report on ERW’s central system Categorisation letter (ERW template) sent to the Headteacher and Chair of Governors, confirming the school’s final category following publication of validated data by Welsh Government. The contents of the letter will be reviewed by Senior Challenge Adviser / Head of Hub before being sent out to schools.

49

January 2016 (pre-publication nationally)

Appendix 2: Autumn Term Core Visit Templates Final Categorisation Letter

Dear Head Teacher and Chair of Governors As part of a regional approach to school improvement, our officers in your Local Authority have been supporting and challenging schools to help them strengthen their capacity to sustain and bring about improvement. We have developed a comprehensive menu of support, challenge and intervention for schools in partnership with school leaders. In addition resources to assist schools to evaluate and come to a judgement about how well they are doing in terms of Standards and their Ability to Improve. Through school visits, meetings and the delivery of training we have established an ongoing dialogue with schools, that has enabled us to identify their strengths and their areas for improvement. We have now used this information to work with you to categorise schools and determine the level of support that is required for improvement. This has been done to ensure that the highest level of support and challenge is allocated to schools in greatest need. Information about your school’s entitlement to support and challenge is contained in Appendix 1 of this letter. In discussions that took place during the Autumn Term Core visit, the school’s strengths and areas for improvement were identified and are summarised as follows: Main Strengths

Areas for improvement

Our overall categorisation of your school is = Standards

Ability to improve

(NUMBER)

(LETTER)

50

Where the school’s self-evaluation was different from the evaluation of the local authority, this will have been discussed fully with the headteacher. The support and challenge provision that your school will receive this year will include: • • •

Insert agreed menu Insert agreed menu Insert agreed menu

We would like you to share this information with your fellow Governors and place school performance and areas for development as a fixed item on your Governing Body agenda so that you can monitor progress. We expect the areas identified for development to be included with other areas that you have identified in your school development plan. During the year we will be providing support for your school in the areas identified for improvement. We will also be monitoring performance and challenging you to improve these areas. We will continue to support you in the preparation of your on-going school self-evaluation and will be collecting the finalised document regularly. School Categories We have divided the schools into four categories. Below are the characteristics of schools placed in each of those categories along with an indication of the nature of the support, challenge and intervention that they will subsequently receive. Green Schools Schools in a green support category are likely to have the following characteristics: • • • • • • • •

• •

a very clear strategy and vision that has improved outcomes for all learners leaders with a very strong capacity to plan and implement change successfully and to sustain improvement robust, systematic and well established self evaluation highly effective in their use of all available performance data and evidence about the quality of learning and teaching a very good track record in raising the achievement of all groups of pupils leaders and staff work very successfully with other schools and partners to enhance significantly their own and others’ capacity to bring about improvement and build resilience governors have an excellent understanding of the school’s strengths and areas for improvement and are highly effective in supporting and challenging the school’s performance the school’s leaders give a high priority to developing the workforce: performance management and professional development are highly successful in fostering effective practice and in dealing with underperformance all staff have a shared understanding of the characteristics of excellent and good teaching teacher assessment is consistent and accurate

Yellow Schools Schools in a yellow support category are likely to have the following characteristics: • •

a shared vision and a clear strategy that has improved outcomes for most learners leaders who plan and implement change and sustain improvement successfully in most respects 51

• • • • • •

• •

self evaluation is regular and thorough in most areas good use of performance data evidence about the quality of learning and teaching a good track record in raising the achievement of most pupils, including vulnerable learners collaboration is developing well and opportunities to work with schools are used effectively governors have a good understanding of the school’s strengths and areas for improvement performance management and professional development make a strong contribution to improving practice and raising standards. The school challenges underperformance effectively and are largely successful in securing improvement most staff have a shared understanding of the characteristics of excellent and good teaching teacher assessment is consistent and accurate in the main

Amber Schools Schools in an amber support category are likely to have the following characteristics: • • • • •

• •

there are inconsistencies in how a vision and strategic objectives are shared leaders manage change successfully in few areas processes for monitoring and evaluating the work of the school are not implemented consistently school improvement activity with other schools and partners does not fully impact on standards and provision performance management and professional development are not always linked closely enough to priorities. The impact on improving performance varies. The school does not always challenge underperformance effectively the characteristics of good and excellent teaching are well defined but applied inconsistently there are some inconsistencies in the reliability and accuracy of teacher assessment

Red schools Schools in a red support category are likely to have the following characteristics: • • • • • • • • •

work to establish an agreed vision is underdeveloped and there is a lack of clarity in the school’s strategic direction leaders do not demonstrate sufficient capacity to plan and implement change successfully a few processes for monitoring and evaluating the work of the school have been developed but these lack rigour and breadth there are wide variations in how performance data and evidence about the quality of learning and teaching and pupils’ work are used to secure improvement does not have a strong track record in improving outcomes including for vulnerable learners leaders and staff have limited involvement in worthwhile collaborative activity with schools performance management and professional development have limited impact on improving performance. The school does not challenge underperformance effectively there is little shared understanding of the characteristics of excellent and good teaching there are significant inconsistencies in the reliability and accuracy of teacher assessment

If you want to discuss any aspects of this letter further please contact your school’s Challenge Adviser Yours sincerely Betsan O’Connor Managing Director ERW

Head of Service/ Head of School Improvement Local Authority 52

Autumn Term Core Visit Report Template

Autumn Term Core Visit There will be two forms – one including data analysis for categorisation, and this outlining support entitlement and requirements SCHOOL NAME: HEADTEACHER: DATE:(dd/mm/yy) ADVISOR’S NAME : SCHOOL CATEGORY :

PROGRESS AND IMPACT AGAINST MAIN PRIORITIES IDENTIFIED FOR 2014-2015

Progress

Cut and paste last year’s actions/ areas for improvement and analyse progress . Note impact on pupils and outcomes

PROGRESS AGAINST ESTYN RECOMENDATIONS Cut and paste last year’s actions/ areas for improvement and analyse progress . Note impact on pupils and outcomes

53

Progress

Step 1 - Standards Category All sections should be written using bullet points Based upon the National Categorisation for standards the school is judged to be:

School Context Brief statements to be inserted here. This should only include; If the school hosts a Specialist Learning Resource Base. Cohort size for end of key stage FSM profile

Key Strengths in attainment Brief statements to be inserted here. This should only include; Strengths from the AWCDS (to include attendance) Strengths from National Tests There should be no more than 5 aspects identified.

Areas for further improvement

54

Step 2 – Improvement Capacity The categorisation based upon evidence and because; discussion at Step 2 is The CA will choose a ‘best fit’ ‘letter’ for Step 2, the reasons for this choice will be captured below. Key strengths in Leadership and Teaching and Learning

Areas for further improvement

Evidence scrutinised to make the judgement

55

Step 3 – Support Category – This should be in line with the ‘grid’. Overriding the ‘grid’ should only be done in very exceptional circumstances.

The Overall Support category for the school is judged to be; (Green, Yellow, Amber, Red) – one colour should be chosen and others deleted. Exceptions Exceptions have been applied: If yes, please identify which have been applied using the list below and give a brief commentary outlining the reasons, delete any not applicable; Potential rare exceptions For Primary / Infant / Junior schools; Schools where 50% or more of pupils over the last 3 years are in receipt of free school meals. Schools with an average cohort of five or less pupils in an individual key stage or both key stages (in the case of a primary school) over the last three years. Schools with a registered learning resource base where a deeper analysis of data over a three-year period indicates performance is in FSM Benchmark group quarter 1 or 2 (Estyn guidance for the inspection of primary schools September 2014 – Annexe 7). Schools where at least 15% of pupils whose stage of English language acquisition is judged to be A, B or C on the agreed National Language Acquisition Model. For secondary schools: Schools with a registered learning resource base where a deeper analysis of data over a three-year period indicates performance is in FSM Benchmark group quarter 1 or 2 (Estyn guidance for the inspection of secondary schools September 2014 – Annexe 7). Schools with a registered learning resource base where a deeper analysis of data over a three-year period indicates performance is in FSM Benchmark group quarter 1 or 2 (Estyn guidance for the inspection of secondary schools September 2014 – Annexe 7).

Other Circumstances where the matrix has been overridden (please list reasons and evidence below) - These risks will need to be weighed carefully when making these judgements and may need to be applied irrespective of the standards group.

56

Explanation base with evidence:

Categorisation Overview (complete the grid below)

Step 1

Step 2

Step 3

Exceptions applied

Agreement on school's support category

This categorisation report will be shared with Governing Body after the National Verification meeting on(dd/mm/yy)

Area

PRACTICE WORTHY TO BE SHARED

57

25/12/2015

Sharing and Verification Arrangements

IMPROVEMENT Priorities *Where a school is highly likely to be inspected/ monitored by Estyn – please note any required support here Standards category

Improvement Capacity

MENU OF SCHOOL SUPPORT FOR 2015-2016 NUMBER OF DAYS THEME

CODE

DETAIIL

Visit 2 Note early discussion around the scope of visit 2 and how this can be scheduled to be useful for school improvement planning. Highlight potential focus around teaching and learning

58

Appendix 3: Headteacher Feedback Forms Please help us to improve by accessing the following link, providing feedback from visit 1 (Autumn) Autumn Term 2015 Core Visit Headteacher Feedback https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/Autcorevisit2015 1. Did you receive useful feedback on your SIP and SER to help improve? 2. Was the focus of the visit evident before the meeting and to what extent did the meeting keep to the agreed focus? 3. How helpful was this to support planning for improvement? 4. Was there agreement regarding the actions and support you need after the visit? 5. Was the report concise, accurate and fair and accurate reflection of the professional dialogue to organise the level of support for the school? 6. Have you shared the findings with staff and governors? 7. How have you used the report and subsequent support to improve outcomes? Further comments

59

Please help us to improve by accessing the following link, providing feedback from visit 2 (Spring / Summer)

Spring / Summer Term 2016 Core Visit Headteacher Feedback https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/SSTerm2016CV Did the visit meet your needs and areas for improvement? Have you been supported to share good and excellent practice? Was the visit conducted fairly with useful accurate feedback?

Further comments

60

Appendix 4: Appeals Procedure Following the Autumn Core Visit, each school and governing body should have come to a jointly agreed support category with the challenge adviser. Wherever possible, any further conversation with the Hub Leads should avoid any escalation of the appeal. Any appeal should be presented to the local authority’s Director of Education in writing within 15 working days. In these exceptional circumstances, the ERW Managing Director and Head of Hub should meet with the Director to discuss.

Please see link to National appeals arrangements

Appendix 5: Rare Exceptions Guidance Supplementary Guidance - Annex 1 (2015 / 2016) Potential rare exceptions It is important that the Challenge Adviser (CA) has fully implemented Step 2 before considering any of the potential rare exceptions below to enable the grid to be overridden. The potential rare exception will not be able to be applied if any of the questions associated with each exception have any ‘gaps’ in responses. The CA must ask all questions under each exception that is being considered. The responses will determine whether this will be applied. Primary / Infant / Junior schools only Schools where 50% or more of pupils over the last 3 years are in receipt of free school meals. • • • •

• • •

Where the percentage eligible for FSM is 50% or more, what was the number/ percentage of pupils in the final year of the relevant key stage? What does an analysis of performance v targets tell us about the performance of pupils in receipt of FSM in comparison with other pupils? How have these pupils achieved in relation to their agreed targets? Can the school clearly demonstrate that pupils in receipt of FSM are making progress which is greater than or at least in line with that of other pupils in the school? Are these pupils making enough progress from one key stage to another? Are pupils in receipt of FSM in the school doing as well, or even better, than they were three years ago/last year? Does performance compare well with similar schools with a very high percentage of FSM? What does the three year trend tell us? Has the school evaluated the progress of these pupils in the key skills of literacy/numeracy/IT and the wider skills [e.g. work independently and develop study skills, problem solving skills and skills to improve their own learning] and is there evidence of good progress?

61

Schools with an average cohort of five or less pupils in an individual key stage or both key stages (in the case of a primary school) over the last three years. • • •

Where a school has the profile above, can it demonstrate that these pupils are making good progress from their starting points? How have these pupils achieved in relation to their agreed targets? How have these pupils performed in literacy and / or numeracy, and where appropriate the national reading/numeracy tests and is there evidence of year-on-year progress?

Primary / Infant /Junior and Secondary schools Schools with a registered learning resource base where a deeper analysis of data over a three-year period indicates performance is in FSM Benchmark group quarter 1 or 2 (Estyn guidance for the inspection of primary / secondary schools September 2014 – Annexe 7). • • • •

Where a school has a registered resource base, can it demonstrate that these pupils are making good progress from their starting points? How have these pupils achieved in relation to their agreed targets? For pupils in a registered resource base, how have these pupils achieved in relation to their agreed targets? How have pupils in a registered resource bases performed in literacy and / or numeracy, and where appropriate the national reading/numeracy tests and is there evidence of year-on-year progress?

Schools with 15% of pupils (in Infant / Junior / Primary) and 8% of pupils (Secondary) whose stage of English acquisition is judged to be A, B or C on the agreed National Language Acquisition Model. • • •



Where a school has the profile above, can it demonstrate that these pupils are making good progress from their starting points? How have these pupils achieved in relation to their agreed targets? Has the school evaluated the progress of these pupils in the key skills of literacy/numeracy/IT and the wider skills [e.g. work independently and develop study skills, problem solving skills and skills to improve their own learning] and is there evidence of good progress? To what extent have EAL pupils developed the skills in literacy and communication needed to access the whole curriculum?

62

Appendix 6: Menu of Support J:\RISIS\2014 - 2015\Menu of Support\Menu of Support - June 2015.xlsx

63

Appendix 7: ERW Ladder of Support, Challenge and Intervention Visits 2015 – 2016

ERW Ladder of Support, Challenge and Intervention Visits 2015 – 2016 ERW’s work in schools is…. • • • •

an opportunity to work collaboratively alongside schools to support their school self-evaluation; an opportunity to discuss the school’s strengths and areas for development in Teaching and Learning and Leadership; an opportunity to validate the school’s own evaluation; an opportunity to agree further ongoing support;

ERW’s work in schools is not…. • • • •

a mini or mock-inspection; to prepare schools for inspection; we will not allow schools to use evidence from these visits as a basis for, or as part of, any informal or formal competency procedures; aiming to take teachers beyond three lesson observations per year.

64

Appendix 8: Progress Descriptors Estyn Progress Descriptors Recommendation Descriptor

Addressing the recommendation

Aspects still requiring attention All or many important aspects still awaiting attention

Limited progress

Does not meet the recommendation

Satisfactory progress

Addresses the recommendation in many respects

A few important aspects still require significant attention

Strong progress

Addresses the recommendation in most respects

Only minor aspects still require attention

Very good progress

Addresses the recommendation in all respects

No aspects require further attention

65

Impact on standards and/or quality of provision No impact on standards and/or quality of provision (e.g. standards have declined since core inspection in key indicators) Limited impact on standards and/or quality of provision (e.g. KS3 outcomes have improved or a few KS4 indicators but not enough improvement in KS4 outcomes in key indicators such as L2+, CSI and CPS) Positive impact on standards and/or quality of provision (e.g. significant improvement in key indicators in KS4 such as L2+, CSI and CPS) Very good impact on quality of provision (for provision only –e.g. for recommendations around health and safety concerns or compliance such as DACW

Work required on the next monitoring visit Much work still to do and many aspects still to consider

Many aspects addressed but still significant work to do in important areas

Most aspects covered already little significant work left to do

School to maintain and build on this improved practice

Appendix 9: PDG Letter and Statement

66