Case study: Greyfriars Primary School
Case study: Greyfriars Primary School
2
The National Strategies | Primary Case study: Greyfriars Primary School
Case study: Greyfriars Primary School How the core elements of ISP were used to strengthen leadership and management: Greyfriars, Norfolk 1. The school: its context and profile Greyfriars Primary School is a larger than average one-and-a-half form entry school in King’s Lynn in Norfolk. Pupils enter school with well below-average attainment. The headteacher joined the school in 2004 and that year the school was identified by the local authority (LA) as a priority school. In July 2004, the school was invited by the local authority to become part of the improving schools programme (ISP). The school needed to improve and the ISP formulated clear ideas in what to do and how best to take those steps. We were a new senior management team (SMT) and we needed something to help us develop as a team together. Headteacher
2. How the school improvement cycle drove the analysis, action, evaluation and review In 2004 the key issues for the school were that we were below floor targets and had low expectations of the pupils, with a blame culture that they came in low and would leave low. We needed to raise the quality of learning and teaching, to raise expectations to achieve at least the floor targets. Headteacher The LA provided the consultant and offered LA adviser support and challenge to the school to implement the ISP. The cycle and core elements of the ISP provided the systems for the SMT to establish their leadership of learning in the school and their impact has been clearly evident in improved standards and teaching and learning. The Ofsted report in March 2008 said: Self-evaluation is a thread that runs through the work of the school. The senior leadership team and subject leaders ensure that provision is consistent and effective through rigorous monitoring and development.
3. How the school used the core elements to strengthen the school leadership of learning The single plan and termly review Introducing the single plan provided the sharp focus that the leadership team needed to make sure that the priority areas identified were followed through, to impact on pupils’ progress. These systems are now well-established in the school; at the start of each half-term, priorities from the single plan (called
00335-2009DWO-EN-02
© Crown copyright 2009
The National Strategies | Primary Case study: Greyfriars Primary School
3
the raising attainment plan – RAP), planned actions and review are shared with all the school staff at a meeting. The SMT uses the RAP milestones to check regularly on progress and, at the end of term, they meet to review the evidence of impact. They then take this back to the staff. The summary of the progress, checked against the priorities, is then fed back to the school improvement partner (SIP) at the regular termly meeting. The cycle and single plan really galvanised us as a leadership team. We all have clear leadership responsibility and share the load. We are all responsible through performance management of the staff and ISP is part of performance management throughout the school. Headteacher The single plan has allowed me to see clearly where we need to go forward, talk to the rest of the staff and show them what we have to do, based on the data available. The leadership team has emphasised that the ISP doesn’t mean more work but that the work the school is doing is more focused and smarter. Subject leader
Using pupil tracking When the school started with the ISP the focus on tracking acted as a ‘wake-up call’. When we started in the ISP we looked at the tracking and it gave us a shock – the tracking showed that us that we weren’t as good as we thought we were. The children weren’t where we thought they were. Using the tracking and the single plan gave us a clear focus for development. Headteacher The school developed its tracking systems and introduced the regular review of progress. These systems are established within the school, with a half-termly review of progress, undertaken by the senior leadership team. These strategic discussions are then taken to the phase meeting, where individual teachers discuss their pupils’ progress, the impact of planned interventions and further support where it is needed. The ISP and my role as class teacher have gone hand in hand. The ISP has helped me become more focused on my teaching and to identify those children who have done very well, those children who are doing as expected and the children who need a bit more work, and plan for their particular needs. We have seen good progress and know that the things we are doing in class have made special impact on that progress. A class teacher The tracking systems have strengthened the governors’ role with the school. Tracking is very important as it enables us to look at how each of the school years is doing; the tracking enables us to look at trends in performance throughout the course of the year. From a parent’s point of view, it enables me to see how my child has progressed from one year to the next, and also on a termly basis, in terms of how she is doing in each subject. Chair of governors This impact of the tracking was acknowledged in the Ofsted report, which said: There is a very detailed and accurate system for tracking pupils’ achievements to check they make enough progress. This includes analysing the rate of progress of different groups of pupils, such as those with learning difficulties and/or disabilities. If progress appears to be slower than expected, pupils receive extra or different support.
© Crown copyright 2009
00335-2009DWO-EN-02
4
The National Strategies | Primary Case study: Greyfriars Primary School
4. Four years on: the impact of the ISP on standards and leadership and governance From the headteacher’s perspective: We have seen a year-on-year rise in our results in Key Stage 2; writing in particular has really moved forward and we expect to see further rises this year. The quality of learning and teaching is 85% ‘good or better’ and we need to continue to move forward on that. When the school moved on from the intensive LA support, it kept all the core elements and process: …because we found them so useful in terms of improvement and self-review. Governors have become more of a critical friend. They understand the standards in the school; they understand what we are trying to do as a school community and, more importantly, where to go, and if we don’t achieve our goals they will come back to us and ask us why we have not, and challenge us more. The role that the ISP systems have had in strengthening the governors’ role is endorsed by the chair: ISP is a very important tool for governors. The information that the ISP gives us enables us, as governors, to tell whether the school is making that progress or not; without having that kind of information it makes it difficult for us to do the job. It gives us the evidence we need to be able to monitor the school against its RAP and it helps us to look at the targets that have been set and decide whether or not those targets are capable of being achieved and whether they are being achieved. The improvements in leadership and management were acknowledged in the Ofsted report in 2008. Since taking up the post four years ago, the current headteacher has worked persistently with staff to improve teaching, assessment and the curriculum to raise standards. The senior leadership team and the governing body have worked well together for these developments and thus leadership and management are very good. It has not been easy to achieve improvements in results quickly; it has required considerable determination to persevere. However, these efforts have paid off; from very low starting points, pupils now make good progress throughout the school.
The next steps The strength of the school has been acknowledged and now it is working to spread its practice and work with other schools. The school has been a lead school in the ISP leadership and governance pilot, which involves the headteacher and schools working with other schools, with a clear focus on the leadership and governance in the school. The headteacher’s hopes for the future are: that we maintain the 85% ‘good or better’ teaching and build on it, raise the L4+ at the end of Key Stage 2 to 80% or more in English, mathematics and science and for every child to be successful here.
00335-2009DWO-EN-02
© Crown copyright 2009
Disclaimer The Department for Children, Schools and Families wishes to make it clear that the Department and its agents accept no responsibility for the actual content of any materials suggested as information sources in this publication, whether these are in the form of printed publications or on a website. In these materials, icons, logos, software products and websites are used for contextual and practical reasons. Their use should not be interpreted as an endorsement of particular companies or their products. The websites referred to in these materials existed at the time of going to print. Please check all website references carefully to see if they have changed and substitute other references where appropriate.
Audience: LAs, SIPs, advisers, consultants, headteachers and senior leaders. Date of issue: 03-2009 Ref: 00335-2009DWO-EN-02 Copies of this publication may be available from: www.teachernet.gov.uk/publications
Extracts from this document may be reproduced for non-commercial research, education or training purposes on the condition that the source is acknowledged as Crown copyright, the publication title is specified, it is reproduced accurately and not used in a misleading context.
You can download this publication and obtain further information at: www.standards.dcsf.gov.uk
The permission to reproduce Crown copyright protected material does not extend to any material in this publication which is identified as being the copyright of a third party.
© Crown copyright 2009 Published by the Department for Children, Schools and Families
For any other use please contact [email protected] www.opsi.gov.uk/click-use/index.htm
2
The National Strategies | Primary Case study: Greyfriars Primary School
Case study: Greyfriars Primary School How the core elements of ISP were used to strengthen leadership and management: Greyfriars, Norfolk 1. The school: its context and profile Greyfriars Primary School is a larger than average one-and-a-half form entry school in King’s Lynn in Norfolk. Pupils enter school with well below-average attainment. The headteacher joined the school in 2004 and that year the school was identified by the local authority (LA) as a priority school. In July 2004, the school was invited by the local authority to become part of the improving schools programme (ISP). The school needed to improve and the ISP formulated clear ideas in what to do and how best to take those steps. We were a new senior management team (SMT) and we needed something to help us develop as a team together. Headteacher
2. How the school improvement cycle drove the analysis, action, evaluation and review In 2004 the key issues for the school were that we were below floor targets and had low expectations of the pupils, with a blame culture that they came in low and would leave low. We needed to raise the quality of learning and teaching, to raise expectations to achieve at least the floor targets. Headteacher The LA provided the consultant and offered LA adviser support and challenge to the school to implement the ISP. The cycle and core elements of the ISP provided the systems for the SMT to establish their leadership of learning in the school and their impact has been clearly evident in improved standards and teaching and learning. The Ofsted report in March 2008 said: Self-evaluation is a thread that runs through the work of the school. The senior leadership team and subject leaders ensure that provision is consistent and effective through rigorous monitoring and development.
3. How the school used the core elements to strengthen the school leadership of learning The single plan and termly review Introducing the single plan provided the sharp focus that the leadership team needed to make sure that the priority areas identified were followed through, to impact on pupils’ progress. These systems are now well-established in the school; at the start of each half-term, priorities from the single plan (called
00335-2009DWO-EN-02
© Crown copyright 2009
The National Strategies | Primary Case study: Greyfriars Primary School
3
the raising attainment plan – RAP), planned actions and review are shared with all the school staff at a meeting. The SMT uses the RAP milestones to check regularly on progress and, at the end of term, they meet to review the evidence of impact. They then take this back to the staff. The summary of the progress, checked against the priorities, is then fed back to the school improvement partner (SIP) at the regular termly meeting. The cycle and single plan really galvanised us as a leadership team. We all have clear leadership responsibility and share the load. We are all responsible through performance management of the staff and ISP is part of performance management throughout the school. Headteacher The single plan has allowed me to see clearly where we need to go forward, talk to the rest of the staff and show them what we have to do, based on the data available. The leadership team has emphasised that the ISP doesn’t mean more work but that the work the school is doing is more focused and smarter. Subject leader
Using pupil tracking When the school started with the ISP the focus on tracking acted as a ‘wake-up call’. When we started in the ISP we looked at the tracking and it gave us a shock – the tracking showed that us that we weren’t as good as we thought we were. The children weren’t where we thought they were. Using the tracking and the single plan gave us a clear focus for development. Headteacher The school developed its tracking systems and introduced the regular review of progress. These systems are established within the school, with a half-termly review of progress, undertaken by the senior leadership team. These strategic discussions are then taken to the phase meeting, where individual teachers discuss their pupils’ progress, the impact of planned interventions and further support where it is needed. The ISP and my role as class teacher have gone hand in hand. The ISP has helped me become more focused on my teaching and to identify those children who have done very well, those children who are doing as expected and the children who need a bit more work, and plan for their particular needs. We have seen good progress and know that the things we are doing in class have made special impact on that progress. A class teacher The tracking systems have strengthened the governors’ role with the school. Tracking is very important as it enables us to look at how each of the school years is doing; the tracking enables us to look at trends in performance throughout the course of the year. From a parent’s point of view, it enables me to see how my child has progressed from one year to the next, and also on a termly basis, in terms of how she is doing in each subject. Chair of governors This impact of the tracking was acknowledged in the Ofsted report, which said: There is a very detailed and accurate system for tracking pupils’ achievements to check they make enough progress. This includes analysing the rate of progress of different groups of pupils, such as those with learning difficulties and/or disabilities. If progress appears to be slower than expected, pupils receive extra or different support.
© Crown copyright 2009
00335-2009DWO-EN-02
4
The National Strategies | Primary Case study: Greyfriars Primary School
4. Four years on: the impact of the ISP on standards and leadership and governance From the headteacher’s perspective: We have seen a year-on-year rise in our results in Key Stage 2; writing in particular has really moved forward and we expect to see further rises this year. The quality of learning and teaching is 85% ‘good or better’ and we need to continue to move forward on that. When the school moved on from the intensive LA support, it kept all the core elements and process: …because we found them so useful in terms of improvement and self-review. Governors have become more of a critical friend. They understand the standards in the school; they understand what we are trying to do as a school community and, more importantly, where to go, and if we don’t achieve our goals they will come back to us and ask us why we have not, and challenge us more. The role that the ISP systems have had in strengthening the governors’ role is endorsed by the chair: ISP is a very important tool for governors. The information that the ISP gives us enables us, as governors, to tell whether the school is making that progress or not; without having that kind of information it makes it difficult for us to do the job. It gives us the evidence we need to be able to monitor the school against its RAP and it helps us to look at the targets that have been set and decide whether or not those targets are capable of being achieved and whether they are being achieved. The improvements in leadership and management were acknowledged in the Ofsted report in 2008. Since taking up the post four years ago, the current headteacher has worked persistently with staff to improve teaching, assessment and the curriculum to raise standards. The senior leadership team and the governing body have worked well together for these developments and thus leadership and management are very good. It has not been easy to achieve improvements in results quickly; it has required considerable determination to persevere. However, these efforts have paid off; from very low starting points, pupils now make good progress throughout the school.
The next steps The strength of the school has been acknowledged and now it is working to spread its practice and work with other schools. The school has been a lead school in the ISP leadership and governance pilot, which involves the headteacher and schools working with other schools, with a clear focus on the leadership and governance in the school. The headteacher’s hopes for the future are: that we maintain the 85% ‘good or better’ teaching and build on it, raise the L4+ at the end of Key Stage 2 to 80% or more in English, mathematics and science and for every child to be successful here.
00335-2009DWO-EN-02
© Crown copyright 2009
Disclaimer The Department for Children, Schools and Families wishes to make it clear that the Department and its agents accept no responsibility for the actual content of any materials suggested as information sources in this publication, whether these are in the form of printed publications or on a website. In these materials, icons, logos, software products and websites are used for contextual and practical reasons. Their use should not be interpreted as an endorsement of particular companies or their products. The websites referred to in these materials existed at the time of going to print. Please check all website references carefully to see if they have changed and substitute other references where appropriate.
Audience: LAs, SIPs, advisers, consultants, headteachers and senior leaders. Date of issue: 03-2009 Ref: 00335-2009DWO-EN-02 Copies of this publication may be available from: www.teachernet.gov.uk/publications
Extracts from this document may be reproduced for non-commercial research, education or training purposes on the condition that the source is acknowledged as Crown copyright, the publication title is specified, it is reproduced accurately and not used in a misleading context.
You can download this publication and obtain further information at: www.standards.dcsf.gov.uk
The permission to reproduce Crown copyright protected material does not extend to any material in this publication which is identified as being the copyright of a third party.
© Crown copyright 2009 Published by the Department for Children, Schools and Families
For any other use please contact [email protected] www.opsi.gov.uk/click-use/index.htm
