Saturday, 5 August 2017

School Effectiveness Criterion #5 - instalment 2

....cont from instalment 1 and still in red font and part in blue font as still being edited:

He turned now to the vital in-service in which teachers work together to interpret the various syllabuses.  In a large Primary school teachers of say the three year 4 classes could be grouped together to have the discussions. However Tom favoured groupings of teachers as follows:

Teachers of years 5 and 6 classes (upper primary);
Teachers of years 3 and 4 classes (middle primary);
Teachers of years 1 and 2 classes (junior primary);
Teachers of the early childhood classes, such as pre-primary (Foundation).

These groupings would need to be adjusted the smaller the school.  Very small schools might have to join larger mentor schools for such in-service opportunities.


Focus for Primary School Teacher discussions about the English syllabus

The discussion groups would scan across the prescribed learning outcomes in the English Syllabus of the ANC under the headings Language, Literature and Literacy (ANC English syllabus version 8).  They would look at the elaborated detail of each prescribed outcome and:

·      …talk about what it means with such discussion being very short, almost a nod when the meaning of the outcome is instantly clear;
·      …simplify the meaning of a prescribed outcome if they decided this to be necessary;
·      …decide whether it is an essential prerequisite to future new learning and mark it as such;
·      …decide what mastery looked like if the learning outcome was deemed a prerequisite as described above;
·      ...highlight learning outcomes that were basic to becoming a literate person.

From this process the English syllabus would be ready for teacher planning of the learning experiences of their students. It would also be ready for the transposing of the learning outcomes into the eventual student reports to be periodically sent to parents.  Appendix ? See below the blue font

There would then be discussion about more general items in respect of the teaching and learning of English that would become part of an English school policy document.  The sort of statements that would comprise the school’s English policy area as follows:

·      English will be taught in the student’s general class, which contains a full range of learning abilities Panthers, Jaguars and Leopards.  There will be no cross setting for English nor will there be exiting from the general class for so called remedial teaching.  The school does not perceive terms such as “remedial” and “being behind” as useful.  The school believes that given best practice teaching each student is learning at a pace dependent on how they are as a whole person based on all the factors affecting their lives at the time.

·      Student attainment of the prescribed English syllabus learning outcomes would be assessed according to the school’s assessment policies.  Mastery of prerequisites would be assessed over the number of relevant spaced assessments needed for each student to show mastery.

·      NAPLAN (see Appendix ?) testing would be one part of the assessment program in English, complementing the assessment of the day to day learning program. (NAPLAN was part of a previous post)

·      There will be a teacher commitment to over-the-shoulder supervision of each student’s written output.  Students would be taught that what they committed to paper was for an audience and therefore needed to be legible. This commitment by the teachers required an active movement by them in and around the classroom advising, congratulating as the written work was produced.  This was to have a closure of the teacher signing and dating each page before a new one was commenced.

·      A commitment will be made not to overemphasise learning to write text as creative writing where this was causing major difficulties for the Leopards in mastering basic skills that would contribute to their functional literacy.

·      Teachers will commit to being effective listeners for student input and questioning, creating a balance that did not allow for an overemphasis on teachers talking at students.

·      At the commencement of a new school year the teachers will have the final report for each student for English from the previous year as a point of reference for planning the English learning for each student for the new year.  This is a commitment to continuity of learning for each student as they move across the school years.

·      Reporting to parents will provide detailed information on mastery of the prescribed learning outcomes of the ANC for English that were highlighted as prerequisites for new learning to come (see Appendix  ?).

·      Parents will be able to view their student offspring English files at arranged times during the year to enable them to obtain more insights into the detail of the English learning experienced by the students.

·      Parents will be informed of the “no gaps” mastery approach.  This will be reinforced in the preamble to the school reports to parents about student progress.

·      Parents will also be assured by the school, that should their student child begin to have unusual and apparently insurmountable learning difficulties they would be notified immediately and solutions would be sought.

·      Parents will be encouraged to peruse the English syllabus on the appropriate website. They will be informed that the English syllabus of the ANC contains a satisfactory balance between a literacy approach and use of basic pedagogy such as phonics.

·      Parents will be encouraged to peruse the school’s English policy on the school’s website.


Tom felt that the in-service process described above ensured that each teacher had every opportunity to enter their classrooms with a shared interpretation of the details of the English syllabus and to have contributed to the school’s English policy.

 Appendix ?  Formats for School Reports to Parents as at 27/7/2017



Tom was aware not to overburden parents with too much reading of complex school reports.  He also factored in a concern for the workloads of teachers in compiling these reports.  In relation to this latter concern he believed that in this digital age reports could be more detailed.

Reporting for English

In writing his treatise on school effectiveness he decided that for F - 10 English each report would contain a list of the syllabus learning outcomes or content that were covered for the reporting period and deemed to be prerequisites for new learning to come.  Alongside each prerequisite learning outcome columns would be provided for an assessment of the student’s progress.  Tom knew that this was a reading challenge for parents but was determined that they should have the opportunity to see what their child knows, understands and can do in English.  He was also reassured that this approach would provide insights into the child’s development of functional literacy.

Tom’s study of the ANC English syllabus revealed content/learning outcomes that were very general and need not be deemed prerequisites for learning to come. For example in the Foundation Year English syllabus there were learning outcomes such as:

·       Understand that English is one of many languages spoken in Australia and that different languages may be spoken by family, classmates and community.


Such an outcome could be achieved over the many years of schooling and was, Tom considered, not a prerequisite to new learning to come.  It was an outcome that was not conducive to the “mastery” no gaps approach.  It was an outcome that would be of general interest to parents but would not carry the weight of outcomes that were about learning to read, write, listen and speak effectively, the outcomes that parents were anxious to know about.

Again in the ANC Foundation English syllabus (version 8.0) Tom noted outcomes as follows:

·       learning that written text in Standard Australian English has conventions about words, spaces between words, layout on the page and consistent spelling because it has to communicate when the speaker/writer is not present

·       Understand that punctuation is a feature of written text different from letters; recognise how capital letters are used for names, and that capital letters and full stops signal the beginning and end of sentences 

·       learning about print: direction of print and return sweep, spaces between words

·       Recognise that sentences are key units for expressing ideas

·       Recognise and generate rhyming words, alliteration patterns, syllables and sounds (phonemes) in spoken word

·       Recognise and name all upper and lower case letters (graphemes) and know the most common sound that each letter represents

·       knowing how to write some high-frequency words recognised in shared texts and texts being read independently, for example ‘and’, ‘my’, ‘is’, ‘the’ and ‘went’

·       breaking words into onset and rime, noticing words that share the same pattern, for example ‘p-at’, ‘b-at’

In the above outcomes parents would be able to identify writing, reading and speaking and these are the learning they want to know about.  These would be the sorts of outcomes that would feature in the reports to parent as follows:





Foundation English



Not Assessed
Moving Towards
Almost Mastered
Mastered
Extended
Writing and Reading





Understand that punctuation is a feature of written text different from letters; recognise how capital letters are used for names, and that capital letters and full stops signal the beginning and end of sentences 






…learning about print: direction of print and return sweep, spaces between words






Recognise and generate rhyming words, alliteration patterns, syllables and sounds (phonemes) in spoken word






Listening and Speaking





Share feelings and thoughts about the events and characters in texts






…reciting rhymes with actions






Viewing





…and so on





…and so on





Teacher Comments:


Teachers plan a set of learning experiences that they will present to their students including the content/learning outcomes that these learning experiences will enable the students to achieve.  Over a term or a semester there will be many sets of learning experiences out of which a list of the prerequisite content/learning outcomes will be made ready to appear in the term or semester report in the format above.

Now for the Foundation Year all students, Panthers, Jaguars and Leopards will be attempting to achieve all the content/learning outcomes prescribed in the ANC syllabus.  By the end of the academic year the Panthers and Jaguars will have achieved all the content/learning outcomes prescribed in the ANC syllabus.  The Leopards will have only achieved some of them.

When the Foundation Year is over the Leopards will move into year 1 and their new class teacher will need to peruse their reports to see what prerequisites from the Foundation Year are still outstanding. The teacher will need to provide learning experiences to allow these prerequisites to be achieved otherwise there could be gaps in the Leopards’ learning.  This teacher will also need to include in her reports to parents an extra column in the report table for the Foundation Year prerequisites still being worked on in year 1. So the report table would look like:

Foundation English



Year 1 English



Not Assessed
Moving Towards
Almost Mastered
Mastered
Extended
Writing and Reading






Understand that punctuation is a feature of written text different from letters; recognise how capital letters are used for names, and that capital letters and full stops signal the beginning and end of sentences 







…learning about print: direction of print and return sweep, spaces between words







Recognise and generate rhyming words, alliteration patterns, syllables and sounds (phonemes) in spoken word







Listening and Speaking






…and so on






…and so on






Viewing






…and so on






…and so on







Writing and Reading



























Listening and Speaking



























Viewing

































Teacher Comments:



 To any readers of the above I'm becoming a bit embarrassed providing material still under edit.  However some reader comments to constructively criticise or offer suggestions would be welcomed.


May the Force be with you!

GD









Tuesday, 1 August 2017

School Effectiveness Criterion #5 - 1st instalment

Criterion # 5 is still under edit and requires a lengthy explanation so here is the first instalment after major edit and hopefully not requiring much further change.  It is in red which is a font colour I use for editing.  I find it a challenge to edit and refine and at times it tortures my mind, but I love doing it and want to share this latest outcome warts and all.


Criterion #5 My School Makes Sure That As I Progress I Don’t Develop Gaps
                           In My English Language, Mathematics And Digital Skills
                           Learning (Aligns with SDP elements #s4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9)


The Red is an edit commenced on 21/07/2017


Tom now turned his attention to the academic program as set out in the prescribed curriculum.  He was pleased that an Australian National Curriculum (ANC) had been developed over recent years and was rather taken by it.  He understood that each state with its constitutional responsibility for compulsory primary and secondary schooling was taking on the ANC with state level modifications.  Within this context he allowed his thinking about the learning program to be based on the latest version of the ANC (version 8) as published on the ACARA website. He did not want teachers to have to be curriculum developers in any major way.  They might make variations and innovate in various ways but they were too busy with daily teaching to have time to build a curriculum.  What was vital however was that teachers were well informed of the underlying rationale of the syllabuses in the curriculum such that they could be confident they were mentoring their students to be fit for life in the present and the future.

As part of this stage of his thinking Tom felt a nagging concern emanating from two articles he had recently read. He decided to record these at this stage of his developing treatise on school effectiveness.

Patrick Garnett, chairman of the School Curriculum and Standards Authority (formally the Curriculum Council of Western Australia) which is a quasi government body that has responsibility for the curriculum offerings of Western Australian government schools opens an article “Giving students their best chance of success”, The West Australian, 10 March 2014, p16 as follows:
“Students, their families and the community have a right to expect that after 13 years of schooling, our young people should emerge prepared for success at university, in training or the workplace.  And, after 13 years of schooling, students should be able to demonstrate an adequate level; of literacy and numeracy.”  He indicates that  “…significant concerns have been raised regarding the standards achieved by students who are leaving school with a WA Certificate of Education.”
As a result of such concerns he notes that:  “Starting this week, Year 10 students across WA will for the first time, sit an Online Literacy and Numeracy Assessment (OLNA), designed to measure their levels of literacy (reading and writing) and numeracy.” The aim is to use these tests to ascertain whether some year 10 students need to take “…new foundation English and/or foundation mathematics courses which are designed to focus on achieving the minimum levels of literacy and numeracy…..”
Garnett indicates that:  “The minimum standard of literacy and numeracy represents Level 3 in the Australian Core Skills Framework, a set of benchmarks for a range of essential skills.  The framework was established by the Commonwealth government in 2008.”  Level 3 is viewed “…as the minimum standard required to live and work in a knowledge-based economy.”


There was a follow up article that added to Tom’s concern.  In The West Australian, 10 August 2015, p3,  the Education Editor Bethany Hiatt wrote an article titled “Tests reveal teens’ shortfalls,” in which she cites the preliminary results of the first round (held in March 2015) of the above compulsory Online Literacy and Numeracy Assessment (OLNA) tests, which students “must pass to get a WA Certificate of Education” awarded at the end of a successful year 12. Hiatt reports:
“One in three Year 10 students was unable to meet the minimum numeracy standard to graduate from high school…”
“34 per cent of Year 10s did not meet the benchmark for numeracy.”
“About 27 per cent of Year 10s did not make the reading standard and 29 per cent did not meet the writing benchmark.”
“…two-thirds of Year 10s had met the standard required of them by the end of year 12.”
“So far 26 per cent of year 11 students have not met the numeracy standard after what may have been the third attempt for some.”
“In reading, 21 per cent of Year 11s did not make the standard and 23 per cent did not meet the writing benchmark.”

Those WA Year 10s who were required to do the OLNA tests did not reach band eight level on the Year 9 NAPLAN (National Assessment Program – Literacy and Numeracy) tests.  “They have six chances to complete the test before the end of year 12 or they can return to sit it after leaving school”.

Tom felt it was laudable that the problem of students exiting year 12 illiterate and innumerate had been recognized but sadly to him this seemed to be shutting the stable door after the horse had bolted.  His answer was to move students on to new learning based on mastery of necessary precursors from the very first years at primary school.  The aim was to eliminate cumulative deficits in learning and make such year 10 testing unnecessary.  If an accumulation of gaps was allowed to develop up to year 10 there was a grave danger of the Leopards being seriously disillusioned about school.  He was worried that the OLNA tests would create a new pressure on top of NAPLAN (see Appendix ?)testing.

Tom reminded me that he had previously described an age cohort entering formal schooling in practical terms as three identifiable groups namely, the Panthers, the Jaguars and the Leopards.  He further reminded me that these groups were in the normal school stream as he was not writing about students  who were in Special Schools where their differences were the consequence of Cerebral Palsy, Downs Syndrome, serious hearing impairment and so on. Tom based his description of his three groups in terms of curriculum subjects such as mathematics being organised in year levels Foundation to Year 10 as in the ANC.  Thus the Panthers were that group who attained the prescribed learning outcomes for say year 4 mathematics in less than the academic year and needed to be further extended; the Jaguars were that group who attained the prescribed learning outcomes for say year 4 mathematics taking the full academic year; and the Leopards were that group who were unable to attain the prescribed learning outcomes for say year 4 that year within the academic year.

As he was basing his writings on the ANC Tom debated whether it was necessary to explain to the reader in summary terms the structure of the ANC subjects.  He decided to do this, but stressed that no matter whether each subject was structured in year levels or bands of two years such as F-2, Years 3-4 and so on, the Panthers would streak ahead, the Jaguars would move steadily forward and the Leopards would take longer.


To further enhance the reader’s understanding Tom regarded:
Primary Schooling as years 1-6;
Middle Schooling as years 7 – 8;
Lower Secondary Schooling as years 9 - 10; and
Senior Secondary Schooling as years 11-12.

There are some minor variations across the states and territories of Australia.


The Structure of the ANC Subjects (version 8.0 of the ANC as at 23/05/2017)

English: is structured in year levels F-year 10.
Mathematics: is structured in year levels F-year 10A.
Science: is structured in year levels F-year 10.
Humanities & Social Sciences: is structured in year levels F-year 7: then subdivided as follows:
History: is structured in year levels year 7-year 10.
Geography: is structured in year levels year 7 – year 10.
Civics & Citizenship: is structured in year levels year 7 – year 10.
Economics & Business: is structured in year levels year 7 – year 10.

The Arts: subdivided into Dance, Drama, Media Arts, Music, Visual Arts where each of these subdivisions is structured in two-year bands F-2, 3-4. 5-6, 7-8, 9-10.

Technologies: subdivided into Design & Technologies, Digital Technologies where each of these subdivisions is structured in two-year bands F-2, 3-4. 5-6, 7-8, 9-10.

Health & Physical Education:  is structured in two-year bands F-2, 3-4. 5-6, 7-8, 9-10.

Languages:  There is a long list of languages other than English.  For some languages there is a focus on being a second language or a first language.
Most languages are structured in two-year bands F-2, 3-4. 5-6, 7-8, 9-10.

Work Studies: is structured as years 9-10


For the Senior Secondary Years the subjects are usually of a 4 unit structure over two years.  They are as expected more specialised compared to the F-10 subjects.

The F-10 subjects usually contained Works Samples described at levels Above Satisfactory, Satisfactory and Below Satisfactory. The Senior Secondary Subjects described content at A – E levels with A being the most complex to E being the least complex. Thus teachers had guidance as to how to rate student performance.  Tom accepted that the A-E ratings were necessary at Senior Secondary level as a guide to tertiary entrance requirements.  He however was not keen on the use of the Above Satisfactory, Satisfactory and Below Satisfactory ratings for Primary and Lower Secondary reporting to parents as he would explain later.

He noted that the F-10 curriculum of the ANC was a 3D model with the dimensions being:
:
·      Disciplinary knowledge in the form of the eight learning areas (subjects);
·      Seven general capabilities of: Literacy, Numeracy, Information and Communication Technology Capability; Critical and Creative Thinking; Personal and Social Capability; Ethical Understanding; and Intercultural Understanding; &
·      Three current cross-curriculum priorities of: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Histories and Cultures; Asia and Australia’s Engagement with Asia; & sustainability.

Tom quoted a further explanation that "the general capabilities comprise an integrated and interconnected set of knowledge, skills, behaviours and dispositions that apply across subject-based content…..” (ACARA website: www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/f-10-curriculum/structure/   as at 22 July 2017).  He also noted that the three current cross-curriculum priorities, which are not separate subjects in themselves, are to be developed, where relevant, through the learning area content (ACARA website: www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/f-10-curriculum/structure/   as at 22 July 2017)

Tom was wedded to the idea that for some subjects there were prerequisite knowledge, skills and understandings that had to be mastered before moving students to new learning that required such prerequisite mastery.  To ignore this and move students on to the new learning without the prerequisite mastery was to create the accumulation of gaps in student learning.  The consequences of this were described above in the opening paragraphs of this section. Such consequences are also manifest in a wider Australian context of the negative reactions of Federal politicians and state educators to what they see as poor NAPLAN (see Appendix ?) test results and Australia falling behind on international comparisons with the STEM subjects.

For Tom “mastery” was defined as success over a spaced set of assessments such that the knowledge, skills and understandings of the prescribed syllabus learning outcomes had been clearly achieved on a lasting basis.  He sympathised, as he could see teachers blanching at the implications of “mastery” for the Leopards and the ingenuity and innovation in pedagogy that this would demand. He was confident that in this digital age there was a plethora of alternative strategies and learning experiences that savvy teachers could find to keep the Leopards on task towards mastery.

Tom had found that the ANC was rich in cross subject referencing about literacy and numeracy.  He saw this as a plus as teachers went about their work.

Tom was committed to teacher in-service within each school whereby teachers were given the opportunity to sit with one another in discussion about how the various curriculum syllabuses should be interpreted.  Tom’s reasoning was that this enabled teachers to go off to their classes having common understandings about the prescribed learning outcomes in the curriculum.  In the common organisational structure for learning, whereby each teacher went off alone to their respective classes, this to Tom was an essential in-service.  It was also obviously essential in team teaching situations.  Tom had run in-service as described and found that it was time efficient and very fruitful.

Such in-service also allowed for informal sharing about ways to teach the subject including discussing exciting learning experiences that would motivate student learning.  Tom was confident that teachers learn a lot from one another given the opportunity to get together.

Tom was confident that such in-service would yield school policies for each prescribed curriculum syllabus.  These would be available to all teachers and be particularly helpful to teachers new to a school.  They could also be made available to parents.

Tom felt he had now set the context to become more specific and realistic about his principle of ‘no gaps’ education as the centrepiece for School Effectiveness Criterion #5.  He planned to outline the detail in terms of Primary Schooling, and Lower Secondary Schooling.  He would have something to say about Senior Secondary Schooling but on a more limited basis.



Primary Schooling and ‘no gaps’ learning

Tom the practical educator was not about to suggest a monster that teachers could not manage.  For Primary schools Tom advocated that the no gaps mastery principle be only applied to English language, Mathematics and Digital Technologies.  Tom was internally pressured to include Science but resisted.  For all other subject areas the students would be given rich experiences across all prescribed learning outcomes scheduled for the academic year in preparation for the more specialised approach of the secondary school years.  For these other subjects the Panthers, Jaguars and Leopards would be moved along together all tackling the attainment of the same learning outcomes at the same time.  Tom was aware that these views had serious implications for reporting to parents but more about that later.


More in instalment 2.


May the Force be with you!


GD