The Project Model
One of the challenges of providing central training days is in ensuring that what is learned in the day is put into practice once the teachers return to their hectic school lives. All too often, teachers have little or no opportunity to reflect on their learning, or to ask further questions, and the best that can be hoped for is that a few ‘nuggets’ find their way into the classroom. It was important that contact with participants was sustained, that they had time for reflection and collaboration in addition to ‘input’ and that they had support in implementing strategies in their own context. These factors led to the design of the model.
Funding
Recognising that the project was directly addressing a County priority, The Buckinghamshire Learning Trust fully funded the project. This meant that supply costs were paid, enabling schools to release teachers for a total of 9.5 days.
|
The University of Cardiff, also recognising the potential of the project, funded the participation of Dr Lise Fontaine, Senior Lecturer in the Cardiff School of English, Communication and Philosophy. Having Dr Fontaine's input meant that teachers had access to the latest academic thinking in the field.
|
Sustained Input and Support for Teachers
Each half term, all teachers attended a full day training session in which they received high quality input on both subject knowledge and pedagogical approaches. Also each half term, the teachers came together in two smaller groups for a network meeting. These meetings gave the teachers extended opportunities to reflect and discuss, to share their work and to revisit any areas of the input that needed follow up or development. Because of the nature of this feedback, it was possible to respond to the teachers’ needs and interests in the input sessions, creating a programme in which teachers were fully engaged and committed.
|
Each term, each teacher was offered a half day support visit from out Teaching Excellence Practitioner, Jo Peters, to support them in implementing their learning in their schools. This took the form of joint planning of lessons/ unit of work, joint teaching, planning of staff training events and support in applying the assessment criteria.
|
A Moodle platform was used to provide a shared space for the teachers involved in the project. This provided a bank of the materials used in the sessions and some additional supporting resources. Some teachers kept their reflective log in the form of a blog on the site and teachers also used a forum to share ideas and resources between sessions.
Building Capacity
By investing in the teachers in this way, a cohort of ‘specialists’ would be developed to a point where they, in turn, could support other teachers in and beyond their own schools. In this way the project aim was to spread the understanding and practice far beyond the reach of a more conventional one day course.
Engaging with Senior Leadership
Half way through the project, a half day ‘mini conference’ for Head Teachers was held. This outlined the principles and learning of the project and the outcomes to date. Teachers presented the work that they had been doing and, importantly, there was time for head teachers to discuss with their teacher the progress of the project in their school and how best to capitalise on it.
At the end of the project, Head Teachers were again invited to a half-day session when the full year outcomes were shared, the teachers presented their key highlights and their achievements were celebrated.
At the end of the project, Head Teachers were again invited to a half-day session when the full year outcomes were shared, the teachers presented their key highlights and their achievements were celebrated.
Evidence Gathering
Teachers were asked to maintain a reflective log, recording their responses to the project and to the work they were doing
The teachers also kept an evidence file. This contained planning and resources for their lessons, and, most importantly samples of pupil work.
At the beginning of the programme, teachers identified up to 6 ‘focus pupils’ to track over the year. These were often children who were not making expected progress, but the reasons for their lack of progress varied considerably. In some cases, lack of engagement was a key issue, other children lacked confidence, were working well below expected levels, were working well above expected levels and needed more challenge. Examples of their writing at different times of the year were kept.
Teachers also kept materials and feedback from training sessions they had run for their colleagues in their schools.
The teachers also kept an evidence file. This contained planning and resources for their lessons, and, most importantly samples of pupil work.
At the beginning of the programme, teachers identified up to 6 ‘focus pupils’ to track over the year. These were often children who were not making expected progress, but the reasons for their lack of progress varied considerably. In some cases, lack of engagement was a key issue, other children lacked confidence, were working well below expected levels, were working well above expected levels and needed more challenge. Examples of their writing at different times of the year were kept.
Teachers also kept materials and feedback from training sessions they had run for their colleagues in their schools.
Data collection
At the beginning of the project, and at termly intervals, writing assessments, in National Curriculum Levels, for the whole of each teacher’s class were submitted. Teachers also completed more detailed assessments of writing, based on the R2L criteria, for the focus pupils at the beginning and end of the process. Separate assessments of chronological and non-chronological writing were made.
Sharing and dissemination
At the end of the project, teachers used the materials collected to produce a case study of the work that they had completed in their schools.