View
219
Download
1
Category
Tags:
Preview:
Citation preview
Hayes Park Primary SchoolLondon Borough of Hillingdon
NCETM small grantsresearch projectLondon region
Research proposition• Can coaching contribute to the effective
embedding on CPD in teacher’s classroom practice?
Time scale• Three terms – Spring, Summer, Autumn 2007
Focus• Mathematics CPD –introducing the PNS
Renewed Framework with a focus on assessment for learning
Hayes Park Primary School
Using this PowerPoint
• The first part of this PowerPoint presentation will take you through a summary of the project and show the research findings and conclusion. All the slides in the summary are denoted by a in the bottom left corner
• To explore specific areas of the project in more detail, please see the sections in the Appendix
Hayes Park Primary School
Hayes Park Primary School
Context• Hayes Park is a highly successful school classed as
outstanding in all aspects by the OFSTED Report carried out on 20th June 2007 (www.ofsted.gov.uk)
• Coaching has been established in the school over the last five years and is part of their standard practice
• Dr Neil Suggett, the head teacher, is the project sponsor
• Deborah Barlow, the deputy head, leads on assessment and curriculum
• The maths subject leader, Susie Singh, was on maternity leave when the project began, came back for the middle part and then left the school to take up a new post in September 2007
Hayes Park Primary School
ContextAlison Jones ( Y5 and AST) took the role whilst Susie was on maternity leave and now shares it with Caroline Marshall (Y6 and AST), who has taken on the main maths responsibility.
Jennie Pennant, the Professional Development Manager at BEAM, has acted as an external consultant for the project and carried out a number of the activities: devising the questionnaire, classroom sweeps, delivering some of the INSET, undertaking some interviews, analysing data and co-writing the report.
Initials will now be used to refer to people involved in activities.
Methodology
• teachers and TAs to be divided into two groups by year group
• half (Years 1, 3 and 5) to receive coaching• three sessions as a year group of
teachers and TAs• three additional sessions individually for
teachers and as a year group for TAs• the other half (Years 2, 4 and 6) will
receive no coaching
Hayes Park Primary School
Coaching
Features• sessions run by the coaches from the
school• the sessions were 45 minutes long• the GROW model for coaching was used• the participants were familiar with the
coaching approach, as it is regularly used in the school
Hayes Park Primary School
Spring 2007
Summer 2007
Autumn 2007
Questionnaire
Classroom sweep
INSET – half day
Coaching sessions
Review and discussion
Coaching sessions
Review and discussion
Coaching sessions
Interviews
Review research and compile report
Hayes Park Primary School
Classroom sweep
INSET - twilight
INSET - twilight
Interviews
Questionnaire
Summary ofTimeline
INSETs - one whole day and four twilight sessions over the year
These focussed on introducing aspects of the Renewed Framework, looking at strategies for prior learning and other aspects of the assessment for learning agenda.
They were run by Jennie from BEAM and Alison and Susie, the MSLs from Hayes Park Primary School.
Hayes Park Primary School
Data collection
• questionnaires, with an assessment for learning focus – prior to the research project and then again in the final term
• teacher and TA interviews • classroom sweeps before and after with a
focus on the questionnaire • teacher and TA feedback from various
training and feedback sessions• year group leader interviews
Hayes Park Primary School
Questionnaire
The questionnaire was devised for this project and the classroom sweeps were also based on the questionnaire.
Teachers filled it in at the beginning and end of the project. BEAM analysed it and compared the findings to the classroom sweep findings and other evidence.
Hayes Park Primary School
Hayes Park Primary School
FindingsClassroom sweeps suggested that many initiatives were whole school and longer and more focussed observations would be needed to detect differences in progress between the cohorts.
Interviews pointed to the fact that coaching offered the following advantages:
• dedicated time• opportunity for reflection• a whole year group focus• a coach to move you forward and keep
you on task• an agreed strategy to go away and trial
and report back on
Hayes Park Primary School
FindingsQuestionnaires indicated the following:
• both the participant groups and the non- participant group reported progress over the time of the project
• the participant group reported more progress, in the majority of areas
• the non-participant group had less room for making progress as their initial scores were higher than the participant group
Conclusion
The findings suggest that the coaching may have contributed to the embedding of the CPD.
There were, however, a range of other factors in play as well including:
• whole school initiatives• the content of the coaching was not
insulated from the other teachers• the sharing ethos of the school
Further investigation is needed into the interplay of the coaching with these other factors.
Hayes Park Primary School
Appendix
Hayes Park Primary School
Coaching
Questionnaires
Classroomsweeps
Interviews
•Click a button to go tothe relevant section
•You can return to thispage by clicking
in the bottom left corner
Return toappendix
‘Coaching is unlocking a person’s potential to maximise their own performance. It is helping them learn rather than teaching them’ John Whitmore
Hayes Park Primary School
Coaching
Page 1 of 4
Return toappendix
How does Whitmore’s coaching approach work?• the process is non directive• the coachee drives the agenda • the coaching session is goal-centred and leads
to action• coaching focuses on the present/future• coaching helps people take responsibility for
action and is an investment in their growth What is the basic structure to the coaching session?G oal (for this session and the whole project)R eality (the coachee’s view of the current reality)O ptions (the possible courses of action)W ill (the level of commitment to action)
Hayes Park Primary School
Coaching
Page 2 of 4
Return toappendix
Coaching
Example of Goal• ‘developing manageable/effective review
sessions’
Example of Will from two different groups • ‘numeracy table, games, sandpit for when task
is finished’• ‘reviewing the way we assess’
Hayes Park Primary School
Coaching
Page 3 of 4
Return toappendix
Hayes Park Primary School
Coaching references
• Whitmore J (2002) Coaching for Performance, Nicholas Brealey Publishing
• Smith A & Thomas W (2004) Coaching Solutions: Practical Ways to Improve Performance in Education Network Educational Press
• Powell G, Chambers M & Baxter G (2001) Pathways to Coaching, TLO
• Creasy J & Patterson P (2005) Leading Coaching in Schools, NCSL Research Publications
Coaching
Page 4 of 4
Return toappendix
Questionnaires
Page 1 of 9
Hayes Park Primary School
Return toappendix
Questionnaire – sections A and B
Questionnaire – sections C, D and E
Return toappendix
Questionnaires
Page 2 of 9
Hayes Park Primary School
Questionnaires
Page 3 of 9
Hayes Park Primary School
January vs September 2007: Average Scores for all Aspects (Participants)
Questionnaire
Return toappendix
Questionnaires
Page 4 of 9
Hayes Park Primary School
January vs September 2007: Average Scores for all Aspects (Non-participants)
Questionnaire
Return toappendix
Questionnaires
Page 5 of 9
Hayes Park Primary School
Questionnaire
January vs September 2007: Comparison of Increase in Average Scores for all Aspects (Participants and Non-participants)
Return toappendix
Findings:• both the participant group and the non-
participant group reported progress over the time of the project
• the participant group reported more progress, in the majority of areas except for B2 - learning styles and B3 - modelling maths talk, where the gains reported by the non-participant group were slightly higher than those of the participant group
• the non-participant group had less room for reporting progress as their initial scores were higher than the participant group
Hayes Park Primary School
Return toappendix
Questionnaires
Page 6 of 9
Questionnaire
Greatest progress was recorded in the following areas by both participants and non-participants:
• A2 the nature of verbal feedback• B5 children assess and articulate what they
can and cannot do• C2 assessing prior learning
Hayes Park Primary School
Questionnaire
These reflected areas that had been whole school foci during the project and also some aspects of these had been taken as a coaching goal by the participant group
Return toappendix
Questionnaires
Page 7 of 9
In two areas the participant group reported more progress than the non-participant group:
•A3 marking of written work•C3 planning adjusted daily
In three areas neither group reported much progress:
•B1 sharing the learning focus - see WALT in classroom sweep section•D1 creating a safe classroom for taking risks•E4 children have strategies to assess their
progressThese were areas that were already well established in the classroom.
Hayes Park Primary School
Questionnaire
Return toappendix
Questionnaires
Page 8 of 9
Both groups reported little progress with:• D2 measure successful learning by not only
getting the right answer• D3 fostering qualities such as
perseverance.
These were areas that had not been specifically addressed during the duration of the project.
Hayes Park Primary School
Return toappendix
Questionnaires
Page 9 of 9
Questionnaire
Classroom sweeps
Hayes Park Primary School
These were carried out by Jennie from BEAM in the Spring and the Autumn across both the coached and un-coached groups.
Jennie used the questionnaire foci on assessment for the observations and spent approximately 15 minutes in each classroom.
Return toappendix
Classroom sweeps
Page 1 of 7
Classroom sweep Autumn 2007
JP observed in the Y1 classroom that children were encouraged to use these fans to show the teacher how they felt about their learning. These had been introduced over the period of the project.
Links to B5 onquestionnaire:“children canassess andarticulate whatthey can andcannot do”
Hayes Park Primary School
Return toappendix
Classroom sweeps
Page 2 of 7
Hayes Park Primary School
WALT (What we Are Learning Today) was present in every classroom in the Spring sweep. In all classrooms the children were now reading it out, discussing language in it and ensuring they all understood it. This was the result of a cross school focus on the language of maths.
Classroom sweep Autumn 2007
Return toappendix
Classroom sweeps
Page 3 of 7
Classroom sweeps
Page 4 of 7
Classroom sweepAutumn 2007
Hayes Park Primary School
These are two examples of laminated cards that children were annotating, to show their understanding of data handling. This was part of the strategy the teacher used to assess their prior learning.
Year 5 coached cohort
Draw the bar chart using the information in the table
Spot the mistakes in these bar charts
Return toappendix
Classroom sweep Autumn 2007
Hayes Park Primary School
• Links to C4 on questionnaire: “My lesson plan is adjusted during the lesson according to the children’s responses”
Well it could be buy one get one free
Two cartons of milk and a chocolate bar cost £1.30. If the choc bar cost 40p how much did each carton of milk cost?
• An excellent example of this was seen in a Year 6 lesson.
So would that be better value?
The teacher responded to the child’s suggestion with an open ended problem solving question for the class to investigate
Return toappendix
Classroom sweeps
Page 5 of 7
Classroom sweep Autumn 2007
Hayes Park Primary School
This children’s self-assessment strategy was observed in both a coached and an un-coached year group. Children placed their name in one of the three columns that they felt best described their progress with the learning objective.
Links to E4 on questionnaire:“children have strategies to help them assess their progress”
Return toappendix
Classroom sweeps
Page 6 of 7
Classroom sweep Autumn 2007
Hayes Park Primary School
The brevity of the visits meant it was difficult to assess differences in practice between the coached and un-coached cohorts.
For example, all classes were using the Renewed Framework and working on prior learning and assessment. However, DB thought that the coaching had contributed to the way that coached teachers had embedded the changes.
Return toappendix
Classroom sweeps
Page 7 of 7
Hayes Park Primary School
Debs Barlow, Deputy Head and responsible for the curriculum
Interview - Autumn 2007
• raised the profile of assessment for learning in maths across the school
• lot of progress on assessing prior learning – now need to focus on how to use that information in lessons
• A4L rippling out from maths to pervade whole curriculum
• teachers indicated several advantages of coaching: dedicated time, specific focus, commitment to action and feedback on progress.
Return toappendix
Interviews
Page 1 of 3
• Susie taught in Year 1 – a coached year group• she felt that the coaching had created a pro-
active atmosphere• ‘if people disagree they can express it in a
non-judgemental way’• ‘coaching has provided opportunities to iron
out problems’• ‘coaching made us very clear’• ‘coaching has deepened thinking’• she wondered if the coaching might have had
more of impact in a less confident school
Hayes Park Primary School
Susie left the school in July 2007 due to a geographical move
Susie Singh, Maths Subject Leader
Return toappendix
Interviews
Page 2 of 3
Interview - July 2007
Hayes Park Primary School
Autumn 2007Alison reiterated much of the above and felt that another benefit of the coaching was the opportunity to look at range of options if the year group was stuck.
Interview - April 2007
April 2007Alison worked in the Year 5 team – a coached year group. She felt that the benefits of coaching were:
• dedicated time to discuss issues• opportunity for reflection on practice• having the coach to keep everyone focussed.
A challenge was knowing what goal to choose. Alison felt that PPA time would not have provided the same benefits as it tends to get used on pressing tasks.
Alison Jones, Shadow Maths Subject Leader
Return toappendix
Interviews
Page 3 of 3
Recommended