CONTENTSCONTENTS

Science Dept Self AssessmentScience Dept Self Assessment

Student ConsultationStudent Consultation

The DepartmentThe Department

The Department – Unofficial SARThe Department – Unofficial SAR

My view of the main issues for the science department:

Few administrative procedures (or even policies) in place across the department such as student consultation, lateness and homework Little QA across the department (i.e. checking by CL’s & HOD) Little sharing of good practice across the department Staff acceptance of average or slightly below average Staff still adapting to courses and the lack of support from college 2 members of staff on unreasonable timetables Some courses lacking good student exam preparation materials

My AimsMy Aims

Improve ALIS

Improve Retention and Results *

* I thought about placing Results above Retention – but the danger there is that I could end up promoting a get rid culture. I’m happy with getting rid when it’s the best thing but not simply to improve our results.

Science Dept Self AssessmentScience Dept Self Assessment

The following slides give an overview of the courses in the department and draft copies of the department summary and development plan.

Self assessment of Mark Rothery: Key pointsSelf assessment of Mark Rothery: Key points

• Standardised ALIS residual (n=61) for AS & A2 is +0.21 (statistically significantly +ve)

• GCSE (n=6), higher pass = 0%, increase 1 grade = 2/6

• External lesson obs. grade = 3. Feedback basically sound but a lack of pace and challenge

• Student feedback was mainly positive (see later item on consultation) but highlighted points for action such as this comment; “The worst things are that whenever I come to revise for a test the notes seem to be either just in picture form or bullet points. Fuller explanations need to be written down next to these”

Biology

Strengths Evidence

High levels of recruitment High no. admitted to course. High A2 takeup. High levels of student progression to related HE courses

Destinations information (Oxbridge, Medical Schools, Veterinary Schools and Dental Schools)

Weaknesses Evidence

AS results A-C Exam results

Poor AS Retention

Grade of provision: 3

Development Plan: Prescription of learning support for students in danger of dropping out. Each subject teacher to select a minimum of 3 students (using

college target setting information) and enrol them for a series of 5 support lessons. MIS to place these students on timetable for the support slots.

Continue to develop collation centrally of practical requirements and student handouts. MR to develop after hours revision classes

Numerical Targets:

TARGET

COURSE Pass Rate (%)

Higher Pass Rate

(%)

Retention (%)

Attendance (%)

AS 85 18 85 A2 96 30 96

87

Chemistry

Strengths Evidence Good AS and A2 results, comparing favourably with national figures year on year. Results Attendance better than sixth form figures. Good attitude of students towards the subject. ALIS, chart 1.2. and page 8 of ALIS. Good laboratory facilities and a high standard of equipment. Links with ICI have ensured this. For example the college has a infra red spectrometer.

Range of equipment

Teaching and learning variety and usefulness Questionnaire Weaknesses Evidence Some class sizes of 20 and above are too big, so laboratory skills can be difficult to teach on occasion.

Grade of Provision: 2

Development Plan: Revamp revision guides and post to college intranet by July 2003 Support A2 students after hours

Numerical Targets

TARGET


Higher Pass Rate

(%)

Retention (%)

Attendance (%)

AS 92 30 90 A2 96 36 95

90

Design

Strengths Evidence Teacher has 2 Degrees in Design, 14 years teaching experience and is a Chief Examiner for OCR

C.V

Regular practical sessions Questionnaire High take up of learning support Questionnaire Weaknesses Evidence Little experience in working at A level design Little experience in working in the further education system. Therefore still learning new aspects of college teaching

Poor AS pass rates


Development Plan: Introduce and encourage use of ILT by December 2002 Provide accessible course materials including past exam papers by July 2003

Numerical Targets:

TARGET


Higher Pass Rate

(%)

Retention (%)

Attendance (%)

AS 94 6 90 A2 100 0 100

85

PE

Strengths Evidence

Teaching that is good and often outstanding External lesson observations

Students’ work which is appropriately set and assessed Moderator report The substantial number of students who progress to sports-related courses in higher education

Student destinations on leaving St Mary’s

Weaknesses Evidence Poor attendance particularly at A2 Attendance data Poor results Examination results data Low retention


Development Plan: Target poorly attending students and invite parents in by December 2002. Continue to produce exam targeted resources by July 2003

Numerical Targets:

TARGET


Higher Pass Rate

(%)

Retention (%)

Attendance (%)

AS 80 8 75 A2 94 30 94

80

Physics

Strengths Evidence A2 pass rate for A-E was above the national standard.

96.9%. National A-E rate 93.1%

G&T and WP students both exceeded their ALIS Weaknesses Evidence AS pass rates were below national rates 78.6% A-E. National rate 84.6%

33.3% A-C. National rate 58.3% Computing and data-logging are inadequate in the department.

There are two computers in 210, and these still use Windows 3.1. This operating system cannot support modern data logging software.


Development Plan: Upgrade IT equipment to include updated datalogging provision by July 2003 Increase take up of student support by December 2002 measure using student consultation questionnaire

Numerical Targets:

TARGET


Higher Pass Rate

(%)

Retention (%)

Attendance (%)

AS 85 25 92 A2 95 20 100

88

Sciences SAR Academic Year 2001-2002

Overall provision in this area is Satisfactory (grade 3)

Strengths

•good pass rates in AS and GCE A Level chemistry and geology, GCE A Level physics and GCE A Level design

•good attitude of students towards department

•good effective teaching in many lessons

•high levels of recruitment and student progression to related HE courses

Weaknesses

• some poor accommodation

•poor retention in AS biology, design and PE

•poor pass rates in AS level design and AS and GCE A level PE

•large classes of 20+ in some practical lessons

•poor achievement in GCSE biology

Development Plan Individual subject courses across the department have their own individual development plans, that are to be monitored by the HOD

Action Persons Responsible

Monitoring Arrangements

Global department homework and marking policy to be developed and subjects to develop individual details

HOD, CL’s HOD

Subjects to develop strategies to increase take-up of student support

Individuals teachers, CL’s

HOD

Increase incidence of sharing good practice

Include issues such as dealing with lateness, effective questioning and production of revision guides at dept. meetings

HOD HOD, questionnaire of all science staff Jun2003

Ensure all newly produced learning materials (e.g. revision guides, h/o etc) are posted to the intranet

Individuals teachers, CL’s, HOD

HOD, CS

Introduce AS environmental science for September 2003 (subject to demand)

LP, JW, HOD HOD, AJ

Student ConsultationStudent Consultation

As I outlined in the memo prior to this meeting I was very aware of two things:• The reliance on AJ’s teaching standards questionnaire in writing SAR’s.• The lack of a clear policy on student consultation across courses within the department

We need to develop a system which collects good data which can inform change

THE BEST & WORST THINGS ABOUT BEING TAUGHT BIOLOGY BY MR ROTHERY (A2 2002)

BEST THINGS “The best things about being taught Biology with Mr Rothery is that he always makes lessons fun with his humour which makes a relaxed atmosphere in the class, this makes it easier to learn and also makes me want to come to the lesson. Also he tells you where your downfalls are which makes it easier to know which things you need to go over. He is also very enthusiastic about his teaching and doesn’t just sit there and make us copy notes. The revision notes (booklets) are class. Get excited to look over them (sad). He is always there to help you when you need it.”

“Lively/entertaining teaching approach- usually holds interest for the lesson – well done!”

“Lessons are never boring, he uses a variety of techniques such as notetaking, OHP computers, practicals, diagrams to make the lesson more interesting! He provides detailed notes and labelled diagrams which he interprets his ‘own way’ (sometimes going off on a tangent) but it does simplify the complicated aspects! I enjoy and benefit more from active learning (writing notes) as all the information goes in!! (I hate listening and not writing)”

WORST THINGS “The worst things are that whenever I come to revise for a test the notes seem to be either just in picture form or bullet points. Fuller explanations need to be written down next to these. Also I don’t like it when I have to draw an eye or leg etc because I am a terrible drawer and when I look over it, it looks unrealistic and I don’t know exactly where the labels are pointing to which makes me make mistakes. Practicals ALWAYS go wrong, he might as well just do one beforehand to make sure that it actually works before we waste time.”

“Notes sometimes difficult to understand when revising topics. Sometimes in confusing order.”

“When drawing diagrams he tends to keep adding and adding more labels and rubbing out others which makes it (sometimes) difficult to follow. The notes, although they are detailed they are sometimes a bit confusing in that they don’t have a sequence to them, this makes it difficult when its time to revise. (Do love the revision notes though).

Chart showing student scores responding to the question "score 1 to 10 , with 1 the least and 10 the best, how helpful you found the following in preparing

you for the A2 exams." (n=11)

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

Th

e b

oo

kle

ts I'

ve

ha

nd

ed

ou

tfo

r M

od

s 4

& 5

My

we

bs

ite

Th

e b

oo

kle

t o

f p

as

t e

xa

m q

'sfo

r M

od

. 8

Pa

st

ex

am

q's

fo

r M

od

. 4 (

giv

en

ou

t a

t in

terv

als

du

rin

g le

ss

on

s)

My

te

ac

hin

g (

I.e. m

e, e

xp

os

itio

n-

no

t re

so

urc

es

Te

xtb

oo

ks

Vid

eo

s s

ho

wn

in c

las

s

H/o

giv

en

in c

las

s

Strategy

Cu

mu

lati

ve s

core

s g

iven

3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5

Frequency of use in lessons

4

4.5

5

5.5

6

6.5

7

7.5

8

8.5

P erc

ieve

d ef

fec t

i ve n

e ss

as a

lear

nin g

ac t

ivit

yFrequency and effectiveness of various learning activities (n=14)

Ind

ivid

ua

l he

l p

Vi d

eo

s

Cl a

ss d

isc u

s

De

mo

s Talk

ing

to

oth

ers

Re

sea

rch

Tea

che

rs d

af t

litt

le s

t ori

es

Di c

tat io

n

Pr a

cti c

als n

ote

s (f

rom

bo

ar d

)

pa

st Q

's

Tea

che

r Q

's (

ora

l)

Gr o

up

wo

rk

Re

ad

i ng

Lis

ten

ing

to

th

e t

ea

c he

r

Form 1

Form 2

Form 3

Documents

CONTENTS