Quality First Teaching for All. Quality First Teaching for ALL The most effective way to narrow the gaps! A Top Priority for Schools! Context and Background

Quality First Teaching for All

Quality First Teaching for ALL

The most effective way to narrow the gaps!

A Top Priority for Schools!

Context and Background

Whose gaps are we attempting to narrow?

• Pupils with special educational needs and disabilities

• Disadvantaged pupils (Pupil Premium)• White working class pupils (Girls as well as

boys)

And . . .• Who have you got in your school?

Key Research

• The special educational needs and disability review. A statement is not enough (Ofsted, September 2010)

• Improving the impact of teachers on pupil achievement in the UK – interim findings (The Sutton Trust, September 2011)

• Unseen children: access and achievement 20 years on. Evidence Report ( Ofsted, June 2013)

• Underachievement in Education by White Working Class Children. First report of Session 2014-15 (House of Commons Education Committee, June 2014)

• Cracking the code: how schools can improve social mobility (Social Mobility and Child Poverty Commission, October 2014)

The special educational needs and disability review

A statement is not enough

Ofsted

Published: September 2010

Reference no: 090221•

The special educational needs and disability review – A statement is not enough

The aims of the review were to:•evaluate the accuracy and the equity of identification of special educational needs across England and within local areas•evaluate the extent to which the assessment of needs results in high expectations, swift access to tailored services and so improves outcomes•establish, in different provisions and local areas, the strength of outcomes for disabled children and young people and those who had special educational needs as well as for children reaching the lowest levels of attainment •evaluate, as part of this, the effectiveness of legislation, policy and the organisation of provision, following identification and assessment, in focusing on the improvement of outcomes for these groups of children and young people.


• However, we also recognise that as many as half of all pupils identified for School Action would not be identified as having special educational needs if schools focused on improving teaching and learning for all, with individual goals for improvement.

Ofsted, September 2010


• At School Action level, the additional provision was often making up for poor whole class teaching or pastoral support.


• Inspectors saw schools that identified pupils as having special educational needs when, in fact, their needs were no different from those of most other pupils. They were underachieving but this was sometimes simply because the school’s mainstream teaching provision was not good enough, and expectations of the pupils were too low.


• . . . some pupils are being wrongly identified as having special educational needs and that relatively expensive additional provision is being used to make up for poor day-to-day teaching and pastoral support. This can dilute the focus on overall school improvement and divert attention from those who do need a range of specialist support.


• The characteristics of the best lessons were:– Teachers’ thorough and detailed knowledge of the

children and young people– Teachers’ thorough knowledge and understanding of

teaching strategies and techniques, including assessment for learning

– Teachers’ thorough knowledge about the subject or areas of learning being taught

– Teachers’ understanding of how learning difficulties can affect children and young people’s learning.

• These were the essential tools for good-quality teaching with any group of children or young people.


• . . . further changes to the system should focus on:• Improving teaching and pastoral support early on so

that additional provision is not needed later• Ensuring that schools do not identify pupils as having

special educational needs when they simply need better teaching.

Special educational needs and disability code of practice: 0 to 25 years

July 2014

• High quality teaching that is differentiated and personalised will meet the individual needs of the majority of children and young people.


July 2014

• Some children and young people need educational provision that is additional to or different from this. This is special educational provision under Section 21 of the Children and Families Act 2014. Schools and colleges must use their best endeavours to ensure that such provision is made for those who need it.


July 2014

• Special educational provision is underpinned by high quality teaching and is compromised by anything less.

• Additional intervention and support cannot compensate for a lack of good quality teaching.


July 2014

• The majority of pupils can make progress through such teaching.

• Schools should regularly and carefully review the quality of teaching for pupils at risk of underachievement.

• This includes reviewing teachers’ understanding of strategies to identify and support vulnerable learners and their knowledge of the special educational needs most frequently encountered.


July 2014

• The quality of teaching for pupils with SEN, and the progress made by pupils, should be a core part of the school’s performance management arrangements and its approach to professional development for all teaching and support staff.


July 2014

• The first response to less than expected progress should be high quality teaching targeted at their areas of weakness.

• Where progress continues to be less than expected the class or subject teacher, working with the SENCO, should assess whether the child has SEN.


July 2014

The Sutton TrustImproving the impact of teachers on pupil achievement

in the UK – interim findings (Sept. 2011)

• The effects of high-quality teaching are especially significant for pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds: over a school year, these pupils gain 1.5 years’ worth of learning with very effective teachers, compared with 0.5 years with poorly performing teachers. In other words, for poor pupils the difference between a good teacher and a bad teacher is a whole year’s learning.

Unseen Children: access and achievement 20 years on

Evidence ReportOfsted, 2013

Unseen children: access and achievement 20 years on

• This report summarises Ofsted’s review which aimed to understand the current pattern of disadvantage and educational success across England.

• In the report, the term ‘disadvantaged pupils’ refers to those pupils who are eligible for free school meals.


• In 1993, Ofsted identified seven urban areas which suffered from geographical isolation. Much of the provision in these areas was described as inadequate and disturbing by inspectors.

• According to this report, the quality of education has improved in some of the areas Ofsted identified in 1993. In others, however, the rate of improvement has been slow.


• The most successful schools recognise that raising academic achievement cannot be tackled in isolation.

• Teachers’ high expectations, consistently high quality teaching and learning and a relevant curriculum must be underpinned by other interventions that increase pupils’ resilience and readiness to learn, as well as developing strong partnerships with parents and carers.


• High quality teaching is crucial, especially for disadvantaged pupils.

• There are big regional variations in the quality of teaching in schools serving the most and least deprived communities.

Underachievement in Education by White Working

Class Children. First report of Session 2014-15 (House of

Commons Education Committee, June 2014)

Curriculum or quality of teaching?

• Professor Becky Francis called for “flex” within a school’s curriculum so that students could “pursue subjects for which they have a passion”.

• In contrast, Dr Kevan Collins (Chief Executive, Education Endowment Foundation) argued that: “pedagogy trumps curriculum every time. It is very clear that the way you teach and how you teach is always more powerful than just changing the curriculum”

Will school improvement alone close the gap?

• Twice the proportion of poor children attending an outstanding school will leave with five good GCSEs when compared with the lowest rated schools, whereas the proportion of non-FSM children achieving this benchmark in outstanding schools is only 1.5 times greater than in those rated as inadequate.

It’s the quality of teaching that counts!

• We agree that there is much that schools can do to address white working class underachievement. Broader societal factors also have an enormous role to play, but this should not deflect attention from the central importance of improving school and teaching quality.

• Cracking the code: how schools can improve social mobility (Social Mobility and Child Poverty Commission, October 2014)

A changing pattern?

• Previous research has found that differences in school quality can explain on average around a fifth of the variation in children’s educational attainment: most of the attainment gap is ultimately determined by differences in the home environment, including family background and parenting. But new analysis of variations in outcomes for students in schools with similar intakes suggests that schools can make a big difference if more step up to the standards of the best.

Variations across schools

Our analysis shows that:

•The best performers are helping three times as many disadvantaged children to achieve five good GCSEs including English and maths as schools with similar levels of disadvantage.

•In the best performing schools, 60 per cent of disadvantaged children achieve five good GCSEs including English and maths compared to only 25 per cent in the lowest performing.

Low Teacher Expectations

• We also found evidence that some teachers’ attitudes towards disadvantaged students could act as a barrier to success. While it is clear that most teachers did not think social background had any influence on expectations at their school, over one in five (21 per cent) overall – and one in four (25 per cent) in secondary schools - agreed that some of their colleagues had lower expectations of students from disadvantaged backgrounds relative to those of other students.

Low Expectations

• There is also strong quantitative evidence showing that there are real risks of unconscious bias and stereotyping based on a child’s background including their family income, ethnicity and SEN status. This used results from the Millennium Cohort Study to compare performance on reading and maths tests at age seven to teacher assessment of children’s ability. Students in families on low incomes were 11 per cent less likely to be judged above average at reading compared to similarly attaining children in better off households.

What works in the best schools?

• Building a high expectations, inclusive culture – this means being ambitious and “sharp-elbowed” for all children, with the school leadership team and governors sending a clear message from the top that they have high expectations of all staff and all students. It includes implementation of a firm and consistent behaviour policy and a ‘whatever it takes’ attitude to improving standards and results among all students: not tolerating lower standards because of a mind-set that disadvantaged children cannot do any better.

What works in the best schools?

• Incessant focus on the quality of teaching – this means placing the provision of highly effective teaching, perhaps the single most important way schools can influence social mobility, at the centre of the school’s approach to narrowing the attainment gap and raising standards. This includes . . . ensuring disadvantaged students have (at least) their fair share of the best teachers’ time – not just subcontracting the teaching of low attainers to teaching assistants or focusing the best teachers on students at the C/D borderline or on top sets where disadvantaged students tend to be under-represented.

Ofsted Inspection of Maintained Schools and Academies from 1st September 2014

• Inspectors should consider the extent to which the ‘Teachers’ Standards’ are being met.

Teachers’ StandardsSeptember 2012

Adapt teaching to respond to the strengths and needs of all pupils

• Know when and how to differentiate appropriately, using approaches which enable pupils to be taught effectively

• Have a secure understanding of how a range of factors can inhibit pupils’ ability to learn, and how best to overcome these

• Demonstrate an awareness of the physical , social and intellectual development of children, and know how to adapt teaching to support pupils’ education at different stages of development

• Have a clear understanding of the needs of all pupils, including those with special educational needs; those of high ability; those with EAL; those with disabilities; and be able to use and evaluate distinctive teaching approaches to engage and support them.

Reflection Time• Do all teachers in your school have high expectations

for disadvantaged pupils?• Do disadvantaged pupils have access to the highest

quality teachers in your school?• What is the quality of teaching and learning for

disadvantaged pupils in your school? (Outstanding? Good? Requiring Improvement? Inadequate?)

• How would your teachers match up to Section 5 of the Teachers’ Standards?

• Do all teachers understand the difference between a pupil who is ‘underachieving’ and a pupil who has SEN – ‘a pupil who has significantly greater difficulty in learning than the majority of their peers’?

Documents

Quality First Teaching for All. Quality First Teaching for ALL The most effective way to narrow the gaps! A Top Priority for Schools! Context and Background