Education REVIEW REPORT:
SWANSON SCHOOL
JULY 2007
1. About the School
2. The Education Review Office (ERO) Evaluation
3. The Focus of the Review
4. Areas of National Interest
5. Recommendations
6. Future Action
Community Page
DisclaimerIndividual ERO school and early childhood centre reports are public information and may be copied or sent electronically. However, the Education Review Office can guarantee only the authenticity of original documents which have been obtained in hard copy directly from either the local ERO office or ERO Corporate Office in Wellington. Please consult your telephone book, or see the ERO web page, http://www.ero.govt.nz, for ERO office addresses.
This report has been prepared in accordance with standard procedures approved by the Chief Review Officer.
1. 1. About the School
Location / Swanson, Waitakere CityMinistry of Education profile number / 1521
School type / Full Primary (Years 1-8)
Decile rating[1][1] / 5
Teaching staff:
Roll generated entitlement
Other
Number of teachers /
22.9
2.0
24
School roll / 496
Gender composition / Boys 51%, Girls 49%
Ethnic composition / New Zealand European/Pākehā 62%, Māori 24%,
Samoan 3%, Middle Eastern 3%, Chinese 2%,
Cook Island Māori 2%, Indian 1%, Tongan 1%,
other ethnicities 2%
Review team on site / June 2007
Date of this report / 27 July 2007
Previous ERO reports / Education Review, November 2004
Accountability Review, March 2001
Effectiveness Review, February 1997
Assurance Audit, December 1992
Review, November 1991
2. 2. The Education Review Office (ERO) Evaluation
Swanson School is a large Year 1-8 primary school located near the foothills of the Waitakere Ranges. Since the 2004 ERO review there have been significant changes in the governance and management of the school. The school was being managed by an acting principal in 2004. The current principal was appointed in 2005 and the two deputy principals were appointed in 2006. The principal and his deputies have a very good knowledge of curriculum and of effective pedagogy. They make good use of student achievement information to plan strategically for the allocation of resources.
The 2004 ERO review recommended that the board take the opportunity provided by the appointment of a new principal to reflect critically on established systems and practices for the operation of the school. Since the principal’s appointment considerable self review has resulted in significant changes that have improved learning and teaching in the school.
Information about student achievement in reading and mathematics is closely monitored and comparisons are made with student achievement nationally. School data show that achievement in reading and numeracy is consistent with national expectations. Students at risk of not achieving are identified and their progress is monitored by the principal. Senior managers have used achievement information to identify aspects of mathematics where overall student achievement is not consistent with national expectations and, as a result, have increased the length of time allocated to teaching mathematics.
In 2006 the Ministry of Education appointed a commissioner to govern the school as elected trustees were no longer able to function effectively as a board. A properly constituted board of trustees now governs the school. New trustees are enthusiastic and interested in on-going school improvement. They have accessed external support for their professional development and the appraisal of the principal. A new governance manual, developed with support from the School Trustees Association, provides the board with useful guidance.
Since the 2004 ERO review, there have been significant developments in the availability of information and communication technologies (ICT) in the school. Staff and students now have greatly improved access to ICT and there is a school-wide professional development focus on how to use ICT resources effectively. The new school website is a useful source of information. Other significant developments include the installation of a new playground and the painting of the school exterior.
Students at Swanson School are happy and confident and are generally focused on schoolwork. They report that they are proud of their school and feel safe and supported by adults. During breaks, the playground is well supervised. The availability of many staff in the playground at these times helps to ensure that students are involved in a variety of activities.
While some high quality teaching practices are evident, these practices are not used consistently across the school. It is important that senior managers support teachers to consolidate the use of formative assessment practices introduced in staff professional development. Deputy principals have already begun to monitor teaching more closely and should support staff to revise their knowledge of formative assessment practices through further professional development.
Classroom teaching is supplemented by carefully targeted and monitored learning support. This well coordinated programme provides effective teacher-aide support and advice to help students who are at risk of not achieving. Parent volunteers enhance this programme.
This report focuses on the quality of education for students at risk of not achieving and on school self review. It evaluates progress in providing educational programmes that support Māori student achievement and comments on aspects of health and safety including the school’s pandemic planning. Significant progress has been made in improving school systems for the benefit of student education. ERO recommends that senior managers continue to work with staff to improve the quality of teaching and learning in the school.
Future Action
ERO is confident that the board of trustees can manage the school in the interests of the students and the Crown and bring about the improvements outlined in this report.
ERO will review the school again as part of the regular review cycle.
3. 3. The Focus of the Review
Student Achievement Overall
ERO’s education reviews focus on student achievement. What follows is a statement about what the school knows about student achievement overall.
A schedule has been established to gather school-wide achievement data in literacy and mathematics. Information on student achievement is closely monitored for reading and mathematics, and comparisons are made with student achievement nationally. School test results indicate that achievement in reading and numeracy is consistent with national expectations.
In 2005 and 2006 running record reading data (using the Probe reading inventory) for Term 4 were compared with Term 1 data. By the end of each year, the percentage of the students reading at their chronological age had increased significantly.
Students at risk of not achieving are identified and their progress is monitored through five weekly testing. Students whose reading levels are six months or more below their chronological age are included in this targeted group.
Aspects of mathematics in which overall student achievement is not consistent with national expectations are identified and strategies for teaching these aspects of the curriculum are reviewed.
Teachers use student achievement information to group students by levels of attainment. Senior managers are now considering how teachers could make better use of achievement information to focus their teaching more precisely on students’ identified needs. The senior management team is further considering how achievement in other curriculum areas should be assessed.
School Specific Priorities
Before the review, the board of Swanson School was invited to consider its priorities for review using guidelines and resources provided by ERO. ERO also used documentation provided by the school to contribute to the scope of the review.
The detailed priorities for review were then determined following a discussion between the ERO review team and the board of trustees. This discussion focused on existing information held by the school (including student achievement and selfreview information) and the extent to which potential issues for review contributed to the achievement of the students at Swanson School.
ERO and the board have agreed on the following focus areas for the review:
· · the quality of the educational provisions for students at risk of not achieving; and
· · the quality of strategic planning and self review.
ERO’s findings in these areas are set out below.
The quality of the education for students at risk of not achieving
Background
Since the 2004 ERO review, the school has established a team specifically to support the education of students at risk of not achieving. The team supports twelve percent of the students at the school. Staff are now focused on ways to meet student needs within classroom programmes.
The learning support team leader coordinates a group of teacher aides who work with students funded through the Ongoing and Reviewable Resourcing Schemes (ORRS) and other students requiring additional learning support. The team leader liaises with parents/whānau, teachers, senior managers and external agencies.
The board was interested in having ERO evaluate the effectiveness of the work done by the learning support team. ERO extended the focus to include the extent to which students at risk of not achieving are supported by classroom teaching.
Areas of good performance
Learning support team leadership. A skilled teacher who is knowledgeable about teaching students with special needs leads the learning support team. She works effectively with students and staff.
Teacher aides. Teacher aides are very skilled at supporting students. They have been well trained for the role and undertake professional development to help them meet the needs of the students whom they support.
Supporting learners in the classroom. Learning support staff and classroom teachers work together skilfully to support literacy learning for students at risk of not achieving. Teacher aides implement carefully planned strategies as they work with individual students or small groups during classroom literacy sessions. Classroom teachers reinforce these strategies during other classroom programmes. Results of daily monitoring of progress and achievement by teacher aides are discussed with teachers and programmes are further modified to match learning needs. Students’ specific learning needs are purposefully met through learning support programmes. .
Identification processes. The learning support team, classroom teachers and senior managers follow effective procedures to identify students who need learning support. They make good use of assessment data from formal testing, classroom observations and relevant information from a variety of other sources.
Assessment. The progress of students having additional learning support is monitored regularly. Learning support staff make daily records of their interactions with students and note any progress made. Classroom teachers are kept well informed about the progress of their students in learning support programmes.
Classroom teaching. Examples of effective strategies that some teachers use to support children at risk of not achieving include:
· · carefully analyzing achievement information and monitoring student progress;
· · providing differentiated programmes that target individual and group learning needs;
· · sharing the purpose of the learning activity with students and identifying with them indicators of success;
· · encouraging students to share ideas and experiences through good questioning;
· · providing relevant follow-up activities that reinforce the intended learning; and
· · guiding students to reflect on their own learning and to identify their next steps through focused oral and written comments on their work.
Areas for improvement
Programme evaluation. Teachers’ self-review practices should be strengthened. The evaluation of teaching programmes should identify the extent to which learning has taken place. Careful analysis of achievement information will enable teachers to determine the concepts and skills that children have learnt and those that need to be revised or taught again. Focused evaluation of the extent to which children have mastered the intended outcomes of the lesson should be used to inform future teaching.
Consistency of teaching practices. While examples of effective teaching practices that support children’s learning are evident in the school, teachers do not use these good practices consistently. Senior managers have identified the need to monitor the planning and delivery of classroom programmes closely.
Use of assessment data. Teachers should make greater use of assessment data to identify children’s next learning steps. By using achievement information to identify specific information about children’s learning, such as their reading and writing behaviours, teachers could plan programmes that are better designed to meet students’ specific learning needs. Planned professional development should ensure that teachers revisit the strategies that they have already been introduced to through the Assessment for Learning professional development programme.
The quality of self review
Background
The principal values self review as a source of information to guide ongoing improvements in the school. Since his appointment he has engaged in constant reflection on school policies, procedures, organisation and operations.
The board asked ERO to provide an external evaluation of self-review practices.
Areas of good performance
Principal’s appraisal. The appraisal of the principal’s performance, conducted with the support of an external consultant, is effective. Constructive feedback against the professional standards and the principal’s professional goals is gathered from a variety of sources.
Staff appraisal. Senior managers have recently reviewed and strengthened staff appraisal processes. A new document to guide staff appraisals was introduced at the beginning of 2007. This template indicates a clear expectation that teachers will identify personal goals as well as school-wide development goals. Appraisers are expected to provide teachers with feedback against the professional standards and teachers are expected to engage in regular and focused reflection on their professional performance.
Policy and procedure review. Policies and procedures are reviewed regularly. A schedule of review has been established to ensure that all aspects of school operations are reviewed over time. This schedule forms part of the school’s governance manual. Senior managers are, however, responsive to needs and, if appropriate, aspects of school operations are reviewed earlier than scheduled.
Informal self review. The culture of the senior management team is very reflective. In addition to more formal review, senior managers constantly reflect on what happens at the school and amend operations to make them more effective.
Use of assessment data. Senior managers make good use of literacy and numeracy assessment information to review the effectiveness of teaching programmes. They provide regular reports to the board to guide the allocation of teaching resources. The principal takes care to ensure that trustees understand the achievement information reported to them.