An Analysis of the Impact of the Subject Leaders in the Primary School Course

The Impact of the Subject Leaders in the Primary School Course

Report Summary

An analysis was made of the Impact of the Subject Leaders in the Primary School Course using course evaluations and case study interviews.

The main findings are that the course had a significant positive impact on both course members and the schools in which they worked. On occasions the benefits had extended beyond the school. However, there is an apparent need for further opportunities for schools to benefit from high quality subject leader training other than this course which can only meet the needs of a relatively small proportion of Hertfordshire teachers.

Course members reported that the course had led to:

Increased knowledge of subject leader role.
Greater confidence and empowerment to do the job
An awareness of whole school picture.
An ability to analyse school summative data.
An ability to observe lessons and give constructive feedback.
Use of pupil questionnaires.
Use of more varied questioning techniques leading to higher level thinking.
Delivery of whole school training on subject leader role.
Better and effective preparation for Ofsted.
Strengthening of existing monitoring schemes in school.
Tighter target setting.
Implementation of new schemes e.g. assessment sheets for AT1 in science.
Introduction of more developmental marking schemes.
Organisation of all Subject Leader files to follow course guidance.
Sharing of course outcomes through booklet form.
Increased ability to manage a team of people.
In some cases, promotion.
The likelihood of higher pupil attainment over time due to the above factors.

Suggestions for extending access to high quality subject leader training:

Increase numbers on course or number of courses available.
Use of previous course members as Consultants.
Develop local subject based cluster meetings.
Put course in booklet form.
Best practice workshops.
A course for newly appointed subject leaders.
Run a parallel course as separate units to suit individual or school needs and help on cost.
Run whole school training sessions where appropriate.

Mary WestleyMarch 2003

An Analysis of the Impact of

the Subject Leaders in the Primary School Course

The course is organised by the Hertfordshire Advisory Team and is based at Wheathampstead Development Centre. It is accredited by the University of Cambridge. All Primary School teachers in Hertfordshire with three or more year’s teaching experience may attend. Within the course there are ten 4 hour study sessions plus four assignments. The sessions cover a comprehensive range of school management issues and the assignments develop some of these in the context of the course members’ own schools. (See Appendix 1 for full course description). Those enrolling on the course have a mixed background in terms of previous leadership experience. The maximum group size is 30 and the current course is now in its fourth cycle.

The aim of the course is to prepare Subject Leaders to be able to lead and manage their subject areas efficiently.

This analysis is based on over 80 evaluations from each of the three completed courses plus seven case studies, also taken from each of these three courses.

Review of Evaluation Forms

The evaluation forms for the Hertfordshire team were completed immediately the course finished and handed in that day. The Cambridge evaluation forms were completed about three weeks later and returned by post. The layout and content of each evaluation differed slightly, but they broadly covered the same areas. Both had open ended and quite general statements to respond to. For example: “The course has helped me to…”. This enabled a wide range of useful responses, but was dependent on course members remembering or referring to all aspects in their answers in order for them to be recorded or acknowledged. It is possible that a different summary might have been recorded from a questionnaire with specific questions and answers given in graded degrees of usefulness.

Forty-two responses were analysed from the University of Cambridge and forty from the Hertfordshire Team.

Main Findings from the Cambridge Evaluation:

The overall response was very positive.

The features most valued, those mentioned by 45% or more members:

The training on how to observe a lesson and give constructive feedback

The explanation and analysis of school summative data (PANDA)

The features least valued:

Outside speakers with little direct relevance to management issues.

Main Findings from the Hertfordshire Evaluation:

The overall response was very positive.

The features most valued, those mentioned by 45% or more members:

An overall understanding of Subject Leaders’ role
The explanation and analysis of school summative data (PANDA)
How to use pupil questionnaires effectively
Knowing how to observe a lesson and give constructive feedback

The features least valued:

Outside speakers with no direct relevance to management issues.

Direct comparisons between the Cambridge and Hertfordshire evaluations cannot be made accurately as the course members completing them may not be the same for each. However, it is interesting to note that a fuller response was recorded in the Hertfordshire forms. This could be because there was little time lag between the end of the course and the evaluation so the issues were still fresh in people’s minds. It could also be that completing a questionnaire twice is not always popular and therefore might not give a true picture.

(Appendix 2 contains full responses to evaluation forms)

The Seven Case Studies

Given that the evaluation forms could only give a part picture, seven course members were selected from each of the three completed courses, so that specific case studies could be made. This would also enable some measure of what action had become established in schools over a longer period of time than would be shown in the evaluations. Their schools were:

Belswains, Hemel Hempstead

Almond Hill Junior, Stevenage

Rickmansworth Park, Rickmansworth

Oaklands Primary, Welwyn

Chaulden Junior School, Hemel Hempstead

St Michael’s Primary School, Woolmer Green

Bovingdon Primary, Hemel Hempstead

Once the Head Teachers and course members concerned had agreed, a questionnaire was sent to all schools to give preliminary information. This then formed the basis for an interview in each school. The interviews proved far more informative than the questionnaire alone might have done. Further questions could be asked and it was possible to see the context that work was being done and access further documentary evidence of action taken in school.

Interview Outcomes:

The main findings were extremely positive. Without exception all course members felt that they and their schools had benefited in many ways. The following are common areas of benefit, (full details in Appendix 3).

All course members felt the course was very valuable for themselves and their schools. There had been a real impact on the practice of individual course members in that they saw themselves as more confidant and more effective.
There had also been an impact on the role of subject co-ordinator in their schools due to cascading information and INSET by course members.
Course members felt empowered by having the knowledge to do the job of Subject Leader more effectively.

Course members felt the course had status and was valued by others. It is accredited by University of Cambridge, and in its current format is in its fourth cycle. There is much local recommendation.
Others who have done the course previously can vouch for its effectiveness and practicality. Many were on the course through word of mouth recommendation.

Those preparing for Ofsted found the course especially useful. In both cases, subject areas and subject leader files were well prepared and this was acknowledged.

Actual Impact of Course:

It is essential to read the table containing the responses for the seven case study schools in order to get the full picture of what impact there was. (See Appendix 3). Below is only a summary of the main trends from the case studies and the evaluations.

All staff from the seven case study schools, and many others as recorded on the evaluations, have led INSET in their own schools. Some have done so in other schools. This has led to whole school policies on Subject Leadership being either further developed or put in place to include: monitoring, Subject Leaders’ files, lesson observation and feedback, work sampling and pupil questionnaires.
It is difficult to say “results” are better as obviously other factors are involved. Also some schools and some systems in place already. However, three elements were reported which all have the potential to improve results over time.

They were:

Evidence of systems having been put in place as a result of the course. For example: leading INSET for Teaching Assistants, new science assessment sheets for scientific enquiry or new weekly planning pro formas.
Existing schemes in schools, such as monitoring or observation, being strengthened through having the course member well trained and au fait with the systems.
Schools specifically mentioned a better PANDA analysis being possible after the training. In one school, for example, this led to a tighter action plan in Literacy and more target setting.

It was felt that attitudes to learning may have improved in several of the schools due to initiatives taken from the course. Members had used:

Pupil questionnaires and listening to pupil voice. Several had introduced this as whole school policies. Ideas ranged from surveys of attitudes to writing to children choosing their own ICT work partners.
Developmental marking and more varied questioning skills leading to higher level thinking.

The course seemed to give the impetus to implement systems and gave the course members the confidence to do so. There was also a high degree of recognition of the course by other teachers in their schools which enabled course members to be taken more seriously during any INSET, and which helped put them in a position where other colleagues might seek their advice.

Subject Leader files had been organised in all seven case study schools, and in many others too as mentioned in evaluations, in line with course guidance.

Some course members have shared course outcomes in other ways too. For example, in booklet form to all colleagues followed by a termly update/reminder to ensure monitoring and other aspects of subject management were in place.
A very significant number of course members reported the benefit of training to understand the school PANDA. Many were unfamiliar with this before the course. Knowing the importance of this document is likely to lead to more planned and systematic leadership in the Core subjects at the very least.
The training in lesson observation and giving feedback was felt to be particularly valuable. Role play in this area was very useful, perhaps especially so for those less experienced and/or leading a subject area away from their specialism. Completing a “dry run” was helpful and the overall training gave confidence to course members.
It was reported that the role of the Subject Leader was simply explained and set in context. Course members felt it was made clear what was involved, how to go about it and why it was necessary, in terms of whole school management, that folk in the middle should be taking issues on. This aspect of seeing the needs of the school as a whole was mentioned by many course members as key. There was much emphasis throughout the course on the whole school context, as it was not subject specific at any stage, and many said how useful this was. People then found it easier to see themselves as leaders as they could see the issues involved. One member said how it had closed the gap between herself and their Link Adviser. There was no longer and “us and them” feeling and it was easy to understand why suggestions had been made.
In terms of professional development all seven interviewed reported that they felt more effective and several had since taken promoted posts; two to be Assistant Head or Deputy and one had been offered a post as Consultant Teacher within the County. From the evaluations 20% reported moving to a promoted post and having the confidence to do so. These things may have happened anyway, but many saw the course as good training and, in turn, the course appears well respected by Head Teachers.

Perhaps, above all, the course appears to have given its members confidence to go back and do the job of managing their areas and helping their colleagues at school to do similar. It did this through explaining clearly what to do and why, dispelling any myths and confirming that much of what people were already doing was good and important.

Possible Next Steps:

Increase numbers on course, or the number of courses available.
Use course members to consider involvement in local schools, (one course member has already delivered two twilight INSET sessions as part of Ofsted preparation).
Possible use of previous course members as consultants/tutors.
Local subject specific groups could be established/developed.
Course could be put into booklet form.
More non-contact time for course members to work on implementation of ideas from course.
Some examples of Good Practice in Subject Leadership could be shared with other advisers and teachers.
A course for newly appointed Subject Leaders.
A parallel course available as separate units: a) to suit individual or school needs and b) to help on cost.
Thoughts on how to solve problems of course member taking promoted posts in other schools shortly after finishing course. One Head lost two people this way and now won’t send any more!
Virtually all Primary Teachers are leaders of at least one subject. This course meets the needs of some, possibly the more motivated. May be other courses are needed as outline above or else as whole school training sessions.

Appendix 1

Course Details:

Subject Leaders in the Primary School

Outcomes:

By attending the course participants will gain:

A thorough understanding of the role of the subject leader in the primary school

Strategies for monitoring, evaluation and target setting in your subject

The ability to collect and analyse data

An understanding of school culture and the process of change, and how it impacts on your role

Improved skills in leading and managing staff development

Course Details:

A course designed to meet the National Standards for Subject Leaders.

The course consists of 10 sessions (1.30 - 5.30 p.m.) over two terms, all of which will focus on the generic skills of subject leadership.

The course is, therefore, suitable for all teachers who are actively involved in subject leadership.

Successful completion of the course, which includes four school-based tasks, will lead to the award of the Certificate of further Professional Study (University of Cambridge).

The course is not suitable for teachers with less than 3 years teaching experience

Appendix 2

Summary of Outcomes Reported by Course Members

Based on evaluations for University of Cambridge

Outcomes Reported by Course Members / % of Course Members referring to Specific Gains

Specific Gains for Individuals

Knowing how to observe a lesson and give feedback / 69%
Understanding a PANDA / 64%
Knowing how to work sample / 37%
How to monitor planning / 24%
How to use pupil questionnaires / 24%
More confidence in the role / 24%
How to manage change / 24%
Becoming more reflective / 17%
Better idea of Subject Leader role / 14%
How to mark and assess work more effectively / 14%

Specific Gains for School /Colleagues

More effective management as Subject Leader / 17%
Contributed to SIP / 14%
All Subject Leaders' files organised on same lines / 14%
Gave INSET / 12%
Monitoring programme established in school / 10%

Professional Development

Promoted post other than Deputy Head / 10%
Became Deputy Head / 10%

Suggestions

Shorter course / 14%
More workshops /hands on activities / 12%
Reunions / 5%
More group discussions / 5%
Spread tasks out evenly / 2%
Take previous experience into account / 2%
More information on tasks / 2%
Whole days / 2%
More data handling / 2%
Longer / 2%

Negatives

MECCS / 35%
Macpherson Report/Stephen Lawrence / 21%
History of the role / 21%
Grant Bage / 10%
Final presentation / 10%
n.b. These were items course members chose to put forward and not answers to direct questions.

Analysis of Hertfordshire Evaluations for the SLIPS Course

40 Responses in total

Outcomes Reported by Course Members / % of Course Members referring to Specific Gains

Specific Gains for Individuals

Better idea of Subject Leader role / 75%
Understanding a PANDA / 63%
How to use pupil questionnaires / 52%
Knowing how to observe a lesson and give feedback / 45%
More confidence in the role / 28%
Understanding School Culture / 28%
Knowing how to work sample effectively / 23%
Developing Management skills / 18%
Ofsted preparation or response / 15%
How to manage change / 15%
How to mark and assess work more effectively / 13%
ICT / 13%
Becoming more reflective / 10%
Alma Harris / 10%

Specific Gains for School /Colleagues

Role of Subject Leader shared / 38%
All Subject Leaders’ files organised on same lines / 33%
Action plans established / 20%
More effective management as Subject Leader / 18%
Gave INSET / 15%
Contributed to SIP / 13%

Professional Development

Became Key Stage Co-ordinator
Became Team Leader / 10%
Became NQT Mentor
Became Science Manager

Professional Development continued

Became Deputy Head / 10%

Suggestions

More workshops/hands on activities

/ 12%

Spread tasks out evenly

/ 13%

Am not pm

/ 5%

Read PANDA before

/ 5%

Non-contact time to follow up ideas in school