1

SECTION 1

Managing Director Foreword

Dear all,

Thank you for your work last academic year. As we move towards a self improving system of support for schools, accurate knowledge of schools and appropriate levels of support will be key. This process is pivotal to securing that knowledge on an ongoing basis.

This document aims to set out clearly the entitlement of support to schools and the arrangements for undertaking our core work for the coming year.

Sincerely

Betsan O’Connor

Managing Director ERW

Introduction

ERW strives to delivers a single consistent and integrated professional school improvement service for children and young people aged 3-19 in a range of settings within the six Local Authorities. ERW’s vision is for a consistently high performing school network across the region with every school a good school offering high standards of teaching with all learners achieving their maximum potential.

The ERW Ladder of Support is well established across the region, and the guidance document has been refined annually to reflect national and local priorities and expectations.This document should be read in conjunction with the Core Support Visit Guidance and the Challenge Adviser Handbook.

It will provide a framework for schools and advisers to work within and enable a focus on key regional, local and national priorities.

In order to enable all learners to achieve their potential in this region, we need to ensure that we provide support for good schools to become excellent and build capacity for schools to improve themselves. We also need a collective agreement to support and intervene in underperforming schools. This includes a continuum of support and intervention that ranges from informal sharing of practice to formal notices of collaboration. Increasingly in ERW, as we develop a self improving school system, we will provide facilitated and brokered support between schools and support an infrastructure based on collaboration. It is envisaged that more support between schools will be included as part of the support menu in coming years. There is now a clear expectation that schools collaborate to strengthen their provision.

The purpose of this document is to articulate as clearly as possible, the level of support facilitated for those schools placed in the agreed four national support categories. However, it must be noted that each case will be considered on its merits and individual school improvement will be brokered accordingly, informed by school self-evaluation and development planning. The levels of support and identified resource will inform a focussed brokered programme of action to raise school standards across the region and according to the needs of each individual school. Our challenge is to accelerate improvement for all schools and to ensure that underperforming schools make the necessary changes as early as possible and affect the improvement of all schools. In strengthening school led improvement in and by other schools, we recognise that the capacity to engage in such activities can be difficult on occasion. Our challenge will be to manage capacity with portability of practice and expertise, and support innovation and technology based solutions.

SECTION 2

Categorisation

The scope and level of support and intervention for each school is determined by the National School Improvement and Categorisation System.

In order to drive improvement for learners, and to recognise the schools which raise standards and those who do not quickly and consistently, key representatives of WG and regional consortia have co- refined the categorisation model.

During the Core Support Visits 1, each school in ERW will be engaged in a dialogue with the Challenge Adviser to come to an agreed judgement on capacity to improve (letter) and a support category (colour). This will be combined with the judgement on standards (number) produced centrally by WG.

The categorisation system leads ambitious transformational change, and drives school improvement from the inside out.

The aim of the national school improvement and categorisation system is:

•to enable consortia to identify quickly the support, challenge and intervention required to raise standards for learners;

•to be a reliable, objective profile of schools across Wales;

•to be an improvement tool for schools and consortia to measure performance and improvement;

•to make sure that the right, timely challenge and intervention secures improvement in outcomes for all learners;

•to build the capacity and resilience of the school to improve itself and to facilitate school to school support through a partnership approach;

•to empower schools to become more resilient with the capacity for self-improvement;

•to ensure the effective, efficient and economical use and deployment of resources;

•to be a transparent, easily understood method of discussing overall school performance and its capacity to improve.

The core principles are:

•to be a jointly constructed and collaborative process starting with the school’s self-evaluation;

•to be based on comprehensive current performance data – both end of key stage and in year progress;

•to be an effective tool for improving standards of achievement and attainment;

•to be a diagnostic tool to improve leadership, learning and teaching;

•to be based on an early-action intervention where required; and

•to have clear accountability arrangements at all levels – school, consortia and local authority.

•to have a common categorisation, common diagnosis, with regional flexibility on the use of resources to bring about improvement to maximise innovation, take appropriate risks and meet local needs.

National categorisation serves two complementary purposes. Firstly, it ensures an agreed point in a school’s improvement journey based on a consistent and nationally agreed assessment of a school’s performance and a judgement of a school’s capacity to improve according to nationally agreed criteria. This assessment should be agreed between the adviser and the school leaders[1]. Secondly, it allows the region, LA and senior school leaders to prioritise actions and resources to secure improvement. While we will broker and tailor support and intervention on an individual, school by school basis, nationally, there is an expectedrequirement of Challenge Adviser days against each support category.

All ERW’s schools can expect a negotiated programme of support and intervention according to need. A bespoke programme built and brokered by the Challenge Adviser in collaboration with the school should follow the identified need. Based on a continuum of a school’s capacity to self improve, there will be an increased responsibility on schools to lead their own support and this will be aligned with accountability. This is a move away from a common entitlement to a bespoke and focused use of resources to raise standards.

Each school will be categorised annually and the information published on My Local School. Regionally we will also provide a support category for Schools will not be able to move to higher categories unless outcomes improve – judgements for leadership will be closely linked to improving outcomes for learners.

The system is based on three steps:

  1. Intelligent data driven categorisation as well as local knowledge, and intelligence of standards in schools
  • Reduces and eventually removes subjective nature of initial judgement
  • Is clear and consistent
  • Makes sure that the focus is on standards for learners
  1. Further analysis of areas for improvement basedon the ability of school to bring about improvement
  • Leadership
  • Learning and teaching

The following factors will influence the judgement on leadership:

  • self-knowledge and self-evaluation
  • effectiveness/ track record in addressing underperformance in outcomes for learners and staff
  • leadership ensuring quality provision of literacy, numeracy and inclusion
  • middle leadership
  • readiness, resilience and capacity to engage in school to school support
  • safeguarding
  • governance

The following factors will influence the judgement on learning and teaching:

•learning – in class progress, scrutiny of pupils’ work, feedback for learners to bring about improvement

•quality of teaching,

•quality of provision for the development of literacy and numeracy

•consistency and accuracy of teacher assessment, consistent with national reading and numeracy tests

Regions have existing intelligence on the school’s ability to bring about improvement, and will be able to act quickly to provide appropriate support, challenge and intervention whilst strengthening their knowledge.

Other risks may trigger a change of support, challenge or intervention

•New Head teacher

•School reorganisation

•Financial arrangements

•Estyn inspection

•Lack of confidence in school

  1. Bespoke support, challenge and intervention to ensure maximum yield
  • Moving away from entitlement and days allocation without focus
  • Brokering the best intervention for the situation
  • Regional flexibility for innovation
  • Deploy resources to achieve the best outcomes for the greatest number of learners

The finding on standards combined with the judgement on the ability to bring about improvement determines the category (colour) of the school and most importantly the character and extent of support, challenge and intervention.

The first step and guidance on implementing both the second and third step will be common across all regions. However, the implementation methodology of the third step will be devised and implemented at a regional level. Regional consistency and quality assurance for these steps are critical to the success of the model.

A national moderation group for the National School Improvement and Categorisation System has been established in order to secure consistency across Wales and to standardise the use of the model.

Schools will be categorised by colour. The colour signifies the quantity of support but its use and content bespoke and made up from a possible menu of support and intervention available locally. It is envisaged that for the schools with mature arrangements for self-knowledge and evaluation, the nature of the support and intervention will be jointly agreed. However, there is likely to be an increasing level of non-negotiable aspects for those schools which underperform.

The colours of the categories should not be attributed directly to Estyn judgments or language. The colours signify a level of support.

During the 1st Core Support Visit, each school in ERW will be engaged in a dialogue with the Challenge Adviser to come to an agreed judgement on capacity to improve (letter) and a support category (colour). Schools in the 4 support categories will have the following characteristics.

Green Schools

Schools in a green support category are likely to have the following characteristics:

•a very clear strategy and vision that has improved outcomes for all learners

•leaders with a very strong capacity to plan and implement change successfully and to sustain improvement

•robust, systematic and well established self evaluation

•highly effective in their use of all available performance data and evidence about the quality of learning and teaching

•a very good track record in raising the achievement of all groups of pupils

•leaders and staff work very successfully with other schools and partners to enhance significantly their own and others’ capacity to bring about improvement and build resilience

•governors have an excellent understanding of the school’s strengths and areas for improvement and are highly effective in supporting and challenging the school’s performance

•the school’s leaders give a high priority to developing the workforce: performance management and professional development are highly successful in fostering effective practice and in dealing with underperformance

•all staff have a shared understanding of the characteristics of excellent and good teaching

•teacher assessment is consistent and accurate

Yellow Schools

Schools in a yellow support category are likely to have the following characteristics:

•a shared vision and a clear strategy that has improved outcomes for most learners

•leaders who plan and implement change and sustain improvement successfully in most respects

•self evaluation is regular and thorough in most areas

•good use of performance data evidence about the quality of learning and teaching

•a good track record in raising the achievement of most pupils, including vulnerable learners

•collaboration is developing well and opportunities to work with schools are used effectively

•governors have a good understanding of the school’s strengths and areas for improvement

•performance management and professional development make a strong contribution to improving practice and raising standards. The school challenges underperformance effectively and are largely successful in securing improvement

•most staff have a shared understanding of the characteristics of excellent and good teaching

•teacher assessment is consistent and accurate in the main

Amber Schools

Schools in an amber support category are likely to have the following characteristics:

•there are inconsistencies in how a vision and strategic objectives are shared

•leaders manage change successfully in few areas

•processes for monitoring and evaluating the work of the school are not implemented consistently

•school improvement activity with other schools and partners does not fully impact on standards and provision

•performance management and professional development are not always linked closely enough to priorities. The impact on improving performance varies. The school does not always challenge underperformance effectively

•the characteristics of good and excellent teaching are well defined but applied inconsistently

•there are some inconsistencies in the reliability and accuracy of teacher assessment

Red schools

Schools in a red support category are likely to have the following characteristics:

•work to establish an agreed vision is underdeveloped and there is a lack of clarity in the school’s strategic direction

•leaders do not demonstrate sufficient capacity to plan and implement change successfully

•a few processes for monitoring and evaluating the work of the school have been developed but these lack rigour and breadth

•there are wide variations in how performance data and evidence about the quality of learning and teaching and pupils’ work are used to secure improvement

•does not have a strong track record in improving outcomes including for vulnerable learners

•leaders and staff have limited involvement in worthwhile collaborative activity with schools

•performance management and professional development have limited impact on improving performance. The school does not challenge underperformance effectively

•there is little shared understanding of the characteristics of excellent and good teaching

•there are significant inconsistencies in the reliability and accuracy of teacher assessment

SECTION 3

ERW Entitlement and Expectation

Support Category

As set out in the previous section, each school is allocated a basic level of support, challenge and intervention. This is monitored regularly and based on an analysis of need.

The core support days to schools as described in the National Categorisation guidance notes that schools should receive a maximum of days support from the Challenge Adviser.

Green support category
A school in this category may receive up to 4 days of Challenge Adviser time.
Yellow Support Category
A school in this category may receive up to 10 days of Challenge Adviser time.
Amber Support Category
A school in this category may receive up to 15 days of Challenge Adviser time.
Red Support Category
A school in this category may receive up to 25 days of Challenge Adviser time.
The school will automatically receive a letter from the Local Authority where appropriate statutory powers may be invoked.

In ERW, the support may exceed or be less than the allocation noted but will include support from other staff in LAs, ERW or other schools.

This will include a proportionate response according to school need and size.

In line with national and regional priorities, we will focus support on:

  • building a self improving system;
  • reducing the impact of poverty on attainment;
  • capacity to respond to Successful Futures and new curricular and pedagogy including literacy, numeracy and digital competence; and
  • leadership.

1

Building a Self Improving System

ERW will focus support on building reliance and capacity on schools to build a self improving system. This may on occasion be perceived as additional requirements on schools. Nevertheless, as we increase the resources available for school to school work and reduce the capacity of specialist advisers – schools will need to build the capacity to respond to pupil needs and drive self improving organisations.

Reducing the Impact of Poverty on Attainment

Each school in ERW should receive the same level of challenge and analysis on the performance and progress of FSM pupils and other vulnerable pupils. The professional discussion between the school and the adviser should always analyse the impact of poverty on attainment and achievement.

In reviewing the impact of poverty on attainment advisers should judge the extent to which schools:

  • mitigate the impact of deprivation in the early years and throughout their school careers so that learners are ‘school ready’ and have well developed early language skills
  • engage families effectively in children’s learning and school life so as to impact on their outcomes
  • better equip the school’s workforce to understand and overcome the challenges faced by learners from deprived backgrounds
  • ensure that learners from deprived backgrounds access the highest quality learning and teaching consistently and benefit from targeted interventions according to need
  • provide high quality digital learning experiences for learners to ensure they are equipped with skills to excel
  • engender high aspirations
  • raise expectations for learners from deprived backgrounds

All schools in ERW should:

  • place tackling the underachievement of learners from deprived backgrounds at the heart of school development planning, thinking about how to use resources and how to develop the workforce to meet the challenge
  • plan effectively for the use of the PDG in the context of taking a whole school approach to tackling disadvantage. The PDG should be targeted at learners, so as to reduce the impact of poverty on attainment interventions and programmes should be sustainable and have an impact in both the short and long term
  • set the highest expectations for all learners and be clear with learners that they can achieve high outcomes and realise their ambitions. Ensure learners know how they are progressing, their targets and what they need to do to achieve those targets. Use effective tracking to monitor progress against targets and provide feedback
  • teach children to plan, monitor and evaluate their own learning. This has been shown to result in between seven and nine months’ additional progress. It is particularly effective for lower achieving learners and those from deprived backgrounds. The Welsh Government has published resource materials on the Learning Wales website to support schools to use metacognition in the classroom
  • consider how digital learning may be used to support learning in school and at home for all learners

Primary schools / challenge schools and special schools also: