Professional Development Meeting (PDM): Planning Additional Provision for Children At

lti_planningadditionalprov.doc

Professional Development Meeting (PDM): Planning additional provision for children at risk of underachievement

Notes to the presenter

• The prompts are intended as possible examples of topics for the PDM. You will want to make decisions about the focus and content of the session and adapt it according to the development of individual schools.
• There is enough material for more than one PDM, if you want to extend the time given to a particular focus. Alternatively, you might want to choose a particular focus, such as developing children’s ability to work independently, that has emerged as a key factor in helping children achieve their curricular targets.
• The PDM is written to be used with school staff but should be led by a leading teacher, a consultant or a member of the SMT.
• As you present the session, keep the key messages in mind so that participants leave the training with a clear understanding of where they need to focus their development over the coming half-term.
• You may want to record relevant contributions on a flipchart as you work through the session so that participants can use these prompts when they complete their IDP towards the end of the meeting.
• The PDMs are written so that they include input, activities and discussion. It is worth including practical examples or video sequences in the training.
• As you take participants through this session, note staff who are confident in this area and could share their expertise, for example by supporting colleagues in school. Also note staff who are less confident and who may need more focused support over the half-term.

Agenda for PDM: Planning additional provision for children at risk of underachievement

1. Planning additional provision

The need for coherence in additional provision

Taking stock of what is already in place

Identifying what works

1. Monitoring and evaluating the impact on pupil progress

Training sequence

Notes

• These notes are for guidance only and it is expected that schools will choose from what is suggested and adapt materials to meet their own needs.
• These notes are written to be appropriate for the whole school, although for the Foundation Stage it is important to think of activities rather than lessons.

Aim of PDM

• To develop shared and transparent plans for additional provision for children at risk of underachievement.

1.Planning additional provision

The need for coherence in additional provision / Possible activity
Read the case study that tracks the provision an individual child receives as she progress through the school (handout 1).
In pairs discuss:

• Strengths and weaknesses in the case study school’s approach to provision
• If Sarah came into this school again, what would you want to do differently in order to secure more effective provision?

Take feedback, drawing out the need for a school to have a shared idea of the additional provision available to children, a shared record of provision children have received, and close links between provision, target setting and tracking children’s progress.
Provision maps / Ask participants to look at handout 2, an example of one school’s provision map – a way of showing a glance the range of provision that a school makes for children with additional needs.
Do people think that a map like this would be useful to them? What are its advantages?
Taking stock of what is already in place / Possible activity
Working in year group teams, ask participants to think of all the different things that already happen in their year group to provide for children with additional needs, in and out of class. They should write each idea on a separate sticky note.
Remind them about the Waves model and draw the Waves diagram on a flipchart. Ask participants to sort their sticky notes according to whether they represent Wave 1, 2 or 3 provision, and attach them to the flipchart.
Use this opportunity to celebrate the range of things people are already doing to support children at risk of underachievement. Make clear that provision maps only record additional provision at Waves 2 and 3, but reinforce the importance of high quality Wave 1 (inclusive and personalised classroom teaching) as the prerequisite for everything else that happens for the child.
Discussing how provision is currently planned / Possible activity
Write on a flipchart the following factors that influence schools’ planning of additional provision.

• History (we’ve always done ALS, Springboard 5…)
• The needs of the children
• The needs of staff (I can’t manage unless I have a TA in my class for maths…)
• The skills and expertise of staff who deliver the provision
• The budget
• Evidence of impact

Ask participants to discuss in pairs which factors they think operate in their school.
Ask the group as a whole to identify the factors they think should or must influence the choices made (the needs of the children, evidence of impact, the budget).
Ask participants to read handout 3, which describes the process one school went through when making choices.
Beginning to construct a map / Possible activity
Give out copies of handout 4 and ask year group teams to complete a must/should could grid for their year group.
They should discuss what it tells them about the provision needed in their year group. How does it match the provision that is currently in place?
Take feedback and as a whole staff group discuss the implications for the pattern of provision in the school. Try to establish priorities for the future.
Identifying what works / Possible activity
Handout 5 presents research evidence on three types of provision typically made by schools to improve the progress of underachieving individuals and groups – TA support, setting and reducing class sizes.
You could divide participants into three groups and allocate each group one type of provision on which they will become expert. The expert group should read and discuss their part of the handout.
After about ten minutes ask participants to regroup into threes made up of one expert on each of the topics. Each expert in turn should describe the key research findings for their topic.
As a whole group discuss implications from this activity for the way additional provision is made in school. It will be important to explore in some depth the issues raised by these challenging research findings about class sizes, the role of TAs and setting. The important point to draw out is that the findings represent large samples but do not necessarily apply to every single individual school. It may well be, for example, that a school is using setting to good effect, monitoring the composition of lower sets carefully to make sure that children (e.g. EAL learners) are not inappropriately placed, that children perceive setting as helpful rather than stigmatising, that the quality of teaching in lower sets is very high and that teachers are aware of the risk of low and self-fulfilling expectations. In these circumstances, there might be a positive impact on all children’s attainment.
Similarly, outcomes may be good where a school is using well trained and supported TAs to provide evidence-based interventions that are time-limited and planned and delivered in close cooperation with the class teacher.
The key point is for schools to be aware of the circumstances in which different interventions are effective, and to monitor and evaluate carefully the impact of the choices about provision that they make.
Talk through some of the interventions that research has consistently shown to be effective. Note those already in use in your school.
Early intervention

• Nurture groups, social skills groups plus parenting support, pyramid clubs, early language and literacy interventions such as talking partners and reading recovery

Literacy interventions

• Acceleread, Accelewrite, Better Reading Partnership, catch-up, cued spelling, direct phonics, family literacy, Fischer Family Trust Wave 3, multisensory teaching system for reading (MTSR), paired reading, paired writing, Phono-graphix, reciprocal teaching, reading intervention, RML (Ruth Miskin Literacy), Sounds-Write, Toe by Toe, THRASS

Mathematics interventions

• Mathematics recovery, numeracy recovery, peer tutoring, family numeracy, PNS Wave 3 mathematics

You will find information about all these interventions elsewhere in this CD-ROM.
Take opinions on any of these that it might be useful to develop in school so as to meet the priority needs that have been identified.
Discuss the next steps in taking further the ideas from the session so far.
What should our next steps be in developing our provision map?
Who could do what, and when?

2.Monitoring and evaluating the impact on pupil progress

Monitoring and evaluating impact / Possible activity
Handouts 6 and 7 are examples of forms to record the methods used to evaluate progress over the course of an intervention, and how the quality of delivery will be monitored.
You could ask participants to comment on whether a recording system like this might support them and how it might link to tracking pupil progress.
Staff might want to look at the case study from Kentish Town primary school elsewhere on this CD-ROM for a model of effective tracking and assessment.

Resources

Resources / Leading teachers in intervention CD-ROM

Handout 1: A case study of an individual child

Prior to her admission to the Reception class as part of the annual intake in September, Sarah had not attended nursery or playgroup, although she had spent brief periods with a childminder. During the first term her teacher became concerned about Sarah’s development in terms of communication and in the spring term included her in small group structured oral language development sessions led by a teaching assistant who had attended Talking Partners training.

During their weekly meetings to review the progress of children in this group, it was noted that Sarah’s confidence and participation within the group, in sessions involving the whole class and during independent, child-initiated activities was improving steadily and that she was developing a range of appropriate oral language structures and functions. It was therefore decided to continue this intervention into the summer term.

At this stage, Sarah’s teacher had also noted that she would benefit from some additional support with phonological awareness and phonic knowledge, skills and understanding in order to keep in step with her peers. She therefore included her in the small group sessions which she regularly ran in addition to the daily word level session based on Playing with Sounds.

Although the school as a whole had not organised its books in the Foundation Stage and Key Stage 1 according to Book Band levels, the Reception teacher had sought the advice of the literacy coordinator to level the books used in Reception. The records passed on to the Year 1 teacher showed that Sarah was able to read confidently at the pink level and enjoyed choosing and independently reading books from the box of familiar books provided at this level. The records also included the records of progress from the small-group interventions in oral language and phonics in which Sarah had been involved.

As they started Year 1 the class teacher encouraged all children to choose books from the black level – a selection of reading scheme books which appeared to be roughly at the same level. During the autumn term Sarah’s teacher decided to place her in the SEN group within the class. This group worked with the teaching assistant during the literacy hour and daily mathematics lesson. When a group of children was identified as likely to benefit from Early Literacy Support in the spring term, Sarah was not considered for inclusion as she was in the SEN group.

By the end of Year 1, Sarah was achieving well below age-related expectations and had an IEP with targets ‘to learn number facts to 10’, ‘to recognise the first 100 high frequency words’, ‘to be able to blend sounds for reading’ and ‘to raise her self-esteem’.

In Year 2, Sarah was included in a group of children given additional support with phonics by a teaching assistant who had gained experience of using Additional Literacy Support in Year 3. She was also given reading support from a parent volunteer who heard her read on a weekly basis from the reading scheme used in this year group. A teaching assistant supported her group in the daily mathematics lesson. At the end of Key Stage 1, Sarah was assessed by her class teacher as working at level 1 in both reading and writing and at level 2c in mathematics. The review of her IEP showed limited progress against the targets set, and these were therefore retained for the next six months.

On entry to Year 3, Sarah was immediately included in a group involved in Additional Literacy Support, which was managed by a newly appointed teaching assistant. On the advice of the SENCO, Sarah was placed on the reading scheme used in the school with children identified as having SEN. The teaching assistant and a parent volunteer regularly heard Sarah read from this scheme and recorded her progress through the books in the reading diary. During the spring term, the class teacher felt that Sarah was not benefiting from whole-class shared sessions during the literacy hour and arranged for the teaching assistant to withdraw her for additional phonics work. Outcomes of the optional tests at the end of Year 3 suggested that Sarah was still working at the same levels in reading and writing as at the end of Key Stage 1 and had progressed to level 2a in mathematics. The review of her IEP continued to show limited progress against the targets set.

Handout 2: Balshaw primary school provision map

This material is available on this CD-ROM under the title ‘Balshaw primary school provision map’.

Handout 3: Case study of Balshaw primary

This material is available on this CD-ROM under the title ‘Case study of Balshaw primary.

Handout 4: Must/should/could chart

This material is available on this CD-ROM under the title ‘Must/should/could chart’.

Handout 5

This material is available on this CD-ROM under the title ‘Summary of research on additional provision.

Handout 6: Additional provision

Name of provision / Paired reading
Lead person / SENCO
Supported by
Start date / Each term (from September 2004)
Length of intervention / 12 weeks
Frequency / Daily with parent/carer or Year 6 child
Target group / Year 3 and Year 4
Groupings / 1:1
Named pupils
Assessment method / Macmillan Individual Reading Analysis before and after the intervention
Monitoring arrangements / SENCO to observe sessions two weeks into the programme and again at six weeks

Handout 7: Intervention provision outline, plan and record sheet

Name of provision / Early Literacy Support (ELS)
Aims of the programme / To generate accelerated learning back to the appropriate NLS Framework for teaching objectives
Description of programme / The programme covers the main teaching objectives for Reception/Year 1 term 1 and term 2. It includes a screening package and 60 extra literacy sessions to be run by a teaching assistant. The Year 1 teacher and teaching assistant work in partnership to teach and support the class as a whole, and to identify the intervention group. At the end of the autumn term, the children are screened and the intervention group is identified. The additional sessions are run during the spring term for 12 weeks. These sessions are in addition to, not instead of, the daily literacy hour.
Target group / Year 1
Entry level / 1c (red/yellow book bands)
Exit level / 1b+ (green book bands)
Length of intervention / 12 weeks
Frequency / 20 min daily
Delivered by / TA delivers three sessions. Teacher delivers guided reading and guided writing. TA/teacher weekly meeting.
Suggested start date / Spring term
Groupings / Maximum 6
Assessment method / Screening Tasks 1–4 from ELS programme
Progress checks 1, 2, 3 and Book Band levels/
Running Records
Monitoring arrangements / Reading recovery teacher to observe two sessions

Page 1 of 9 | Leading on Intervention03817-2006PCK-EN

© Crown copyright 2006