Self-Evaluation at Group Level: Themes, Departments, Projects

Workshop 3.3: Friday morning

Self-evaluation at group level: Themes, departments, projects

Mary Anne HALTON

DominicanCollege

Griffith Avenue, Dublin

IRELAND

Introduction

Self-evaluation of school structures provides opportunities to support and enhance the work of the whole school community. The practice of self-evaluation is easier when it is integrated into the work processes of the group members, is ongoing (not just event-driven), relies on democratic processes and encourages a culture of questioning which values improvement and learning.

Context of self-evaluation (also referred to as the review) of post system

Consensus had been reached that this structures required review

A commitment had been given to its evaluation within the context of School Development Planning and the School Plan

It was acknowledged that changing needs of the school could have implications for the post structures as they were currently implemented
Time and resources were made available by management for the review to be carried out over a period of time
The review/evaluation was to be accommodated within the school’s I-Probe Net activities

Purpose of the evaluation/review (Main Points)

To examine the existing system
To define the evaluative issues and to focus the inquiry in order to determine the extent to which the post structure was meeting the needs of the school and to examine ways in which the structure might be improved or changed
To identify and acknowledge the views of the stakeholders
To determine the evaluative questions that would guide the review
To analyse data gathered (using a variety of methods), to identify alternatives and to develop a set of recommendations which could be piloted from September 2003

Difficulties associated with the timing of the evaluation

Period of difficulties between a teachers’ union and the Department of Education and Science on a countrywide basis
More time was required than anticipated due to a variety of local factors

Area (adapted from new guidelines, May 2003) / Quality of school middle management structure
(Assistant Principals & Special Duties Teachers)
Theme? (What?) / Schedule of duties and responsibilities
- changing needs of the school
Who? /

Principal
Deputy principal
Steering committee
Whole staff (post & non-post holders, permanent & temporary academic staff)

When? /

Steering Committee meetings (working group)
Individual staff task (SWOT)
Staff meetings (working individually, in groups and reporting back)
Special staff working sessions (working on specific evaluation tasks)
April 2002-May 2003 (to date, further work to be done 2003-2004)
End-of year 2003 (proposed plans for next year)

How? /

Document analysis (DES & School Plan)
Discussion and planning committee meetings
Swot & swot analysis
Group work & discussions
Presentations
Reporting back
Audits of post and non-post duties
Critical friends

WHY the stated method/tools/approaches were chosen…

The approaches used / Purpose
Document analysis
(DES official circulars, School Plan, JMB agreement, ASTI agreement, current list of posts and descriptions of the responsibilities involved in each post) /

To provide all staff members with information on the levels and types of duties that are possible
To take into account the changing needs of the school
To consider the legal contract for posts of responsibility
To reflect on the objectives for restructuring as outlined in Circular 3/98 and other relevant official data
To afford members of staff with an opportunity to familiarise themselves with the broad concepts involved e.g. non-post holders, staff who have none or little experience of schedule of posts, new staff who may have little knowledge of agreement reached within the school on previous occasions

Planning committee discussions / To have representatives from the different groups within the staff (senior management, assistant principal and special duties teacher, non-post holder)
Swot & swot analysis /

To invite submissions from all staff members
To gain an accurate insight into staff perceptions of the current system from their experiences – to focus on relevant information
To provide equal opportunity for all academic staff members to participated (to make the process inclusive and transparent)
To create a comfortable atmosphere where all contributions are valued and to establish a climate of trust
To eliminate wasting time and the development of isolation

Group work & discussions (staff level) /

To capture the concerns, issues and ideas about previous experiences and potential solutions/recommendations
To encourage the sharing of information and experiences
To encourage staff members to value the contributions of others
To encourage learning from past experiences and to facilitate individual, group and organisational learning

Presentations & reporting back /

To keep the whole staff up-to date with the work done at previous staff meetings/working sessions
To outline plans for the next stage of the evaluation process

Audits of post and non-post duties /

To identify work done in the school by staff in relation to the key areas of post and non-post responsibilities
To identify “overlaps” which might be eliminated in the future
To develop a clear specification for posts, which would result in a more equitable system
To acknowledge the variety of work already carried out by all members of staff

External consultants /

To gain an external perspective on how best the evaluation could be moved forward
To act as a facilitator for the final staff meeting/working session at end of school year 2003
To present solutions from another school’s experience
To facilitate groupwork which would focus on possible alternatives/changes which would be acceptable to the whole staff – a totally new system or a modification of the existing system

Critical friends /

Provide support and advice during the evaluation process
Act as external critical voices

OUTCOMES – What next?

Two possible alternatives (action to be taken) were reached based on the work done by the whole staff:

-A complete change of system

-A modification of the current system

2.A time frame was suggested for 2003-2004

3.The proposed alternatives will be discussed by senior management and then presented to whole staff in next school year (September/October 2003)

School Tel: 353-1-8376080 (main office)

School fax: 353-1-8367253 (main office)

School email:

School website:

Home email:

“Evaluation of the Transition Year Programme”

Dominican College, Ireland

Introduction

Transition Year is a one-year programme. Its mission is “To promote the personal, social, educational and vocational development of the students and to prepare them for their roles as autonomous, participative and responsible members of society”. Reference: Department of Education Guidelines 1994-1995.

The Transition Year programme in DominicanCollege is based on a curriculum that is non-prescribed. The curriculum for this one-year programme is designed within the school following the guidelines provided by the Department of Education and Science. Learning is student-centred rather than examination-centred.

Aims of Transition Year Programmes

The aims of the Transition Year programmes are:

Education for maturity with emphasis on social awareness and increased social competence
Education through experience of adult and working life as a basis for personal development and maturity
Promotion of general, technical and academic skills with an emphasis on interdisciplinary and self-directed learning.

Reference: Department of Education Guidelines 1994-1995

Context of internal evaluation

An in-depth evaluation involving all the partners had never been carried out
Concerns expressed about the quality of what is offered within the programme

Purpose of the evaluation

“To establish what the Transition Year Programme adds to our school”. Evaluation documentation 2003, DominicanCollege, designed by programme co-ordinator and the TY team.

Areas of Focus

Criteria for entry into the programme

Availability of information
Make-up of student groups/class groups
Optional or compulsory
Outdoor pursuit trips
Work experience

School Show (musical)
Benefits of TY programme
Aims of programme
Programme balance
Life skills programme
Careers programme
Benefits to Leaving Certificate course

WHAT?

/ Quality of the Transition Year Programme and its added value in the school

Who designed and implemented the evaluation?

/ Programme co-ordinator and the TY team
WHO was involved? / Principal
Deputy principal
Teachers:
-who teach the programme
-who do not teach the programme
Students (Participant, non-participant, past and present):
-present in the current year
-5th year students (non-TY participants)
-6th year students (non-TY participants
-5th year students (past TY participants)
-6th year students (past TY participants)
-Past TY students (who have already left the school)
Parents:
-of present TY students
-of past TY students

HOW was the data gathered?

/ Questionnaires for each group
- structured and open-ended questions

WHEN was it implemented?

/ May 2003 (end of school year)
WHAT has happened to the data collected? / Analysed over the summer holidays and ready for presentation during the next school year, 2003-2004

“Introduction of self-evaluation into a subject department”

Mary Anne Halton, Ireland

Introduction

Self-evaluation within subject departments has always been an integral aspect of the work of teachers in DominicanCollege. It happens at the beginning and end of year, at dedicated points in time during the year depending on the needs of the subject area and when identified by teachers involved in teaching the subject. Currently there is no written formal evaluation framework/formula for individual subject areas. The evaluation carried out in this specific subject area was aimed at setting the scene for the development of an infrastructure which would support teachers in learning from evaluation and using the learning to support the planning and development of the subject department. A culture, which supports learning from collective experience, determines the quality of the learning, the action taken and the performance. Evaluation becomes a matter of habit; it is a matter of what we do in our school.

Context of self-evaluation (also referred to as the review)

The introduction of a more formal review would be in line with the new requirements of the Department of Education & Science

A commitment had been given to self-evaluation within the context of school development planning and the School Plan

Changing needs of the subject department required to be identified
Problems experienced during 2002-2003 needed to be acknowledged
Problems associated with building work in the school for two years had ended and teachers could resume the development of the subject department without disruption
It is expected that the Head of Department takes responsibility for organising meetings, dealing with issues relating to the subject area, reviews, etc.
Head of Department is an unpaid and voluntary role within the Irish system. It is generally carried out by the most senior person in co-operation with the other members of the subject area (permanent and temporary teachers)
Difficulties experienced with finding replacements for teachers absent for any period of time (in-service, attendance at conferences, periods of illness)
The review/evaluation was part of the school’s I-Probe Net activities

Purpose of the evaluation/review (Main Points)

To focus on specific issues which emerged during the year
To identify and acknowledge the views of the stakeholders (teachers)
To identify ways in which the subject department might be improved or changed
To analyse data gathered (using a variety of methods), to identify alternatives and to develop a set of recommendations which could be presented at the department meeting in September 2003

Difficulties associated with the evaluation

The review was carried out in the teachers’ own time and follow up action was taken during the month of June by the head of the department and all teachers involved in the subject area.
More time was required than anticipated due to other factors

Areas selected for inclusion in the evaluation – an overview

1. Resources:
-allocation of accommodation
-rotation of accommodation
-new requirements for 2003-2004
-problems in current year
-range of resources
-new resource needs
-organisation of resources (rooms and equipment) related to student needs and the needs of the curriculum
-security of resources
2. Students:
-meeting the needs of students in the deployment of timetable and access to resources (time, rooms) for practical session
-use of rooms during class time
-access to rooms outside class time
-use of equipment
-storage of student examination project work
-communication with students re the new Leaving Certificate Course (state exam) / 3. Professional:
-support needed by teachers
-support offered by teachers to their colleagues
-availability of professional courses
-staff development (in-service)
-planning of new programmes
4. Contact with parents
-communication with parents re new Leaving Certificate Course
5. Health and Safety issues
-update safety rules for the department
-safety and student access to rooms
6. Priorities for 2003-2004
7. Agenda for September meeting – development of key areas for discussion

OUTCOMES OF EVALUATION - What was done during June 2003?

Data gathered, compiled and analysed
Audit of rooms (equipment, resources, library resources) implemented and recorded on computer
Updating of existing computer information
Review of health and safety within the department
Security of resources investigated and resolved
Agenda for September meeting drawn up

Other issues will be dealt with during the next school year at subject department meetings:

Planning of work across different year groups
Updating of Health and Safety Documents
Strategies for new Leaving Certificate Course
Strategies for Junior Certificate Practical examinations
Professional courses (if available)

Subject Department / Home Economics
What? / Accommodation, resources, curriculum, professional needs of staff, changing needs re organisation of the subject department, communication with students and parents re new curriculum, management of resources, health and safety
Who? /

Head of Department
Staff (permanent & temporary academic staff)

When? /

At the end of the school year – formal (May 2003)
From January-May 2003 (informal observation by Head of Department)

How? /

Document analysis (DES, School Plan, subject department)
Questionnaire (end-of-year)
Discussions (informal and formal)
Reporting back
Audits

NOTE

Members of the subject department will examine the new guidelines provided by the Inspectorate Evaluation Support & Research Unit, Department of Education and Science when designing the framework for self-evaluation from September 2003. (“Looking at our School: an aid to self-evaluation in second-level schools”, May 2003)

Outcomes of evaluation was presented and discussed at the September subject department meeting

Mary Anne Halton

DominicanCollege, Griffith Ave., Dublin, Ireland

Email:

Workshop 3.3: Friday morning

Marjolijn Smith

Stedelijk Dalton Lyceum, Dordrecht

THE NETHERLANDS

Evaluation at group level at the Stedelijk Dalton Lyceum in Dordrecht

Besides evaluation at school level specific activities are evaluated at group level.

These include:

The introduction of study schedules

PTAs (schedule of the dates of tests and the dates on which reports and other exam work have to be handed in)

Comenius project

Dalton assignments

Introduction of a new exam subject

Methods (books, workbooks)

Tests

In 2002-2003 study schedules were introduced in all the year groups. For the first and the second year pupils they were drawn up for a period of 3 weeks, so each teacher had to draw up a schedule stating exactly what pupils had to study, which exercises they had to do, when teachers wanted to give a test and when a Dalton assignment had to be finished.

The senior pupils got a study schedule for 6 up to 8 weeks. Tests and exam work is also included in the PTA for the whole school year (both for the 3rd year pupils and the 4th year pupils at VMBO level). This PTA is sent to the school inspectorate as it includes tests that are part of the school exams. (so there are actually two exam years)

These schedules were evaluated by the form teachers and the subject teachers of these two groups. This was done during a special meeting in which the teachers discussed the effect of these schedules. Did the pupils plan their homework better, did they consult their schedules every day?

Some teachers were of the opinion that it was just a lot of extra work, they complained that the younger pupils often lost their schedules or hardly ever consulted them. Others were very positive about the use of these schedules, the first lesson each week they just checked with the pupils what was on for that specific week so they could not pretend that they 'didn't know' .

For the senior pupils the PTAs are very useful, but again it depends on the teachers whether they use them well. So it is important for form teachers to keep telling their pupils to consult their schedules, draw up a plan and start working on their reports and other exam work in time. For these pupils the Dalton assignments are integrated in the exam work.

For the evaluation of a Comenius project we use the MICE materials (Available on the internet). This evaluation is done by the project coördinators and may involve teachers, pupils, parents, school management, project partners.

Dalton assignments

A Dalton assignment is not just a different kind of homework.

There are several criteria for these assignments and they are evaluated by the school management, subject teachers and pupils.

(workshop 4.1)

Introduction of a new exam subject (CKV – Culture and Art Education)

The objective of this subject is to make pupils aware of their possibilities to enjoy culture and art in their own neighbourhood, city, country. They can make a selection from the following items: architecture, photography, drama, music, dance, exhibitions, etcetera.

For their school exams they have to select four items. They can go to the theatre, visit a museum, go to a concert, the cinema, a dance performance and write an essay about it, take photos and show these in an exhibition or (individually / with a group) do a performance.