EUREKA

EUREKA Transnational Meeting

16th December 2016

St Georges Community Hub, Birmingham

0900-1600

Present
Sarah Bonser – Birmingham City University Martina Nemcova - KPPP
Eleni Kanira – Birmingham City University Miroslav Orel - KPPP
Brian Martin – external evaluator John McLoughlin - GRETB
Alan Mongey – GRETB StiofainO’Cualain - GRETB Stephanos Chreouvis – Ellinogeermaniki Agogi Sarah Webb - Titan Partnership
Helen Mawson - Titan Partnership
Summary Points / Action Points
1.0Minutes and Matters Arising
1.1 Welcome and introductions
2.0Partner Presentations
2.1HM asked the partners to deliver a presentation on the identification processes and provisions for the most able pupils in their countries.
2.2CZ – KPPP cover around 200 Primary schools and 40 Secondary schools. The identification process begins with an initial identification made by schools and/or families before referral to the institution who can confirm the diagnosis. Once Gifted and Talentedness has been confirmed the child will be provided with a certificate and the institute will provide a recommendation for a tailored learning plan to schools. KPPP will continue, as part of the process, to monitor the progress of the child and their learning plan in schools. As part of this learning plan schools are obliged to create an environment that suits the child’s needs. Provisions include: curriculum adjustments, higher level classes, placement in higher phased education, and entitlement to specialised school supplies in accordance to their interests, all of which is government funded. KPPP also provide support for teachers in the identification process with a national network. Checks are performed after one year to ensure that the child remains most able. MO estimates that there may be a 50% chance of misdiagnosis after one year.
2.3UK – In the UK, NACE identify most able students as those whose progress significantly exceeds their peers. From 1999-2008 most able students were recorded and schools were free to make their own provisions with little funding from the government. Identification is made by the teachers via baseline testing with individual support strategies developed for each student in school. Under new proposals the government plans to increase funding for most able students. There are a limited amount of private specialist schools and programmes but most provisions are made through teachers. There has been a call for a further standardised test at early Secondary level to help in the identification process. There is little preparation for teachers in the identification process and support of most able students.
2.4IRE - The guidelines are still in the draft process and have never been formally confirmed. Identification is most often reliant upon teachers. Most able are defined as ‘exceptionally able’ and require provisions for enrichment and extension beyond their peers. Identification is linked to context of the schools: between 5-10% of the population. There is a subcategory of 0.5% who are exceptionally able. IRE curriculum is no longer divided into subjects but by Key Skills with a focus on problem solving to assist all students, but in particular the most able. These are still assessed with term exams but include a descriptive grading given by the teachersto reflect class projects, class work and provides evidence of balanced development and school participation. The identification process includes, observation in class work and social interactions, tests and other assessments and information from parents and guardians. There is no exclusive funding for the most able. There is a centre for talented youth from Dublin University (Centre for Talented Youth) where students can attend extra courses and who provide the schools with guidelines and support privately. Provisions include an enriched curriculum, extensions opportunities in class, access to higher tiered exams, access to school based clubs and societies, artists in residence and specialist teaching via one to one or small groups. ITT is underdeveloped in terms of preparation for the most able. The whole school system is developed with a holistic approach to the development of the child. ‘Dual exceptionality’ pupils exist, these are students identified as most able/exceptional but who also sit upon the Spectrum. These students are given extra classes to support their dual nature.
2.5GR – Experimental schools exist that support both high achievers and the most able. Two type of schools were developed for those pupils who were gifted in sports or music. Since 2002 teachers have been encouraged to address the needs of Gifted and Talented students via Flexible Learning Zones, however there was no government funding provided for this. In 2003 Gifted and Talented students were recognised as a particular student group and further Art schools were created with examination required as part of entrance. There are no guidelines and little direction for teachers in the identification of the most able students with only one book on the reading list for teacher training but there is no specialised training provided by the government Curriculums encourage problem solving and inquiry based learning. There are Regional Centres for the Detection of Special Talents and Needs however there is a lack of standardisation in the operation and referral processes. There are private initiatives but these are often elite and expensive. There is access to private training for teachers through private initiatives though this is not funded. EA is involved in a framework for addressing the variability of learners and inclusion: UDLnet, which the government now wants to adopt. There are hopes that this network will raise the ideal of the need to address most able children.
3.0 Czech Republic Training Session – June 2017
3.1 MN explained that the first training session is aimed at identification and recognition of the most able.
3.2 The sessions will be 5 days/30 hours long. KPPP expect 20 participants and advise them to arrive on a Sunday due to scheduling.
3.3 The training will include an introduction, seminars, workshops, discussions, observations and shadowing in a range of schools and universities alongside two branches of KPPP counselling centres. These visits will show almost the whole spectrum of education and their identification processes
3.4 Requirements of the participants include: pre training questionnaires, post training evaluations, and plans active participation during the programme. Participants will be required to create their own individual action plans based on what they learn during the programme. KPPP will propose drafts of these forms before the training. The post training questionnaires will ask participants to identify what they believe was the best practice they experienced in order to identify the best practical tools and ideas.
3.5 KPPP will arrange accommodation in Zlin and transportation once there. MO advised they will prepare guidelines for travel.
3.6 MO advised that schools will be closed during the later end of June so it was agreed that the 5th-9th June would be the most appropriate time for the training to take place with travel on the 4th.
3.7 HM expressed some concern over dates due to the exam process in the UK. It was decided that the week before (May Half Term) would work as an alternative and HM would advise the group by early January 2017. / KPPP
KPPP
Titan
4.0 Birmingham Training Session –March 2018
4.1SB delivered a presentation on the training being provided in Birmingham in 2018. At the moment the plan is very skeletal as it will be refined once visits to the Czech Republic have taken place.BCU requested to move the training to June due to a University wide building move. The course will last for 5 days and BCU expect around 20/21 participants.
4.2 SB asked the group if they would like the training to be generic or subject specific to identify any accommodations between countries and ideologies. The group agreed that the training should remain generic to allow the teachers who attend to return to their own schools and disseminate the training to others regardless of subject.
4.3 Due to the nature of the training SB, advised that it would make most sense for Partners to nominate Secondary teachers for the Birmingham training. It was agreed that teachers, psychologists, school managers etc. would be acceptable participants for the training.
4.4 SB asked the group if they would like school observations and teacher training information during the training. The group agreed that these would be beneficial to the training.
4.5 SB and EM provided the group with a proposed plan for the training and asked the group to look through and provide any suggestions. SB advised that they would be trying to secure speakers from organisations such as MENSA. SB advised that if anyone has any suggestions to please contact and advise.
4.6 BM advised that the training should consist of 4 and a half days as opposed to 5 days.
4.7 SB asked for appropriate dates for June 2018. EM asked that during the visit to the Czech Republic, the dates should be decided in order to arrange accommodation and bookings.
5.0 Dissemination Requirements
5.1 HM delivered a presentation on the dissemination and sustainability requirements for the project. HM highlighted the importance of the dissemination of the training and resources developed during the project alongside the promotion of the results.
5.2 There are four different levels for the dissemination: local level, regional level, national level and EU level dissemination.
5.3The Talented Children project website could be utilised to support and integrate with the Eureka project. MN advised that it would be difficult to alter the site and suggested creating a new website. The partners agreed. JM and AM advised that they would be happy to take the lead on a Eureka website and would discuss it before reporting back.
5.4 HM suggested the following structure for the agreed press releases: one detailing the start of the project, one for each of the training programmes and one for each of the resources created and disseminated. This was agreed.
5.5 HM advised that a biannual newsletter was agreed as part of the Eureka bid. Titan will coordinate using information from each partner with dates agreed at a later date.
5.6 HM advised that the project required a logo. The partners agreed that Titan would develop two logos using key themes and ideas from the project and would deliver these for consideration.
5.7 It was agreed that each organisation would use their own social media platforms but that SC would set up and maintain exclusive accounts for the project across various platforms. SC asked that each partner locate one online forum in order to enable this. / AM & JM
Titan