Sure Start in the Conningham Ward of Hammersmith and Fulham is

Document Sample
Sure Start in the Conningham Ward of Hammersmith and Fulham is Powered By Docstoc
					     LONDON BOROUGH OF HAMMERSMITH AND FULHAM


    EARLY PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT FOR TEACHERS IN
                      THEIR SECOND AND THIRD YEAR.


                        PROGRESS REPORT JULY 2002


Summary


After the original bid to the DfES for the Pilot Project the following took place
   the meeting of the steering group
   the initial meetings with heads of schools describing the pilot
   meeting for heads and mentors of participating schools


Then the Inspector with responsibility for the Pilot Project moved to another post outside
the LEA.
The LEA Advisory Head was asked to co-ordinate the organisation of the Pilot Project
under the supervision of the Chief Inspector, Gillian Palmer.
This organisation involved:
   providing training for mentors (half day)
   ensuring that teachers’ individual Action Plans were received by the LEA by the end
    of October 01. Some teachers submitted Autumn and Spring term plans at the same
    time.
   ensuring schools had access to the coordinator for resolving issues/queries
   ensuring finance was available to schools
   setting up a further Steering Group meeting.
The LEA decided from the outset to involve second year teachers only.
Schools took part on a voluntary basis.
                         Schools                  Teachers            Mentors
Primary                  15 of 36                 29                  19
Secondary                4 of 8                   6                   4
                         2 joined Jan 2002
Special                  No teachers for
                         whom this is
                         applicable
Early Years              No teachers for
                         whom this is
                         applicable


The majority of schools with second year teachers opted into the pilot.
The mentor training was attended by 16 of the 19 participating schools
Of the teachers taking part the majority had coordinator responsibilities
Primary
19 foundation subjects
4 ICT
2 science
1 shadowing the science coordinator
2 responsibilities not allocated at the start of the pilot.
Secondary
1 Textiles with DT
1 RE dept. budget
1 KS3 Maths strategy
1 Delivery of KS3/4 Art and Design curriculum
2 responsibilities within their departments.
Mentors with the exception of two are Key Stage Coordinators, Deputy Headteachers or
Assistant Heads.


Analysis
i). Action plans
Generally not different enough from NQT plans though summer term plans had
heightened creativity.
Common themes were Literacy;Numeracy, SEN; Behaviour,Thinking Skills
ii). The courses identified in the original bid of January 2002 bid have not taken place,
apart from the mentor training - see January progress report. However this has meant that
the teachers have had the opportunity to attend courses or make visits etc. according to
their perceived needs as considered by both them and their mentors.
The advantage of this has been that teachers have been able to address both their own
needs and the needs of the school.
The disadvantage has been that teachers from different schools have not met together in a
learning environment.
iii). However, to address the purpose of the first year of the pilot to improve teaching
skills the LEA is providing all teachers and mentors access to Transforming Learning. A
number of teachers already have access and the remainder will have access early in
September.
It is envisaged that mentors and mentees will discuss issues raised in the use of
Transforming Learning which attempts to improve the ‘climate’ of the classroom.
iv). A questionnaire has been devised (thanks to Kensington and Chelsea for the idea)
which will provide an opportunity for the LEA co- ordinator to have face to face
discussion with heads, mentors and second year teachers on CPD to evaluate their views
of the positive and less positive aspects of the pilot. It will also provide an opportunity for
the coordinator to revise current action plans and provide a lead in to Strand 2 of the pilot,
which has an emphasis on leadership.
This is time consuming and although only a few discussions have taken place it is a
valuable process that raises the status of the pilot and CPD overall.
Attached is a blank example of the questionnaire.




Evaluation


LEA questionnaire
Visit by Mark Sands DfES to one primary school in the borough followed by a meeting
with Gillian Palmer and Wendy Coombes.
NFER questionnaires to all participating schools and visits to three schools in the
borough.
NFER researcher visits to three schools in the borough
NFER researcher visit to LEA interviewing Gillian Palmer, Wendy Coombes and Patrice
Canavan, new C PD inspector (taking over the pilot in September 2002)


Positive impact and outcomes
i). The ‘feel good’ factor experienced by second year teachers that they matter and do not
drop off the end after their probationary year. They have also appreciated the opportunity
to have an element of control over their own professional development.
ii). The positive attitudes of some mentors to the exciting opportunity provided by
supporting a teacher post the traumas of an NQT year.
There was positive feedback from the mentor training. Mentors viewed the training as
important in many of the tasks relating to senior managers.
iii). The possible retention of teachers Twenty-five of the original thirty-five teachers are
progressing into the second year of the pilot.


Lessons learned
i.) Instead of schools being involved in the pilot on a voluntary basis it would have been
better if all schools with eligible teachers had participated. This would have ensured that
all NQTs becoming second year teachers in September 2001 would have benefited from
CPD


ii.) To have expected termly action plans was difficult. It would have been better to have
had an annual plan which allowed room for flexibility and change eg .new areas of
development or more in depth training where needed. A one year plan allows for more
vision and clearer management of time.
iii.) A more rigorous approach to the monitoring of individual action plans by the co-
ordinator nearer the beginning of the project followed by a discussion with mentors on
the quality of the plans would have been helpful. This would enable action plans to fit the
needs of the individual teacher more closely and recognise those teachers with
outstanding classroom and leadership potential so that they could be challenged
appropriately through more effective professional development.
iv.) There is an issue with the cost of agency teachers. There needs to be creative
management by schools to avoid the use of agency supply teachers so that pilot funding is
used as effectively as possible,.


This is an exceptionally welcome pilot project. If in the future the ‘first five years’ of
teaching has CPD entitlement this may go someway to retaining teachers in the
profession. In Hammersmith and Fulham, however, there is still the added difficulty of
the cost of housing.


The Future
      Patrice Canavan to evaluate outcomes of action plans from first year of pilot
      2nd and 3rd year teachers to attend - 2 day residential conference on Teaching
                                              and Learning
                                            -1day conference on Thinking Skills
      Hay McBer Transforming Learning project to continue
      Train new and existing mentors
      Develop the role of middle managers through INSET and school based
       programmes
      Encourage teachers to take up module options from the Institute of Education’s
       Master of Teaching Degree and other courses


Case studies
Fulham Primary
Fulham Cross Secondary School
St.John Walham Green C of E primary School

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:8
posted:2/19/2010
language:English
pages:6