Scoping Paper School Review

Argyll & Bute Council

Scoping Paper – School Review

Rationale

Argyll and Bute Council is committed to enabling our children and young people to gain the skills and knowledge they require to become successful learners, confident individuals, responsible citizens and effective contributors. There is also commitment to the delivery of a high quality service to our children and young people and to working in partnership with parents and communities. Our goal is to deliver continuously improving standards of performance. In addition, much of our improvement work is based on our Education Service Aims (Appendix 1: Argyll and Bute Council: Community Services Education Aims and Strategic Objectives) which are shared with partners. The stated aim of Argyll and Bute Council is ‘To strive continuously to improve the quality of Education for all in Argyll and Bute’.

The Standards in Scotland’s Schools Act 2000 imposes a duty upon education authorities to bring about improvement in the quality of education provided in schools under their control. Section 7(2) defines one of the mechanisms by which the authority will do this as the duty to from time to time review the quality of education which the school provides.

School review has been a central part of quality assurance within Argyll and Bute Council’s education processes (Appendix 2: List of school reviews undertaken).

In 2007, the Quality Improvement Team began a revision of the school review process. The Team took part in a two-day training session with Darren Holmes which resulted in a consultation paper. (Appendix 3a: Next Generation School Review – Darren Holmes 2007 )A discussion paper was then written by the Quality Improvement Team which considered the next generation model of school review (Appendix 3b: Next Generation School Review) in the context of Our Learning Culture – an Argyll and Bute framework for working together more effectively - published in 2005. (Appendix 4: Our Learning Culture).

A review of the process in 2010 acknowledged self-evaluation as a core professional skill. This also reflected changes in the HMI inspection processes. In addition, it was recognised that best practice would involve a wider range of staff (eg staff in schools, colleagues from other schools etc) to be involved in the review process. The outcome of this review was the Partnership Working and Review document for the session 2010-2011. (Appendix 5: Partnership Working and School Review).This was discussed with Head Teachers in September 2011. (Appendix 6 – Presentation to Head Teachers).

School Review is now an integral part of partnership working. (see Partnership Working and School Review paper September 2011 Appendix 5). A review can be initiated by any member of the partnership although it is envisaged that schools will themselves identify when a review is best initiated based on their own improvement agenda – the most recent example being Rockfield Primary School where the review process was requested by the school and is currently underway.

Process Once a review has been triggered, a review team will be established consisting of the head teacher, partnership QIO and a representative cross-section of school staff. In some cases, additional QIOs and other relevant personnel may become part of the review team. Themes for the review are decided following a collective collaborative enquiry and thereafter a review programme will be agreed.

029e5507cbf25a514f70ed7e63f2cc16.docx V7 200912 The process will consist of professional dialogue, classroom observation and focus group meetings. The views of students and parents and other stakeholders are essential to this process. Following the self- evaluation review programme, the outcomes of the review will be agreed by the review team – most often in consultation with school staff. Thereafter these will form the contents of the review report. The report will identify areas of strong practice and priorities for improvement.

In the 18 months following the adoption of the new process, reviews have been completed in 10 establishments and there are currently three reviews in progress. (Reports are available to the VSE team).

Colgrain Primary Rothesay Joint Campus Dunbeg Primary Rockfield Primary Kilchrennan Small Primary Oban High Secondary Rhunahaorine Small Primary Carradale/Drumlemble Small Primaries (Joint Headship) Dunoon Grammar Secondary Dalmally Small Primary

Reviews in progress Ashfield Small Primary Rockfield Large Primary Strath of Appin Small Primary – review newly underway

Evidence of efficacy comes, to an extent, from action points in improvement plans from schools that have participated in the new revised process. More work is needed to ensure review recommendations articulate fully with school improvement plans. As part of the Authority’s annual assessment of school improvement plans, some schools will be asked to re-evaluate their improvement priorities along with their partnership QIO. This will be to ensure that the school improvement plan takes more account of recommendations in the school review. (Evidence Appendix 1 – Excerpts from a review of selection of School Improvement Plans)

To date, the involvement of most schools in the process has been initiated largely by the partnership QIO. However, in one instance a thematic school review was instigated by the local authority. This took place in Dunoon Grammar School and was well received to an extent that processes undertaken in the review are now used as a major part of the school’s self-evaluation calendar. (Evidence Appendix 2 – Responses from Schools 5/9/12).

In these early stages in most cases the partnership officer continues to play a key role in leading the review rather than the facilitation role as envisaged by the review framework. However it is hoped that as confidence around the school review process increases then this will develop.

Priorities and outcomes

 Increased capacity for improvement

The involvement of school-based staff from the earliest stage supports the development of collegiate working, ownership of the process and a greater understanding of self-evaluation. Examples include focus groups within the school review process referring with increasing confidence to quality indicators to underpin their self-evaluation.

 Improved quality of professional dialogue

Professional reflection and dialogue amongst staff underpins successful implementation of Curriculum for

029e5507cbf25a514f70ed7e63f2cc16.docx V7 200912 Excellence. The revised review process features opportunities for professional dialogue. In addition to developing the self-evaluative skills required, it is intended that the process will encourage a culture of critical and developmental discussion of school practice. (Evidence Appendix 2 – Responses from Schools 5/9/12).

 Developing a culture of working together

The revised school review process recognises that effective school self-evaluation is a collective experience. The commitment to base review on the school’s own self-evaluation and place school staff at the fore front of the process will emphasise our commitment to improved partnership working.

Collegiate working and positive relationships among head teachers enable learning from one review to be shared with colleagues in the Authority.

Immediate evaluation at the end of each review, informs good and improving practice in subsequent reviews of other schools.

Our self-evaluation process and methodology

Early indications are that the revised process has been well received and works in all educational establishments from the small rural primary schools to large secondary schools and joint campuses. (Evidence Appendix 2a - Responses from Schools printed individually 5/9/12 – Responses from Dalmally Primary, Dunoon Grammar and Rothesay Joint Campus).

Officers involved have reported that staff in schools have engaged positively. A strong feature is the involvement of colleagues from the earliest stages in the planning and structuring of the all approaches.

How are we doing? What key outcomes have we achieved?

With regard to our capacity for improvement, and self-evaluation skills we can make some early observations:

 We have directly involved a large number of our staff within school communities in running aspects of school review. In terms of professional development, we have more people expressing confidence in school self-evaluation  There is an opportunity for staff development in identifying people within our school reviews who could take part in other schools, perhaps as critical friends.  We have observed openness and honesty within the new process. Debriefings following school reviews have been characterised largely by detailed and honest information to a larger extent than in the previous review process.

Professional dialogue has been improved by:

 having multiple, professional conversations with critical friends during review which may were not previously a feature of the process. Some element of professional discussion did occur during the previous form of review, but was clearly less central to the process. (Appendix 7: Definition of critical friend in Argyll and Bute)

“Working in partnership” development:

“Working in partnership” has been promoted as the process has been centrally built on collegiality. There will of course be challenges in our forthcoming engagement to evaluate the process. The QIT has been undertaking ongoing evaluation to review and improve the new process. It is now necessary to involve more school stakeholders such as partner head teachers in our joint-development of the new work. How well do we meet the needs of our stakeholders?

029e5507cbf25a514f70ed7e63f2cc16.docx V7 200912 A formal evaluation of the review process is needed. For this purpose evidence will be gathered and scrutinised from the following sources:

Collation of relevant evidence:

 Documentation e.g. policy papers, review reports, improvement plans etc.  Minutes.  Communication with District Inspector.  A collaborative enquiry with Head Teachers and other school staff. (Involvement of QIO’s/QIM?).  A survey of staff experiences and learning.  An observation of a representative collaborative enquiry in a small school.  A focus group of staff/students/parents during VSE week.  Meeting with core group to analyse evidence during VSE.  Evaluation of success and next steps against our key outcomes.

Our Learning Culture – Argyll and Bute Council 2005 Quality Management in Education 2 – HMIE 2006 Next Generation School Review – A Discussion Paper QIT September 2007 Improving Our Curriculum Through Self-Evaluation – HMIE 2008 School Review meeting –Presentation to head teachers November 2010 Partnership Working and School Review Arrangements – letter to head teachers June 2011 Partnership Working and School Review – Presentation to head teachers September 2011

How good is our leadership and management?

The successful implementation of the revised school review process has been well led in terms of the rationale underpinning it and in the positive response from schools. Schools which take part in the process are better enabled and more confident in their own self-evaluation. School reviews are well led.

There is scope for development in the management of the context of school review within school improvement planning and in partnership working as a whole.

How do we know?

 Evidence from evaluation of reviews  Evidence from focus groups and questionnaire  Examination of the correlation between review reports and improvement plans  Evidence from HTs’ meeting 5/9/12

What are we going to do now?

029e5507cbf25a514f70ed7e63f2cc16.docx V7 200912 Next Steps

 We plan a full evaluation of the process of school review. (Evidence Appendix 3 – notes from HT meeting 5/9/12)

 We plan to increase partnership working even further – eg including colleagues from Health if undertaking a review of a Nursery or Pre-5 unit or involving an educational psychologist in a review of primary or secondary.

 Depending on the outcome of full evaluation, while maintaining schools autonomy to shape their reviews and retaining flexibility of approach, plan for more consistency eg length and format of report and more uniformity in the number of recommendations made to schools.

 Increase follow-up activity in schools after reviews to ensure greater consistency in schools capacity to reflect review outcomes in their improvement plans.

 Work in partnership with the school to support and challenge post-review’ action undertaken by schools in relation to review findings. This will be about the sustainability of evaluation practice by schools in order that this process has a lasting and positive impact.

 Consider raising parent/pupil awareness of the link between school review and the school improvement plan

 Devise a shared timescale from the end of a school review to the report being written.

029e5507cbf25a514f70ed7e63f2cc16.docx V7 200912 029e5507cbf25a514f70ed7e63f2cc16.docx V7 200912