The Kirn Primary School
model of the curriculum
James Wylie, HT Rockfield Primary
Robyn McIlroy, ADHT, Kirn Primary
Overview
1. Rationale for the introduction of the “upper
school model” in 2010
2. How it works in practice
3. Self-evaluation and views of staff, pupils,
parents
4. Outcome of the self-evaluation
5. Tips for success
Rationale
• The creative solution to an inherited
problem
• 2010 – six teachers, compulsory transfers
from schools with falling roles
• Staff had specialist skills: art, literacy,
outdoor learning, maths
Sample timetable – P7
9.00 – 10.30am
10.45am – 12.15pm
1.15 – 2.15pm
2.30 – 3.00pm
3.00 – 3.30pm
Monday
LANGUAGE & ARTS
Ms McIlroy
MATHS &
SCIENCES
Ms McKie
SOCIAL
SUBJECTS/RME
Ms McIlroy
SOCIALSUBJECT
S /RME
Ms McIlroy
SOCIALSUBJECTS
/RME
Ms McIlroy
Tuesday
MATHS & SCIENCES
Ms McKie
LANGUAGE &
ARTS
Ms McIlroy
SOCIAL
SUBJECTS/RME
Ms McIlroy
PE Mr Wakefield
PE Mr Wakefield
Wednesday
LANGUAGE & ARTS
Ms McIlroy
MATHS &
SCIENCES
Ms McKie
LANGUAGE & ARTS
Ms McIlroy
LANGUAGE &
ARTS
Ms McIlroy
PASTORAL TIME
Ms McIlroy
Thursday
LANGUAGE & ARTS
Ms McIlroy
MATHS &
SCIENCES
Ms McKie
SOCIAL SUBJECTS
Mrs Marr
SOCIAL
SUBJECTS
Mrs Marr
SOCIAL
SUBJECTS
Mrs Marr
Friday
SOCIAL SUBJECTS
Mrs Marr
SOCIAL SUBJECTS
Mrs Marr
SOCIAL SUBJECTS
Mrs Marr
SOCIAL
SUBJECTS
Mrs Marr
SOCIAL
SUBJECTS
Mrs Marr
In practice
• Steps to ensure:
– Consistency of approach to discipline
– Co-ordination of timetables
– Shared planning
– Retention of the “pastoral” element by having
pastoral teachers
– Consultation with Parent Council
– Quality assurance
– Co-ordination of homework
Self-evaluations
• November 2012 & April 201
• Evidence considered:
• Quantitative data
• People’s views
• Direct observation
–
–
–
–
–
–
Sampling pupil work
Class visits/ learning walks
Observations of children
Forward plan monitoring
Tracking of learners’ experiences
Parent/Pupil Surveys/Feedback
Self-evaluation
1. Is this model consistent with the rationale
and the aims of CfE?
2. How does this model impact on the
quality of teaching and learning of each of
the curriculum areas?
3. How has this model impacted on
attainment and assessment?
4. Are literacy, numeracy and health and
wellbeing being developed across
curriculum areas?
5. Views of the pupils, staff and parents?
6. In what ways, if any, should the current
operating model be adapted to take account
of the findings of this self-evaluation and
consultation with the various stakeholders?
Views of pupils
• Pros
– Different teachers = variety
– Specialisms ultimately being for their benefit
– Good preparation for transition to S1
• Cons
– Carrying pencil cases
– Remembering where to go
– Homework – too much from some teachers
Views of teachers - pros
“The principles of curriculum design are more easily met
through this model than where individual teachers were
planning for differentiated activities across three, four or
more curriculum areas every day.”
“This model suits children with shorter attention spans
since the teacher and the subject are changed every 1.5
hours.”
“It helps planning of next steps for individual children
since you get to know their development needs very well
within the subject areas.”
Views of teachers - pros
“It allows teachers to invest more time planning and
preparing very good quality resources.”
“This models helps the children become much more
responsible and independent which is especially valuable
for P7s.”
“Teacher don’t have to spend time at the beginning of
term getting to know pupils’ learning styles, next steps
and development needs since they have already gone
through that process when they come into P5.”
“This model helps improve teachers’ specialist skills.”
Views of teachers - cons
“Presents more of an organizational challenge”
“Teachers can miss forming a bond with the one set
of pupils every day over a year.”
“There is no “down time” for chats with pupils during
the day. “
“It can be difficult to finish off work since pupils move
on to the next lessons and “catch up” work has to be
kept until the next day.”
Views of teachers - cons
“Sometimes teachers can miss teaching different
aspects of for example a topic.”
“Teachers need to ensure that they don’t become “deskilled” in teaching all curriculum areas.”
“It can be more difficult to organise the giving and
returning of homework.”
“Children with support needs may not like the changes.”
“It can take a while for P5 pupils to get used to the
routine.”
Views of parents
• Pros
– Liked the “specialist vs generalist” idea
– Felt that pupils were being “active” moving
around from class to class
– Great preparation for S1
– Fostering independence
• Cons
– Initially some concerns
– Homework
– Transition from P4 to P5
Outcome of the self-evaluation
“While this self-evaluation has shown that pupils,
parents and staff have positive views about the
current operating model, there are two factors
which might mitigate against continuing the current
model. Firstly at this point in time there is no
objective empirical evidence to show that the
current operating model has improved in
attainment and/or achievement per se. Secondly
the current staff complement allows the option of
returning to a more traditional curriculum model.”
Outcome of the self-evaluation
• Refinement of the model 2013 – 2014 session
–
–
–
–
–
Moved to a 2 stream model
P5 returned to traditional model
P6 & P7 rotating only
Specialisms retained: numeracy and literacy
More support given to pupils with ASN through the
model
– Monthly homework grids retained
– Retained planning with P5,6,7 teachers and pupils
– Retained upper school shared experiences, e.g. topic
work to introduce P5 to other teachers gradually
Recommendations
• Success of this model will depend on:
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Staff engagement
Staff expertise
Good timetabling
Clear communication and flexibility
Shared planning
Engagement of pupils and parents
Attention to ASN and pastoral issues
Much more difficult potentially with a composite
class