Valuing Parents
Welcome and Introduction to the
day
Councillor Graham Newman
Cabinet Member for Education and Young
People
Raising the Bar for Suffolk
Cllr Mark Bee
Leader of Suffolk County Council
Deborah Cadman
Chief Executive, Suffolk County Council
Health, Aspirations, Attainment
Tessa Lindfield
Director of Public Health,
NHS Suffolk /Suffolk County Council
Health
Education
How healthy are we?
80 years
84 years
12 year
gap
between
the most
affluent
and most
deprived
ward
Deprivation in Suffolk
Children in poverty in Suffolk
• 1 in 6 Suffolk children live in poverty
• Children from the most deprived areas are:
– 4.5 times more likely to be absent from their lessons
– performing 26% lower at Early Years Foundation
Stage (at age 5)
– performing 70% lower at GCSE level (at age 16)
– a third more likely to be obese
– three times more likely to be a teenage parent
As Suffolk children grow so do
inequalities in education and health
Bring me solutions not problems
•
•
•
•
•
•
Knowing the problem is halfway there
Some are modifiable some not….
But mitigation is possible
Not just about schools and education
Health is part of the picture too
Parents are crucial
Health actions to improve
educational attainment
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Healthy Child Progamme
Breastfeeding
Smoking
Decreasing under 18 conceptions
Therapies
DAAT
CAMHS
Physical activity
Breastfeeding
• At 6-8 weeks a little over
half (52%) of infants in
Suffolk were breastfed.
• This is higher than the
regional (47.7%) and the
national figures (49.1%)
• But still too low
Further Information
www.suffolkobservatory.info
www.chimat.org.uk
Raising the Bar: Valuing parents
What works nationally and
internationally
Kevan Collins
Education Endowment Foundation
Addressing educational disadvantage,
sharing evidence, finding out what works
Kevan Collins
The EEF is an independent grantmaking charity
• A £125m endowment fund was announced by the Department
for Education in Autumn 2010
• The Sutton Trust and Impetus won the bid to administer it and
launched the Education Endowment Foundation
in July 2011
• To date we have funded 21 projects, working with 950 schools
and 250,000 children
• We aim to disburse around £200m over the next 15 years
Achieving our mission:
The EEF mission
• We aim to break the link between family income
and educational achievement by:
 Identifying promising educational innovations that address the
needs of disadvantaged children
 Evaluating these innovations to extend and secure the evidence
on what works and can be made to work at scale
 Encouraging schools, government, charities, and others to apply
evidence and adopt innovations found to be effective
19
EEF Overview
Our projects support
children eligible for
free school meals
across the country,
including in the most
underperforming
schools
We provide open
access to our learning
and support schools to
make the best use of
evidence
Evaluation
All our projects are
rigorously and
independently evaluated
The challenge:
Social mobility
•
Though some progress has been made, the UK remains very low on
international rankings of social mobility. Parental income continues to exert
a very powerful influence on the academic progress of children
28%
59%
% achieving 5 A*-C
•
The influence of parental income on the income of British children is the
strongest in the OECD and over 50% stronger than in Canada, Germany or
the Netherlands
The attainment gap over time
• Over the life of disadvantaged children the gap between their attainment and
that of their peers widens
The impact of the gap
•
On the individual:
 higher academic attainment increases lifetime earning and decreases
the risk of unemployment
 it is strongly linked to better health outcomes, better civic engagement
and lower levels of offending
•
On the country:
 The attainment gap drags down overall educational outcomes on both
national and international measures
 Cutting the attainment gap by 50% would raise our standing in PISA by
an estimated five places in English and 14 places in Maths
 The top performing countries (Korea, Finland and Canada) demonstrate
that high attainment is impossible without high equity
The context
• The system is (as ever) changing; there is a drive to
greater autonomy and ‘mediating tiers’ of support are
changing
• The accountability framework continues to flex and twist
to meet changing expectations and competing interests;
schools have more control over spending, but will be
held to account for decisions and their consequences
• The full chill of austerity and impact of the economic
crisis has not yet hit the school system
We believe evidence can help
• Educational fashions and things which “seem like a good
idea” do not always deliver on their promise
• Context is important and anecdote is not a strong
foundation on which to make decisions
• Schools and head teachers face more decisions than
ever before; time and money are scarce resources, and
maximising impact is not straightforward
Why not just increase spending?
• International experience shows that increasing performance is not a
simple function of increasing expenditure
550
Korea
539
PISA 2009 Reading Score
530
Singapore
526
Finland
536
Hong Kong
533
Canada
524
510
USA
500
England
495
490
Greece
483
Israel
474
470
Spain
481
Italy
486
Austria
470
450
$4000-$5000
$5000-$6000
$6000-$7000
$7000-$8000
Public spend per student (PPP US$)
$8000+
Views on what works – latest
survey of teachers
• Three recent surveys have highlighted the disconnect
between teachers and evidence
• We believe that this “evidence gap” is not the fault of
schools; researchers have historically not always been
good at making research accessible and schools are
being expected to take on a new role
• However, we must recognise that the state of play has
changed; whether we like it or not, with more autonomy
comes greater responsibility and accountability
What does good evidence look like?
• It doesn’t just tell you what the best case scenario is, it
gives you a realistic picture about what has worked in
the past and what has not
• It provides information about cost, confidence, and does
not suggest that there are silver bullets – there are not
• Internationally we are moving towards meta-analysis –
Dr Gene Glass and Dr Robert Marzano (USA), Professor
John Hattie (New Zealand), Professor Steve Higgins
(England)
The Teaching and Learning Toolkit
• Free summary of educational research: what works and,
as important, what doesn’t
• Practice focused: giving
schools in the information
they need to make
informed decisions and
narrow the gap.
• Based on meta-analyses
provided by Durham
University
The Toolkit (continued)
• There are many caveats: the results quoted are based
on averages and past results.
• The Toolkit is a starting point, and evidence is not a
replacement for professional judgement
• The ‘Bananarama principles’:
Implementation:
It ain’t what you do it’s the
way that you do it
Spending:
It ain’t what you spend it’s the
way that you spend it
Using evidence to get the biggest
bang for your educational buck
Feedback
High
Impact
Homework
One-to-one
Phonics
Low
cost
Reducing
Class Size
School
Uniforms
Performance
Pay
Low
Impact
Teaching
Assistants
High
cost
This requires reflection
Example 1: Teaching Assistants
Approach
Potential Gain
Cost
Applicability
Teaching
Assistants
0 months
££££
Pri, Sec,
Maths, Eng, Sci
Evidence
estimate
Summary
Very low/no impact for
high cost
Teaching assistants undoubtedly contribute to the effective management and
organisation of a school. On average, however, they do not seem to add to the
learning of the children and the classes that they support. We do not know the best
way for them to be used in schools to support learning, but likely best bests are:
• Identify tasks and activities where teaching assistants can support learning, rather
than simply manage tasks.
• Provide support and training for teaching assistants so that they understand how
to effective, e.g. by allowing time for teachers and teaching assistants to talk
before and after lessons.
• Ensure that teachers do not reduce their support or input to the pupils supported
by teaching assistants.
• Ensure that teaching assistants are focused on improving learning, as opposed to
ensuring that students finish their work.
This requires reflection
Example 2: Parental involvement
Approach
Potential Gain
Cost
Applicability
Parental
involvement
+ 3 months
£££
Pri, Sec,
Maths, Eng, Sci
Evidence
estimate
Summary
Moderate impact for
moderate cost
Focused approaches which support parents in working with their children to improve
their learning are beneficial. The challenge is in engaging and sustaining such
involvement.
• Involvement is often easier to achieve with parents of very young children.
• Parents of older children may appreciate short sessions at flexible times to involve
them.
• Schools can be daunting places for parents so it is important to establish a
welcoming environment.
• Parents may be anxious about their own educational achievements it is important
to encourage them to focus on their children’s effort and improvement, rather than
worry about ability (“You did really well and learned to do X better, because you
really practiced/ worked hard at/ concentrated on Y…”).
Some of the most promising
strategies
• Perhaps not surprisingly, a focus on teaching and
learning is key:
 Improving the quality of feedback
 Collaborative and co-operative learning
 Peer involvement in learning (peer tutoring, team
approaches)
 Meta-cognitive strategies, making learning explicit
 Specific subject strategies (e.g. phonics instruction in
reading, computer assisted instruction in maths)
How should evidence be used?
• Internal data used to
identify biggest
barriers to learning
• Resources targeted
at areas of greatest
need
Step 1
Step 2
• External evidence
from England and
overseas can be
used to identify best
bets and areas of
promise.
• Internal data used
again, to evaluate
the impact of a new
strategy.
• Did it work and
should you continue?
Step 3
How will the Toolkit develop?
• We plan to develop the Toolkit into a dynamic resource
documenting evidence proven effective practice; the next
update will take place in January 2013
• It will grow as the evidence base does; EEF projects will
help fill-in the gaps and expand the Toolkit’s scope
• The EEF will also create practical examples of the
interventions backed up by evidence – e.g. training,
toolkits, services that schools can deploy
The Toolkit is just one part of
the work of the EEF
Decide
grants
EEF
Toolkit
Synthesise
evidence
Commission
evaluations
EEF
Evaluations
Report
results
Grant-making
• We are looking to fund, develop and evaluate projects
that:
 Have a measurable impact on attainment
 Are innovative: a new or a significant advancement of
an existing idea
 Evaluation is at the heart of what we do. Robust
evaluations will be built into projects from the start
 If proven to have an impact, can be replicated in other
areas / schools cost effectively
Evaluation
• Robust yet pragmatic evaluations, wherever possible
using randomisation
• Conducted by an independent evaluator. Our panel
includes: LSE, Durham University, Institute of Education,
University of York, IFS, NFER, NIESR, University of
Birmingham, University of Bristol, University of
Manchester
Pilot
(development)
Efficacy
(validation)
Effectiveness
(scale-up)
Reflections
• The attainment gap is a complex and challenging
problem
• Evidence can support schools to make decisions and
maximise the impact of their spending, but we need
more of it, and we need to make better use of what we
already know
• Meeting our challenges will require a determination,
knowledge and sustained collective endeavour, to which
the EEF has an unparalleled opportunity to support
For further information:
www.educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk
info@eefoundation.org.uk
11.00 am – 11.20 am
Break
RSA: Raising the Bar Inquiry
‘Suffolk: A county without limits’
Matthew Taylor
Chief Executive, RSA
Workshop 1
What would Raising the Bar look like if
it was successful?
What could your specific area
contribute ?
Workshop 1
Group
Room
Facilitator
1
1
Alex Bedford
2
2
Mike Crichton
3
3
Rosemarie Sadler
4
4
Helen Wolstencroft
5
5
Sally Wilkinson
6
6
Sue Boardman
7
7
Karen Forbester
Feedback and panel questions
1.15pm – 2.00pm
Lunch
Suffolk solutions for Raising the
Bar: Valuing Parents
Moving the agenda through
localities
Simon White
Director, Children and Young People’s
Service
Workshop 2
•
•
•
How can we share what we know?
How can we let all parents know that we value them?
How can we involve parents in raising aspirations and achievement for all
Suffolk children?
Agreed Focus:
Action 1
Action 2
Action 3
Name and contact details of the 3 group representatives attending 22nd November
meeting:
Name
Contact details
Workshop 2
Group Room
Facilitator
1
1
Rosemarie
Sadler
2
2
Mike Crichton
3
3
Sue Boardman
4
4
Sally Wilkinson
Scribe
Gareth Bettsdavies
Anne Edwards
Kirsteen Holland
Karen Forbester
5
5
Liz Pitts
6
7
6
7
Helen
Wolstencroft
Mark Bennett
Alex Bedford
Carolyn Heyburn
Claire Kent
Plenary
Feedback from workshops and next
steps
Deborah Cadman
Chief Executive
Simon White
Director, Children and Young People’s Service
Closing
Councillor Graham Newman
Cabinet Member for Education and
Young People
Deadline 02 December 2012