School improvement through
external inspection and
school self-evaluation
SDPI Summer School
NUI Galway: 22 June 2010
Emer Egan
Assistant Chief Inspector
INSPECTORATE
PROMOTING THE QUALITY OF LEARNING
1
Overview
•
Structures, role and context of the Inspectorate’s work
•
Our approach to evaluation and school improvement
•
Providing an external perspective
•
External inspection and school improvement: what should happen after
inspection?
•
Maximum impact from inspection
•
School self-evaluation: challenges and questions in realising self-evaluation
•
WSE: MLL
•
Programme evaluation
2
STRUCTURE, ROLE AND
THE CONTEXT OF OUR WORK
3
Organisation
Chief Inspector
(Head of Division and a member of MAC)
Regional Subdivision
Policy Support Subdivision
Deputy Chief Inspector
Deputy Chief Inspector
BU1-North & Dublin North
BU5: ESRU & European Schools
BU2-South East & Dublin South
BU6: Teacher Education Policy &
Inspectorate Human Resources
BU3-Mid-West & South
BU4-Midlands & West
BU7: Curriculum & Assessment Policy &
Inspectorate International Linkages
BU8: Special Education Policy &
Inspectorate Corporate Functions
Other deployments: Regional Services, Planning Unit, Teacher Education
4
The Inspectorate
• Centralised inspectorate
– A division of the Department of Education and Skills
• Statutory remit under Education Act 1998
– Evaluate the quality and effectiveness of educational provision at
primary and second level
– Support and advise schools, teachers, boards of management
– Advise the Minister on educational policy and provision
5
What influences
the way we work?
The learner
• Every learner entitled to high quality provision
Legislation
• Statutory remit under the Education Act and other legislation
Public Service Reform
• Initiatives to improve the delivery & accountability of public services
• Requirement for annual business plan
• Performance management (PMDS)
– Each staff member agrees role profile (targets for year) with manager
– Mid-year and end of year review
6
What influences
the way we work?
Partnership
• Legislation places strong duty on Inspectorate to consult about the
way in which it carries out evaluative work
Professionalism
• Strong historical tradition which ensures Inspectorate has close links
with teaching profession
• Maintenance of good, professional working relationships with
schools, management bodies, teachers, students and parents
7
OUR APPROACH TO EVALUATION AND
SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT
8
Effective school improvement
is multi-faceted
GOALS AND
STANDARDS
TEACHER QUALITY
Teachers
Principal
DES SUPPORTS
School
Improvement
Students
& Parents
EVALUATION
& REVIEW
PROCESSES
BOM
MANAGEMENT
SUPPORTS
9
We all have a role to play in school improvement
INTERNAL
• Principal, for example…
– Leadership for improvement
– Setting emphasis on learning outcomes
– Tackling under-performance
• Each teacher, for example…
– his/her commitment to highest professional standards
– role in furthering improvement of co-teachers in
subject department and work of school as a whole
• Board of management
10
We all have a role to play in school improvement
EXTERNAL
The professional teacher
The Teaching Council
Teacher quality
Continuum of teacher
education
Professional teacher networks
NCCA – Curricula and syllabi
Goals and
standards
State Examinations
NQAI - Qualification frameworks
Management organisations
Management
supports
Patron/trustees
VECs and CEOs
11
We all have a role to play in school improvement
DES supports
for schools
DES support services (e.g. PDST,
SESS)
Funding: capitation, teacher
salaries, capital expenditure
Supports for students (e.g. SEN,
NCSE, DEIS)
Evaluation
and review
School development planning
Self-evaluation
External inspection
National and international surveys
12
Emphasis in the inspection
of schools has changed….
From
A policing model of external inspection
o Locates control and development outside the school
o Idea that quality can be “inspected into” the school
o Requires significant personnel resources
To
Promoting internal control and development
o Recognises that change must be fostered within organisations
o Based on a vision of school as a professional organisation
o Sees inspectors and school personnel as co-professionals
13
Our dominant
philosophy is formative
 Purposes of inspection
o Assure quality in education system
o Provide an external perspective on the work of the school
o Affirm good practice
o Constructively identify areas for improvement
o Facilitate school self-evaluation
o Recommendations provide a platform for development
14
We commit to…
• Take account of school context
and school self-review
• Courtesy, respect and fairness
• Sensitivity to individual teachers
and schools
• Fostering positive relationships
with the school community
• Fair and accurate judgements
based on evidence
• Clear and transparent review
mechanism: Review Procedure
under Section 13(9) of Education Act
15
Influences on
evaluation approach
• School improvement literature
– Research and professional development of staff
• Curriculum reform and review
– e.g. Links with NCCA
• Socio-economic demands for high quality education
• Government commitment to transparency and
service
• International reviews of education: e.g. PISA
• International educational bodies
– OCED Education Committee; OECD Centre for Educational Research
and Innovation (CERI), Towards an Integrated Public Service (OECD)
– EU policy on education (e.g. teacher competencies, education for
16
citizenship, Lisbon agenda)
Co-operation with
other inspectorates
• North-South
– Management cooperation, staff exchange
• Britain & Ireland (Ofsted, Estyn, HMIe, ETI & DES)
– Participation in joint meetings
– Sharing of good practice
• Europe
– European Network for the Evaluation of Educational Systems
• Joint projects led by Ireland or in which Ireland participates
– Standing International Conference of Inspectorates
• e.g. Papers from Ireland on inspection practices and outcomes
• Other countries, e.g. New Zealand
– Study visits, exchange of speakers/lecturers
17
Evaluation Support
and Research Unit
• Develop evaluation techniques and tools
– Inspection models, tools to collect and analyse evidence,
reporting styles and templates
• Design and lead specialised evaluations
– Respond to demands/needs of Department, school system,
learner groups
– Design specialised evaluations, train inspectors
– Oversee writing of composite national report
• Publishing house for the Inspectorate
• Research on issues such as inspection models,
trends and developments
18
PROVIDING AN
EXTERNAL PERSPECTIVE
19
External evaluations
• Using a range of inspection types
• Developing models to suit circumstances
of provision
• Current models include….
20
Reports published by 27 May 2010
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Whole School Evaluation (PP):
200
Subject inspection within WSE:
730
Subject inspection (stand-alone):
1753
Programme evaluation within WSE:
18
Programme evaluation (stand-alone): 68
Centres for Education:
64
Whole School Evaluation (P):
857
Total:
3690
21
EXTERNAL INPECTION AND
SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT:
What should happen after inspection?
22
After inspection
• Underlying principle: School self-review and
improvement at the heart of effective school
• External evaluation can provide advice but
improvement only happens if there is effective
implementation in school
• Primary responsibility for following through on
recommendations rests with board and staff
– BOM, CEO, Principal, Staff must take ownership of need for
change and implement change programme
• Others may be involved to limited extent
– Patron/VEC, certain DES divisions, school support services, etc.
23
So what should happen
after inspection?
• Full circulation of the report
• Read and examine the strengths and areas for
development
• Review the school’s planning and self-evaluation
– Review needs to include board, senior management, staff, parents
and students, as appropriate
– Have these processes identified similar priorities?
– What should our priorities now be?
– Does the self-review and planning process need to be improved?
• What actions will we take now?
– Action plan
– Identify where assistance is needed
• Implementation, monitoring and review to ensure
real improvement happens
24
Are inspections effective?
Independent survey in 2005 by MORI…..
• 86% of teachers agreed or strongly agreed that
“Feedback and advice were given in a supportive
and constructive manner”
• 80% of teachers agreed or strongly agreed that
“Inspectors provided constructive advice about
ways of improving educational provision”
• 80% of teachers agreed or strongly agreed that
“Written reports were clear and provided me with
valid and constructive recommendations for
development”
25
Is the Department involved in following-up?
• Coordinated sharing of information between
Inspectorate and Schools Division of DES
• Involvement of DES and Inspectorate in followthrough to inspection is
– proportionate to need
– concentrated on very small number of schools with very
serious failings and those with significant problems
– concentrated on learning outcomes
– is tailored to the needs of the individual case
– looks at supports and the approach needed to address
26
underlying issues in school
Examples include…
• DES engaging with board and/or the patron/trustees of the school
• Patron/trustees working with BOM to bring about change
• School engaging with support services
• Assistance to leadership or management of school
• Report(s) from BOM to DES on actions taken to implement
recommendations
• Follow-up visit(s) by Inspectorate or other officials from DES
• Combination of actions suited to needs of situation
There is no one solution!!
27
MAXIMUM IMPACT FROM INSPECTION:
Learning lessons from
the inspection programme
28
Sharing the outcomes of inspection:
Reports on the website of the DES
Publication allows us to
learn from each other
AND
can inform self-evaluation
29
For example, where WSEs find more effective
leadership and middle management..
• Quality leadership, principal & deputy principal
communicate effectively, cooperate fully in running
effective school
• Mix of pastoral, curricular and organisational duties
for middle management; clear duties; effectively
implemented; regularly reviewed for good of school
• Collaborative policy making process; SDP focussed
on core areas of teaching and learning
• Time for planning but not at the expense of minimum
teacher contact time for students
30
Where WSEs find less effective
leadership and middle management…
• Weak leadership; poor cooperation between Principal and
Deputy; poor cooperation between in-school management
team
• SDP not well developed – paper and/or recent exercise
rather than a continuous process for improvement
• Middle management posts not well structured to changing
needs of school
• Planning and review not impacting on teaching and the
quality of students’ learning
• Teacher deployments / Teacher absenteeism
31
Recommendations
• In some cases, evaluations have found quite considerable
room for improvement…
• “In line with section 21 of the Education Act, the board
….should begin immediately to develop a school plan….
• “The school’s admission and enrolment policies should be
reviewed to ensure that they are in line with the policy of
inclusion….”
• “A total review of existing posts and duties should take
place.”
32
Recommendations
• “A whole-school review of the school’s code of behaviour is
recommended ...”
• “It was noted that…a number of teachers are allocated fewer
than the stipulated minimum of 18 hours....the allocation of time
for some subjects is not fully in line with syllabus guidelines…”
• “A more concerted effort by the whole staff should lead to a
general improvement in the quality and amount of work
completed by students and contribute to the raising of
standards and outcomes in all subjects.”
- WSE Report, PP school
33
Composite reports
• Findings and recommendations based on analysis of subject inspection
reports or other inspection data
• Emphasis on advice as well as evaluation
• “Good practice” and “Concerns” boxes
• Aimed at subject departments, school leaders, advisers
34
Other composite reports
Other titles
Looking at Guidance, English, History
Forthcoming: Looking at Biology
35
Thematic evaluations
• Specialist evaluation projects with a research focus
• Considerable research in advance of evaluation
• Specific evaluation criteria, templates and schedules
developed and tested
• Additional focussed training for inspection teams
• Reports
– Highlight good practice
– Identify challenges of the system
– Suggest how schools can improve practice
36
Thematic reports
37
SCHOOL SELF-EVALUATION
How can it help us to improve our school?
38
What can school self-evaluation do?
School self-evaluation is a process that should enable the
principal, teachers and school community....
• to evaluate how well their school provides for its students
• to make a difference to the experience of every student by
enriching teaching and improving learning outcomes
• to reflect on whole-school and classroom practice
• to recognise the strengths of their school
• to focus on teaching and learning strategies and on
student learning outcomes
39
What can school self-evaluation do?
• to examine areas where outcomes could have been
better and identify areas for further development
• to assist staff in sharing ideas and good practice
• to provide opportunities for teachers to monitor their own
teaching and identify their professional needs
• to support the ownership of school policies and establish
a clear vision for future direction of the school
• to provide a means of school accountability
40
How could self-evaluation differ or relate to
School Development Planning?
• SDP processes are well embedded in many schools
• Robust self-evaluation should be a key element in
the SDP process
• Self-evaluation should not be additional to SDP,
rather it seeks to provide a sharper focus to SDP:
– Acknowledges the context of the school
– Brings more critical, objective focus to the review of the school’s
work
– Can lead to better action planning
– Should result in better monitoring of progress and implementation
• And it can be used to provide better information to41
parents and others about the work of the school
How could self-evaluation
bring about this better focus?
• By asking questions about outcomes such as…
– How effective is our teaching and the learning of our students?
– Are the learning outcomes of our students improving?
– What are the learning outcomes for different groups of students?
– Are we good at retaining students? At promoting student attendance?
– Are we stretching students’ achievements as much as possible? Getting
as many as possible to take higher levels?
– How good is the management of this school in terms of the leadership it
provides for school improvement?
– How good are the supports we provide to students?
42
How could self-evaluation
bring about this better focus?
• By basing judgements on solid evidence, e.g.
– Detailed questionnaire evidence from students and from parents, board
members, etc.
– Analysis of examination results and comparisons with national data: for all
students; for different groups (e.g. higher/lower achieving groups)
– Standardised test results
– Analysing uptake of higher levels in subjects / subject in senior cycle
– Achievements in terms of students’ skills/abilities
– Tracking and analysing data on retention of students
– Examining attendance patterns
– External evaluation evidence
43
How could self-evaluation
bring about this better focus?
• By facilitating and encouraging peer learning and
peer review, for example….
– Encouraging teachers to share good practice
– Facilitating teachers in observing each other teach and providing
developmental feedback
– Developing a culture of discussing pedagogy, suggesting and
accepting suggestions for improvement
– Creating a culture where teachers are constantly asking
• “How can I do this better?”
• “Can you suggest to me how I can improve?”
• “Could we improve this by …….?”
– By having principals, curriculum leaders, etc. engage in reviewing
44
teaching and learning in classrooms
How could self-evaluation
bring about this better focus?
• By setting clear targets for change and
improvement…
– Identifying areas for improvement, planning how change can be
brought about
e.g. improving achievement levels in specific subjects or for specific
groups of students
– Helping to identify staff learning needs and addressing these
– Setting clear short-term and longer-term goals for improvement that
can be measured
– Providing a way in which progress can be monitored, acknowledged
45
and celebrated
Promoting self-evaluation
Social Partnership Agreement delivering
School Self-Evaluation
 Towards 2016 embeds the Inspectorate’s
Looking at Our School framework in the
partnership agreement with teachers
 The agreement intended to facilitate the
systematic implementation of school
self-evaluation in all primary and postprimary schools
 Agreement specifically mentions schools
assessing performance in teaching and
learning
46
So in the interface between inspection and
self-evaluation…
• External evaluations, composite reports and Looking at Our
School can help to inform the criteria by which schools
judge their outcomes
• Inspectorate can develop more refined criteria to aid selfevaluation
– Can do this in cooperation with schools and others
• Initially, self-evaluation needs to be primarily for the school
community
• But as confidence grows, schools should share findings with
others
47
– Schools could aim to publish their own reports, targets, achievements
and areas for development
So in the interface between inspection and
self-evaluation…
• External evaluation
– Complements internal evaluation
– Can look at the school’s self-evaluation as one key element of evidence
• Self-evaluation has potential to inform and sharpen
the “School Response” to inspection reports
– School community should compare findings of external and internal
processes
– More focussed statements about what school will do next
• Models of inspection could adjust over time to
incorporate outcomes of robust self-evaluation
– WSE could be less intensive in some cases
– Shorter or less frequent or different forms of evaluation
– Quality assuring self-evaluation
48
WSE MLL
Management, Leadership and Learning
49
Model of Inspection trialled at Post
Primary level in 2010
• WSE – Management, Leadership and Learning
• Aim: to facilitate a shorter, more focused evaluation
of the work of schools
• Main focus on the quality of management and
leadership and the quality of teaching and learning
• WSE-MLL designed to complement the established
evaluation models (WSE, Subject, Programme,
Thematic).
50
WSE MLL – Outline
• A limited range of information and documentation sought in
advance of the evaluation
• Evaluation consists of two inspectors (three inspectors in
schools with over 700 students)
• Three weeks notice of the evaluation.
• One day in the school during the preparatory phase
– Informal meeting with staff, administer questionnaires, review
documentation, meet BOM (including presentation by BOM)
• Three days in the school during the in-school phase of the
evaluation
– Meetings with P&DP, Key Staff Members and Students
– Observation of T&L in a range of lessons.
51
WSE MLL – Outline
• Inspectors view a wide range of lessons, not limited to specific
subject areas, in order to:
– evaluate the overall quality of teaching and learning in the school
– gather evidence on any other whole-school matters: school management,
curriculum provision, planning and assessment
– follow-up on recommendations from previous evaluation reports
• A schedule of lessons to be inspected is provided on each day
of the in-school phase
• Brief, general feedback is provided to teachers at the end of
lessons
• Student and parent questionnaires are a key part of the
evidence base
• Inspection report is succinct (6 pages approx)
52
Key elements
- Requirement for BOM to give presentation to inspection team
- The use of Student and Parent Questionnaires (2nd year and 5th
year students and their parents)
- Less documentation sought in advance, far fewer meetings
- Any lesson can be inspected as part of the evaluation
- Onus placed on schools to engage in the self-evaluation process
(presentation from BOM, awareness that evidence of development
from previous reports being sought).
53
Key elements
– Much shorter model – less time in school, fewer
meetings, smaller inspection team
– Previous inspection reports, student and parent
questionnaires analysed as part of the evidence base
– Inspecting and following up on generic aspects of
teaching and learning in a wide range of lessons
– Much shorter report in a shorter time-frame.
54
Trial and feedback
• WSE-MLL has been trialled in 12 schools to date
• These reports have not been published
• Members of Boards of Management, Principals and
Teachers invited to DES to give feedback
• Feedback on this model overall very positive
• Trials to continue in the next school year
55
PROGRAMME EVALUATION
56
Programme Evaluations
• JCSP,TY, LCA, LCVP all evaluated by the
Inspectorate
• School receives two weeks notice
• Programme plan, programme timetables
and information request form required in
advance
57
Programme Evaluation Outline
(i) Interview with school principal
(ii) Meeting and ongoing liaison with the programme coordinator(s) during the evaluation visit
(iii) Interview with small group of students
(iv) Interview with core group of teachers
(including a SEN teacher in the case of LCA)
(v) Observation of teaching and learning in a number of
lessons
58
Programme Evaluation Outline (contd.)
(vii) Review of relevant documentation pertaining to the
programme
(viii) Feedback to principal, programme co-ordinator and
core team (on a day to be arranged between the
inspector and the principal in the case of JCSP and LCA
evaluations and in the case of TY programme
evaluations where there are three or more class groups
following the programme)
(ix)
Meeting with programme co-ordinator if necessary
59
Evaluation Framework
– Programme organisation
– Programme planning and co-ordination
– Teaching and learning
60
Questions?
61