Visit Report
Name: Jenny Horton
Date: 3/6/2015
Purpose of visit:
(Previously agreed by the governing body with the Headteacher)
To observe the conduct of the half termly pupil progress meetings, and learn more about the processes
that underpin the data presented to governors. Also, to see how these discussions contribute to our
continuing school development.
Links with the School Development Plan/SEF:
(How does the visit relate to a priority in the School Development Plan or SEF?)
Pupil progress and attainment underpins all aspects of our SDP, and, informs key activities described in
our SEF.
Governor observations and comments:
(e.g. What did you see? How long did the visit last? What did you learn? What would you like clarified?)
My visit lasted the whole of the school day.
Each class teacher was seen in turn ( Foundation Stage held on a separate day, due to time constraints).
The format for each meeting was the sameAt the start of each interview, Nicola gave each teacher a pack, mapping attainment for all pupils across
school up to summer mid term in reading, writing and mathematics. Each pupil was plotted in a grid
based on the level achieved and grouped by year group. The levels in a grey background represented Age
Related Expectations. In addition, there were separate sheets, outlining the attainment of Pupil Premium
pupils across school, and Non- Pupil Premium pupils.
In each interview, it was acknowledged that the PP/ SEN pupils received much additional provision. Focus
then , was on PP children who were not SEN, and what additionality was being offered to them ,
especially those at age related expected levels eg There had been discussion at the beginning of the year
about certain year 2 pupils in this group- identifying those who could be pushed to Level 3. Also, Nicola
frequently referred to National levels of attainment throughout the meetings.
Each class teacher then reported on the progress of their focus children over the half term, points progress
made etc in each curriculum area, and, the effectiveness of the strategies that had been put in place both
material and additional teaching support. Throughout these discussions, Nicola and Janice contributed
observations, commented on the merits of one kind of support over another for particular groups/
individual pupils. Janice advised using her knowledge of assessing/ working with particular children with
SEN, and her experience of maths intervention across school. Both Nicola and Janice demonstrated a deep
knowledge of individual childrens' educational background , continuing needs , family circumstances, and
support agencies involved with them outside school.
Discussion then moved to listing new focus children for intervention this half term, and the kind of
additional support likely to be most effective. If one sort of support had not worked for a group/ individual
then another was identified. Next steps were not considered with a narrow curriculum basis, but ,were
rather rooted in concerns for development of the whole child- for instance, there were recommendations
GEL 2010
Page 1
Visit Report
that individual children became ambassadors, members of the school council to build their confidence. The
benefits of aspects of the Kagan technique for promoting speech and language, building confidence/ skills
via peer review etc was clearly a teaching/ learning strategy that the school is continuing to develop
expertise in, and has the potential to further enhance the learning of all of our children.
During these interviews, Nicola and Janice were making notes for actions/ developments generally across
school in response to issues emerging from the discussions- development of phonic teaching, strategies
for developing the confidence of girls especially those eligible for PP, aspects of speech and language- the
development of a list of words/ concepts children find difficult ie opposites, concept of 'in between' etc
Attendance on the Steve Dawson course around provision for children who fail to pass the year 1 phonics
test.
Each class teacher left the room with a list of decisions made and priorities agreed for the next half term.
All interviews demonstrated a sharing of practice, understandings and concerns to a high professional
level ,based on mutual trust and respect. I felt this process would enable all staff to feel very supported in
an atmosphere of high challenge. Effective practice was recognised and shared, progress acknowledged,
while challenges were confronted. Complex situations were discussed openly and sensitively, with an
emphasis on solutions. Also, it enabled the head and Inclusion co-ordinator to have a complete knowledge
of the working of the school and the effectiveness of provision, the learning / progress of individual
children, and the effectiveness of teaching.
Any key issues arising for the governing body:
(e.g. the way resources are allocated, the way the school communicates, progress in implementing a key
policy, evidence of the impact of the governing body’s work on pupils’ achievement)
1. The importance of the continuing development and resourcing of teaching /learning strategies to meet
specific needs, with attendant training in these for staff.
2. The continuing resourcing and development of our ICT provision.
3. Recommendation that other governors attend these meetings.
Action following governing body meeting:
(Record any action agreed by the governing body with regard to this visit)
GEL 2010
Page 2