MFL Collaborative Practice 2013-14
Mid-Year Review
Focus on Phonics in French to promote better comprehension and pronunciation
1. Actions taken by your collaborative group
The MFL department agreed to investigate and extend work on phonics with our students. This is an
important component in the development of listening skills but we had also previously noted serious concern
about students’ poor pronunciation during GCSE controlled speaking assessments and it was agreed that
we should aim to tackle this earlier with students. Two colleagues identified phonics as a particular target
this year in their teaching (NMD/NS). SHD circulated appendix 1 which included detailed phonics resources
and instructions for the conduct of a small scale research project based on an unseen text in French. The
aim of the project is to measure if there is improvement in pronunciation following regular intervention in the
classroom. Each team member identified a small sample of students (3 per year 8 French group). The
students then read the unseen text aloud individually in French with no assistance or prompting and this was
recorded. Each teacher has now identified and highlighted every pronunciation error made by the students
and SHD has collated all of the initial recordings and copies of teachers’ annotated notes on each student.
2. Initial findings/ successes/ barriers
The initial trial was very successful and all teachers submitted detailed annotations and recordings to SHD
following the first set of recordings. It was very clear that there were a number of recurring errors common
to all students sampled. For example:
 Third person plural verb endings sounded –ent (e.g. étaient)
 Liaison between words – either missed or included when not necessary
 Cognates (e.g. impatient) and eu /er / oi / qu sounds anglicised
 silent letters like spor’t’ are pronounced
 confusion with accented letters e.g. é not pronounced / ç as hard k
 separation of words where there is an apostrophe e.g. l’équitation
Colleagues also noted that many students had very poor fluency and intonation.
A focused intervention on phonics is now taking place and colleagues regularly include phonics activities in
their teaching with all Y8 students e.g short starter activity focusing on particular sounds, listening exercise
to identify differences between for example ‘ou’ and ‘u’ greater emphasis on reading aloud through dictation
work. Although we have not yet made a second detailed analysis, there is some initial evidence that this
already having an impact on pronunciation. A large phonics wall display has been created in D7. NMD also
circulated an excellent detailed list of phonics strategies to colleagues (see appendix 2 below)
3. Planned next steps
The same students will be tested towards the end of the year in order to measure if there is any improvement
in their French pronunciation. The team will need to discuss the validity of our findings and agree whether
to roll out regular phonics practice for all our students. SHD will collate our findings and consider preparation
of a research paper for submission to Association for Language Learning Journal.
Appendix 1: Phonics Research document circulated by SHD at the start of the project provides a
range of resources available for trial
SHD
DT Collaborative Practice Mid-Year Review 2014
Group work tips agreed for when planning and delivering lessons
When planning
•
Have clear aims
•
Have a clear procedure, plan ahead
•
Plan out what you want to happen
•
Plan for tasks that promote discussion
When setting groups
•
Aim for mixed gender and characters
•
Avoid alphabetical groupings or friendship groups
•
Keep group size to maximum of 3 for spoken tasks and 2 for practical tasks
•
•
Put poor attendees in larger groups
Check any data on class before selecting groups ie PP, Cop, attendance, withdrawal for literacy,
extra support etc
When the work is going on
•
Take a step back – give the groups time to get into the task
•
Ensure they do not talk outside the groups
After the lesson
•
Evaluate the practice, review the success of the task
•
don't be afraid to make changes
MAC
English department collaborative learning – 2013-4
NCH and LPF
Objective: to prepare for the new focus at GCSE and KS3 on grammar and literacy skills in the English
Curriculum by creating a bank of resources, including new or modified schemes of work.
Actions taken/Progress so far:



LPF and NCH trial of ‘Grammar for Writing’ schemes of work by Exeter University and NATE
with Years 7, 8 and 9 to great success.
Resources being collected and saved in ‘grammar and punctuation’ folder on English Staff
shared for all teachers to use whenever appropriate.
LPF experimenting with a ‘Literacy Mat’ to see if they help boost progress.
JEH, JLW, LSL, CVP, RJS
Objective : to improve the management and effectiveness of written feedback to students.
Action taken and progress so far:
 Classroom observations, sharing different strategies for providing feedback, and evaluation.
 Preparation of group feedback documents, to provide a structure to feedback which students
recognise and can use to improve their attainment.
 Statements created to improve the quality of feedback and to provide next step statements.
RJS/JH
Objective: to investigate the ways TAs supports students’ learning
This has changed focus somewhat due to some timetable changes. RJS has conducted a survey of
students’ views about the support they receive, to establish what students value. It is clear that students do
value the individual and immediate support they receive from teachers and TAs.
Next steps: 



Share experience with department and model some lessons to encourage wider usage of new
schemes, both in the teaching of grammar and in providing feedback.
Invite department to watch lessons to help encourage a more consistent approach to teaching
grammar, and providing feedback.
Summer term visits to Primary Schools by all members of the department to be arranged to observe
the teaching of grammar and punctuation to improve transition and teaching of basic skills in Year 7.
Key questions: how do they teach it? What do they teach? Are we building on their skills
appropriately or not challenging Year 7 enough?
Extend the use of student voice in our innovations.
Maths department collaborative learning – Mid Year Review 2013-14
Use of Progression Ladders in Maths
John Mould (JSM), Sabina Mason (SKM) and Gary Wells (GSW)
The initial investigation stage involved assessing how best to access material that had been produced by
the previous Government and archived by the current one, rendering links unusable. Although not all the
links are ‘live’, the most robust solution appears to be the use of an archive disc previously provided by
Dorset LA when the online resource sites were initially being archived. This has been uploaded to Dropbox
to enable use by all members of the department.
It was decided that the material in the progression ladders would be used to plan lessons and the material
was reviewed and suitable topics and classes identified. The first lesson was planned by SKM who
assessed the current progress of a class against the levels in the ladder and planned based on the ‘next’
level. An Ofsted review of the Maths Department was announced in the week SKM was due to teach the
lessons so the observations were postponed.
During the next meeting, the efficiency of using the ladders was discussed and it was felt that, although a
useful tool to analyse specific difficulties being experienced by a class (or individuals within a class), the
routine use of all information provided within the ladders could cause a significant increase in planning
time. They were, however, still considered to be a useful source of information when teaching an
unfamiliar subject or when reviewing approaches to a topic.
It is also of note that the review of the progression ladders shows that they are likely to have a role in the
planning of the phasing of schemes of work in addition to planning groups of lessons. In particular, the
Shape section is laid out in a manner that limits its use in the more detailed planning of lessons within the
current scheme of work as the levels do not easily link with the current phasing but it could be valuable
when this is next reviewed.
All 3 members of the team considered the most valuable aspect of the ladders for planning lessons is likely
to be the suggested question types. These questions are similar in style to those currently asked of
classes but it was felt that having them provided within a progressive, phased structure was likely to be
particularly useful. Use of the questions will allow planning for progression using the ladders as a guide.
It is intended that use of the questions will be trialled this term with 3 observations taking place before
Easter. A follow-up meeting will be held to feedback observations and decide the next steps.
Geography Trio/Collaborative Work – JPL /SIS/ JAC 2013-14
Focus – meeting needs of different groups at KS4 (Yr10)
Actions :
Engagement of KS4 predicted data + fine grades to identify groups within KS4 classes.
JPL shared with JAC and SIS
Identification / discussion of good practice regarding meeting needs of different students. This included
active learning techniques and formative feedback – discussed in dept meeting & individually.
Initial observations of KS4 groups between JPL & JAC (SIS currently planning this): this looked at
identifying groups that exist in the class and brief book trawl to see what feedback had been given at early
stage.
Further developments / next steps:
Focused observations on differentiation / actions and review reported
Findings / good practice to be shared at dept meeting in summer 2014
Barriers:
Time to observe classes
PE Collaborative Learning - Mid
Year Review 2013-14
Item
Discussion
Action
Department project.
Establishing if there is a link
between a student’s
primary school and a
student’s level of sports
participation at school clubs
and in school teams.
IRS shared the discussion he had with
Sarah Vincent and how the PE questions
could be included.
SRV was very interested in the project.
To liaise with Sarah Vincent to incorporate
our project with her survey that she will be
completing as part of her Leadership
Challenge role.
A long discussion was held to discuss
what we would actually like to find out.
Students possibly complete the survey in
a PE lesson.
All agreed that the results should also be
used to look for correlations between
attainments in PE.
DCC to correlate students with their
primary school.
Possible male and female differences.
Results to be analysed in a department
meeting in the summer term.
Types of activities undertaken.
EC/IRS to share with primary schools.
Summer school connection.
Results should be passed on to the
primary schools and be a starting point for
PE provision.
Assessment Wheel.
Following our free trial a discussion
regarding the new assessment wheel was
held.
The implementation of the wheel was
discussed and after Feb half term was the
decided introductory time.
Staff looked at and discussed how the
students would complete the wheel out of
lessons.
Staff discussed the implications for their
lessons and how staff now need to make
the wheel an integral aspect of their
lessons.
Feb 14th – OTJ introduces to PE staff the
wheel – log in details, operating systems
etc.
OTJ introduces the wheel to IRS and
DCC after half term
OTJ and HLM introduce the wheel to all
year 7 in the week after half term.
Year 7 start using the wheel immediately.
History Collaborative Learning – Mid Year Review 2013-14
Trio Members: TFW, RSB, EJP
Focus: Raising attainment of C/D borderline pupils at KS4
Initial findings: Last year while achievement amongst higher ability pupils was OK at GCSE. Pupils at the
C/D borderline did not achieve as well as they ought to have done.
Successes: Visit to Holyrood to gather ideas and strategies, implementation of mindmaps, cue cards, tips
posters, formative assessment, revision classes,
Barriers: Resource creation has been very time consuming
Planned next steps: Lesson observations: teachers to observe each other's classes focussing on
performance of C/D borderline pupils.