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 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 – P – 10.30am10.45am – 12.15pm1.15 – 2.15pm2.30 – 3.00pm3.00 – 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 “de- skilled” 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