New Junior Cycle Literacy & Numeracy Strategy School Self Evaluation

Staff Meeting Teacher Pair Work Brainstorm (whole staff) Priorities for action Literacy especially written work

Core Team Sharing resources – Google drive Literacy Methodology resource pack Teacher & Student journal resources

Whole School Communication Core Group All Teachers All Students

Core Group 8 Members Many Departments Represented Varied lengths of service

Maths & Science English Languages (Irish, French, Spanish & German) History/ Geography Practical Subjects (Art, Music & Home Economics) Business Subjects P.E./ C.S.P.E./ Careers & Religion Learning Support

Facilitating Resource Sharing Google Drive - Five Facilitators 3 were members of core team +2 other volunteers Staff trained by subject department Max: 6 teachers per session Focus: various elements of Google Drive: set up address for all Upload & Share resources Hyperlink Plans Teachers freed up for training (SnS used) Initial Training: 2 class periods Total duration: 2 weeks

Teacher Resource Pack All encouraged to experiment and share experiences Resource pack given to all staff (see Appendix 7) Identified pros, cons & recommendations for use Core Team experimented with various methodologies ( we selected a variety to cover all elements of literacy)

Teacher & Student Journal To help continuity of focus – reminders. LONG, evolving process - part of the SIP. Based on our focus – improvements in reading, written work and working together. Core team discussed with colleagues & each other to determine contents of journals – 4 page limit.

Literacy Numeracy Assessment for Learning

OutcomesLearningTeaching Surveys written – inspired by: 1.Staff attitudes expressed at staff meeting on areas of focus to be discussed 2.SSE guidelines – followed evaluation criteria and quality statements Primary School STens & reports (learning support dept & career guidance counsellor) Subject depts. analysed state exam results – pdst online tool As written work was to be our focus, the core team gathered samples of student written work from across the curriculum and error analysis conducted All first year students brought to computer room class by class – all covered in three class periods (did this twice due to errors in completion!!) Surveys administered online using Google forms allowing instant analysis. Teachers were asked to complete by a deadline – survey sent to their gmail address.

Outcomes LearningTeaching Primary School STens scores for reading for the cohort are slightly above the national norms. The majority of subjects compare favourably to national norms, Writing error analysis conducted under the following headings: spelling, punctuation and grammar, use of subject specific vocabulary, sequencing and development of answers 79% of students read for more than 1 hr pw for enjoyment. 41% of students believe their writing is legible and 18% of students edit their work. 29% of students like making their own notes. For 27% it is their favourite way to learn. 89% of students feel most comfortable sharing their ideas in pairs/small groups. 57% of students stated they got a chance to learn this way. Focus of teaching is on knowledge and skills 86% of teachers stated they provided opportunities for pair or group work 82% of teachers use comprehension strategies in their teaching 36% of teachers use editing checklists or issue their own set of criteria for writing

 Ensure questions are easy to analyse – quantitative rather than qualitative.  Google forms provides instant results.  Not all information is useful.  Focus on what is important to you as a school.  Remember YOUR school context.

Strengths Above national norms in STens & exam results in most departments 79% of students read for more than 1 hr pw for enjoyment. 82% of teachers use comprehension strategies in their teaching Weaknesses Writing error analysis : not satisfactory: -spelling 37%, -punctuation & grammar 52%, -vocabulary 44%, -sequencing 56%, -development 63%. 86% of teachers provided opportunities for pair/group work, 52% of students said it was their favorite way to learn and 57% said they got chance to learn this way. 36% of teachers use editing checklists

SSER is a summary of - the school - the findings from step 1, Data Gathering step 2, Analysing. Follow the layout on pg 63 of the SSE guidelines for post primary schools

Targets – how to decide? S pecific M easureable A chievable R ealistic T imebound SSE Guidelines pg 68

This is only a snapshot. See: www.

Teachers Methodologies – tweak to suit (eg traffic lights, 2 stars & a wish) Sharing ideas Resource sharing Students Active & collaborative learning Directed Focus (Writing Editing Checklist) Responsibility (for their learning) Class Dept

Overall Effects/Changes Teaching & Learning Culture more collaborative Open to new initiatives eg Health Promoting School Improved Motivation Responsibility Restored Visual impact on school & classroom – aesthetically more pleasing Improved discipline Targets reached? wont know until May!

Monitoring Built into SIP – review dates Same surveys at end of year – hope for improvement!! Review from teacher observation at staff meeting at end of year

Good Core Team dynamic, experiment, prepared to share, to fail, to try again Communication Useful tools eg google drive/ moodle Regular subject meetings Use Croke Park Hours – one hour every 6 weeks approx Easy to administer surveys Minimise paperwork – google drive – instant analysis Quantitative info rather than qualitative Don’t overstretch Small steps, tickable tasks Ensure progress can be seen Not everything goes according to plan be prepared to redo, change, start again Give people time to adjust and adapt Some quicker than others, some not at all!! Plan at least 2 terms in advance (begin Jan for implementation in Sept)

Numeracy In the process of preparing this at the moment Numeracy link person