Consortiwm De Orllewin a Chanolbarth Cymru South West and Mid Wales Consortium Consortiwm De Orllewin a Chanolbarth Cymru South West and Mid Wales Consortium The Role of Governors in Self Evaluation 2015 Swansea’s Challenge Advisor Team

What is Self Evaluation How do we know? How well are we doing? How far can we reach?

Estyn “Leadership” Excellent/GoodAdequate/Unsatisfactory 69%31%

Estyn in Swansea KQ3 – 3.1 & 3.2

Estyn A majority of schools have effective processes for improving quality. In these schools, leaders use a range of first-hand information to support their analysis of the school’s performance. This includes analysing data, listening to learners and obtaining the views of parents, observing lessons, scrutinising work. They use the results to highlight strengths and to identify areas for development that feed directly into the school’s improvement plan.

Estyn….. The number of areas for improvement is manageable, and targets focus on improving pupils’ outcomes. In the very few schools where improving quality is excellent, leaders and managers, at all levels, monitor and evaluate the progress of plans rigorously and ensure that staff comply with agreed actions. There is a concentrated focus on closing the gap in achievement between pupils living in deprivation and their peers.

Why is Leadership Important? LeadershipProvisionStandards

School Development Planning Cycle Vision Context Purpose Agreed Shared Motivational Achievable

What is an SER? “An SER is a summary of findings from self evaluation, which can be presented to audiences who need a clear overview.” “Self Evaluation is an on going process of deep and accurate analysis of school performance.” Chris Quigley 2013

Self Evaluation Where do we get our evidence?

Self Evaluation Processes….. Not a one-off event – Do not confuse the SER document with Self-evaluation Data-analysis – pupil, subject, group, key stage, whole school, attendance, tests (trends, comparisons & targets) Observing lessons by appropriate peers & managers Evaluating the quality of pupils’ written & practical work Evaluating the quality of the curriculum planning & assessment, recording & reporting.

……..Cont Moderating teacher assessment The views of pupils, staff, parents/carers or other stakeholders Reviews by managers & external organisations Auditing practice against policies & procedures (Safeguarding / Health & safety) Reviewing progress against development plans

Judgements should be…. Secure – based on sufficiently robust, reliable & accessible evidence First hand – based on direct observation; Reliable – based on common, well understood criteria; Valid – accurately reflecting what is achieved and provided; Free of bias – looking at all aspects objectively; and Corporate – reflecting the collective view of staff & other stakeholders

“The SER” – Minimum Expectations Be evaluative & concise Identify areas of improvement as well as good features Indicate excellent & sector-leading practice, where appropriate; Use evaluative words and quantities to support/reflect judgments on each quality indicator in the CIF Ensure that the judgments derive from evidence & include links or reference to it Refer to statistical data about outcomes over recent years or recent monitoring & reviews of provision; (DO NOT NEED TO PLACE GRAPHS AND CHARTS IN SER) Link clearly SIP/SDP

The SDP/SIP Strategic plan for improvement Setting out actions to improve learner outcomes Informed by regular self-evaluation processes within the school Clear long and short term targets Clear links with national priorities Regularly monitored

Roles and responsibilities Regulations place a duty upon the governing body to prepare, monitor, review and revise the SDP The governing body will be responsible for agreeing and “signing off” the SDP In practice the HT will work with staff and govs to implement actions and bring about improvement.

Effective School Development Planning Key Characteristics Impacts upon learner outcomes Involves all stakeholders Informed by contextual data Focusses on both short and long term priorities Actions focussed on improving outcomes for all learners (The outcomes of which needs monitoring!) Reflected in the status of the “live” SDP document Provide a context for Performance Management for all staff (Golden Thread!)

Golden thread of SDP SIP TargetTo improve standards of writing particularly among boys in KS2 Headteacher PM Target To identify & set targets for a group of border line level 3 – 4 (at end of key stage 2) pupils & monitor progress in order for them to reach the expected level. SMT PM Target To effectively monitor progress across the school to ensure the end of KS2 target group meet their expected levels in writing, and each co- hort meets expected target. Teacher PM Target To improve standards of writing among all pupils and particularly target group of boys. TA Staff Review Target To encourage & support pupils in intervention to improve writing. Work closely with teacher to understand pupils’ next steps in writing. Pupil Target To write using extended sentences with clarity & structure. (Commensurate to age and ability). “I will write longer sentences, making them clear & organised.” Monitoring Focus Standards of writing – Book scrutiny. Planning of writing opportunities. Lesson obs. with a writing focus. Listening to learners. Monitoring of pupil progress, particularly in boys. Governor visits/meetings to focus on writing and outcomes.

The Cycle 1. Self Evaluation 2. Strategic Planning 3.Actions 4.Reviewing impact

So what should Governors ask?

Standards Are we doing as well as we should? Are we doing well in comparison to others? Are we doing as well as 3 years ago? How do groups of learners perform? Can we justify our performance? What are the factors that affect our performance? Do we know where we want to get to?

Provision What is the quality of teaching like? How are we improving teachers that need support? Do we have appropriate performance management systems in place? Are we keeping children on track? What do we do to support vulnerable learners?

Leadership Do we weigh up strengths and weaknesses together? Are we honest and accurate about what needs to improve? Do we contribute to the School Development Plan? Can we articulate our priorities? Do we receive appropriate performance data on pupils and staff?

Leadership Do we provide good value for money in relation to the standards achieved? Do we prioritise our spending according to clear outcomes? Do we target our resources in the right direction? Do we check that resources are used efficiently and effectively?

Clues to an effective self evaluating governing body… Is the School Development Plan on the agenda? Do we discuss how well pupils are doing? Do we consider the negatives and positives? Do we get a chance to see actual evidence? Do we know about the support and challenge the school receives from the LA/ ERW? Do we know how well the school is addressing recommendations?

….Further Clues Can we demonstrate how we hold the school to account for standards achieved? Do we know how well we did with last year’s improvement plan? Is there an annual update of the self- evaluation report? Do we start each academic year with a clear map?

Further Clues Do we spend more time on budget than standards? Are we encouraged to ask questions?ask questions Are we critical friends or friendly critics?

GB Self-analysis Have we got examples of challenging questions that are noted in minutes? Do we have a data governor? Do we have an SEN governor? Do we have a safeguarding governor? Can we improve as a governing body?

What Estyn judges as “good” Governors are proactive, well informed and very supportive. They hold the school to account well and help to determine its strategic direction. Many visit the school regularly and monitor its progress carefully. The school’s self-evaluation processes are robust and involve staff, governors, parents and pupils. The school makes very effective use of first-hand evidence, including monitoring of pupils’ books and formal lesson observations as part of the self-evaluation process. This has contributed towards a clear and evaluative report that is shared effectively with stakeholders.

What Estyn judges as “adequate” Governors are beginning to monitor and evaluate standards and quality in the school through the introduction of learning walks and visits to the school. However, these visits and the link between governors and curriculum co-ordinators are not firmly enough established the self-evaluation report and reports to governors are not sufficiently self-critical and as a result do not always provide an accurate assessment of the school’s strengths and areas for improvement; the governors do not receive sufficient information at present that derives from the school’s self-evaluation systems to allow them to play a more active part in producing the school development plan and set the school’s strategic direction.

Are we, the governors, making a difference? Accountability Performance Ownership Leadership Outcomes

Questions?