1. Moving towards advanced accreditation: Creating a research-engaged Thinking School

2.  High Achievement

3. But there’s more to it than that!
E C T C R H I

4. How we get there! December
December / January
Team leaders set broad priorities for their Department Improvement Plans and submit funding bids.
December
Autumn DSEF, Complete Draft Development Plan
January
Synthesis of plans by SLT- Allocate financial commitments to actions
November
Implement, review & monitor Development Plans
Appraisal Target Set
First SIP visit
February
DSEF’s inform College SEF and enables college financial priorities to be set by SLT & Governors Interim review of change teams
September/October
Update SEF
SLT, HOD’s exam analysis to Governors
Performance Cycle begins
Setting up Change Teams
March
Principal completes College Development Plan and submits budget to Governors Interim review of Targets / KPI’s Whole school planning and consultation Spring DSEF Complete
June / July
Development Plan and all Department / House team Development Plans to Governors
3rd SIP Visit
Summer DSEF complete
April
New Financial Year
2nd SIP Visit
Governor Department Reviews complete
May
Department & House Team Improvement Plans finalised
Spring Term DSEF Review

5. Key Driver 1

6. Key Driver 2

7. Key Driver 3

8. Key Driver 4!

9. Key Driver 5!!

10. Setting
What are the core values and purpose (or the espoused ones!) of those leading the project and are they shared by the people involved?
What are the attitudes within the wider community towards academic success?
What is the overall ethos regarding the possibility of educational success with this initiative?

11. Setting continued…
What are the attitudes of the majority of staff members to innovation?
Which aspects of the system are considered to be in need of change?
What is the nature of the relationship between those aspects and the system as a whole?
Who has decided that change is needed? For what reason?

12. Setting – some more…. What is the exact nature of the proposed change?
How will the successful implementation of this change affect the system as a whole and individuals within it?
What aspects of the system are likely to respond positively/negatively to the proposed change?

13. Putting the ‘I’ and ‘we’ back into the change process – ‘Living Theory’ Research Questions
How can I improve the quality of collaborative group work in my Year 8 geography class?
How can I foster dialogic talk in my Year 9 English class?
How can we embed a range of cognitive tools across the college?

14. Effect Sizes – Reaction/Impact
The work of John Hattie has real potential here
He has worked internationally with the notion that every child deserves a year’s growth for a year’s input
He has calculated that a year’s growth amounts to an effect size of 0.4 (yes we can show people what this looks like)
All international measures end up with this figure – PISA, PIRLS, TIMMS (as does The Sutton Trust)

15. Effect Sizes in Practice – Some Options
Set a test (or performance) at the beginning of the year to baseline – every subject ends up with a numerical score for GCSE. Then re-visit it after a term or a year (0.4 is expected within the year also).
Set a test (or performance) at the beginning of the year or term and then ask the teacher to say what they would expect from the student at the end of the year or term.

16. The Effect Size Calculation for Groups
Average (post-test) – Average (pre-test)
Effect size = ____________________________________
Average spread (standard deviation, or sd)

17. Effect Size – Group Example
Cell number A B C 1
Student
February Test
June Test 2
David 40 35 3
Anne 25 30 4
Eeofa 45 50 5
Barry 6
Corrin 7
Hemi 60 70 8
Juliet 65 75 9
Karmo 80 10
Fred 11
Ginnie 55 85 12 13
Average 48 59 14
Spread (sd) 15 21
Average of spread 18 16
Effect size
0.6

18. Effect Size Calculation for Individuals
Individual post-test score – Individual pre-test score
Effect size = ____________________________________
Average spread (sd) for the whole class
In the whole group example the average spread for the class was 18.
Therefore, the effect size for David in the following table is:
35 – 40
______ = 18

19. Table for effect sizes of individuals
STUDENT
FEBRUARY TEST
JUNE TEST
EFFECT SIZE
David 40 35
- 0.28
Anne 25 30
0.28
Eeofa 45 50
Barry
0.56
Corrin
Hemi 60 70
Juliet 65 75
Karmo 80
Fred
1.39
Ginnie 55 85
1.67

20. Down to the teacher! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rkXE4lBwHD4