|
Good quality provision for G&T pupils covers a wider range of issues than some schools realise. A fundamental change of approach to the ways in which teachers teach may be required. Some departments encourage discussion about pedagogy whilst others only seem to discuss administration. The range of study support activities (though not necessarily the quality) and identification procedures are the two main areas of relative strength in schools. But where provision for G&T pupils is most effective, teachers are adapting their teaching styles to suit the preferred learning styles of their pupils. This requires a great deal of reflectivity on the part of schools and departments and a willingness to talk about pedagogy. In schools where this is an established part of their self-evaluation procedures, good quality provision for the gifted and talented cohort is developing rapidly.
A) Characteristics of good practice
- The strand co-ordinator has expertise, status, time, administrative support and experience of working across schools at the management level.
- The partnership produces a clear development plan with carefully thought out success criteria and this is clearly communicated to all the schools.
- The partnership carefully considers the funding which will be delegated to the partnerships and the schools and the proportion which will be retained for central training.
- Training programmes are carefully planned by the strand co-ordinator so that school co-ordinators have the training they need before being asked to produce their school materials and training programmes.
- The monitoring and evaluation of both spending and provision is carefully planned by the strand co-ordinator and forms part of the LEA’s quality control procedures.
- The clusters are set up strategically to enhance the dissemination of good practice and to support schools at their various stages of development.
- Careful consideration is given to the choice of lead co-ordinator. They have the imagination, enthusiasm, time and status to enable them to be effective and they are strongly supported by the strand co-ordinator and by all the headteachers in the cluster.
- The lead co-ordinator sets up subject specific training for representatives from departments within the cluster, perhaps arranging for a subject specialist to work with the teachers on an ongoing action research project.
- Within schools the co-ordinators are chosen with care. The role is advertised, has responsibility points attached to it as well as a substantial amount of safeguarded time and administrative support. It is seen as a high status responsibility.
- The headteacher gives very public support to the school co-ordinator. He/she works with the school co-ordinator to ensure that heads of department produce action plans on developing their teaching and learning programmes, that they set targets within their provision for the G&T cohort and that progress towards achieving those targets is monitored through the school’s self-evaluation procedures. He/she gives the co-ordinator control of the G&T budget.
- Through training, all the teachers in the school become adept at identifying their G&T pupils by using a range of wide range of indicators. The makeup of the cohort is constantly assessed and evaluated and strategies exist to move pupils out of the cohort as well as in (perhaps into another “special” programme so as not to demotivate).
- Provision for the G&T pupils within the school shows a wide range of approaches including acceleration and/or enrichment and is based upon a detailed examination of individual needs, abilities, aptitudes and interests. Provision is not just something extra given to the cohort after school but also evident in changes to teaching strategies and learning experiences for these pupils in every lesson.
- The pastoral needs of the G&T cohort are given high priority and there is a programme of working with pupils to negotiate attainment targets as well as wider objectives. The school very openly involves parents in both identification and provision.
- The co-ordinator invites departments to bid for funding to develop their G&T provision against very specific success criteria.
- Teachers are accustomed to discussing pedagogy and time is set aside at meetings to discuss and to share successful practice.
B) Strengths of current provision
- In general there is a great deal of enthusiasm at every level for the G&T strand. Expertise is following some way behind but is developing.
- Schools have become much more expert at identifying G&T pupils over the course of the initiative.
- Summer school activities have been extremely successful overall. Taster courses at universities have often dramatically changed the attitudes of both pupils and teachers.
- The range of study support activities taking place in schools and out of school is extensive.
- Whilst some clusters of schools have had problems, the majority of strand, cluster and school co-ordinators are very positive about the advantages of clustering. Some of the northern strand co-ordinators have also clustered very effectively.
C) Weaknesses in current provision
- Insufficient time has been allocated to the majority of strand, cluster and school co-ordinators to enable them to fulfil their role effectively.
- The role of the strand co-ordinator has not been given sufficient consideration by many partnerships and the status given to the role, the levels of experience and expertise and the time allocation vary enormously from partnership to partnership.
- There has been a lack of continuity in the role of strand co-ordinator. Many partnerships were slow to appoint and many have had several different co-ordinators in post already.
- In some partnerships, the setting up of clusters has been slow and has lacked a coherent strategy.
- Difficulties over teacher staffing have hampered the development of the strand at every level.
- Some school co-ordinators have met resistance from some departments. Often this has centred on the term “gifted” which some teachers are uncomfortable with.
- A number of schools admit that their cohort is unrepresentative of their school as a whole. The biggest imbalance is in terms of social class. A small number of schools miss the point over under-representation and suggest that gender, racial or social groupings are irrelevant – they simply look at ability. This reveals a failure to understand underachievement.
- Many schools involve parents less than they might in both identification and provision.
- Very few schools have strategies for moving pupils out of the cohort as new pupils are included. Whilst the reluctance to do this is understandable it does mean that the funding for the strand is diluted as the size of the cohort grows and cohorts should not, therefore, exceed 10% of the population in any year group. The practice of running larger cohorts obviously puts pressure on a finite amount of funding, for example on funding adequate amounts of non-contact time for the co-ordinator.
- Pastoral support for G&T pupils is under-developed in many schools.
- The development of high quality teaching and learning for G&T pupils is slow in many schools.
- Training at the department level is under-developed.
- Links between the G&T strand and other strands within EiC are under-developed.
- Monitoring of the strand against properly thought out success criteria is under-developed at every level.
D) Recommendations
- More time needs to be given to the majority of strand, cluster and school co-ordinators to allow them to fulfil their roles effectively. At the cluster and school level this time needs to be safeguarded.
- Partnerships need to have clear views about the role of strand co-ordinator. Ideally the co-ordinator should have expertise in the field, experience of working across schools at the senior management level and adviser status. More thought needs to be given to appointing the co-ordinator early and maintaining the continuity of the role. The time commitment given to the role should be based on the number of schools in the programme.
- Monitoring of the initiative should be built into the school improvement visits by the advisory service.
- Strand co-ordinators should consider ways to improve communication with their clusters and schools so that there is a better awareness of partnership targets in the schools.
- Strand co-ordinators need to be more strategic about funding arrangements, basing decisions on identified need rather than simply devolving all the money to schools. Whilst this may be unpopular with the schools there is substantial evidence that where, for example, strand co-ordinators have focused funding on training and curriculum development it has been of high quality.
- Strand co-ordinators should identify “beacon departments” or “beacon elements” within their schools as centres from which to disseminate effective practice. Whilst few schools are good at everything, the majority of schools have something which they are doing well and which they could demonstrate to others.
- Clusters of schools provide an effective model for development but some partnerships need more persuasion towards this view. Partnerships also need to be more strategic in setting them up and lead co-ordinators need greater support from all the senior management teams in the cluster.
- The role of lead co-ordinator needs enhancing. It needs a substantial time commitment allocated to it and this time must be safeguarded. A minimum of 0.4 of a week is our suggestion. It is entirely unreasonable to expect lead co-ordinators to operate effectively on their current time allocations.
- Headteachers need to be fully committed to the development of the strand if it is to flourish.
- The status of the school co-ordinator and therefore his/her impact needs enhancing by:-
- Attaching responsibility points to his/her post
- Advertising and interviewing for the post
- Awarding and safeguarding a realistic amount of time to the role
- Providing administrative support
- very evident ongoing support is given and is seen to be given by the SMT
- The school co-ordinator should have control of the budget and departments should be invited to bid for financial support within very clear parameters.
- Schools should consider involving parents more in both identification and provision. Though some schools are reluctant, better communication with parents, which includes talking to them about how they can help, can actually alleviate the pressure from parents which some schools seem to fear.
- Schools need to develop strategies for moving pupils out of their G&T cohort as other children move in.
- Pastoral support for G&T pupils needs greater consideration in most schools, for example by using learning mentors.
- More thought needs to be given as to how study support activities can be built upon to enhance everyday teaching and learning activities.
- Subject teachers need more specific training on what good quality provision for G&T pupils looks like in their department to enhance the quality of teaching and learning programmes.
- Teachers need to be more aware of the need to tailor provision to the preferred learning styles of groups and of individuals. Extending pupils by accelerating their learning or by enriching the standard curriculum are equally valid approaches which teachers should consider after assessing the child’s needs.
- Clusters and schools should consider the action research model of professional development where departments work together with a subject specialist on developing programmes or activities and then each try these out in the classroom before meeting and discussing further.
- Schools should consider how the G&T strand might benefit from links with other strands, for example using learning mentors with under-achieving members of the G&T cohort.
- Strand, cluster and school co-ordinators need to develop monitoring and evaluation strategies set against properly thought out success criteria
- More thought should be given to how school co-ordinators can work together with departments on setting and achieving targets. More progress may well be seen if the senior management team within schools asks heads of department to take greater responsibility for setting targets and delivering them. Provision could be monitored as part of the departments’ self-evaluation procedures.
- Target setting is a valuable tool in raising standards and the quality of provision but more thought needs to be given to the range of targets and to the success criteria. Consideration should be given to the following points:-
- good exam grades may be only a milestone on the way to a broader and deeper educational experience rather that an end in themselves
- pursuit of examination grades alone may narrow the educational experience rather than broadening it
- early examination entry may be inappropriate for some children
- the number of out of school visits completed by a school is not a valuable criterion of success
- changes in attitude or motivation are difficult to quantify
- the ultimate success criteria should focus on producing creative thinkers rather than training pupils to pass exams
The most effective schools are those who have realised that provision for G&T pupils is not something extra that you do, but something that has fundamental implications for the way teachers teach. They have adopted the adage “if children don’t learn the way we teach, perhaps we should teach the way they learn”. There is evidence that where schools, departments and individual teachers are prepared to question what they do and why, they are making a significant impact on the quality of the pupils’ learning experiences.
|
|
