Transforming provision for new arrivals

Case Study 15 Background

School: A large comprehensive school in Greater London

This large urban mixed comprehensive school has over 1000 students on roll and faces many challenges: it serves one of the poorest council wards in Greater London; unemployment is high; its free school meal percentage is the highest in the local authority (LA); there is considerable student mobility, including a high proportion of refugees and asylum seekers; and well over half of the students are learning English as an additional language (EAL). A recent Ofsted inspection in 2006 reported, 'This school community works harmoniously and demonstrates the advantages of students from different heritages learning together'. As the recently appointed headteacher points out in the school handbook, there is a lot on the positive side of the equation. Many families have taken risks by leaving behind everything and coming to Britain to make a better life for themselves and their children. The majority of British-born parents come from cultures that have traditionally placed tremendous importance on education. The school is well placed, he argues, to take advantage of this parental support for education.

Prior to the arrival of the new headteacher, an Ofsted report had commented unfavourably on the EAL provision in the school. There was lack of support for new arrivals at early stages of learning English as well as for those who had been in the country longer but were still struggling with literacy, especially academic writing. The former head of department for ethnic minority achievement (EMA) and EAL had left and not been replaced, and the headteacher (by his own admission not experienced in this area) was not sure how best to develop this aspect of the school's provision. In the interim, two part-time teachers of special educational needs (SEN) had been asked to provide language support to new arrivals through induction classes and a Key Stage 4 EAL option. While keen to do their best for the students, the SEN teachers were aware that they lacked the necessary expertise for this work.

An audit of EAL provision by a London Challenge* specialist adviser at the end of 2005 found that support for students with EAL was poor. Various factors contributing to this were identified.

• The structure of EAL support: the SEN and EMA departments had been merged, resulting in a fundamental confusion about the differing needs of students with EAL and SEN – an example of this was the inclusion of all EAL students on the SEN register
• Staffing: the number and qualifications of those teaching EAL were inadequate
• Teaching and learning: the teaching in the Key Stage 3 induction groups was SEN influenced and in the Key Stage 4 option group consisted of decontextualised grammar exercises. The majority of the EAL students had received age-appropriate schooling in their country of origin and literacy skills in their home languages were good. The teaching therefore lacked appropriate intellectual challenge and did nothing to help students access the mainstream curriculum to which they were entitled. In addition late-arriving students were routinely placed in bottom sets.

In brief, students with EAL – especially new arrivals – were getting a raw deal, with little chance of fulfilling their academic potential. In addition, the school was missing out on the chance to capitalise on the considerable intellectual ability of many of these bilingual youngsters.

* This school was at that time part of the London Challenge Keys to Success (K2S) programme.

Go to top