Hayes Park Primary School London Borough of Hillingdon NCETM small grants research project London region

1
Hayes Park Primary SchoolLondon Borough of
Hillingdon NCETM small grantsresearch
projectLondon region

• Research proposition
• Can coaching contribute to the effective
  embedding on CPD in teachers classroom practice?
• Time scale
• Three terms Spring, Summer, Autumn 2007
• Focus
• Mathematics CPD introducing the PNS Renewed
  Framework with a focus on assessment for learning

2
Using this PowerPoint

• The first part of this PowerPoint presentation
  will take you through a summary of the project
  and show the research findings and conclusion.
  All the slides in the summary are denoted by a
  in the bottom left corner
• To explore specific areas of the project in more
  detail, please see the sections in the Appendix

3
Context

• Hayes Park is a highly successful school classed
  as outstanding in all aspects by the OFSTED
  Report carried out on 20th June 2007
  (www.ofsted.gov.uk)
• Coaching has been established in the school over
  the last five years and is part of their standard
  practice
• Dr Neil Suggett, the head teacher, is the project
  sponsor
• Deborah Barlow, the deputy head, leads on
  assessment and curriculum
• The maths subject leader, Susie Singh, was on
  maternity leave when the project began, came back
  for the middle part and then left the school to
  take up a new post in September 2007

4
Context

• Alison Jones ( Y5 and AST) took the role whilst
  Susie was on maternity leave and now shares it
  with Caroline Marshall (Y6 and AST), who has
  taken on the main maths responsibility.
• Jennie Pennant, the Professional Development
  Manager at BEAM, has acted as an external
  consultant for the project and carried out a
  number of the activities devising the
  questionnaire, classroom sweeps, delivering some
  of the INSET, undertaking some interviews,
  analysing data and co-writing the report.
• Initials will now be used to refer to people
  involved in activities.

5
Methodology

• teachers and TAs to be divided into two groups
  by year group
• half (Years 1, 3 and 5) to receive coaching
• three sessions as a year group of teachers and
  TAs
• three additional sessions individually for
  teachers and as a year group for TAs
• the other half (Years 2, 4 and 6) will receive no
  coaching

6
Coaching

• Features
• sessions run by the coaches from the school
• the sessions were 45 minutes long
• the GROW model for coaching was used
• the participants were familiar with the coaching
  approach, as it is regularly used in the school

7
Summary ofTimeline
Questionnaire
Classroom sweep
Spring 2007
INSET half day
Coaching sessions
Review and discussion
Coaching sessions
INSET - twilight
Interviews
Summer 2007
Review and discussion
INSET - twilight
Coaching sessions
Classroom sweep
Questionnaire
Autumn 2007
Interviews
Review research and compile report
8
INSETs - one whole day and four twilight sessions
over the year

• These focussed on introducing aspects of the
  Renewed Framework, looking at strategies for
  prior learning and other aspects of the
  assessment for learning agenda.
• They were run by Jennie from BEAM and Alison and
  Susie, the MSLs from Hayes Park Primary School.

9
Data collection

• questionnaires, with an assessment for learning
  focus prior to the research project and then
  again in the final term
• teacher and TA interviews
• classroom sweeps before and after with a focus on
  the questionnaire
• teacher and TA feedback from various training and
  feedback sessions
• year group leader interviews

10
Questionnaire

• The questionnaire was devised for this project
  and the classroom sweeps were also based on the
  questionnaire.
• Teachers filled it in at the beginning and end of
  the project. BEAM analysed it and compared the
  findings to the classroom sweep findings and
  other evidence.

11
Findings

• Classroom sweeps suggested that many initiatives
  were whole school and longer and more focussed
  observations would be needed to detect
  differences in progress between the cohorts.
• Interviews pointed to the fact that coaching
  offered the following advantages
• dedicated time
• opportunity for reflection
• a whole year group focus
• a coach to move you forward and keep you on
  task
• an agreed strategy to go away and trial and
  report back on

12
Findings

• Questionnaires indicated the following
• both the participant groups and the non-
  participant group reported progress over the time
  of the project
• the participant group reported more progress,
  in the majority of areas
• the non-participant group had less room for
  making progress as their initial scores were
  higher than the participant group

13
Conclusion

• The findings suggest that the coaching may have
  contributed to the embedding of the CPD.
• There were, however, a range of other factors in
  play as well including
• whole school initiatives
• the content of the coaching was not insulated
  from the other teachers
• the sharing ethos of the school
• Further investigation is needed into the
  interplay of the coaching with these other
  factors.

14
Appendix
Coaching

• Click a button to go to the relevant section
• You can return to this page by clicking
• in the bottom left corner

Questionnaires
Return to appendix
Classroom sweeps
Interviews
15
Coaching
Coaching is unlocking a persons potential to
maximise their own performance. It is helping
them learn rather than teaching them
John Whitmore  
Page 1 of 4
Return to appendix
16

• How does Whitmores coaching approach work?
• the process is non directive
• the coachee drives the agenda
• the coaching session is goal-centred and leads
  to action
• coaching focuses on the present/future
• coaching helps people take responsibility for
  action and is an investment in their growth
•  
• What is the basic structure to the coaching
  session?
• G oal (for this session and the whole project)
• R eality (the coachees view of the current
  reality)
• O ptions (the possible courses of action)
• W ill (the level of commitment to action)

Coaching
Page 2 of 4
Return to appendix
17
Coaching

• Example of Goal
• developing manageable/effective review sessions
• Example of Will from two different groups
• numeracy table, games, sandpit for when task is
  finished
• reviewing the way we assess

Coaching
Page 3 of 4
Return to appendix
18
Coaching references

• Whitmore J (2002) Coaching for Performance,
  Nicholas Brealey Publishing
• Smith A Thomas W (2004) Coaching Solutions
  Practical Ways to Improve Performance in
  Education Network Educational Press
• Powell G, Chambers M Baxter G (2001) Pathways
  to Coaching, TLO
• Creasy J Patterson P (2005) Leading Coaching in
  Schools, NCSL Research Publications

Coaching
Page 4 of 4
Return to appendix
19
Questionnaire sections A and B
Questionnaires
Page 1 of 9
Return to appendix
20
Questionnaire sections C, D and E
Questionnaires
Page 2 of 9
Return to appendix
21
Questionnaire
January vs September 2007 Average Scores for all
Aspects (Participants)
Questionnaires
Page 3 of 9
Return to appendix
22
Questionnaire
January vs September 2007 Average Scores for all
Aspects (Non-participants)
Questionnaires
Page 4 of 9
Return to appendix
23
Questionnaire
January vs September 2007 Comparison of Increase
in Average Scores for all Aspects (Participants
and Non-participants)
Questionnaires
Page 5 of 9
Return to appendix
24
Questionnaire

• Findings
• both the participant group and the non-
  participant group reported progress over the time
  of the project
• the participant group reported more progress, in
  the majority of areas except for B2 - learning
  styles and B3 - modelling maths talk, where the
  gains reported by the non-participant group were
  slightly higher than those of the participant
  group
• the non-participant group had less room for
  reporting progress as their initial scores were
  higher than the participant group

Questionnaires
Page 6 of 9
Return to appendix
25
Questionnaire

• Greatest progress was recorded in the following
  areas by both participants and non-participants
• A2 the nature of verbal feedback
• B5 children assess and articulate what they can
  and cannot do
• C2 assessing prior learning

Questionnaires
Page 7 of 9
These reflected areas that had been whole school
foci during the project and also some aspects of
these had been taken as a coaching goal by the
participant group
Return to appendix
26
Questionnaire

• In two areas the participant group reported more
  progress than the non-participant group
• A3 marking of written work
• C3 planning adjusted daily
• In three areas neither group reported much
  progress
• B1 sharing the learning focus - see WALT in
  classroom sweep section
• D1 creating a safe classroom for taking risks
• E4 children have strategies to assess their
  progress
• These were areas that were already well
  established in the classroom.

Questionnaires
Page 8 of 9
Return to appendix
27
Questionnaire

• Both groups reported little progress with
• D2 measure successful learning by not only
  getting the right answer
• D3 fostering qualities such as perseverance.
• These were areas that had not been specifically
  addressed during the duration of the project.

Questionnaires
Page 9 of 9
Return to appendix
28
Classroom sweeps
These were carried out by Jennie from BEAM in the
Spring and the Autumn across both the coached and
un-coached groups. Jennie used the questionnaire
foci on assessment for the observations and spent
approximately 15 minutes in each classroom.
Classroom sweeps
Page 1 of 7
Return to appendix
29
Classroom sweep Autumn 2007

• JP observed in the Y1 classroom that children
  were encouraged to use these fans to show the
  teacher how they felt about their learning. These
  had been introduced over the period of the
  project.
• Links to B5 on questionnaire childre
  n can assess and articulate what they
  can and cannot do

Classroom sweeps
Page 2 of 7
Return to appendix
30
Classroom sweep Autumn 2007
WALT (What we Are Learning Today) was present in
every classroom in the Spring sweep. In all
classrooms the children were now reading it out,
discussing language in it and ensuring they all
understood it. This was the result of a cross
school focus on the language of maths.
Classroom sweeps
Page 3 of 7
Return to appendix
31
Classroom sweepAutumn 2007
Draw the bar chart using the information in the
table
Year 5 coached cohort
Spot the mistakes in these bar charts
These are two examples of laminated cards that
children were annotating, to show their
understanding of data handling. This was part of
the strategy the teacher used to assess their
prior learning.
Classroom sweeps
Page 4 of 7
Return to appendix
32
Classroom sweep Autumn 2007

• Links to C4 on questionnaire My lesson plan is
  adjusted during the lesson according to the
  childrens responses

• An excellent example of this was seen in a Year 6
  lesson.

Well it could be buy one get one free
Two cartons of milk and a chocolate bar cost
1.30. If the choc bar cost 40p how much did each
carton of milk cost?
Classroom sweeps
Page 5 of 7
So would that be better value?
The teacher responded to the childs suggestion
with an open ended problem solving question for
the class to investigate
Return to appendix
33
Classroom sweep Autumn 2007
Classroom sweeps
This childrens self-assessment strategy was
observed in both a coached and an un-coached year
group. Children placed their name in one of the
three columns that they felt best described their
progress with the learning objective. Links to E4
on questionnairechildren have strategies to
help them assess their progress
Page 6 of 7
Return to appendix
34
Classroom sweep Autumn 2007
The brevity of the visits meant it was difficult
to assess differences in practice between the
coached and un-coached cohorts. For example, all
classes were using the Renewed Framework and
working on prior learning and assessment.
However, DB thought that the coaching had
contributed to the way that coached teachers had
embedded the changes.
Classroom sweeps
Page 7 of 7
Return to appendix
35
Interview - Autumn 2007
Debs Barlow, Deputy Head and responsible for the
curriculum

• raised the profile of assessment for learning in
  maths across the school
• lot of progress on assessing prior learning now
  need to focus on how to use that information in
  lessons
• A4L rippling out from maths to pervade whole
  curriculum
• teachers indicated several advantages of
  coaching dedicated time, specific focus,
  commitment to action and feedback on progress.

Interviews
Page 1 of 3
Return to appendix
36
Interview - July 2007
Susie Singh, Maths Subject Leader

• Susie taught in Year 1 a coached year group
• she felt that the coaching had created a
  pro-active atmosphere
• if people disagree they can express it in a
  non-judgemental way
• coaching has provided opportunities to iron out
  problems
• coaching made us very clear
• coaching has deepened thinking
• she wondered if the coaching might have had more
  of impact in a less confident school

Interviews
Page 2 of 3
Return to appendix
Susie left the school in July 2007 due to a
geographical move
37
Interview - April 2007
Alison Jones, Shadow Maths Subject Leader

• April 2007
• Alison worked in the Year 5 team a coached year
  group. She felt that the benefits of coaching
  were
• dedicated time to discuss issues
• opportunity for reflection on practice
• having the coach to keep everyone focussed.
• A challenge was knowing what goal to choose.
• Alison felt that PPA time would not have provided
  the same benefits as it tends to get used on
  pressing tasks.

Interviews
Page 3 of 3
Autumn 2007 Alison reiterated much of the above
and felt that another benefit of the coaching was
the opportunity to look at range of options if
the year group was stuck.
Return to appendix