Evaluation of the Key Stage 2 Language Learning Pathfinders

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Of course, the phrase ‘make no difference’ implies maintaining the status quo. This schoolhad yet to ‘spread’ languages throughout KS2 and the headteacher, while correctly beingdefined by one of her colleagues as ‘supportive’, was not yet able to guarantee that the fullentitlement would be in place by the due date.The positive influence of supportive school management is crucial in sustaining anycurriculum development. In another school, one headteacher who was about to leave herpost raised questions over the future of languages. She expressed her doubts in this way:‘If I were to remain Head, I would ensure this continued, working with the SLC to employFLAs to provide expertise with the LSA, continue to use ICT resources and the resourcesthe AST has developed.’ (headteacher)It was recognised that a new headteacher might have different priorities.Sustainability in education has dimensions beyond the purely financial. Questions needed tobe considered on the issues of staffing, actually finding appropriate people to do the workand keeping them in post. Initial training and further professional development of thosedirectly involved in teaching were also addressed.The learning experience of the pupils themselves was not overlooked since, with thereduction in status of languages in KS4 – from statutory requirement to entitlement – therewas an expressed hope, already mentioned in the Green paper that introduced the change,that pupils would be so enthused by their primary language learning that they would bemotivated to continue with languages beyond the option stage in Year 9.The issues of transition and transfer have been analysed in detail earlier in this report but, indiscussing how schools were planning to keep their languages developing, sustaining theachievements of the Pathfinder and building upon them, primary teachers and local authoritystaff stressed the need to make more - and more effective - links with secondary schools.As well as the usual reasons cited: recognition of pupils’ achievements, sense ofprogression, continuity of learning, there was the broader and more fundamental issue ofdeveloping the national policy. If after all the efforts made before, during and after thePathfinder programme, secondary schools continued to take little or no account of languageprovision among their feeder schools (and it was suggested by several primary teachersduring interviews that this was, indeed, the situation in their area), there was bound to beincreasing scepticism in those primary schools where languages had yet to be properlyintroduced. Authorities with less developed primary languages policies might also findreasons or pretexts to delay allocation of funding to this aspect of the curriculum.103
3.5.4. Leadership and managementThe Pathfinders represented a wide range of practice in the way they were managedfinancially. At one end of the spectrum, local authorities used the funding to make newappointments at advisor or advisory teacher level specifically to implement the local policy ofintroducing or extending primary languages. In some cases, Pathfinder project developmentwas impeded or, worse, delayed for up to as much as six months by the arrangementsnecessary for such appointments. Fortunately, in at least one case, these newappointments, originally temporary, had been made permanent or had their fractional parttimecontract increased. In these cases, therefore, the chances of sustaining developmentshave been increased, although by local authority rather than DfES Pathfinder funds.At the other end of the spectrum, funding was channelled directly to one or more SecondaryLanguage Colleges who then used the money to increase their outreach work. Where thisapplied, the authority’s role was restricted to a relatively light touch monitoring of financialprocesses rather than detailed accountability over educational targets.Of course there were several other examples among the local authorities where financeswere split between local authority directed activities and those supported by direct funding toschools. To decide which of these approaches offer the best chance of sustaining provision(or increasing provision) is not really possible, since so many other factors come to play.However, it is possible to point out some of the advantages and disadvantages of these andother means of managing the project, at least in financial terms.The appointment of specialists to local authority advisory teams has the advantage ofidentifying clear points of contact for all the people associated with the new or extendedactivity. Provided that primary languages is the sole or main activity of the person, it meansthat there is oversight of key aspects such as training, dissemination of good practice,production of schemes of work and resources and monitoring of what actually goes on in theschools. As one local authority interviewee put it:‘This local authority is not faced with headteachers and teachers asking “How shall we fitprimary languages in?” The scheme is so well established now that the local authority isbeyond that stage. The experience is replicable because the structures are there, even ifthe context is different.’ (LA co-ordinator)A strong local authority team also means mobility between schools, something not achievedto the same extent by co-ordinators based in a secondary school or, for example, anadvanced skills teacher (AST) tied to a time-table in one or just a small number of primaries.104
Page 1 and 2:
RESEARCHEvaluation of the Key Stage
Page 3 and 4:
Contents1. Executive summary 32. In
Page 5 and 6:
practice and factors that might imp
Page 7 and 8:
of the experience. Individual feedb
Page 9 and 10:
• The analysis revealed the need
Page 11 and 12:
• Are pupils with SEN and gifted
Page 13 and 14:
Both respondent characteristics and
Page 15 and 16:
Interviews were recorded and a 25%
Page 17 and 18:
2.2. Advantages and disadvantages o
Page 19 and 20:
2.2.2. Languages Delivery by the Pr
Page 21 and 22:
2.2.4. Languages Delivery through a
Page 23 and 24:
Analysing these models, conditions
Page 25 and 26:
• Schools should be encouraged to
Page 27 and 28:
however, instances of schools where
Page 29 and 30:
3.1.3.4. Time allocated to language
Page 31 and 32:
‘French would not be taught now a
Page 33 and 34:
• beneficial for the subject’s
Page 35 and 36:
Many teachers remained very depende
Page 37 and 38:
Table 2: Integration and Communicat
Page 39 and 40:
‘We’ve written a letter and dra
Page 41 and 42:
‘it makes you realise that if acc
Page 43 and 44:
Table 5: Languages and Learning - Q
Page 45 and 46:
3.1.5. Pupils - Learning and Attitu
Page 47 and 48:
• useful for travelling abroad -
Page 49 and 50:
• ‘Comments at the end to help
Page 51 and 52:
‘At times they find it difficult
Page 53 and 54: teacher who knew our level.’ In t
Page 55 and 56: In most Pathfinders, however, there
Page 57 and 58: 3.2.2. Recommendations• Primary t
Page 59 and 60: Effective staffing is essential to
Page 61 and 62: Martin and Mitchell 1993). In anoth
Page 63 and 64: Nineteen respondents had specialise
Page 65 and 66: As revealed in questionnaire 1, in
Page 67 and 68: However, some teachers were pleasan
Page 69 and 70: However, there were frequent instan
Page 71 and 72: • team-teaching on the ground•
Page 73 and 74: involved external bodies in the del
Page 75 and 76: Generally, there was a sense that s
Page 77 and 78: • Methods of recording progressio
Page 79 and 80: However, there were challenges in a
Page 81 and 82: In one Pathfinder one school cluste
Page 83 and 84: One example of assessment included
Page 85 and 86: trying to evaluate, prior to each u
Page 87 and 88: Case study: exemplar of a well deve
Page 89 and 90: In some Pathfinder schools effectiv
Page 91 and 92: ‘Only a very small number (6/7) g
Page 93 and 94: • transfer of more sensitive info
Page 95 and 96: ‘…I know the Year 7 teachers we
Page 97 and 98: 3.4.5. Links to KS3 Framework/Natio
Page 99 and 100: situation was especially difficult
Page 101 and 102: 3.5. Sustainability and Replicabili
Page 103: develop ‘effective and replicable
Page 107 and 108: on one aspect of delivery. This was
Page 109 and 110: 3.5.5. Staff and staff expertiseIn
Page 111 and 112: ‘Usually it is impromptu: 10 or 1
Page 113 and 114: ‘The reason why I have decided to
Page 115 and 116: c) there is obvious progression fro
Page 117 and 118: to be constrained. Methodologies ge
Page 119 and 120: Time spent on the project was gathe
Page 121 and 122: Estimating development costs of res
Page 123 and 124: There were significant differences
Page 125 and 126: on staff costs, with the impact on
Page 127 and 128: 5. CONCLUSIONSOverall, this evaluat
Page 129 and 130: 5.2. Teacher Competence• Primary
Page 131 and 132: o for training secondary teachers i
Page 133 and 134: ReferencesBell, E with Cox, K. (199
Page 135 and 136: Case Study 2Case study 2 is a compa
Page 137 and 138: channelled through this school. At
Page 139 and 140: Case Study 5This LA is a large auth
Page 141 and 142: Case Study 7Case study 7 is a joint
Page 143: Copies of this publication can be o
show all

Evaluation of the Key Stage 2 Language Learning Pathfinders

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?