Evaluation of the Key Stage 2 Language Learning Pathfinders

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Second interviews were conducted in November-December 2004. As well as checking onany amendments or variations from the original plan, and giving an up to date picture of thescope of the projects after 18 months of funding, these interviews included questions oncostings and cost effectiveness.Documentary evidence was also collected from these key local authority personnel andschools regarding the Pathfinder. This included Pathfinder bids which provided initial datarelating to the aims; local authority context and schools’ capacity; partners involved andproposed programmes together with targets; implementation plans and financial plans.Further documentation was sought from Pathfinders, including their reports to DfES but thiswas more variable, e.g. the number of reports produced differed and support materialproduction was also varied.2.1.2. QuestionnairesQuestionnaires were sent out to a sample of 500 schools from all Pathfinder areas, once atthe start and once towards the end of the project, to allow investigation of change. The aimof the questionnaires was to collect descriptive data on the workings of the project in theirschools (including training received, workforce and resourcing arrangements, pupils andyear groups involved, identification of who is delivering languages, issues of curriculumtimes, range of languages covered) as well as their views on added value, effectiveness ofworkforce models, training, inclusiveness, support from the LA and impact on the curriculum,teacher and pupil motivation and learning.Questionnaire 1Five hundred questionnaires were sent out to participating teachers in October 2004, whowere given a month to respond. By the deadline, 207 usable responses were received, aresponse rate of 41.4%.Questionnaire 2In March 2005 a second questionnaire was conducted with the same schools. The responserate (39.6%, N = 198) was slightly lower than the previous questionnaire.11
Both respondent characteristics and other findings did not change significantly betweenquestionnaires one and two, in part due to the short time between questionnaires (less thanhalf a year).A sample of 250 schools from comparator LAs also received a questionnaire, in order toprovide evidence of levels and models of provision of language learning in non-PathfinderLAs. The comparator LAs were matched to Pathfinder LAs on a number of factors, includinggeography, attainment levels and urban/rural.2.1.3. Case studiesEight case study authorities were identified in order to explore the operation of Pathfinderson the ground, including the interaction between systems and schools, not just systems perse. Case studies here are defined as Pathfinder LAs within each of which a sample ofschools was studied. The case studies were also intended to identify examples of effectivepractice and factors that might impede such practice, and so suggest implementationmechanisms and processes which could be generalisable and hence of interest topractitioners and policy makers.The selection of case studies was influenced by the number of different basic modelsidentified in the initial phase of data collection, from the telephone interviews with LA officersand the Pathfinders’ initial plans. It was anticipated that, although each Pathfinder would beslightly different, it would be possible to identify typologies which could be distilled into amore limited number of distinct models. In the event, eight case studies were chosen. Theprocess for selecting case studies passed through a number of filters, which were applied inorder to all the bids:1. Pathfinder models. The number one priority was to select a variety of Pathfinder models,with regards to aspects such as curriculum model, delivery model, training and ContinuingProfessional Development model, languages provided, arrangements for assessment,transition, sustainability, Special Educational Needs and Gifted & Talented.2. Socio-demographic diversity. This second filter aimed to ensure that we had a mix ofPathfinders with regards to ethnic diversity of the student population and socio-economicstatus.12
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: • Are pupils with SEN and gifted
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 and 104:
develop ‘effective and replicable
Page 105 and 106:
3.5.4. Leadership and managementThe
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?