An Roinn Oideachais agus Eolaíochta
Department
of Education and Science
Subject
Inspection of English
REPORT
Tulla,
Co. Clare
Roll number:
62020F
Date of
inspection: 21 March 2007
Date of
issue of report: 17 January 2008
Subject provision and whole school support
Summary of main findings and recommendations
Report on the Quality
of Learning and Teaching in english
Subject
inspection report
This report has been written following a subject
inspection in
Subject
provision and whole school support
Timetabled provision for English is in line with
syllabus guidelines. Students of St. Joseph’s Secondary School have three
classes of English per week in TY; four classes of English per week in
first year; and five classes of English per week in second, third, fourth, and
fifth years. The distribution of English is good, with classes timetabled
across all available days. One exceptional circumstance affects the timetabling
of some first years this year. To better support the learning needs of students
in two of the four first-year class groups, those English classes were
re-organised in December, with parental consent. This has resulted in a
situation where the students in those two classes have two teachers for
mainstream English: one for three classes per week and the other for one class
per week. It is acknowledged that this unexpected re-organisation was performed
in response to significant student needs. However, management is still advised
to ensure that the school’s systems for the early identification of first years
with special educational needs or general literacy difficulties are reviewed
and developed as necessary, to minimise mid-year class re-organisations and the
establishment of shared-teacher arrangements for the provision of mainstream
English in the future.
Students are placed in mixed-ability classes for first
year and for the first term of second year before being assigned to
higher/ordinary level classes. Fourth year setting takes place at the end of
the first term. In second, third, fourth, and fifth years students are set in
concurrently timetabled classes to facilitate student movement. School
management is commended for creating these concurrencies. Not only do they
support student choice, but they also make inter-class and year-group
activities and team teaching possible.
General resource provision for the teaching of English
is good. The majority of teachers of English have their own classrooms, which
facilitates resource storage and the creation of print-rich environments. In
addition, communal DVD and video resources and class sets of novels are stored
in a shared cabinet. Most teachers have TV, VCR/DVD, and CD players in their
base rooms. However, for teachers who do not have their own classroom, no
whole-school booking form for securing access to the school’s one mobile TV/
DVD unit currently exists. Such a form should be created and posted in the
staffroom, granting all teachers equitable access to the resource. Auditing the
use of that form will enable school management to determine whether and where
additional mobile TV and VCR/DVD units are needed in the school. Lastly,
the school has a computer room housing twenty-four broadband-connected
computers. However, the English department reported difficulties in accessing
the room because of its frequent use by LCVP and other class groups.
The teaching and learning of English in
In January 2007, a decision was jointly taken by the
English department and the principal to create a whole-school library on a
broad, light-filled corridor of the school. By the time of the evaluation,
remaindered books from a public library had been added to the school’s existing
stock, low benches had been placed perpendicularly to the wall shelves to
facilitate seated browsing, a careers library had been arranged in part of the
available space and a computer had been placed in that central area. Also, the
gathered books had been labelled as suitable for junior (J) and senior (S)
students. School management is commended for facilitating the creation of such
an attractive, accessible resource for students. The school’s Special Needs
Assistants are also commended for performing the arduous task of labelling the
entire book stock. Finally, the English teachers are also highly commended for
their promotion of personal reading to their students by taking them to the new
library, organising paired reading programmes, encouraging them to complete
reviews of books they have read, and compiling those book reviews into a
library reference file.
In developing the school’s library service over the
coming years, three suggestions are offered. First, the possibility of a full
post or part of a post of responsibility for running the library could be
considered as part of the next review of the school’s schedule of posts and
student volunteers could be sought to help administer the library (perhaps from
the TY class or student council). Second, it is encouraged that over the coming
years, the book stock be organised in curricular areas and genre sections to
make it easier for readers to find books they want to read and surveys of
students’ reading interests and of books teachers feel that students should
have access to should be conducted, to guide planning for the acquisition of
future stock for the library. Sources such as the Tulla
public librarian, the 2001 Children’s Books
An array of co-curricular and extra-curricular
activities supports the teaching and learning of English in
With regard to continuous professional development,
members of the English department have been facilitated to attend courses on
“teaching strategies in the classroom,” “co-operative learning,” and
“comparative study” in recent years. Some members of the English department
were able to avail of the TESS in-service provided with the introduction of the
new Leaving Certificate English syllabus a few years ago. To help those members
who were not in a position to avail of that in-service, it is suggested that
in-house discussions on the main methodological and assessment innovations
contained in that syllabus be organised by the department. A collaborative
examination of the LC English syllabus and of the associated Draft
Guidelines for Teachers of English and Resource Materials for Teaching
Language could be one method of facilitating that in-house professional
development. Finally, the department is encouraged to continue consulting the
TESS website (http://english.slss.ie/Main/), the TESS magazine
(http://english.slss.ie/Magazine.html), and Looking at English: Teaching
& Learning English in Post-Primary Schools, a 2006 composite report
published by the inspectorate.
(See http://www.education.ie/servlet/blobservlet/insp_looking_at_english.pdf?language=EN).]
Planning
and preparation
The teachers of English in
A collaborative team spirit was evident among the
English teachers. Impressively, in January 2007 they altered their policy on
the timing of JC setting arrangements (moving them from May of first year to
December of second year), in response to their study of Looking at English.
This study of and action in response to best practice advice is highly
commended and indicates the department’s commitment to continually adapting its
practices to suit students’ needs.
By the time of the evaluation, the English teachers
had prepared a subject department plan that included a thoughtfully completed
SDPI template, curriculum content plans for the different year groups, a
subject department policy statement, minutes of some departmental meetings, a
record of professional development activities undertaken by department members
in recent years, an inventory of the school’s class sets of books, and relevant
documents (JC and LC syllabuses and the Draft Guidelines for Teachers of LC
English). The department is commended for this work. Looking toward the
future, the following subject department planning recommendations are made.
First, it is recommended that a more formalised
sharing of professional expertise and resources now take place, so that
individual good practices observed during the evaluation can be consolidated
across the entire department. Arising from those discussions and exchanges, a
separate section on methodology should be added to the subject department plan.
(Handouts from professional development courses and copies of teaching
strategies and resources being used by the learning support and resource team
could also be included in this section, if considered relevant).
Second, it is recommended that the department develop
its curriculum content plans into schemes of work. Starting with its first-year
plan, the department should identify what it considers the most appropriate
learning outcomes (knowledge, skills, and attitudes) for those students. (See
pages 8-14 of the LC English syllabus for exemplars of such statements). Then
the department should select, combine and add new units of work, as it sees
fit, to create a common first-year scheme of work that incrementally develops
those learning outcomes. This process should also be used to agree a common
scheme for the first term of second year and for the first term of fourth year,
at the very least. Then, when English students are being placed with new
teachers after setting takes place, the knowledge that they will have completed
units of work comparable to those studied by their new classmates will be a
great aid to teachers. In planning all schemes (whether common or not),
teachers should identify appropriate learning outcomes for the different
examination-level cohorts in year groups. They should also plan for the
constant integration of language and literature and for differentiation by
text-selection, process, or outcome for students with learning and literacy
difficulties and also for exceptionally able students. Moreover, schemes should
set out explicitly, how, in the course of each year, teachers will
incrementally set about honing students’ writing skills (by developing their
pre-writing, proofing, editing, modelling, and redrafting strategies; by
widening their vocabularies; and by developing their spelling, punctuation, and
paragraphing competencies), reading skills (by teaching word and text-attack
techniques, library layout and usage, and dictionary and thesaurus usage), and
oral communication skills. Individual teachers’ existing plans will be an
important foundation for, and aid to, this work. The benefits of such
year-group schemes will include more incremental, consistently-reinforced
learning experiences for students and the creation of reference documents for
new teachers and for teachers providing literacy support to students. The
department may find pages 19-20 of Looking at English useful when
undertaking this work.
Third, it is recommended that a section on homework
and assessment be added to the subject department plan. The existing
whole-school homework policy will be an important base document for that
section. Other elements to be agreed and incorporated should include the
department’s collective expectations for presentation standards for student
work, appropriate types and amounts of homework (including the number of
assigned essays per year), samples of common assessments and of differentiated
assessments, and samples of student work across the ability range for peer
assessment purposes. Finally, SEC chief examiners’ reports and marking schemes
should be added to the section for teacher reference.
The current TY English programme incorporates the
following elements: a Holocaust-themed unit of study incorporating poetry, a
novel, and a film; a film production workshop for students; a cross-curricular
calendar project; media studies, language development and functional writing
activities anchored by the study of the Irish Times; and a critical
analysis of a play and the subsequent rehearsal and performance of an act from
that play in a drama competition. Strengths of the programme include its
exposure of students to a wide variety of genres, its incorporation of active
learning and cross-curricular methodologies, and its inclusion of writing and
language development activities. However, three aspects of the programme are in
need of further development.
First, the TY English programme should specifically
plan for the development of students’ “basic competences in key areas according
to the needs of individual pupils,” thus necessitating the analysis of
individual TY students’ language needs and regular remediation work focused on
those needs (TYP Guidelines for Schools, pg 2). Second, while the
cross-curricular project for 2006-07 completed during timetabled English
classes was of benefit to a range of subjects, it was of no perceivable benefit
to the development of students’ competence in English. Hence, before deciding
to involve students in future cross-curricular
projects, English teachers should determine whether or not those projects will
potentially lead students to accomplish the learning outcomes at the heart of
the TY English plan. Third, given that a separate Drama module is also part of
the TY programme, dialogue between the English and Drama teachers should be
initiated in relation to possible cross-curricular planning for approaches and text
choices. For further guidance in this work, the department is directed to pages
21-22 of Looking at English, to the article “The Teaching of English in
Transition Year: Some Thoughts” published in the Spring 2006 edition of the
TESS magazine, and to the TY Support Service’s suggestions for TY English
programmes (http://ty.slss.ie/areas_study.html). Finally, providing students
with a copy of the TY English programme (including the methods of assessment)
is encouraged, as it gives them a measure of responsibility for their own
progress.
In terms of individual teacher planning, weekly, termly, and or yearly plans and some accompanying resource
folders and materials were presented for inspection. The best of them included
evidence that teachers were reflecting on their practice (briefly recording the
work they were covering and the homework they were assigning each day, as a
basis for future review and planning), were keeping samples of student work for
future use as writing exemplars, and were continually gathering contemporary,
varied resources from reference books, the internet, and newspapers and
magazines to enrich the study of particular units. Such careful preparation
shows great dedication and zeal. Where weaknesses were noted, the time
allocated for units of work was overly generous to some syllabus elements while
disadvantaging others.
[Planning, preparation, and provision of literacy and
language support in
Teaching
and learning
Effective teaching was observed over the course of the
evaluation. In all classes observed, lessons were structured, the content being
taught was in line with syllabus requirements, and all teachers’ instructions
and explanations were clear. In most classes observed, the learning outcome for
the lesson was clear. Best practice is when intended learning outcomes are
shared with learners at the outset of lessons. Such explicit sharing helps
students connect new learning with previous work and also invites them to share
responsibility for the lesson.
The resources used by the English teachers included
worksheets, affirmation stickers for students’ homework journals, textbooks, a
photograph of a writer, and an audiotape of a sung poem. Evidence was also
gathered of the use of film clips to illuminate the teaching of texts, of
exemplars of letters and other functional writing tasks, of concrete materials
(the gutting of a fish in class to support the teaching of a poem), writing
frames (such as book reviews), and language development games
(Scrabble and Boggle). Building on this foundation, it is recommended that
audiotapes/CDs of play productions and of poems being read by authors,
concrete artefacts (such as the use of props associated with texts as
discussion and revision aids), and educational website be more frequently used
in the teaching and learning of English, to stimulate all student learning
styles and levels of ability.
Individual uses of the whiteboard observed included
recording new words encountered in a text, summarising biographical points
about an author, setting homework assignments, and diagramming writing frames
to help students construct essays and to organise information for examination
questions. These are sound educational practices and are commended. Providing
such written reinforcement of new vocabulary, grammatical and syntactical
features, and pre-writing and writing strategies is essential for the
incremental development of students’ writing skills. Other structured whiteboard
uses the department should consistently employ include dedicated vocabulary and
homework columns, different coloured markers to help students discriminate
between headings and sub points, and occasionally inviting students to record
class feedback on the whiteboard. Lastly, the requirement that students
transcribe board work into their copies (a practice already established in some
classes) will provide them with an invaluable revision aid.
All teachers used questioning to good effect to
stimulate and interact with students and to structure the learning activity.
Their questioning styles generally interspersed questions directed to
particular students with questions open to the entire class. Where best
practice was observed, questions were carefully sequenced and graduated,
leading students to higher-order thinking and encouraging them to make personal
aesthetic responses. To further develop this shared methodological strength,
two suggestions are offered. First, guiding questions
should be set by teachers before they ask students to view/read unseen texts,
to ensure that students’ comprehension efforts are guided by a purpose derived
from the lesson’s desired learning outcome(s). Second, students should be
occasionally encouraged to answer questions after consulting in pairs/groups,
thus allowing them time to develop multi-faceted answers to higher-order
questions and enabling students with literacy difficulties to contribute their
insights to the formulation of those answers.
Many teachers built on students’ prior knowledge and
experiences to deepen their understanding of texts being studied or to
stimulate skill development. For example, first-year students’ preparation of
an essay about their first day at secondary school was an excellent experience-appropriate
writing exercise for them. Similarly, students’ preparations to write a letter
of complaint were significantly enhanced by their teacher’s linking of products
and services typically sought by teenagers (MP3 players and fast food) to the writing
task. Also, individual teachers’ practices of leading students to examine new
words through contexts familiar to them (for example, analysing the word
“distil” through a science context) was best practice because it modelled how
students might investigate unknown words on their own. Such linking of lesson
topics/tasks with students’ personal experiences is highly commended.
A variety of teaching methods was observed over the
course of the evaluation including question and answer, teacher reading, student
reading, peer learning (where students were asked to listen to and comment on
samples of others’ work read out to them), pair work, brainstorming, in-class
writing exercises (spelling tests and handwriting improvement exercises), and
response journals. Evidence was also gathered of the use of visualisation
(students illustrating their own advertisements, brand names and captions),
language analysis (words within words activities), cross-curricular linking (TY
calendar project), and the occasional use of ICT (students typing up a few
pieces of their written work). To ensure that all students get the benefit of
these excellent pedagogical practices taking place in individual classrooms,
the English department should pool its teaching resources and professional
expertise as part of the subject department planning process.
As for identifying pedagogical areas for further
development across the department, the following recommendations are offered.
First, it is recommended that the department pool its resources and
professional expertise in relation to the teaching of writing. A systematic
departmental promotion of the integrated teaching of vocabulary, grammar,
spelling, and punctuation through literary texts; of sentence, paragraph, and
essay building; and of drafting/re-drafting approaches will help raise
standards of writing even higher in all classes. Second, it is recommended that
the department incorporate more pair/group work and other active learning
approaches into its repertoire, to cater for the different learning styles and
levels of ability in classes. In-service on active learning methodologies and
on differentiation from the Special Education Support Service (SESS) and or
from the Second Level Support Service (SLSS) should be sought in this regard.
(See http://www.sess.ie/sess/Main/Home.htm and
http://www.slss.ie).
Very good rapport between teachers and students was
evident in all classrooms visited. Teachers consistently affirmed students’
responses and integrated them into lessons. In some classes, students’
eagerness to understand a topic in greater depth prompted them to ask their
teacher unsolicited questions. Discipline was sensitively maintained in all
classes and almost all students were attentive and engaged in their learning.
To activate the enthusiasm and interest of the few students who were disengaged
in a few classes, it is recommended that the teacher-student talk/activity
ratio always be more heavily weighted toward students and that audio-visual
materials and pair/group and differentiation strategies be more regularly
utilised by teachers. Also, more varied in-class and homework writing tasks
(such as alternating interventions, research, and projects with textbook
comprehension questions) should be assigned across the department. (An
excellent example of such higher-order learning promotion occurred during the
evaluation when the prose autobiography of a studied poet was briefly described
and displayed by a teacher, who then encouraged her senior-cycle students to
read the book in their own time, to deepen their personal response to the
prescribed poets’ work).
A striking feature of the entire
Assessment
A range of assessment modes is used to monitor student
competence and progress in English including oral questioning, spelling tests,
homework, in-class writing assignments to support continuous assessment, and
formal examinations. Additional assessment practices are also used by
individual members of the department. For example, some teachers use
assessments as diagnostic instruments, identifying the most common grammatical,
spelling, and or organisational errors of each student and preparing lessons
and spelling lists to help remediate those problems. A few teachers also mark
substantial, senior-cycle writing assignments using the LC criteria for
assessment. Finally, the English department is developing a culture of
analysing its students’ State examination results in relation to national norms
for the subject and some teachers use SEC chief examiners’ reports and marking
schemes to inform their work. Such assessment practices are highly commended.
A number of the classes observed began with a review
of homework or of work done in a previous class, thus maximising the chances
that students would retain their new learning. Best practice in relation to the
setting of homework was noted in a number of classes. In some cases, homework
activities were written on the whiteboard for students to copy down before the
end of class. After transcribing them, students were then questioned to ensure
they understood their assignments. In other classes, specific instructions were
given to students on how homework was to be presented and on the criteria that
work should meet (page length, number of points and quotations required, and so
on). Furthermore, a few teachers were differentiating homework assignments to
ensure that all students in a class were challenged to achieve to their
potential. Such assessment practices are highly commended and it is recommended
that they be incorporated into the department’s collective assessment
practices.
From a review of student copies, it was evident that
homework was being set and corrected in all classes. In some cases, students’
work was acknowledged by a tick and short comment (very good/excellent) or a
tick and a grade. In other cases, the tick and mark/grade was accompanied by
developmental feedback which affirmed the strengths in the piece of writing and
gave concrete ideas for improvement. The department is encouraged to discuss
this issue and to arrive at a consensus on it, so that teachers’ responses to
students’ writing are relatively consistent from first to sixth year. In
arriving at a common policy on the correction of mechanical errors and on the
provision of developmental feedback on substantial pieces of writing, the
department may find materials such as the NCCA’s
“Assessment for Learning” web pages, the JCSP publication Between the Lines,
and the relevant section of Inclusive Dyslexia-Friendly Practice useful.
(See
http://www.sess.ie/sess/Files/Dyslexia_crossborder.pdf).
Over the coming years, two other aspects of
departmental assessment policy should be developed. First, depending on the
specific learning outcomes being targeted with a particular year group, some
marks toward end-of-term results could also be allocated for tasks such as
spelling and vocabulary tests, for folder and copy maintenance, for an average
of the marks awarded to a student’s best three essays over a term, for oral
presentations, and or for reviews of books read independently by students.
Second, to enable students to gain a greater degree of understanding of the
reasons why they earn the grades they do, the practices of peer and
self-assessment should be further developed. The criteria for assessment that
were published as Appendix 1 to the LC English syllabus should be introduced
early in the senior cycle, a copy of the grid distributed to students and or
posted on classroom walls as a visual aid, and students should be encouraged to
use the language of the criteria when engaging in peer and self-assessment.
(See http://english.slss.ie/resources/Appendix_1_HL_and_OL.pdf and
http://english.slss.ie/resources/
Assessment_Advice Students.pdf).
All teachers of senior-cycle students should use the PCLM criteria when marking
substantial pieces of writing. Lastly, a simplified version of the criteria
could also be introduced to junior cycle students, to help them identify the
strengths and areas for development in their own writing.
Appropriate class records of students’ results are
kept using a teacher diary system. In first year, students are continuously
assessed during the year and sit a formal examination in May. In second and fourth
year, students sit formal examinations in December and May. In third and fifth
year, students sit formal examinations in November and February and
pre-certificate examinations in the spring. In the case of TY students,
portfolio and continuous assessments are used. The English department is
commended for its work in preparing and administering a common assessment every
May to first years, thus enabling teachers to give advice to students and
parents as to the most appropriate exam level for them. Similarly, common
continuous assessments throughout first year and common December assessments
for second and fourth years would give further support to those students.
Parents/guardians are informed of students’ progress through comments in
students’ homework journals, through twice-yearly school reports, through
annual parent-teacher meetings for each year group, and through individual
meetings (either requested by parents/guardians or where parents/guardians are
invited to the school to discuss a student’s progress).
Summary of
main findings and recommendations
The following are the main strengths identified in the
evaluation:
- The English teachers of
- Whole school support and resource provision for the teaching and
learning of English is very good.
- The English teachers and school management are highly commended for
the array of English-related co-curricular and extra-curricular activities
they routinely arrange for their students.
- The English teachers began the formal process of subject department
planning in 2003 to complement and enhance existing practices of
individual subject planning and informal consultation. By the time of the
evaluation, they had established the practice of electing a new subject
co-ordinator every year. Also, they had prepared a thoughtfully completed
subject department planning template, curriculum content plans for the
different year groups, a subject department policy statement, minutes of
some departmental meetings, a record of professional development
activities undertaken by department members in recent years, and an
inventory of the school’s class sets of books. The department is commended
for this work, much of which took place during teachers’ free time.
- Effective teaching was observed over the course of the evaluation.
Varied teaching methods were observed and all teachers used questioning to
good effect.
- Very good rapport between teachers and students was evident in all
classrooms visited. Teachers consistently affirmed students’ responses and
integrated them into lessons. Discipline was sensitively maintained in all
classes and almost all students were attentive and engaged in their
learning.
- Efforts to create print-rich environments to support the teaching
and learning of English were noted during the evaluation.
- A range of assessment modes is used to monitor student competence
and progress in English. From a review of student copies, it was evident
that homework was being set and corrected in all classes.
As a means of building on these strengths and to
address areas for development, the following key recommendations are made:
- The subject department plan and TY plan should be developed as
discussed in the main body of this report.
- The English department should pool its resources and strategies in
relation to the teaching of writing and should continue to add to its
repertoire of active learning and of differentiation strategies.
- The department should further develop its assessment practices, as
discussed in the main body of this report.
Post-evaluation meetings were held with the teachers
of English and with the principal at the conclusion of the evaluation when the
draft findings and recommendations of the evaluation were presented and
discussed.