An Roinn Oideachais agus Eolaíochta
Department of Education and Science
Subject Inspection of English
REPORT
St. John Bosco Community College
Kildysart County Clare
Roll number: 76075K
Date of inspection: 11 December 2007
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 St. John Bosco Community College, Kildysart, Co. Clare. It presents the findings of an evaluation of the quality of teaching and learning in English and makes recommendations for the further development of the teaching of this subject in the school. The evaluation was conducted over two days during which the inspector visited classrooms and observed teaching and learning. The inspector interacted with students and teachers, examined students’ work, and had discussions with the teachers. The inspector reviewed school planning documentation and teachers’ written preparation. Following the evaluation visit, the inspector provided oral feedback on the outcomes of the evaluation to the principal and subject teachers. The board of management of the school was given an opportunity to comment on the findings and recommendations of the report; the board chose to accept the report without response.
Subject provision and whole school support
Students have five classes of English per week over four days (one double and three single classes) in fifth and sixth year. This level of provision is in line with syllabus requirements. In first, second and third year, students are allocated four classes of English per week and those classes are always spread over four days. This is less than is generally allocated to the subject in other schools. However, given that the school is already providing well in excess of the minimum required instructional time for students under Circular M29/95, there is little scope for reviewing the timetable situation for junior cycle English at present.
Resource provision for the teaching of English is good. The school has a central assembly area that can serve as a performance space. School management makes funds for purchase of resources available on request. Also, the school’s book rental scheme is a valuable support to English teachers, allowing them to switch novels or plays on discovering that a planned text does not sufficiently match the needs and interests of a particular class cohort. School management is commended for its general policy of having teachers based in their own rooms, thus facilitating resource storage and the creation of print-rich environments. The English teachers have good access to audio-visual (AV) equipment. In the case of the central resource area that the English teachers have commendably developed, it is suggested that its contents be catalogued and that the resultant catalogue be added to the subject department plan.
With regard to information and communication technologies (ICT), in-house training for staff was organised by school management in 2006. Teachers may reserve the school’s computer room for use with a particular class. Also, students may use the PCs and printer located in the public library incorporated into the school building for reference purposes. A number of English teachers use their home PCs for lesson preparation and thus have developed their confidence and competence in using ICT. However, it was reported in the subject department plan for English that “rooms are within range of wireless broadband . . . at present the appropriate equipment does not exist to implement the use of ICT within the classroom.” Hence, it is strongly advised that a whole-school strategic plan be drawn up and implemented to develop the capacity within general classrooms for the incidental use of ICT as a teaching tool.
St John Bosco Community College is in the rare position of having a public library incorporated into its school building. Staffed on four days of the week (including two late-evening openings) by an employee of the Clare County Library service, the library incorporates books representing a variety of genres and also encourages borrowers to order books through inter-library loan. Readings by visiting writers and other book promotion events are regularly organised in the library. Individual English teachers promote personal reading through initiatives such as requiring students to read a novel independently and to write a review on it, taking junior English classes to the library for personal reading periods, and creating a class library for student borrowing. To further motivate students’ personal reading and to achieve maximum effectiveness from the library facility, a number of suggestions are offered. An orientation to the library from the public librarian could be organised for all first years. The school’s learning/resource support teacher could be asked to identify supports for reluctant and struggling readers (such as high interest, low reading age readers and Readalong packs) that could be ordered for student borrowing by the public librarian. Junior students’ reading interests could be surveyed in their English classes and that information could be compiled to aid the public librarian in updating the stock available for borrowing. Requiring students to prepare independent projects on aspects of texts they are studying would give students a practical reason to use the library facility and would develop their independent learning skills. A useful reference document the department may wish to consult in this regard is Room for Reading: The Junior Certificate School Programme (JCSP) Demonstration Library Project (http://www.jcspliteracy.ie/library_demo_project.htm).
In relation to the school’s student-organisation procedures, fifth-year students opt for the examination level in English they wish to prepare for, guided by teacher advice and by their Junior Certificate results. Good planning in relation to the selection of common texts and concurrent timetabling facilitates student movement between examination levels and this is commended. In first year, students are placed into mixed-ability classes. Based on their results at the end of that year, students are then set into examination-level classes for English. The fact that concurrent timetabling is provided once students are set in junior cycle means that students can move between classes preparing for different examination levels and this is commended. Looking toward the future, the department is advised to consider its current practice of setting students into junior-cycle level classes at the beginning of second year in relation to the advice provided in the inspectorate publication Looking at English (pgs 9-10).
Co-curricular and extra-curricular activities support the teaching and learning of English. Teachers invite visiting speakers to the school to address students. Creative writing is promoted by encouraging students to enter short story and poetry writing competitions. Students are prepared to participate in public speaking competitions. Trips to cinematic and theatrical productions are annually organised. School management and the English teachers are highly commended for their commitment to providing such activities for their students.
English teachers wishing to engage in continuing professional development are encouraged and supported by school management. Sources of professional development that have been accessed by individual members of the department include acting as State Examination Commission (SEC) examiners for English; courses on creative writing, teaching film, and on mixed-ability teaching; reading subject inspection reports on the teaching and learning of post-primary English; in-service seminars for other subjects that are relevant to English; further study; and the development of expertise in directing plays. With regard to the professional development of the department in the future, it is recommended that it collaboratively re-examine the LC English syllabus and the associated Draft Guidelines for Teachers of English and Resource Materials for Teaching Language to support those teachers who were not able to avail of the in-service programme for the new syllabus. Also, it is encouraged that the department continue consulting the Teaching English Support Service (TESS) website, the inspectorate publication Looking at English, and the various guideline documents and websites referred to in this report.
Planning and preparation
Formal subject department planning has commenced for the teaching of English in St. John Bosco Community College. This process has been supported by an input from the School Development Planning Initiative (SDPI) and by school management’s scheduling of subject department meetings at the beginning of every school term. In addition, the full department meets in teachers’ own time on approximately five other occasions in the year and teachers of LC English meet in their own time once a week. This level of commitment to collaborative planning is highly commended. At present, a subject department co-ordinator and an assistant co-ordinator are guiding this process.
By the time of the evaluation, the English teachers had documented their practices under the headings of the SDPI subject-planning template and had gathered relevant documents together to support their planning process. In particular, three aspects of the current plan are commended. First, recording decisions taken and items for follow-up action in the minutes of its meetings equips the department with a useful roadmap for reference and forward planning. Secondly, the compilation of handouts from professional development courses, articles from textbooks, articles downloaded from the internet, and catalogues of teacher resources relevant to supporting students with special educational needs signals the department’s commitment to up-skilling itself in this area. Thirdly, the fliers advertising English-related co-curricular activities gathered together in the subject department plan are an invaluable reference resource.
In terms of individual teacher planning, monthly or termly plans were presented for inspection. Among the commendable materials found in some of those plans were curriculum content plans for class groups, evidence of teachers identifying specific strategies to teach particular syllabus components, reflective teacher notes on lessons/units students responded well to, planning for links between different areas of the syllabus (for instance, linking the poetry of World War I with media reports on contemporary wars), weekly teacher records of work done with class groups. Furthermore, a list of useful websites to support the study of English was found in individual teacher planning documents during the inspection. It is encouraged that such handouts listing web links under specific topics be included in the subject department plan. They can then be used by teachers as appropriate and/or distributed to students for independent research purposes.
To help develop the English department’s planning even further, two recommendations are offered. First, it is recommended that time be specifically allocated for a “show and tell” input at the beginning of each subject department meeting, where individual members would be asked to present an effective resource/strategy they use in their practice and/or to share insights relevant to the teaching of English they gained from a professional development course, from practices they observed in the English departments of other schools, and/or from further study. Secondly, it is recommended that the department draw on its individual plans to develop termly departmental schemes of work. At the outset, the department should identify what it considers the most appropriate learning outcomes (knowledge, skills, and attitudes) for students in each year group and identify activities and texts that will help achieve those outcomes. (See the LC English syllabus and JCSP statement materials for exemplars of such learning outcomes). The department will also need to formally discuss specific texts to be taught and the sequencing of their introduction to different year groups. In mixed-ability first-year classes, for example, the department may find it useful to get students to identify examples of the genres they are familiar with (such as ballads and the poetry of popular song) and to help students identify literary techniques in those familiar examples, rather than commencing the study of genres with de-contextualised lists of techniques. Once the first-year scheme units and their sequencing are agreed, the same process should then be employed, over the coming years, to prepare schemes of work for the other year groups. For students to have the full benefit of this work, coherence between teachers’ individual plans and the collective department plan will be essential. Ultimately, what is envisaged is a planning process guided by the advice on best practice outlined on pages 50 to 51 of Looking at English and customised to the needs of the students of St. John Bosco Community College.
Teaching and learning
In all classes evaluated, lessons were structured, there was evidence of short-term planning, and the content and pace of lessons was appropriate. Teachers’ instructions and explanations were precise in all classes observed. All teachers acted as strong oral language role models for students.
Very good practice was observed when the intended learning outcome was shared with learners at the outset of a lesson, thus helping students connect new learning with previous work and also inviting them to share responsibility for the lesson.
The resources used by the English teachers over the course of the evaluation included handouts, books, chalk/whiteboards, and concrete artefacts (a framed piece of embroidery and a newspaper). Evidence was also gathered that teachers use dictionaries, word searches, graphic organisers (acronyms such as “STEP” to help students plan their own short stories and grids to help them organise information on comparative texts), cloze texts, audio and film clips to teach/revise texts, and that a few teachers encourage students to locate good-quality writing models from newspapers and/or to research new terms on the internet. Chalk/whiteboards were used effectively in a number of classes to provide written reinforcement of new vocabulary, to summarise students’ feedback on the key points of previously studied texts as a springboard for engaging with a new text by the same writer, and/or to set homework assignments. Building on this foundation and given the variety of learning styles and of student abilities in the school, it is recommended that even more graphic organisers, writing frames, audio and ICT materials be utilised in the teaching of English.
Direct whole-class presentations of content by teachers and the questioning of students were the main teaching methodologies observed. Particular strengths of the department were connecting new material to students’ prior experiences and/or to previously studied texts and also focusing on new words encountered in texts to develop students’ vocabularies. Other strategies used less frequently included teacher and student reading, the use of private response journals, in-class writing activities, mind maps, role play and dramatisation, and visualisation (students illustrating key moments/scenes from texts).
Teachers used questioning to good effect to interact with students and to structure the learning activity. Generally, teachers asked a blend of targeted questions (directed to a named student) and questions open to response from willing individuals. Such inclusive practice is commended. In a small number of classes, teachers asked predominantly lower-order questions (focused on the recall and recognition of information) and/or much of the lesson was taken up by “teacher talk,” thus limiting the role students could play in their learning to being active listeners and note-takers only.
Two recommendations are offered with regard to pedagogical areas for further development across the department. First, it is advised that even more strategies for inviting students to be co-responsible with teachers for analysing and responding to texts be incorporated into the department’s practices. For example, students can initially be given prompt questions to guide their reading/listening to a new text and then asked to share their insights before the close analysis of the text commences. Moreover, to motivate those who are less confident of their ideas and/or of their linguistic competence, students can occasionally be asked to consult in pairs when developing answers to higher-order questions. Finally, in-class language games can also be incorporated to help students actively identify examples of effective language use in studied texts. Such pedagogical practices will support all learners. Possible sources for such strategies include Inclusion of Students with Special Education Needs: Post-Primary Guidelines (chapter 5) and the Teacher Guidelines for JC and LC English.
Secondly, the department should further develop its resources and strategies to support the incremental, consistent development of students’ writing skills. Some examples of good practice already taking place in individual classrooms include the compilation of “character trait” word banks to equip students for writing tasks and providing students with exemplar answer models to help them draft their own answers. Other areas for development could include the use of spelling tests and vocabulary copies, teaching students presentation and editing routines from first year onwards, and the use of writing frames and of writing samples as diagnostic instruments. Among the professional development resources the department may wish to browse in this regard are those described on the websites http://www.jcspliteracy.ie/school_wide.htm and http://www.literacytrust.org.uk/.
Very good rapport between teachers and students was evident in all classrooms visited. Students’ responses were affirmed by teachers and integrated into lessons. Discipline was maintained in all classes and students were engaged in their learning. Most students had good levels of knowledge of studied texts, literary techniques and conventions. An examination of students’ copies revealed that most students had commendably been assigned a variety of writing tasks, ranging from language development activities (such as putting new words into sentences), to comprehension questions, to compositions. Where students had been required to engage in personal/creative writing regularly, where they were sometimes expected to consolidate their understanding of studied texts through creative intervention and modelling exercises, and where they had been explicitly prepared for writing assignments, their levels of achievement in writing were particularly high. Both in students’ written work and in their oral responses, instances were observed where students expressed original viewpoints, convincingly grounded in textual evidence, and this was particularly impressive.
The English-related resources on display in rooms included student illustrations of key images from a studied poem, posters advertising theatrical productions of studied plays, fliers advertising writing competitions, photographs or posters of Irish writers, motivational slogans, newspaper articles, a display of quotations selected by students from studied texts to act as revision aids, and LC marking schemes and syllabus lists. The English teachers are highly commended for their efforts to create such nurturing, print-rich environments for their students.
Assessment
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. Where best practice was observed, homework assignments were written on the whiteboard; students were given specific instructions 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); and sufficient time was allocated for students to note down their assignments. The school’s “Homework and Study” policy and the English department’s agreed expectations for appropriate types and amounts of homework support this work and are commended.
In further developing its common approach to assessment, the department is advised to consider the following. First, it is encouraged that teachers assign class time early in the first term of every year for students to produce a substantial personal writing sample. Analysing and recording the recurring errors in each student’s work will give the teacher a good benchmark for skill development programme planning. Secondly, it is suggested that the department consider awarding some marks toward end-of-term results for tasks linked to the agreed learning outcomes for different year groups. (Those tasks could include spelling and vocabulary tests, a cumulative average for composition work, folder maintenance, oral presentations, and project work). Thirdly, it is advised that the department invite the school’s learning/resource support teacher to review its class and house assessment instruments (particularly in terms of their layout, readability, and capacity to support differentiation) to maximise their effectiveness for assessing the learning of students of varying abilities.
The English department is commended for its work in preparing and administering a common summer examination to all first years and a common examination to all second-year higher-level candidates. This practice facilitates the comparison of achievement across a cohort and thus provides an evidence base for planning to meet students’ needs. Some teachers use SEC chief examiners’ reports and marking schemes to inform their work and this is good practice. The English department annually monitors students’ results in SEC examinations in relation to national norms and includes that analysis in its subject department plan. Finally, handouts used to track instances where students forget to bring books/homework to class are another measure of the department’s attentive monitoring of student performance and this is highly commended.
From a review of student copies, it was evident that homework was being set and monitored in all classes. In some cases, students’ work was acknowledged by a tick and short comment (very good/excellent). Good practice was observed where teacher feedback on substantial assignments praised a specific aspect of a student’s writing and gave specific ideas for improvement. The department is urged to discuss this issue and to arrive at a consensus on it, so that teachers’ responses to students’ writing are consistent from first to sixth year. In arriving at a common policy on the correction of mechanical errors and on the provision of formative feedback on substantial pieces of writing, the department may find materials such as the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment (NCCA)’s “Assessment for Learning” web pages and the JCSP publication Between the Lines useful.
First, second, and fifth-year students of English are assessed using class tests and formal Christmas and summer examinations. Third and sixth-year students are assessed using class tests and formal pre-certificate examinations. A good level of contact is maintained between the school and parents. In addition to twice-yearly reports, ongoing information regarding students’ progress is also given to parents through the students’ journals and annual parent-teacher meetings.
Summary of main findings and recommendations
The following are the main strengths identified in the evaluation:
· School management is commended for its teacher-based classroom policy, its concurrent timetabling arrangements for English, and for supporting teachers’ individual professional development.
· The public library incorporated into the school building is a valuable support to the teaching and learning of English.
· The English teachers and school management are highly commended for their commitment to providing an array of English-related co-curricular and extra-curricular activities for students.
· The English department has documented its practices under the headings of the relevant SDPI template, has developed the practice of minuting its meetings, and has gathered relevant documents together to support its planning process.
· In all classes evaluated, lessons were structured, there was evidence of short-term planning, the content and pace of lessons was appropriate, and teachers’ instructions and explanations were precise.
· Evidence was gathered that a variety of teaching strategies and resources is used across the department.
· Very good rapport between teachers and students was evident in all classrooms visited. Students’ responses were affirmed by teachers and integrated into lessons. Discipline was maintained in all classes and students were engaged in their learning.
· The English teachers are highly commended for their efforts to create nurturing, print-rich environments for their students.
· From a review of student copies, it was evident that homework was being set and monitored in all classes.
As a means of building on these strengths and to address areas for development, the following key recommendations are made:
· Over the coming years, the English department should formally pool its teaching strategies and resources. In particular, the department should further develop its capacity to explicitly and incrementally develop students’ writing skills and to invite students to take co-responsibility for their learning.
· The English department should further develop its common approach to assessment.
· Subject department planning should be further developed in line with the advice in 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.
Published June 2008