An Roinn Oideachais agus Eolaíochta
Department of Education and Science
Subject Inspection of English
REPORT
Coláiste Iognáid SJ
Bóthar Na Mara Gaillimh
Roll number: 62970K
Date of inspection: 1 October 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 Coláiste Iognáid, Galway. 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 was given an opportunity to comment in writing on the findings and recommendations of the report; a response was not received from the board.
Subject provision and whole school support
Timetable provision for English is in line with syllabus requirements. Provision for English in Transition Year (TY) is good and is generous for classes in the established Leaving Certificate (LC) programme. In first, second and third year, students are allocated four classes of English per week. This is less than is generally allocated to the subject in other schools. It is advised that school management seek to provide an additional period for third year English over the coming years.
Eight teachers are currently involved in the delivery of English in the school. Given that teachers are assigned to classes based on seniority and continuity, deployment does not always facilitate the rotation of English specialist teachers across all cycles and programmes. This aspect of whole school provision for English is in need of review.
Students are placed in mixed-ability classes in first year and generally remain in these classes until the end of sixth year. This practice is highly commended for encouraging and facilitating all students to aspire to sitting higher-level examinations. In fifth and sixth year, English classes are concurrently timetabled. This facilitates the redistribution of a small number of students from the “Gaeilge” stream for equitable student numbers in the senior cycle English classes and also makes possible the organisation of joint-class activities and team teaching.
General resource provision for the teaching of English is fair. School management makes funds for the purchase of resources available on request. The school possesses a hall, equipped with a stage, which serves as a performance space. Students have classroom bases and teachers have to move between rooms. At present, there is no centrally-located storage for departmental resources. It is recommended that a lockable cabinet be installed in an area accessible to all teachers of English, such as the library, to facilitate the sharing of resources. An inventory of the departmental resources should then be compiled and included in the subject department plan. This would enable the subject department to identify the resources available in the school to support the teaching and learning of English and also to identify gaps where resources need to be urgently acquired. Furthermore, given that a new classroom block is to be constructed on the school campus, it is recommended that the school facilitate the designation of a small number of base rooms for English in the new and/or remaining building, where visually and print-rich environments could be created to support students’ learning of the subject.
The level of audio-visual and information and communications technology (ICT) equipment available for the teaching and learning of English is unsatisfactory. Overhead projectors and CD players can be borrowed from a store room in the building where third, TY, fifth and sixth year students are based and TV and DVD players are available for booking in that senior building. However, it was reported that such equipment was not available for borrowing in the building where first and second year students are based. As film is a vital teaching tool for the subject in all syllabuses and programmes, it is desirable that all teaching corridors/zones of the school would have TV and VCR/DVD equipment on site and that, in time, all base rooms for English would have these facilities. In relation to ICT equipment, it was reported that the school is wired for internet access, that teachers may use the computers in the small work room adjacent to the staff room for lesson preparation, and that teachers may take classes to the school’s computer laboratory. However, the school’s computer room tends to be heavily used by TY students for ECDL learning. The subject department plan for English states that ICT facilities are not available for the teaching and learning of English. School management is advised to have an inventory compiled of the existing stock of laptops and of data projectors available for teachers to borrow, and to add to it if necessary, to facilitate greater incidental use of ICT in the teaching and learning of English. Having studied the inventory, the English department should then collectively identify its remaining needs and bring them to the attention of management.
At present, the school library serves as an instructional base for some classes, as the base room for the school’s debating society, and as a room where presentations are sometimes delivered. While some ad hoc borrowing arrangements are being operated by individual teachers, no whole-school borrowing service is in operation. School management has provided some funding for the purchase of fiction texts in recent years and this is commended. However, much of the library’s English stock is either obsolete or only suitable as teacher reference material. It is suggested that, under teacher supervision, a TY service project and/or a student council initiative could lead to the pruning of the library’s stock, the electronic cataloguing of the stock to be kept, and to the management of book borrowing, perhaps during one/two lunch periods per week. It is recommended that school management actively support the re-invigoration of the school library as a vibrant resource for student learning in all subjects.
Personal reading is promoted by the English department in a number of ways. Some teachers of first-year English take their classes to the school library for reading periods, leading to the production of book reviews. Individual teachers of English compile book boxes from the library’s stock and bring them into general classrooms for reading periods. Also, links have been established with the Galway public library service, leading to the encouragement of students to become borrowers from the service. To further motivate students’ personal reading, it is recommended that the English department explicitly interweave the promotion of personal reading into its schemes of work for junior cycle students in particular and also for TY students, celebrate World Book Day and/or other similar landmark days, and have a list of recommended books for particular age groups posted on the library walls and/or have them included with booklists for parental reference. (See Circular M16/99 “Guidelines for reading at Second Level Schools”). The English department is also encouraged to turn the school library into a showcase for its activities, displaying photographs and student reports on readings/workshops by visiting writers/performance groups, and on school shows. Relevant Junior Certificate School Programme (JCSP) in-service courses and materials, the School Library Association of Ireland and the UK School Library Association are useful reference sources that could inform the development of departmental and whole-school practice in this area. (See http://www.libraryassociation.ie and http://www.sla.org.uk/advice-and-support.php).
A very impressive array of co-curricular and extracurricular activities has communicated the importance of language, the arts, and self-expression to the students of Coláiste Iognáid over many years. The school show, which involves all fifth years and over a hundred other students awakens a lifelong interest in performance in many students as well as providing them with invaluable insights into the mechanics of drama that support their subsequent academic study of plays. The school is very fortunate in the number of teachers of English whose dramatic expertise and enthusiasm support the production of the school show every year. In addition, the school’s debating team concretely supports the development of students’ oral communication skills and has achieved notable competition success. Moreover, the magazine produced as part of the TY English programme has been a national competition winner in recent years. Trips to theatrical productions and frequent workshops with visiting writers/film makers also contribute to the vibrant experiences of English that students are exposed to in the school. The teachers of English and school management are commended for their commitment to providing such stimulating co-curricular and extra-curricular activities for their students
English teachers are encouraged and facilitated to attend continuing professional development (CPD) activities. Sources of professional development that have been accessed by individual members of the department include Teaching English Support Service (TESS) courses, acting as State Examination Commission examiners for English, in-service courses for other subjects that are relevant to English, and further study. Also, the fact that individual teachers are involved with local arts organisations and festivals has significantly enhanced those teachers’ knowledge of the subject and has benefited students through their teachers’ organisation of in-school workshops and of outings to particular performances. With regard to the professional development of the department into the future, it is recommended that members share teaching methods they have learned or developed with each other; that they invite a representative of the school’s special education support team to periodically attend part of their subject department meetings, to advise them on strategies for supporting students with different learning styles and needs; and that they consult with confident users of ICT within the school, to help develop their skills in using that teaching tool. School management is advised to organise whole-school inputs on differentiation, mixed-ability teaching, and assessment for learning, to support all teachers’ pedagogical development and the sharing of good practice within and among subject departments. Finally, the teachers of English are also encouraged to avail of external sources of professional support including the Second Level Support Service (SLSS), the Special Education Support Service (SESS), and/ or the distance learning course provider ICEP. (See www.slss.ie, www.sess.ie. and http://www.icepe.eu/index.html).
Planning and preparation
A subject department co-ordinator is in place whose role is to “co-ordinate the department’s work and to highlight issues of common cause to candidates, to indicate changes in State Examination Commission marking schemes and to promote best practice.” Teachers of English to junior and senior students tend to meet separately. Issues common to both groups that have been discussed include the formation of classes at the beginning of first and fifth year, the review of relevant whole-school policies such as the homework policy, and resources. It is suggested that the department consider appointing a second subject department co-ordinator for meetings of teachers working with junior students, so that minutes of those meetings are recorded as they are for meetings of the teachers of senior students. The two subject department co-ordinators could then jointly plan a few common agenda items to ensure the discussion of issues of common concern within the same timeframe, possibly leading to the agreement of a common position by all. It is also strongly encouraged 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 they gained from a professional development course, from practices they observed in the English departments of other schools, and/or from further study. In addition, meetings of all the teachers of English should be held at least at the beginning and end of the school year, to agree and later review action planning targets. Lastly, it is recommended that the joint subject department co-ordinator roles be rotated annually, to help develop leadership skills across the department.
Good progress has been made in compiling a subject department plan. The collaborative relationship between members of the department has contributed significantly to this achievement. In particular, two aspects of the plan are highly commended. The placement of information on the school’s ethos at the beginning of the plan reminds established and newer teachers of the need to translate ethos principles into lived practices. Moreover, the “Myself” unit that is planned for the first term of first year is commended as a way of engaging students’ experiences and skills and using them to create a bridge to the study of language and literature at second level. To help develop the English department’s planning even further, two recommendations are offered.
First, it is recommended that the department continue to refine its schemes of work. It should identify what it considers to be appropriate student learning outcomes for each year group. (See the draft rebalanced JC English syllabus and JCSP statement materials for exemplars of such learning outcomes). For example, a progression should be clearly apparent from first year onward in plans for the development of students’ writing skills (pre-writing, drafting, proofing, editing, and modelling strategies; spelling, punctuation, and paragraphing competencies; and the planned expansion of students’ vocabularies), reading skills (word and text-attack techniques, library layout and usage, and dictionary and thesaurus usage), and oral communication skills. Secondly, using tools like a SCOT (Strengths, Challenges, Opportunities, Threats) window, the department should engage in formal action planning and seek to achieve one or two measurable targets every year. (To aid such action planning, the department is directed to the SDPI website, http://www.sdpi.ie/guidelines/Unit0400.html). Ultimately, what is envisaged is a planning process guided by the advice outlined in chapter three of Looking at English and customised to the needs of the students of Coláiste Iognáid.
Active learning strengths of the TY programme for English include the integration of drama workshops and outings to plays with training in acting techniques and the academic study of a play, leading students from storyboarding through drafting a lengthy script to filming it, and assigning writing assignments that are meaningful to students such as writing for the TY magazine or the school website. Further development of three aspects of the programme will make it an even more educative experience. First, it is suggested that student projects, selected from a menu of teacher-structured choices, could be introduced to promote the purposeful integration of independent learning, research, and presentation skills. (This could also help the department broaden its range of resources, particularly if students chose to prepare their projects in multi-media formats). Secondly, it is suggested that the department consider incorporating a key assignment approach (as is used in the LCA programme) to set formal expectations and to assess students’ progress in TY English. Providing students with an outline of the TY English programme and of their key assignments (including criteria and dates for completion) would help them take responsibility for their own learning. Thirdly, an explicit focus on analysing individual students’ language needs and planning for regular remediation work focused on those needs should also be incorporated into the programme, to help improve the TY English students’ general life skills and preparedness for senior cycle study. (See the TYP Guidelines, page 2).
Teaching and learning
Effective teaching was observed over the course of the evaluation. Most teachers’ ease and breadth of reference in relation to the studied texts was impressive. In all lessons observed, there was evidence of planning and continuity with prior learning. All teachers acted as oral language role models for students. Lessons were well-structured and were paced appropriately in almost all classes. Where best practice was observed, lessons were planned to serve specific learning outcomes and those learning outcomes were shared with learners at the beginning of lessons, helping them to connect new learning with previous work and also inviting them to share responsibility for the lesson.
During the lessons evaluated, the resources used by teachers included an audio version of a play, textbooks, and handouts. Chalkboards were commendably used to record student feedback to questions, to provide written reinforcement of new vocabulary, and to provide specific instructions to guide in-class writing tasks. (Though a minor point, a minority of the chalkboards observed were in need of repainting to ensure legibility). ICT was used by one teacher to prepare teaching materials. Evidence was also gathered of the use of exemplars of student writing by a small number of teachers to support peer learning. Building on this foundation and given the variety of learning styles and of student abilities in the school, it is recommended that the department substantially increase its use of graphic organisers (writing frames, mindmaps, and timelines); audio, graphic, and abridged versions of texts; concrete objects (such as relevant props and models); and ICT. Given the absence of print-rich environments for English in the school due to the lack of any base rooms for the subject and to the student-based nature of general classrooms, it is even more vital that teachers of English use a wider range of resources in their teaching to support student learning.
Teachers used questioning to good effect to stimulate and interact with students and to structure the learning activity. All teachers were careful listeners, connecting student responses contributed at different moments in lessons. Where very good practice was seen, teachers progressed from lower-order (recall/recognition) questions to higher-order questions seeking personal responses and textual support. Where weakness in questioning was noted, most questions posed were left open for whole-class answering. In those instances, more advanced learners offered answers to almost all questions posed, thus allowing less advanced/confident learners to remain a silent cohort within the room. To motivate students across the range of ability, it is advised that lower-order questions be sometimes targeted to struggling learners and that students be occasionally encouraged to consult in pairs when developing answers to higher-order questions.
A variety of teaching methods was observed over the course of the evaluation, including question and answer, teacher and student reading, students in role, peer learning (where students were asked to listen to and comment on samples of other students’ work read out to them), directed listening to a scene from a play, activating students’ relevant prior knowledge and experiences before introducing new material, mind mapping, picture perception, free writing, and equipping students with a relevant vocabulary bank in preparation for a personal writing task. Evidence was also gathered of some teachers’ use of creative interventions (asking students to compose a letter, diary entry, report or other piece of functional writing from the perspective of a particular character in a studied text). The teachers of English now need to formally share these methodologies to ensure that all students get the benefit of them.
One recommendation is offered with regard to pedagogical areas for development: the expansion of the department’s strategies for supporting less able students. The use of more varied resources by teachers of English will offer significant support in this regard. Increased use of structured pair/group work within lessons will also facilitate more active and collaborative learning. Moreover, the incorporation of agreed literacy-related learning outcomes and strategies into the department’s schemes of work for all year groups will support incremental development of students’ literacy skills from first to sixth year in a consistent manner. (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/.) Furthermore, while some differentiation by question is being implemented in some cases, it is recommended that the department develop its expertise in this area. Ultimately, the strategies outlined above should benefit all students by connecting with a wider pool of learning styles in class groups.
Teachers communicated high expectations to students and consistently affirmed students’ responses, integrating them orally into lessons. Very good interpersonal relations between teachers and students were evident and discipline was sensitively maintained in all classes. Oral questioning by teachers and by the inspector demonstrated many students’ wide-ranging vocabularies; their eagerness to answer; and their very good levels of knowledge of the plot, character traits and character relationships underpinning studied texts. Particularly impressive were the maturity and imaginative quality of students’ answers and their ability to support their views with textual evidence. An examination of students’ copies revealed some variety in the writing tasks that had been assigned to them. Where strengths were noted, individual teachers had equipped students with writing frames to help them produce well-planned, high-quality pieces of writing and had used passages from newspapers or magazines on contemporary issues as a basis for comprehension work. Where weaknesses were noted, students were not implementing routines for the organisation of different sections of their written work, leading to the recording of disorganised notes that were unlikely to serve as effective revision aids and were not storing handouts supplied to them in class and/or written work produced by them on loose sheets in an easily-retrievable manner. It is recommended that the department agree a common position on how students should present and store their written work, and should consistently expect and communicate these routines to 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 good practice was observed, homework assignments were written on the whiteboard and sufficient time was allocated for students to note down their assignments. It is also important that students be given specific instructions on how homework is to be presented and on the criteria that work should meet (for example, page length, number of points and quotations required).
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, the correction of some errors, and a short comment. In other cases, evidence was noted of detailed, developmental feedback being written on substantial pieces of student writing, with teachers balancing the identification of student errors/omissions with affirmations of what students had done correctly and with developmental feedback on how they might improve their work. This best practice is commended and it is recommended that it be extended across the entire department. Input on Assessment for Learning (AfL) would help to develop consistent departmental practice in this area. The department may find the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment (NCCA)’s AfL web pages and the JCSP publication Between the Lines useful in this regard.
Three other aspects of student assessment should now be further developed by the department. 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 agree a common position on awarding some marks toward end-of-term results for tasks linked to the agreed learning outcomes for different year groups. (Tasks could include spelling and vocabulary tests, a cumulative average for composition work, folder maintenance, quotation tests, oral presentations, project work). Thirdly, while it was evident that individual teachers work to give their LC students an understanding of the State Examinations Commission criteria for assessment for English, it is recommended that this practice be adopted as a consistent departmental one. For example, the commendable practice of making students aware of the grid explaining the criteria and of the “Assessment Advice for Students” document issued at the time of the syllabus launch is already engaged in by individual teachers. Similarly, all teachers should use the PCLM (Purpose, Coherence, Language use, Mechanics) criteria to comment on and/or mark substantial assignments to give senior cycle students more specific insights into strengths and areas for development in their writing. A simplified version of the criteria could also be introduced into teacher marking of substantial pieces of junior cycle writing, to offer similar support to student learning.
Reports are sent to parents following the four annual assessments of non-examination classes. Mock examinations are administered to third and sixth year students at Christmas. The LC mock examinations are prepared and corrected by the students’ subject teachers. This practice is highly commended as it gives teachers very clear insights into the subject strengths and weaknesses of their students and thus helps them to customise their teaching and revision plans to meet individual class groups’ needs. It was reported that some teachers also prepare and administer a second mock examination to sixth-year students at Easter, outside school time. Again, such dedication to supporting student achievement is highly commended.
Summary of main findings and recommendations
The following are the main strengths identified in the evaluation:
- The English teachers are a dedicated, professional group.
- The English teachers and school management are highly commended for the very impressive array of English-related co-curricular and extra-curricular activities they routinely arrange for students. Not only do these activities support the academic study of English, but they also develop students’ lifelong interests.
- Students are placed in mixed-ability classes in first year and generally remain in these classes until the end of sixth year. This practice is highly commended for encouraging all students to achieve to their full potential.
- Good progress has been made in compiling a subject department plan.
- Effective teaching was observed over the course of the evaluation and high expectations were communicated to students by their teachers.
- Very good interpersonal relations between teachers and students were evident and discipline was sensitively maintained in all classes.
- From a review of student copies, it was evident that homework was being set and monitored in all classes.
- The teachers of English are highly commended for preparing and correcting their own mock LC examination papers.
As a means of building on these strengths and to address areas for development, the following key recommendations are made:
- Aspects of whole-school support for the subject including the designation of a small number of base rooms for English, the provision of adequate access to AV and ICT resources to the teachers of English, and the rotation of English specialist teachers across all cycles and programmes should be further developed by school management, as resources allow.
- The teachers of English should expand their collective range of strategies for supporting less able students.
- The teachers of English should formally share the various methodologies and assessment strategies they employ. Specific areas for discussion should include how to incrementally develop students’ literacy skills from first to sixth year in a consistent manner, differentiation approaches and resources, and assessment for learning strategies.
- Advice provided in this report in relation to subject department planning should be implemented over the coming years.
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 April 2009