An Roinn Oideachais agus Eolaíochta
Department of Education and Science
Subject Inspection of English
REPORT
Saint Brendan’s College
Woodbrook, Bray, Co. Wicklow
Roll number: 61790D
Date of inspection: 19 February, 2007
Date of issue of report: 6 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. Brendan’s College which was conducted as part of a whole school evaluation. 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.
Subject provision and whole school support
All junior cycle students in St. Brendan’s College have four English lessons per week. This is satisfactory provision. Provision improves at senior cycle as Transition Year (TY) students have four English lessons a week and fifth-year and sixth-year students have five English lessons a week. Lesson periods are generally forty minutes in duration. However, one timetabled lesson each day is only thirty minutes in duration which is an extremely short timeframe for lesson content to be properly delivered. It is recommended that school management review the timetable with a view to addressing this shortfall as soon as is feasible.
The manner in which students are placed in class groups from first year onwards is appropriate for English. First-year students are placed in mixed-ability classes. Then, on the basis of common examinations held at the end of first year, the better able students are placed in one class group and the remaining students are banded together to form two mixed-ability class groups. All students have the opportunity to take higher-level English in their Junior Certificate examination. The mixed-ability placement of students in Transition Year is also appropriate as is the setting of students into higher and ordinary level in fifth year. English lessons are concurrently timetabled in fifth and sixth year which allows for students to change levels. There was evidence of good collaboration between teachers to facilitate such movement in that teachers agree on common texts and when to teach these texts. The fact that concurrency is used appropriately, as recommended in a previous English inspection report, is commended as it was.
Eight teachers currently teach English in St. Brendan’s College. Six of these have English in their degrees. Those who are not English specialists teach one class group for English. This leads to a situation where the specialist English teachers in the school do not always have enough contact with their subject. In addition, there is a sufficient number of specialist English teachers in the school to avoid situations where teachers who are not English specialists have to teach the subject. It was reported that such situations occur to facilitate the timetable for students with special educational needs (SEN) which is arranged in September. It is strongly recommended that efforts be made to organise the timetable in such a way as to deploy teachers to their subject speciality. In addition, the rationale behind the allocation of teachers to higher-level or senior cycle class groups was not clear. It is recommended that a policy be agreed following consultation with English teachers as to the deployment of teachers so that all teachers have an opportunity to teach all levels on a rotational basis in a transparent manner. This will ensure that no teacher is associated with teaching a particular level and that all specialist teachers have the opportunity to develop their subject expertise.
While there is no specific budget for English it was reported that senior management meets all reasonable requests for resources. In addition, English teachers expressed satisfaction with the level of audio-visual resources available to them. Teachers are generally in charge of their own resources. It is recommended, in the context of subject planning, that an inventory of resources be conducted so that all teachers are aware of the range of DVDs, videos and other resources in the school which could be shared as appropriate.
A number of resource issues were apparent during the course of the inspection. For example, some classrooms lacked curtains or the curtains were of a poor quality which meant that it was sometimes difficult for students to see the board. The acoustics in some classrooms were also very poor. There is a library in the school which, due to lack of space, is also used as a classroom. This library has fallen into disuse and the books it contains need to be updated. Likewise, it was reported that the computer room does not contain enough workable computers to bring English classes to. There are plans to build a new school in the near future and hopefully many of these issues will be rectified at that time. However, some issues, such as lack of curtains could be rectified in the interim period. Teachers are to be commended for accessing the internet for relevant notes for their students. In addition, there was one example observed of a box of books being effectively used with a group of first-year students to develop their reading habit in class. This is a simple strategy which, in the absence of a working school library, could be developed among all English teachers to encourage the reading habit.
Co-curricular activities pertaining to English include participation in the Transition Year play, in the college musical and in debating and public speaking competitions. In addition, students are brought by their teachers to a range of productions of texts from their course.
There are a number of students with special educational needs (SEN) in the school as well as newcomer students whose first language is not English. While there is provision of resource teaching for these students, there was evidence that there was a need for more awareness among mainstream teachers of the specific needs of these students. In addition, some newcomer students were receiving just one lesson of English as a second language per week which is not adequate provision. It is recommended that school management access inservice on teaching students with SEN in mainstream classes and that there be more formal liaison between teachers of such students and mainstream teaching staff. This recommendation was also made in the previous English inspection report.
Planning and preparation
Subject planning on a collaborative basis has commenced in the school. One formal meeting is provided at the start of the school year so that teachers can meet in their subject groupings and discuss matters pertaining to English. While it is commendable that the school is now providing formal time for English teachers to meet, it is strongly recommended that school management facilitate at least one more meeting each year. Such planning meetings are important in order to share good practice, to induct new teachers of the subject and to discuss issues such as allocation of teachers, common examinations, effective approaches for teaching students with SEN, and developing learning outcomes for each year group. A record of each meeting is documented which is good practice as it ensures that key decisions are recorded. Records of meetings show that English teachers also meet in smaller groups during the year to discuss issues such as choice of textbooks.
English teachers have made a start on compiling a documented subject plan following the school development planning initiative (SDPI) template. The plan documents the content to be taught by each teacher with their class. The plan also outlines the mission statement and aims and objectives for teaching English in the school. These commendable aims include giving students the language skills necessary for adult life and developing an appreciation of language among students. The plan should be a basis for discussion and sharing of ideas rather than an end in itself. The plan also includes a page of learning outcomes that first-year students could achieve. This is praiseworthy as although the content of teachers’ courses may be different the learning outcomes for each year group to achieve should remain the same for all students. This is recognised in the English plan which aims to integrate the English courses at junior and senior cycle “to ensure that the broad aims and objectives as set out are realised”. It is suggested that it would be more efficient to use ICT to prepare the plan in future years in order to make simple adjustments from year to year when reviewing the plan rather than filling in a new template each year. The work to date on the development of an English plan, which was recommended in the previous report, is commended. The tradition has been for the senior English teacher to act as chair of meetings or subject convenor. It is suggested that a coordinator of English be appointed from among the English teachers on an annual basis so that all teachers have the experience of coordinating the subject and of taking responsibility for disseminating information relevant to the subject.
There is an overall TY plan available. However, the English section of the plan is in need of updating as it does not reflect the current arrangements for the teaching of TY English. Nor does it reflect the range of texts and activities that is covered. It is therefore recommended that the TY English plan be reviewed and that the current teachers of TY have a copy of this plan available.
The fact that teachers have autonomy over choice of texts for their class groups is sensible as it means that texts can be chosen to suit the particular student cohort. Yet agreement over texts is made where necessary, as already stated. It is commendable practice that first-year students study a novel and a play. The texts chosen for study in Transition Year are also appropriate as they are mainly texts that cannot be again studied for the Leaving Certificate. In addition, the fact that students study a drama text in TY which is then produced and staged is also laudable. There was no evidence of overlap between texts studied at junior and senior cycle which was the practice previously. Many teachers have developed a range of resources which are used to good effect to complement their teaching.
Teaching and learning
Eight class groups and eight teachers were visited during the inspection. All classes had a clear purpose which was communicated from the outset to the students which is very good practice. Lessons were also well paced and a variety of activities was included over the course of each lesson. Instructions were always clear. Teachers engaged students in the lessons in a number of ways. These included creating links with what they were studying and previous learning, with contemporary issues including television programmes, sport and other subjects on the curriculum. This stimulated student interest and placed their learning in context. Students were, on the whole, more involved in their learning than during the previous inspection, which is commended.
Questioning of students was generally appropriate although there were instances when the same students tended to dominate lessons as these were the students who put up their hands when questions were asked. To avoid these situations it is recommended that teachers ask questions of all students, whether or not they have their hands up. In addition, students could be asked to discuss a question together in pairs for a few moments before being asked to share the answer with the class. In this way, students might have more confidence in answering. Best practice was seen when both closed and more open-ended questions were asked so that all abilities were catered for and so that students were pushed to develop their answers.
There were many examples of active learning observed during the inspection including use of drama in the classroom, students actively listening to a recording of a poem, and students doing group work. In other classes there was more teacher talk with students actively listening and being engaged through questioning. Teachers were adept at pointing out key points and ensuring that these points were understood through the use of good questioning. It is recommended that opportunities for active learning become a more regular feature of all lessons so that teachers give students opportunities to discuss issues together in groups or pairs for a period of some lessons so that teachers become facilitators of learning and allow students to learn from each other rather than just learning the teacher’s point of view.
A feature of all lessons was the good use of the board to record key points and to set out the key learning points for their lessons. Many teachers had also developed or accessed handouts for students which consolidated their learning. Although there were some efforts to create a print-rich environment in evidence in some classrooms, as recommended in the previous report, a lot more work could be done in this area. Students would benefit from having key words or key quotations on display in their classrooms as well as having samples of their work displayed. It is therefore recommended that further efforts be made by teachers to enhance the learning environment in the school.
There is a need in all lessons for teachers to develop their strategies for teaching to the range of abilities that inevitably are contained within a class group. Some good strategies for such differentiation already occur including writing key points on the board and some targeted questioning. Other strategies might include simplifying tasks for some students, giving individual attention to certain students during the course of the lesson and giving students more time to answer questions. As already recommended, teachers would benefit from accessing some inservice on this area of differentiation.
The enthusiasm that many teachers demonstrated for their subject was matched by equal enthusiasm by students, which was impressive. In addition, teachers’ language in the classrooms was an example of good practice and showed that high expectations were expected of students who modelled this language in their work and verbal contributions in class. Such language was seamlessly introduced into the lessons, which is good practice. There were occasions, in order to foster an appreciation of poetry for example, when an initial reading of the poem followed by general discussion would have been more appropriate than a detailed examination of the techniques of the poem in the first instance.
Although it was reported that low-level indiscipline is a feature of some classes there was no evidence of this during the course of the inspection and students were well managed and on task. There was a respectful relationship in evidence between teachers and students in all lessons and students articulately answered questions put to them by the inspector. Students demonstrated an ability to handle a range of texts well and it was noteworthy that they could discuss texts studied earlier in the year as well as what they were now learning. In addition, a feature of all lessons was the willingness of students to participate in their learning.
While individual teachers examine state examination results each year, it is suggested that trends be analysed more closely from year to year. For example, more students sat higher-level English in their Junior Certificate in 2006 than in previous years, while fewer students sat higher-level English in their Leaving Certificate in 2006 than in previous years. This may reflect a particular year group’s ability but it is important that such trends are analysed.
Assessment
All students, including third and sixth years, sit end-of-term tests at Christmas. Examination students sit ‘mock’ examinations in February and non-examination classes sit end-of-term tests in the summer. Formal reports are sent home at these times. In addition to these formal tests, and in an effort to improve outcomes for students and to keep them working, students and parents also receive progress reports at regular intervals throughout the year. For example, examination years receive progress reports in November, March and April while non-examination classes receive progress reports in October and Easter. Such efforts to improve standards are commended. First-year students sit common examinations with a common marking scheme which is good practice.
Students’ copies demonstrated evidence of regular assessment by teachers. Students’ work was well maintained. Some teachers expect students to use hard-back copies and folders for their notes which were particularly well maintained. A higher expectation of students’ work was a recommendation in the previous English report and this recommendation has been fully implemented. While some teachers gave good written feedback to students on areas where they need to improve, such formative assessment was not in evidence in a range of classes, and copies were simply ticked and dated. Students need both verbal and written feedback to direct them in their learning and it is recommended that all teachers adopt this policy. This was also a recommendation in the previous English report. In addition, students should be expected to correct or redraft their work in light of teachers’ comments in order to demonstrate improvement.
Homework was frequently given which is important to consolidate learning. It is recommended that teachers write homework on the board for all students to record. After-school study is provided for all students who wish to avail of this facility which is commendable.
Summary of main findings and recommendations
The following are the main strengths identified in the evaluation:
· There was evidence of good collaboration between teachers to facilitate movement of students where concurrency is provided on the timetable.
· A range of co-curricular activities pertaining to English is available to students.
· Subject planning on a collaborative basis has commenced in the school and English teachers have made a start on compiling a documented subject plan.
· The novels and plays chosen for study are appropriate.
· Lessons had a clear purpose, which was articulated to the students. Lessons were well paced and included a variety of activities.
· Students were engaged in their lessons and there was a respectful relationship in evidence.
· The quality of teaching and learning was good with the enthusiasm of teachers being matched by enthusiastic learners.
· Teachers’ language in the classrooms was an example of good practice.
· Students demonstrated an ability to articulately discuss their texts and to participate in their lessons.
· Students are regularly assessed with reports sent home at frequent intervals. In addition, appropriate amounts of homework were given.
· Students’ work was well maintained.
As a means of building on these strengths and to address areas for development, the following key recommendations are made:
· It is recommended that school management review the timetable with a view to addressing the issue of one thirty minute class daily.
· It is recommended that efforts be made to deploy teachers to their subject speciality. A policy should also be agreed so that all teachers have an opportunity to teach all levels on a rotational basis.
· It is recommended that an inventory of resources be conducted so that all teachers are aware of the range of resources in the school which could be shared as appropriate.
· The strategy of using book boxes with students to develop their reading habit could be adopted by all teachers of English.
· There is a need in all lessons for teachers to develop strategies for teaching to the range of abilities within a class group. It is recommended that school management access inservice on teaching students with SEN in mainstream classes and that there be more formal liaison between teachers of such students and mainstream teaching staff.
· It is recommended that school management facilitate at least one more subject planning meeting each year.
· The Transition Year plan should be reviewed and the current teachers of TY should have a copy of this plan available.
· It is recommended that opportunities for active learning become a more regular feature of all lessons.
· Efforts should be made by all teachers to enhance the learning environment in the school.
· It is recommended that more formative assessment be given to students when correcting their work and that students be expected to redraft their work in the light of teachers’ comments.
· Homework should be written on the board for all students to record.
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.