2021-2024 strategic improvement plan€¦ · page 3 of 15 large primary school 1 (2021-2024)...

of 22 29 October 2020

Large Primary School 1 (2021-2024)

2021-2024 Strategic Improvement Plan

Large Primary School 1



School vision and context

School vision statement At Large Primary School 1 we believe that every student should be challenged to learn and continually improve in a respectful, inclusive and high expectation environment. Our vision is to be partners in learning and collaboratively empowering all students to become confident, resilient, self-directed and successful learners.

School context Large Primary School 1 is located in South Western Sydney and has a student enrolment of 560. The school culture is that of connectedness, inclusion and belonging with students, staff, parents and the wider community working together to promote school excellence.

Our school is supported by a strong and vibrant multi-cultural community, and our Vietnamese and Indian languages Community Language Program supports students in maintaining and developing further communicative competence in their community language. 88% of our students have a language background other than English, and 78% require some level of EAL/D (English as an Additional Language or Dialect) support. 4% of students identifying as Aboriginal. Our students come from a wide range of socio-economic backgrounds.

Extra-curricular opportunities in Sport, Science, Technology, and Creative and Performing Arts, enable our students to excel through a range of different experiences.

Through our situational analysis, we have identified a need to use data driven practices that ensure all students have access to stage appropriate learning. Further work will need to occur around how teachers can successfully plan for and deliver quality differentiated instruction to students with additional needs including those identified as high potential and gifted. Through the NAPLAN gap analysis, the school has identified system-negotiated target areas in Reading and Numeracy.

Work will take place on developing quality summative and formative assessment tasks and data collection practices and developing greater consistency of judgement within and across schools.

School services will be utilised to build understanding on how to do this successfully and the instructional leader will lead much of this work in the school.

Our work with individual students will be responsive and closely monitored. Individual and targeted support will be provided where growth is not evident. Pre and post assessments will be carried out to assess the impact of this support. Structures will be put in place to identify students who need intervention and students not showing growth will be referred to the Learning and Support Teacher for intensive intervention.

Continual monitoring of student performance data will determine areas of need and success at a class and school level and the involvement of the whole school community in this process will be essential for success.



2021-2024 Strategic Improvement Plan Strategic Direction 1: Student growth and attainment Purpose In order to maximise student learning outcomes in reading and numeracy and to build strong foundations for academic success, we will further develop and refine data driven teaching practices that are responsive to the learning needs of individual students. Improvement measures

• A minimum of 64.2% of Year 3 and 5 students achieve in the top two bands in NAPLAN numeracy. (Lower bound system-negotiated target).

• A minimum of 74.7% of students achieve expected growth in NAPLAN numeracy. (Lower bound system-negotiated target).

• A minimum of 68.1% of Year 3 and 5 students achieve in the top two bands in NAPLAN reading. (Lower bound system-negotiated target).

• A minimum of 69.7% of students achieve expected growth in NAPLAN reading. (Lower bound system-negotiated target)

• At least 90% of students completing Year 3 will have achieved the learning indicators within the additive strategies sub-element of the Numeracy Progressions.

• At least 77% of students in Year 2-6 will demonstrate a 0.4 growth (calculated through effect size formula) when comparing start of year to end year scale scores in the Progressive Achievement Test (PAT) in numeracy.

• At least 90% of students completing Kindergarten will have achieved within Level 4 of the understanding texts sub-element of the Literacy Progressions.

• At least 95% of students completing Year 3 will have achieved within Level 8 of the understanding texts sub-element of the Literacy Progressions. Outcome EN2-8b.

Initiatives Personalised learning Embed a learning culture that enables students to create, receive feedback and achieve their learning goals. • PL on use of literacy and numeracy

progressions to personalise learning and understanding.

• Expertly use student assessment data to reflect on teaching effectiveness and provide individualised explicit differentiated and responsive learning opportunities.

• Embed and use professional learning models to build teacher capabilities and collective pedagogical practice.

Data driven practices Ensure effective strategies and processes for data analysis and reflection are used for responsive curriculum delivery. • PL in data literacy, data analysis and

data use in teaching for all staff. This is linked to gap analysis data.

• Establish and use IL positions to work with teachers using data to monitor and assess student progress and design future learning on a whole class, group and individual level.

• Review and adapt practice to ensure reliable formative and summative assessment tasks are used to analyse student progress, evaluate growth over time and report student achievement.

Success criteria Assessment data is collected in reading and numeracy on a regular and planned basis and used responsively as an integral part of classroom instruction.

Valid teacher judgment is evident across the school.

Data and feedback inform teaching practice and direct learners and learning.

All students articulate, understand and achieve their literacy and numeracy learning goals.

EAL/D and LST teams are collaborative, build the capabilities of all teachers and are an integral component of whole school approaches to language, literacy and numeracy programs.

Evaluation plan The school will use the following data sources to regularly analyse the effectiveness of the initiatives in achieving the purpose and improvement measures of the strategic direction. This analysis will guide the school’s future directions: • NAPLAN data • Scout – Value added data • Learning sprint data analysis • Student work samples • Literacy and numeracy PLAN2 data • Student PLPs • Student focus groups.

The evaluation plan will involve: • Regular review of these data sources to

provide clarity around whether we are on track for achieving the intended improvement measures.

• Regular professional discussion around the School Excellence Framework elements and themes.

• Executive team and whole staff reflective sessions.

• Term by term review and triangulation of data sources including quantitative and qualitative, internal and external data to corroborate conclusions.

After analysing the data a determination will be made as to the future of the four years’ work and ‘Where to Next?’



• At least 82% of students in Year 2-6 will demonstrate a 0.4 growth when comparing start year to end year scale scores in the PAT in reading.

• All students achieve at or above expected growth in determined literacy and numeracy school-determined targets (goals) using PLAN2 data.

• Learning sprints are sustained as embedded practice across the school with teachers applying a range of assessment strategies, informing teaching and learning.

• Value added data in Scout for K-3 and Y3-5 continues to show Excelling; Value added data in Scout for Y5-7 increases from Sustaining and Growing to Excelling

• Excelling in the theme ‘Data use in teaching’ within the element ‘Data skills and Use’.

• Embed data informed formative assessment practices as an integral part of daily instruction in every classroom.



2021-2024 Annual progress measures

Strategic Direction 1: Student growth and attainment

2021 Progress measures

• Increase the percentage of students achieving in the top 2 bands of NAPLAN numeracy to be above the system-negotiated target baseline of 59.64%.

2022 Improvement measures

• A minimum of 64.2% of Year 3 and 5 students achieve in the top two bands in NAPLAN numeracy. (Lower bound system-negotiated target).


• Increase the percentage of students achieving in the top 2 bands of NAPLAN numeracy to be above the system-negotiated lower bound target of 64.2%.


• Increase the percentage of students achieving in the top 2 bands of NAPLAN numeracy to be trending upwards towards the system-negotiated upper bound target.


• Increase the percentage of students achieving in the top 2 bands of NAPLAN reading to be above the system-negotiated target baseline of 59.64%.


• A minimum of 68.1% of Year 3 and 5 students achieve in the top two bands in NAPLAN reading. (Lower bound system-negotiated target).


• Increase the percentage of students achieving in the top 2 bands of NAPLAN reading to be above the system-negotiated lower bound target of 64.2%.


• Increase the percentage of students achieving in the top 2 bands of NAPLAN reading to be trending upwards towards the system-negotiated upper bound target.

2021 Progress measure

• Increase the percentage of students achieving expected growth in NAPLAN numeracy to be above the system-negotiated target baseline of 72.57%.


• School-determined growth targets based on the number sense and algebra element of the Numeracy Progressions are identified for all students and more than 75% are showing expected growth.

2023 Improvement measure

• A minimum of 74.7% of students achieve expected growth in NAPLAN numeracy (Lower bound system-negotiated target).


• Increase the percentage of students achieving expected growth in NAPLAN numeracy to be between the system-negotiated lower and upper bound target range.


• Increase the percentage of students achieving expected growth in NAPLAN reading to be above the system-negotiated target baseline of 60.3%.


• School-determined growth targets based on the reading and viewing element of the Literacy Progressions are identified for all students and more than 65% are achieving expected growth.

2023 Improvement measure

• A minimum of 69.7% of students achieve expected growth in NAPLAN reading. (Lower bound system-negotiated target)


• Increase the percentage of students achieving expected growth in NAPLAN reading to be between the system-negotiated lower and upper bound target range.


• At least 70% of students completing Year 3 will have achieved the learning indicators within the additive strategies sub-element of the Numeracy Progressions

• At least 62% of students in Year 2-6 will demonstrate a 0.4 growth (calculated through effect size formula) when comparing start year to end year scale scores in the Progressive Achievement Test (PAT) in numeracy.


• Using 2021 baseline (XX%), an additional XX% of students completing Year 3 will have achieved the learning indicators within the additive strategies sub-element of the Progressions.

• Using 2021 baseline (XX%), an additional XX% of Year 2-6 students will demonstrate a 0.4 growth when comparing start year to end year scale scores in the Progressive Achievement Test (PAT) in numeracy.


• Using 2022 baseline (XX%), an additional XX% completing Year 3 will have achieved the learning indicators within the additive strategies sub-element of the Progressions.

• Using 2022 baseline (XX%), an additional XX% of students in Year 2-6 will demonstrate a 0.4 growth when comparing start year to end year scale scores in the Progressive Achievement Test (PAT) in numeracy.


• At least 90% of students completing Year 3 will have achieved the learning indicators within the additive strategies sub-element of the Progressions.

• At least 77% of students in Year 2-6 will demonstrate a 0.4 growth (calculated through effect size formula) when comparing start of year to end year scale scores in the Progressive Achievement Test (PAT) in numeracy.




• At least 65% of students completing Kindergarten will have achieved within Level 4 of the understanding texts sub-element of the Progressions

• 70% of students completing Year 3 will have achieved within Level 8 of the understanding texts sub-element of the Progressions

• 65% of students in Year 2-6 will demonstrate a 0.4 growth (calculated through effect size formula) when comparing start year to end year scale scores in the PAT in numeracy.


• Using 2021 baseline (XX%), an additional XX% of students completing Kindergarten will have achieved within Level 4 of the understanding texts sub-element of the Progressions.

• Using 2021 baseline (XX%), an additional XX% of students completing Year 3 will have achieved within Level 8 of the understanding texts sub-element of the Progressions.

• Using 2021 baseline (XX%), an additional XX% of students in Years 2-6 will demonstrate a 0.4 growth when comparing start year to end year scale scores in the PAT in numeracy.

Note: XX% is determined after previous year’s annual reflection


• Using 2022 baseline (XX%), an additional XX% of students completing Kindergarten will have achieved within Level 4 of the understanding texts sub-element of the Progressions.

• Using 2022 baseline (XX%), an additional XX% of students completing Year 3 will have achieved within Level 8 of the understanding texts sub-element of the Progressions.

• Using 2022 baseline (XX%), an additional XX% of students in Years 2-6 will demonstrate a 0.4 growth (calculated through effect size formula) when comparing start year to end year scale scores in the PAT in numeracy.

Note: XX% is determined after previous year’s annual reflection


• Between 68.2.0 and 71.0% of Year 3 and 5 students achieve top two bands in NAPLAN and 80% of Year 5 students achieve expected growth. (System-negotiated target)

• At least 90% of students completing Kindergarten will have achieved within Level 4 of the understanding texts sub-element of the Progressions.

• At least 95% of students completing Year 3 will have achieved within Level 8 of the understanding texts sub-element of the Progressions. Outcome EN2-8b

• At least 82% of students in Years 2-6 will demonstrate a 0.4 growth when comparing start year to end year scale scores in the PAT in reading.


• All students have learning goals based on determined ‘expected growth’ data using literacy/numeracy progressions which are tracked and monitored using PLAN2


• All students achieve learning goals based on determined ‘expected growth’ data using Year 1 progress measure baseline data.


• All students achieve learning goals based on determined ‘expected growth’ data using Year 2 progress measure evaluations.


• All students achieve at or above expected growth in determined literacy and numeracy school-determined targets (goals) using PLAN2 data.


• All teachers review student assessment data and compare results with grade team members through the implementation of learning sprints


• Assessments are used regularly within grade/ stage teams to monitor learning, identify skill gaps/ areas for extension, and determine learning sprint focus.


• Learning sprints are embedded practice across the school with teachers applying a range of assessment strategies, informing teaching and learning.


• Learning sprints are sustained as embedded practice across the school with teachers applying a range of assessment strategies, informing teaching and learning.

2021 Progress measures • Value added data in Scout for K-3 and

Y3-5 continues to show Excelling; Value added data in Scout for Y5-7 increases from ‘Delivering’ to ‘Sustaining and growing’


Y3-5 continues to show Excelling; Value added data in Scout for Y5-7 is maintained at ‘Sustaining and growing’.


Y3-5 continues to show Excelling; Value added data in Scout for Y5-7 is maintained at ‘Sustaining and growing’.

2024 Improvement measures • Value added data in Scout for K-3 and

Y3-5 continues to show Excelling; Value added data in Scout for Y5-7 is ‘Excelling’.







• Delivering in the theme ‘Data use in teaching’ within the element ‘Data skills and Use’.

• ‘Sustaining and growing’ in the theme ‘Data use in teaching’ within the element ‘Data skills and Use’.

• Maintain ‘Sustaining and growing’ in the theme ‘Data use in teaching’ within the element ‘Data skills and Use’.

• ‘Excelling’ in the theme ‘Data use in teaching’ within the element ‘Data skills and Use’.



2021 – Implementation and progress monitoring Strategic Direction 1: Student growth and attainment Initiative Personalised learning

Activity Engagement of instructional leader (IL) (0.5 FTE K-2, 0.5 FTE 3-6) and establishment of role in leading this Personalised learning initiative for SD1: • IL develops PL for whole school on

using the learning progressions to develop student learning goals

• executive planning day with IL to review and adjust developed PL plan for whole school

• deliver PL for all staff on using the learning progressions to develop student learning goals (W3&4 staff weekly TPL schedule)

• subsequent IL activities itemised and evaluated below.

Resources Teacher release 4 teacher x 1 day executive team release = $464.69 x 4 = $1,858 Engagement of Instructional leader $167,335

Funding Sources: Equity • Socio-economic (flexible) $167,855 Initiative Professional Learning $1,858

Evaluation Q: Do staff understand the Elements and Sub–elements of the Progressions after the PL?

D: Staff PL evaluation.

A: Analysis of PL shows 75% of teachers have a very good understanding of the progressions and are confident to use them to develop learning goals for students. 15% would like further PL. 10% have a basic understanding. Lower rates of understanding were identified with Stage 2 teachers and early career teachers.

I: Additional PL planned. IL to work more closely with those identified as having a basic understanding, with a focus on early career teachers and mentoring programs.

SEF elements Learning & Development Data skills Team Leadership team Teaching team When Term 1 Week 2 Tracking

Evidence Staff PL survey results

Initiative Personalised learning

Activity Literacy & numeracy differentiation & intervention embedded in whole school practices provided through socio-economic background equity loading.

Above entitlement stage-based teaching & SLSO staff led by Assistant Principals, in collaboration with IL & DP:

• develop literacy & numeracy face-to-face in-class differentiation & intervention timetable based on student needs analysis

• continue to review timetable to maximise optimum differentiated learning needs

• ensure identification of high potential students from low socio-economic backgrounds and with disability

Resources Above entitlement class teachers, 1 per stage 4.0 @ $109,384 = $437,536 SLSO 3 @ $66,442 = $199,326 focus K-2, S2, S3 (additional SLSO to 2 provided through Targeted funding) Equity (Socio economic background flexible) • $636,862

Evaluation Q: Are students with educational disadvantage supported with targeted and differentiated teaching and learning and is this organised to provide optimal in-class support for students?

D: Internal data CTJ assessments, NAPLAN, PLAN2, PAT, class and stage timetables, literacy and numeracy differentiation and intervention teaching and learning programs, staff feedback

A: Analysis of staff feedback clearly demonstrates dedicated staff to stage teams highly beneficial to developing expertise and building team; through collaborative programming and shared professional resources, teachers became more flexible with timetabling to maximise targeted teaching for students; more staff

SEF elements Curriculum Effective Classroom Practices Wellbeing Assessment Data skills Team Leadership team When Term 1 Week 1 Tracking Evidence PLAN2 data reports Class needs complexity analysis Stage differentiation and intervention support timetable



2021 – Implementation and progress monitoring Strategic Direction 1: Student growth and attainment

Above entitlement staff integrated with multiple activities (below) within this Personalised learning initiative, including: • plot students on progressions • provide Stage and class support for

PLAN2 • collaboratively develop learning goals

around the learning progressions • learning sprints • refining learning goals.

development required for classroom management.

I: Review whole school classroom management practices to optimise impact additional in-class resources; ensure RFF for additional teaching staff is scheduled for afternoon.


Activity Personalised Learning Pathways (PLP) for students with Aboriginal background. 2021 – 22 students spread across 7 classes: • professional development day for 7

class teachers. Leadership works with class teachers to develop PLP for Aboriginal students with focus on identifying and developing resources to support the literacy & numeracy learning outcomes

• review and adjust PLP in consultation with students and parents

• implement PLP • review and adjust PLP throughout

year.

Resources

Casual teacher release 16 days x 464.69 = $7,435 Equity (Aboriginal background - flexible)

• $7,212 Equity (Socio-economic background - flexible)

• $223

Evaluation Q: Do all Aboriginal students have a PLP with specific focus on literacy and numeracy improvement and is there collaboration with students and parents? D: PLP, PLAN2, NAPLAN, PAT, teacher and student feedback A: Aboriginal student – 81% (18/22) achieved their personal learning goals based on the literacy & numeracy progression; The % of Year 3 & 5 Aboriginal students achieving expected growth in NAPLAN bands Reading and Numeracy is in line for achieving the school’s lower bound target for growth in 2022. Students and teachers reported increasing engagement with regular PLP review and adjustment.

I: There needs to be continued focus on involving students in PLP adjustments.

SEF elements Effective classroom practices Student performance measures Data skills Wellbeing Team Class teacher(s), Deputy Principal, Instructional Leader When Term 1 Week 5

Tracking

Evidence PLP NAPLAN data analysis Initiative Personalised learning

Activity EAL/D practices continued:

• continue intensive focus for on Beginning (95) and Emerging (148) students

Resources EAL/D teacher (3.6 FTE) practices embedded in whole school literacy and numeracy practices. 3.2 FTE ELP staffing + 0.4 FTE flexible staffing.

Evaluation Q: Are EAL/D team actively involved in whole school teaching and learning activities referenced in this initiative for the whole year, and have T&L programs been adjusted and delivered?

SEF elements Curriculum Assessment Effective Classroom Practices Data skills



2021 – Implementation and progress monitoring Strategic Direction 1: Student growth and attainment Team EAL/D team Leadership team

• in class regular timetabled support for Kindergarten classes, and withdrawal for other grades at Beginning & Emerging

• in class regular timetabled support for Developing (124), prioritised based on PLAN2 data and classroom complexity analysis.

2021 focus – Improved EAL/D practices as identified through EAL/D School Evaluation Framework:

• develop and implement processes to support teachers to collect and use ongoing EAL/D assessment data for monitoring and reporting of EAL/D student learning progress across KLAs

• class and EAL/D specialist teachers collaborate to plan, develop and document sequenced teaching and learning programs using designed in scaffolding to meet the needs of EAL/D students including marking criterion which differentiates between content knowledge and language skills

• EAL/D supervisors and specialist teachers engage in professional learning to develop leadership capabilities to support and lead colleagues to implement effective processes and practices across the school

• class teachers identify the skills and experiences of LBOTE parents and use this to develop a culturally inclusive learning environment, e.g. bilingual reading

TELL Professional Learning for 2 staff – 6 days casual relief @ 464.69.

Funding Sources: Equity (ELP 3.2 staffing) • English language proficiency 3.2 FTE

$350,029 Equity (flexible 0.4 FTE) • ELP $40,242 • Socio-economic background $3,511 Initiative • Professional Learning $2788

D: EAL/D data embedded in activities during year; PLAN2 data; T&L programs; EAL/D sliced NAPLAN (Custom groups) growth data; EAL/D TPL staff feedback; EAL/D School Evaluation Framework A: EAL/D data embedded in activities during year; staff challenged by complexity of collaborative programming when identifying language learning needs in all KLAs; NAPLAN growth analysis delayed I: EAL/D data embedded in activities during year; continued focus on collaborative planning to ensure differentiation between content and language skills; investigate data slicing for PAT data to measure growth; consider focus for 2022 using EAL/D School Evaluation Framework.

Please note: This example activity demonstrates the deployment of staff funded through equity loadings across a number of activities in the initiative. The level of detail in this activity is not expected for all activities.

When Term 1 Week 1 Tracking Evidence PLAN2 data reports Learning sprint grade meeting minutes T&L programs TPL feedback survey




EAL/D Team integrated with whole school practices for this initiative. Activities (below) include: • plot students on progressions

(literacy) • provide Stage and class support for

PLAN2 • collaboratively develop learning goals

around the learning progressions • learning sprints • refining learning goals.


Activity Learning & Support Team are integrated with whole school practices for this initiative. Activities (below) include: • plot students on progressions • provide Stage and class support for

plotting students using PLAN2 • collaboratively develop learning goals

around the learning progressions • learning sprints • refining learning goals • identify students not showing growth

every five weeks (including those students working at higher levels), deliver a five-week intensive learning program

• collaboration with class teachers developing and implementing PSLPs for identified students as per Learning and support teacher role statement

• adjust literacy & numeracy T&L programs, and deliver interventions, informed by improved teacher assessment practices.

Resources Learning and support teacher practices embedded in whole school literacy and numeracy practices.

Funding Sources: Equity (LLAD staffing) • Low level adjustment for disability 1.5

FTE $164,076 Equity (LLAD flexible) • Low level adjustment for disability 0.8

FTE $86,209

Evaluation Q: How effectively has LST integrated their support into whole school literacy and numeracy initiatives, and what impact has this had on adjusted T&L programs and student progress? D: LST data embedded in activities during year; T&L programs; 5 week identification & intensive learning program data; LST and school leadership team minutes A: LST data embedded in activities during year; I: Effectiveness of 5 week intensive learning program to be more closely monitored Please note: This example activity demonstrates the deployment of staff funded through equity loadings across a number of activities in the initiative. The level of detail in this activity is not expected for all activities.

SEF elements Learning & Development Effective Classroom Practices Data skills Team Leadership team When Term 1 Week 3 Tracking Evidence PLAN2 data reports Learning sprint grade meeting minutes PSLPs


Activity Reading intervention program for Year 1 students

Resources 0.5 FTE specialist reading intervention teacher

Evaluation Q: Are Year 1 students meeting reading benchmarks identified, assessed through SEF elements

Effective Classroom Practices

https://education.nsw.gov.au/teaching-and-learning/disability-learning-and-support/personalised-support-for-learning/roles-and-responsibilities#Learning2

https://education.nsw.gov.au/teaching-and-learning/disability-learning-and-support/personalised-support-for-learning/roles-and-responsibilities#Learning2



2021 – Implementation and progress monitoring Strategic Direction 1: Student growth and attainment Data skills Assessment

• Year 1 students identified for reading intervention based on consistent teacher judgement (PM benchmark)

• students not meeting expected reading benchmark referred to LST for case review

• Reading Recovery model retained for first year of SIP to be reviewed as part of annual reflection.

Staffing • 0.42 FTE Literacy & Numeracy

Intervention $45,941 Initiative • 0.08 FTE Literacy & Numeracy

(flexible) $8,750

LST, provided with intensive targeted intervention and tracked? D: Reading benchmarks; pre & post intervention measures; ongoing measures; class teacher feedback A: Expertise of reading specialist and highly effective collaboration with class teachers led to measurable high growth in reading for individual students. I: To be reviewed considering L3 review, phonics diagnostics and Primary Literacy Consultant input.

Team LST When Term 1 Week 2 Tracking Evidence Reading benchmarks CTJ LST minutes

Initiative Personalised Learning

Activity Organise and present Information evening for parents on progressions, goal setting.

Resources Community and parent hospitality $300

Funding Sources: Equity • Socio-economic Background (flexible)

$300

Evaluation Q: Do the parents understand the relationship between goal setting and student progress?

D: Parent survey data.

A: Survey results indicated parent support for collaborative goal setting based on the progressions. 90% of parents understood how goals would be set and monitored using PLAN2 and PLPs.

I: Parents invited in to co-develop PLP goals.

SEF elements Educational Leadership Team IL Principal Leadership team When Term 1 Week 7 Tracking

Evidence Parent survey data


Activity Collaboratively develop learning goals around the learning progressions.

Resources Nil – School Development Day professional learning led by IL and ongoing achieved through in Stage meetings

Evaluation Q: Are the learning goals collaboratively developed and do they reflect the progressions?

D: Sample of learning goals from across the school.

A: All grade teams have learning goals based on progressions for all students.

I: Goals to be shared with students.

SEF elements Learning Culture Assessment Curriculum Effective classroom practice Data skills Team Instructional Leader (IL) teachers LST



2021 – Implementation and progress monitoring Strategic Direction 1: Student growth and attainment Parents When Term 2 Week 1-3 Tracking

Evidence Sample of learning goals from across the school.


Activity Students begin to use their learning goals to reflect on their personal learning journey.

Resources Nil – IL to complete walkthroughs and student focus groups

Evaluation Q: Can all students understand and articulate their learning goals?

D: Walk throughs, Student focus group data, student survey data.

A: Students in K, Y1, Y3 and Y5 cannot yet articulate their learning goals.

I: IL to work more closely with the above-mentioned grades, modelling practice around goal setting and how to focus on them in class so students understand them and know how to achieve them.

SEF elements Learning Culture Wellbeing Curriculum Team Teachers When Term 2 Week 5-9 Tracking

Evidence Walk throughs Student focus group data Student survey data. Initiative Data driven practices

Activity Deliver PL for all staff on using learning sprints to achieve learning goals and syllabus outcomes as measured on the progressions.

Resources • PL resources = $300

Funding Sources: Initiative • Professional Learning $300

Evaluation Q: Are staff confident in using learning sprints and relating these to the progressions? D: Staff Survey post PL, Classroom observations.

A: Post PL Staff survey indicated 90% felt confident in using sprints in teaching programs and classrooms. 75% of staff

SEF elements Learning and development Professional standards Effective classroom practice Data skills and use Team IL When Term 2 Week 5



2021 – Implementation and progress monitoring Strategic Direction 1: Student growth and attainment Tracking

indicated they needed more PL on the progressions.

I: additional PL on using progressions offered to staff .Following the additional PL it was determined to move into the next activity.

Evidence Staff Survey post PL, Classroom

Initiative Data driven practices

Activity Develop and implement learning sprints based on student learning goals/ needs on a fortnightly rotation.

Resources Nil – IL to complete classroom observations

Evaluation Q: Have the sprints been implemented successfully?

D: Teaching Programs, Classroom observations, PLP’s.

A: All staff were using learning sprints on a fortnightly rotation. A staff survey indicated that students were beginning to understand goal setting and its purpose. Teachers saw it as a positive impact for student learning.

I: Need data on the impact of sprints on learning. IL to work with each team on the further development of learning sprints

SEF elements Effective classroom Practice Learning Culture Wellbeing Curriculum Team IL Teaching Teams When Term 2 Week 6 Tracking

Evidence Teaching Programs Classroom observations PLPs. Initiative Data driven practices

Activity Evaluate the impact of learning sprints thus far and consider ‘where to next?’

Resources Nil – IL to complete evaluation

Evaluation Q: Have sprints and the monitoring of goals had a positive impact on learning?

D: PLP’s, Samples of student progressions, Student work samples, Student survey

A: Analysis of the data showed that the learning sprints had been implemented. However, 35% of students in Year 3, 4 & 5 had not reached their determined goals.

SEF elements School Planning Implementation & reporting Team IL Teaching Teams When Term 2 Week 10




Further analysis indicated that the majority of these students (80%) did not understand the purpose of the goal setting

I: Teachers of these students were then given strategies by the IL for developing that understanding.

Evidence Learning sprint evaluation PLPs Samples of student progressions Student work samples Student survey Initiative Data driven practices

Activity Teachers enter PLAN 2 data.

Resources Nil

Evaluation Completed by all teachers.

SEF elements Management practices and processes Assessment Data skills and use Team Teachers When Term 2 Week 11 Tracking

Evidence


Activity Collaboratively review and refine learning goals for all students based on learning progressions.

Resources Nil

Evaluation Q: Do all students have collaboratively revised PLPs and learning goals? D: PLAN 2 data, PLP checklists. A: All PLP checklists were completed by all stages except Stage 3. They will complete theirs by end Week 5. I: Implement next round of learning sprints.

SEF elements Effective classroom Practice Learning Culture Wellbeing Curriculum Team IL Teaching teams Parents LST When Term 3 Week 1-4




Evidence PLPs Plan 2 data analysis Initiative Data driven practices

Activity Develop, implement and monitor learning sprints based on student learning goals/ needs on a fortnightly rotation.

Resources Nil

Evaluation Q: Do lesson plans and observations reflect the learning sprint focus? D: Lesson plans, PLP’s, observation reports A: The sprints have been developed and administered on a fortnightly basis. Lesson observation reports show that all teachers in ES1 and Stage 2 are implementing the sprints based on student needs. Stage 1 and Stage 3 teachers still require additional support from the IL to implement the sprints effectively. I: IL will further support Stage 1 and Stage 3 teachers. As sufficient sprint rotations have been conducted they can now be evaluated for impact on student learning.

SEF elements Effective classroom Practice Learning Culture Wellbeing Curriculum Team IL Teaching teams When Term 3 Week 5-8 Tracking

Evidence Observation document analysis Initiative Data driven practices

Activity Teachers enter PLAN 2 data.

Resources Nil

Evaluation Completed by all teachers.

SEF elements Management practices and processes Assessment Data skills and use Team Teachers When Term 3 Week 9 Tracking



2021 – Implementation and progress monitoring Strategic Direction 1: Student growth and attainment Evidence PLAN 2 comparative data analysis from term 2. Initiative Data driven practices

Activity Evaluate the process quality of learning sprints and consider ‘where to next”.

Resources AP release 4 APs x 1 day to evaluate 4 x $484.69 = $1,858 6 staff (4 APs, 1 DP, 1 IL). DP & IL do not require release.

Funding Sources: Equity • Socio-economic Background (flexible)

$2,083.56

Evaluation Q: Has the goal setting and learning sprint strategy been effective?

D: PLPs, teacher survey, student survey.

A: The data has shown that during term 3 the percentage of students not achieving their learning goals had decreased to 20%.

The student survey indicated a greater understanding of the importance and impact of goals setting and saw it as motivational.

The teacher survey indicated that 95% of teachers were engaged with using the strategy and that they had seen a definite shift in learning and that students were motivated by both the goal setting and the sprints.

I: Move into term 4 embedding the 2 week rotation in all classrooms and the regular goal setting.

SEF elements School Planning Educational Leadership Team IL Teaching Teams Leadership team When Term 3 Week 10 Tracking

Evidence Survey analysis


Activity Continue to plan, develop and monitor learning sprints for the term and build learning goals for Year 2 of the plan.

Resources Nil – IL to collate and review

Evaluation Q: Do lesson plans and observations reflect the learning sprint focus? D: Lesson plans, PLP’s Observation reports PLAN2 data A: The sprints have been developed and administered on a fortnightly basis. Lesson observation reports show that based on the additional support from the IL, all teachers are effectively

SEF elements Effective classroom Practice Learning Culture Wellbeing Curriculum Assessment Team Teacher teams IL



2021 – Implementation and progress monitoring Strategic Direction 1: Student growth and attainment When Term 4 Week 2-8

implementing the fortnightly cycle of sprints. I: Sufficient sprint rotations have been conducted to enable the evaluation of their impact.

Tracking

Evidence Observation report analysis


Activity Evaluate the impact of learning sprints and consider ‘where to next”.

Resources Nil – IL to collate data, evaluate and propose next steps.

Evaluation Q: In what year groups was additional support required on: • Progressions • PLAN2 • Goal setting

In what year groups was the rotation not used?

D: Lesson Plans, PLPs, progression data, PLAN2, observations, student surveys, teacher evaluation.

A: All data sources indicated that Learning sprints had been used on a rotational basis over 2 weekly cycles. PLAN2 data sheets had been updated by all teachers.

12% of students only did not reach the expected rate of growth according to the data.

75% of Teachers surveyed on their own practice indicated that the learning sprints had enabled a deeper focus on explicit teaching.

Teacher evaluations stated that 100% saw value in the initiative as well as a desire to continue refining and further embedding in the following year.

SEF elements School Planning Assessment Ed Leadership Team IL When Term 4 Week 9 Tracking

Evidence Teacher evaluation of learning sprints




I: Sprints have been implemented. Move into next year as embedded practice and monitored by the IL and Exec.

Strategic Direction 1: Annual reflection Annual progress measures – prepopulated from the current year’s progress measures.

Resources allocated – auto-calculated as a total of the budgeted funds identified in the Resources column.

Evaluation – schools add text following evaluation of the impact of the initiatives.

Note – the annual reflection will be published in the annual report.

Annual progress measures NAPLAN • Performing above system-negotiated

target baseline as measured by NAPLAN Reading and Numeracy for Years 3 and 5.

Numeracy • At least 70% of students completing Year

3 will have achieved the learning indicators within the Additive Strategies element of the Progressions.

• At least 62% of students in Year 2-6 will demonstrate a 0.4 growth (calculated through effect size formula) when comparing start year to end year scale scores in the Progressive Achievement Test (PAT) in numeracy.

Reading: • At least 65% of students completing

Kindergarten will have achieved within Level 4 of the Understanding Texts elements of the Progressions.

• 70% of students completing Year 3 will have achieved within Level 8 of the Understanding Texts elements of the Progressions.

• 65% of students in Years 2-6 will demonstrate a 0.4 growth (calculated through effect size formula) when comparing start year to end year scale scores in the PAT in numeracy.

Resources allocated A range of resources were used to implement and monitor the progress of our school’s initiatives detailed in our Strategic Improvement Plan. These resources contributed to the achievement of the annual progress measures.

Funding Sources

Equity • Socio-economic (flexible) $810,864 • Aboriginal background (flexible) $7,212 • English language proficiency (staffing)

$350,029 • English language proficiency (flexible)

$40,242 • Low level adjustment for disability

(staffing) $164,076 • Low level adjustment for disability

(flexible) $86209

Initiative • Professional Learning $4,946 • Literacy & Numeracy $8,750

Staffing Entitlement • Literacy & Numeracy $45,941

Evaluation [Evaluate the impact of the initiative(s) on student learning and effective teaching practice, and consider the implications for future planning.]

The impact on student learning and effective teaching practice is evidenced by:

• Years 3 and 5 performing above system-negotiated target baseline as measured by NAPLAN Reading and Numeracy

• School-determined targets for numeracy and literacy progressions for Kindergarten and Year 3 were achieved.

• Instructional leadership (IL) roles, filled through Expression of Interest, led to whole school improvements in practices, namely: o Establishing sustainable practices

for tracking students using the learning progressions and plotting on PLAN2

o Learning sprints: lesson observations/modelled lessons/ feedback on learning sprint focus within each grade

o Data discussions showed an improved understanding and achievement of the shared learning sprint goals over time



All students have learning goals based on determined ‘expected growth’ data using literacy/ numeracy progressions which are tracked and monitored using PLAN2.

All teachers review student assessment data and compare results with grade team members through the implementation of learning sprints.

o Personalised learning goals for students

o IL timetable was used to allow timely feedback between colleagues to discuss, further test and improve upon learning sprint focus goals across the school

o Focus group analysis and PLAN 2 data showed learning sprints and individual learning goals are having a positive impact on student engagement and progress. This will provide baseline for next year.

• Feedback from staff and executive survey indicated high success with 4 above entitlement teachers & 3 additional SLSOs being dedicated to stage teams. Student relationships, stage teams and curriculum/pedagogical knowledge was reportedly greatly enhanced

• A class complexity analysis based on a range of data sources was used to identify high and medium need classes. All these classes were provided with additional in-class teacher/SLSO resources funded through the socio-economic equity loading provided differentiated literacy and numeracy sessions at least 2 times per week

• Additional SLSOs for Literacy & numeracy differentiation & intervention were embedded in whole school practices

• 2.3 FTE teachers funded through the low-level adjustment for disability equity loading delivered the 5-week identification & intensive learning program, K-6. Progression of students along the learning progressions for targeted students was observable and recorded on PLAN2. Insufficient data from implementation of program was available to measure NAPLAN growth for Year 5 students

• 3.6 FTE EAL/D teachers were funded through the ELP equity loading. By



working with the IL and class teachers on the progressions, PLAN2 and learning sprints projects, all staff reported that EAL/D practices were more embedded in learning during the year. NAPLAN data was sliced for all EAL/D students. EAL/D staff sliced PAT data for students in Beginning and Developing phases to measure annual growth. Students were identified for more intensive EAL/D support

• 100% of students from Aboriginal backgrounds and their parents contributed to development of Personalised Learning Pathways. Teaching staff reported greater collaboration and enhanced student and family engagement through team approach

• Reading Recovery continued in 2021 and has been reviewed in the context of updated curriculum, phonics diagnostics, reading benchmarking school practice guide and the L3 review.

Where to from here?

• Continued focus on learning sprints to improve practice and student learning

• Professional learning to accommodate staff transition between stages and to support new staff will need to be a key focus in Term 1 to ensure the continued success of the initiative

• Continue to resource role of K-2 & 3-6 IL through EOI to build leadership capacity

• Continue to resource stage-based above entitlement teaching staff through equity loadings

• A continued focus on collaborative planning with EAL/D is required to ensure differentiation between content and language skills. Considering



lessons learnt from TELL training and self-assessment using the EAL/D School Evaluation Framework, the focus for 2022 should include differentiation in all classes for EAL/D students based on effective EAL/D pedagogy to be evident in teaching and learning programs

• Using the baseline data now captured at the end of year one gives a clear whole school focus on student growth moving into next year.

2021-2024 strategic improvement plan€¦ · page 3 of 15 large primary school 1 (2021-2024)...

Documents