A DIFFERNET A DIFFERNET VIEW OF VIEW OF

LEADERSHIP LEADERSHIP The Self-The Self-

Evaluating Evaluating Middle Manager Middle Manager

The LCS The LCS approachapproach

Notes Made Notes Made from from

presentation by presentation by Dr Shevlin ETIDr Shevlin ETI

Hearts and minds Hearts and minds

What is the difference between a department/school aspect that is led mechanistically by “monitoring and evaluation “ or lead effectively by “self evaluation “ ? ?

THE CULTURE IS THE DIFFERENCE !

OWNED BY middle managers and TEACHERS!

“Hearts and Minds”

How is this the responsibility of the Middle Manager?

What does LCS mean? How are they linked by effective people skills utilised by the middle manager?

MOST IMPORTANTMOST IMPORTANT

Hearts and Minds!

Has to be an integral embedded part of the departmental/ school aspect culture

Effective middle manager - Minimum of paperwork – maximum of IMPACT – but measure outcomes and challenge assertively on these if needed

Seen as professional development – not accountability

Your priorities are owned by teachers in your area of responsibity and valued by teachers

What is an effective self evaluative Head of What is an effective self evaluative Head of Department/Middle manager Department/Middle manager

A good people person

A good coach – who doesn’t have a fixed view T+L

A good “ challenger” who uses first hand evidence in a collegiate and involving way – not easy

REMEMBER:

Focus all of this on measuring THE IMPACT OF YOUR LEADERSHIP WORK

NOT THE INPUT/OUTPUT/PROCESS

Effective self-evaluation is about

1. Gathering good quality first-hand evidence on the progress you are making on your school priorities.

2. Using that evidence to make changes in learning and teaching if needed.

3. But remembering that ownership and identification with the process by staff at all levels is critical and central in 1 and 2 above.

What is first hand evidence? What is first hand evidence?

1. Pupils’ Books

2. Lesson observation – “trusted colleague” observation – work with a “ critical mass” of volunteers and go from here. Trusted colleague networking a version of this TCN

3. Pupil/teacher/BOG/parent voice – use of questionnaires

4. Quantitative and benchmarked data

BUT THERE IS A HIERARCHY TO THIS EVIDENCE

Often Need to do no 4 first and then to 1 to 3 – often challenge

No 4 gives the strengths and challenges but have to use 1-3 to find the reason why and take action – in a COLLEGIATE WAY

The self evaluation within The self evaluation within your department/area your department/area

Collectively Audit first hand evidence

Make a collegiate decision with dept – decide an action point- on teaching and learning- implement

Wait a period of time – audit again – show improvement – I call this “ closing the loop” TRUST IS IMPORTANT

CLOSE THE LOOPCLOSE THE LOOP

1. REMEMBER CLOSE THE LOOP. (1. Baseline from joint evidence (or not/) 2. Discussion/Joint action on T and L – no paper 3. Wait – audit again using same evidence source – 4. See improvement Minimum paper/maximum action. This is about professional development not accountability – focus on learning – trust dept members – but clear learning goals

2. DON’T STOP AFTER THE AUDIT. WHAT IS THE POINT OF THIS ?

3. TAKING ACTION – COLLEGIATIVELY CHECKING AND SHOWING CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT IS THE REAL CHALLENGE

Three specific suggestions to get us started Three specific suggestions to get us started

CBM for written work in books

TCN for lessons

THE VOICE – Closing the loop here

TCN proformaTCN proforma

Focus of lesson: ------------

Quality Indicators:

The pupils will be ------- well

The pupils will be -------- accurately

The pupils will be ------

Strengths (6) Suggested adjsts to learning (1)

The pupils could be ----

Tear up after use

Other side of TCN learning logOther side of TCN learning log

TURN THE MIRROR

Observer

On reflection after jointly participating in TCN I will

---------------------------

So the pupils will

CLOSE THE LOOP CLOSE THE LOOP

AUDIT

DECIDE AND IMPLEMENT ACTION

AUDIT AGAIN

SHOW THAT IMPROVEMENT HAS OCCURRED

COMMUNICATE WITH YOUR FELLOW TEACHERS AT ALL STAGES ABOUT THE IMPACT – WHAT IS CHANGING KEEP PAPERWORK AT A MINIMUM . THE DYNAMIC IS THE KEY

THE POINT OF QA WITHIN YOUR DEPARTMENTTHE POINT OF QA WITHIN YOUR DEPARTMENT

IMPACT

NOT PROCESS

NOT WRITING A REPORT – KEEP THE WRITING TO A MINIMUM

THIS IS NOT A PHD THESIS

ALL DONE IN A COLLEGIATE BUT RIGOROUS WAY

Strategies for improvementStrategies for improvementA CHECKLIST FOR HOD/MMA CHECKLIST FOR HOD/MM

Are self-evaluative procedures rigorous and effective, do they lead to improvement and are they underpinned by effective analysis of qualitative and quantitative data?

Does the HOD/MM set, share and review realistic targets and are these underpinned by rigorous self-evaluation?

Has the departmental/school aspect plan been agreed and contributed to by all departmental members and is this supported by an action planning process MEASURING IMPACT ?

Does the HOD/MM promote effective and innovative strategies to raise standards and improve the quality of teaching and learning?

Does the HOD/MM ensure that departmental objectives align with the SDP?

Is first hand evidence being gathered/used collegially?

MM Leadership- WHAT IS IMPORTANT ?MM Leadership- WHAT IS IMPORTANT ?

The extent to which clear and realistic targets are set for the department?

HOD/MM Inspires confidence/ respect of departmental colleagues – goals met?

Channels of communication – effective?.

Learner/teacher/SLT involved in discussion/implementation of departmental priorities – open and inclusive ?

The standards and expectations set for staff and pupils – are they clear, challenging and most importantly are they met ( only know through collegiate examination of first hand evidence – this is challenging and needs the middle managerto have excellent people skills and provide a effective challenge and coaching role ?

Middle manager – a Middle manager – a different view different view I am a(n)

Involver

Example setter

Evidence gatherer – user of first hand evidence evidence

“Close the looper”

Persuader

Bottom liner but have solutions

Target setter and target “meeter” but all from “first hand evidence” – four types

LCS? LCS? LEADERSHIP

CHALLENGE

SUPPORT

COLLEGIATE APPROACH – ALL INVOLVED

But

EVIDENCE BASED – 4 TYPES SO NOTHING OVERLOOKED

PAPER CAN OVERLOOK THINGS

THIS IS CHALLENGING!