headteachers report to governors sept 2013

Headteacher's Report

September 2013Dr Neil Hopkin

www.petershillprimary.orgPage 1

The structure of staffing in aschool should reflect the needsof the learners and theambitions of the school.Through this twin-prongedapproach we should ensure thatour children's current needs aremet, as well as ensuring thatwe have a vision for evengreater learning andperformance in the future,towards which we aredeveloping

However, we have to attempt to dothis within the context of verychallenging economic times andever higher demands onperformance from the Departmentfor Education.

Analysis of our financial accountsshows that, in keeping with mostschools, the vast majority of ourincome is spent on staff salary. Thatis as one would expect for anorganisation whose main stock intrade is knowledge and skills.

However, we must ensure that that'stock' is of the highest quality andis organised in the most efficientway possible. In part this meansthat we must have processes andmonitoring procedures that ensureour efficiency, with all staff

committed to our improvement andnot embodying any kind of 'that'snot my job' philosophy. Equally, weneed to ensure that the staff weemploy are appropriately qualifiedand trained to be able to deliver thequality that our children deserveand need.

All of this must take place rapidly,as with only 195 days of schoolingin each year, every day is vital tothe children's progress. Also, theschool workforce must remain asagile as possible, so that we canrespond quickly to emerging trendsor needs around pupil performance.

The proposed changes to the schoolpay policy approved by Governors atthe last meeting and which, pendingapproval from school based unionreps, will have come into force bythe time you read this, attempt tohighlight this need for focus onperformance. However we need togo further to ensure the agility andcapacity of our school to respond tochange. Analysis of our results showthat although we have madeconsiderable improvements thisyear, there is still much to be done.

As a senior leadership team wehave begun the task of asking thequestions about why interventions

Performance related pay has long been 'thenorm' outside of the educational bubble,but is seen by some as controversial withinschools.In many respects PRP has beenpart of the school appraisal system foryears, however in practice, most schoolsand Local Authority HR departments havenot enforced the rules.

The Secretary of State has hardened thoserules and has given extra bite to theregulator, OfSTED, to ensure that schoolsare implementing performance related pay.

This has of course brought a wave ofprotests and accusations of underhandmanoeuvring from unions. However, itseems to me at least that PRP is a verysensible and much needed improvement tothe way in which school leaders can helpcolleagues to develop the productivity andcore-purpose focus of staff in school, in away that matches similar focus in the bestcompanies from the private sector.

The changes approved by governors at ourlast meeting are being verified by schoolunion reps and will become policy for thisyear's appraisal cycle.

Our Strategy forImproving Performance

Personnel and HR

www.petershillprimary.org Page 2

As a school we arealways on the searchfor internationalexamples of greatpractice. Finland hasbeen much lauded asa consistently highperforming province.

There are a number ofreasons suggested forthis: a narrow socio-economic divide;relatively mono-cultural society; highlyqualified teachers; acompetitive graduatejob market.

However, whateverthe reasons, it is notpossible to 'lift'practice from one

place and drop it intoa different context.Nevertheless, generallessons can be learnedfrom Finland:

Staffing structures,intervention strategies,'catch up' groups andstaff professionalismare all focused onensuring that thehighest qualified andmost skilledpractitioners areworking with children,particularly those thatneed to narrow thegap betweenthemselves and theirpeer group.

Learning from Finland...

that have been put in to place for somegroups have not been effective, whichleads inevitably to questions aboutwhether we have the right people in theright place to deliver the interventionsthat the children require.

The next few weeks and months will seea concerted effort by the schoolleadership team to envisage solutions tothese performance shortfalls. Inevitablythere will be difficult decisions to be made

and the journey could well be a difficultone. However, as Einstein reputedlyobserved, it is insane to do the samething over and over again and expectdifferent results. In short, we must dothings differently if we want to improveour school performance sufficiently toensure that every child reaches at leastthe government's minimum expectationby Year 6 and furthermore, that everychild maximises their potential.

Achieving these aims, whilst investing inour infrastructure and delivering a 21stcentury world-class environment andpedagogy may feel sometimes this yearlike attempting to deliver the impossible.However, it is exactly that kind ofambition that should drive us if helpingour children to reach for the stars is to beanything less than empty rhetoric. Wemust do whatever it takes to maximisetheir life chances.


Quality First Teaching:can we be sure that it is happening?

Our school is committed toproviding 'Quality First Teaching'.However, if we were to be resonantwith the Secretary of State's WhitePaper and the new NationalCurriculum, we might equally callour commitment 'Quality TeachingFirst'.

We are pleased at the progress that ourschool has made to July of this year,recorded in our best ever SATs results.We are particularly pleased with the wayin which we have narrowed the gap forPupil Premium children, makingimprovements of some 40% in achievingLevel 4!

However, we remain restless in thepursuit of excellence and whilst 90% ofchildren achieving Level 4 is a goodimprovement, it still means that 10% ofchildren did not. Furthermore, this wasachieved by significant interventionstrategies deploying the AssistantHeadteachers in to Year 6 fromNovember through to June. This is notonly an unsustainable model, it is alsonot cost effective.

Without a doubt, the way that we mustclose this gap to ensure that all of of ourchildren achieve (what used to be called,prior to the SoS scrapping levels in the

summer) Level 4, is through improvingthe teaching. It is in this sense thatquality teaching from all teachers startingin Reception and all the way through toYear 6, must come 'first'.

We have made a significant investment inachieving the required improvement. Wehave introduced new pedagogies wherewe need to better provide for the 21stcentury learners' experience and future. Idescribe these overleaf. We have alsodedicated 80% of two AssistantHeadteachers' time to coaching andmentoring and have a CPD programmefocused on the principles of QFT.

Yet, as important as these elements are,they still represent the 'input' aspect ofimproving teaching. As school leadersand governors we need to know that thisinput has a corresponding 'output', i.e.that the teaching actually improves thechildren's learning and performances.Failure to monitor this means that we willhave improved provision without knowingwhether it has had any impact.

The diagram on the next page illustratesthe cycle of monitoring that the schoolundertakes.

Assessment is central to the actionplanning and monitoring of progress.Following the work of Professor Dylan

Wiliam, the school has put in place asystem where the teachers design thetasks or tests that children will undertakeand through which they will evidence thestage of their learning. This ensures thatthe tests/tasks are appropriate,challenging and useful in the assessingprocess. The children's results aremoderated across the year group andphase and annually by reference toleading schools across the country.

The action plans produced by classteachers and phase leaders arecontinually measured against their impactthrough the pupil progress meetings.This link gives very clear evidence for theperformance management process andalso provides the earliest opportunity tobetter manage our interventionstrategies.

The termly subject reviews examine theteaching and learning of English andMaths, looking at lesson observations,coaching records, assessment results,learning walks, governor reviews, bookscrutinies and any other appropriatetools. These reviews judge the quality ofteaching and learning in those subjects,both within year groups and across thewhole school, in order to determine theimprovements required across the nextterm.

What really helpsteachers improve?I have been a staunch critic fora long time of the lesson-observation model of teacherimprovement. Standing at theback of a classroom with a clipboard only to share feedbacklater is a poor, demoralising andinefficient means of improvingthe quality of teaching. That iswhy we coach and mentor somuch (see overleaf for more onthis).

However, teachers benefit fromformal lesson observationinsofar as it adds a performanceelement to our data analysesand gives teachers a betterunderstanding of theimprovements required and theissues that give rise to them.

In a supportive environmentthere is room for both non-judgemental coaching ANDobservations which reachjudgement.

Teaching and Learning


The annual subject reviews for all othersubjects, perform the same task with thesame rigour, but their resultant actionplans are implemented annually ratherthan termly.

Book scrutinies take place each week andare conducted by the senior leadershipteam, cognisant that the books are amajor tool to discerning the quality ofteaching and learning 'over time'. Oneyear group is targeted each week,

ensuring the whole school's books areanalysed every half term.

Governor reviews and senior leadershipteam learning walks add to thecomprehensive nature of the review ofteaching and learning and all contributeto the teachers' individual professionalportfolios which may be used by theteacher as evidence of performance attheir appraisal.

Finally, all evidence strands contribute to

the ongoing review of the SchoolDevelopment Plan, which is summarisedfor Governors at each governing bodymeeting and adjusted each term ifnecessary to meet changing needs.Through this thorough and rigorousmonitoring cycle we endeavour to ensurethat no child's attainment and progress isunexamined and no aspect of colleagues'teaching is left unevaluated. The nexttask is to act upon these analyses toeffect any necessary changes.

Teaching over time...A key change to the new OfSTEDregime is the emphasis that is placedon book analysis as a means toevaluating the quality of 'teaching overtime'. I think this emphasis is right.

Consequently, when the SLT analysebooks they are looking not just for thesuperficial elements of presentation,although disciplined neatness isimportant to learn. Rather the SLT islooking to see that teachers are usingthose aspects of QFT that we have

been emphasising that we know affectchildren's learning. These are:intervention marking to accelerateprogress,;next steps marking (and itsresponse) to progress childrenbetween pieces of work.;differentiation to ensure children'swork is challenging no matter whattheir ability; clear use of successcriteria and learning outcomes to givethe work focus; daily high qualityEnglish and Maths learning.

Tests or assessments are taken in October, February and June for all children

Half term assessments are analysed for overall, class and group (eg. boy, Pupil Premium, EAL) performance

Teachers write class action plans based on individual children’s performances in Reading, Writing and Maths

Phase Leaders write Year Group action plans based on latest data, 3 year trend data and class action plans

Pupil Progress Meetings are held in November and March to analyse individual children’s performance, holding teachers and Phase Leaders to account for the impact of class action plans

Appraisal meetings are held in September and hold teachers to account for whole year progress and attainment, based on June data, linking to performance related pay review

Subject and Phase Reviews are conducted in December, April and July for English, Maths and all phases. Monitoring teaching, learning, environment and experiences

School Development Plan is reviewed and revised in January, April and July, following Subject & Phase reviews and end of year test analyses

Subject Reviews for all other subjects are conducted in March and May

Governor reviews are conducted throughout the year on a cyclical basis

Assessment and Monitoring Cycle

2013/14

Book scrutinies are conducted each half term

Formal lesson observations take place each term


Improving teaching is as muchabout changing the habits ofmind as it is about changingpractice...If we are to support our colleagues todevelop great practice, to explore newand innovative approaches, or to activelyseek advice and guidance then we mustensure that we provide this support in apositive way.

This might appear obvious at first sight,but teaching has long suffered with ajudgement-driven culture and that hasled to colleagues being anxious ordistrustful of SLT support, which in turn

can lead to teachers trying to maskweaknesses or play safe with pedagogy.In order to be able to address issues weneed to be able to see them clearly, andin order for colleagues to feel free toshare their weaknesses, they need toknow they are working in a non-punitiveenvironment. That is why, although wehave three formal lesson observationsper year, these are linked to theappraisal cycle. The real 'meat' of teacherimprovement is the coaching andmentoring programme.

Two of our assistant headteachers,Amanda Clarke and Hayley Owen, work80% of their time mentoring andcoaching. They meet with teachers, aweek before the lesson that they will be

in, to discuss the teachers' planning forthe lesson and to ensure that it meetsQFT standards. However they alsodiscuss the qualities that make greatlessons: the hook to engage children'sinterest; the pace; the acquisition ofchallenging skills and the application ofthose skills. A week later, they are inclass as the teacher teaches that lesson.Instead of waiting until after the lessonto give feedback, they intervenediscretely as the teacher is teaching,guiding and prompting subtle changes inapproach to improve the lesson further orto respond to events arising as a result ofclassroom practice. The improvementcycle delay is then reduced to zero aschanges are made instantly.

For the past few years the schoolhas taught its foundation subjectsusing a framework called theInternational Primary Curriculum.This year we depart from the IPC aswe seek to move our children'sindependence and engagement in toa whole new dimension.

The IPC was, in many ways, the same asthe old study units issued by the nowdefunct Qualifications and CurriculumAuthority (QCA). I have never been a fanof either system as I believe that theyperpetuate two weaknesses in schoolunnecessarily.

Firstly, the IPC takes away the need torefer to the national curriculum, which inthese times of significant change is notnecessarily wise. But more than this, ittakes away the need to be particularlycreative: the learning pathway is mappedout for the teachers. I have long believedthat the best teachers do not replicatethe same materials for 'topics' each year,but tailor and adjust the content thatthey teach to match their classes. TheIPC undermines that sort of focus.

This forms the basis of my second issuewith the IPC. Engaging learning is notabout 'delivering' teaching to thechildren, in abstraction from the

children's interests. We have a duty toensure that children learn the skills andknowledge contained in the NationalCurriculum, but the manner in which theydo this and the content that they study inorder to acquire that knowledge andskills can be determined by us, based onour knowledge of the children.

The EYFS changed over a decade ago topromote 'child initiated learning', inrecognition of the fact that the key toengaging those very young learners wasto allow their interests to infiltrate thelearning. I don't think that thatphilosophy or need is any different aslearners get older: we all learn betterwhen we are engaged with the subject.Yet the IPC takes no stock of that andjust delivers the topic theme regardless.It is a return to the notion of "It'sAutumn in Year 4, so it must be theTudors."

We are making a departure from thisinflexible approach. We are alreadyteaching the 2014 curriculum and arereferring only to the curriculum toidentify our learning outcomes. In a pilotthat is starting in all Year 1 classes, aswell as by single classes in Years 2, 3, 4and 6, we are using project basedlearning and design thinking as thepedagogies for foundation subjects.

Project based learning is an approachthat allows teachers to teach three orfour foundation subjects through acommon project. The lessons aredifferentiated as they would be if taughtin isolation, but they all link to thecommon theme of the project. There isnothing particularly revolutionary aboutthat. However, there are two additionaltwists to our approach that give thispedagogy a truly innovative andpotentially outstanding dimension.

Firstly, we negotiate the content with thechildren, rather than dictate it. Thisserves to engage the children betterbecause they have some influence overthe subject matter that they will explorein order to achieve the government'sstated learning outcomes.

We achieve this by using a 'designthinking' approach which starts theproject with a generative statementwhich should be epic (rather than tiny),inspire and provoke curiosity (rather thanelicit a "so what?") and be expansiveenough to cover several subject areas.Examples could be: "The past is historyand the future is a mystery", "Clashescreate cultures" or "Couch potatoBritain".

In response to this provocation, children

...Teaching and Learning

Negotiated Learning and Project Based Learning:Moving Beyond the International Primary Curriculum


immerse themselves in the statementand generate many, many possible linesof enquiry that pique their interest. Oncethis period of immersion has generatedsufficient ideas (possibly even hundreds),the teacher works with the children tochoose a line of enquiry to pursuetogether. Initially the teachers will allowjust one line of enquiry to be pursued bythe class, but as they become moreaccustomed to the pedagogy they willbuild up to possibly four simultaneousprojects being run in the class.

Once the line of enquiry is identified, thechildren and adults define their project.This will include: identifying a projectoutcome and audience; conceptualising aprototype 'product' (which may be apoem, story, movie, artwork,spreadsheet, composition etc); plotting atimeline and identifying resources.

Once the project is underway childrenintend to produce their first prototype by40% of the allocated time for the project.That means by the end of Tuesday if it isa five day project. They then evaluatetheir 'product' against the success criteria

and learning outcomes for the project. Inthis process they will also seek theassessment of their peer group. Thisprocess is called assessment 'as' learninginsofar as the assessment itself formspart of the child's learning. Based onthese evaluations, the child refines anddevelops their prototype. They then re-evaluate, then refine again. In this waythe next 55% of their project time isspent re-iteratively improving theirfinished version of the work. Thisinvaluable process is almost alwaysmissed in standard lesson structureswhere children only have one opportunityto produce work, rather than understandthe benefits of continual improvement.The final 5% of the project time is spentin presenting or publishing this work,either through blogs, our radio or TVstations or presentation in class.

In fact, Project Based Learning is just awell known subset of the lesser knownNegotiated Learning. Our aim is toensure that children become increasinglyindependent and accountable in theirapproach to learning. In Reception thisstarts with something we call 'Learning

Agreement Time', which is a list of 7 orso tasks that the child must completeeach week. They are helped to achievethis by having their parent or an adulthelp them every morning for about halfan hour (this has the added benefit ofengaging parents in their child's learningfor half an hour every day). Thoseparents who are not able to make thatcommitment, do so whenever they can,whilst those that are able to make surethat they support as many children aspossible each morning: it is a great wayof building a learning community. As thechildren become older their level ofindependence and accountabilityincreases and they learn to manage theirproject timelines, negotiate how toconstruct a project to include thenecessary non-negotiable learningoutcomes and even by the top end ofKS2 negotiate the project length andcomplexity.

In this way, we have constructed apedagogy that makes schemes such asIPC not only look restrictive and directive,but also disempowering of vital life skillsthat the children need.

The philosophy that underpins a pedagogy does notjust extend to teaching and learning or the nationalcurriculum. The same principles that give rise to theway we teach also affect where we teach. KenRobinson urges, “Look at your learning space with 21stcentury eyes: Does it work for what we know aboutlearning today, or just for what we know about learningin the past?”. It is in this sense that the classroom iscalled the 3rd teacher. But what does it mean to beworking in this way? We maintain that a classroom thatis functioning successfully as a 3rd teacher will beresponsive to the children’s interests, provideopportunities for children to make their thinking visibleand then foster further learning and engagement. OurYr5 classrooms replete with hotboards, iPads, brightlarge TVs and movable furniture, represent just such a21st century learning space.

Designing a classroom to meet all needs...


Key Performance Indicators for Teaching and Learning

...Teaching and Learning

Quality of teaching observed:

Outstanding )

Good )

Requires Improvement ) Will be reported on at the November meeting

Inadequate )

Percentage of pupils whose attainment and progress is at expected levels or higher, overall, by yeargroup:

Attainment Progress Good or better teaching (will be reported in Nov)

Reception R 58 W 51 M 58 R 100 W 100 M 100

Year 1 R 95 W 93 M 97 R 99 W 90 M 67

Year 2 R 90 W 77 M 85 R 86 W 76 M 89

Year 3 R 81 W 77 M 78 R 99 W 93 M 100

Year 4 R 87 W 98 M 79 R 94 W 95 M 100

Year 5 R 93 W 81 M 85 R 100 W 90 M 99

Year 6 R 90 W 91 M 90 R 93 W 100 M 94

Percentage of pupils whose attainment is at expected levels or higher (by type of pupil):

Rec Att Yr1 Att Yr2 Att Yr3 Att Yr4 Att Yr5 Att Yr6 Att

Gender

Boy

Girl

Pupil Premium

Look After Child

SEN

School Action

School Action +

Statemented

Ethnicity

White British

Other

R57 W44 M53

R71 W68 M68

R42 W25 M42

NA

R0 W0 M0

R14 W29 M29

R0 W0 M0

R65 W56 M62

R60 W55 M55

R92 W78 M87

R88 W80 M84

R69 W56 M57

R100 W100 M100

R50 W10 M40

R33 W17 M33

R40 W40 M40

R90 W75 M83

R93 W93 M100

R94 W89 M97

R98 W98 M98

R91 W83 M99

R100 W100 M100

R100 W100 M100

R56 W45 M89

NA

R95 W92 M62

R99 W99 M55

R84 W55 M79

R79 W75 M78

R72 W50 M64

R0 W0 M 50

R43 W14 M43

R44 W11 M66

R0 W0 M0

R82 W64 M78

R78 W69 M84

R93 W74 M83

R94 W88 M88

R86 W71 M79

NA

R91 W28 M64

R43 W14 M29

R80 W60 M80

R95 W84 M88

R92 W67 M75

R84 W68 M81

R90 W80 M78

R88 W60 M72

R0 W0 M0

R48 W26 M37

R68 W22 M56

R0 W0 M0

R91 W79 M83

R72 W58 M72

R83 W84 M94

R95 W95 M88

R85 W84 M89

R50 W100 M 50

R50 W67 M67

R62 W37 M50

R50 W50 M50

R91 W91 M91

R90 W90 M90


The Government has introduced a newcurriculum for September 2014 whichincludes radical changes for ICT. In factthe Secretary of State 'disapplied' the ICTcurriculum on 11th January 2012 (whichmeant that schools no longer had tofollow the curriculum), in recognition thatmost of the best schools had stoppedfollowing it anyway because it was so outof date.

The main catalyst for this move was astinging rebuke from Eric Schmidt theChair of Google who said, ‘I wasflabbergasted to learn that todaycomputer science isn’t even taught asstandard in UK schools; your ITcurriculum focuses on teaching how touse software, but gives no insight intohow it’s made’. The Prime Minister DavidCameron was quick to offer a mea culpaon behalf of the nation, ‘I think EricSchmidt is right... we're not doingenough to teach the next generation ofprogrammers. One of the things you hearfrom the businesses here in Tech City is“I don’t just want people who are literate

in technology, I want people who want tocreate programs”, and I think that’s areal wake up call for us in terms of oureducation system’.

However, despite the SoS's avowal tostop micro management of ICT and handit over to school leaders, what followedlast summer was a prescriptive and veryrestricted Computing curriculum, almostentirely focused on programming. Formost teachers, this is not only a quantumleap in terms of subject specificknowledge required, but is is also atgreat risk of failing to teach a whole raftof ICT skills that are extremely useful,but which didn't happen to be singled outby Google.

Needless to say, we are providing notonly what the government hasprescribed, but a lot more besides. Ourradio station, TV studio, animationstation and 24/7 learning platform allprovide stimulating, non-code basedexperiences of computing and ICT thatsupport story planning and writing,

presentation, assessment, reflectivethinking and teaching and safeguarding.We are moving our classrooms awayfrom ICT suite ("Try and remember thatuntil next Tuesday when it's our turn forthe suite"), to immediate arms-lengthaccess to technology, or locally basedcomputer clusters. We now have 8classes that are equipped with iPads at a1:4 ratio (which matches our Kagangroup classroom layout of children sittingin fours). We also have 4 classes fittedwith 60" TVs instead of whiteboards,linked to teacher iPads. These haveenabled the classes to be flooded withnatural light.

Where next? We anticipate that we willdo more with our Mac clusters, includinggraphic design. We will also start arobotics cluster and 3D printing, both ofwhich will provide opportunity forindustrial design. And of course, we willhave our own coding club, wherechildren produce their own animatedgames. Computing at Peters Hill hasnever looked so good, or so relevant to

The Computing Curriculum: What place is there forNew Technologies in school now?

The New Animation Station at Peters Hill School

The animation station, modeled onthe impressive Aardman studio at@Bristol's science museum, isequipped with state of the art iMacs.

The animation station runs AnimateIt software, anintuitive and impressive animation programme. Butwe will soon expand what we do in the station toinclude graphics, film making and editing.


Premises

We have had some great successes withour refurbishment programme thissummer and, inevitably, one or twohiccups.

EYFS Reception - The EYFS area hashad a major injection of funding andEllen Johnson our new AssistantHeadteacher and Recep/Yr1 phase leaderworked very hard over the summer incleansing the unit of tired and batteredfurniture and replacing it with gloriousreal wood furniture. The children nowhave a fabulous learning environmentinside the classrooms, with space, lightand the highest quality furnishings.

Imaginative play area

Open shelving for independent access

Outside the classroom, one of ourpremises team Richard Jones, created amini-forest school and den environmentfrom the small wooded area on thegrassy bank outside Reception.

Our youngest children therefore nowhave a new teaching team, a newcurriculum and new indoor and outdoorlearning spaces. I am delighted with theprogress that we have made with thiscrucial start point to our school.

Raised Planting Beds, Polytunnelsand Greenhouse - our initial advice hasbeen that the area that we wanted to sitethe greenhouse on will be too expensive

Making our school environment a stimulating place to learn


to convert, so that plan will (for themoment be put on hold). Delays to theraised beds and polytunnels will meanthat these will be fitted by the time of thegoverning body meeting.

Pizza Bread Oven - The clay for ourpizza bread oven has been dug out ofSarehole Mill in Birmingham, by ourconsultant Dave Broadfield.

Forest School - the forest area wassecured over the summer with newfencing and will be in use once ourspecial projects leader, Louise Stokes,has had the appropriate training.

Wild Fruits Garden - Richard and JohnSmith cleared the area at the top left ofthe playground to make room for thisgarden. The ground will need rotavatingto enable the children to plant and

manage the variety of fruits includingblackberries, strawberries, cherries,apples and pears.

Hen House - the hen house has notarrived yet, but will be in place for whenthe hens are rescued from their fate atthe end of September!

TV Studio - the room has beenredecorated, networked and had lightingfitted. However, our suppliers lost thecustomised Mac that will run the TVcameras! Another will be deliveredshortly and should be in place by theGoverning Body meeting.

External Doors in Yrs 1 and 3 - thedeteriorating external doors along theKS1 playground side of the Yr1/3 buildinghave all been replaced with uPVCwindows and doors to match the work

that had been done previously. This willchange those classrooms from single todouble glazing and will improve theenergy efficiency over winter.

School Shop - the scale of worksundertaken across the site meant that wedecided to delay this conversion until theOctober half term.


Animation Stations - the cloakroom atthe end of the Year 6 corridor becamethe animation station using iMACcomputers and bespoke workstations.Stephen Parsons and Les Jones fittedcustom built brackets to create 2D and3D animation facilities, which looksuperb. The area has a 47" TV fitted withApple TV so that teachers and pupils canshare their work with the 16 pupils at atime that will work in the station.

Special Needs Meeting Room - Weneed a private room that parents canmeet with our Assistant Headteacher andCoSENCO, Stephen Porter, in privacy andcomfort. We found some space that waslargely redundant outside the Asst HToffice / Year 1 classroom and haveconverted that into a great meetingspace, which will now become Stephen'spermanent office.

Lighting in the school - is old andyellowed. We have replaced the lightingin the year 5 classrooms and corridorwith new daylight mimicking lights. Wehave also uncovered the skylights in theyear 3 communal area to let light into avery dark part of the school.

Decor - We started our programme ofre-decoration in the Year 3 area thissummer. There was a very unusual tophalf only wall between one classroomand the Radio station, which we havemade complete once more. We also hadthe very oppressive brown concertinadoors boarded, plastered and decoratedwhich has tidied away all cabling (aproblem in most of our buildings whichare strewn with plastic trunking down themiddle of walls). The overall effect has

immediate impact and I am very pleasedwith the calming and lightening effect ithas had in the classroom spaces.

Classrooms - The Year 2 classrooms areprobably the most problematic in theschool in terms of providing anunpleasant learning environment. Wehave had a visit from an award winningarchitectural adviser who has suggesteda simple solution. However, we will needto go out to tender for architecturaladvice and then to builders to completethe project. It looks as though this mayhave to wait until next summerunfortunately.

Reception / Leadership block lobbydoorways - We have replaced the darkbrown doorways leading off the entrancelobby with oak doors. These have also

been fitted to the Asst HT offices and therefurbished School Business Manager'soffice.

Yr5 Classrooms - these have now beenfitted with hotboards, 60" TVs, iPads, realwood furniture have been totallyredecorated. They are, quite simply,superb learning spaces.

...Premises


Finance and Business Management

Across the past few years schools haveseen a steady reduction in real termsfunding, whilst the costs of services andsupplies has continued to rise aboveinflationary rates. Towards the end of theLabour government there had beenattempts to ask schools to submit threeyear financial plans, but as the predictedlevels of income never materialised,these became more fantasy than fact andceased to be a useful tool for leadershipand governance.

Nevertheless, there is some sense inwhich strategic planning beyond theconfines of the immediate financial yearmust take place, so that schools do notlet their strategy for development be tornapart by the spontaneous inconsistenciesof central government policy andfunding.

This term the headteacher, deputy andschool business manager will devise a 3year financial strategy that links in withthe school development plan and assetmanagement plan, in order to chart apathway through what could be somechoppy financial waters.

Key to this will be our approach to someongoing financial liabilities which haveseen poor financial return, in order tomake way for others that we believe willshow a better return. In this the LifeChannel contract and the RM contract arethe two main protagonists. The LifeChannel contract is nearing its end andalthough it has been a very poorinvestment, its liability is soon coming toa close, this financial year. The RMliability has also been a very poorinvestment and is much moreproblematic as it is a 10 year contract

controlled by Dudley as part of anauthority wide PFI. There is a break outclause in 3 years time, but this ismanaged by Dudley and is adjudicatedalso by Dudley LA, which seems asomewhat partisan arrangement. With

our annualinvestment at£45,000 per year,it is difficult to seehow we canhonestly say thatthis represents anything like value formoney for the tax payer. Howevermeetings were held on 11th Septemberwith myself, Nick Foley, our parentGovernor and head of customer ITsupport at the University of Birmingham,along with our technician Steve Parsons.Whilst we have been assured that we areat the top of the 'refresh' list, we willwant to see an ongoing investment in theschool's technology in order to representvalue for money in the next 7 years ofthe contract, i.e. in excess of £300,000.If this is not forthcoming, then we shouldtake whatever advice is necessary tobreak the contract as early as possible.

Our financial plan should not only dealwith the contractual side of the school'sefficiency, but should also measure theacademic economic efficiency of theschool's performance. This is commonplace in secondary schools, where theacademic development profile iscorrelated clearly with the financialpriorities set.

In real terms this means not only lookingcarefully at the subject or phase areas ofneed and allocating budget accordingly,but also looking at specific groups suchas Pupil Premium (variously called Ever 6indicating that the children were PupilPremium at some point, but notnecessarily presently) or SEN. Thesubject specific reviews and phasereviews will be very important in thisregard as they will provide the metricsfor the financial strategy to revieweffectiveness of budget spend againstoutcome achieved.

The interplay here between performancerelated pay and budget spend needhardly be emphasised. Many educatorsbaulk at the prospect of the school beingrun as a business, which isunderstandable when many of the most'valuable' outcomes, such as socialisation,enjoyment, happiness, well roundedlearning, ambition and welfare are sodifficult to measure and chart. Asguardians of our local children's present

and futures, we do no want to fly withthe whim of government, but to ensurethat our children get the very best dealover time spans that long out-livepolitical ambitions or terms of office.

However, schools can also suffer if theyare not run in a business-like enoughmanner. Failure to measure investmentagainst return could cause a school tomis-invest its funds in the untested beliefthat 'XYZ' intervention needs to be put inplace or is indeed effective.

The strategic financial plan needs to beconsistently reflecting the reviews of theeffectiveness of academic performanceconducted as part of the school'smonitoring processes. Therefore it will bereviewed in keeping with the monitoringcycle and school development plan.

The proposed strategic plan will bepresented to Governors at the nextGoverning Body meeting.

There are no significant Health andSafety issues to report. The school isseeking to continue its programme ofreplacing the windows in year 1 and 3 asthey have deteriorated, however, we arecurrently awaiting quotes to determinehow many of them will replaced in thisfinancial year. The Asset ManagementPlan will be reviewed by the schoolleadership this term and althoughoriginally scheduled for this meeting willnow be completed prior to the nextGoverning Body Meeting, to allow allworks initiated over the summer to becompleted and final costs assessed.

Strategic Financial Planningto Maximise Effectivenessin Difficult Economic Times


Professional Development

Why change how weteach and learn?

Firstly, although we are pleased with90% Level 4s in English and Maths, weknow we can do 10% better. Evenmore so for our more able pupils. So tomake this improvement, somethingneeds to change. These threeinitiatives address different aspects ofthat aim.

Improving children's ability to write forlonger and to enable them to choose todo this in a position that is comfortablehas obvious benefits for productivity.

Allowing children to negotiate a little oftheir learning with their teachers isvery empowering and helps to engagethem in co-constructing their learning.The project based integrated subjectshelps children to make cross-disciplinary connections betweensubjects and see how one area oflearning impacts upon another. But italso demands and fosters higher orderthinking skills as children learn toorganise their projects and evaluate orrefine their product.

The Cooperative Learning Structuresdevised by Dr Spencer Kagan are notrevolutionary. Philosophically andpedagogically they are simplymanifestation of work of the globallyextremely influential RussianPsychologist of the 1920s, LevVygotsky. He noted that children learnbest when they are talking and that inparticular their talk should be withsomeone of slightly different ability tothemselves. The children therefore sitin groups of four of different abilitylevels and using one of hundreds ofnamed structures talk to one anotheras they attempt to solve problems orcomplete tasks. A cooperative learningclassroom is noisier than others, duringthose conversations, but very welldisciplined. This is the notion of 'on-task discussion' which is the holy grailof the outstanding classroom.

Together the training provided forthese three initiatives will transformthe teachers understanding of reading,handwriting, on-task discussion,independence, co-construction andpupil voice. However, mostimportantly, it will transform theexperiences the children have intolivelier, more engaging and interestinglessons, with better theoreticalunderpinning and training to keepimproving them.

The school has introduced three key newinitiatives this term in order to improvethe quality of teaching and learning.

The first, Negotiated Learning and itssubset, Project Based Learning, isdescribed in detail in the teaching andlearning section of this report. But just tohelp you recall, it is a method of buildingincreasing independence amongstchildren, whilst engaging them better intheir learning because they help tochoose the themes of study (though notthe learning outcomes prescribed by thecurriculum). In short, we all learn betterif we are interested in the subject or areathat we studying. Negotiated Learningcapitalises upon that idea.

The second new initiative is the KRMReading programme. I have used thisvery successfully in two schools now,most recently taking children thatentered school with extremely lowreading ability and ensuring that they notonly met national expectations by Yr2,but that they achieved 100% in theirSATs test in Yr6. KRM is a highlyorganised and systematic way ofteaching children to decode words usingphonic knowledge. With three 15 minutesessions a day children in Reception, Yrs1 & 2 will all be drilled in these phonicdecoding and applying skills. Theprogramme does not use a readingscheme, such as Oxford Reading Tree,instead it uses a 'real book' approach, sothat children are engaged in qualitychildren's literature. They are able to dothis because the KRM programme willgive them the phonic knowledge to beable to decode 95% of texts put in front

of them by the end of Yr2. It is importantto understand that this means childrenwill be able to read almost any text, notthat they will understand almost anytext. That is a very different skill, readingcomprehension, and this will be taught inthe whole class setting. However, youwill understand that being able to read aword is a vital first step in being able tounderstand a text. KRM will make ourchildren very capable readers.

The third new initiative is KineticLetters, a handwriting programmedevised by a former teacher andOccupational Therapist. Handwriting isn'ttaught on teacher training courses andso most schools just give teachers ahandwriting scheme, such as Nelson, andexpect them to teach it. In schools upand down the country we see childrenwriting with a poor pencil grip, poorposture and showing poor letterformation. Some may say that this is notsuch a worry in this age of the ubiquitouskeyboard, however, we should rememberthat all children, students andundergraduates are still examined inlonghand and Kinetic Letters is aprogramme not designed only for neathandwriting, but also to strengthen themuscles in the hand to enable children towrite for longer. Interestingly the lessonsthemselves take place with children lyingon the floor (on sheets to ensurehygiene) which helps isolate the correctmuscles. The rest of their handwritingused in all other subjects may of coursetake place at tables, but many childrenopt to use the floor as they find it morecomfortable and better for their writing.

Supporting teachers to teachchildren better: three key newinitiatives


Key Performance Indicators

Quality of Teaching & Learning and Attainment & Progress levels are reported separately.

Data accurate on 6th September 2013

Attendance (since September)

Pupil Attendance: Last year: 95.27% So far this year: 96.6%

Authorised Absences: 4.21% So far this year: 1.28%

Unauthorised Absences: 0.52% So far this year: 2.13%

Teaching Staff Attendance: 98% So far this year: 97.61%

Non-teaching Staff Attendance: 94% So far this year: 98.58%

Paid / compassionate Leave: 3 days So far this year: 0 days

Unpaid Leave: 4 days (since Easter) So far this year: 0 days

Exclusions (this term): 1 So far this year: 0

Racist Incidents (this term): 0 So far this year: 0

Referrals to Social Services (this term): 2 So far this year: 0

Official Complaints Received (this term): 3 So far this year: 0

Mobility

Numbers of children arriving in year (this term): 1 So far this year: 10

Numbers of children leaving in year (this term): 4 So far this year: 1

Year Group Numbers

Incoming Sept Rec Yr1 Yr2 Yr3 Yr4 Yr5 Yr6

110 119 104 120 120 108 109 110

--- 112 120 106 120 119 111 110

(74 from Nursery)

Teaching staff: 41 Unchanged

Teaching support staff: 34 (7 HLTAs, 12 TAs and 15 1:1s) This year unchanged except: 13 1:1s

Admin staff: 7 Unchanged

Premises staff: 3 Unchanged

Contents

Personnel and HR .......................................................................................................... 1

Teaching and Learning ................................................................................................... 3

Key Performance Indicators (Teaching and Learning) ....................................................... 7

Premises ...................................................................................................................... 9

Finance and Business Management ............................................................................... 12

Professional Development ............................................................................................ 13

Key Performance Indicators (non-teaching and learning) ................................................ 14