An Roinn Oideachais agus Scileanna

Department of Education and Skills

Whole School Evaluation

Management, Leadership and Learning

REPORT

Ainm na scoile /

School name St Joseph's Community College

Seoladh na scoile /

School address

Charlestown

Mayo

Uimhir rolla /

Roll number 76334I

Date of Evaluation: 18-05-2017

WHAT IS A WHOLE-SCHOOL EVALUATION – MANAGEMENT, LEADERSHIP AND LEARNING?

Whole-School Evaluations – Management, Leadership and Learning report on the quality of teaching

and learning and on the quality of management and leadership in a school. They affirm good practice

and make recommendations, where appropriate, to aid the further development of educational

provision in the school.

HOW TO READ THIS REPORT

During this inspection, the inspectors evaluated and reported under the following headings or areas

of enquiry:

1. Quality of school leadership and management

2. Quality of teaching and learning

3. Implementation of recommendations from previous evaluations

4. The school’s self-evaluation process and capacity for school improvement

Inspectors describe the quality of each of these areas using the Inspectorate’s quality continuum

which is shown on the final page of this report. The quality continuum provides examples of the

language used by inspectors when evaluating and describing the quality of the school’s provision in

each area. The board of management of the school was given an opportunity to comment in writing

on the findings and recommendations of the report, and the response of the board will be found in

the appendix of this report.

Whole-School Evaluation – Management, Leadership and Learning

INSPECTION ACTIVITIES DURING THIS INSPECTION

Dates of inspection 3-05-2017 to 18-05-2017

Inspection activities undertaken

Meeting with board of management

Meetings with principal and deputy principal

Meetings with key staff

Review of relevant documents

Student focus-group interview

Meeting with parents

Analysis of parent, student and teacher questionnaires

Observation of teaching and learning

Examination of students’ work

Interaction with students

Feedback to senior management team, board of management and teachers

SCHOOL CONTEXT

St Joseph’s Community College, Charlestown is a co-educational school in a rural town. Formerly, as St Joseph’s Secondary School, it operated under Marist trusteeship and it had a proud history as the sole provider of post-primary education in Charlestown. In 2011, with the retirement of a long-serving principal who was a member of the order, the Marist Sisters announced their intention to withdraw from the patronage of the school in 2014. During the three-year period 2011-2014, an intense campaign was organised to secure the future of the school, resulting in the formal handover of the school to the trusteeship of Mayo, Sligo & Leitrim Education and Training Board (MSLETB) on 1 September 2014. Five different principals have served in the role from 2011 to 2017. In September 2014, a new external principal and a new external deputy principal were appointed. 156 students were enrolled in the school in the 2016/17 school year. In November 2015, an announcement was made by the Department of Education and Skills that approximately €1 million was to be provided under the capital school’s programme to develop a modern campus for the school. It was reported that work is due to commence on this project in 2017. SUMMARY OF MAIN FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:

FINDINGS

The quality of teaching was at the level of good or very good in most of the lessons observed; it is commended that some teachers have been developing innovative approaches to teaching and learning over the past three years.

The quality of learning was good or very good in more than half of the lessons observed;

meaningful learner experiences and assessment practices should be focus areas for

consistent, whole-school development and implementation.

Most students reported that they feel safe and well cared for in the school, that they get on well with other students in the school, and that they are getting on well with their school work.

The quality of school management and leadership, encompassing board, senior and middle management, management of students, curriculum, and facilities, ranges from poor in some areas to good in others.

While very good work has been done over the past year in redeveloping the school’s Transition Year programme, the school’s overall curriculum is in need of urgent review, to ensure that the curriculum planned into the future is sustainable based on the school’s teacher allocations and to ensure compliance with junior cycle implementation requirements.

Good progress has taken place in relation to some in-school and board of management practices, policy development work, tracking the implementation of inspection recommendations, and engagement with school self-evaluation (SSE) in recent years; however, the school’s capacity for improvement will remain less than satisfactory unless certain deficiencies are addressed without delay.

At the time of the evaluation, the teachers of English were not fully implementing the school-based assessment aspects of the junior cycle specification. The reason for this was reported to be industrial action.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The ETB needs to ensure closer oversight to monitor progress on key curriculum and management decisions by the senior management team and on health and safety compliance.

The board needs to extend its leadership to a broader range of areas including oversight of junior cycle curriculum development and of how planning for the allocation of teaching resources into the future is managed.

Senior management should ensure that the school’s curriculum is planned, in a consultative manner, to meet the new junior cycle requirements and in accordance with available teacher allocations.

A student support team and a class tutor system need to be established and a review of the learning experiences of students with special educational needs (SEN) and of teachers’ SEN planning and support practices needs to be conducted and acted upon to support improvement.

A stronger focus on planning for meaningful learner experiences and for assessment practices that progress students’ learning is needed for all class groups

The board needs to ensure that all the requirements of Child Protection Procedures for Primary and Post-Primary Schools are met for the 2017/18 school year and thereafter.

DETAILED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

1. QUALITY OF SCHOOL MANAGEMENT AND LEADERSHIP

1.1. School ownership and management

The board of management brings together members with significant educational and financial expertise and community links, strongly committed to the survival and growth of the school. The board has been effective in a number of areas: taking a strategic approach to reviewing and to developing school policies, developing collaborative relationships with stakeholders, and engaging in a number of aspects of SSE.

Notwithstanding the above, there is a need for the board to extend its leadership to a broader range of areas. For example, it needs to engage in strategic longer-term planning for the priorities

and agenda of its meetings, to deepen its understanding of how the subjects offered have to be carefully considered in light of the junior cycle implementation requirements and of the school’s teacher allocations, and to further develop health and safety school policies and practices to achieve statutory compliance. Questionnaires administered during the whole-school evaluation to teachers and parents suggest that the board needs to develop further its communication mechanisms with stakeholders beyond agreed reports of meetings that are currently posted on the school website.

The board has sought to act in a respectful, solution-focused manner in dealing with complaints about communication and management practices involving the principal, teachers and parents. The MSLETB has put a mediation process in place to help resolve these issues and the board has met directly with the parents’ association (PA) to listen to its concerns. This process was ongoing during the whole-school evaluation. The board is aware of the power of its influence in setting the tone and expectations around collaborative relationships in the whole school community. The leadership the board shows here will be vital to the success of the school in coming years.

Many of the parents are past pupils, have a strong sense of pride in the education they received from the school, and want to see their local community college grow. The PA contributes to school life by providing feedback on draft policies, by organising and participating in key events in school life, and by acting as a communication channel between parents and the school. It has also identified areas for improvement to the board highlighted by some parents; subsequently good progress has been made in a few of those areas. Two-way communication between the school and the PA could be further supported if a liaison person from the school were invited by the PA to provide information and seek feedback on proposals during an allotted timeslot of PA meetings.

Parent questionnaire responses indicate most parents agree that their children are safe and well looked after, that their children enjoy school, and that their children are doing well in school. Parents are less positive in their views that the school is well run, that the school consults them if their child needs extra help, and that the school regularly seeks their views on school matters. Key communication developments recommended include strengthening how the school consults with parents, briefing the PA on junior cycle requirements and on realistic timetable expectations for coming years. Ensuring a fair, balanced and positive profile of the school is communicated to parents by all staff is vital; there is some evidence that parents are not getting this and that their perceptions and enrolment preferences are being impacted by this.

1.2 Effectiveness of leadership for learning

The principal and deputy principal, as the senior management team, have faced significant school development challenges from taking up their appointments in 2014. At that time, distributed leadership was underdeveloped in the school, key school infrastructure was outdated, and a significant body of school policy review and development work was needed. In common with many other schools, industrial relations challenges arose in relation to the implementation of the Framework for Junior Cycle (2015) and associated subject specifications. Also, the steering committee managing the transition of trusteeship of the school ceased in September 2014, the appointment of the board of management was delayed until March 2015 due to national ETB restructuring, and strong competition was taking place between local schools for limited student numbers.

Senior management has achieved notable improvements in areas of school life. These include the adoption of new approaches to integrating information and communication technologies (ICT) into teaching, learning, and administration and social media and the website promotion of student

successes. Professional development of staff has been encouraged by senior management through in-school training sessions and teacher inputs at staff meetings.

Significant conflict has also marked the senior management team’s tenure. Given the degree of change that the school needed to be led through, it was inevitable that the transition process would be difficult. However, deficient judgements were made in relation to setting an appropriate pace for change, to ensuring appropriate and effective dialogue around the rationale for the need for key curricular changes, to prioritising areas for development that were grounded in shared priorities for school survival, and to the approaches taken to addressing issues raised by some staff and some parents.

The evidence gathered during the whole-school evaluation pointed to the need for the ETB to provide support for the senior management’s team approach to change management work. The ETB needs to ensure closer oversight and to monitor progress on key curriculum and management decisions by the senior management team. Also, regular surveys of teacher and parent views should be conducted and analysed, to gauge progress and to seek suggestions for more effective ways of working.

Staff experienced a school culture shift in 2014, moving from a voluntary secondary culture to an ETB one. This, combined with managing the expectations of staff about the implementation of ongoing educational changes such as junior cycle reform, is an important task that needs to be supported by more regular inputs to staff from the board and from the ETB

Evidence gathered from questionnaires and interviews conducted during the whole-school evaluation indicated that, while there was still a cohort of staff and parents who were negative about current management practices, the majority of staff and parents agreed that the school was making progress. Most students were positively disposed to their experience of school life, with a minority who were quite negative about their experiences. A mediation process was ongoing before the whole-school evaluation commenced, with the aim of providing directions on how to repair the damaged relationships that had arisen.

The distributed leadership improvements that have been led by the senior management team since 2014 are significant: a weekly post holder meeting was established to support communication and planning and an externally-facilitated full review of posts took place in 2015. However, the schedule of posts still needs ongoing review, in light of the school’s changing needs.

Staff are commended for their engagement in developing a culture of innovation in teaching and learning over the past three years. A few teachers have volunteered to act as subject leaders for the MSLETB online network of subject teachers across the scheme. Some teachers are using ICT to support new modes of learning, assessment, and subject planning collaboration, resulting in heightened student engagement. Moreover, Transition Year has been redeveloped over the past year. It was reported that the programme is now a very strong support to student interests and voice and that parents are very happy with the system now established for timely notification of upcoming events and requirements.

A high value is placed on providing a broad range of subjects to students. From 2014-2016, three new optional subjects were added to the school’s curriculum. However, a radical overhaul of the school’s timetable is now required for junior cycle implementation requirements such as a minimum of forty minute periods, a cap of ten subjects for certificate examination, and the removal of traditional core status for some subjects.

The current curriculum is not sustainable based on current teacher allocations. It is acknowledged that timetabling is constrained by the availability of teachers for a few optional subjects who are shared with other schools in the scheme, the pool of teacher qualifications for different subject areas, the requirements of particular curricular programmes, and staff turnover. Sharing the rationale for timetable options available with staff and the board is vital, since this has not been happening adequately to date.

To support the timetable changes needed, it is recommended that the staff advisory committee which has been working on timetable suggestions report to senior management very soon and that its report be made available to all staff. Senior management, working with the ETB, should then prepare proposals for the September 2017 timetable and a longer term framework for the September 2018 onward timetable. Senior management should brief the board on the school’s allocation situation and on the timetabling implications of junior cycle implementation requirements. Ideally, parents and incoming first year students should be consulted on their views on the junior cycle curriculum, however this may not be possible due to the short lead-in time available. The board-approved curricular plan for September 2018 should then be communicated to teachers and to students before the start of the next school year. A time bound plan needs to be put in place to ensure that these steps are taken.

With regard to the school’s provision for students with special educational needs (SEN), the school has an inclusive admissions policy. It was reported that the school has made very good provision for certain students with emotional, physical and/or learning needs. However, it is clear that there is still work to be done in this area, given that SEN was one of the areas for improvement highlighted by the PA to the board in 2016 and by some whole-school evaluation questionnaire responses. A review of SEN students’ learning experiences as well as of teachers’ planning and support practices should be undertaken through a targeted survey of students receiving SEN support and of their parents/guardians.

Strong support is provided for students’ holistic development through teachers’ voluntary coaching of school sports, enterprise, and other co-curricular teams. Improvements made since 2014 that have strengthened student management include the revision of the code of behaviour and ladder of referral through partnership in 2016, the establishment of a timetabled weekly post holder meeting bringing year heads together with senior management to discuss issues, and projects/ talks on student support topics being promoted by the school (including cyberbullying, gender stereotyping, and a mental health week). Questionnaire returns show that most students feel safe and well cared for in the school, and that most parents who responded to the questionnaire share that opinion.

Some aspects of student support still need to be improved. As was recommended in the 2009 whole-school evaluation, a class tutor system should be established to ensure a more supportive structure for students. In the longer term, until school enrolment increases significantly and more posts become available, the current year head structure should be replaced by a single year head for junior cycle students and a single year head for senior cycle students. The school’s Social, Personal and Health Education and Relationships and Sexuality Education policies need to be updated, approved by the board, and then communicated to stakeholders. A system for monitoring student journals and for requiring parental monitoring of same should be developed. Finally, the weekly post holder meeting model needs to be adapted to accommodate a student support team model of working, as set out in Student Support Teams in Post-Primary Schools (NEPS) guidelines. The guidance counsellor/SEN co-ordinator will need to be included in this to support pro-active planning and follow-through work for students with particular needs.

A subject-sampling programme is in place for first years and Transition Years. An information session is provided to third-year students and parents to support Leaving Certificate Vocational Programme or Transition Year programme and subject choice. A similar session is advised for first years. Strong self-evaluation is evident in the guidance programme plan. While open subject choice is available to students entering fifth year, first years are required to choose their optional subjects from within school formed bands. It is recommended that this be reviewed to preserve open choice for first years in so far as that is possible.

All partners agreed that the school’s students are its greatest assets, with achievements in sport, in entrepreneurial competitions, in mentoring first-year students, and in working with older community members through TY modules. The student council is democratically elected and has been consulted on student needs and on policy feedback; it now needs to be trained and to be given a role in leading certain school initiatives. Regularly surveying student views on learning, future curriculum provision, and wellbeing issues is recommended.

Confirmation was provided that the board of management has formally adopted the Child Protection Procedures for Primary and Post-Primary Schools without modification but two actions are now required to ensure full implementation of those procedures, as per Circular 65/2011. First, the Department’s Child Protection Procedures for Primary and Post-Primary Schools need to be made available to all school personnel, both teaching staff and ancillary staff, and they need to be made aware of their responsibilities under the procedures. Second, an annual implementation review of the school’s child protection policy needs to be conducted by the board using the specified “Appendix 2” checklist in the Child Protection Procedures and the board needs to provide written notification of the date the review took place to parents.

1.3 Management of facilities

The school corridors are very attractively presented, featuring student calligraphy and murals, noticeboards on different areas of school life, and photographs of student achievements. The school grounds and corridors are well maintained. The school buildings date from different periods of construction (1952, 1971, 2010), resulting in unexpected issues sometimes surfacing for the attention of management. Very significant progress has been achieved between 2014 and 2017 in developing the school’s ICT infrastructure for administration/ learning. A new building programme is reported to be commencing in 2017.

By the time of the evaluation, risk assessment training had been attended by a number of staff, and progress had been made on almost all 2008 Science inspection recommendations related to safety. It is recommended that the early draft of a health and safety school policy presented during the evaluation be amended and developed in line with the Health and Safety Authority’s 2010 Guidelines on Managing Safety and Health in Post-Primary Schools and in consultation with staff and MSLETB, before being brought to the board for ratification. Annual risk assessment practices involving all staff should be established and acted on by senior management. Finally, the board of management should include health and safety on its agenda items and ensure that risks identified are addressed in a planned manner.

2. QUALITY OF LEARNING AND TEACHING

2.1 The quality of learning and teaching

Based on the sample of subject department plans evaluated, the quality of plans ranged from poor to very good. In multi-person departments, teachers need to plan collaboratively for content coverage and common assessment practices, not just submit individual schemes. Subject department duties need to be agreed, shared and documented. Schemes should feature learning outcomes linked to specific methodologies and assessment modes; practical planning for differentiation to support learners with specific needs; and annual, targeted action planning for ongoing subject improvement (based on results analysis, teacher reflection, and formal student feedback). As new junior cycle specifications are phased in for subjects, this will give focus and purpose to the ongoing development of subject department plans.

The quality of teaching was good or exemplary in most lessons, with satisfactory practice in a small number of lessons. Where practice was effective, questioning activated students’ prior knowledge of tasks and created links between new content and students’ lives or past learning. Learning intentions which focused on specific knowledge, skills or understandings to be gained were shared with students at the outset of lessons and were used to check students’ mastery during and at the end of the lesson. During periods where students were engaged in practical tasks, teachers moved among the students providing good differentiated support to their learning. In a number of lessons, teachers were engaging in good formative feedback practices such as establishing success criteria before setting tasks, supporting students to engage in self and peer assessment leading to a deepening of their learning, and giving good written formative feedback to support learning.

In the lessons where there was scope for improvement in teachers’ individual practice, three elements were noted. A good deal of tuition time was being spent on the correction of homework, more active methodologies needed to be incorporated into lessons to create a greater balance between teacher and student activity, and/or teachers needed to plan more varied approaches to working through information-focused lessons beyond teacher-led presentation of the content using PowerPoint and the requirement that students copy down the PowerPoint text. The focus of lessons was shaped by a desire to cover a particular body of content, without adequate differentiation or use of assessment for learning (AfL) strategies to check that students’ learning needs were being met.

The quality of learning was good or very good in the majority of lessons, with satisfactory practice in a significant minority of lessons. Where good or very good, lessons were conducted in an atmosphere of mutual respect and positive rapport and students were engaged in their learning in an orderly, self-motivated manner. In those lessons, opportunities were also created for students to be actively involved in their own learning, to verbalise the approaches they were taking to others, and to self and peer assess work in a meaningful way. Teachers used digital technology to support learning in a varied, purposeful manner, such as through the electronic provision of support notes and the requirement that students prepare digital project presentations.

In the significant minority of lessons where the learner experience was satisfactory, meaningful learning activities to help students grow as learners were not being planned for in class, the focus instead being only on the delivery of content. In such lessons, varied, purposeful homework tasks were not being planned to reinforce or to activate learning or to make best use of tuition time in the next class. It is recommended that meaningful learner experiences and assessment practices that progress students’ learning be designated as the focus of whole-school pedagogical work over the coming years. While the sharing of in-house expertise should be one strand of that work, so too should a review of the relevant standards on teaching and learning as set out in the SSE Guidelines 2016-2020, to guide self-reflection and action planning by individuals and departments and to increase student motivation among the minority of students who are not attending consistently at present.

3. IMPLEMENTATION OF RECOMMENDATIONS FROM PREVIOUS EVALUATIONS

3.1 Management

The board of management’s systematic approach to checking for the implementation of recommendations arising from inspections conducted during its term of office is very good practice. Good progress has also been made in relation to a number of the management-related recommendations made in a 2009 whole-school evaluation (WSE) report on the school. A small number of significant recommendations from that WSE report are again made in this report because they are still relevant and because only partial progress has been achieved on them.

3.2 Learning and teaching

Some good or very good practice was observed in lessons, implementing teaching and learning recommendations made in previous inspections such as formative feedback (AfL) teaching practices, active learning opportunities, and differentiation. However, in other lessons, practice observed in these areas was fair to satisfactory. It is recommended that recurring teaching and learning recommendations in inspection reports be communicated by the senior management team at staff meetings and that the sharing of strategies being used by staff to address them should be elicited. Periodically surveying students on their learning would help the school gauge its progress in this area.

4. THE SCHOOL’S SELF-EVALUATION PROCESS AND CAPACITY FOR SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT

The school has engaged very positively with the SSE process. It has gathered evidence from teachers, parents, and students to support action planning. Some of the agreed SSE actions were observed in lessons and in subject plans. SSE actions regularly discussed at staff and board meetings and SSE took place in relation to key changes suggested by the PA. Future engagement in SSE should be guided by Circular 40/2016, by the six-step process and by SSE Guidelines 2016-2020, to identify minimum two and maximum of four aspects of teaching and learning for development. Sharing plans to help improve learning with students would also be good practice.

At the time of the evaluation, the school’s capacity for school improvement was fair. Some good progress has taken place in relation to in-school and board management practices, the implementation of inspection recommendations, and to SSE in recent years. If the same focus is brought to bear on staff and management working together on agreed goals, then the school will be able to release and develop its capacity to improve.

Appendix

SCHOOL RESPONSE TO THE REPORT

Submitted by the Board of Management

Part A Observations on the content of the inspection report The Board welcomes this report and is particularly satisfied to note the Inspectorates finding of innovative approaches to teaching and learning. The Board are also pleased that students reported that they feel safe and well cared for in the school and that lessons were conducted in an atmosphere of mutual respect and positive rapport. The Board and the newly-appointed principal will use this report as a tool for continuous improvement. Part B Follow-up actions planned or undertaken since the completion of the inspection activity to implement the findings and recommendations of the inspection.

1. MSLETB facilitated a curricular review in conjunction with senior management team in the development of the 2017/18 timetable.

2. The school has engaged with a Health and Safety consultant which will result in an updated Health and Safety policy.

3. Appropriate planning is now in place for the allocation of teaching resources. 4. The teachers of English are now fully implementing the school-based assessment aspects of

the junior cycle specification. 5. All staff have completed two days training in the new Junior Cycle curriculum. 6. Teachers of associated subject specifications are now engaging with CPD days. 7. A Taster programme has been introduced for first years since September 2017 with an

information session included for parents/guardians. 8. Students now meet the requirements of DES CL 0024/2016 re: the requirement of a

maximum of 10 subjects for certification. 9. The school’s timetable structure is reviewed, in consultation with all partners, to facilitate 40

minute class periods and to meet the requirements of DES CL 0024/2016. 10. Senior management continue to liaise with MSLETB regarding teacher allocation. 11. A class tutor system is in place since September 2017, with further development planned for

the next academic year. 12. The SEN policy is currently being reviewed. 13. The guidance counsellor is now timetabled with the weekly post holder meeting to support

pro-active planning and follow-through work for students with particular needs. 14. Further strategies to enhance student learning will be supported by the school’s SSE process. 15. Staff have taken part and will continue to take part in one note training which enhances

learner experiences and assessment techniques. 16. All staff have attended Child Protection training and the Child Protection Policy has been

reviewed by the Board of Management, using the recommended checklist.

Published January 2018 / Foilsithe Eanáir 2018

THE INSPECTORATE’S QUALITY CONTINUUM

Inspectors describe the quality of provision in the school using the Inspectorate’s quality continuum

which is shown below. The quality continuum provides examples of the language used by inspectors

when evaluating and describing the quality the school’s provision of each area.

Level Description Example of descriptive terms

Very Good

Very good applies where the quality of the areas evaluated is of a very high standard. The very few areas for improvement that exist do not significantly impact on the overall quality of provision. For some schools in this category the quality of what is evaluated is outstanding and provides an example for other schools of exceptionally high standards of provision.

Very good; of a very high quality; very effective practice; highly commendable; very successful; few areas for improvement; notable; of a very high standard. Excellent; outstanding; exceptionally high standard, with very significant strengths; exemplary

Good

Good applies where the strengths in the areas evaluated clearly outweigh the areas in need of improvement. The areas requiring improvement impact on the quality of pupils’ learning. The school needs to build on its strengths and take action to address the areas identified as requiring improvement in order to achieve a very good standard.

Good; good quality; valuable; effective practice; competent; useful; commendable; good standard; some areas for improvement

Satisfactory

Satisfactory applies where the quality of provision is adequate. The strengths in what is being evaluated just outweigh the shortcomings. While the shortcomings do not have a significant negative impact they constrain the quality of the learning experiences and should be addressed in order to achieve a better standard.

Satisfactory; adequate; appropriate provision although some possibilities for improvement exist; acceptable level of quality; improvement needed in some areas

Fair

Fair applies where, although there are some strengths in the areas evaluated, deficiencies or shortcomings that outweigh those strengths also exist. The school will have to address certain deficiencies without delay in order to ensure that provision is satisfactory or better.

Fair; evident weaknesses that are impacting on pupils’ learning; less than satisfactory; experiencing difficulty; must improve in specified areas; action required to improve

Weak

Weak applies where there are serious deficiencies in the areas evaluated. Immediate and coordinated whole-school action is required to address the areas of concern. In some cases, the intervention of other agencies may be required to support improvements.

Weak; unsatisfactory; insufficient; ineffective; poor; requiring significant change, development or improvement; experiencing significant difficulties;