Page | 1 Wednesday, 6 April 2022 Programmes for Students: Accelerating Learning in Literacy, Accelerating Learning in Mathematics and Mathematics Support Teacher Theory of Action Working Draft 2016
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
P a g e | 1
Monday, 15 May 2023
Programmes for Students:
Accelerating Learning in Literacy,
Accelerating Learning in Mathematics and
Mathematics Support Teacher
Theory of ActionWorking Draft
2016
P a g e | 2
ContentsWhakatauākī....................................................................................................................4
Foreword..........................................................................................................................5
Programmes for Students................................................................................................6
PfS Theory of Action.........................................................................................................7PfS Theory of Action: ALL, ALiM and MST Principles.........................................................................................7
Theory underpinning ALL, ALiM and MST – Levers for change..........................................................................9
Guiding principles for the development and use of supplementary programmes..........................................11
Intervention Logic..........................................................................................................13Figure 2: Evaluation Framework and Questions..............................................................................................15
The Chain of Influence.....................................................................................................................................15
Building school-wide systems, capability and processes.................................................................................17
Curriculum and Achievement Plans.................................................................................................................18
Smart Tools......................................................................................................................................................19
Implementation.............................................................................................................21Figure 3: Implementation Process based on Intervention Logic......................................................................22
Conditions for successful implementation.......................................................................................................23
Selection..........................................................................................................................................................23
Undertaking the Intervention........................................................................................26The ALL, ALiM and MST Programmes..............................................................................................................27
‘Step up’ in implementation over time............................................................................................................29
Workshops support in-school capability..........................................................................................................29
Mathematics Support Teacher (MST)..............................................................................................................32
Table 1: Funding for MST Year 1 and Year 2 (based on salary of $81,867)......................................................34
Table 2: Workshops for schools participating in Mathematics Support Teacher (MST) Year 1........................35
Table 3: Workshops for schools participating in Mathematics Support Teacher (MST) Year 2........................36
Communities of Learning...............................................................................................37
Assessment and Reporting.............................................................................................37Accelerating Learning in Literacy (ALL)............................................................................................................39
Accelerating Learning in Mathematics (ALiM).................................................................................................40
Mathematics Support Teacher (MST)..............................................................................................................42
Accountability Responsibilities.......................................................................................43
Monday, 15 May 2023
P a g e | 3
Research, monitoring and evaluation............................................................................44Figure 4: Three Fields of Knowledge................................................................................................................45
Knowledge building by Leadership Team........................................................................................................46
Table 4: Sources of evidence for programme outcomes from each school.....................................................47
Table 5: Sources of evidence for system outcomes from each school.............................................................48
References.....................................................................................................................49
Monday, 15 May 2023
P a g e | 4
Whakatauākī
Iti rearea teitei kahikatea ka taea
The rearea (bellbird) is one of the smallest birds in the forest, yet it is capable of reaching the top of the kahikatea, the tallest tree in the forest
The whakatauākī has a number of positive messages, for example:
If effort is sustained, we can reach great heights.
Out of small beginnings, great things can be achieved.
Although we might be but a small bird, we too can fly to the same heights, should we put our mind to it. This means that size is not relevant to the ability to fly to the heights. If we have the dedication and
determination to succeed and achieve the greatest of greats, then we will get there!
We are all born with ‘feathers’ but we need to use them in order to reach the heights of the forest. We are all born with the same ability as each other. Each person has the ability to succeed; what we
need to do is put the hard work and determination to succeed into action, just as the bird does when learning to fly.
If we put that effort in, then each and every one of us will be able to reach the same achievement levels, and we will be able to accomplish any task that is brought our way.
A bird always looks up when aiming for the resting place at the top of the tree. This means that regardless of where we are – on another tree, a close rock or on the ground – we
should always look up and strive to get to the heights of the tall tree. This is about having a vision and a purpose and a goal to reach up for. If we don’t have this, then we
will look down to see how much it will hurt if we fall. We need to be more like the bird and keep that goal up high, that way we will, via our own persistence, get to that height.
Monday, 15 May 2023
P a g e | 5
Foreword
This Theory of Action has been drafted to provide a professional document for the leadership team, supplier regional leaders, Ministry of Education national office and area offices, senior advisors, mentors and school personnel regarding the interventions – Accelerating Learning in Literacy, Accelerating Learning in Mathematics, and Mathematics Support Teacher.
The document is a logic framework which supports the implementation of the Programmes for Students intervention.
Rationale
A range of international and national reports demonstrate that while the New Zealand education system has provided excellent outcomes for some students, overall improvement has been inconsistent, with significant groups missing out. In particular, the system has not altered the inequitable educational outcomes for a large number of Māori and Pasifika students, students with special education needs, or students from low income backgrounds.
Overall, Public Achievement Information (PAI) data shows that there are pressing issues of inequality. Whilst there are particular challenges and successes for each group, overall, achievement for Māori and Pasifika across the three National Standards is much lower than for Asian and European/Pākehā. With regards to gender, girls’ achievement is much higher than boys (except in mathematics).
The challenge for New Zealand’s education system is to bring more students to a higher achievement level, with a broader skill range and more equity of outcomes than ever before. In response to this challenge, the Government’s education targets include developing a goal for the sector of 85% of students at or above the reading, writing and mathematics National Standards by 2017.
To support this target, the Ministry of Education (the Ministry) is also focusing on accelerating the progress of years 1 to 8 students who are achieving below or well below National Standards in mathematics, reading or writing for their year group.
The system improvements needed include the way supplementary supports for students are coherent with the practices of “what makes a bigger difference”.
Monday, 15 May 2023
P a g e | 6
Programmes for StudentsProgrammes for Students (PfS) are a suite of supplementary supports for primary students: Accelerating Learning in Literacy (ALL), Accelerating Learning in Mathematics (ALiM) and Mathematics Support Teacher (MST).
ALL, ALiM and MST are designed to address underachievement in literacy or mathematics, and to ensure that every student in New Zealand has access to a quality education.
ALL, ALiM and MST are school inquiry and knowledge building interventions that accelerate progress for groups of students who are below or well below National Standards in mathematics or literacy, and sustain cycles of inquiry for systematic spread across classrooms, schools and the system.
These interventions are led and driven by the school using their existing literacy or mathematics expertise. Schools’ annual plans and targets are used to identify groups of students who are below or well below National Standards in mathematics or literacy, and would benefit from additional support to accelerate their achievement.
Teachers provide short, intensive support for students in addition to, and connected with, their existing classroom programmes to accelerate their progress. It is expected that schools will engage with family and whānau to have greater impact on the outcomes of the students.
ALL, ALiM and MST are based on a Theory of Action which ensures design and delivery consistency and coherence.
Outcomes
ALL, ALiM and MST are designed to achieve the following outcomes:
Acceleration for targeted students who are below or well below National Standards in literacy or mathematics
Improved student achievement of learners, with a focus on priority learners, enabling greater percentages of students to reach curriculum expectation
The development over time, of a school Curriculum and Achievement Plan (CaAP)
System improvement and capability building across each participating school.
What this will look like in schools:
Student achievement is lifted from below or well below National Standards in literacy and mathematics
Student’s identity as successful learners in reading, writing and mathematics which supports their learning across The New Zealand Curriculum is enhanced
Schools review their current intervention processes and practices so there is a school-wide response to student underachievement, reflected in a school Curriculum and Achievement Plan.
Monday, 15 May 2023
P a g e | 7
PfS Theory of Action The theory of action builds on the 2010 – 2011 pilot studies, the intervention logic of the 2012 programmes, the evaluations of the impact and success of these programmes, and conversations with national and regional Ministry personnel, providers and schools about the impact, and improvements and successes. System level improvement theories based on student outcomes were used in the sense making process.
PfS Theory of Action: ALL, ALiM and MST Principles The primary focus of ALL, ALiM and MST is accelerating progress for small groups of students leading to
school wide change. An inquiry process is central at all levels of this project.
“Teaching as Inquiry” in this project (as described in the New Zealand Curriculum) underpin the PfS interventions ALL, ALiM and MST. That is, the teacher’s continual monitoring, reflection and response to student learning and progress:
“Inquiry in to the teaching–learning relationship can be visualised as a cyclical process that goes on moment by moment (as teaching takes place), day by day, and over the longer term. In this process, the teacher asks:
What is important (and therefore worth spending time on), given where my students are at?
What strategies (evidence-based) are most likely to help my students learn from this?
What happened as a result of the teaching, and what are the implications for future teaching?”
Inquiry also draws on the experiences and knowledge generated from the practice of leaders and teachers as they develop their own inquiries within their specific school contexts. This can be seen as “professional inquiry”. By valuing and supporting the use of both practitioner knowledge and research knowledge, leaders and teachers are able to learn and innovate. Finding effective learning pathways and ensuring the most capable teaching of priority student groups enables participants to answer the question of, ‘what works for whom?’”.
An “inquiry question” is also a key focus of workshops for schools participating in ALL and ALiM.
For Year 1 workshops, the inquiry question is: “What is acceleration and how do we achieve it?”
For Years 2 & 3 workshops the inquiry question is: “How do we develop effective systems of support that sustain student acceleration and ensure intervention coherence at a school-wide level?”
The “inquiry” referred to in this Theory of Action is: Teachers use evidence related to students and teaching to inform cycles of inquiry and
knowledge-building Leaders use evidence-informed cycles of inquiry and knowledge building to support school-wide
systems and organisational conditions for improved student outcomes. The Ministry uses evidence and cycles of inquiry to develop system wide improvements
ALL, ALiM and MST are short, intensive supplementary supports for small groups of students, in addition to and connected with the classroom programme initially.
Systems for transfer of knowledge support systematic spread across classrooms, schools and the sector.
Monday, 15 May 2023
P a g e | 8
System-level improvement
Accelerating progress for students within a school context is due to particular instructional and leadership practices. e.g. (Stein)1, Thompson and William)2, designing for sustainability from the beginning (William and Leahy)3, learning design (Cobb and Jackson)4, chain of influence (Timperley and Parr)5, using Evidence in the Classroom for Professional Learning (Timperley), acceleration not remediation. (Pepper Rollins)6
Design is based on system-level improvement theories, teaching and learning research: Best Evidence Synthesis (BES) quality schooling dimensions for the Supplementary Supports
Framework http://www.ero.govt.nz/National-Reports/Raising-achievement-in-primary-schools-ALIM-and-
ALL-June-2014 These describe the guiding principles for all supplementary support for students, teachers, leaders and schools and ensure improvement focus is coherent with other foci.
1 Stein, M. K., Hubbard, L., & Toure, J. (2008, March). Travel of district-wide approaches to instructional improvement: How can districts learn from one another? Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York2 Thompson, M., & Wiliam, D. (2007, April). Tight but loose: A conceptual framework for scaling up school reforms. A paper presented at the Annual American Educational Research Association, Chicago.3 Wiliam, D., and Leahy, S. (2008.) From teachers to schools: scaling up professional development for formative assessment. Downloaded from http://www.dylanwiliam.net/4 Cobb, P., & Jackson, K. (2011). Towards an empirically grounded theory of action for improving the quality of mathematics teaching at scale. Mathematics Teacher Education and Development, 13(1), 6-33.5 Timperley, H., & Parr, J. M. (2009). The chain of influence from policy to practice in the New Zealand Literacy Strategy. Research Papers in Education, 24, 135–154.6 Rollins, S.P. (2014). Learning in the Fast Lane: 8 ways to put ALL students on the road to academic success. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Monday, 15 May 2023
P a g e | 9
Theory underpinning ALL, ALiM and MST – Levers for change Best Evidence Synthesis (BES) “The BES model for systemic improvement that leverages evidence and expertise to make a bigger difference for valued outcomes for diverse (all) student” (Alton-Lee, 2012)7 provides a map for improvement that will lead to this vision. The model has four components that are the levers for change:
effective pedagogy for valued outcomes for diverse (all) learners,
activation of educationally powerful connections, leadership of conditions for continuous improvement, productive inquiry and knowledge building for professional and policy learning.
These four levers for change are inherent in the design of ALL, ALiM and MST.
Accelerating learning supports student achievement
Students who are underachieving risk remaining on a trajectory to continued underachievement. To bring students’ progress back on track, they need intervention to accelerate their progress so it shows a noticeably faster, upward movement than might otherwise have been expected from the trend of their own past learning and is faster than that of classmates, who are progressing at expected rates, in order to catch them up (See Figure 1 - Designing Pathways for Accelerating Learning). Schools collect data about the impact of the intervention and to plan where to next. This student achievement data also supports the Ministry’s evaluation of ALL, ALiM and MST.
Programmes for Students: ALL and ALiM focuses on accelerating learning through teaching a group (or groups) of students in readiness for classroom learning in advance of their class peers. Acceleration is, therefore, not primarily focused on mastering concepts of the past, but uses the child’s strengths to build the expertise, attitude, skills and knowledge needed to meet their current New Zealand Curriculum level. Acceleration in this way avoids a remediation focus of drilling isolated skills or items that students have failed to master. Instead, acceleration teaching approaches ‘readies students for new learning where past concepts and skills are addressed, but always in the purposeful context of future learning.’ (Rollins, 2014)8.
Acceleration in the context of ALL and ALiM requires teachers to be thinking about their classroom programme, and how they can teach their intervention group to build expertise, attitude, skills and knowledge ready for their new learning. To do this, teachers need to be able to identify the ‘big’ ideas of reading, writing and mathematics and understand the progression of each of these over time. Pathways of progress for intervention students will assist this learning.
The ALL and ALiM intervention includes close monitoring, intensive planning and evaluation, and the provision of many rich and intellectually rigorous opportunities for learning provided by the teacher. Each student would experience being part of a learning community, develop learning strategies and personal self-evaluation skills9
7 Alton-Lee, A. (2012). The use of evidence to improve education and serve the public good. Paper prepared for the Ministry of Education and presented at American Educational Research Association. Vancouver: Canada8 Rollins, S.P. (2014). Learning in the Fast Lane: 8 ways to put ALL students on the road to academic success. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.9 PISA 2009 found that there was a strong relationship between students who did not have these strategies and under-achievement.
Monday, 15 May 2023
P a g e | 10
along with the particular knowledge and skills that had been identified to ensure they can engage with all aspects of the school curriculum appropriate for their peer group.
Figure 1 - Designing Pathways for Accelerating Learning10
10 Retrieved from: https://www.google.co.nz/search?q=designing+pathways+for+accelerated+learning&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&gws_rd=cr&ei=lfs7Vo-HCoGu0ASe06bwDA. Ministry of Education Tool 13: Designing pathways of learning.
Monday, 15 May 2023
P a g e | 11
Supplementary Supports for Students
Supplementary programmes can neither substitute for nor compensate for poor-quality classroom instruction. Supplementary instruction is a secondary response to learning difficulties. Although supplementary instruction has demonstrated merit, its impact is insufficient unless it is planned and delivered in ways that makes clear connections to the child’s daily experiences and needs during instruction in the classroom. (Snow et al, 1998, p327)11
There are three tiers of teaching support for students:
Tier 1: Effective classroom teaching. Tier 2: Supplementary support. Tier 3: Specialist support.
Most students should progress through their schooling in an effective classroom teaching programme where the teacher uses supplementary support and adaptive teaching to meet the students’ needs and accelerate their progress (Tier 1). Those students who do not make the expected progress in Tier 1 will require supplementary support programmes at Tier 2 and Tier 3. These should supplement core classroom teaching.
Tier 2 is a short and intensive school-based intervention inside and/or outside the classroom for some learners, and Tier 3 is a long-term specialist intervention intended for a very small number of students. (See the diagram above).
Guiding principles for the development and use of supplementary programmes From the BES body of knowledge and the work of other researchers focused on system improvement (e.g. Cobb & Jackson, 2011; Fullan, 2009; McKinsey Report, 2010) a number of guiding principles have been identified for the development and use of programmes that supplement effective classroom teaching.
11 Snow, C.E., Griffin, P., and Burns, M.D., eds. (1998) Preventing Reading Difficulties in Young Children. Washington DC: National Academies Press.
Monday, 15 May 2023
P a g e | 12
Effective pedagogy for valued outcomes
The aim of any supplementary programme for students is to support them to access the school curriculum and reach valued educational goals, i.e. it is a matter of equity.
The New Zealand Curriculum 2007 identifies teacher actions to promote student learning (pages 34-35). Assessment is used to inform decisions about who needs to access to supplementary support and how
successful the teaching and learning is. Ongoing monitoring of student progress aligns with the school curriculum and the educational goals and improves evaluative capability.
The content of these programmes aligns with the school curriculum and is based on high impact pedagogies12 – i.e. the ‘what’ and ‘how’ focus and is not on low-level skills.
Curriculum resources and tools are ‘smart’. Learning occurs within socio-cultural contexts. As particular groups of students, namely: Māori, Pasifika, students with special education needs and
students from low socio-economic backgrounds are under-represented in the student population reaching the valued student outcomes, the curriculum of accelerated teaching and learning needs to be cognisant of and responsive to their strengths, needs and aspirations. For example, a significant number of students have diverse language backgrounds.
Activation of educationally powerful connections
The success of a supplementary programme for students is determined by the quality of the educational interactions between and amongst student - student; student - teacher; teacher - parent/whānau/family; student - parent/whānau/family; teacher-teacher; teacher-school leaders/visiting leaders.
Generally people need to learn how to engage in deep constructive talk that focuses on improving learning (for example see BES Exemplars13 for student talk, Timperley, 201114 for teacher talk).
Leadership of conditions for continuous improvement
The supplementary programme for students is designed for success. This means leadership needs to monitor for improvement and undertake leadership tasks so that the programme is:
Underpinned by effective classroom teaching Coherent with and embedded within school curriculum, i.e. designed as part of a school’s
Curriculum and Achievement Plan that covers 3 - 5 year as per the school review cycle Embedded within school self-review, monitoring and assessment practices - including contracted
reporting Resourced by effective teachers who are professionally supported to provide high-impact
pedagogies for accelerated progress, i.e. there is efficiency and urgency in the practice Transparent to ensure there is reciprocal learning for teachers and students across a range of
supplementary and classroom settings.
12 The “What works clearing house” states that there is strong evidence that the following works for short intensive interventions in mathematics. Instruction during the intervention should be explicit and systematic. This includes providing models of proficient problem solving, verbal-ization of thought processes, guided practice, corrective feedback, and frequent cumulative review. Interventions should include instruction on solving word problems that is based on common underlying structures. (page 27) Assisting Students Struggling with Mathematics: Response to Intervention (RtI) for Elementary and Middle Schools http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/practiceguide.aspx?sid=2 See Appendix 2 for further comment on pedagogy and curriculum.
13 BES Exemplar 1 - Ngā Kete Raukura - He Tauira 1 Developing Communities of Mathematical Inquiry http://www.educationcounts.govt.nz/topics/BES/bes-exemplars
14 Timperley, H.S. (2011) Realizing the Power of Professional Learning. London: Open University Press.
Monday, 15 May 2023
P a g e | 13
Productive inquiry and knowledge building
Systems that support school self-review, monitoring and assessment are underpinned by the concept of improvement rather than ‘to prove’.
An ethic of care underpins the notion of collective responsibility and individual accountability to ensure there are no unintended consequences from these programmes.
The gathering and analysis of data for monitoring position and progress are used to focus the response on the relevant response.
Intervention Logic Intervention logic is a narrative or graphical depiction of processes that communicate the assumptions upon which an activity is expected to lead to an expected outcome. It generally illustrates a sequence of cause and effect relationships. The logic describes linkages among programme resources, activities, outputs and the multiple participants. Intervention logic is planning the steps, resources and system supports required to achieve the desired outcomes. If we do things this way, then these things should happen.
The intervention logic for ALL, ALiM and MST sits within two inter-related contexts – both are systems in themselves.
1. The school context of a local curriculum delivered in such a way as to improve outcomes for diverse (all) students using the particular resources available to it
2. The wider education system with a national curriculum, national goals and a coherent range of supplementary resources to support schools, leaders and teachers to meet the national goals
The intervention logic is based on a school’s capability to: identify students’ strengths and needs design learning programmes to accelerate the learning of identified students monitor the impact of this learning for students in both the short and long term refocus and adapt practices as a response to the monitoring examine school-wide processes.15
A key aspect of the ALL, ALIM and MST design is extending before and beyond the short and intensive supplementary programme for the selected students, to promote the concepts of evaluation and refocus within a school’s self-review process. In this way, schools transfer knowledge and skills about teaching and learning practices to accelerate student progress across classrooms and syndicates. The Curriculum and Achievement 15 See Figure 3 Implementation Logic (implementation column)
Monday, 15 May 2023
Current state
Desired outcome
Intervention what needs to happen
and change from current state to desired outcome
P a g e | 14
Plan (CaAP) provides the opportunity for school leaders and the Supplementary Inquiry Team to strengthen system improvement and capability building across the school.
Evaluation
A key aspect of the ALL, ALiM and MST design is a focus on the concepts of evaluation, and a refocus within a school’s self-review process (see Figure 2 – Evaluation Framework and Questions).
Evaluation is to assess what is, and is not working, and for whom, and then to determine what changes are needed, particularly to advance equity and excellence goals. The process involves asking good questions, gathering fit-for-purpose data and information, making sense of that information and responding appropriately. Evaluation is always driven by the motivation to improve, to do better for the students. ALL, ALiM and MST encourages schools to be innovative in their response to underachievement and to learn from their focus.
Deep constructive talk is an important part of evaluation and often begins with this Evaluation Framework and questions e.g. “what needs to be done differently?”, “Is the response I am implementing working – when why and for whom?”
Deep constructive talk involves exploring the many practices and beliefs associated with supplementary student support, e.g. reliance of second wave support, which are embedded and need challenging. Prioritising time and opportunities for this is important. Expect the mentor to ask school leaders, SIT and teachers questions to encourage deep constructive thought.
Monday, 15 May 2023
P a g e | 15
Figure 2: Evaluation Framework and Questions
The Chain of InfluenceThere are key factors that influence change – together these make up a chain of influence. Each point of the chain of influence plays a role to bring about change.
The ALL, ALiM and MST chain of influence for improved outcomes for students includes, but is not limited to:
PfS National Leadership Team School leaders Teachers Family, whānau and community Mentors
PfS National Leadership Team
The PfS National Leadership Team are the “drivers” in ensuring that ALL, ALiM and MST is a project focussed on improvement. The team uses evidence based inquiry to monitor and enhance ALL, ALiM and MST design.
Monday, 15 May 2023
P a g e | 16
School Leaders
There is consistent evidence of the critical importance of senior leader/principal engagement and support to success of initiatives such as ALL, ALiM or MST.
The BES School Leadership and Student Outcomes: Identifying What Works and Why Best Evidence Synthesis (2009) identifies that when school leaders promote and participate in effective teacher professional learning this has twice the impact on student outcomes across a school than any other leadership activity.
ALL, ALiM and MST support leaders and teachers to inquire into their professional practice and share their learning.
Teachers
Quality teaching is identified as a key influence on high quality outcomes for diverse students (BES 2003). John Hattie says “It is what teachers know, do and care about which is very powerful in the learning equation.” (Hattie, 2003). The focus for teachers in ALL, ALiM and MST is to have a powerful effect on motivation engagement and achievement. Further examples of teacher effect are:(Bishop & Glynn, 1999; Alton-Lee, 2003; Hattie 2009; Dumont et al 2010; Bishop et al, 2014)
Family, whānau and community engagement
The Best Evidence Synthesis - Communities identifies the influences of families/whānau and communities as key levers for high quality outcomes for diverse children. Outcomes include both social and academic achievement. Key findings are that:
ethnicity and culture are linked to children’s achievement levels of human and material resources available within families are also linked to children’s
achievement home language is related to children’s achievement family structure, and changes in family type, in themselves, do not necessarily have a significant impact
on achievement.
The Education Review Office released a report – Educationally Powerful Connections with Parents and Whānau - in November 2015. This looks at examples of where schools have specifically worked with parents and whānau to accelerate and support progress and improve achievement.
http://www.ero.govt.nz/National-Reports/Educationally-powerful-connections-with-parents-and-whanau-November-2015
Mentors
Definition of a Mentor16 Bullock (2006) ‘An important function of mentoring is to assist protégés in becoming autonomous professionals who reflect and solve problems as experts.’
Parsloe (2000) ‘Mentoring is to support and encourage people to manage their own learning in order that they may maximise their potential, develop their skills, improve their performance.’
The quality of the chain of influence relies on the interactions mentors have within schools, with the leadership team and with sector experts. They are the lynchpin for success. The mentors need to carry the theory and ideas
16 See Appendix 4 Programmes for Students Roles and Responsibilities, for full description
Monday, 15 May 2023
P a g e | 17
into schools and, through deliberate acts of mentoring, assist schools to challenge practices that are not effective, efficient or equitable.
Schools can expect mentors to:
have strong pedagogical content knowledge be adaptive and highly responsive to context and needs use a structured process to support and challenge inquiry teams and teachers in preparation for and
through their 15-week intervention initiative model an inquiry process in their work draw on a range of strategies such as the evaluation and questions framework to assist school leaders,
SIT and teachers to question and evaluate the impact of their own practices work with leaders and teachers on proven teaching approaches ensure regular meetings/contacts occur with a focus on self-review support a plan for a trajectory of student acceleration and monitor this help inquiry teams to establish meeting processes and protocols introduce schools to research and readings.
Building school-wide systems, capability and processes As a result of being involved in ALL, ALiM and MST, school systems and processes around interventions are strengthened.
increased numbers of teachers are involved during the two years of ALiM and MST, and the three years of ALL that schools can access the initiative,
the development of a comprehensive School Curriculum and Achievement Plan supports schools to inquire into and strengthen their intervention structures, systems and processes.
Involvement in ALL, ALiM and MST will:
increase teacher knowledge within and across the school of what works for each priority group of students determine which interventions should be offered in the school to meet the needs of students who are below
curriculum expectations measure the ongoing success of interventions, retaining only those that show acceleration; help processes that will identify a need for supplementary support and the timeliness in providing this
support build coherence of all supplementary support responses within the school curriculum support school and teaching cycles of inquiry.
Monday, 15 May 2023
P a g e | 18
Curriculum and Achievement PlansThe Curriculum and Achievement Plan (CaAP) combines several school plans into one document.
Schools currently develop a curriculum plan that starts as a school-wide plan about the delivery of their local curriculum. This plan is the framework for coherent instruction and reflects the school’s charter and the wishes of the students and the community. More curriculum detail is added at syndicate level, and day-by-day detail is added at the classroom level.
The classroom plan is underpinned by Teaching as Inquiry as teachers respond to student strengths and needs by adapting the classroom curriculum.
Schools also have an assessment schedule which signals student progress and when intervention is needed. Many schools have developed a graduate profile to describe the valued outcome for all students.
The development of a school CaAP combines the schools’ curriculum, assessment and achievement plans into one document, so that student progress and the impact of interventions can be monitored, and appropriate responses planned.
The Curriculum and Achievement Plan describes:
the expected academic improvements over time, from one year to the next as described by agreed achievement signposts, e.g. the school-wide plan would include the National Standards signposts and Overall Teacher Judgment information, and the classroom plan would include signposts found in such documents as the Literacy Learning Progressions or The Numeracy Framework
Monday, 15 May 2023
P a g e | 19
the breadth and depth, as well as the annual improvements/progress expected for all students
what might trigger a need to introduce a supplementary programme, e.g. end of year data, mid-year data, classroom observation, etc, for each year group and particular groups of students
the layers of intervention: Tier 1 support, being effective classroom teaching. Tier 2 support, being a short-term, school-based supplementary intervention inside and/or outside
the classroom (outside the classroom = ‘withdrawal’ from the class and class activities. Inside the classroom, the teacher might work with the small group while another teacher works with the rest of the class.)
Tier 3 support, being a long-term specialist intervention
monitoring within and beyond the supplementary intervention, to ensure the students continue to achieve, and teachers can continue to adapt their teaching methods to suit their students
when and how students move from one type of support to the next, e.g. a description of what happens for the students whose progress does not accelerate after an initial Tier 2 support. Figure 4 shows the concept of a Curriculum and Achievement Plan
effective classroom teaching (Tier 1).
Timely reviews of the school CaAP lead to discussions regarding the impact of classroom curriculum and supplementary interventions, which are part of the classroom curriculum.
The Leadership Team is responsible for selecting and guiding the use of these tools.
Smart ToolsSmart tools carry the policy/research message to the practice (BES Leadership, 2009). They support the effective and efficient use of theory that is known to make a difference when guiding a particular routine. They are resources that have been trialled in a number of contexts to ensure the message and routines are clear to users.
The leadership team is responsible for selecting and guiding the use of these tools.
There are six criteria to be cognisant of, to ensure the tool is well designed.
1. It is logically structured around a clear and unambiguous purpose2. It clearly explains the rationale for change/use3. It incorporates misconception alerts4. It acknowledges existing understandings of reader/user and integrates them5. It maximizes internal coherence and minimizes complexity6. It clearly connects abstract ideas to spatially contiguous detail and examples.Reviews also highlight which students have access to what support, and the impact of those supports, so there is ongoing improvement in the response to student needs.
Monday, 15 May 2023
P a g e | 20
The following smart tools are part of ALL, ALiM and MST:
Self-review tool for schools: Focus on students achieving below curriculum expectation in literacy and mathematics (years 1-8) needs to be the guiding document for school leadership to use and report against. The self-review tool for schools is used to guide the school-wide development of a Curriculum and Achievement Plan.
The Ruia Tool: Reviewing school/whānau partnerships.
Measurable Gains Framework: Smart Tool 2.5 Māori learners and whānau - well informed and making good choices about education pathways and career options.
Curriculum and Achievement Plan.
Student progress smart tools: GLoSS/JAM/PAT/STAR/e-asTTle/Obs survey pathways for progress wedge graphs for whole class and individual progress and achievement English Language Learning Progressions Literacy Learning Progressions The Number Framework Progress and Consistency Tool (PaCT) National Standards self-review tools
BES Exemplars including: Ngā Kete Raukura - He Tauira Developing Communities of Mathematical Inquiry; BES Exemplar 1 Ngā Kete Raukura - He Tauira Reciprocal Teaching BES Exemplar 4 Effective pedagogy in mathematics – Educational Practice Series 19. BES 1017 The Complexity of Community and Family Influences on Children's Achievement in New Zealand:
Best Evidence Synthesis Iteration the BES Exemplars 1 and 4, which can be used to guide the classroom environment before the
acceleration learning takes place, so the rest of the class is not negatively impacted.
17 Anthony, G., & Walshaw, M. (2009).International Academy of Education & International Bureau of Education Paris. UNESCO.
Monday, 15 May 2023
P a g e | 21
Implementation A National Leadership Team, lead by the Ministry, has the responsibility to ensure the interventions to accelerate student achievement are meeting the Ministry’s policy and practice standard and approve and disseminate research ideas.
Literacy and mathematics external expertise are contracted by the Ministry to mentor school leaders and teachers as they implement ALL, ALiM or MST.
The implementation process provides school leaders and teachers with the opportunity to plan an intervention that is responsive to their school environment.
Adherence to the implementation process and the steps outlined in Figure 3 below will support schools to embed ALL, ALiM and MST over time.
Monday, 15 May 2023
Governance and Policy - The PfS ALL, ALiM and MST Leadership Team
The PfS ALL, ALiM and MST Leadership Team is comprised of National Leaders for literacy and mathematics, Ministry Sector Enablement and Support, Ministry research, Ministry design and implementation, the Ministry Curriculum, Learning and Teaching, and sector representatives. The Leadership Team provides quality leadership for the programme and is responsible for implementation design, and coherence with the system’s goals, policies and practices. The Leadership Team has responsibility for:
ensuring integrity of implementation of ALL, ALiM and MST, and consistency with the Theory of Action across literacy and mathematics, ensuring the intervention responds effectively to schools’ particular contexts
building the capacity of the ALL, ALiM and MST design to ensure continuous improvement identifying opportunities for future developments identifying agreed areas of research ensuring communication between all stakeholders, and tracking up and down the chain of
influence.The Leadership Team needs to ensure Regional Coordinators know how to link theory and practice through the use of deep constructive talk – in particular the theory behind ALL, ALIM and MST and confirm that the Regional Coordinators are passing this knowledge to the mentors.
P a g e | 22
Figure 3: Implementation Process based on Intervention Logic
Monday, 15 May 2023
For students
Acceleration of progress
Knowledge and skills to engage with classroom curriculum
Self-directing learning strategies
Agency
For supplementary inquiry team
Improved evaluative capabilities
Improved pedagogies Improved
educationally powerful relationships
For teachers
Improved pedagogy and practice
Agency
Outcomes
Curriculum & Achievement
What works in our school, for
whom and why?
What does the research say
works faster for whom and why?
Organisation
How best do we resource this for:
Powerful connections with family/whānau
Classroom teaching
Supplementary inquiry team
Evaluation
Selection of students
Based on school and national targets
Particular focus on equity – Māori, Pasifika, SEN, and students from lower socio-economic backgrounds
Iterative programme
design
Based on what works
Includes monitoring and evaluation processes
Supplementary Inquiry Design
Teaching as Inquiry
Highly effective and culturally responsive teaching based on what works
Develops educationally powerful relationships with parents/whānau
Inquiry and knowledge building
cycles
Monitors, reviews and adjusts practices, and develops educationally powerful connections with community
Implementation of supplementary
programme
For the supplementary
inquiry team
What do we embed and what do we improve?
Which teachers should try an acceleration programme next?
For students
What do we need to do differently for the students who didn’t accelerate progress?
What do classroom teachers need to do differently to support those who have accelerated?
Refocus
School leadership self review – monitoring long term impact, improving school curriculum and achievement plan, transferring to new contexts, communicating with parents/whānau, Boards of Trustees, community/iwi/hapū and the Ministry.
P a g e | 23
Implementing the ALL or ALiM initiative requires school willingness to adapt and change at an operational and professional level. Processes of self-review and iterative cycles of inquiry are undertaken so that teachers and leaders can explore better ways of meeting the mathematics and literacy needs of their target students.
This gives schools opportunities to identify where change needs to happen, and what needs to be done differently to achieve the desired outcomes.
‘Innovation floats on a sea of inquiry, and curiosity is a driver for change’18
Conditions for successful implementation
The following conditions are effective in ensuring the school gains from ALL, ALiM and MST:
Effective classroom teaching and school leadership Teaching as Inquiry is central to examining and changing practice Theory of Action underpins the pedagogy of ALiM, ALL and MST interventions School-wide monitoring and assessment through school inquiry and knowledge building processes, which
are underpinned by the concept of ongoing improvement An ethic of care underpins the notion of collective responsibility and individual accountability to minimise
the risk of unintended consequences from these interventions Teachers engaging in ALL, ALiM and MST need to be well-supported by school leaders so that they can
undertake their professional inquiries. This includes making release time made available for planning and sharing teaching strategies with other teachers
Smart tools are used for monitoring progress so effort can be focused on the teaching response rather than gathering and analysing information
A Supplementary Inquiry Team to review school wide processes and ensures the successful implementation of Programmes for Students
If a school is requesting ALL, ALiM and MST, the principal or lead teacher will need to introduce it to the Board of Trustees. Schools will also be encouraged to provide a management unit to their literacy/mathematics Leaders.
The selection of schools, teachers and students is critical to the success of ALL, ALiM and MST. This section outlines the commitment and roles and responsibilities required.
Selection
School selectionWhen the right conditions exist within a school the students, teachers and the school will benefit from ALL, ALiM and MST. These conditions include:
an effective and culturally responsive literacy or mathematics teacher with good content and pedagogical knowledge, and the courage to inquire into doing things differently
18 Timperley, Kaser and Halbert (2014)
Monday, 15 May 2023
P a g e | 24
leadership capability and support for ALL, ALiM and MST and a willingness to adapt and change at an operational and professional level
school-wide monitoring and assessment through inquiry and knowledge building processes, underpinned by the concept of ongoing improvement
ERO Report. Raising Achievement in Primary Schools: ALL and ALIM (June 2014) outlines what a ‘strategic and successful’ school looks like.
Selection of the PfS literacy/mathematics leaders
The role of the literacy and mathematics leader is critical to the success of ALL, ALiM and MST, especially as the work develops over time. The leader has oversight of PfS interventions and/or may be used as a coach to support the developing mathematics and literacy expertise of other teachers.
Literacy and mathematics school leaders should:
have strong pedagogical and content knowledge of literacy/mathematics ensuring a deep understanding of progression at all levels
be a member of the Supplementary Inquiry Team be open to learning and confident to try new things be able to engage Teaching as Inquiry cycles and to build this practice in others notice, observe and refine and reflect on own practice be flexible with the ability to employ multiple strategies to work with students be flexible with the ability to employ multiple strategies to work with a range of teachers have high expectations of the students be a permanent member of teaching staff have credibility and confidence to deliver to other staff and work across the school have the ability to build positive relationships with staff, parents and students.
Development of the Supplementary Inquiry Team
Schools participating in ALL, ALiM and MST programmes are expected to establish a Supplementary Inquiry Team (SIT) if they do not already have a team within their school, carrying out the role as it is described below.
There are two roles for the SIT- support and inquiry.
The SIT team includes someone from the leadership team and either literacy leader or mathematics leader when ALL or ALiM are being undertaken. Eventually, if schools have undertaken both ALL and ALiM, the literacy leader and the mathematics leader will both be involved. There will also be representation from the teaching staff involved in interventions.
The responsibilities of this team are to:
support ALiM, ALL and MST teachers to inquire into their teaching strategies and approaches ensure teachers are making sound pedagogical decisions about the interventions and have regular
opportunities for evidence-based conversations ensure there are processes to support teachers to critique their own teaching practices strengthen the transfer of acceleration strategies across the school’s teaching practices ensure that student data collection process is followed schedule regular meetings/conversations.
Monday, 15 May 2023
P a g e | 25
The SIT should monitor the academic, personal and teaching improvements made and undertake leadership tasks so that the programme is:
underpinned by effective classroom teaching across the school coherent with and embedded within the school’s curriculum, i.e. designed as part of a school’s Curriculum
and Achievement Plan that covers 3-5 years, as per the school review cycle embedded within school self-review, monitoring and assessment practices - including contracted
reporting setting up systems for transfer, long-term monitoring and response resourced by effective teachers who are professionally supported to provide high-impact pedagogies for
accelerated progress, i.e. there is efficiency and urgency in the practice transparent, to ensure there is reciprocal learning for teachers and students across a range of
supplementary and classroom settings Prioritised with time and opportunities to critique and reflect.
During the interventions, teachers are assessing students, monitoring their progress and using new learning to respond to students’ needs. The impact on student achievement is reported both during and after the intervention. If schools participate beyond the first year into a second or third year, there is an expected ‘step up’ from the initial teaching inquiry. The SIT plays a key leadership role in schools that continue in Years 2 and 3, to ensure the ‘step up’ and refocus and transfer of learning across syndicates and across the school.
Selection of teachers
The following is provided as guidance for school leaders in their selection of teacher/s.
Teachers should:
have sound pedagogical and content knowledge of literacy/mathematics, ensuring an understanding of progression at all levels
be culturally responsive so that they take identity, language and culture into consideration be a member of the Supplementary Inquiry Team be open to learning and confident to try new things be willing to be challenged and talk about the challenges be able to engage in Teaching as Inquiry cycles notice, observe and refine and reflect on own practice be flexible with the ability to employ multiple strategies that work have high expectations of the students be a member of teaching staff who is fully engaged and committed to the integrity of the intervention have the ability to build positive relationships with staff, parents and students be willing to transfer knowledge of effective practice to others in the school
Selection of students
Students selected for the ALL, ALiM and MST interventions should have had at least 40 weeks of schooling, and for ALiM be ‘below’ the National Standards mathematics, for MST be ‘well below’ and ‘below’ the National Standards mathematics; for ALL be ‘ below’ or ‘well below’ the National Standards in reading or writing.
Monday, 15 May 2023
P a g e | 26
Groups to consider are:
Māori students and Pasifika students students from low socio-economic background students who may have irregular attendance students who may need extra support due to transitioning students who are English Language Learners (ELL) students who have learning and/or behavioural difficulties.
Schools should make equitable and fair decisions about which of these students will be selected for ALL, ALiM and MST.
For some student groups, teachers may need to learn new information when considering the most effective teaching response that is required. For example:
if students are bilingual or multilingual, then teachers will need to know about the additional language acquisition process, and understand the critical and valuable role of home language in new language learning
if students have high rates of absenteeism, then teachers may need to consider new practices for communicating with families and ensuring students are motivated to attend school.
Undertaking the Intervention
Teaching and learning to accelerate student outcomes should be innovative and based on research of effective teaching practices. Schools need to ensure that teaching is responsive to students’ strengths, needs and aspirations, including family/whānau. Learning occurs within socio-cultural contexts that are important to the students and reflect their identity, language and culture. Māori, Pasifika, students with special education needs and students from low socio-economic backgrounds achieving below their curriculum expectations are a priority.
The design of ALL, ALiM or MST interventions should be coherent with the school curriculum and based on high impact pedagogies.
The interventions are for students from who have had at least 40 weeks of schooling and are in Years 2 – 8.
The key aspects are:
The school inquiry into supplementary programmes is designed to occur over 1–3 years with the school improving their coherence across the school curriculum and supplementary programmes over that time. Certain conditions must be in place to be allocated a second year for ALL and ALiM and a third year for ALL.
Schools with effective classroom pedagogy in many classes and effective leadership are invited to participate. These schools will have areas of underachievement (particularly in the target areas) and will be willing to focus on Tier 2 support to supplement their classroom teaching (Tier 1 support). Effective classroom pedagogy occurs in classrooms where the teacher has evidence of accelerating the progress of priority group students. Evidence would be from classroom observations and student achievement data. Effective leadership occurs when student achievement data is disaggregated, responses are well resourced and monitored for impact and there is acceleration of progress for a high proportion of at risk students. Evidence would be from school documentation.
Monday, 15 May 2023
P a g e | 27
The Self Review Tool for Schools: Focus on student’s achieving below curriculum expectations in literacy years 1–8 is used to guide the school wide development of a Curriculum and Achievement Plan.
Schools strengthen systems and processes for mobilising knowledge gained through ALL, ALiM or MST. Teachers are supported to transfer knowledge and practices across classrooms.
School mentors have expertise in the focus areas for acceleration and are employed through the regional PLD providers.
The leadership team has the responsibility to drive the programmes, make changes to design if needed and sits across both the mathematics and literacy programmes.
The Theory of Action for Programmes for Students underpins each school’s programme design. Evaluation is used by schools and the Minister as a driver for continual change for student improvement
The ALL, ALiM and MST Programmes ALL and ALiM are 15-week interventions. Preparation for the intervention, the 15-week intervention itself, and follow-up workshops will run either in ‘Intake 1’ (terms 1–3), or ‘Intake 2’ (terms 2–4).
MST runs for two years, with a number of 10–20 week interventions running concurrently through the year.
In ALL, ALiM and MST, teachers with expertise in the literacy or mathematics work with small groups of students to explore what they could do differently to accelerate student progress. The teachers are supported to inquire into their practice and share their learning.
Schools are supported to develop systems and processes to scaffold the students beyond the intervention, as well as other students in the school. Schools are also supported to strengthen their data collection, collation and analysis, for evidence-based decision making.
Supports are in two forms:
1. Ministry-funded support through the school’s operations grant for teacher release. Facilitated PfS events for preparations, planning and sharing, and mentoring are also funded by the Ministry.
2. School based support through the development of a school Supplementary Inquiry Team (SIT). The mentor supports the SIT as they grow expertise in the SIT areas of responsibility. The SIT supports:
teacher inquiry developing systems and processes to monitor students at risk of not achieving and responds to their
needs developing systems and processes to mobilise knowledge about good practice to accelerate student
learning developing the school’s Curriculum and Achievement Plan (CaAP) – evidence-based systems and
processes developed for the school’s context inquiry into the impact of supplementary supports and interventions used in the school.
School leadership commitment and support has a significant influence on the success of ALL, ALiM and MST. The school funding provides for the principal, literacy or mathematics lead and teacher to attend a series of ALL, ALiM or MST workshops, differentiated to meet their needs for self-review, planning and preparation. Workshops are facilitated by subject matter experts.
ALL and ALiM schools are supported by a Ministry-funded mentor, as well as funding that allows the school to free up a teacher with existing expertise in mathematics or literacy to provide additional help to a group of 6-8 students once a day, over a 15-week timeframe.
Monday, 15 May 2023
P a g e | 28
In Year 2 ALL and Year 2 ALiM, the funding will be used in various ways to support a group of 2-5 teachers to implement an intervention. This will be delivered over a 15 week timeframe.
In Year 3 ALL, the funding will be used in various ways to support a group of 6 or more teachers to implement an intervention. This will be delivered over a 15 week timeframe.
An MST school is much the same as an ALiM school, except that MST runs for a whole year with multiple groups of short to medium-term interventions, whereas ALL and ALiM are single short-term interventions with one or more groups.
MST schools receive funding support to release a teacher for each year of MST, from a portion of their usual classroom teaching, to inquire into accelerating students who are below or well below National Standards in mathematics or literacy.
Typically, MST teachers work with at least 2-3 groups of students once a day for 10 - 20 weeks, enabling the teacher to examine best practice methods with several groups of students during that period.
The current ALL, ALiM and MST school funding model (see also Table 1: Funding for MST):
ALL and ALiM schools are funded 0.1 Full Time Teacher Equivalent (FTE) at the top of the Primary Teachers’ salary scale. Schools are expected to use the funding for:
Teacher release (including workshops) to support teaching Teacher planning and review Student monitoring meetings Preparation for intervention e.g. parent meetings Coaching Data collection/assessment/observation
Note: funding is not to be used for the purchasing of digital technology, resource books/materials and PLD MST schools are funded a proportion of FTE (based on school roll and decile) at the top of the scale of the
Primary Teachers’ salary scale (plus two management units). Bulk payments are made into schools’ Operational Grant in April (Intake 1) and July (Intake 2). Refunds
from schools that withdraw are invoiced to the school.
University papers: While ALL, ALiM and MST have a primary focus on students, the interventions encourage the building of teacher capability through additional study. MST has a compulsory post- graduate paper component.
The Ministry is continuing to implement its tertiary fees subsidy scheme for approved literacy and mathematics papers. Up to 600 teachers each year will be supported to study a literacy or mathematics paper at the graduate or postgraduate level. Half the tuition fee will be paid for by the Ministry, and half by the teacher or teacher’s school. MST’s receive $1000 towards their post graduate paper on successful completion of the paper. No release time or leave provision is part of this scheme. See NZMaths and literacy online for more information.
Teachers can apply for scholarships that contribute to the cost of studying for TESSOL qualification. http://literacyonline.tki.org.nz/Literacy-online/Teacher-needs/Professional-readings/Foundation-learning-literacy
To understand what is required of schools, as well as details of the Ministry’s funding and support, see TKI fact sheets.
Monday, 15 May 2023
P a g e | 29
‘Step up’ in implementation over timeThe nature of a school’s involvement in ALL, ALiM and MST will change, develop and strengthen over time. An overview of this development (‘step-up’) supports mentors, school leaders and teachers to understand the expected knowledge building and actions that are undertaken over the continued time of each school’s involvement. Following this developmental process will leave the school in a stronger position to make sound pedagogical decisions about their school-wide interventions. It leaves them with the internal capability to maintain systems and inquiry to respond to student needs, and in a suitable place to be able to lead themselves.
Workshops support in-school capabilityALL and ALiM schools are supported through a series of workshops by facilitators from regionally contracted literacy and mathematics professional learning and development suppliers.
Workshops will be held locally or regionally. The Supplier Lead and event organisers can determine the actual organisational details. The National Leaders need to ensure there is consistency in messages at the workshops.
Event organisers will contact each participant at least one month prior to each workshop(s) to organise travel and accommodation requirements. Two participants will be able to attend workshops.
The workshops for Intake One and Intake Two schools participating in ALL and ALiM in Year 1 are:
The Year 1 inquiry question is: "What is acceleration and how do we achieve it?"
Monday, 15 May 2023
P a g e | 30
Year 1
An evaluation and self-review workshop
The school commits to a review of its current literacy/mathematics strengths and needs and considers the selection of teacher/students for the intervention.
There is an overview of ALL and ALiM and the expectations.
(A one-day workshop for the principal and literacy/mathematics leader)
A one-day workshop
Intake One:
February/March
Intake Two:
May/June
Planning workshop
Planning the intervention with a focus on identifying key levers for improved literacy and mathematics teaching and learning.
(These days are for the literacy/mathematics leader and the ALL/ALiM teacher)
Two consecutive workshop days
Intake One: March
Intake Two: June
Impact and refocus workshop
Review, reflection, forward planning. This is an opportunity to reflect on mentoring and other forms of support that were provided (or not).
(This workshop is for the principal and the ALL/ALiM teacher)
A one-day workshop
Intake One: August/September
Intake Two: October/November
Monday, 15 May 2023
P a g e | 31
The Year 2 ALiM and Year 2/3 ALL inquiry question is: “How do we develop effective systems of support that sustain student acceleration and ensure intervention coherence at a school-wide level?”
The workshops for Intake One and Intake Two schools participating in ALiM Year 2 and ALL Year 2 and Year 3 are:
Years 2 (ALL and ALiM)/3 (ALL only)
Evaluation, self-review and planning workshop
A review of the previous year’s learning and success in ALL/ALiM.
Selection of teachers/students to be involved across the school. Designing and planning the new intervention. Further develop the school Curriculum and Achievement Plan,
focusing on the action points.
(A two-day workshop for the principal, literacy/mathematics leader and/or ALL /ALiM teacher)
Two consecutive workshop days
Intake One: February/March
Intake Two:
May/June
Impact and refocus workshop
Review, reflection, forward planning.
(This workshop is for the principal, literacy/mathematics leader and/or ALL/ALiM teacher)
A one-day workshop
Intake One: August/September
Intake Two: October/November
After the first year of inquiry, schools focus on continuing cycles of inquiry to build knowledge of acceleration and the strategies and learning conditions that support this in their school. This extends the literacy and mathematics practices to develop school-wide coherence of literacy/mathematics interventions with a strong focus on critiquing the school’s supplementary support programmes and monitoring their effectiveness.
Schools will further develop their Curriculum and Achievement Plan (CaAP) to reflect this process.
Monday, 15 May 2023
P a g e | 32
Mathematics Support Teacher (MST)Mathematics Support Teacher 1 and 2 is a two-year initiative. Participating teachers are required to complete a post-graduate paper each year.
MST teachers should have sound pedagogical and content knowledge of mathematics, ensuring an understanding of progression at all levels. They should also have demonstrated capability in Teaching as Inquiry (NZC 2007 P 34-35)
An MST school is much the same as an ALiM school, except that MST runs for a whole year with multiple groups of short to medium-term interventions, whereas ALL and ALiM are single short-term interventions with one or more groups.
MST schools receive funding support from a portion of their usual classroom teaching to release a teacher for each year of MST, to inquire into accelerating students who are below and well below the standard expected of their peers.
Typically, MST teachers work with two to three groups of students once a day for 10-20 weeks, enabling the teacher to explore best practice methods during that period.
This section outlines the commitment required by school leaders, the lead teachers, the supplementary inquiry team (SIT) and the Ministry for implementing the Mathematics Support Teacher (MST) intervention.
Schools participating in MST will have mathematics as a focus, and it is recommended they will have successfully implemented ALiM. They will have systems in place for addressing the needs of students who are achieving well below the mathematics National Standard. The SIT should have reviewed their intervention processes and practices so there is a school-wide response to student under-achievement, which is reflected in their school Curriculum and Achievement Plan (CaAP). MST is also based on the same conditions of learning and quality underpinning: ALL, ALiM and MST Theory of Action.
If schools have previously participated in ALiM, it is expected they will have:
demonstrated accelerated progress and be committed to the intervention at least 1 ALiM teacher directly involved a minimum of 20 students generally working well below (or sometimes below) the expected standard in
mathematics teacher expertise and capability, as well as the courage to inquire into doing things differently a school-wide culture of adapting and changing at an operational and professional level leadership capability and support for MST a CaAP that has been extended to encompass most, or all, year groups.
Schools that have participated in ALiM in the past must select their past ALiM teacher to be the MST. Schools that haven’t participated in ALiM will be supported into the role. The Supplementary Inquiry Team will support the MST throughout the two years of the initiative (MST 1 and MST 2).
The Mathematics Support Teacher should be a key member of the supplementary inquiry team (SIT). Mathematics should be a school focus as the supplementary inquiry team is responsible for ensuring there is coherence between any supplementary support, the classroom curriculum and the ongoing monitoring of students. The SIT is responsible for contributing to the mathematics component in a school’s Curriculum and Achievement Plan. They will evaluate the effectiveness of current practices that support accelerated
Monday, 15 May 2023
P a g e | 33
mathematics learning, and closely monitor the impact of an intervention for small groups of students who are below or well below the National Standards in mathematics.
The aim of MST is to build mathematics support capability. The MST will provide targeted instruction for small groups of students who are struggling and achieving below or well below their expected standard. Typically, these students will need teachers with specialised skills and knowledge in mathematics. The MST role is designed to develop teachers’ expertise in this area to become more effective in accelerating students’ learning. Targeted students will receive a short and intensive supplementary programme in addition to their classroom programme to accelerate progress.
The MST’s role is to share information that they have learnt through knowledge sharing with the Supplementary Inquiry Team (SIT). The SIT is responsible for ensuring the key knowledge gained by the MST is shared with other teachers. Effective teaching practices for students who are achieving below the National Standards should be shared and implemented school-wide. The SIT is also required to focus on enabling effective classroom connections for MST students.
In the first year of MST the focus is on identifying effective teaching practices of a supplementary programme.
The MST 1 inquiry question is: “What effective mathematics teaching practices accelerate the learning of students well below the National Standards?”
In the second year of MST the focus is on transferring the effective teaching practices with in the school.
The MST 2 inquiry question is: “How do we develop effective systems of support that sustain student acceleration and ensure intervention coherence at a school- wide level?”
Selection of students
Students selected for the MST interventions should be mainly well below (some will be below) the National Standards in mathematics. Groups to consider are:
Māori students and Pasifika students students from low socio-economic background students who have irregular attendance students who need extra support due to transitioning students who are English language learners (ELL) students who have learning and/or behavioural difficulties.
Schools need to ensure that students identified as requiring accelerated support have been at school for a minimum of 40 weeks.
Monday, 15 May 2023
P a g e | 34
Funding for MST
Table 1: Funding for MST Year 1 and Year 2 (based on salary of $81,867)
School roll
at time of allocation
MST roll
TOTAL
Funding
Decile 1-4 Decile 5-8 Decile 9-10
Ministry 80%
School 20%Ministry
60%School 40%
Ministry 40%
School 60%
0 – 130 0.2 $16,373 $13,098.72 $3,274.68 $9,824.04 $6,549.36 $6,549.36 $9,824.04
131 – 184
0.3 $24,560 $19,648.08 $4,912.02 $14,736.06 $9,824.00 $9,824.04 $14,736.06
185 – 234
0.4 $32,747 $26,197.44 $6,549.36 $19,648.08 $13,098.72 $13,098.72 $19,648.08
235 – 415
0.5 $40,934 $32,746.80 $8,186.70 $24,560.10 $16,373.40 $16,373.40 $24,560.10
416 – 494
0.6 $49,120 $39,296.16 $9,824.04 $29,472.12 $19,648.08 $19,648.08 $29,472.12
495 – 598
0.75 $61,400 $49,120.20 $12,280.05 $36,840.15 $24,560.10 $24,560.10 $36,840.15
599 + 1 $81,867 $65,493.60 $16,373.40 $42,526.20 $39,340.80 $32,746.80 $49,120.20
The MST is to be released for the relevant pointage indicated in the table above for your school. Funding for schools is primarily for teacher release, and includes (teacher release) costs related to the principal and MST attending any MST workshops. Funding varies depending on the size, and decile rating of the school. Costs are shared between the Ministry and the school, and the formula is based on roll size and decile (see Table 1 above). This money is paid directly into the school’s Operation Grant in April and July.
The release time is based on a 40-hour week as per the collective agreement, e.g. eight hours a day for a 0.2 MST (this includes non-contact time). The time allocation is to be spread over five days, e.g. a 0.2 MST position would teach for approximately one hour a day, and they would use their non-contact time on one of the days. The non-contact time is both before and after school, and should be used for planning/prep time or staff meetings.
The MST is expected to work with approximately 10 students for every 0.1 pointage that they have been funded for. The MST’s sole focus is under-achieving students who will be provided with additional mathematics lessons per week, over and above their normal classroom programme, in order to accelerate their progress.
Monday, 15 May 2023
P a g e | 35
Post-graduate study
The MST is required to undertake a post graduate paper each year for which Tertiary Fees Funding Support is available. The Ministry will pay $1000 towards the tuition fee on successful completion of the MST compulsory paper. The Board of Trustees (BOT) is expected to pay the balance as part of building the school’s capability in mathematics.
The application form, which needs to be completed and sent to the Ministry, is located on the NZMaths website. All application forms need to be signed by the MST teacher, principal and a BOT representative. Study leave is not part of this scheme; however BOT’s may agree to support their MST by providing one study day a term.
Workshops
MST’s are supported through a series of workshops by facilitators, and are mentored throughout the implementation of this supplementary initiative. A school’s involvement in MST is for two years. Mentoring support will consist of in-school support, contact with mentors though electronic means, and some cluster meetings (where it is possible to cluster).
Table 2: Workshops for schools participating in Mathematics Support Teacher (MST) Year 1
MST 1
An evaluation and self-review workshop
A self-review of the school’s current mathematics strengths and needs
Data and information from past MST reports
Expectations for the release time for the MST
(A one-day workshop for the principal and the MST)
A one-day workshop in January/February
Block Course/Planning workshop
Block course focusing on engaging the learner, supporting mathematical thinking, and developing a community of mathematical learners
Planning the intervention with a focus on identifying key levers for improved mathematics teaching and learning
(These days are for the MST)
Three consecutive workshop days in March
Block Course/Planning workshop
See above (These days are for the MST)
Three consecutive workshop days in May
Block Course/Planning workshop
See above
(These days are for the MST)
Three consecutive workshop days in August
Impact and refocus workshop
Review, reflection, forward planning
(This workshop is for the principal, the MST and a SIT member)
A one-day workshop in November
Monday, 15 May 2023
P a g e | 36
Table 3: Workshops for schools participating in Mathematics Support Teacher (MST) Year 2
MST 2
Evaluation, self-review and planning workshop
A review of the previous year’s learning and success in MST
Designing and planning the new intervention
Developing a Curriculum and Achievement Plan
(The first day is for the principal and MST, the second day is for the MST only)
A two-day workshop in February
Block Course/Planning workshop
Block course focusing on the nature of mathematics and mathematical practice, the nature of mathematics teaching and learning, and the role of mathematics in our education system and society
Planning the intervention with a focus on identifying key levers for improved mathematics teaching and learning
MST’s will be sharing their teaching inquiry
(These days are for the MST)
Two consecutive workshop days in May
Planning workshop
Evaluating the intervention with a focus on identifying key levers for improved mathematics teaching and learning
MST’s will be sharing their teaching inquiry
(These days are for the MST)
Two consecutive workshop days in August
Impact and refocus workshop
Review, reflection, forward planning
(This workshop is for the principal and MST)
A one-day workshop in November
Event organisers will contact each participant at least one month prior to each workshop(s) to organise travel and accommodation requirements.
MST schools are required to provide achievement data for students who have participated in an MST intervention.
The school Curriculum and Achievement Plan (CaAP) should outline how the school is going to monitor and track the students who have participated in an MST intervention.
Monday, 15 May 2023
P a g e | 37
Communities of Learning
Communities of Learning (COL) are groups of kura/schools that come together along with their communities to raise achievement for all students by sharing expertise in teaching and school leadership.
While ALL, ALiM and MST focus is supporting teachers to run short-term intervention(s) for their students in their school context, there will be opportunities for ALL, ALiM and MST to contribute to COL systems.
Assessment and Reporting Data reportingPrincipals, teachers, parents and the Ministry want to understand if the positive changes in student achievement seen during the ALL, ALiM and MSTs interventions continue long-term and to do this we need robust data. There is already evidence that there are positive changes in student achievement during the ALL, ALiM and MST interventions and the need to continually monitor this is important. There is also a need to see if those positive changes continue longer term.
The Ministry funds assessments for ALL, ALiM and MST students. This information is used to evaluate a number of aspects of the project.
As part of their commitment to ALL, ALiM or MST, schools are required to report their ALL, ALiM and MST student data to NZCER and NZ Maths and record those students’ data at all time points.
School reports
Schools will report on the long-term and short-term outcomes of their supplementary supports to a range of people in the form of an “Impact and Refocus Report”.
The Impact and Refocus Report has a dual purpose, firstly to report to other schools at impact day, and secondly to be forwarded to the Ministry for further synthesis and analysis.
The Impact and Refocus Report reflects the commitment the school has made to ALL, ALiM and MST. This reporting process is central to a school’s way of working through their ALL and ALiM commitment, and reflects a shared school understanding of the learning at student, teacher and school-wide levels. They should be completed by members of the Supplementary Inquiry Team, following spirals of inquiry from the outset of the project. The report format is available digitally, and becomes the ‘working document’ throughout the programme.
This report will provide some detail on the decisions and actions resulting in accelerated learning that has occurred for students. It will also provide an opportunity to evaluate the school’s ability to integrate the learning with other strategic decisions to improve outcomes for students.
Monday, 15 May 2023
P a g e | 38
Assessment and Reporting Data
The ALL, ALiM or MST teachers enter their ALL, ALiM or MST students’ information and data in a number of fields on either the NZCER website or NZMaths site including:
school and student demographic details including NSN previous end of year OTJ pre intervention assessment data post intervention assessment data end of year OTJ length of intervention
For accurate evaluation of the data it is important that it is submitted in the right place in the correct form.
Literacy/mathematics leads are supported by the SIT and mentors to ensure schools have submitted data to the right place by set dates.
The Ministry monitors that all schools’ data is entered.
The number of students whose data will be entered on NZCER/Maths Tech sites
Year 1 teachers will record data for students in the ALL/ALiM intervention. Teachers working in Year 2 ALL/ALiM will select 3 students from their ALL or ALiM group at random and enter those students’ data for the year (i.e. the NSN numbers for the students will be the same for all sets of data entry.)
o Year 1 1 teacher 6-8 studentso Year 2 2-5 teachers 3 students per teachero Year 3 (ALL only) 6+ teachers 3 students per teacher
Monday, 15 May 2023
Evaluating the long-term impact of ALL and ALiM Schools ‘stepping up’ to Year 2 in 2016 ALL and ALiM are asked to support a study of the long-term impact of ALL/ALiM. Writing data end of 2016 for the 2015 ALL students. Mathematics PAT data end of 2016 for the 2015 ALiM students. We thank schools for their support in this.
P a g e | 39
Accelerating Learning in Literacy (ALL)Notes:
NEED NSN on individual student data on database – data to be linked for analysis later in year
Junior Literacy – for students from 40 – 65 weeks at school at the start of the intervention
OTJ 40 week OTJ 80 week OTJ All schools
Observation Survey including sixth item Running Records
Before intervention After intervention All schools
Reading Yrs 3-8
OTJ End of 2015 End of 2016 All schools
STAR Before intervention After intervention All schools
Writing Yrs 2-8
OTJ End of 2015 End of 2016 All schools
e-asTTLe writing Before intervention After intervention All schools Year 2 schools:
Writing data end of 2016 for the 2015 ALL students
Monday, 15 May 2023
P a g e | 40
Accelerating Learning in Mathematics (ALiM) NZCER
· Need to have NSN on individual student data on database· The OTJ required is Well Below, Below, At, or Above· PAT for first intake of ALiM schools only· Longitudinal study requires data for ALiM students from 2015. Those schools in their second year of ALiM and in intake 1 are asked to provide
end of year PAT data for their students involved in ALiM in 2015.
ALiM 2016
NZCER OTJ Years 2-8 End 2015 End 2016 Intake 1
NZCER PAT Years 4-8 Beginning Intervention
End Intervention End of Year 2016 Intake 1
NZCER PAT Longitudinal Study
End of Year 2016 ALiM Students from 2015 who are in ALiM 2016 Intake 1 schools
NZMaths (see next page)
Monday, 15 May 2023
P a g e | 41
Accelerating Learning in Mathematics (ALiM) NZMaths
Need to have NSN for each student on database The OTJ required is a best fit OTJ Longitudinal study requires data for ALiM students from 2015. All schools in their second year of ALiM are asked to provide end of year OTJ
and strategy stage data for their students involved in ALiM in 2015. The end of 2015 data will automatically 'roll over' from their 2015 data entry for these students.
ALiM 2016
Numeracy database
Mathematics OTJ Years 2-8 End 2015 End 2016 All ALiM 2016 students
Numeracy database
Strategy stages Years 2-8 Beginning Intervention
End Intervention End of Year 2016 ALiM 2016 Intake 1
Numeracy database
Strategy stages Years 2-8 Beginning Intervention
End Intervention ALiM 2016 Intake 2
Numeracy database
Mathematics OTJ Longitudinal Study
End 2015 End of Year 2016 All students from 2015 year 1 ALiM schools
Numeracy database
Strategy stages Longitudinal Study
End 2015 End of Year 2016 All students from 2015 year 1 ALiM schools
Monday, 15 May 2023
P a g e | 42
Mathematics Support Teacher (MST) NZCER
· Need to have NSN on individual student data on database· The OTJ required is Well Below, Below, At, or Above· PAT test – PAT for first intake only from beginning of intervention 2016/chosen by teacher based on the level the student is performing· Need to capture length of the MST intervention alongside student achievement data
NZMaths
Need to have NSN for each student on database The OTJ required is a best fit OTJ
Mathematics MST
NZCER OTJ Years 2-8 End 2015 End of 2016 Intake 1
PAT mathematics Years 4-8 Beginning of intervention
End of intervention
End of 2016 Intake 1 Intake 1
NZMaths OTJ Years 2 -8 End 2015 End of 2016 All schools
Strategy stages Beginning of intervention
End of intervention
All schools
End of year Intake 1 studentsAt least 3 months between end of intervention and end of year assessment
Monday, 15 May 2023
P a g e | 43
Accountability ResponsibilitiesMonitoring and Reporting and evaluation responsibilities in ALL, ALiM and MST
Who What Rationale Audience
School inquiry team/leaders
Refocus and Impact report
Provide analysed and interpreted student data (in database or agreed format)
Refocus response – what will you do differently as a result of your inquiry?
CAAP year one in relation to target group, years two and three – a wider school plan. Annual plan – charter has relevant goals that reflect the PfS focus
Schools with a focus on mathematics could use the 10 dimensions of effective practice as described in the IAE series[1][1], and literacy focused schools could use the Dimensions of Effective Practice[2][2]
Identify key learning across the school Meet regularly
The inquiry team/leaders will be undertaking these responsibilities to ensure the fidelity/implementation of PfS.
All stakeholders will understand and support PfS. Schools need to see the relevance of the refocus and impact reports otherwise they will become compliance focused. They need to be supported to see that these reports provide the BoT, teachers and community with a rich analysis of a key foci area for the school. The design should focus on all four levers for improvement – effective classroom pedagogy, educationally powerful relationships, leadership, inquiry and knowledge building as described in section 2.
Schools should be supported to focus on the improve aspect for all
School
Mentors
BOT
Whānau, Community
The Ministry
National Leaders
[1][1] Effective pedagogy in mathematics. Educational Practice Series – 19 [pdf 350kb]
Anthony, G., & Walshaw, M. (2009). International Academy of Education & International Bureau of Education Paris. UNESCO.
[2][2] Ministry of Education handbooks: Effective Literacy Practice in Years 1 to 4 and Effective Literacy Practice in Years 5 to 8Monday, 15 May 2023
P a g e | 44
students rather than proving that what they did worked.
Who What Rationale Audience
Mentor What do mentors do that brings about teacher practice change?
What do they do at each level that deepens or refocuses?
Ensure the integrity of the ToA in the school Support the teacher/school to undergo an inquiry that focuses on
acceleration Set questions for school leaders, SIT and teachers to encourage deep
constructive thought. Support the school to carry out actions for PfS programme and alert
PfS regional coordinator of any opportunities, issues and risks.
The quality of the chain of influence relies on the interactions mentors have within schools, with the leadership team and with sector experts. They are the lynchpin for success. The mentors need to carry the theory and ideas into schools and, through deliberate acts of mentoring, assist schools to challenge practices that are not effective, efficient or equitable.
School
Regional PfS Leaders/ Coordinators
PfS Regional PLD co-ordinators (suppliers)
Mathematics x 5
Literacy x 9
Manage mentor schedules, support mentors and mentor development to ensure mentors promote the best use of evidence research and frameworks to support school leaders and teachers to explore new ways of working to accelerate student progress.
Provide workshops for school leaders and teachers which are aligned with the TOA.
Liaise closely with their National Leaders (either ALL/ALiM).
Support the PfS National Leadership Team.
Report on programme delivery according to contract milestones, including impact of mentor support on accelerating student achievement.
To ensure the PfS National Leadership team is supported in its work
To ensure the Ministry receives regional PfS reports that reflect the regional picture.
Regional providers
National Leaders
Schedule manager
CTL and CPI teams
National Office
Monday, 15 May 2023
P a g e | 45
Research, monitoring and evaluation
The development and implementation of ALL, ALiM and MST draws from three key areas.
1. Theory and research: It draws on already well-researched public knowledge domains about best practice from the international and national theory available in teaching, and in teaching mathematics and literacy, specifically.
2. Student achievement data: This provides us with information about the impact of the intervention itself, both in the short term and the longer term.
3. Inquiry: It also draws on the experiences and knowledge generated from the practice of leaders and teachers, as they develop and implement their own inquiries within their specific school contexts. By valuing and supporting the use of both practitioner knowledge and research knowledge, leaders and teachers are able to learn and innovate. Finding effective learning pathways and ensuring the most capable teaching of priority student groups enables participants to answer the question of, “what works for whom?”
This means that ALL, ALiM and MST are cyclical processes of using knowledge generated by the educational community, and in turn contributing to further development of it. New knowledge and expertise are therefore an outcome for all involved in this research, monitoring and evaluation process.
Figure 4: Three Fields of Knowledge19
19 Jackson, D. And Temperley, J. (2007). From Professional learning community to networked learning community. In L. Stoll and K. Seashore Louis (Eds.), Professional learning communities: Divergence, depth and dilemmas. (pp. 45-62). Open University Press: England.
Monday, 15 May 2023
P a g e | 46
Knowledge building by Leadership TeamThe ALL, ALiM and MST National Leadership Team is comprised of National Leaders for literacy and mathematics, Ministry Sector Enablement and Support, Ministry research personnel (Evidence, Data and Knowledge Group), Ministry design and implementation (Curriculum Teaching and Learning Group), and sector representatives. Its role is to maintain the integrity of ALL, ALiM and MST, and to lead with areas of development or change.
The research, monitoring and evaluation needs to be about:
Accountability schools to students, family/whānau and community, and the Ministry (for funding) providers to schools and students, and the Ministry, The Ministry to the nation and the Minister.
Improvement for design and policy for short-term and long-term implementation.
New knowledge to be shared within the intervention, the SIT, classrooms, teachers, across the school, and the wider
education community.
ALL, ALiM and MST have been designed to support the system outcome of an increase in the number of students at or above the National Standards for their year level. Therefore the percentage of students at or above National Standards in these schools needs to be measured short-term (moving towards) and long-term (at National Standards OTJ decision points).
Key questions associated with these outcomes:
“Did the supplementary intervention support the students to accelerate their progress of achievement in the long term and short term?”
“Was this progress equitable?” “Did ALL, ALiM and MST support schools to develop a comprehensive school CaAP)?” “Was the development of these CaAP's equitable, i.e. did all schools make the same improvements?” “Do the schools have a higher proportion of students at or above National Standards than the previous
year?” “What were the conditions in schools that lead to the outcomes – the pedagogy, the relationships, the
leadership, the inquiry and knowledge building?” “Was this equitable? Did all schools end up with similar conditions?” “How did the provision of mentorship (in-school and in workshops) impact on these conditions – the
leadership, the expertise, the smart tools, and the talk?” “Was this equitably provided? Did all schools receive similar provisions?”
Monday, 15 May 2023
P a g e | 47
Table 4: Sources of evidence for programme outcomes from each school
Programme Outcomes
Sources of evidence of short term shifts, i.e. before and after the supplementary
support
Sources of evidence of long term shifts, i.e. over the annual school
self-review cycle
Acceleration of progress
Achievement data beginning and end of supplementary support, compared with achievement data beginning of year (or end of previous year).
OTJ end of previous year (or after x years at school) and ‘working towards’ judgement at mid-year reporting.
Personal achievement and progress before, and because of, supplementary support/s.
Expectation for achievement if progress continues when compared with year group and National Standards expectation.
Achievement data and OTJ end of previous year, compared with achievement data and OTJ end of programme year.
Achievement at two points in time.
Progress that led to this. For group, when compared
with cohort, when compared to standard.
School Curriculum and Achievement Plan
School’s Impact and Refocus Report (this could also be a report to the BOT)
School evaluation of the programme: reason for supplementary support/s, timeliness of response, description of response and why, impact of response, plan B for the students whose progress does not accelerate, ongoing monitoring for all of the students involved in the programme.
Annual reporting – variance and annual plan.
Annual plan that describes school’s signpost triggers for supplementary support, responses, ongoing monitoring, and impact.
The system outcomes’ source of evidence may be the same as the source of evidence for outcome one, but the question is different so it would need to be analysed for the particular question.
Monday, 15 May 2023
P a g e | 48
Table 5: Sources of evidence for system outcomes from each school
System Outcome
Sources of evidence short term (half-yearly)
Sources of evidence long term (full year)
National Standards target of 85%
First half of the year:
Disaggregated achievement data showing percentage of students At, Above, Below, and Well Below National Standards, and moving towards National Standards, for group and whole school.
Second half of the year:
Disaggregated achievement data showing percentage of students At, Above, Below, and Well Below National Standards, and moving towards National Standards, for group and whole school.
Annual Report and variation statement.
School’s record of disaggregated percentage of students At, Above, Below, and Well Below National Standards.
Ministry Evidence, Data and Knowledge Group researchers support the contracted research suppliers who provide assessment, data collection and reporting. The contracted suppliers are Mathematics Technology Ltd (Mathematics Tech), and the New Zealand Council for Educational Research (NZCER).
Monday, 15 May 2023
P a g e | 49
ReferencesAlton- Lee, A. (2003). Quality Teaching for Diverse Students in Schooling: Best Evidence Synthesis Iteration (BES). Wellington, New Zealand: Ministry of Education.
Alton-Lee, A., Hunter, R., Sinnema, C., & Pulegatoa-Diggins, C. (2012). Hei Kete Raukura BES Exemplar 1: Developing communities of mathematical inquiry. Wellington, New Zealand: Ministry of Education.
Anthony, G., & Walshaw, M. (2009). Effective pedagogy in mathematics: Educational practices series, 19. International Academy of Education & International Bureau of Education Paris. UNESCO.
Bishop, R., Berryman, M., & Wearmouth, J. (2014). Te Kotahitanga: Towards effective education reform for indigenous and other minoritised students. Wellington, New Zealand: NZCER Press.
Bishop, R. & Glynn, T. (1999). Culture Counts: Changing power relations in Education. Palmerston North: Dunmore Press.
Cobb, P., & Jackson, K. (2011). Towards an empirically grounded theory of action for improving the quality of mathematics teaching at scale. Mathematics Teacher Education and Development, 13(1), 6-33.
Dumont, H., Istance, D. & Benavides. (2010). The nature of learning: Using research to inspire practice. OECD.
Education Review Office (2014). Raising Achievement in Primary Schools: Accelerating learning in Mathematics (ALiM) and Accelerating Literacy Learning (ALL). Retrieved from http://www.ero.govt.nz/
Halbert, J. & Kaser, L. (2013). Spirals of Inquiry: For equity and quality. Vancouver, BC: BCPVPA.
Hattie, J. (2009). Visible Learning: A Synthesis of Over 800 Meta-Analyses Relating to Achievement. Routledge: London.
Jackson, D. And Temperley, J. (2007). From Professional learning community to networked learning community. In L. Stoll, & K. Seashore Louis, (Eds.), Professional learning communities: Divergence, depth and dilemmas. (pp. 45-62). England: Open University Press.
Ministry of Education (2003). Effective Literacy Practice in Years 1 to 4. Wellington, New Zealand: Learning Media.
Ministry of Education (2006). Effective Literacy Practice in Years 5 to 8. Wellington, New Zealand: Learning Media.
Routman, R. (2014). Read, Write, Lead: Breakthrough Strategies for Schoolwide Literacy Success. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Riccomini, P.J., & Witzel, B.S. (2010). Response to Intervention in Math. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Stein, M. K., Hubbard, L., & Toure, J. (2008). Travel of district-wide approaches to instructional improvement: How can districts learn from one another? Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York.
Thompson, M., & William, D. (2007). Tight but loose: A conceptual framework for scaling up school reforms. A paper presented at the Annual American Educational Research Association, Chicago.
Monday, 15 May 2023
P a g e | 50
Timperley, H., Kaser, L. & Halbert , J. (2014) A Framework for Transforming Learning in Schools: Innovation and the spiral of inquiry. Retrieved from http://www.cse.edu.au/
Timperley, H., & Parr, J. M. (2009). The chain of influence from policy to practice in the New Zealand Literacy Strategy. Research Papers in Education, 24, 135–154.
Wiliam, D., and Leahy, S. (2008). From teachers to schools: scaling up professional development for formative assessment. Downloaded from http://www.dylanwiliam.net/
1. Fig 3. Intervention logic diagram 2. 2010 McKinsey report3. Fullan (2009)4. Hattie (2003)5. Bullock (2006)6. Parsloe (2000)
See also:
The New Zealand Curriculum Online. An integrated system of support for learners and schools. Literacy Online: Supplementary Supports. Education Counts Public Achievement Information. Best Evidence Synthesis (BES) Programme - What Works Evidence.
ERO reports:
Evaluation at a Glance: Priority-Learners-in-New-Zealand-Schools (August 2012). Accelerating the Progress of Priority Learners in Primary Schools (May 2013). Raising Achievement in Primary Schools (June 2014). Raising Achievement in Primary Schools: ALiM and ALL (June 2014).
Monday, 15 May 2023
Related Documents
