Wanganui Girls’ College

1. Wanganui Girls’ College NCEA Achievement 2013

2. Putting it in context • We strongly believe that using data to inform decisions is the key to enhancing success • We tested our students on arrival at Year 9 using NZCER STAR • We informed teachers of the stanine and made class and subject choices based on these results

3. We started triangulating our data to predict Year 11 outcomes (STAR stanine and anecdotal knowledge about students) and predicted that students on stanine 5 and above should achieve NCEA level 1 • We could then predict by whole cohort and Maori students the Year 11 outcomes

5. These results and predictions were based on cohort not personalised to students • We were challenged during an ERO visit about why we weren’t aiming for 100%! • And why weren’t we - we asked ourselves?

6. ERO’s advice was that the entry data should guide us with the number, type and range of interventions needed to get 100% pass rate for all students • We were challenged to move beyond our self-fulfilling expectations – a light bulb moment!

7. Wanganui Girls’ College 2012 Annual PlanA Successful School Leaver will have achieved at least NCEA Level 2 A safe, respectful, inclusive and positive learning environment • The challenge was set! • So…In 2012 one of our Board of Trustees strategic statements was that “A successful school leaver will have achieved at least NCEA level 2”

8. In 2011 we had introduced our Academic Mentoring programme for senior students matching students to teachers that year; students met with two or three times a year with their allocated Academic Mentor around goal setting identifying barriers, checking progress and support and guidance • In 2012 we were expanding this and we were also developing and embedding our SWPB4L work and RJ / RP work – a huge culture shift for staff

9. We focussed on Year 11 as that was our most pressing need (ERO speak!) and … • individual plans were developed to ensure all student work begun was completed • the range of standards available for assessment were used to meet the student needs • parents contacted by AMs to advise students were at risk of not passing • study leave only after targets were met….

10. In term 3 2012 we set up large excel spreadsheet for each year level and each student was named, the number of students needinghelp identified and some strategies put in place to meet their needs – the three Ns!

11. In term 4, just before study leave commenced, a letter was sent home for every senior student detailing: • How many credits the student had • How many credits were still available through external standards • Literacy and numeracy and UE progress • Remaining opportunities for completing outstanding assessments For any student deemed ‘at risk’, the letter was followed up with a telephone call.

12. In 2012 the outcome for Level One was 89% pass rate – the highest in the town!

13. 2013 An even more focussed approach: • We provide more regular progress updates for SMT, Deans, HODs and AMs • We have worked with HOD Learning Centre to develop alternative pathways where relevant • We have regular, meaningful contact with parents

14. We provide ongoing training for AMs on how to check progress for specific groups • We have started to triangulate data in a more effective way – it is now on a much more personal level rather than cohort • Increased accountability for staff as whanau, Form Teachers, students and AMs are regularly using the system to track progress

15. Academic Mentoring Days • Timetable suspended for whole school and 15 – 20 minute meetings arranged with students, whanau and AMs • AMs received extensive training in weeks prior to meeting including how to use data to set targets; role playing difficult conversations; how to access information on NZQA website • We arranged training, provided by Massey University, on having professional conversations with colleagues

16. AMs negotiated agreed targets based on data provided • We arranged future checkpoints to monitor targets • Whanau, students and staff completed online and physical surveys about the effectiveness of the day

17. Impressions of ART 13-17 • Initially we didn’t quite grasp the purpose of this project and we were worried that there were hints of ‘Big Brother’… • However, Vivianne went to session in Palmerston North, and I went to presentation by Rawiri at Wanganui City College and it all fell into place for us. • We are very in favour of the idea of pathways; what works for us is really knowing our students, what their intentions are and ensuring the courses they are following fits into the pathway. The joy of a smaller school!

18. The spreadsheet • We do have some concerns about the spreadsheet as we seemed to be spending a lot of time presenting the data in a different way just for the sake of ‘the spreadsheet’ – so we now send Mary and Andrea our own version of the data. • The spreadsheet does not have the facility to take into account outside providers. • We found it difficult to calculate how many credits a student should be achieving in a particular week as courses are evolving and changing specifically because of the nature of this project.

20. Identifying students Quantitative data • Academic data from CM • Attendance • Pastoral (SWPB4L) Qualitative data • Feedback from teachers and AMs • Self-referral

21. Sharing data with staff • We have regular, calendared staff meetings to discuss and review academic progress of specific year groups • Provide ongoing training in using MUSAC to acquire data • We have a notice board in staffroom which is updated weekly

22. Needs of students The needs depended entirely on individual stories • Pathways (inappropriate choice of subject – HOD LC) • Attendance (AM, Dean and Form teacher) • Pastoral (Dean) • Academic (AM)

23. Strategies • All students in the focus group have additional AMs who report to the Academic Dean weekly on progress (or lack of it….) • Regular contact with home • Ongoing liaison between AMs and subject teachers • Holiday Pathways course incorporating study skills and career planning • Dedicated section of NCEA notice board for the focus group – all teachers know who is in the group and the AMs involved

24. Current position This time last year 32% of our students had already gained Level 2 NCEA We are currently sitting on 45%

25. Insights • Rigorous monitoring works • Personalising works • Knowing students works • Sharing information produces increased sense of ownership among all staff

26. Challenges • Maintaining integrity of assessment conditions • Teacher concern about losing academic integrity due to ‘credit harvesting’ • MUSAC • Establishing and maintaining meaningful communication with our Maori families

27. Where to now? • For 2014 AMs have already been given the opportunity to choose if they wish to stay with their current year level or move to the next year level with their group • Our ASTRA programme will contain a more focussed unit on choosing pathways • At the end of this year we will review and reflect on our current programme and adapt and improve our plan where necessary