SMARTER SCHOOLS NATIONAL PARTNERSHIPS INITIATIVE

1. SMARTER SCHOOLS NATIONAL PARTNERSHIPS INITIATIVE St Mary Magdalen’s Chadstone

2. OUR CONTEXT • We are a small school in the south-eastern suburbs with approximately180 students. • We have previously won State Awards for Excellence in Literacy and Numeracy—2006, 2007.

3. Our Community-- • High ESL background • Varying socio-economic background • A significant proportion of our families receive welfare payments • Refugees • Children under the care of grandparents, DHS intervention • High level of learning difficulties amongst our students—Severe Language Disorder, Physical, Social / Emotional, Intellectual as well as a high proportion who are just under a diagnosis level. • Over 50 /184 children access support from Speech Therapists, SCOPE, OnPsych psychologists or under the LNSLN umbrella.

4. School Improvement Goals 2008--2012 • To develop confident, resilient life-long learners who are active participants in the changing global community. • To promote the academic, emotional, social and spiritual growth of each student.

5. WHERE IT ALL BEGAN……

6. The National Partnerships Initiative • In Victoria, the Smarter Schools National Partnerships represent a partnership between the Australian Government, the State Government and the government, Catholic and Independent school sectors.  • We were selected to participate in this initiative due to our disappointing Literacy NAPLAN results in 2008.

7. GOALS • Build leadership capacity through coaching and professional learning. • Build teacher capacity through coaching and professional learning. • Improved monitoring of literacy performance. • Timely student intervention and support for students not achieving at expected levels.

8. The intended targets from this strategy were: • To develop a shared vision for effective literacy learning and teaching. • To raise the standards of all students in literacy particularly the lowest 25%. • That staff will embrace contemporary literacy pedagogy in classroom practice. • That all staff will participate in professional development in specific Literacy Teaching and Learning. • That all staff continue to collect and analyse data to provide strategic literacy activities that promote authentic learning tasks involving assessment of and assessment for literacy learning.

9. The Coach!!!!! • A major component of this initiative was the appointment of a Literacy Coach to work shoulder-to-shoulder in a school for oneday per week. • This required some level of adjustment by most staff—We believed we were working as hard as we could—we now know we can work smarter and achieve higher results!!!!!

10. The Vision—What we needed to do------ • We needed to create a shared Literacy Vision—This now drives every PLT. • We created a list of non-negotiables. • We needed to create an Annual Literacy Plan based on the Sacred Landscape Document. • We needed to develop an impact statement where we could document, monitor and assess our progress.

11. FOCI from the impact statement • 2010 All teachers will use explicit comprehension strategies to match to the individual needs of the students. (These strategies will sustain processing and expand thinking of all students) • 2011 and 2012 All teachers will use a wide range of DATA to inform their planning and teaching. (Use of evidence—What the child does, says, makes, writes.)

12. Building the skills-- • The role of the coach: • model explicit teaching strategies • discuss the learning that was occurring • challenge the thinking that was happening • ensure explicit documentation of planning • raise the level of professional conversations • work alongside literacy leader and staff.

13. Professional DevelopmentOnsite--2010 and 2011 • As a school we needed to provide additional time to specific staff to participate in weekly onsite professional development—30 minutes per week—this has been invaluable to our learning and student success. • These sessions provided feedback to teachers on strategies they were using and set goals for the next week. • There was a sharing of the learning that was occurring.

14. Offsite Professional Development • Throughout 2010 and 2011 the Literacy Leader attended 12 days of professional development—some with team and some individually. • We chose, as a staff, Prep—4 to participate in Foundation days in 2010. • Staff in years 2, 3, 4 and 5 were also involved in 4 days each of offsite professional development in the national partnership initiative. • 5 Staff completed the TESL in 2011. • The Literacy Leader is completing the Experienced Literacy Leaders course and Literacy Support Leader is completing New Literacy Leaders course,

15. Structure for 2011 • We were fortunate that CEOM recognised the effort we were putting into the initiative but they were also aware of the heavy demands a small school experiences in delivering quality programs. • Thus they provided us with extra financial support last year which enabled me to be fully released from the classroom .2 and a literacy support leader .1 to commence training.

16. Implementation Structure--2010 • foci—Reading • 1st Semester—Years 3 and 5 /6 on a weekly basis—fast track • 2nd Semester—Years 2 and 4 on a weekly basis—slow track

17. Implementation Structure--2011 • Foci—Reading and Writing • Whole year---Years 3 /4 1st Semester 5 / 6 2nd Semester 1 /2 • Term 4 we included the Preps in the program so that we had full coverage from Prep-6 over the two years. • Coach worked fortnightly in each classroom but planned weekly with these teachers.

18. Term 4 2011 • As we were aware that the program was coming to an end we implemented a slightly different format in Term 4. • We implemented a team approach where the Coach modelled shared reading and writing strategies to whole groups-e.g. both prep classes or 1/2 or 3/4 classes together so both teachers and all aides could see the same strategy. • This was the start of team teaching and mentoring between teams and is the format we are hoping to implement in 2012. • We were trying to allow the teachers to take control/ownership and share the teaching of the program and develop the professional dialogue between the teams.

19. This year we are continuing to focus on mentoring amongst staff—modelled on the role demonstrated by the coach: • Setting guidelines/timetable • Specific structure—what to focus on • Feedback opportunities • Powerful conversations are now occurring and this is leading to deeper knowledge and improved practices—staff are actively seeking professional talk/development sessions.

20. Professional Learning Team Meetings • Weekly Professional Learning Team meetings are conducted for all staff, Prep—6 and the Principal attends every session—thus reinforcing her level of support for the program. • A smarter way of conducting PLTs is to be investigated in 2012—allowing strategies to determine focus, applying these strategies across all subjects—literacy, numeracy, inquiry • Data analysis • Effective school planners • Explicit strategies.

21. Special Needs—Catering for All • Our commitment to providing the best possible education for all and to match learning and teaching explicitly to needs has resulted in a higher level of identification of students with learning or social and emotional needs—I am now able to assess at point of need as I am released from the classroom. • LNSLN—2009---16 students 2010—13 students 2011—20 students 2012—24 Students. (Possible) • Another 25 students access Speech pathologist • 15 students access services from on Psych--Psychologist

22. Integration Aides (6) Possibly 7 in 2012 • AIDES----I have been able to provide the Aides with professional knowledge • They were keen to develop their skills. They can now complete: • Running Records • Speech Pathology programs • Develop targeted small group activities • Administer targeted programs to larger groups of children and document • Make informed judgements about student progress.

23. COMMUNITY • In 2011 without my classroom commitments it enabled me to conduct Parent workshops on topics of importance in an informal environment which encouraged many parents to attend. • I will offer this opportunity again in 2012. • Here I am reaching out to our families to try and change the cycle.

24. WHAT WE DID-- The Action we took----

25. The Action---NAPLAN Tests • We analysed the NAPLAN data and test to document the skills that were being tested and the skills that our children were having difficulty with. • This formed the basis of our teaching. • The results were evident immediately through classroom programs.

26. The Genre of Testing • We began to explicitly teach our students the genre of testing— • To access texts in a variety of forms—charts, diagrams, advertisements, factual excerpts • To understand importance of print, bold, italics, headings, labels • To identify distractors in questions • To read different texts for longer periods of time. • We used classroom resources to support this teaching—not tests!!

27. TEACHING TO THE TEST!!!! • AT NO TIME WERE WE TEACHING TO THE TEST—WE WERE FOCUSING ON EXPLICIT INSTRUCTION OF COMPREHENSION STRATEGIES. • It was pleasing to hear Anna Burke our local federal member congratulate our school on having the greatest value added in her electorate in 2010!!!!

28. Students were encouraged to think, pair and share. • This strategy became an integral part of our teaching—we were encouraging children to articulate the strategies.

29. EXPLICIT STRATEGIES • Making connections • Finding the main idea • Sequencing • Paraphrasing • Summarising • Scanning • Interpreting tables / diagrams • Predictions • Fact and Opinion • Phrasing and Fluency • Inferences • Analysing

30. Progress in 2011 • Last year we were able to consolidate the learning that had occurred in Reading and transfer it to Writing. • We focused on: Explicit strategies—such as • fact and opinion • compare and contrast • note-taking • cause and effect • skimming and scanning • locating the main idea • summarising.

31. The Incentives / results • Students began articulating the strategies they were using. • There was continuity across all levels of the school Prep—6. • They began transferring the strategies across all areas of the curriculum. • There was a real effort to match text to needs / matching specific strategies.

32. The professional dialogue was developing—staff realised that the coach was interested in the best teaching and learning that could occur. • It was not about criticising staff efforts. It was about acknowledging their strengths and raising questions to probe where they might go

33. Accountable talk became a powerful teaching and learning strategy. • Teachers can articulate what and why they are teaching and students can now articulate what, how and why they are learning. • This focused explicit teaching combined with professional conversations was the catalyst for improvement.

34. NAPLAN RESULTS!!!!!

37. These are the cut scores from the CEO / Philip Holmes Smith—red one year behind, green one year ahead YEAR 3 READING 2008 2009 2010 2011 State Mean 430 State Mean 419 State Mean 430 State Mean 434

38. These are the cut scores from the CEO / Philip Holmes Smith—red one year behind, green one year ahead YEAR 5 READING 2008 2009 2010 2011 State Mean 504 State Mean 496 State Mean 506 State Mean 502

39. These charts look at the progress of the same cohort of children in Reading. 2008—2010 2009--2011 ABOVE STATE MEAN 2008----5, 2010---- 12, 2009-----3, 2011---7

42. Expected growth is 80 points per 2 years—10 points per term

43. Expected growth is 80 points per 2 years—10 points per Term

44. WHAT HAVE WE ACHIEVED?

45. On reflection---What have we achieved? • Everything is documented—data drives the instruction. • Decisions are being made based on data and evidence. • Focus sheets are used from P-6. • Our commitment to providing time and support to explicit planning and documentation has underpinned and ensured continual success.

46. Differentiated teaching and learning is evident—whilst the strategy is the same the learning is appropriate. • Students and staff can articulate what they are learning, what they are teaching and why. • We have embraced the contemporary curriculum through explicit teaching of literacy.

47. COACHING • The role of the coach has been paramount to the success of the initiative. • Her guidance, encouragement, mentoring, knowledge and support have underpinned the decisions we have made. • She has been able to transfer off-site professional learning to our school context and build upon it to explicitly match our needs. • She has been a mentor to myself as a Literacy Leader and this has then empowered me to lead staff.

48. How do we embed this practice? • 1. VISION • We have a documented Literacy Vision • We have documented expectations and non-negotiables. • We have developed an Annual Literacy Plan. • 2. INCENTIVES • Classroom data—what the child says, makes, writes and does, and NAPLAN data significantly support the improved outcomes that we have documented.

49. 3. SKILLS • We have provided opportunities for professional development on-site and offsite. We are providing mentoring opportunities. • We need to ensure school is committed to maintaining time commitment to Literacy Leader and Literacy Support Leader. • The Literacy Leader has been able to attend all back to back planning sessions, conduct literacy learning walks and conduct informal workshops on specific strategies. • The Literacy Leader is able to conduct informal Education workshops for parents to skill them in supporting their children at home with learning. • The Literacy Leader will complete the coaching module of professional study next year (2012).

50. 4. RESOURCES • We have provided targeted people resources to support the initiative. • We have purchased new resources. • We provided specific time for Literacy planning and this has been extremely beneficial and valued—people and time resource. • 5. ACTION PLAN • We now formulate a literacy plan for each term documenting the strategies and skills we wish to teach. • We are beginning to transfer these explicit strategies across all areas of the curriculum—thus ensuring true contemporary learning is occurring.