VIEW FROM THE CLASSROOM


How does the school assess whether the interventions are working?


Previously we did not have a formal way of recording and reviewing the results. As a consequence, we were pulling progress data together in an irregular way and having to rely on anecdotal evidence to help us make decisions about the success of programmes. This was further compounded by the sheer number of interventions we have in place. It was very time-consuming to review programmes and check they were truly benefitting pupils. We decided we needed a quicker way of getting an accurate picture about the difference our interventions were making, so we could focus our time on the most successful ones. When the opportunity came to be part of a pilot programme to use SIMS Interventions, a software programme from Capita that promised to do all this for us, I jumped at the chance.


By implementing the new system, did you discover any surprises within the intervention programmes you were running? We’ve realised some children who have historically been on intervention programmes no longer need to be and can enjoy more classroom time, whilst others who may have been missed are now included.


For example, a Year 5 pupil had been attending our Gross Motor Group sessions since Year 1, but had not made any significant improvement, so clearly this intervention was not suitable for him. This had not been identified before. As is typical of many schools, staff are often too busy with classroom tasks to be able to monitor what might be happening outside of their classroom and what progress a child might be making or not making.


SIMS Interventions has meant more staff can view what their children are doing outside of their own teaching time. It has lent clarity to what we do.


What difference is the data making in your approach to the school’s intervention programme?


Now that analysing key data is more straightforward, with all our intervention data to hand, it is becoming easier for the school to differentiate learning opportunities and set realistic expectations and targets. It’s not just about tracking pupils, it’s about teachers knowing the individual children and what works for them. Seeing the bigger picture benefits everyone, as staff can target the right pupils for the right type of support, ensuring the best possible outcomes.


October 2017 www.education-today.co.uk 21


As you have several intervention programmes in place, how important is it for you to show accountability?


We need to be certain we are making the best investments, in terms of money, teacher time and pupil experience. I can now demonstrate to the governing body how well the money is being invested and how it is impacting on the overall school’s performance, as well as for individual children.


It’s vital we can spot underperformance and we are committed to closely tracking our pupils’ achievements, putting in place additional support as needed to improve their learning. Pupils’ performance in writing and maths is now in line with the national average and whilst we still have improvements to make in their reading, we are working very hard to raise the level. We can now track and evaluate performance far more easily than before and with teachers also having access to the wider school data from SIMS, we can see if the extra support is having an impact on overall assessment results.


The links to SIMS also means teachers can cross reference information about pupils, analysing whether an intervention works for all pupils or maybe only those with English as their first language, for example. If something isn’t working, we can now reassess the situation and redeploy resources where necessary.


What impact has being able to review data easily had on pupil performance? Results keep improving as the staff are far more proactive in their approach, monitoring pupils’


progress with specific timescales and expectations. It’s fantastic to see pupils reaping the rewards and leaping forward, which is highly motivating for everyone.


Lastly, can you share any examples of these improvements with us?


We had some Year 2 children who needed intervention work with phonics, as they had not achieved the level required in Year 1. However, when we reviewed the progress being made, we discovered one pupil had only increased their word count by one, despite 18 phonics intervention sessions.


Being able to analyse the data brought this into focus and so we decided to shorten the intervention time, setting specific targets within an agreed timescale. As a result, the child’s word count went up by 10 in 12 sessions, whilst another pupil whose word count was 15 increased it to 34, in just five sessions.


Analysing the data helped us to define the tasks more clearly and highlighted the need to adapt the interventions as they were not achieving the desired results.


I believe the results of our efforts speak for themselves and we are already seeing the impact of a more defined and accountable approach. At the start of the last academic year, 50% of the children in our Year 2 phonics group were under target, 10% were at the expected level and 40% were above. In our spring review, 33% were at the expected level and 67% are exceeding. Not a single child missed their target, which the teachers, the pupils and the school are very proud of.


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44