An Roinn Oideachais agus Scileanna
Department of Education and Skills
Subject Inspection of Special Educational Needs
REPORT
St Michael’s College
Listowel, County Kerry
Roll number: 61370E
Date of inspection: 10 February 2010
Subject provision and whole school support
Summary of main findings and recommendations
Report on the Quality of Learning and Teaching in special educational needs
This report has been written following a subject inspection St. Michael’s College, Listowel, County Kerry. It presents the findings of an evaluation of the quality of teaching and learning in the provision for special educational needs and makes recommendations for the further development of the teaching of students with special educational needs in the school. The evaluation was conducted over two days during which the inspector visited classrooms and observed teaching and learning. The inspector interacted with students and teachers and examined students’ work. The inspector reviewed school planning documentation and teachers’ written preparation. Following the evaluation visit, the inspector provided oral feedback on the outcomes of the evaluation to the principal, deputy principal and teachers. The board of management was given an opportunity to comment in writing on the findings and recommendations of the report, and the response of the board will be found in the appendix of this report.
There are a number of students enrolled in St. Michael’s College, Listowel who have been identified with special and additional educational needs. These include low-incidence and high-incidence needs, students with low achievement in literacy and numeracy, as well as students learning English as an additional language (EAL). Support is also provided for students who may present with social, emotional or behavioural difficulties. A whole-school evaluation (WSE) report, completed in 2004, made significant recommendations in relation to a number of school issues associated with special and additional educational needs. Many of these recommendations have been adopted by the school. This report recognises such progress but also highlights areas that require immediate and ongoing attention.
The school is in receipt of significant additional resources for the support of students with low achievement and students with special educational needs. This provision includes a 0.5 whole time learning-support teacher allocation, which facilitates an additional 16 class periods of teaching, and is provided directly by the Department of Education and Skills. The National Council for Special Educational Needs (NCSE) provides 10 hours of additional teaching hours for students with low-incidence needs and this represents an additional 15 class periods of teaching. Provision for Traveller education totalling 6 additional teaching hours (9 class periods) is provided by the Department and by concessionary hours from Kerry Educational Services (Kerry VEC). The school has no allocation for 5 students with EAL and is encouraged to pursue and implement such supports as per circular 0015/2009. Additional supports for students presenting with transitory and long-term learning, emotional, social and behavioural difficulties are also provided by the Department-funded Learning Initiative North Kerry (LINK) programme. This programme forms part of the North Kerry School Completion Programme.
At the time of the inspection the master timetable did not reflect the full range of supports as identified above. Recommendations in this report regarding the use of the additional resources provided are significant, should take priority and are outlined in detail in the planning and preparation section of this report.
Following the WSE of 2004, the co-ordination of support was undertaken by a staff member who acted in a voluntary capacity and not as part of a special-duties or assistant-principals post structure. In light of this teacher’s recent appointment as a programme co-ordinator, school management has decided that co-ordination would be undertaken by another staff member and again this is done in a voluntary capacity. While the individual and voluntary work of the teachers in question is commendable it is recommended that school management give serious consideration to the appointment of a post-holder to the position of co-ordinator. As outlined the increased diversity of needs presenting requires considerable organisation so that optimum benefit can be derived from the range of resources provided. Ideally the co-ordinator should have recognised qualifications in special needs education and the school management is encouraged to consider how best this may be achieved. Previous efforts by teachers to gain access to the relevant courses offering such qualifications are acknowledged in this report. The school management is encouraged to continue to examine how best to support staff access to suitable training opportunities.
Interventions to support students in St. Michael’s usually focus on specific language and mathematical needs. A suitable balance is struck between providing for individual prioritised learning needs and access to the broader curriculum. Support provided includes individual student withdrawal and small-group withdrawal. Some students are timetabled to meet with their subject teachers who can assist them with subject-related learning. However other students’ learning experiences are less effective and less cohesive. Students may be timetabled to encounter a number of teachers which does not result in optimum learning opportunities and may indeed cause confusion for the learner. The manner in which teaching resources are timetabled has a significant impact upon the quality of the learning experienced by students and indeed the quality of the teaching environment enjoyed by teachers.
One of the more successful programmes in the school is the LINK programme which clearly identifies who is in receipt of which resources and how these resources are deployed. This programme places a strong emphasis on in-class support where another adult is timetabled to assist students while they are being taught by their teacher. As an extension of such good practice it is recommended that school management give consideration to availing of some of the additional resources provided to engage in team-teaching arrangements, where two teachers work together in the same classroom at the same time. Apart from the obvious benefit of being part of a group, this joint provision offers a level of support which meets and often exceeds the recommended individualised provision as per the relevant Department of Education and Skills circulars.
Class groups are formed on the basis of mixed ability in first year with students having access to the full curriculum. Second and third year classes are formed by a combination of streamed and mixed-ability groupings. Senior cycle classes adopt similar grouping patterns. Students with exemptions from Irish are sometimes timetabled to receive additional support but again greater clarity around criteria determining who should be exempted and how they can be best supported with their learning is required. The less than ideal practice of students with exemptions remaining in Irish classes is best avoided by factoring in an additional teacher when the master timetable is being devised.
While there is no dedicated resource room, the school has acquired a range of resources which are accessible to all staff in the well-maintained library. This library also provides students with a range of reading material that takes account of students’ interests and reading abilities. The need for a specific resource room is lessened by teachers having their own base classroom and by the use of another room to safely store records and other documents. Recent investment in information and communication technology (ICT) facilities is welcomed and procurement of relevant software for students with identified needs is planned. This will further enhance the impact of such facilities upon students’ learning. Classrooms visited during the course of the inspection displayed students’ own work and in so doing provide students with an additional motivation to present their best. The well-constructed school website may also offer similar opportunities for students to present their work.
The school is also mindful that learning is a social activity, both within, and outside the classroom. In conversation with the students it is clear that the range of extracurricular and co-curricular activities on offer is appreciated by the students. Activities are open to all students and assist in fostering friendships and a sense of belonging among the student population. The range of photographs and artistic displays on the corridors also assists in this regard. In addition to the above the school has long and well established links with the local special school and the good work undertaken is, as witnessed during the inspection, clearly beneficial to all students and teachers involved. Of note is the manner in which students from St Michael’s are perceived, by both their teachers and themselves, in a new and positive light as they adopt positions of responsibility and care. Similar outcomes are derived from the schools’ peer-mentoring programme between first years and older students, where again all involved are deserving of much praise.
As discussed in the post-evaluation meeting with the principal, the deputy principal and some teaching staff there is an agreed recognition in St. Michael’s that the promotion of inclusive practices is closely linked to overall school improvement. The challenge facing the school is first to maintain the good practices that are being undertaken and second, to continue to pursue complementary structural and cultural changes which will benefit both students and teachers.
The quality of whole-school planning and preparation is a key determinant of whether such changes will be successfully implemented and sustained.
In advance of enrolment the school plans and prepares for students who may require additional assistance in accessing the curriculum and in developing to their potential as young people. In conjunction with the good work of the guidance counsellor, primary schools are visited and a standardised assessment is administered in advance of the students attending the school. Such good practice places the school in a position to meet individual student’s needs and facilitates ongoing communication with teachers, parents and guardians. Observation of students, particularly in the early weeks of first year is also correctly used to determine if a student may be in need of some additional support.
As referenced at the beginning of this report, in order to make optimal use of the additional resources provided to the school it is strongly recommended that all available additional teaching hours are factored into the master timetable at the time of its construction. This will ensure that the resources provided are received in a timely manner, by those for whom it was intended, at the beginning of the school year. It will also allow for the deployment of staff in a purposeful and focused manner with teachers’ qualifications, skills, knowledge and interests aligning with students’ identified strengths, interests and identified needs. Such practice will also ensure that teachers can work consistently with students across a school week and from year to year. This practice will also facilitate teachers who may wish to engage in team-teaching arrangements. Implementation of such timetabling practices will facilitate the formation of a core team of teachers who can deliver a cohesive and effective programme of support in conjunction with their colleagues. As discussed and agreed, at the post-evaluation meeting an experienced member of the special educational needs team should be involved in the co-construction of the master school timetable and serious consideration should be given to factoring the additional resources into the master timetable at the beginning of the exercise.
Apart from some possible outstanding allocation issues among incoming first year students, the school will be in a position to allocate additional provision to all other year groups when constructing the master timetable. In constructing the timetable the core team of teachers supporting students’ special and additional needs should also be allocated a regular weekly meeting time on the master timetable. This meeting time should operate in conjunction with other staff members such as the guidance counsellor and members of the pastoral care team. Such a timetabled meeting will also facilitate engagement with members of external agencies such as National Educational Pyschological Service (NEPS), the National Council for Special Education (NCSE), the Visiting Teacher Service and School Completion Programme personnel. In implementing the recommendations in this report the school management is encouraged to continue to foster relations with these and other external agencies.
The role of the mainstream teacher in meeting the needs of all students cannot be overstated and is central to the quality of the educational experience of each student in the school. In meeting with the staff members and from witnessing some of the teacher-led initiatives that support the practices and principles of inclusive education, it is clear that teachers want to do what is best for each student enrolled in St. Michael’s College. To support such good work, and as discussed in the post-evaluation meeting, the drawing up of a school register of students in receipt of additional support is recommended. Such a register should be made available to all staff and should include the name of the student, the identified need(s) preferably coded, the additional teaching hours allocated, the manner in which they are deployed and the teachers involved. In accordance with Department circular 24/03 the additional hours can be categorised as a combination of individual or small group withdrawal or may be used in the form of in-class support such as team-teaching.
The recommended student register can track the modes of delivery and also can be used to outline broad learning goals, student progress and agreed dates for review. As discussed, in initiating this register a focus on incoming first year students and existing students in receipt of support through the NCSE may prove a good place to start. The LINK programme commendably has already in place aspects of the suggested school register of students in receipt of additional support. A single register would assist with ensuring a cohesive response to students’ needs and a cohesive response to evaluating how such resources are impacting upon the students. The register can in turn dovetail with planning for individual student’s learning.
The school has engaged in formulating personalised plans for individual students and the good work commenced in this regard is duly acknowledged. Prior to notification of this inspection, the school had contacted the Special Educational Support Service (www.sess.ie), to advance staff and management’s professional learning. In engaging such supports the school will have an opportunity, at whole-staff level, to seek advice on a range of issues relating to individual educational plans (IEPs), the role of the mainstream teacher in differentiating teaching, learning and assessment for the benefit of all students and other issues pertinent to inclusive and effective practices both within the school and within the classroom. Individual teachers or subject departments may also wish to avail of online learning opportunities which again can be accessed through the above mentioned website.
Subject planning is an obvious vehicle for improving literacy and numeracy by adopting whole-subject and whole-school approaches across the curriculum. In this regard, the good work undertaken by the English department with regard to the promotion of literacy is duly noted. Re-engagement with the Junior Certificate Schools Programme (JCSP) support service personnel may also assist in accessing suitable resources and pedagogical strategies that support whole-subject and whole-school efforts to promote literacy and numeracy development. However, in planning for improvement, it is suggested that the quality of professional learning and good practice that already exists among staff should continue to be accessed. It would be worthwhile to provide staff members with ongoing opportunities to share their own good practice with their colleagues. Professional discussions could, for example, be based on evaluating and advancing the range of models associated with the delivery of team-teaching. Similarly, discussions could focus on examining collective planning for individual student’s needs or a review of successful teaching methodologies. Reciprocal sharing of professional knowledge would have the added advantage of being context-sensitive and accessible on a regular basis.
The school has a draft special educational needs policy. As indicated at the time of the inspection, this document requires some amendments. It is suggested that the Department of Education and Science publication Inclusion of Students with Special Educational Needs Post-Primary Guidelines (2007) may assist with such work. In amending the policy it may be useful to construct an overarching inclusion policy where all practices, both existing and desired, can be captured and shared. Such a policy could also be used as a lens through which all other school policies can be viewed and the degree to which they promote inclusive practices can be determined. Clear statements on the central role of the subject teacher and on agreed context-based interpretations of terms such as ‘inclusion’, ‘differentiation’, ‘assessment’, ‘whole-school approach’, literacy’ and ‘numeracy’ may also be of benefit in formulating the school’s policy statement. Criteria for students accessing and ceasing to access additional supports should be documented in the policy as well as a range of roles, responsibilities and other procedures as outlined in the aforementioned Department guidelines.
The well-designed school handbook, originally conceived as part of the school’s admirable mentoring programme, also offers opportunities to further extend the sharing of information among all staff members, while simultaneously attending to the promotion of inclusive practices among all those who work in the school. Relevant aspects of the proposed school inclusion policy could form part of this document and in so doing foreground desired aspects of policy and practice. Pedagogical practices should not be ignored and it may also prove useful for teachers to give a brief outline of the successful teaching and learning practices in which they engage.
The quality of individual teacher planning and some aspects of subject-department planning had a positive influence upon the quality of teaching and learning. The quality of whole-school planning and preparation is the area in most need of attention and is pivotal to the successful implementation of the main recommendations in this report.
The quality of teaching and learning in the lessons inspected was good. Pre-state examinations curtailed the number of classes that could be observed and a total of six lessons were visited over the course of the two-day inspection. These lessons spanned junior and senior cycle programmes and included, English, Mathematics, Gaeilge, and History. These classes were formed on the basis of whole-class groups, small group and individual withdrawal. Teachers were well prepared for their lessons and students were engaged in their learning. The atmosphere in the lessons observed was conducive to learning.
Lessons were well paced with clear learning purposes. Students visibly had a good rapport with their teachers. Teachers’ framing of questions was good with the effective use of lower-order and higher-order questioning. Knowledge of their students and of the subject matter informed teachers in choosing to ask directed or global questions. In most cases students were encouraged to put up their hands to answer global questions and in all cases sufficient wait time was given for students to compose their thoughts before replying. Opportunities for students to give joint as well as individual responses were also witnessed in some classes and an extension of these practices to include joint accountability through co-operative learning would further add to the quality of the learning environment. Good use of humour and praise were frequently encountered during the course of the inspection.
Differentiation by content and process was used to good effect in many of the lessons visited with a student-centred approach being the norm. New content was introduced using a variety of resources, many being teacher-made or student-made. These resources assisted with engaging and maintaining students’ attention and, where necessary, clarified abstract concepts with concrete examples. On occasions teachers also took advantage of pairing and grouping students to promote co-operative learning. Purposeful seating arrangements in some classrooms allowed teachers to work with individuals and small groups thereby facilitating access to learning by differentiating both content and process.
The history lesson inspected drew on local history to capture students’ attention and to situate the topic under discussion. It was clear that the students knew the content of the topic and the use of the blackboard and appropriate additional reading material assisted them with their learning. The English lesson observed focused on the study of a poem and the practice of not revealing the title of the poem until the end of the lesson succeeded in keeping the students focused throughout. Students’ willingness to ask questions was encouraged by the teacher and was used to good effect in advancing learning opportunities. Student questioning was also encouraged in the Gaeilge lesson where students’ participation was encouraged through structured activities that included opportunities for pair work. As with all lessons observed, teachers sought at all times to enhance students’ concept of what was being learned and their own self concept as learners. The mathematics lesson focused on providing additional support to two students in senior cycle. These students were correctly encouraged to identify their own learning needs and were in turn assisted by the teacher.
Recommendations relating to teaching, learning and assessment are not significant, relative to the recommendations associated with the previous two sections of this report. Extension of practices associated with co-operative learning are encouraged as is greater use of graphic organisers to support students’ learning. Team-teaching may offer opportunities for the above suggestions to be enacted by providing teachers with additional in-class time and space to pursue pedagogical practices, both old and new, and monitor their impact upon student participation, engagement and learning.
The school engages, in conjunction with the guidance counsellor, in a range of assessment practices and recognises the interplay between assessment, teaching and learning. Standardised and diagnostic tests are used and interpreted appropriately. Further work on availing of diagnostic testing of numeracy skills is encouraged as is the continued interaction with the school’s NEPS psychologist. The practice of administering standardised tests in advance of students’ arrival in the school is commended. Upon entry to the school daily classroom observation and interaction with students combine with more formal diagnostic assessment practices to inform teaching and learning. Such practice further affirms and supports the key role of the mainstream teacher in supporting students’ learning and development. As well as pre-state examinations, formal examinations take place at midterm, Christmas and summer. Class-based examinations are administered on a regular basis and results are appropriately monitored, stored and used to track student progress.
Students’ progress and achievement are communicated to home on a regular basis and parents are encouraged and facilitated to meet with teachers. The school’s continued engagement with the IEP process is encouraged. The involvement of individual students in assessing their own progress will also add to the quality of assessment and subsequent learning. An examination of how best to communicate and respond to formal and informal assessment data from the LINK programme also merits consideration.
Some retesting is already undertaken to determine progress in literacy skills. In order to further promote and sustain a collaborative and whole-school response, it is recommended that the findings from retesting of both literacy and numeracy attainment, along with other student gains, should be appropriately shared with colleagues. Such findings, could in turn, feed into the aforementioned student register and individualised plans. Members of the special educational needs team have made presentations to colleagues and it is suggested that such good practice be extended to facilitate sharing of assessment information, based on entire year groups or individual case studies.
In consultation with the local NEPS psychologist, the school adopts a systematic approach to arranging Reasonable Accommodations in Certificate Examinations (RACE). In general, students are facilitated in becoming familiar with the relevant accommodations provided and are assisted in accessing these when they sit their pre-examinations. It is important that this good practice continue. The participation and achievements of students with special educational needs in state examinations are rightfully a source of pride for all concerned. As well as acknowledging academic achievements the school seeks always to promote students self-esteem and sense of belonging by recognising student engagement and other achievements. The OECD publication Student Engagement At School (2003) may assist further in this regard and may be of benefit to the school’s commendable academic council which seeks to monitor student progress and development by engaging with students on a individual and personalised basis.
As well as the above mentioned aspects of assessment, future policy development would be well served by examining the interplay between assessment and instruction. A very good example of this interplay was observed in a lesson where the teacher gave students a choice of homework based on the learning achieved in class. Reference to differentiating homework and other assessment practices would sit well with the school’s efforts to support all students with their learning. Ongoing development of individualised plans for students and the use of the staff handbook to share teaching methodologies and strategies are also linked to the development of assessment practices. The benefits to student learning that accrue from peer and self-assessment practices also merit consideration in the development of any future policy document on assessment.
The following are the main strengths identified in the evaluation:
As a means of building on these strengths and to address areas for development, the following key recommendations are made:
Post-evaluation meetings were held with the principal and deputy principal at the conclusion of the evaluation when the draft findings and recommendations of the evaluation were presented and discussed.
Published June 2010
Appendix
Submitted by the Board of Management
Area 1: Observations on the content of the inspection report
The BOM is pleased with the several positive comments in the report and wish to express our thanks to the Inspector, management, staff and all who participated for their contributions
Area 2: Follow-up actions planned or undertaken since the completion of the inspection activity to implement the findings and recommendations of the inspection
The BOM of St.Michael’s College is fully committed to adopting and implementing the recommendations in the report and to providing the best possible education for all students with Special Needs.