HC 269 Education CommitteeWritten evidence submitted by Myscience

Introduction

1. Myscience manages the National Science Learning Centre on behalf of the Wellcome Trust, the network of regional Science Learning Centres on behalf of the DfE, and the National STEM Centre on behalf of the Gatsby Charitable Foundation as well as running a number of other programmes supporting STEM education.

2. Over the past two years Myscience has developed partnerships with 66 Teaching School Alliances, with an additional 20 Teaching Schools working closely with Myscience as a network to support and improve science education in the schools reached by these Teaching School Alliances, six Sponsored Academy chains, and one Learning Trust. The size of these school partnerships varies from a small group of four (an Academy chain) to a large of 34 schools (the Learning Trust).

3. In addition to the above groups of schools, Myscience has established networks of schools to support Triple Science, and pairings between schools experienced and effective in running Triple Science with schools struggling to introduce and/or implement Triple Science.

4. Over the last three years, Myscience has also supported 50 clusters of schools across England, involving 350 schools from all phases. The clusters have worked together to address areas which required improvement which the schools had in common, for example aspects of teaching and learning, practical work in science, assessment and/or leadership of science.

5. We are responding from experiences of working with primary and secondary schools through school partnerships and networks, input from an independent panel of science teachers and research studies we have commissioned.

Key Points

6. A small number of schools are experienced in leading professional development for other schools. Their effectiveness in sharing effective practice and contributing to school improvement is greatly increased when working with an external facilitator, such as Myscience.

7. School partnerships vary in their responsiveness to organisation to external organisations. External agencies can help schools bring people together to, exchange ideas and effective practice so ultimately raise the quality of science education.

8. We have found that tension exist between outstanding schools using their staff to support other schools using and leaving them in the classroom to continue to achieve outstanding results.

9. Not all teachers who step into the role of trainer/mentor of other teachers have developed the necessary “consultancy” skills. Professional development is needed to equip those who take on the role. The Teaching Schools have generic training, but not subject specific training which is needed to really make a difference in raising attainment.

10. Schools are generally skilled at developing and implementing a strategy for improvement. Our research shows that they are generally unskilled at evaluating the impact of the change on pupil learning.

The differing forms of school partnership and coordination, and whether they have particular advantages and disadvantages

11. Our work with clusters of schools and school networks indicates that teachers can work very effectively across schools to improve their practice, especially when they are working on a specific educational focus, such as improving the range of practical work, using the outdoors as a classroom, developing progression and assessment measures. By working the schools see the benefits of learning together as equals, with some input from specialist subject experts. The teachers become more reflective about their practice and support each other achieve better practice.

12. The additional funding which Teaching Schools have for Initial Teacher Training (ITT) enables them to attract partner schools to host and mentor trainee teachers. At a recent meeting of the 24 Teaching Schools Science Network working with Myscience, the schools reported difficulties attracting suitable Science and Mathematics candidates to the “salaried” School Direct scheme as the applicants are not “school ready” and do not have the necessary pedagogical skills or if they are “schools ready” they often do not have appropriate qualifications.

13. Where Teaching Schools are using expertise from across the Alliance to support a range of schools, the Alliance is likely to have a track record over a long period of time of doing this work, and have worked out a model for delivering the support which doesn’t impact on the schools own performance. A key role is the designation and deployment of Specialist Leaders in Education (SLEs). Normal practice involves a financial model for recompensing the releasing school that is balanced with an income from the school requesting help. The SLE will support the lead member of staff, and it is their responsibility to then support the classroom practitioner. The number of subject specific Specialist Leaders in Education is small compared to the number with expertise in generic areas to offer to schools for improvement. We have observed tensions in partner Teaching Schools, between releasing subject specific classroom teachers to the Specialist Leaders in Education role and the need to keep them the classroom to achieve outstanding results. Whereas those in a leadership role have a smaller teaching commitment and it is therefore easier for them to be released.

14. Our experiences indicate that the most Teaching Schools have focused on Initial Teacher Training in the first year of operation and are yet to really work together on subject specific professional development.

15. Multi-school Academies: From our limited experience of this group of schools we have noted the tension between the outward facing role and the lead academy need to retain its outstanding status. The most effective alliances manage this by having over-capacity in staff, to release staff to go into the schools requiring support. The Executive Heads often draw upon other members of the senior leadership team to help. The support is mainly in the area of leadership, rather than subject specific work.

16. In one school with this status with whom we have a close relationship, the sharing of the Executive Head did improve other schools, but it also lead to a decline in performance of the lead school. This raises a question how to maintain effective practice in schools while working across schools.

17. Where teachers have been sent to support other schools in subject specific areas, they were unskilled in this role and lacked the authority to suggest to colleagues in other schools how to improve practice. Training in “consultancy cycle and skills” is vital to provide them with the mentoring skills they need to do this work effectively. Being a teacher of young people does not necessarily prepare a person to become a trainer of peers.

18. Our experience is that some of the sponsors of academy chains have adopted the approach that they and their staff can address all the needs of the teachers in their chain. This can lead to a narrow approach, and can miss vital opportunities to use other expertise for specialist support. However the academy chains that do work with external partnerships to help improve practice have a very efficient means of ensuring all the schools in their chain engage in the provision, so very quick gains can be made, and the staff across schools are supportive of each other during the professional development programmes.

19. So far we have found that UTCs and Studio schools tend to work in isolation from other schools in their area. This means there are missed opportunities to share the specialist experience of working in a different way and to introduce young people to either practical or vocational learning respectively.

20. The schools within Learning Trusts tend to seek support from within the Trust, and so good practice can be disseminated swiftly and efficiently within the Trust. The school members will have contributed to the Trust funds and so it is in their interest to get as much back from the Trust as they can. Our experience is that Learning Trusts are open to working with external support and using a range of expertise to support improvement.

How highly performing schools could better be encouraged to cooperate with others

21. For the highly performing schools take on a supporting role, there is a significant tension between those in the school whose responsibility it is that the school continues to be outstanding and those who are responsible for the support given to other schools where they may wish to draw upon the most skilled teachers in the school. Often this tension is expressed by Heads of Department who do not wish to share their best staff with other schools and risk a drop in the quality of teaching leading to a drop in student achievement.

22. Schools that have faced and overcome this tension report that they:

Take a risk with over capacity in staffing in order to be able to be responsive to other schools;

Have developed a funding model to cover additional costs of over resourcing;

See significant gains from working in other schools in their own staff development and performance especially in those that have been involved in supporting other schools, which is then cascaded throughout their departments.

23. Where schools cluster around a highly performing school, the lead school usually establishes a Board to steer activity, so that all the schools in the partnership benefit from the planning, joint resourcing, professional development and other support.

Whether schools have sufficient incentives to form meaningful and lasting relationships with other schools

24. The schools that support other schools often consider it a moral responsibility for their school, rather than as a business development. It is clear that a business model needs to be developed to sustain their position as an authority and leader for other schools to turn to. We have seen examples where the business element has taken over from the moral responsibility, and the supported schools obviously get sufficient from the relationship to remain in the partnership.

25. As a weaker school develops and improves, it benefits from the strategic direction, advice and guidance, modelling and mentoring they receive from their more successful partners.

26. For the lead school, there is sufficient incentive in sharing effective practice, leading to improved teaching and learning experiences in other schools. Often these schools report that there is mutual benefit, and although “on paper” they are the stronger school they still learn from the schools they are supporting.

27. In the clusters model we have supported, the schools see themselves as equal, though one school will take on the responsibility of driving the professional development activity forward taking on an administrative role. The common needs and sharing professional development helps to cement the relationship between the schools, and we have often found that the clusters continue to work together beyond the funded period.

28. In a recent survey of our teacher panel, over 50% reported that their school was part of a partnership or family of schools. The opportunity for networking and idea sharing was seen to be the biggest advantage of schools being in families or alliances. Other benefits were seen in increasing the opportunities available to pupils, and improving the teachers’ science knowledge and improving teaching style.

29. A significant minority of the teacher panel felt that being in a family or alliance offered increased access to CPD. Respondents from primary schools were particularly likely to think this, and at primary level more than half of respondents in a family/alliance said that they jointly purchased CPD.

If and how the potential tension between school partnership and cooperation, and school choice and competition can be resolved

30. The setting up of league tables created competition between schools, which hindered some schools from sharing effective practice and supporting each other. The new education landscape and increasing number of school partnerships is to reduce the negative aspects of the competition.

Whether converter academies’ requirements to support other schools, included in their funding agreements, are sufficient and are effectively policed

31. We haven’t focused our work with this group of schools, but some Teaching Schools have reported concern that converter academies in their area are working in isolation.

Whether academies sponsored by another school receive sufficient support from their sponsor

32. Our teachers’ panel, which includes senior leaders, states that time is a barrier to partnerships working effectively from the perspective of both the supplier school and the recipient school.

33. Most of support from the sponsor is focused on leadership and management, with little emphasis on subject specific support.

Whether school partnerships drive effective school improvement

34. When we questioned our teacher panel about the partnership activity, a significant number were unaware of how the partnership worked, suggesting much of the activity is done at a senior level and the classroom teacher is oblivious to the impact of the partnership on school improvement.

35. Where teachers were involved at a department or individual level they felt they gained new ideas, improved subject knowledge and ideas for teaching.

36. Interestingly, most teachers whose schools are not in a partnership felt it would be beneficial to join one.

37. Our research into partnership approach to school improvement would suggest that this is a new activity for schools and that most gains are made when the partnership includes an organisation with time to help evaluate needs and support the schools in their planning for interventions which will lead to the required improvements.

38. Schools are fairly comfortable about setting up a strategy for improvement and implementing these plans. Our research indicates that they are generally unskilled at evaluating how a change in teaching practice has had an impact on pupil learning.

Whether there are any additional upsides or downsides for highly performing schools supporting others through partnerships.

39. Where school budgets are tight more expensive science, engineering and technology resources can be bought and pooled by the partnership giving students access to a greater range of practical opportunities.

40. Shared learning means that tools that have proved effective can be used in common across partnerships eg resources to improve subject knowledge, professional development, instruments to support self-evaluation, approaches to leadership.

October 2013