NAEP case study 15

Date of issue: Mar. 2008

Theme: New Arrivals Excellence Programme (NAEP): Case studies 11 - 15

School: A large comprehensive school in Greater London
Focus: Transforming provision for new arrivals

Background

This large urban mixed comprehensive school has over 1000 students on roll and faces many challenges: it serves one of the poorest council wards in Greater London; unemployment is high; its free school meal percentage is the highest in the local authority (LA); there is considerable student mobility, including a high proportion of refugees and asylum seekers; and well over half of the students are learning English as an additional language (EAL). A recent Ofsted
inspection in 2006 reported, 'This school community works harmoniously and demonstrates the advantages of students from different heritages learning together'. As the recently appointed headteacher points out in the school handbook, there is a lot on the positive side of the equation. Many families have taken risks by leaving behind everything and coming to Britain to make a better life for themselves and their children. The majority of British-born parents come from
cultures that have traditionally placed tremendous importance on education. The school is well placed, he argues, to take advantage of this parental support for education.

Prior to the arrival of the new headteacher, an Ofsted report had commented unfavourably on the EAL provision in the school. There was lack of support for new arrivals at early stages of learning English as well as for those who had been in the country longer but were still struggling with literacy, especially academic writing. The former head of department for ethnic minority achievement (EMA) and EAL had left and not been replaced, and the headteacher (by his own admission not experienced in this area) was not sure how best to develop this aspect of the school's provision. In the interim, two part-time teachers of special educational needs (SEN) had been asked to provide language support to new arrivals through induction classes and a Key Stage 4 EAL option. While keen to do their best for the students, the SEN teachers were aware that they lacked the necessary expertise for this work.

An audit of EAL provision by a London Challenge* specialist adviser at the end of 2005 found that support for students with EAL was poor. Various factors contributing to this were identified.

The structure of EAL support: the SEN and EMA departments had been merged, resulting in a fundamental confusion about the differing needs of students with EAL and SEN – an example of this was the inclusion of all EAL students on the SEN register

Staffing: the number and qualifications of those teaching EAL were inadequate

Teaching and learning: the teaching in the Key Stage 3 induction groups was SEN influenced and in the Key Stage 4 option group consisted of decontextualised grammar exercises. The majority of the EAL students had received age-appropriate schooling in their country of origin and literacy skills in their home languages were good. The teaching therefore lacked appropriate intellectual challenge and did nothing to help students access the mainstream curriculum to which they were entitled. In addition late-arriving students were routinely placed in bottom sets.

In brief, students with EAL – especially new arrivals – were getting a raw deal, with little chance of fulfilling their academic potential. In addition, the school was missing out on the chance to capitalise on the considerable intellectual ability of many of these bilingual youngsters.

* This school was at that time part of the London Challenge Keys to Success (K2S) programme.

What was done?

The following recommendations were made to senior managers:

ensure the current EMA post holders receive specialist EAL training
review the staffing of the EMA department
review the structure of EAL support, addressing in particular the apparent confusion of EAL with SEN
review setting arrangements as previously all new arrivals were placed in bottom sets
review the content of the induction programme and the Key Stage 4 EAL option
review procedures for assessing and tracking progress of EAL learners
consider, in the longer term, the training needs of mainstream staff so that support for developing bilingual learners is seen as a whole-school responsibility.

Senior managers and EMA post holders responded positively to these suggestions and began to debate priorities for tackling the various issues. Following further discussions with London Challenge advisers (who were supporting the school at the time) and LA advisers, the following actions were undertaken:

an EMA action plan was drawn up, addressing all the recommendations over a realistic timescale
the two EMA teachers attended a year-long accredited EMA course
the school increased the size of its EMA team
new arrivals were no longer put in bottom sets as a matter of course
induction, assessment and tracking procedures were reviewed
the structure for SEN and EAL support was reorganised and clarified.

In addition, the headteacher asked to visit a school with good EAL provision and this was arranged.

Following the successful completion of the accredited course, the EMA teachers suggested that a ten-session EAL training course, aimed at mainstream teachers, should be offered on site to subject staff. Take-up was good and 13 teachers from a range of faculties completed the course.

The most recent appointment to the EMA department has now requested a place on the specialist EMA-accredited course for 2007–08.

Outcomes

EMA staff, who readily agreed during the 2005 audit of provision that they lacked appropriate experience for the role they had been asked to undertake, have expressed their growing confidence in working with EAL students and enthusiasm for this area of work. Access to the specialist EAL course helped equip them with new skills and empower them,enabling them to see themselves as a key resource in the school. They have been the driving force behind a number of exciting EAL initiatives in the school over the past 18 months.
Mainstream staff who completed the school-based EAL training were highly motivated by the course and said that the impact on their classroom teaching had been considerable. These are some of their comments:
'I am more able to empathise with EAL students and understand their needs.'
'I now put more emphasis on developing spoken English.'
'I have a greater variety of activities to use in the classroom, making lessons more interesting and accessible.'
Good working relationships with the LA EMA service have been established
Senior managers now recognise the vital role of language in learning and see it as the key to further academic achievement. They are currently seeking to become a School of Excellence for language acquisition and development
A focus on EAL is to be an essential element of staff continuing professional development
Schemes of work are to be rewritten with this dimension integrated throughout
GCSE results continue to rise and, from a low base, are now above national averages
A recent Ofsted review praised the progress being made in this area of work

Feedback

Following a further audit of provision in March 2007, feedback to the headteacher stated:

'The structure now in place for the induction of new arrivals is comprehensive. In particular, the strengths of this work are the clear curriculum focus, the good cognitive challenge and the use of effective EAL pedagogy. Lessons were well planned, used a wide range of teaching strategies and were supported by carefully designed, attractive resources. Partnership working with mainstream staff is also developing well, with both EMA specialists and subject teachers showing growing confidence in working with linguistically diverse classes.

The school should be congratulated for having moved relatively rapidly from a situation where EAL provision was virtually non-existent to a position where the quality of the work is very good. This is due to the following:

the energy, skill, commitment and enthusiasm of the key specialist staff
the support given to the work by senior managers
the positive response of some key mainstream staff
the quality of the training provided.

There still remains work to be done in embedding successful EAL teaching across the whole school. But you will be pleased to know that impressive progress has been made – indeed the change could be called a transformation.'