IEPPI - Gauteng East Underperforming High Schools
-
Upload
guestc756a7 -
Category
Education
-
view
1.943 -
download
4
description
Transcript of IEPPI - Gauteng East Underperforming High Schools
1
Gauteng East District
Under-performing High Schools
Presenter: Dr Muavia Gallie (PhD)
Institute of Education Policy, Planning and Implementation @ University of Pretoria
IEPPI@UP
20 May 2009
Springs
2
Success rate = 8,1%
•Success-rate of the system = 8,1%•Of every 12 learners starting GradeOne, only 1 learner attains what thesystem is promising them - data 2005!
3
Dysfunctionality vis-à-vis Under-performanceFigure 10: Three levels of school functionality in relation to the support needed by
schools
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
-10%
-20%
Non-Functioning -20% – +20%
Low-Functioning 21% - 60%
High-Functioning 61% - 100%
Basics
Gallie 2006
41. Is the school receptive to innovation and change?
ResponsesJ. Managing Change
1. Are the staff and governing body enjoying a positive and harmonious relationship?
ResponsesI. The Governing Body and Department of Education
1. Are teachers working to build and maintain good relations with parents?
ResponsesH. Links with Parents and the Community
1. Is there a good team spirit?
ResponsesG. Professional Working Relationships
1. Are staff meetings used for the discussion of major policy issues?
ResponsesF. Decision Making and Communication
1. Is there a clear organisational structure that is appropriate for meeting the school’s aims?
ResponsesE. Structures, Roles and Responsibilities
1. Are they working well together as a team through clearly defined roles and responsibilities known to staff?
ResponsesD. The Principal and the Senior Management Team
1. Does the principal provide strong leadership and a definite sense of direction through a clear vision based beliefs and values?
ResponsesC. The Principal
1. Do the principal and you, as staff member share a common vision about the school’s future development?
ResponsesB. Vision, Aims and Strategic Planning
1. Are attendance, discipline and vandalism by learners major problems in school?
I don’t knowNoYesQuestions
ResponsesA. School Ethos
Questionnaire on School Functionality (SFI)
5 8%88%4%4222111.10 Are teachers working in a stimulating, enjoyable and
satisfying atmosphere?p
9%74%17%17321741.9 Are learners and teachers feeling safe and secure at
school?p
8%25%67%67226161.8 Are teachers talking freely about professional matters?p
26%39%35%3536981.7 Is there an open atmosphere for change in the school?p
17%65%17%173
41541.6 Are teachers holding high expectations of learnerbehaviour and achievements through displaying confidencein them?p
21%38%42%42259101.5 Is there a continual striving for improvement and growth
among teachers?p
13%42%46%462
310111.4 Is a questioning, critical attitude actively encouraged,and a complacency attitude actively discouraged amongstaff?n
8%13%79%79223191.3 Is there a general concern through the teaching and
learning process to provide quality education?p
67%17%17%17216441.2 Are most of the parents proud that their children are
attending this school?p
0%4%96%4201231.1 Are attendance, discipline and vandalism by learners
major problems in school?n
Don'tknowNoYes
%Diff.Don’tknow
NoYesQuestionsY=p
PosA. School EthosY=n PercentageSummaryResponses
Y = Preferred response (both Yes and No)
Summary of Analysis of Questionnaire responses
6
Entire summary
7
Graph 9 - School Ethos
417 79
46
42
1735
67
17 40
20
40
60
80
1001
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Results 1 Graph 10 - Vision, Aims and Strategic Planning
8 13 38
25
38
5452
1313
21
0
20
40
60
80
1001
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Results 2Graph 11 - The Principal
2117 42
39
38
63
3042
42
50
020
406080
1001
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Results 3 Graph 12 - The Principal and SMT
2563
43
25
384246
33
3329
020406080
1001
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Results 4
8
Graph 13 - Structures, Roles and Responsibilities
33 39
39
35
262638
67
25 80
2040
60
80
1001
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Results 5
Graph 14 - Decision Making and Communication
96
54
78
61
523354
58
92
67
020406080
1001
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Results 6Graph 15 - Professional Working Relationships
3829
67
42
46
70
3554
42 170
20
40
60
80
1001
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Results 7
Graph 16 - Links with Parents and Community
50
2967
74
75
4021
38 80
2040
60
80
1001
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Results 8
9
Graph 17 - The SGB and DoE
8
50
54
21004250
43
020
40
60
80
1001
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Results 9
Graph 18 - Managing Reform
54
1733
21421
1314
2117
0
20
40
60
80
1001
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Results 10
35.7Average
21.5J. Managing Change
20.5I. The Governing Body and Department of Education
36.6H. Links with Parents and the Community
44.0G. Professional Working Relationships
64.5F. Decision Making and Communication
33.6E. Structures, Roles and Responsibilities
37.7D. The Principal and the Senior Management Team
38.4C. The Principal
27.5B. Vision, Aims and Strategic Planning
32.8A. School Ethos Graph 19 - Level of school Functionality A
0102030405060708090
100School Ethos
Vision, Aims and Strategic Planning
The Principal
The Principal and SMT
Structures, Roles and Responsibilities
Decision making and Communication
Professional Work Relationships
Links with Parents and Community
SGB and DoE
Managing Change
10
Graph 20 - Level of School Functionality B
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
School Ethos
Vision, Aims and Strategic
Planning
The Principal
The Principal and SMT
Structures, Roles and
Responsibilities
Decision Making and
Communication
Professional Work
Relationships
Links with Parents and
Community
SGB and DoE
Managing Change
Level of School Functionality (SFI)
Requests for use of the SFI - [email protected]
11
Level 3Administration
Level 2Management
Level 1Leadership
HighFunctioningSchools(HFS)
LowFunctioningSchools(LFS)
Non-FunctioningSchools(NFS)
Conceptual Argument -Types of Functionalities (relating to the Core Purpose)
12
Supervisory andAccountability
systems
Evaluation andAppraisalSystems
PerformanceManagement andReward Systems
High FunctioningSchools (HFS)
Low FunctioningSchools (LFS)
Non-FunctioningSchools (NFS)
4. Measuring Teaching Quality i.r.t.different school functionalities
The Judgement of Quality is dependent on the Quality of the Judgement.
13
Supervisory andAccountability
systems
Getting them‘to do theirjob’
Evaluation andAppraisalSystems
Getting them‘to dosomethingextra’
PerformanceManagement andReward Systems
Getting themto perform‘optimally’
High FunctioningSchools (HFS)
Low FunctioningSchools (LFS)
Non-FunctioningSchools (NFS)
5. Focus of the measuring tool ..
14
Supervisory andAccountability
systems
Getting theINPUT right
Evaluation andAppraisalSystems
Getting thePROCESSright
PerformanceManagement andReward Systems
Getting theOUTCOMESright
High FunctioningSchools (HFS)
Low FunctioningSchools (LFS)
Non-FunctioningSchools (NFS)
5. Keeping their ‘eye’ on achieving …
15
Did your school closeearly on the 21 April2009 (the day beforethe Elections), and onthe 30 April 2009 (theday before May day)?
16
Defining Dysfunctional schools• Schools who continue to function, but do not accomplish the purpose
for which they were created;• Schools exist to help each child realise his or her fullest potential as a
human being;• Schools become dysfunctional when they stop serving the needs of the
individuals with them;• School can take on a life of their own where their main objective
becomes self-preservation;• One of the key indicators that a school has become dysfunctional is the
‘no talk rule’. Those within the school are not permitted, and do notpermit themselves, to speak (or even think) critically about the school
• Critical thinking begins with the question “why?” Why are we doing this?Why are things arranged this way? Why do we do it this way and not thatway? These kinds of questions are not allowed in a dysfunctional group;
• The other indicator is the evolution of a priestly caste whose allegianceis more strongly tied to the school than it is to the learners the school ismeant to serve - this means the teachers and administrators within theschool
17
Logistics of Teaching and Learning 1
100%90%80%70%60%50%40%30%20%10%10%20%30%
Current Academic YearPrevious YearH
FSLF
SN
FS
18
Logistics of Teaching and Learning 2.1
School ReadinessComponents
30%
100%90%80%70%60%50%40%30%20%10%10%20%30%
Current Academic YearPrevious YearH
FSLF
SN
FS
19
Logistics of Teaching and Learning 2.2
School ReadinessComponents
30%
Teaching40%
100%90%80%70%60%50%40%30%20%10%10%20%30%
Current Academic YearPrevious YearH
FSLF
SN
FS
20
Logistics of Teaching and Learning 2.3
School ReadinessComponents
30%
Teaching40%
100%90%80%70%60%50%40%30%20%10%10%20%30%
Current Academic YearPrevious Year
Learning50%H
FSLF
SN
FS
21
Logistics of Teaching and Learning 2.4
School ReadinessComponents
30%
Teaching40%
100%90%80%70%60%50%40%30%20%10%10%20%30%
Current Academic YearPrevious Year
Learning50%
Assess-ment10%H
FSLF
SN
FS
22
Logistics of Teaching and Learning 2.5
School ReadinessComponents
30%
Teaching40%
100%90%80%70%60%50%40%30%20%10%10%20%30%
Current Academic YearPrevious Year
Learning50%
Assess-ment10%H
FSLF
SN
FS
90%Time-on-Task
23
Logistics of Teaching and Learning 3.1
School ReadinessComponents
30%
Teaching40%
100%90%80%70%60%50%40%30%20%10%10%20%30%
Current Academic YearPrevious Year
Learning50%
Assess-ment10%H
FSLF
SN
FS
90%
24
Logistics of Teaching and Learning 3.2
School ReadinessComponents
30%
Teaching40%
100%90%80%70%60%50%40%30%20%10%10%20%30%
Current Academic YearPrevious Year
Learning50%
Assess-ment10%H
FSLF
SN
FS
School ReadinessComponents
30%
90%
25
Logistics of Teaching and Learning 3.3
School ReadinessComponents
30%
Teaching40%
100%90%80%70%60%50%40%30%20%10%10%20%30%
Current Academic YearPrevious Year
Learning50%
Assess-ment10%H
FSLF
SN
FS
School ReadinessComponents
30%
Assessment20%
90%
26
Logistics of Teaching and Learning 3.4
School ReadinessComponents
30%
Teaching40%
100%90%80%70%60%50%40%30%20%10%10%20%30%
Current Academic YearPrevious Year
Learning50%
Assess-ment10%H
FSLF
SN
FS
School ReadinessComponents
30%
Disrup-tions10%
Assessment20%
90%
27
Logistics of Teaching and Learning 3.5
School ReadinessComponents
30%
Teaching40%
100%90%80%70%60%50%40%30%20%10%10%20%30%
Current Academic YearPrevious Year
Learning50%
Assess-ment10%H
FSLF
SN
FS
School ReadinessComponents
30%
Teaching30%
Disrup-tions10%
Assessment20%
90%
28
Logistics of Teaching and Learning 3.6
School ReadinessComponents
30%
Teaching40%
100%90%80%70%60%50%40%30%20%10%10%20%30%
Current Academic YearPrevious Year
Learning50%
Assess-ment10%H
FSLF
SN
FS
School ReadinessComponents
30%
Teaching30%
Disrup-tions10%
Assessment20%
Learning20%
90%
29
Logistics of Teaching and Learning 3.7
School ReadinessComponents
30%
Teaching40%
100%90%80%70%60%50%40%30%20%10%10%20%30%
Current Academic YearPrevious Year
Learning50%
Assess-ment10%H
FSLF
SN
FS
School ReadinessComponents
30%
Teaching30%
Disrup-tions10%
Assessment20%
Learning20%
90%
50%Time-on-Task
30
Logistics of Teaching and Learning 4.1
School ReadinessComponents
30%
Teaching40%
100%90%80%70%60%50%40%30%20%10%10%20%30%
Current Academic YearPrevious Year
Learning50%
Assess-ment10%H
FSLF
SN
FS
School ReadinessComponents
30%
Teaching30%
Disrup-tions10%
Assessment20%
Learning20%
90%
50%
31
Logistics of Teaching and Learning 4.2
School ReadinessComponents
30%
Teaching40%
100%90%80%70%60%50%40%30%20%10%10%20%30%
Current Academic YearPrevious Year
Learning50%
Assess-ment10%H
FSLF
SN
FS
School ReadinessComponents
30%
School ReadinessComponents
30%
Teaching30%
Disrup-tions10%
Assessment20%
Learning20%
90%
50%
32
Logistics of Teaching and Learning 4.3
School ReadinessComponents
30%
Teaching40%
100%90%80%70%60%50%40%30%20%10%10%20%30%
Current Academic YearPrevious Year
Learning50%
Assess-ment10%H
FSLF
SN
FS
School ReadinessComponents
30%
School ReadinessComponents
30%
Teaching30%
Disrup-tions10%
Assessment20%
Learning for Assessment
20%
Learning20%
90%
50%
33
Logistics of Teaching and Learning 4.4
School ReadinessComponents
30%
Teaching40%
100%90%80%70%60%50%40%30%20%10%10%20%30%
Current Academic YearPrevious Year
Learning50%
Assess-ment10%H
FSLF
SN
FS
School ReadinessComponents
30%
School ReadinessComponents
30%
Teaching30%
Disrup-tions10%
Assessment20%
Learning for Assessment
20%
Learning20%
Disruptions& Chaos
20%
90%
50%
34
Logistics of Teaching and Learning 4.5
School ReadinessComponents
30%
Teaching40%
100%90%80%70%60%50%40%30%20%10%10%20%30%
Current Academic YearPrevious Year
Learning50%
Assess-ment10%H
FSLF
SN
FS
School ReadinessComponents
30%
School ReadinessComponents
30%
Teaching30%
Teaching20%
Disrup-tions10%
Assessment20%
Learning for Assessment
20%
Learning20%
Disruptions& Chaos
20%
90%
50%
35
Logistics of Teaching and Learning 4.6
School ReadinessComponents
30%
Teaching40%
100%90%80%70%60%50%40%30%20%10%10%20%30%
Current Academic YearPrevious Year
Learning50%
Assess-ment10%H
FSLF
SN
FS
School ReadinessComponents
30%
School ReadinessComponents
30%
Teaching30%
Teaching20%
Disrup-tions10%
Assessment20%
Learning for Assessment
20%
Learning20%
Disruptions& Chaos
20%
Learn-ing
10%
90%
50%
36
Logistics of Teaching and Learning 4.7
School ReadinessComponents
30%
Teaching40%
100%90%80%70%60%50%40%30%20%10%10%20%30%
Current Academic YearPrevious Year
Learning50%
Assess-ment10%H
FSLF
SN
FS
School ReadinessComponents
30%
School ReadinessComponents
30%
Teaching30%
Teaching20%
Disrup-tions10%
Assessment20%
Learning for Assessment
20%
Learning20%
Disruptions& Chaos
20%
Learn-ing
10%
90%
50%
30%Time-on-Task
37
• Ten critical questions for every school leader1. Does every teacher teach everyday in every class for 196 school days in the year? [10]2. Do you as school leader regularly observe teachers teaching in their classrooms? [10]3. Do you spend at least 70% of your time in school on matters of teaching and learning?
[10]4. Do you regularly visit parents of learners in their homes? [10]5. Is your school consistently clean, ordered and well-decorated in ways that convey
positive sentiments about the learning environment? [10]6. Do more than 95% of learners pass the highest grade in the school every year for the
past five years? [10]7. Do more than 98% of learners enrolled attend school everyday? [10]8. Does every learner have a textbook in every subject? [10]9. Does your school bring in at least R100,000 every year in external (private) funds e.g.
the business community? [10]10. In the case of High Schools, do at least 80% of your learners go on to
university/university of technology? In the case of Primary Schools, do all yourlearners go on to high school?
Prof. Jonathan Jansen (Executive Leadership Programme 2008)
Is your school Dysfunctional?
38
Functionality Scorefor your school
A School?20
A Seriously Dysfunctional School40
A Marginally functional School60
A Moderately Functional School80
A Functional School100
39
8 School Readiness Components
School ReadinessComponents
30%
100%90%80%70%60%50%40%30%20%10%10%20%30%
Current Academic YearPrevious YearH
FSLF
SN
FS
School ReadinessComponents
30%
School ReadinessComponents
30%
SRC ComponentIndicators of NFS
8 School Readiness Components
40
School Readiness Components 1
School ReadinessComponents
30%
100%90%80%70%60%50%40%30%20%10%10%20%30%
Current Academic YearPrevious YearH
FSLF
SN
FS
School ReadinessComponents
30%
School ReadinessComponents
30%
1. Teacher and LearnerAttendance
1.1 High rate of staff absenteeism
1.2 High rate of learner absenteeism
SRC ComponentIndicators of NFS
8 School Readiness Components
41
School Readiness Components 2
School ReadinessComponents
30%
100%90%80%70%60%50%40%30%20%10%10%20%30%
Current Academic YearPrevious YearH
FSLF
SN
FS
School ReadinessComponents
30%
School ReadinessComponents
30%
2. Teacher Information2.1 High rate of staff turnover
2.2 Negative school atmosphere
1. Teacher and LearnerAttendance
1.1 High rate of staff absenteeism
1.2 High rate of learner absenteeism
SRC ComponentIndicators of NFS
8 School Readiness Components
42
School Readiness Components 3
School ReadinessComponents
30%
100%90%80%70%60%50%40%30%20%10%10%20%30%
Current Academic YearPrevious YearH
FSLF
SN
FS
School ReadinessComponents
30%
School ReadinessComponents
30%
3. Learner Information3.1 Low learner performance
3.2 High dropout rates of learners
2. Teacher Information2.1 High rate of staff turnover
2.2 Negative school atmosphere
1. Teacher and LearnerAttendance
1.1 High rate of staff absenteeism
1.2 High rate of learner absenteeism
SRC ComponentIndicators of NFS
8 School Readiness Components
43
School Readiness Components 4
School ReadinessComponents
30%
100%90%80%70%60%50%40%30%20%10%10%20%30%
Current Academic YearPrevious YearH
FSLF
SN
FS
School ReadinessComponents
30%
School ReadinessComponents
30%
4. Annual Planning4. High level of disruption and violence
3. Learner Information3.1 Low learner performance
3.2 High dropout rates of learners
2. Teacher Information2.1 High rate of staff turnover
2.2 Negative school atmosphere
1. Teacher and LearnerAttendance
1.1 High rate of staff absenteeism
1.2 High rate of learner absenteeism
SRC ComponentIndicators of NFS
8 School Readiness Components
44
School Readiness Components 5
School ReadinessComponents
30%
100%90%80%70%60%50%40%30%20%10%10%20%30%
Current Academic YearPrevious YearH
FSLF
SN
FS
School ReadinessComponents
30%
School ReadinessComponents
30%
5. Implementable andflexible timetable
5. Unclear academic standards
4. Annual Planning4. High level of disruption and violence
3. Learner Information3.1 Low learner performance
3.2 High dropout rates of learners
2. Teacher Information2.1 High rate of staff turnover
2.2 Negative school atmosphere
1. Teacher and LearnerAttendance
1.1 High rate of staff absenteeism
1.2 High rate of learner absenteeism
SRC ComponentIndicators of NFS
8 School Readiness Components
45
School Readiness Components 6
School ReadinessComponents
30%
100%90%80%70%60%50%40%30%20%10%10%20%30%
Current Academic YearPrevious YearH
FSLF
SN
FS
School ReadinessComponents
30%
School ReadinessComponents
30%
6. Quarterly Teachingschedules
5. Implementable andflexible timetable
5. Unclear academic standards
4. Annual Planning4. High level of disruption and violence
3. Learner Information3.1 Low learner performance
3.2 High dropout rates of learners
2. Teacher Information2.1 High rate of staff turnover
2.2 Negative school atmosphere
1. Teacher and LearnerAttendance
1.1 High rate of staff absenteeism
1.2 High rate of learner absenteeism
SRC ComponentIndicators of NFS
8 School Readiness Components
46
School Readiness Components 7
School ReadinessComponents
30%
100%90%80%70%60%50%40%30%20%10%10%20%30%
Current Academic YearPrevious YearH
FSLF
SN
FS
School ReadinessComponents
30%
School ReadinessComponents
30%7. Organogram
6. Quarterly Teachingschedules
5. Implementable andflexible timetable
5. Unclear academic standards
4. Annual Planning4. High level of disruption and violence
3. Learner Information3.1 Low learner performance
3.2 High dropout rates of learners
2. Teacher Information2.1 High rate of staff turnover
2.2 Negative school atmosphere
1. Teacher and LearnerAttendance
1.1 High rate of staff absenteeism
1.2 High rate of learner absenteeism
SRC ComponentIndicators of NFS
8 School Readiness Components
47
School Readiness Components 8
School ReadinessComponents
30%
100%90%80%70%60%50%40%30%20%10%10%20%30%
Current Academic YearPrevious YearH
FSLF
SN
FS
School ReadinessComponents
30%
School ReadinessComponents
30%8. Learner and Teacher
support materials
7. Organogram
6. Quarterly Teachingschedules
5. Implementable andflexible timetable
5. Unclear academic standards
4. Annual Planning4. High level of disruption and violence
3. Learner Information3.1 Low learner performance
3.2 High dropout rates of learners
2. Teacher Information2.1 High rate of staff turnover
2.2 Negative school atmosphere
1. Teacher and LearnerAttendance
1.1 High rate of staff absenteeism
1.2 High rate of learner absenteeism
SRC ComponentIndicators of NFS
8 School Readiness Components
48
Research - High PovertySchools 0
2007
49
Research - High PovertySchools 1
Elements of High-Performing, High-Poverty Schools Nationally: Mass Insight’s “Readiness” model
50
Research - High Poverty Schools 7What’s Stopping You?
Create a map of the design challenges in your way
Human capacity– Adequacy of teacher workforce– Adequacy of top and distributed team leadership– Adequacy of outside support system (all partners and TA)
Operating conditions– Freedom to act: authority over key resources (money, time, people,
programming) to make mission- and data-driven decisions– Freedom from unproductive or overlapping compliance burdens– Incentives that drive adult (and student) behavior
Resources– Adequacy of time for learning– Adequacy of time for teacher planning, collaboration, PD– Adequacy of resource support in general (class size, facilities, etc.)
51
Research - High Poverty Schools 8
The 3 ‘C’s of comprehensive, coherent,transformative reform
Clustering3
Conditions1
Capacity2 Build turnaround resources & humancapacity in schools and lead partners
Organize in clusters by region, need,or type -- where new conditions applyand states/districts create specialcapacity
Change the rules and incentives governingpeople, time, money, & program
So: What would reform that incorporatesall three sides of the triangle look like?
52
Research - High Poverty Schools 9
Conditions Change:Outside-the-systemapproaches, appliedinside the system
53
Operation of the NCS in schoolsMacrolevel
issues
• Working week• Timetable time• Staffing numbers• Rooming• Class-size-ratio• Timetabling• Assessment - Recording - Reporting• Continuous Teacher Professional Development• Governance involvement
Mesolevel
issues
Microlevel
issues
Learning Areas/Subjects
* Planning * Time * Delivery * Testing
School
Departments
Teacher
54
Time-on-Task 1
Teaching40%
100%90%80%70%60%50%40%30%20%10%10%20%30%
Current Academic YearPrevious Year
Learning50%H
FSLF
SN
FS
Teaching30%
Teaching20%
Learning20%
Learn-ing
10%
90%
50%
30%
55
Time-on-Task 2.1
Teaching40%
100%90%80%70%60%50%40%30%20%10%10%20%30%
Current Academic YearPrevious Year
Learning50%H
FSLF
SN
FS
Teaching30%
Teaching20%
Learning20%
Learn-ing
10%
90%
50%
30%
•4.5 days p.w.•176 days p.a.
56
Time-on-Task 2.2
Teaching40%
100%90%80%70%60%50%40%30%20%10%10%20%30%
Current Academic YearPrevious Year
Learning50%H
FSLF
SN
FS
Teaching30%
Teaching20%
Learning20%
Learn-ing
10%
90%
50%
30%
•4.5 days p.w.•176 days p.a.
•2.5 days p.w.•98 days p.a.
57
Time-on-Task 2.3
Teaching40%
100%90%80%70%60%50%40%30%20%10%10%20%30%
Current Academic YearPrevious Year
Learning50%H
FSLF
SN
FS
Teaching30%
Teaching20%
Learning20%
Learn-ing
10%
90%
50%
30%
•4.5 days p.w.•176 days p.a.
•2.5 days p.w.•98 days p.a.
•1.67 days p.w.•65 days p.a.
58
Time-on-Task 3
Teaching40%
100%90%80%70%60%50%40%30%20%10%10%20%30%
Current Academic YearPrevious Year
Learning50%H
FSLF
SN
FS
Teaching30%
Teaching20%
Learning20%
Learn-ing
10%
90%
50%
30%
4.5 days p.w.
2.5 days p.w.
1.67 days p.w.
59
Learning: From Past to Future
60
5 Levels of Learning
Wisdom1755Comprehension1404Know-How1053Information702Facts351
Type ofTeaching
TeachingDays
Level
61
Bloom’s Level of learning andThinking
1. Know - Define, match, repeat, memorise, label, outline,record, recognise, state, sort, list
2. Understand - Restate, show, illustrate, summarise, predict,locate, paraphrase, describe, explain
3. Apply - Demonstrate, solve, test, use, manipulate, organise
4. Analyse - Examine, debate/defend, compare/contrast, refute,relate, generalise, classify, research
5. Synthesise - Propose, design, construct, invent, formulate,plan, imagine
6. Evaluate - Judge, recommend, critique/criticise, justify,choose
62
School shake up - Video
63
Quote!
If you don’t change,change will changeyou, or change will
replace you.