Junior Curriculum Review & Evaluation A school’s experience – St. Louis Secondary School Dundalk

Curriculum Review – original rationale 2001 Unmanageable timetable – too many constraints Additional subjects on the curriculum – SPHE, CSPE Religious Education as an exam. subject Pressure on the weaker students Pressure on teachers Not enough time for subjects Too many subjects

Timeline Autumn 2001 – constraints identified Task group set up – looked at models in other schools; concern re. French & Science Dec – surveyed students Jan – whole staff debate on issues identified; agreed a review necessary Feb – report to BoM No further work for a year

Timeline March 2003: agreed to reduce subject load by one. Task Group re-formed with some new members – planned for introduction of revised curriculum in Sept and ready by March 2004 for parents of incoming 1 st Year. Nov – sample combinations of subjects and options circulated and discussed. Jan. 2004: proposals of Task Group accepted by Staff and forwarded to BoM. Sept. 2004: new curriculum commenced. Sept.2004 – Jun – new curriculum implemented for 1 st cohort Sept. 2007: evaluation of curriculum commenced.

Intended outcomes of initial review Reduce the exam. subject load on students Space on timetable for SPHE and Pastoral Care French, Business and Science core subjects in 1 st Year To improve the uptake of Science at J.Cert. and Senior Cycle

Intended outcomes of initial review To help students make a more informed choice of subjects at the end of 1 st Year To reduce the constraints on the timetable Undertaking given to evaluate the revised curriculum when the first cohort had gone through Junior Cert.

Revised curriculum - Sept Key change – introduction of an “almost taster” programme in 1 st Year Number of core subjects increases from 9 to 13 subjects in 1 st Year including French, Science & Business two additional from a list of 5 others i.e. any two from German, Spanish, Art, Technology and Home Economics – 15 subjects in total Music core in 1 st Year only and then an option

Revised curriculum - Sept Students drop 2 subjects at the start of 2 nd Year Students take 11 instead of 12 subjects to Junior Cert. 1 period per week for Pastoral Care/Guidance/Choir

WORKSHOP 1 What steps and structures would you take if you want to carry out a review?

Junior Certificate Review Factors affecting curricular provision - The Current Staff School Ethos & Traditions Regulations of the DES Wishes of Parents Wishes of BOM/trustees Marketability of the school Needs of students Local Business links/Workplace Society/Social Values School Facilities Senior Cycle Options Other factors

Junior Certificate Review Areas of Experience: Language, Literature & Communication Mathematics Studies & Applications Science & Technology Social, Political & Environmental Education Guidance, Counselling & Pastoral Care Religious & Moral Education Physical Education Arts Education

Junior Certificate Review CURRICULUM PRINCIPLES »Breadth & Balance »Relevance »Quality »Coherence »Continuity »Progression

Junior Certificate Review Curriculum Review Summary – The school curriculum review highlights the following issues: »Short – term – »Long – term –

Looking to the future Evaluation of the quality of the current curriculum How do we determine the extent to which we have achieved the original intended outcomes?

Evaluation of Current Curriculum How do we go about conducting an evaluation of the current Junior Curriculum?

Evaluation of Current Curriculum Three Questions: How are we doing with the revised curriculum? How will we find this out? What do we do then?

WORKSHOP 2 What criteria would you use to evaluate your current curriculum? Individual response: Group response: Report back -

Evaluation of Current Curriculum Stakeholders must be involved – patrons, BoM, Staff, Parents, Students, Local community 4 Steps in evaluation: Philosophy – focus is on teaching & learning; constant feedback essential; commitment to meaningful change & development

Evaluation of Current Curriculum Procedures: who is this for? What’s in it for students/teachers? Reflection on findings as work progresses; involvement of an external facilitator to assist objectivity Criteria: identification of preset priorities, targets; statements of desired outcomes; keep partners informed Evidence: qualitative – perceptions of students, staff, parents on the revised curriculum; quantitative – exam. results; subject uptake levels etc.

Framework for Evaluation Task Group worked with an SDPI facilitator and raised the following questions and issues: What are the issues in relation to curriculum that we should explore? What is good practice in relation to these? What is the focus of this evaluation? Consultation – who & how? Data gathering methods Timescale for the evaluation Success criteria – what are these? Communication – with the partners

Evaluating quality of the current curriculum - Issues to explore in relation to the original intended outcomes – Science as core – impact on uptake at J.Cert. & Senior Cycle Subject choice – better informed students? Are we catering effectively for the weaker students? Constraints on the timetable – reduced? Impact of RE as a compulsory exam. subject? Impact on traditional experience of music in the school

Evaluating quality of the current curriculum Does the current curriculum enhance personal development? Does the current curriculum enhance self esteem/self confidence? Impact on subjects such as Music, Technology, German, Physics Uptake of subjects at Higher Level Impact of banding/streaming – mixed ability teaching Implications for staff?

Work initiated by Task Group in Comparison of student outcomes of JC 2007 with 2006 and 2005 Looked at uptake of higher and ordinary levels across a range of subjects at JC Looked at performance across a range of subjects Set up a Parents’ Focus group to help with consultation

Work initiated by Task Group Pilot survey of parents of present 5 th and Transition Year students re. perceptions on the revised curriculum Adaptation of this questionnaire for use with students and staff Collation of current research – e.g. NCCA Longitudinal Study; Mixed Ability Teaching; Equality & Diversity in curriculum Facilitated session with all staff on mixed ability teaching (SLSS)

Sample results - French

Sample results - Science

Future work – Survey of staff on their views of the current curriculum – identify areas of concern Survey of students on levels of satisfaction Consultation with parents’ group Address areas not dealt with since initial review – mixed ability teaching and RE as an exam. subject Make recommendations for areas of development Report to BOM

References: School Development Planning –Curriculum Review at Junior Cycle (SDP & NCCA) –Draft Guidelines for Post-Primary School Unit 5 Approaches to Evaluation Siobhan Greer St. Louis Secondary School, Dundalk, Co. Louth