Salisbury Diocese Board of Education1 Gill Hunter Adviser for School Development 2005 What Next? Using Your School Self-Evaluation

Salisbury Diocese Board of Education2 For Inspection: The SEF SEF is a holistic account of the school ’ s character and performance School ’ s SE is effective when: it uses a range of telling evidence to answer questions it benchmarks the school ’ s and pupils ’ performance against the best schools and the best comparable schools it involves staff, pupils, parents and governors at all levels it takes account of the views of external agencies it is integral to the school ’ s systems for assessing and developing pupils and managing and developing staff. it ensures that judgements are well-supported by evidence

Salisbury Diocese Board of Education3 For Inspection: Feeding the National Society Toolkit into the SEF Character and context of school (1B) How well does the school, through its distinctive Christian character, meet the needs of all learners? (5B) What is the impact of Collective Worship on the community? (4C, 4D) How effective is the Religious Education? (3A) How effective are the leadership and management of the school as a church school? (6) How distinctive and effective is the school as a C of E school? (7)

Salisbury Diocese Board of Education4 So what? Planning for Improvement SDP (to avoid confusion with School Improvement Partners) PIAP

Salisbury Diocese Board of Education5 School Development Planning EFFICIENT Raising standards and pupil achievement at heart of plan Evidence based on thorough audit of strengths and weaknesses of the school Informed by the views of stakeholders including pupils Taking account of national and local priorities Informed by data and a good range of monitoring activities Actions and timescales clearly stated and who is responsible Success criteria sharply focussed Clear links to Performance Management and CPD Staff know what the priorities are and why Strategies in place to track the progress being made A working document – the best plans are annotated during the year DEFICIENT Lack of estimated costing Lack of overall prioritisation Over-reliance on the HT and Senior Leadership Team Insufficient involvement of the GB Insufficient specificity about outcomes Failure to address pupil achievement sufficiently Poorly defined completion dates Lack of success criteria Failure to address monitoring and evaluation Failure to put the one year plan into a wider time context Unclear responsibility Failure to address time issues alongside other school activities

Salisbury Diocese Board of Education6 What Should SDP Include? Summary of school ’ s vision and aims Rationale for SDP priorities (link to SEF) Brief evaluation of previous plan Operational plans for each priority Longer term overview Annual cycle of SSE Subject Leaders ’ Action Plans Governors ’ Plans Maintenance Plans

Salisbury Diocese Board of Education7 What should action plan include? Nature and location of issue Comprehensive strategy for tackling issue Success criteria / outcomes to determine when the issue has been resolved – related to improvements in quality of teaching and learning Identified person responsible for action Identified people/group responsible for monitoring Arrangements for monitoring the effects of the changes (evaluation) Time limits Initiatives realistically costed in terms of staff time and resources

Salisbury Diocese Board of Education8 Continuing cycle of Self-Evaluation Continual timetabled review across year (consulting, monitoring and evaluating, regular GB agenda) Update SEF regularly Share and extend the vision Plan for Improvement

Salisbury Diocese Board of Education9 Build a more successful future