In my first term as assistant headteacher, there were many demands that I faced but one challenge stood out above all else - why had one department just been rated as “inadequate” in an inspection while all the others were “very good”?
It was a task I was keen to delve into.
I knew it was a big undertaking but I was motivated to help turn the situation around - and saw it as a great first opportunity to cut my leadership teeth, so to speak.
It was a long journey but one with a real impact. Here’s how I set about turning things around.
School improvement: Focusing on teaching and learning
The first thing I did was make sure that I really understood what was going on and where the issues seemed to lie.
Looking into the report that had labelled the department “inadequate”, some themes revealed themselves - with the quality of the teaching and learning the most notable issue.
For example, the inspection report highlighted that “the majority of achievement and teaching is acceptable and the large minority is weak”.
The report also stated that the senior leadership at the time was new and unaware of the depth of the gulf between this department and the rest of the school.
It interested me that there was such a difference in the culture of lessons between this faculty and the rest of the school, so I conducted student surveys to try to understand this further.
From this, it became apparent that there was a perception among the students that these teachers did not “help them learn” as much as those in other subjects. There were also other factors such as behaviour being worse and students not being told regularly how they were doing.
Initial baseline data also showed that students were well below expectations and this needed to be addressed immediately.
Clearly there were some key issues that needed addressing.
Evaluating the department
However, I knew I needed to present a coherent overview of these issues to show the rest of the senior leadership team what was going on - and how we could fix things.
To do this I conducted a review of the department to present to SLT, which included learning walks, observations of the staff and book and resources reviews.
Learning walks were carried out at random and with different year groups, along with other members of the SLT. I wanted to include the leadership so there was transparency in reviewing the department as it was.
For all of these learning walks, I created a form to collect evidence and therefore enable me to spot patterns or recurring themes in the department.
This presented me with a clear picture of the immediate situation in the department, and it helped to narrow the scope of where the training would be best delivered.
For example, a big issue I observed was a lack of variety in teaching methods, with most lessons using didactic teaching, leaving students unengaged, staff depending on the prescribed textbooks and a lack of a personal relationship with the students.
I also reviewed schemes of work, methods of data collection and tracking, all of which were lacking in standardisation, consistency and regularity.
With all of this information I was able to make a compelling case to the rest of the SLT around what was going on and how we could fix it.
Putting a model together
So now we knew what the issues were and had buy-in to change things, the next stage was to put a plan together.
However, before putting a plan into place, I had to decide on a model for implementing the changes I wanted to make.
I decided to use the management change programmes created by Dr John Kotter that define an eight-step process for implementing change, from creating urgency all the way up to cementing the changes you make into your organisation.
I like Kotter’s model as it involves members of the department in every step, which suited my leadership style.
There was also a sense that the staff had never before been taken so seriously and led in such a direct way, which motivated them to show what they could contribute to the school.
Kotter’s process involved creating a strategic vision and initiatives, which I wrote up using information from my review of the department as well as previous inspection reports.
In this way, I hoped to be an inclusive leader and involve staff with every step of implementing change, and it worked very well as staff felt they had ownership of the process as well as its implementation.
Taking action
So, with our model decided, the next stage was to act.
It was clear from all that I had uncovered that we had to work to improve the skill set of the teachers in the department.
As the major McKinsey report How the world’s best-performing school systems come out on top states: “Top-performing school systems recognise that the only way to improve outcomes is to improve instruction.”
As such, I designed a programme that ran from October to May, with input from my team as well as my own observations from the review I had conducted.
This programme looked very much like a newly qualified teacher in-house training programme.
A session was delivered every three weeks either during lunchtime or after school. Staff across the school volunteered to lead sessions based on key areas that I had identified as needing training.
I held a meeting with the head of secondary and took her through the journey from the start of my leadership of the department up to this point, culminating with presenting my idea about the bespoke training programme.
She loved the idea because it included all leaders in the school taking responsibility for investing in the staff.
This helped to get buy-in from others as deputy heads, heads of year, heads of department and class-based teachers were all asked to help train our teachers and increase their confidence in the classroom.
The initiative focused on a training schedule made up of sessions such as behaviour management, school policy training, living the teacher professional standards, assessment for learning and creating meaningful assessments, among others.
All of these sessions were aimed at narrowing the attainment gap and involved staff whose expertise lended itself well to delivering them.
Having staff from across the school giving these training sessions was a powerful tool to garner togetherness, a sense of belonging and to heighten the sense of responsibility for all staff in achieving the school’s aspiration to be “outstanding”.
The impact of this approach was the beginning of a truly integrated team - one that now had links across the school that it could call on for support.
Further to this, I attached each member of the team to a “buddy” in another department who would peer-observe them (at the observed teacher’s request) once half-termly and also be a point of reference for any teaching questions or opinions.
The impact
This worked very well in allowing the staff to try different approaches and strategies in a safe environment.
This, along with my regular learning walks and observations of the team, helped to develop more risk-taking teachers who began experimenting with different strategies and also leaning on the support of others where they had not done so before.
The behaviour strategies learned also helped to create a more positive environment for all students, and teachers felt more confident in challenging inappropriate behaviour that had been a problem for the whole department in the past.
The culmination of the support from the whole school as well as my line management of the faculty staff was a significant improvement in student attainment and progress. A sample of Year 8 and Year 10 students showed an average of two levels of progress across terms 2 and 3.
What’s more, it also meant that when the department was inspected again by our governing body two years later, it moved to an “outstanding” rating - proof that a solid plan and buy-in from staff can help to drive improvements in all areas of a school.
Rafeef Kadhum is assistant head at The British School Al Khubairat in Abu Dhabi
