school improvement partner programmewsassets.s3.amazonaws.com/ws/nso/pdf/d603c3fd4338cd311f...school...

The Coalition Government took office on 11 May 2010. This publication was published prior to that date and may not reflect current government policy. You may choose to use these materials, however you should also consult the Department for Education website www.education.gov.uk for updated policy and resources.

School Improvement Partner programme

Quality management framework

School Improvement Partner programmeQuality management framework

Edition 1

Curriculum and Standards

Guidance

Local authoritiesStatus: Recommended

Date of issue: 09-2007

Ref: 00505-2007BKT-EN

School Improvement Partners

00505-2007BKT-EN | © Crown copyright 2007 | Primary and Secondary National Strategies �

School Improvement Partner Programme: quality management framework, edition 1

ContentsSection 1: Managing quality 2

Purposes 2

The aspects of quality 3

Principles 3

The quality management framework 4

SIP quality assurance within the National Strategies regional structure 15

Section 2: Evaluation schedules 16

Schedule 1: Local authority processes 17

Schedule 2: Interactions with schools 20

Schedule 3: Shadowing SIP visits 23

Schedule 4: Criteria for self-evaluation of LA practice 26

Primary and Secondary National Strategies | © Crown copyright 2007 | 00505-2007BKT-EN�


Section 1: Managing quality

PurposesThe purpose of quality assuring the programme is to ensure that the School Improvement Partners (SIP) programme has the maximum impact on schools, contributing to their effectiveness and raising the achievement of all learners. A vital component of the programme is to secure the changes envisaged in the New Relationship with Schools (NRwS).

Quality management will seek to ensure that all aspects of the programme are fit for purpose and meet the needs of stakeholders:

the government;

DCSF;

National Strategies (NS);

local authorities;

schools (staff and governors);

pupils;

wider school communities.

In particular it will seek to establish:

the impact of the programme on pupil attainment and achievement, schools and LAs;

confidence in all stakeholders that the programme is robust and delivering its agreed outcomes;

confidence in the personnel involved in the programme: individual SIPs, local authority, regional and national staff;

consistency of quality and standards across LAs and regions in responding to local circumstances and need, without uniformity;

early intervention where standards do not meet the required levels;

a programme of continuous improvement.

There is also an opportunity for local authorities to build on their own practice by comparing their own QM frameworks to this one. This will support their self-evaluation processes towards Joint Area Reviews (JAR). In particular the framework supports overall judgements on the contribution of services to delivering the Every Child Matters five outcomes and the following issues in particular:

action is taken to ensure that educational provision is of good quality (JAR Section 3);

action is taken to ensure that good quality education and training is provided (JAR Section 4);

1.

■

■

■

■

■

■

■

■

■

■

■

■

■

■

■



looked-after children are supported in achieving educationally (JAR Section 6);

steps are taken to meet the educational, health, care and recreational needs of children and young people and to help them lead as normal a life as possible (JAR Section 7);

there is a robust strategy to deliver the priorities (JAR Section 8 and below);

robust action is taken to deliver the strategy;

there is clear accountability and decision-making to support service delivery and improvement.

The aspects of qualityThe aspects of quality to be addressed within the programme are:

quality standards – clarity about the quality criteria or standards for each aspect of the programme – How will we know high quality when we see it? What will it look like?

quality assurance – setting up the processes that will secure quality – How do we secure high quality?

quality control – checking that key aspects of the programme meet the agreed standards – Implementing processes that secure the evidence that will inform improvements in the programme.

PrinciplesIn order for the quality management process to achieve the purposes outlined above it must have underpinning principles which inform how the process is carried out and the conduct of those engaged in it. The key principles are:

proportionality – the focus of the quality management processes will be upon those aspects that will have maximum impact upon the success of the programme;

openness and honesty – the processes of quality management, and the evidence and data collected during the process will be shared and open to scrutiny except where it concerns the performance of individuals;

clarity – when evidence is collected it will be clear for what purpose the information will be used;

partnership – outcomes of the quality management processes will be shared with stakeholders;

informed professionalism – in line with the NS principle this acknowledges that feedback from schools and the NS field force through self-evaluation is an essential component in measuring quality;

performance management (PM) – the success of any undertaking is dependent on the performance of each person who works for it, so PM will be the key to assuring the quality delivery of the programme;

■

■

■

■

■

2.

■

■

■

3.

■

■

■

■

■

■



integration – quality management will be an integral part of the planned SIP programme and not an ‘add-on’;

usefulness – the outcomes of quality management processes will clearly be seen to inform change and identify areas for improvement.

The Quality Management FrameworkOverall responsibility for quality of all the aspects of the SIP programme rests with the National Director for SIPs and with Regional SIP Co-ordinators (SIPCos) taking specific responsibility for quality control of LA implementation.

All aspects of LA delivery of the SIP function should be governed by the overarching principles set out in the NRwS document, the SIP brief and the central importance of ensuring a single conversation for schools and their headteachers in relation to school improvement.

Outcomes of the SIP process

The purpose of the SIP process is school improvement and improvement in pupil outcomes. In particular the SIP programme intends to improve schools and raise standards of attainment by interacting with and producing improvements in the leadership of the school. The key outcome indicators that will show success of the programme over time are therefore leadership and management grades and those for the quality of the school’s self-evaluation in Ofsted inspections, pupil attainment outcomes across all the different groups within the school and outcomes related to Every Child Matters, in particular attendance and exclusion data. In the final analysis this will be the quality standard against which the quality of the programme must be measured.

■

■

�.



Loca

l au

tho

rity

pro

cess

es

Qua

lity

stan

dar

ds

Qua

lity

assu

ranc

eQ

ualit

y co

ntro

l

1.1

Man

agem

ent

of

SIP

s

Con

ditio

ns o

f the

gra

nt a

re fu

lly m

et

SIP

s ar

e ta

sked

in li

ne w

ith th

e S

IP b

rief

Sch

ools

and

SIP

s ar

e ap

prop

riate

ly m

atch

ed

SIP

s ar

e de

ploy

ed to

act

as

the

prin

cipa

l axi

s of

sch

ool i

mpr

ovem

ent f

or s

choo

ls a

nd th

ere

is, w

ithin

the

LA, a

s fa

r as

pos

sibl

e a

‘sin

gle

conv

ersa

tion’

All

SIP

s ar

e fu

lly b

riefe

d on

eac

h sc

hool

to w

hich

th

ey a

re a

ttac

hed,

incl

udin

g al

l sch

ools

’ dat

a in

th

e po

sses

sion

of t

he L

A

All

SIP

s ar

e fu

lly b

riefe

d on

sch

ool i

mpr

ovem

ent

proc

esse

s, p

roce

dure

s an

d se

rvic

es in

rel

atio

n to

th

eir

atta

ched

sch

ools

Effe

ctiv

e co

mm

unic

atio

n ex

ists

at a

ll le

vels

All

SIP

s ex

perie

nce

effe

ctiv

e pe

rfor

man

ce

man

agem

ent l

eadi

ng to

app

ropr

iate

, tim

ely

and

deci

sive

act

ion

by th

e LA

The

PM

sys

tem

pro

vide

s ev

iden

ce th

at S

IP

accr

edita

tion

stan

dard

s ar

e be

ing

mai

ntai

ned

The

PM

pro

cess

iden

tifie

s ne

eds

for

deve

lopm

ent t

hat i

nfor

m th

e pr

ovis

ion

of

Con

tinui

ng P

rofe

ssio

nal D

evel

opm

ent (

CP

D)

■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

DC

SF

cond

ition

of g

rant

lett

er o

n S

IP d

eplo

ymen

t

Pol

icie

s re

latin

g to

the

NR

wS

, inc

ludi

ng th

e

SIP

brie

f

The

NS

adv

ice

and

guid

ance

to L

As

LA d

ocum

enta

tion

on th

e S

IP p

roto

cols

SIP

brie

fing

and

netw

ork

mee

tings

hel

d by

LA

LA c

ompl

etio

n of

the

depl

oym

ent r

ecor

d on

M

ange

men

t Inf

orm

atio

n S

yste

m (M

IS)

Reg

iona

l SIP

Cos

’ rou

tine

inte

ract

ions

with

LA

of

ficer

s in

clud

ing

SIP

man

ager

mee

tings

PM

pol

icy

and

proc

esse

s th

at s

uppo

rt p

reci

se

iden

tific

atio

n of

CP

D n

eeds

and

oth

er a

reas

fo

r de

velo

pmen

t

■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

SIP

Co

and

SIP

man

ager

eva

luat

e th

e ef

fect

iven

ess

of th

e S

IP m

anag

er n

etw

orks

an

d m

eetin

gs

LA e

valu

ates

its

perf

orm

ance

man

agem

ent p

olic

y an

d pr

actic

e th

roug

h st

akeh

olde

rs’ f

eedb

ack

SIP

Co

mon

itors

dep

loym

ent t

hrou

gh te

rmly

revi

ew

and

MIS

SIP

Co

eval

uate

s an

d re

port

s on

LA

m

anag

emen

t, co

ntrib

utin

g to

the

natio

nal

dire

ctor

’s r

epor

t

■ ■ ■ ■

�.



Qua

lity

stan

dar

ds

Qua

lity

assu

ranc

eQ

ualit

y co

ntro

l

1.2

Ong

oin

g s

upp

ort

and

tra

inin

g f

or

accr

edite

d S

IPs

Ther

e is

effe

ctiv

e in

duct

ion

of S

IPs

SIP

PM

iden

tifie

s a

CP

D p

lan

for

each

SIP

for

the

year

, whi

ch is

rec

orde

d an

d m

onito

red

by th

e LA

SIP

s ac

cess

a s

uita

ble

rang

e of

CP

D a

ctiv

ities

in

orde

r to

mee

t the

ir id

entif

ied

need

s

SIP

s ac

cess

NS

ele

ctro

nic

reso

urce

s as

par

t of

thei

r C

PD

pla

n

The

skill

leve

l of S

IPs

incr

ease

s

Ther

e is

an

incr

easi

ngly

con

sist

ent m

essa

ge

deliv

ered

by

SIP

s to

sch

ools

abo

ut e

ffect

ive

lead

ersh

ip a

nd m

anag

emen

t (L&

M),

scho

ol

impr

ovem

ent p

lann

ing

and

self-

eval

uatio

n re

sulti

ng in

an

incr

easi

ngly

exp

ert a

nd h

ighl

y sk

illed

wor

kfor

ce

CP

D fo

r S

IPs

ensu

res

they

hav

e th

e rig

ht

know

ledg

e, u

nder

stan

ding

and

ski

ll le

vel t

o pr

ovid

e su

ppor

t and

cha

lleng

e to

sch

ools

on

natio

nal a

nd lo

cal p

riorit

ies,

whe

re a

ppro

pria

te to

th

e sc

hool

s’ o

wn

prio

ritie

s

■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

Ann

ual n

atio

nal C

PD

prio

ritie

s cl

early

iden

tifie

d fo

r LA

s by

NS

NS

pro

vide

s LA

s w

ith m

ater

ials

and

gui

danc

e to

su

ppor

t SIP

CP

D o

n na

tiona

l prio

ritie

s

Ann

ual l

ocal

prio

ritie

s cl

early

iden

tifie

d fo

r N

S

by L

As,

mat

eria

ls fo

r lo

cal C

PD

dis

cuss

ed a

nd

agre

ed w

ith N

S S

IPC

os w

here

add

ition

al s

uppo

rt

reso

urce

is d

eplo

yed

Per

form

ance

man

agem

ent p

olic

y th

at r

equi

res

the

prod

uctio

n of

a C

PD

pla

n

SIP

PM

obj

ectiv

es u

sed

to d

rive

the

proc

ess

NS

SIP

Cos

pro

vide

uni

vers

al s

uppo

rt to

LA

s in

th

e st

rate

gic

plan

ning

of C

PD

for

SIP

s

NS

SIP

Cos

pro

vide

targ

eted

and

inte

nsiv

e su

ppor

t for

som

e LA

s in

ope

ratio

nal p

lann

ing

and

deliv

ery

of S

IP C

PD

A r

ange

of n

atio

nal C

PD

con

fere

nces

pro

vide

d by

NS

NS

pro

vide

s hi

gh-q

ualit

y on

line

reso

urce

s

NS

com

mun

icat

ion

stra

tegy

to e

nsur

e hi

gh-

qual

ity u

se o

f NS

onl

ine

mat

eria

ls in

clud

ing

SIP

W

eb P

orta

l and

onl

ine

prof

essi

onal

dev

elop

men

t m

odul

es (e

PD

s)

■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

Eval

uatio

n by

SIP

s of

CP

D

Eval

uatio

n by

LA

s of

nat

iona

l CP

D p

rovi

sion

Eval

uatio

n by

SIP

Cos

of l

ocal

pro

visi

on

Eval

uatio

n of

ski

ll le

vel o

f SIP

s

Eval

uatio

n of

con

sist

ency

of S

IP p

ract

ice

regi

onal

ly a

nd n

atio

nally

LA s

elf-

eval

uatio

n vi

sits

by

SIP

Cos

Sch

ool e

valu

atio

n vi

sits

by

SIP

Cos

Impa

ct m

onito

ring

by S

IPs,

loca

l aut

horit

y S

IP

man

ager

s an

d N

S S

IPC

os

■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■



Inte

ract

ion

s w

ith

scho

ols

Qua

lity

stan

dar

ds

Qua

lity

assu

ranc

eQ

ualit

y co

ntro

l

2.1

SIP

cha

lleng

e an

d s

upp

ort

Cha

lleng

e an

d su

ppor

t fro

m th

e S

IP r

esul

ts in

ga

ins

in le

arni

ng, a

chie

vem

ent a

nd a

ttai

nmen

t fo

r al

l chi

ldre

n in

the

scho

ol, b

ut in

par

ticul

ar fo

r an

y gr

oups

of c

hild

ren

who

are

und

erac

hiev

ing,

an

d w

ith a

focu

s up

on g

roup

s vu

lner

able

to

unde

rach

ieve

men

t

SIP

s pr

ovid

e a

robu

st b

ut s

ensi

tive

chal

leng

e to

sc

hool

s th

at h

elps

them

to id

entif

y th

e pr

iorit

ies

for

scho

ol im

prov

emen

t and

hig

h-im

pact

st

rate

gies

for

tack

ling

thes

e pr

iorit

ies

SIP

s su

ppor

t im

prov

emen

t in

the

qual

ity o

f sc

hool

s’ s

elf-

eval

uatio

n pr

oces

ses

and

in th

e re

cord

of t

he o

utco

mes

SIP

dia

logu

e re

sults

in im

prov

ed p

lann

ing

and

bett

er o

utco

mes

for

scho

ols

SIP

s co

ntrib

ute

to im

prov

emen

ts in

fina

ncia

l pl

anni

ng a

nd th

e ex

tent

to w

hich

spe

ndin

g m

eets

sc

hool

s’ p

riorit

ies

SIP

s’ m

eetin

gs w

ith s

choo

ls a

re p

art o

f a

cont

inuo

us p

roce

ss o

f im

prov

emen

t. E

ach

mee

ting

eval

uate

s pr

ogre

ss s

ince

the

last

and

id

entif

ies

furt

her

prio

ritie

s, a

ctio

ns to

be

take

n an

d th

e su

ppor

t req

uire

d

■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

SIP

brie

f to

spec

ify th

e ro

le

Acc

redi

tatio

n pr

oces

s to

ens

ure

that

all

SIP

s m

eet t

he th

resh

old

stan

dard

of t

he S

IP b

rief

Qua

lity

assu

ranc

e an

d pe

rfor

man

ce

man

agem

ent o

f SIP

s (re

f sec

tion

1.1)

CP

D o

ppor

tuni

ties

(ref s

ectio

n 1.

2)

■ ■ ■ ■

LAs

and

SIP

Cos

mon

itor

the

prog

ress

of s

choo

ls

SIP

Cos

to o

bser

ve a

sam

ple

of S

IP s

choo

l vis

its,

in p

artic

ular

targ

et s

ettin

g m

eetin

gs

SIP

Cos

and

LA

s to

mon

itor

SIP

rep

orts

and

tr

iang

ulat

e w

ith s

choo

l per

form

ance

dat

a, w

ith a

br

ief t

o id

entif

y in

suffi

cien

t cha

lleng

e fo

r sc

hool

s

Eval

uatio

n fe

edba

ck fr

om s

choo

ls

Follo

w-u

p te

leph

one

calls

and

mee

tings

with

sc

hool

s

Feed

back

from

gro

ups

of h

eadt

each

ers

at

regi

onal

and

nat

iona

l con

sulta

tive

grou

p m

eetin

gs, a

nd S

IP m

anag

ers

at n

atio

nal L

A

cons

ulta

tive

grou

p m

eetin

gs a

nd S

IP m

anag

er

netw

ork

mee

tings

■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

�.



Qua

lity

stan

dar

ds

Qua

lity

assu

ranc

eQ

ualit

y co

ntro

l

2.2

Targ

et s

etti

ng

Thro

ugh

prof

essi

onal

dia

logu

e w

ith S

IPs,

the

scho

ols

set a

mbi

tious

targ

ets

that

:

acco

rd w

ith D

CS

F gu

idan

ce;

build

on

prio

r at

tain

men

t and

pre

viou

s be

st

perf

orm

ance

;

focu

s on

pro

gres

sion

, ens

urin

g th

at n

o ch

ildre

n ar

e pr

edic

ted

to m

ake

less

than

tw

o le

vels

’ pr

ogre

ss;

repr

esen

t im

prov

emen

t ove

r cu

rren

t att

ainm

ent

for

the

scho

ol;

are

at o

r ab

ove

the

top

quar

tile

perf

orm

ance

fo

r co

ntex

tual

val

ue a

dded

(CVA

) com

pare

d to

sim

ilar

scho

ols

othe

r th

an in

the

mos

t ex

cept

iona

l circ

umst

ance

s;

iden

tify

and

tack

le u

nder

perf

orm

ance

of

indi

vidu

al p

upils

and

gro

ups

of p

upils

;

fact

or in

the

impa

ct o

f sup

port

and

res

ourc

es

avai

labl

e fro

m th

e sc

hool

, LA

and

DC

SF.

The

SIP

has

the

skills

and

exp

erie

nce,

mod

erat

ed

and

qual

ity-a

ssur

ed b

y th

e LA

, to

dist

ingu

ish

betw

een

genu

ine

addi

tiona

l con

text

fact

ors

and

low

exp

ecta

tions

Agg

rega

ted

scho

ols

targ

ets

acro

ss e

ach

LA

indi

cate

cha

lleng

e at

leas

t in

line

with

nat

iona

l ta

rget

s

The

targ

ets

set b

y a

scho

ol s

how

a tr

ajec

tory

of

impr

ovem

ent o

ver

time

■

■ ■ ■

Sop

hist

icat

ed d

ata

prov

ided

for

scho

ols

and

SIP

s by

the

LA/D

CS

F/O

fste

d/L

earn

ing

and

Ski

lls

Cou

ncil

(LS

C)/N

S

Gui

danc

e pr

ovid

ed b

y N

S a

nd D

CS

F on

ana

lysi

s an

d in

terp

reta

tion

of th

e da

ta is

sha

red

effe

ctiv

ely

with

SIP

s an

d sc

hool

s

Gui

danc

e an

d te

mpl

ates

pro

vide

d by

LA

are

fit

for

purp

ose

and

used

con

sist

ently

Per

sona

lised

CP

D o

n th

e se

ttin

g of

targ

ets,

ar

isin

g fro

m p

erfo

rman

ce m

anag

emen

t

SIP

s su

itabl

y br

iefe

d ab

out s

choo

l con

text

and

LA

exp

ecta

tions

by

LA p

rior

to fi

rst c

onta

ct

SIP

s in

terp

ret i

nfor

mat

ion

syst

ems

at th

eir

disp

osal

to c

halle

nge

targ

ets

LA h

as a

pub

lishe

d sy

stem

for

man

agin

g an

d co

ntro

lling

the

qual

ity o

f tar

get s

ettin

g

■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

LAs

mon

itor

targ

ets

set a

gain

st e

xpec

tatio

ns

from

dat

a

LAs

mod

erat

e an

d qu

ality

-ass

ure

SIP

s’

judg

emen

ts a

bout

the

ambi

tion

of s

choo

ls’

targ

ets

SIP

Cos

con

trib

ute

to m

onito

ring

targ

ets

set

by L

As

agai

nst c

riter

ia in

nat

iona

l adv

ice

and

guid

ance

Per

form

ance

man

agem

ent i

dent

ifies

SIP

s w

ho

prov

ide

insu

ffici

ent c

halle

nge

to s

choo

ls

The

SIP

mon

itors

the

exte

nt to

whi

ch s

choo

ls a

re

on tr

ack

to a

chie

ve th

eir

targ

ets

with

in th

e LA

■ ■ ■ ■ ■



Qua

lity

stan

dar

ds

Qua

lity

assu

ranc

eQ

ualit

y co

ntro

l

2.3

Bro

keri

ng s

upp

ort

Bro

kerin

g is

a k

ey fu

nctio

n of

the

SIP

. Bro

adly

the

role

ens

ures

that

sup

port

for t

he s

choo

l is

dete

rmin

ed b

y th

e di

alog

ue b

etw

een

the

scho

ol a

nd th

e S

IP, t

hat t

he

impa

ct o

f suc

h su

ppor

t is

eval

uate

d an

d th

at s

uppo

rt fo

r the

sch

ool p

rodu

ces

the

desi

red

impr

ovem

ents

. The

qua

lity

assu

ranc

e m

echa

nism

s to

ens

ure

alig

nmen

t be

twee

n th

e S

IP d

ialo

gue

and

LA re

sour

ced

supp

ort f

or b

roke

ring

are:

NS

gui

danc

e p

rovi

ded

to L

A o

n br

oker

ing

func

tion

by N

S;

guid

ance

pro

vide

d by

LA

to S

IPs

and

all s

taff

in L

A r

esp

onsi

ble

for

scho

ol im

pro

vem

ent;

brok

erin

g su

ppor

t pol

icy;

scho

ols

caus

ing

conc

ern

(SC

C) p

olic

y;

NS

res

ourc

e de

plo

ymen

t pol

icy;

SIP

rep

orts

gui

danc

e an

d te

mp

late

s;

LA r

ecor

ds o

f SC

C r

esou

rce

and

NS

res

ourc

e de

plo

ymen

t.

This

sec

tion

is b

roke

n in

to th

ree

sep

arat

e co

mp

onen

ts fo

r th

e d

iffer

ent d

imen

sion

s of

bro

kerin

g.

■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

Primary and Secondary National Strategies | © Crown copyright 2007 | 00505-2007BKT-EN�0


Qua

lity

stan

dar

ds

Qua

lity

assu

ranc

eQ

ualit

y co

ntro

l

2.3a

The

SIP

’s r

ole

in c

ateg

ori

sing

sch

oo

ls a

nd w

ork

ing

wit

h sc

hoo

ls c

ausi

ng c

onc

ern

Whe

re a

sch

ool i

s ca

usin

g co

ncer

n th

e LA

act

s de

cisi

vely

, rap

idly

and

effe

ctiv

ely

to s

uppo

rt

the

scho

ol in

brin

ging

abo

ut th

e ne

cess

ary

impr

ovem

ents

; the

SIP

is c

entr

al to

any

act

ion

the

LA ta

kes

The

SIP

sup

port

s th

e sc

hool

in a

rriv

ing

at

an a

ccur

ate

self-

eval

uatio

n w

ithin

the

LA

cate

goris

atio

n po

licy

The

SIP

adv

ises

the

LA o

n ca

tego

risat

ion

acco

rdin

g to

the

LA’s

cat

egor

isat

ion

polic

y

The

LA h

as c

lear

str

uctu

res

for

actin

g up

on th

is

advi

ce a

nd p

rovi

des

clea

r fe

edba

ck a

bout

thei

r de

cisi

on a

nd th

e re

ason

s fo

r th

is d

ecis

ion

to th

e S

IP

The

SIP

sup

port

s th

e sc

hool

in m

onito

ring

and

eval

uatin

g th

e im

pact

of t

he s

choo

l and

LA

pla

ns

The

SIP

pro

vide

s cl

ear a

dvic

e to

the

mon

itorin

g an

d re

view

gro

up fo

r the

sch

ool,

and

the

min

utes

fro

m th

ose

mee

tings

dem

onst

rate

the

resp

onse

to

the

SIP

s re

com

men

datio

ns

The

mon

itorin

g an

d re

view

gro

up a

cts

upon

the

SIP

’s a

dvic

e

This

res

ults

in r

apid

impr

ovem

ent f

or th

e sc

hool

■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

SC

C p

olic

y

SIP

dep

loym

ent p

olic

y (ri

ght S

IP fo

r th

e rig

ht

scho

ol)

SIP

rep

orts

gui

danc

e an

d te

mpl

ates

Min

utes

of m

onito

ring

and

revi

ew g

roup

and

ci

rcul

atio

n of

thes

e to

all

rele

vant

par

ties

PM

of S

IPs

■ ■ ■ ■ ■

LA s

elf-

eval

uatio

n vi

sits

by

SIP

Cos

Sch

ool e

valu

atio

n vi

sits

by

SIP

Cos

Sch

ool e

valu

atio

n vi

sits

by

RA

s

Impa

ct m

onito

ring

by S

IPs,

LA

SIP

and

str

ateg

y m

anag

ers

and

NS

SIP

Cos

and

RA

s, in

clud

ing

mon

itorin

g of

pro

gres

s of

SC

C u

sing

SIP

rep

orts

an

d O

fste

d m

onito

ring

repo

rts

■ ■ ■ ■

00505-2007BKT-EN | © Crown copyright 2007 | Primary and Secondary National Strategies ��


Qua

lity

stan

dar

ds

Qua

lity

assu

ranc

eQ

ualit

y co

ntro

l

2.3b

The

SIP

’s r

ole

in b

roke

ring

Nat

iona

l Str

ateg

ies

reso

urce

s an

d in

eva

luat

ing

the

ir im

pac

t

All

the

LA’s

SIP

s ar

e kn

owle

dgea

ble

abou

t the

ra

nge

of a

vaila

ble

NS

res

ourc

es

The

SIP

mak

es r

ecom

men

datio

ns b

oth

to th

e sc

hool

and

the

LA a

bout

the

appr

opria

te N

S

reso

urce

s

The

LA r

espo

nds

to th

e re

com

men

datio

n

The

LA u

ses

SIP

inte

lligen

ce to

diff

eren

tiate

th

eir

offe

r

The

SIP

sup

port

s th

e sc

hool

in m

onito

ring

and

eval

uatin

g th

e fid

elity

of i

mpl

emen

tatio

n an

d th

e im

pact

of t

he N

S r

esou

rces

and

pro

gram

mes

The

reso

urce

s an

d st

rate

gies

bro

kere

d pr

oduc

e th

e de

sire

d im

prov

emen

ts

■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

Diff

eren

tiate

d de

ploy

men

t pol

icy

for

NS

res

ourc

e

Man

agem

ent a

nd c

omm

unic

atio

ns s

truc

ture

s to

su

ppor

t goo

d in

form

atio

n flo

w

SIP

rep

orts

gui

danc

e an

d te

mpl

ates

NS

gui

danc

e to

LA

on

reso

urce

dep

loym

ent a

nd

expe

ctat

ions

of t

he u

se o

f SIP

inte

lligen

ce

Gui

danc

e by

pro

vide

d LA

to S

IPs

and

all L

A

stra

tegy

man

ager

s an

d co

nsul

tant

s, in

clud

ing

the

expe

ctat

ion

that

SIP

s m

onito

r an

d ev

alua

te th

e im

pact

of N

S r

esou

rces

■ ■ ■ ■ ■

LA s

elf-

eval

uatio

n vi

sits

by

SIP

Cos

Sch

ool e

valu

atio

n vi

sits

by

SIP

Cos

Sch

ool e

valu

atio

n vi

sits

by

RA

s

Impa

ct m

onito

ring

of N

S r

esou

rce

depl

oym

ent

by S

IPs,

LA

SIP

and

str

ateg

y m

anag

ers

and

NS

S

IPC

os a

nd R

As

■ ■ ■ ■

Primary and Secondary National Strategies | © Crown copyright 2007 | 00505-2007BKT-EN��


Qua

lity

stan

dar

ds

Qua

lity

assu

ranc

eQ

ualit

y co

ntro

l

2.3c

The

SIP

’s r

ole

in b

roke

ring

ad

dit

iona

l sup

po

rt f

or

the

scho

ol f

rom

oth

er s

our

ces

such

as

oth

er s

cho

ols

, the

LA

, MIS

and

oth

er p

rovi

der

s

All

SIP

s ar

e kn

owle

dgea

ble

abou

t the

ran

ge o

f ad

ditio

nal s

uppo

rt a

vaila

ble

loca

lly, r

egio

nally

and

na

tiona

lly

The

SIP

bro

kers

sup

port

whi

ch is

fit f

or p

urpo

se

and

avoi

ds c

onfli

ct o

f int

eres

t, w

heth

er th

is

may

res

ult f

rom

the

SIP

bro

kerin

g hi

s/he

r ow

n su

ppor

t, th

at o

f his

/her

ass

ocia

tes

or fr

om L

A

trad

ed s

ervi

ces

The

SIP

bro

kers

sup

port

from

oth

er s

choo

ls

with

in a

nd b

eyon

d th

e LA

The

SIP

adv

ises

the

LA o

n th

e de

ploy

men

t of t

he

wid

er c

hild

ren’

s se

rvic

es (C

S) t

o th

e sc

hool

The

SIP

bro

kers

sup

port

from

oth

er p

rovi

ders

in

clud

ing

natio

nal o

rgan

isat

ions

(for

exa

mpl

e Tr

aini

ng a

nd D

evel

opm

ent A

genc

y (T

DA

), N

atio

nal C

olle

ge fo

r S

choo

l Lea

ders

hip

(NC

SL)

), in

depe

nden

t con

sulta

nts

and

such

initi

ativ

es

as N

atio

nal L

eade

rs o

f Edu

catio

n (N

LE) a

nd

Con

sulta

nt L

eade

rs

The

SIP

sup

port

s th

e sc

hool

in m

onito

ring

and

eval

uatin

g th

e im

pact

of t

he s

uppo

rt

Sup

port

bro

kere

d re

sults

in r

apid

impr

ovem

ent

■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

Gui

danc

e on

bro

kerin

g fro

m N

S

Sup

port

from

NS

for

SIP

s to

bro

ker

a ra

nge

of s

ourc

es o

f sup

port

incl

udin

g th

e S

IPs

Web

P

orta

l, an

d in

Lon

don

a da

taba

se o

f Lon

don

Cha

lleng

e co

nsul

tant

s an

d ad

vise

rs

Sup

port

from

LA

for

SIP

s to

bro

ker

a ra

nge

of

supp

ort s

ervi

ces

incl

udin

g fro

m:

natio

nal a

genc

ies;

inde

pend

ent c

onsu

ltant

s;

othe

r sc

hool

s w

ithin

and

bey

ond

the

LA;

a ne

twor

k of

adv

ance

d sk

ills te

ache

rs (A

STs

).

SIP

rep

orts

gui

danc

e an

d te

mpl

ates

PM

of S

IPs

■ ■ ■

■ ■

LA s

elf-

eval

uatio

n vi

sits

by

SIP

Cos

Sch

ool e

valu

atio

n vi

sits

by

SIP

Cos

Impa

ct m

onito

ring

of u

se o

f sup

port

ser

vice

s by

SIP

s, L

A S

IP a

nd s

trat

egy

man

ager

s an

d N

S

SIP

Cos

■ ■ ■



Qua

lity

stan

dar

ds

Qua

lity

assu

ranc

eQ

ualit

y co

ntro

l

2.4

SIP

rep

ort

s

SIP

rep

orts

avo

id d

uplic

atin

g th

e sc

hool

’s s

elf-

eval

uatio

n fo

rm (S

EF) o

r an

insp

ectio

n re

port

They

are

:

timel

y;

accu

rate

and

pre

cise

, ide

ntify

ing

the

scho

ol’s

re

spon

se to

all

issu

es e

mer

ging

from

the

data

;

info

rmat

ive;

eval

uativ

e;

conc

ise.

Iden

tify

key

stre

ngth

s, p

riorit

ies

and

stra

tegi

es fo

r im

prov

emen

t

Pro

vide

a ju

dgem

ent o

n th

e ro

bust

ness

of

the

scho

ol s

elf-

eval

uatio

n (S

SE

) inc

ludi

ng th

e st

reng

th o

f the

sch

ool’s

evi

denc

e ba

se a

nd o

nly

prov

ide

judg

emen

ts b

eyon

d th

is w

here

the

SIP

ha

s di

rect

evi

denc

e

Form

an

agen

da fo

r ac

tion

for

the

scho

ol, n

otin

g pr

ogre

ss s

ince

the

last

mee

ting

and

agre

ed

actio

n be

fore

the

next

Rec

ord

the

scho

ol’s

targ

ets

and

the

prog

ress

to

war

ds a

chie

ving

them

Are

dire

ct y

et s

ensi

tive,

add

val

ue to

the

scho

ol’s

im

prov

emen

t pro

cess

es a

nd im

pact

upo

n ou

tcom

es fo

r ch

ildre

n

■ ■

− − − − −

■ ■ ■ ■ ■

Nat

iona

l gui

danc

e on

rep

ort w

ritin

g fro

m N

S

LA r

epor

t tem

plat

es p

rovi

de s

uita

ble

guid

ance

to

prod

uce

the

requ

ired

outc

omes

out

lined

in th

e S

IP b

rief

LA q

ualit

y pr

oced

ures

iden

tify

area

s of

wea

knes

s in

eac

h S

IPs’

rep

ort w

ritin

g

LA in

duct

ion

prov

ides

firs

t-le

vel t

rain

ing

on r

epor

t re

quire

men

ts

CP

D p

rovi

ded

by N

atio

nal S

trat

egie

s an

d or

LA

on

rep

ort w

ritin

g

PM

of S

IPs

■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

LA m

onito

ring

feed

s in

to P

M p

roce

ss

NS

mon

itorin

g of

rep

orts

by

SIP

Cos

:

rand

om s

ampl

e;

any

whe

re th

ere

are

com

plai

nts

from

sch

ool

or L

A;

scho

ols

caus

ing

conc

ern

(Ofs

ted

or L

A);

any

that

the

SIP

bel

ieve

s sh

ould

be

brou

ght t

o th

e S

IPC

o’s

atte

ntio

n.

■ ■



Qua

lity

stan

dar

ds

Qua

lity

assu

ranc

eQ

ualit

y co

ntro

l

2.5

Ad

vice

to

gov

erno

rs o

n th

e he

adte

ache

r’s

per

form

ance

man

agem

ent

SIP

s ad

vise

all

LA g

over

ning

bod

ies

and

man

agem

ent c

omm

ittee

s of

pup

il re

ferr

al u

nits

(P

RU

s) in

line

with

regu

latio

ns a

nd g

uida

nce

The

SIP

ens

ures

the

conf

iden

tialit

y of

the

advi

ce

to g

over

nors

Hea

dtea

cher

obj

ectiv

es a

re c

ongr

uent

with

th

e sc

hool

prio

ritie

s an

d ap

prop

riate

for

the

head

teac

her

Gov

erno

rs a

re s

atis

fied

that

they

rec

eive

in

sigh

tful

adv

ice

of g

ood

qual

ity

The

head

teac

her’s

per

form

ance

man

agem

ent

proc

ess

lead

s to

sch

ool i

mpr

ovem

ent

■ ■ ■ ■ ■

The

SIP

brie

f

Acc

redi

tatio

n st

anda

rds

Indu

ctio

n

CP

D (s

peci

fical

ly th

e on

line

mod

ule

for

head

teac

her’s

per

form

ance

man

agem

ent)

■ ■ ■ ■

Eval

uatio

n fe

edba

ck fr

om g

over

nors

and

he

adte

ache

rs a

fter

the

proc

ess

Use

r gr

oups

of h

eadt

each

ers

Feed

back

to L

As

from

gov

erno

rs

■ ■ ■



SIP quality assurance within the National Strategies regional structure

The National Strategies regional structure is at the heart of the National Strategies approach to providing tailored and coherent support to LAs. There is a range of personnel within each region who liaise with specific personnel within each LA.

At the head of each region is a Senior Regional Director (SRD) who leads and manages the National Strategies regional team and has responsibility for liaison with the Director of Children’s Services (DCS) in each LA. The Regional SIP Co-ordinators are part of the regional management team reporting directly to the SRD and will keep the SRD apprised of developments in the SIP function in each LA within the region, and the outcomes of these briefings will form part of the agenda for the SRD with the DCS. The relationships within the QM process for the LA SIP function are illustrated in the diagram below.

�.

QA of LAProcesses

Head of School

Improvement

DCS

SIP

School

Support and challengeof LA using SIP

evidenceSRD

SIPCo-ordinator

Schoolperformance

data

Triangulation of data with SIP report QA of Interaction

QA of SIP report(by sampling)

Alerts about majorconcerns

Oversight andmonitoring of process

Termly notes of visit(including alerts about

major concerns)

School Improvement Dialogue

Briefs SRD onprocess and any

concerns



Section 2: Evaluation schedulesThis section comprises a series of tools for use in the evaluation of the SIP function in LAs and schools.

Schedule 1 The core agenda that NS Regional SIP Co-ordinators will use in their meetings with LA SIP managers during the course of the year.

Schedule 2 The core agenda that NS Regional SIP Co-ordinators will use in their discussions with headteachers. Each discussion is intended to cover the whole range of SIP activity described by this schedule.

Schedule 3 An evaluation tool for use when shadowing a SIP visit to a school. Only those elements of the schedule relevant to the specific visit will be addressed.

Schedule 4 Criteria for self-evaluation of LA practice; this schedule provides descriptors of practice against the quality standards, indicating whether practice is outstanding, good or whether it requires some/substantial improvement. These criteria form the basis of the judgements recorded on the regional SIP coordinators note of visit.



Evaluation schedule 1: Local authority processes

LA self-evaluation/regional SIPCo termly report

1.1 Local authority management of the SIP function

Conditions of grant (CoG) are fully met

SIPs are tasked in line with the SIP brief

Schools and SIPs are appropriately matched

SIPs are deployed to act as the principal axis of school improvement for schools and there is, within the LA, as far as possible a ‘single conversation’

All SIPs are fully briefed on each school to which they are attached, including all schools’ data in the possession of the LA

All SIPs are fully briefed on school improvement processes, procedures and services in relation to their attached schools

Effective communication exists at all levels

All SIPs experience effective performance management leading to appropriate, timely and decisive action by the LA

The PM system provides evidence that SIP accreditation standards are being maintained

The PM process identifies needs for development that inform the provision of CPD

■

■

■

■

■

■

■

■

■

■

1.2 CPD for SIPs

There is effective induction of SIPs

SIP performance management identifies a CPD plan for each SIP for the year; this is recorded and monitored by the LA

SIPs access a suitable range of CPD activities in order to meet their identified needs

SIPs access NS electronic resources as part of their CPD plan

The skill level of SIPs increases

There is an increasingly consistent message delivered by SIPs to schools about effective L&M, school improvement planning and self-evaluation, resulting in an increasingly expert and highly skilled workforce

CPD for SIPs ensures they have the right knowledge, understanding and skill level to provide support and challenge to schools on national and local priorities where appropriate to the schools’ own priorities

■

■

■

■

■

■

■

2.1 The quality and effectiveness of SIP challenge and support

Challenge and support from the SIP results in gains in learning, achievement and attainment for all children in the school, but in particular for any groups of children who are underachieving, and with a focus upon groups vulnerable to underachievement

SIPs provide a robust but sensitive challenge to schools that helps them to identify the priorities for school improvement and high-impact strategies for tackling these priorities

SIPs support improvement in the quality of schools’ self-evaluation processes and in the record of the outcomes

SIP dialogue results in improved planning and better outcomes for schools

SIPs contribute to improvements in financial planning and the extent to which spending meets schools’ priorities

SIPs’ meetings with schools are part of a continuous process of improvement. Each meeting evaluates the progress since the last one and identifies further priorities, actions to be taken and the support required

■

■

■

■

■

■



2.2 The quality and effectiveness of target setting

Through professional dialogue with SIPs, schools set ambitious targets that:

accord with DCSF guidance;

build on prior attainment;

build on previous best performance;

focus on progression, ensuring that no children are predicted to make less than two levels’ progress;

represent improvement over current attainment for the school;

are at or above the top quartile performance for CVA compared to similar schools, other than in the most exceptional circumstances;

identify and tackle underperformance of individual pupils and groups of pupils;

factor in the impact of support and resources available from the school, LA and DCSF.

The SIP has the skills and experience, moderated and quality-assured by the LA, to distinguish between genuine additional context factors and low expectations

Aggregated schools targets across each LA indicate challenge at least in line with national targets

The targets set by a school show a trajectory of improvement over time

■

■

■

■

2.3 Effectiveness in brokering support

2.3a The SIP’s role in categorising schools and working with schools causing concern

Where a school is causing concern the LA acts decisively, rapidly and effectively to support the school in bringing about the necessary improvements; the SIP is central to any action the LA takes

The SIP supports the school in arriving at an accurate self-evaluation within the LA categorisation policy

The SIP advises the LA on categorisation according to the LA’s categorisation policy

The LA has clear structures for acting upon this advice and provides clear feedback about its decision and the reasons for this decision to the SIP

The SIP supports the school in monitoring and evaluating the impact of the school and LA plans

The SIP provides clear advice to the monitoring and review group for the school, and the minutes from those meetings demonstrate the response to the SIPs recommendations

The monitoring and review group acts upon the SIP’s advice

This results in rapid improvement for the school

■

■

■

■

■

■

■

■

2.3b The SIP’s role in brokering National Strategies resources and in evaluating their impact

All the LA’s SIPs are knowledgeable about the range of available NS resources

The SIP makes recommendations both to the school and the LA about the appropriate NS resources

The LA responds to the recommendation

The LA uses SIP intelligence to differentiate their offer

The SIP supports the school in monitoring and evaluating the fidelity of implementation and the impact of the NS resources and programmes

The resources and strategies brokered produce the desired improvements

■

■

■

■

■

■



2.3c The SIP’s role in brokering additional support for the school from other sources such as other schools, the LA, MIS and other providers

All SIPs are knowledgeable about the range of additional support available locally, regionally and nationally

The SIP brokers support which is fit for purpose and avoids conflict of interest, whether this may result from the SIP brokering his/her own support or that of his/her associates or from LA traded services

The SIP brokers support from other schools within and beyond the LA

The SIP advises the LA on the deployment of the wider CS to the school

The SIP brokers support from other providers including national organisations (for example TDA, NCSL), independent consultants and such initiatives as NLE and Consultant Leaders

The SIP supports the school in monitoring and evaluating the impact of the support

Support brokered results in rapid improvement

■

■

■

■

■

■

■

2.4 The quality of SIP reports

SIP reports avoid duplicating the school’s SEF or an inspection report

They are:

timely;

accurate and precise, identifying the school’s response to all issues emerging from the data;

informative;

evaluative;

concise.

Identify key strengths, priorities and strategies for improvement

Provide a judgement on the robustness of the SSE including the strength of the school’s evidence base and only provide judgements beyond this where the SIP has direct evidence

Form an agenda for action for the school, noting progress since the last meeting and agreed action before the next

Record the school’s targets and the progress towards achieving them

Are direct yet sensitive, add value to the school’s improvement processes and impact upon outcomes for children

■

■

−

−

−

−

−

■

■

■

■

■

2.5 Effectiveness in providing advice to governors on headteacher performance management

SIPs advise all LA governing bodies and management committees of PRUs in line with regulations and guidance

The SIP ensures the confidentiality of the advice to governors

Headteacher objectives are congruent with the school priorities and appropriate for the headteacher

Governors are satisfied that they receive insightful advice of good quality

The headteacher’s performance management process leads to school improvement

■

■

■

■

■

3 The overall effectiveness of the LA in implementing the SIP programme

Particular strengths for dissemination. Areas for improvement.



Evaluation schedule 2: Interactions with schoolsSchool visits and telephone calls to the headteacher

Protocols:

LA will be consulted on SIPCo school visits, SIP shadowing and telephone calls in order to ensure coherence and continuity with LA activity and to ensure that it is timely and manageable for the school.

The SIP is informed of the shadow visits and oral feedback is given to the SIP.

For school visits and phone calls there is feedback to the LA on LA processes and to the SIP and LA where there is evidence related to their specific performance.

1.1 and 1.2 LA management of SIPs

How content are you with the procedures for deploying the SIP to your school?

Has the SIP made the agreed visits?

Do you have an opportunity to feedback your view of the SIP’s performance to the LA?

How well prepared was the SIP in their knowledge of the LA and your school?

What is your assessment of the overall skill level of your SIP?

■

■

■

■

■

2.1 The quality and effectiveness of SIP challenge and support

Is your SIP thoroughly prepared for each meeting and clear about the issues the school is facing and the priorities that emerge from the data?

Has your SIP discussed under-performing groups of children with you and have they highlighted groups such as black and minority ethnic (BME), special educational needs (SEN) and looked after children (LAC)

Has your SIP been able to assist you with your SSE and SEF?

Does your SIP extend the challenge beyond the data and into your plans to tackle your priorities and your school improvement plan?

Have you discussed financial planning with your SIP? If so can you give an example of the impact of the discussion?

Are your meetings with your SIP part of an ongoing conversation? Does each meeting start with a review of action since the last meeting and end with agreed actions for the next?

Can you give an example of how your SIP has provided a challenge to you?

In this example can you identify anything you have done differently as a result?

What has been the impact of your action in this area?

■

■

■

■

■

■

■

■

■

2.2 The quality of target setting

Do your targets:

build on prior attainment and previous best performance?

focus on progression, ensuring that no children fail to make progress?

represent improvement over current attainment for the school?

Are they at or above the top quartile performance for CVA compared to similar schools?

Do the targets identify and tackle underperformance of individual pupils and groups of pupils?

Do your targets show a trajectory of improvement over time?

■

■

■

■



2.3 Effectiveness in brokering support

Does your conversation with your SIP identify the support resources you will need to achieve your priorities?

Does your SIP assist you in evaluating the impact of the actions you have taken and any external support?

Can you give an example of improvements resulting from external support?

■

■

■

2.3a

Are you clear about the LA’s policy for schools causing concern and the SIP’s role within this?

■

2.3b

Is your SIP knowledgeable about the range of available NS resources?

How does the LA decide upon the level of NS consultant resource your school will receive? What is your SIP’s part in this?

Can you give an example of the impact of NS resources in your school?

■

■

■

2.3c

Is your SIP knowledgeable about the range of additional support available locally, regionally and nationally? Have you purchased or otherwise made use of any support of this nature recommended by your SIP?

Is your SIP able to broker support from other schools within and beyond the LA?

Is your SIP able to advise the LA on the deployment of wider Children’s Services to the school?

Is your SIP able to broker support from other providers including national organisations, independent consultants and such initiatives as NLE and Consultant Leaders?

Can you give an example of the impact of support brokered by your SIP from one of these wider sources?

■

■

■

■

■

2.4 Quality of SIP reports

Do your SIP’s reports provide a useful record and agenda for future action for you and your governors, noting progress since the last meeting and agreed action before the next?

Are they:

timely? So that actions are not delayed;

accurate and precise, identifying your response to all issues emerging from the data?

informative?

evaluative?

concise?

Do they:

identify key strengths, priorities and strategies for improvement?

record the school’s targets and the progress towards achieving them?

provide a useful agenda for action including timescales?

■

■

−

−

−

−

−

■

−

−

−



2.5 Effectiveness in providing advice to governors on headteacher performance management

Does your SIP carry out the role of advising the governing body on your performance management?

Are you content that the SIP is fully conversant with regulations and guidance on the PM function?

Does your SIP recognise the appropriate confidentiality of the advice to governors?

Are your objectives congruent with the school priorities and appropriate for you?

Are governors satisfied that they receive insightful advice of good quality?

■

■

■

■

■

3. The overall effectiveness of the SIP in their work with the school

Particular strengths for dissemination. Areas for improvement.

Overall do you think that you, your school and the learners in your school have benefited from your work with your SIP this year? What specific benefits have you experienced?



Evaluation schedule 3: Shadowing sip visitsPurposes of joint visits

The primary purpose of joint visits is to contribute to the overall QA of the programme, thus securing maximum impact on the outcomes for children and young people in the LA.

In conjunction with other QM activities joint visits will contribute to:

the development of LA systems and procedures;

ensuring high-quality challenge and support by SIPs;

an overall evaluation of the effectiveness of the LA’s SIP programme;

the LA’s SIP performance management process;

the national understanding of how the SIP programme works.

LAs receiving intensive support (three days per LA per term per phase)

Joint visits to schools are identified using regional and local intelligence.

The QM framework requires that each SIPCo will conduct a joint visit with a SIP to one school in each intensive LA each term. The visits will be part of an intensive programme for developing the systems and procedures within the LA.

LAs receiving targeted support (two days per LA per term per phase)

Each SIPCo will conduct joint visits with SIPs in each targeted LA. The visits will be part of a targeted programme for developing the systems and procedures within the LA.

Universal support (one day per LA per term per phase)

Joint visits are not essential; however they might be undertaken where discussions about the development of the systems and procedures identify this as a priority.

Protocols for joint visits

The regional SIPCo will:

identify schools in consultation with the LA who will notify the SIP;

seek the permission of the headteacher;

clarify the purpose and the timings of the visit with all parties, giving reasonable notice;

provide brief oral feedback to the SIP, and a written summary of the visit to the headteacher and the LA focused on the purpose of the visit as part of the national QA procedures.

Not all of the areas identified in the following sections will be evaluated in any one visit, where headings are not appropriate for the visit in question this will be indicated.

■

■

■

■

■

■

■

■

■



SIP

Loca

l aut

hori

ty

1. T

he q

ualit

y an

d e

ffec

tive

ness

of

SIP

cha

lleng

e an

d s

upp

ort

(2.1

)1.

The

qua

lity

and

eff

ecti

vene

ss o

f S

IP c

halle

nge

and

sup

po

rt (2

.1)

The

SIP

is th

orou

ghly

pre

par

ed fo

r th

e m

eetin

g an

d is

cle

ar a

bout

the

issu

es

the

scho

ol is

faci

ng a

nd th

e p

riorit

ies

that

em

erge

from

the

data

The

SIP

dis

cuss

es u

nder

-per

form

ing

grou

ps o

f chi

ldre

n an

d ha

s hi

ghlig

hted

B

ME,

SEN

and

LA

C

The

SIP

is k

now

ledg

eabl

e ab

out S

SE

and

is a

ble

to g

ive

guid

ance

on

the

qua

lity

of th

e sc

hool

’s p

roce

sses

and

SEF

like

ly to

res

ult i

n im

pro

vem

ent i

n S

SE

over

tim

e

The

SIP

ext

ends

the

chal

leng

e be

yond

the

data

and

into

the

scho

ol’s

p

riorit

ies

and

pla

ns to

tack

le th

em

The

mee

ting

star

ts w

ith a

rev

iew

of a

ctio

n si

nce

the

last

mee

ting

and

ends

w

ith a

gree

d ac

tions

for

the

next

The

SIP

is a

ble

to e

ngag

e in

a fr

uitf

ul d

ialo

gue

with

the

scho

ol a

bout

its

finan

cial

pla

nnin

g an

d th

e ex

tent

to w

hich

sp

end

ing

mee

ts th

e p

riorit

ies

the

scho

ol h

as s

et it

self

■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

The

LA p

rovi

des

the

SIP

with

all

nece

ssar

y in

form

atio

n, d

ata

and

advi

ce

incl

udin

g lo

cal a

nd n

atio

nal p

riorit

ies

LA d

ata

incl

udes

info

rmat

ion

abou

t the

per

form

ance

of g

roup

s in

clud

ing

BM

E, S

EN a

nd L

AC

The

LA h

as c

omm

unic

ated

cle

ar e

xpec

tatio

ns o

f the

SIP

’s im

pac

t and

leve

l of

cha

lleng

e in

sup

por

ting

scho

ols

to m

eet t

heir

par

ticul

ar p

riorit

ies

The

LA’s

indu

ctio

n an

d C

PD

pro

vide

the

SIP

with

the

skill

s an

d kn

owle

dge

to

chal

leng

e an

d su

ppor

t the

sch

ool

The

LA h

as d

eter

min

ed a

n ap

pro

pria

te fr

amew

ork

for

mee

tings

with

the

scho

ol

■ ■ ■ ■ ■

2. T

he q

ualit

y o

f ta

rget

set

ting

(2.2

)2.

The

qua

lity

of

targ

et s

etti

ng (2

.2)

Thro

ugh

pro

fess

iona

l dia

logu

e w

ith S

IPs,

the

scho

ols

set a

mbi

tious

targ

ets

that

:

acco

rd w

ith D

CS

F gu

idan

ce;

build

on

prio

r at

tain

men

t;

build

on

pre

viou

s be

st p

erfo

rman

ce;

focu

s on

pro

gres

sion

, ens

urin

g th

at n

o ch

ildre

n ar

e p

red

icte

d to

mak

e le

ss

than

tw

o le

vels

’ pro

gres

s;

rep

rese

nt im

pro

vem

ent o

ver

curr

ent a

ttai

nmen

t for

the

scho

ol; a

nd

are

at o

r ab

ove

the

top

qua

rtile

per

form

ance

for

CVA

com

par

ed to

sim

ilar

scho

ols

othe

r th

an in

the

mos

t exc

eptio

nal c

ircum

stan

ces;

■

The

LA h

as p

rovi

ded

clea

r gu

idan

ce a

nd C

PD

on

targ

et s

ettin

g in

line

with

an

nual

DC

SF

guid

ance

■



iden

tify

and

tack

le u

nder

perfo

rman

ce o

f ind

ivid

ual p

upils

and

gro

ups

of p

upils

;

fact

or in

the

imp

act o

f sup

por

t and

res

ourc

es a

vaila

ble

from

the

scho

ol,

LA a

nd D

CS

F.

The

SIP

has

the

skill

s an

d ex

per

ienc

e, m

oder

ated

and

qua

lity-

assu

red

by

the

LA, t

o d

istin

guis

h be

twee

n ge

nuin

e ad

diti

onal

con

text

fact

ors

and

low

ex

pec

tatio

ns

■ 3. E

ffec

tive

ness

in b

roke

ring

sup

po

rt (2

.3)

3. E

ffec

tive

ness

in b

roke

ring

sup

po

rt (2

.3)

The

SIP

:

iden

tifie

s th

e su

ppor

t res

ourc

es r

equi

red

to a

chie

ve th

e sc

hool

’s p

riorit

ies;

eval

uate

s th

e im

pac

t of t

he a

ctio

ns ta

ken

and

any

exte

rnal

sup

por

t;

is c

lear

abo

ut th

e LA

’s p

olic

y fo

r sc

hool

s ca

usin

g co

ncer

n, h

is/h

er r

ole

with

in

this

and

how

this

app

lies

to th

e sc

hool

;

is k

now

ledg

eabl

e ab

out t

he r

ange

of a

vaila

ble

NS

res

ourc

es;

is k

now

ledg

eabl

e ab

out t

he r

ange

of a

dditi

onal

sup

por

t ava

ilabl

e bo

th

loca

lly, r

egio

nally

and

nat

iona

lly;

is a

ble

to b

roke

r su

ppor

t fro

m o

ther

sch

ools

with

in a

nd b

eyon

d th

e LA

;

is a

ble

to a

dvi

se th

e LA

on

the

dep

loym

ent o

f wid

er c

hild

ren’

s se

rvic

es to

the

scho

ol;

is a

ble

to b

roke

r su

ppor

t fro

m o

ther

pro

vide

rs in

clud

ing

natio

nal

orga

nisa

tions

, ind

epen

dent

con

sulta

nts

and

such

initi

ativ

es a

s N

LE a

nd

Con

sulta

nt L

eade

rs.

■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

The

LA:

has

fully

brie

fed

the

SIP

abo

ut:

the

LA’s

NS

res

ourc

es;

othe

r ch

ildre

n’s

serv

ices

sup

por

t;

good

pra

ctic

e in

oth

er s

choo

ls;

exte

rnal

pro

vide

rs.

has

cons

ider

ed th

e S

IP’s

pre

viou

s re

por

ts in

allo

catin

g its

NS

res

ourc

e al

loca

tion;

has

ensu

red

that

the

SIP

is c

lear

abo

ut th

eir

pol

icy

for

scho

ols

caus

ing

conc

ern

and

the

SIP

’s r

ole

with

in th

is;

has

fully

brie

fed

the

SIP

abo

ut th

e ra

nge

of a

vaila

ble

NS

res

ourc

es a

nd

pro

vide

d ap

pro

pria

te C

PD

;

has

fully

brie

fed

the

SIP

abo

ut s

ourc

es o

f ext

erna

l sup

por

t inc

lud

ing

othe

r sc

hool

s w

ithin

and

bey

ond

the

LA;

ensu

res

that

ther

e is

sep

arat

ion

of r

oles

bet

wee

n th

e S

IP a

nd p

rovi

ders

of

add

ition

al s

upp

ort.

■

■ ■ ■ ■ ■

4. T

he o

vera

ll ef

fect

iven

ess

of

the

SIP

in t

heir

wo

rk w

ith

the

scho

ol

4. T

he o

vera

ll ef

fect

iven

ess

of

the

LA

in s

upp

ort

ing

the

SIP

in t

heir

wo

rk

wit

h th

e sc

hoo

l

Par

ticul

ar s

tren

gths

for

dis

sem

inat

ion.

Are

as fo

r im

pro

vem

ent.

Par

ticul

ar s

tren

gths

for

dis

sem

inat

ion.

Are

as fo

r im

pro

vem

ent.



Evaluation schedule 4: Criteria for self-evaluation of LA practice All of the criteria within the quality framework should be judged against the overarching policy aims of the New Relationship with Schools and should be driven by the desire to achieve a single conversation and by the guiding principles from the SIP brief. These are:

focus on pupil progress and attainment across the ability range, and the many factors which influence it, including pupil well-being, extended services and parental involvement;

respect for the school’s autonomy to plan its development, starting from the school’s self-evaluation and the needs of the pupils and of other members of the school community;

professional challenge and support, so that the school’s practice and performance are improved;

evidence-based assessment of the school’s performance and its strategies for improving teaching and learning.

Critical criteria are highlighted in bold; these criteria are the key definitions for practice at that level.

When SIPCos report upon the framework then the following vocabulary will be used to describe the standard of practice.

Column 1: Outstanding, highly effective (evaluations of practice in this column must be accompanied by substantial evidence of impact).

Column 2: Good, effective (evaluations of practice in this column must be accompanied by at least emerging evidence of impact to be judged according to roll-out status).

Column 3: Requires some improvement, sound, satisfactory.

Column 4: Requires substantial improvement, requires significant improvement, unsatisfactory, inadequate.

■

■

■

■



AS

PE

CT

Pra

ctic

e w

oul

d b

e o

utst

and

ing

whe

reP

ract

ice

wo

uld

be

go

od

w

here

Pra

ctic

e w

oul

d r

equi

re

som

e im

pro

vem

ent

whe

reP

ract

ice

wo

uld

req

uire

su

bst

antia

l im

pro

vem

ent

whe

re

Ove

rall

effe

ctiv

enes

s an

d

imp

act

The

LA

SIP

pro

gra

mm

e d

eliv

ers

upo

n th

e ov

erar

chin

g p

olic

y o

f th

e N

Rw

S, t

he s

ing

le

conv

ersa

tio

n an

d t

he

gui

din

g p

rinc

iple

s fr

om

th

e S

IP b

rief

The

pro

gra

mm

e is

d

emo

nstr

ably

hav

ing

an

imp

act

upo

n th

e p

rog

ress

of

pup

ils,

teac

hing

, lea

der

ship

and

m

anag

emen

t an

d r

esul

ts

in s

ubst

anti

al id

enti

fiab

le

gai

ns in

ach

ieve

men

t an

d

atta

inm

ent

All

crite

ria

for

go

od

p

ract

ice

are

met

w

ith

som

e el

emen

ts

rep

rese

ntin

g e

xem

pla

ry

pra

ctic

e

■ ■ ■

The

LA

SIP

pro

gra

mm

e d

eliv

ers

upo

n th

e ov

erar

chin

g p

olic

y o

f th

e N

Rw

S, t

he s

ing

le

conv

ersa

tio

n an

d t

he

gui

din

g p

rinc

iple

s fr

om

th

e S

IP b

rief

The

re is

imp

act

upo

n th

e p

rog

ress

of

pup

ils,

teac

hing

, lea

der

ship

and

m

anag

emen

t an

d t

here

ar

e g

ains

in a

chie

vem

ent

and

att

ainm

ent

Ther

e is

a c

lear

vis

ion

for

the

SIP

’s ro

le,

effe

ctiv

e le

ader

ship

an

d m

anag

emen

t with

cl

ear

acco

unta

bilit

y an

d de

cisi

on-m

akin

g to

sup

port

se

rvic

e de

liver

y an

d im

prov

emen

t

The

prog

ram

me

is

dem

onst

rabl

y bu

ildin

g ca

paci

ty to

impr

ove

in

man

y sc

hool

s in

the

LA

SIP

s ar

e in

tegr

ated

with

the

LA s

choo

l im

prov

emen

t st

rate

gy

■ ■ ■ ■ ■

The

LA

SIP

pro

gra

mm

e ai

ms

to d

eliv

er u

po

n th

e ov

erar

chin

g p

olic

y o

f th

e N

Rw

S, t

he s

ing

le

conv

ersa

tio

n an

d t

he

gui

din

g p

rinc

iple

s fr

om

the

SIP

bri

ef b

ut

is d

efic

ient

in s

om

e re

spec

ts

The

impa

ct o

f the

pr

ogra

mm

e on

the

prog

ress

of p

upils

, te

achi

ng, l

eade

rshi

p an

d m

anag

emen

t and

gai

ns in

ac

hiev

emen

t and

att

ainm

ent

is d

iffic

ult t

o di

scer

n

Ther

e is

a v

isio

n fo

r th

e S

IP’s

role

but

acc

ount

abilit

y an

d de

cisi

on-m

akin

g to

su

ppor

t ser

vice

del

iver

y an

d im

prov

emen

t may

be

wea

k or

con

fuse

d

Hea

dtea

cher

s ar

e sa

tisfie

d w

ith th

e sy

stem

but

ther

e is

litt

le e

vide

nce

that

the

prog

ram

me

is b

uild

ing

capa

city

in s

choo

ls

Inte

grat

ion

of S

IPs

with

in

the

LA s

choo

l im

prov

emen

t st

rate

gy is

wea

k

■ ■ ■ ■ ■

The

LA

SIP

pro

gra

mm

e d

oes

no

t d

eliv

er u

po

n th

e ov

erar

chin

g p

olic

y o

f th

e N

Rw

S, t

he s

ing

le

conv

ersa

tio

n an

d t

he

gui

din

g p

rinc

iple

s fr

om

th

e S

IP b

rief

Ther

e is

no

disc

erna

ble

impa

ct o

n th

e pr

ogre

ss o

f pu

pils

, tea

chin

g, le

ader

ship

an

d m

anag

emen

t or

ach

ieve

men

t and

at

tain

men

t and

the

stru

ctur

e of

the

prog

ram

me

mea

ns th

at it

is u

nlik

ely

that

th

ere

will

be

Ther

e is

no

clea

r vi

sion

for

SIP

’s ro

le a

nd le

ader

ship

an

d m

anag

emen

t is

not

effe

ctiv

e, w

ith a

lack

of

clea

r ac

coun

tabi

lity

and

deci

sion

-mak

ing

to s

uppo

rt

serv

ice

deliv

ery

and

impr

ovem

ent

Hea

dtea

cher

s ar

e di

ssat

isfie

d w

ith th

e pr

ogra

mm

e an

d th

ere

is

no e

vide

nce

of it

bui

ldin

g ca

paci

ty to

impr

ove

in

scho

ols

■ ■ ■ ■



AS

PE

CT

Pra

ctic

e w

oul

d b

e o

utst

and

ing

whe

reP

ract

ice

wo

uld

be

go

od

w

here

Pra

ctic

e w

oul

d r

equi

re

som

e im

pro

vem

ent

whe

reP

ract

ice

wo

uld

req

uire

su

bst

antia

l im

pro

vem

ent

whe

re

SIP

s ar

e ce

ntra

l in

chal

leng

ing

and

supp

ortin

g sc

hool

impr

ovem

ent.

Act

ion

iden

tifie

d is

act

ed

upon

and

is e

ffect

ive

The

cri

teri

a in

thi

s b

ox

are

tho

se p

ublis

hed

as

the

RA

G c

rite

ria

for

NS

re

po

rtin

g p

urp

ose

s

■C

halle

nge

and

supp

ort

prov

ided

by

SIP

s is

in

cons

iste

nt a

cros

s th

e LA

and

may

be

conf

usin

g fo

r sc

hool

s as

a r

esul

t of

depl

oym

ent o

f oth

er L

A

staf

f lin

ked

to s

choo

ls

■S

IPs

are

not i

nteg

rate

d w

ith

the

LA s

choo

l im

prov

emen

t st

rate

gy

SIP

s ar

e no

t cha

lleng

ing

and

supp

ortin

g sc

hool

s ef

fect

ivel

y w

ith fe

w if

any

us

eful

act

ions

iden

tifie

d

■ ■

Imp

act

of

the

man

agem

ent

of

SIP

sA

ll el

emen

ts o

f g

oo

d

pra

ctic

e in

man

agin

g

SIP

s ar

e p

rese

nt

The

rec

ruit

men

t,

dep

loym

ent

and

m

anag

emen

t o

f S

IPs

are

hig

hly

effe

ctiv

e,

resu

ltin

g in

sig

nific

ant

and

rap

id g

ains

in s

cho

ol

imp

rove

men

t, a

nd in

o

utco

mes

fo

r ch

ildre

n an

d y

oun

g p

eop

le in

the

L

A

Per

form

ance

m

anag

emen

t p

roce

dur

es

are

par

ticu

larl

y ri

go

rous

re

sult

ing

in s

harp

ly

focu

sed

fee

db

ack

and

rap

id g

ains

in t

he

effe

ctiv

enes

s o

f th

e S

IP

wo

rkfo

rce

■ ■ ■

The

LA

fully

co

mp

lies

with

th

e co

nditi

ons

of g

rant

The

LA

suc

cess

fully

im

ple

men

ts t

he

sing

le c

onv

ersa

tio

n co

ncep

t an

d s

cho

ols

ar

e cl

ear

abo

ut t

heir

co

re e

ntit

lem

ent

and

ad

dit

iona

l sup

po

rt t

hat

mus

t b

e p

urch

ased

The

LA

’s r

ecru

itm

ent,

d

eplo

ymen

t an

d

man

agem

ent

of

SIP

s ha

s an

imp

act

on

scho

ol

imp

rove

men

t in

the

L

A a

nd o

n o

utco

mes

fo

r ch

ildre

n an

d y

oun

g

peo

ple

■ ■ ■

The

LA

co

mp

lies

in m

ost

as

pec

ts a

nd is

mak

ing

b

est

end

eavo

urs

to f

ully

co

mp

ly w

ith

cond

itio

ns

of

gra

nt

The

LA

is s

triv

ing

to

im

ple

men

t th

e si

ngle

co

nver

sati

on

conc

ept

Hea

dtea

cher

s ar

e sa

tisfie

d w

ith th

eir

SIP

s an

d ar

e su

ppor

tive

of th

e LA

’s

recr

uitm

ent,

depl

oym

ent

and

man

agem

ent o

f the

m

but i

mpa

ct is

diff

icul

t to

disc

ern

The

LA’s

QM

sys

tem

pr

ovid

es s

ome

evid

ence

ab

out t

he p

erfo

rman

ce

of S

IPs

but i

s lik

ely

to b

e in

form

al

■ ■ ■ ■

Ther

e ar

e si

gnifi

cant

di

scre

panc

ies

with

the

cond

ition

s of

gra

nt a

nd li

ttle

in

clin

atio

n to

cor

rect

them

The

LA u

ses

SIP

s as

one

of

a n

umbe

r of

mea

ns

of c

omm

unic

atin

g w

ith

scho

ols

abou

t sch

ool

impr

ovem

ent i

ssue

s

Hea

dtea

cher

s ar

e no

t sa

tisfie

d w

ith th

eir

SIP

s or

th

e LA

’s r

ecru

itmen

t and

de

ploy

men

t of t

hem

. The

re

is n

o ap

pare

nt im

pact

on

outc

omes

for

child

ren

and

youn

g pe

ople

If th

e LA

has

a Q

M s

yste

m

it fa

ils to

eva

luat

e th

e in

divi

dual

per

form

ance

of

SIP

s

■ ■ ■ ■



AS

PE

CT

Pra

ctic

e w

oul

d b

e o

utst

and

ing

whe

reP

ract

ice

wo

uld

be

go

od

w

here

Pra

ctic

e w

oul

d r

equi

re

som

e im

pro

vem

ent

whe

reP

ract

ice

wo

uld

req

uire

su

bst

antia

l im

pro

vem

ent

whe

re

The

LA’s

QM

sys

tem

pr

ovid

es c

lear

feed

back

for

SIP

s on

thei

r pe

rfor

man

ce

Per

form

ance

man

agem

ent

is e

ffect

ive

and

impr

oves

th

e ef

fect

iven

ess

of th

e S

IP

func

tion

in th

e LA

All

SIP

s pe

rfor

m w

ell a

nd

are

judg

ed to

be

mee

ting

the

SIP

sta

ndar

ds, o

r w

here

they

are

not

bris

k ac

tion

is ta

ken

to c

orre

ct

any

defic

it

Hea

dtea

cher

s an

d sc

hool

le

ader

ship

team

s ar

e fu

lly

enga

ged

in th

e S

IP p

roce

ss

■ ■ ■ ■

Per

form

ance

man

agem

ent

proc

esse

s ar

e in

evi

denc

e an

d m

eet m

inim

um

stan

dard

s, b

ut th

ere

is a

la

ck o

f cla

rity

with

in th

e LA

abo

ut th

e qu

ality

of

perf

orm

ance

of S

IPs

and

abou

t the

ir C

PD

nee

ds

Ther

e is

a la

ck o

f cle

ar

evid

ence

abo

ut w

heth

er

SIP

s m

eet t

he S

IP

stan

dard

s an

d as

a r

esul

t m

anag

emen

t of p

oor

perf

orm

ance

is w

eak

Hea

dtea

cher

s an

d sc

hool

le

ader

ship

team

s la

ck

clar

ity a

bout

the

role

of

SIP

s in

the

LA

■ ■ ■

Per

form

ance

man

agem

ent

proc

esse

s ar

e cu

rsor

y;

ther

e is

litt

le e

vide

nce

of

indi

vidu

al fe

edba

ck o

n pe

rfor

man

ce, o

r w

here

this

do

es ta

ke p

lace

it a

void

s th

e re

al is

sues

. The

re is

no

con

side

ratio

n of

CP

D

need

s

The

LA h

as n

ot c

onsi

dere

d w

heth

er o

r no

t SIP

s ar

e m

eetin

g th

e S

IP s

tand

ards

or

if it

has

it h

as d

one

so w

ith a

n in

adeq

uate

ev

iden

ce b

ase

Hea

dtea

cher

s an

d sc

hool

le

ader

ship

team

s w

ould

pr

efer

not

to h

ave

SIP

s

■ ■ ■

Imp

act

of

the

ong

oin

g

trai

ning

and

dev

elo

pm

ent

of

SIP

s

All

elem

ents

of

go

od

p

ract

ice

in o

ngo

ing

tr

aini

ng a

nd d

evel

op

men

t o

f S

IPs

are

pre

sent

CP

D fo

r S

IPs

prov

ides

the

corr

ect b

alan

ce b

etw

een

natio

nal-,

loca

l- an

d sc

hool

-leve

l prio

ritie

s an

d is

dem

onst

rabl

y m

atch

ed

to th

e ne

eds

of e

ach

indi

vidu

al S

IP

■ ■

Ther

e ar

e go

od s

yste

ms

for

empl

oym

ent a

nd in

duct

ion

Ther

e is

a r

igor

ous

CP

D

prog

ram

me

for

each

SIP

em

ergi

ng fr

om h

is/h

er

iden

tifie

d ne

eds

thro

ugh

the

PM

pro

cess

The

CP

D p

rogr

amm

e fo

r S

IPs

take

s fu

ll ac

coun

t of

natio

nal a

nd lo

cal p

riorit

ies

■ ■ ■

Ther

e is

a s

atis

fact

ory

proc

ess

for

indu

ctio

n in

pl

ace

Ther

e is

a C

PD

pla

n fo

r S

IPs

but i

t lac

ks p

reci

sion

an

d pr

ovid

es a

gen

eral

ap

proa

ch to

CP

D n

ot

tailo

red

to in

divi

dual

nee

ds

SIP

s’ C

PD

bro

adly

m

eets

the

need

s of

the

prog

ram

me

■ ■ ■

SIP

s ha

ve n

o in

duct

ion

or w

here

they

do

it is

in

adeq

uate

Ther

e is

litt

le o

r no

ev

iden

ce o

f CP

D p

lann

ing

for

SIP

s

SIP

s’ C

PD

is in

adeq

uate

to

mee

t nat

iona

l, lo

cal o

r sc

hool

prio

ritie

s an

d fa

ils to

m

eet t

he n

eeds

of S

IPs

■ ■ ■



AS

PE

CT

Pra

ctic

e w

oul

d b

e o

utst

and

ing

whe

reP

ract

ice

wo

uld

be

go

od

w

here

Pra

ctic

e w

oul

d r

equi

re

som

e im

pro

vem

ent

whe

reP

ract

ice

wo

uld

req

uire

su

bst

antia

l im

pro

vem

ent

whe

re

Imp

act

of

chal

leng

e an

d

sup

po

rtA

ll th

e fe

atur

es o

f g

oo

d

chal

leng

e an

d s

upp

ort

ar

e p

rese

nt

Cha

lleng

e an

d s

upp

ort

an

d t

he a

sso

ciat

ed L

A

syst

ems

are

of

such

hi

gh

qua

lity

that

the

re

are

rap

id g

ains

in s

cho

ol

per

form

ance

■ ■

Sch

ools

and

LA

s ar

e sa

tisfie

d w

ith th

e ch

alle

nge

and

supp

ort p

rovi

ded

by

SIP

s an

d th

ere

is d

isce

rnib

le

posi

tive

impa

ct u

pon:

per

form

ance

in s

cho

ols

;

the

qual

ity o

f sel

f-ev

alua

tion

in s

choo

ls w

here

im

prov

emen

t is

requ

ired;

the

qual

ity o

f sch

ool

impr

ovem

ent p

lann

ing

whe

re im

prov

emen

t is

requ

ired;

the

effe

ctiv

e us

e of

re

sour

ces

by th

e sc

hool

w

here

impr

ovem

ents

are

re

quire

d;

thos

e ar

eas

of s

choo

l ac

tivity

targ

eted

as

natio

nal

prio

ritie

s.

■ ■ ■ ■ ■

Sch

ools

and

LA

s ar

e sa

tisfie

d w

ith th

e ch

alle

nge

and

supp

ort p

rovi

ded

by S

IPs

but t

here

is li

ttle

evi

denc

e of

im

pact

upo

n:

perf

orm

ance

in s

choo

ls;

the

qual

ity o

f sel

f-ev

alua

tion

in s

choo

ls w

here

suc

h im

prov

emen

ts a

re r

equi

red;

the

qual

ity o

f sch

ool

impr

ovem

ent p

lann

ing

whe

re s

uch

impr

ovem

ent i

s re

quire

d;

the

effe

ctiv

e us

e of

re

sour

ces

by th

e sc

hool

w

here

suc

h im

prov

emen

ts

are

requ

ired;

thos

e ar

eas

of s

choo

l ac

tivity

targ

eted

as

natio

nal

prio

ritie

s.

■ ■ ■ ■ ■

Sch

ools

and

/or

LAs

are

diss

atis

fied

with

the

chal

leng

e an

d su

ppor

t pro

vide

d by

S

IPs

and

ther

e is

litt

le o

r no

ev

iden

ce o

f im

pact

upo

n:

perf

orm

ance

in s

choo

ls;

the

qual

ity o

f sel

f-ev

alua

tion

in s

choo

ls w

here

suc

h im

prov

emen

ts a

re r

equi

red;

the

qual

ity o

f sch

ool

impr

ovem

ent p

lann

ing

whe

re s

uch

impr

ovem

ent i

s re

quire

d;

the

effe

ctiv

e us

e of

re

sour

ces

by th

e sc

hool

w

here

suc

h im

prov

emen

ts

are

requ

ired;

thos

e ar

eas

of s

choo

l ac

tivity

targ

eted

as

natio

nal

prio

ritie

s.

■ ■ ■ ■ ■



AS

PE

CT

Pra

ctic

e w

oul

d b

e o

utst

and

ing

whe

reP

ract

ice

wo

uld

be

go

od

w

here

Pra

ctic

e w

oul

d r

equi

re

som

e im

pro

vem

ent

whe

reP

ract

ice

wo

uld

req

uire

su

bst

antia

l im

pro

vem

ent

whe

re

Imp

act

on

targ

et s

etti

ngT

hro

ugh

pro

fess

iona

l d

ialo

gue

wit

h th

e S

IP,

over

95%

of

scho

ols

set

am

bit

ious

tar

get

s th

at:

mee

t th

e D

CS

F g

uid

ance

;

build

on

prio

r at

tain

men

t;

build

on

prev

ious

bes

t pe

rfor

man

ce;

focu

s on

pro

gres

sion

, en

surin

g th

at n

o ch

ildre

n ar

e pr

edic

ted

to m

ake

less

th

an t

wo

leve

ls’ p

rogr

ess;

repr

esen

t im

prov

emen

t ov

er c

urre

nt a

ttai

nmen

t for

th

e sc

hool

;

are

at o

r ab

ove

the

top

quar

tile

perf

orm

ance

for

CVA

othe

r th

an in

the

mos

t ex

cept

iona

l circ

umst

ance

s.

■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

Thr

oug

h p

rofe

ssio

nal

dia

log

ue w

ith

the

SIP

, ov

er 8

0% o

f sc

hoo

ls s

et

amb

itio

us t

arg

ets

that

:

mee

t th

e D

CS

F g

uid

ance

;

build

on

prio

r at

tain

men

t;

build

on

prev

ious

bes

t pe

rfor

man

ce;

focu

s on

pro

gres

sion

, en

surin

g th

at n

o ch

ildre

n ar

e pr

edic

ted

to m

ake

less

th

an t

wo

leve

ls’ p

rogr

ess;

repr

esen

t im

prov

emen

t ov

er c

urre

nt a

ttai

nmen

t for

th

e sc

hool

;

are

at o

r ab

ove

the

top

quar

tile

perf

orm

ance

for

CVA

othe

r th

an in

the

mos

t ex

cept

iona

l circ

umst

ance

s.

■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

Thr

oug

h p

rofe

ssio

nal

dia

log

ue w

ith

the

SIP

, 50

–80%

of

scho

ols

set

am

bit

ious

tar

get

s th

at:

mee

t th

e D

CS

F g

uid

ance

;

build

on

prio

r at

tain

men

t;

build

on

prev

ious

bes

t pe

rfor

man

ce;

focu

s on

pro

gres

sion

, en

surin

g th

at n

o ch

ildre

n ar

e pr

edic

ted

to m

ake

less

th

an t

wo

leve

ls’ p

rogr

ess;

repr

esen

t im

prov

emen

t ov

er c

urre

nt a

ttai

nmen

t for

th

e sc

hool

;

are

at o

r ab

ove

the

top

quar

tile

perf

orm

ance

for

CVA

othe

r th

an in

the

mos

t ex

cept

iona

l circ

umst

ance

s.

■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

Thro

ugh

prof

essi

onal

di

alog

ue w

ith th

e S

IP, l

ess

than

50%

of s

choo

ls s

et

ambi

tious

targ

ets

that

:

mee

t the

DC

SF

guid

ance

;

build

on

prio

r at

tain

men

t;

build

on

prev

ious

bes

t pe

rfor

man

ce;

focu

s on

pro

gres

sion

, en

surin

g th

at n

o ch

ildre

n ar

e pr

edic

ted

to m

ake

less

th

an t

wo

leve

ls’ p

rogr

ess;

repr

esen

t im

prov

emen

t ov

er c

urre

nt a

ttai

nmen

t for

th

e sc

hool

;

are

at o

r ab

ove

the

top

quar

tile

perf

orm

ance

for

CVA

othe

r th

an in

the

mos

t ex

cept

iona

l circ

umst

ance

s.

■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■



AS

PE

CT

Pra

ctic

e w

oul

d b

e o

utst

and

ing

whe

reP

ract

ice

wo

uld

be

go

od

w

here

Pra

ctic

e w

oul

d r

equi

re

som

e im

pro

vem

ent

whe

reP

ract

ice

wo

uld

req

uire

su

bst

antia

l im

pro

vem

ent

whe

re

Imp

act

of

bro

kere

d s

upp

ort

Imp

act

of

the

SIP

’s r

ole

w

ith

scho

ols

cau

sing

co

ncer

n

All

the

elem

ents

of

go

od

b

roke

ring

sup

po

rt f

or

scho

ols

cau

sing

co

ncer

n ar

e p

rese

nt

Sup

port

and

the

LA

syst

ems

for

scho

ols

caus

ing

conc

ern

are

such

that

they

res

ult i

n ra

pid

impr

ovem

ent o

f the

sc

hool

and

rem

oval

from

a

cate

gory

of c

once

rn in

a

shor

t tim

e

■ ■

The

LA

has

an

agre

ed

po

licy

for

SC

C t

hat

com

plie

s w

ith t

he

Ed

ucat

ion

and

In

spec

tions

(E&

I) A

ct 2

006

This

pol

icy

is tr

ansp

aren

t, en

sure

s th

e sc

hool

take

s re

spon

sibi

lity

for

its o

wn

impr

ovem

ent,

is b

ased

up

on th

e S

SE

and

pla

ces

the

SIP

in a

cen

tral

role

SIP

s pr

ovid

e ac

cura

te

advi

ce to

the

LA o

n ca

tego

risat

ion

of s

choo

ls

acco

rdin

g to

the

LA’s

ca

tego

risat

ion

polic

y

The

SIP

eva

luat

es th

e ef

fect

iven

ess

of th

e sc

hool

su

ppor

t pla

n an

d th

ere

is

sepa

ratio

n of

role

s be

twee

n su

ppor

t and

eva

luat

ion

Ther

e is

evi

denc

e of

ef

fect

ive

actio

n ta

ken

by th

e m

onito

ring

and

revi

ew g

roup

ba

sed

upon

the

SIP

’s a

dvic

e

The

scho

ol m

akes

goo

d pr

ogre

ss a

gain

st th

e id

entif

ied

key

issu

es

■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

The

LA p

olic

y on

SC

C is

no

t ful

ly a

ligne

d w

ith th

e E&

I Act

200

6 or

has

som

e w

eakn

esse

s

The

polic

y is

not

und

erst

ood

by s

choo

ls o

r SIP

s an

d m

ay

not p

lace

eno

ugh

relia

nce

upon

the

scho

ol’s

SS

E, b

ut

the

SIP

has

an

impo

rtan

t rol

e w

ithin

the

polic

y

SIP

s pr

ovid

e ac

cura

te

advi

ce to

the

LA o

n ca

tego

risat

ion

of s

choo

ls

acco

rdin

g to

the

LA’s

ca

tego

risat

ion

polic

y

The

SIP

eva

luat

es th

e ef

fect

iven

ess

of th

e sc

hool

su

ppor

t pla

n an

d th

ere

is

sepa

ratio

n of

role

s be

twee

n su

ppor

t and

eva

luat

ion

Ther

e is

som

e ev

iden

ce

of a

ctio

n ta

ken

by th

e m

onito

ring

and

revi

ew

grou

p, th

ough

not

all

is

effe

ctiv

e or

wel

l jud

ged

The

scho

ol m

akes

sa

tisfa

ctor

y pr

ogre

ss a

gain

st

the

iden

tifie

d ke

y is

sues

■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■

Ther

e is

no

polic

y fo

r SC

C o

r it

has

sign

ifica

nt w

eakn

esse

s

The

polic

y la

cks

tran

spar

ency

and

co

here

nce

or a

ppea

rs to

ta

ke c

ontr

ol o

f the

sch

ool’s

im

prov

emen

t age

nda

or p

lace

s th

e S

IP in

a

perip

hera

l rol

e

Rec

ords

sho

w th

at S

IPs’

ad

vice

to th

e LA

on

the

cate

gory

of s

choo

ls h

as

been

inac

cura

te o

n to

o m

any

occa

sion

s

The

SIP

fails

to e

valu

ate

the

scho

ol s

uppo

rt p

lan

and

may

be

in b

oth

SIP

an

d ad

ditio

nal s

uppo

rt ro

le

thus

cre

atin

g a

conf

lict o

f in

tere

st

The

mon

itorin

g an

d re

view

gr

oup

fails

to ta

ke in

to

acco

unt t

he S

IP’s

adv

ice

or w

here

it d

oes

actio

n is

in

effe

ctiv

e

The

scho

ol d

oes

not m

ake

suffi

cien

t pro

gres

s or

co

ntin

ues

to d

eclin

e

■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■



AS

PE

CT

Pra

ctic

e w

oul

d b

e o

utst

and

ing

whe

reP

ract

ice

wo

uld

be

go

od

w

here

Pra

ctic

e w

oul

d r

equi

re

som

e im

pro

vem

ent

whe

reP

ract

ice

wo

uld

req

uire

su

bst

antia

l im

pro

vem

ent

whe

re

Imp

act

bro

keri

ng

NS

pro

gra

mm

e an

d

cons

ulta

nts

All

the

elem

ents

of

go

od

bro

keri

ng o

f N

S p

rog

ram

mes

and

co

nsul

tant

s ar

e p

rese

nt

The

sch

oo

l’s u

se o

f N

S

pro

gra

mm

es is

hig

hly

effe

ctiv

e re

sult

ing

in

rap

id im

pro

vem

ents

in

the

scho

ol’s

pri

ori

ties

The

LA’s

dep

loym

ent o

f N

S c

onsu

ltant

s is

wel

l ta

rget

ed a

nd r

esul

ts

in r

apid

impr

ovem

ent

and

sign

ifica

nt a

nd

dem

onst

rabl

e ga

ins

in

outc

omes

for

child

ren

■ ■ ■

SIP

s ha

ve a

thor

ough

un

ders

tand

ing

of th

e ra

nge

of N

S r

esou

rces

an

d su

ppor

t ava

ilabl

e to

sc

hool

s

SIP

s un

ders

tand

the

LA’s

N

S r

esou

rce

depl

oym

ent

polic

y an

d th

eir

part

with

in

it SIP

inte

lligen

ce a

nd

reco

mm

enda

tions

are

use

d by

the

LA s

trat

egy

man

ager

(S

M) t

o en

sure

max

imum

im

pact

from

NS

res

ourc

e de

ploy

men

t

SIP

and

sch

ool e

valu

ate

the

impa

ct o

f NS

con

sulta

nts

or p

rogr

amm

es e

mpl

oyed

in

the

scho

ol a

nd th

e S

M

uses

this

for

the

over

all

eval

uatio

n of

NS

impa

ct in

th

e LA

NS

pro

gram

mes

and

co

nsul

tant

s pr

oduc

e th

e de

sire

d im

pact

in th

e sc

hool

■ ■ ■ ■ ■

SIP

s ha

ve a

som

e un

ders

tand

ing

of th

e ra

nge

of N

S re

sour

ces

and

supp

ort a

vaila

ble

to s

choo

ls

SIP

s ha

ve s

ome

unde

rsta

ndin

g of

the

LA’s

N

S re

sour

ce d

eplo

ymen

t po

licy

and

that

they

hav

e a

role

with

in it

LA s

yste

ms

sugg

est

SIP

inte

lligen

ce a

nd

reco

mm

enda

tions

are

use

d to

info

rm d

eplo

ymen

t but

th

ere

is li

ttle

evid

ence

that

th

is h

appe

ns

SIP

s ev

alua

te th

e im

pact

of

NS

pro

gram

me

and

cons

ulta

nts,

but

ther

e is

lit

tle e

vide

nce

of e

ffect

ive

use

bein

g m

ade

of th

is

eval

uatio

n

Sch

ools

indi

cate

sa

tisfa

ctio

n w

ith b

roke

ring

of N

S p

rogr

amm

es a

nd

cons

ulta

nts

but i

mpa

ct is

di

fficu

lt to

dis

cern

■ ■ ■ ■ ■

SIP

s ha

ve a

par

tial

know

ledg

e of

the

rang

e of

N

S r

esou

rces

and

sup

port

SIP

s ha

ve li

ttle

un

ders

tand

ing

of th

eir

role

in

NS

res

ourc

e de

ploy

men

t

Litt

le o

r no

use

is m

ade

by

the

LA o

f SIP

inte

lligen

ce

and

reco

mm

enda

tions

in

NS

res

ourc

e de

ploy

men

t or

depl

oym

ent r

esul

ts in

poo

r im

pact

SIP

s do

not

see

ev

alua

tion

of th

e im

pact

of

NS

pro

gram

mes

and

co

nsul

tant

s as

par

t of t

heir

role

or

whe

re th

ey d

o it

is

min

imal

, non

-exi

sten

t or

inac

cura

te

Ther

e is

litt

le im

pact

from

N

S p

rogr

amm

es a

nd

cons

ulta

nts

■ ■ ■ ■ ■



AS

PE

CT

Pra

ctic

e w

oul

d b

e o

utst

and

ing

whe

reP

ract

ice

wo

uld

be

go

od

w

here

Pra

ctic

e w

oul

d r

equi

re

som

e im

pro

vem

ent

whe

reP

ract

ice

wo

uld

req

uire

su

bst

antia

l im

pro

vem

ent

whe

re

Imp

act

of

bro

keri

ng f

rom

w

ider

so

urce

s o

f su

pp

ort

All

the

elem

ents

of g

ood

b

roke

ring

of w

ider

sou

rces

of

sup

por

t are

pre

sent

The

LA s

uppo

rts

SIP

s an

d sc

hool

s in

acc

essi

ng

a w

ide

rang

e of

fit-

for-

purp

ose

qual

ity-a

ssur

ed

sour

ces

of s

uppo

rt

incl

udin

g in

depe

nden

t co

nsul

tant

s, o

ther

sch

ools

w

ithin

and

bey

ond

the

LA

and

a ra

nge

of n

atio

nal

prov

ider

s

Sup

port

cho

sen

resu

lts in

ra

pid

impr

ovem

ent

■ ■ ■

LA

sys

tem

s en

cour

age

SIP

s to

bro

ker

a w

ide

rang

e o

f ad

dit

iona

l su

pp

ort

fro

m lo

cal,

reg

iona

l and

nat

iona

l p

rovi

der

s

Bro

kerin

g of

wid

er s

uppo

rt

acce

lera

tes

the

scho

ol’s

im

prov

emen

t of i

ts

iden

tifie

d pr

iorit

ies

The

SIP

and

sch

ool

eval

uate

the

impa

ct o

f thi

s su

ppor

t

Sup

port

resu

lts in

im

prov

emen

t of t

he s

choo

l

■ ■ ■ ■

SIP

bro

kera

ge o

f wid

er

supp

ort i

s ad

hoc

and

de

pend

ent u

pon

the

SIP

, no

t LA

sup

port

for

this

role

■Th

e LA

dis

cour

ages

SIP

s fro

m b

roke

ring

addi

tiona

l su

ppor

t fro

m p

rovi

ders

ot

her

than

the

LA

■

Imp

act

of

SIP

rep

ort

sA

ll th

e el

emen

ts o

f g

oo

d

SIP

rep

ort

s ar

e p

rese

nt

Indi

vidu

al S

IP r

epor

ts

cont

ribut

e to

rap

id

impr

ovem

ent i

n sc

hool

s

SIP

rep

orts

acr

oss

the

LA

are

of a

con

sist

ently

hig

h qu

ality

■ ■ ■

SIP

rep

ort

s ar

e:

tim

ely

so t

hat

rep

ort

cl

eara

nce

do

es n

ot

del

ay a

ctio

ns;

accu

rate

;

sup

po

rted

by

evid

ence

;

able

to

iden

tify

the

is

sues

fo

r ac

tio

n an

d a

ti

mes

cale

;

able

to

pro

vid

e ev

iden

ce o

f th

e ch

alle

nge

pro

vid

ed b

y th

e S

IP.

■

One

or

two

of

the

five

crit

ical

cri

teri

a fo

r g

oo

d

rep

ort

s ar

e m

issi

ng

Rep

orts

pro

vide

the

LA

with

som

e in

form

atio

n ab

out i

ts s

choo

ls p

riorit

ies

and

prog

ress

SIP

rep

orts

hav

e a

clea

r ag

enda

and

form

at,

alth

ough

they

may

tend

to

be o

ver-

pres

crip

tive

or m

ay

be s

o fle

xibl

e as

to a

llow

fo

r w

ide

inco

nsis

tenc

ies

in

repo

rtin

g

■ ■ ■

Thr

ee o

r m

ore

of

the

crit

ical

cri

teri

a fo

r g

oo

d

rep

ort

s ar

e m

issi

ng

Rep

orts

pro

vide

the

LA

with

litt

le u

sefu

l inf

orm

atio

n ab

out i

ts s

choo

ls p

riorit

ies

and

prog

ress

SIP

rep

orts

hav

e no

cle

ar

agen

da a

nd fo

rmat

, or

have

an

agen

da a

nd

form

at th

at fo

cuse

s up

on

mon

itorin

g an

d in

spec

toria

l ju

dgem

ents

con

trar

y to

the

prin

cipl

es o

f NR

wS

■ ■ ■



AS

PE

CT

Pra

ctic

e w

oul

d b

e o

utst

and

ing

whe

reP

ract

ice

wo

uld

be

go

od

w

here

Pra

ctic

e w

oul

d r

equi

re

som

e im

pro

vem

ent

whe

reP

ract

ice

wo

uld

req

uire

su

bst

antia

l im

pro

vem

ent

whe

re

Rep

orts

pro

vide

a c

lear

ag

enda

for

actio

n fo

r th

e sc

hool

and

res

ult i

n im

prov

ed o

utco

mes

for

child

ren

and

youn

g pe

ople

Rep

orts

ens

ure

the

LA

is w

ell i

nfor

med

abo

ut

its s

choo

ls’ p

riorit

ies

and

prog

ress

The

LA e

nsur

es th

at:

SIP

rep

orts

hav

e a

clea

r ag

enda

and

form

at;

ther

e is

a g

ood

leve

l of

cons

iste

ncy

acro

ss a

nd

with

in r

epor

ts;

ther

e ar

e ef

fect

ive

QA

ar

rang

emen

ts in

pla

ce.

■ ■ ■

Ther

e is

som

e in

cons

iste

ncy

acro

ss a

nd

with

in r

epor

ts

LA Q

A a

rran

gem

ents

lack

rig

our

and

fail

to e

nsur

e S

IP

repo

rts

are

of g

ood

qual

ity

■ ■

Ther

e is

a la

ck o

f co

nsis

tenc

y ac

ross

and

/or

with

in re

port

s

Ther

e m

ay b

e no

LA

QA

ar

rang

emen

ts o

r if

ther

e ar

e th

ey a

re w

eak

and

inco

nsis

tent

ly a

pplie

d

■ ■

Imp

act

of

SIP

ad

vice

to

g

over

nors

on

head

teac

her

PM

All

elem

ents

of

go

od

ad

vice

to

go

vern

ors

are

p

rese

nt

Ther

e is

evi

denc

e th

at th

e S

IP a

dvic

e to

gov

erno

rs

has

resu

lted

in im

prov

ed

outc

omes

for

child

ren

and

youn

g pe

ople

■ ■

SIP

s ar

e p

rovi

din

g a

dvi

ce

to t

he g

over

nors

of

all

scho

ols

wit

hin

the

LA

Hea

dtea

cher

s an

d go

vern

ors

repo

rt th

at:

obje

ctiv

es th

at r

esul

t fro

m th

e pr

oces

s ar

e fu

lly

alig

ned

with

the

need

s of

the

scho

ol a

nd r

esul

t in

impr

oved

out

com

es

for

child

ren

and

youn

g pe

ople

;

■ ■

SIP

s ar

e p

rovi

din

g a

dvi

ce

to t

he g

over

nors

of

all

scho

ols

wit

hin

the

LA

Hea

dtea

cher

and

go

vern

ors

repo

rt th

at:

obje

ctiv

es th

at r

esul

t fro

m th

e pr

oces

s ar

e no

t un

alig

ned

with

the

need

s of

the

scho

ol b

ut m

ay

bene

fit fr

om b

eing

mor

e fo

cuse

d;

■ ■

SIP

s ar

e no

t pro

vidi

ng

advi

ce to

the

gove

rnor

s of

al

l sch

ools

with

in th

e LA

The

head

teac

her

or

gove

rnor

s re

port

that

:

they

are

dis

satis

fied

with

th

e pr

oces

s;

ther

e is

no

disc

erni

ble

impa

ct o

n ou

tcom

es

for

child

ren

and

youn

g pe

ople

;

■ ■



AS

PE

CT

Pra

ctic

e w

oul

d b

e o

utst

and

ing

whe

reP

ract

ice

wo

uld

be

go

od

w

here

Pra

ctic

e w

oul

d r

equi

re

som

e im

pro

vem

ent

whe

reP

ract

ice

wo

uld

req

uire

su

bst

antia

l im

pro

vem

ent

whe

re

the

SIP

pro

vide

s go

od

advi

ce fo

r th

e go

vern

ing

body

whi

ch s

uppo

rts

and

chal

leng

es th

e he

adte

ache

r;

SIP

adv

ice

iden

tifie

s st

reng

ths

and

area

s fo

r de

velo

pmen

t and

pr

opos

es a

ppro

pria

te

obje

ctiv

es fo

r im

prov

emen

t with

in th

e co

ntex

t of t

he s

choo

l.

SIP

adv

ice

iden

tifie

s st

reng

ths

and

area

s fo

r de

velo

pmen

t an

d pr

opos

es

soun

d ob

ject

ives

for

impr

ovem

ent w

ithin

the

cont

ext o

f the

sch

ool,

alth

ough

impa

ct o

n ou

tcom

es fo

r ch

ildre

n an

d yo

ung

peop

le is

not

cl

ear;

the

SIP

pro

vide

s so

und

advi

ce fo

r th

e go

vern

ing

body

whi

ch s

uppo

rts

and

chal

leng

es th

e he

adte

ache

r.

the

advi

ce p

rovi

ded

for

the

gove

rnin

g bo

dy

does

not

sup

port

an

d ch

alle

nge

the

head

teac

her

suffi

cien

tly

rigor

ousl

y;

the

resu

lt is

that

st

reng

ths

and

area

s fo

r de

velo

pmen

t are

not

id

entif

ied

and

obje

ctiv

es

for

impr

ovem

ent a

re n

ot

appr

opria

te.

This publication is available for download from:

www.standards.dcsf.gov.uk

www.teachernet.gov.uk/publications

Copies may be available from:

DCSF Publications Tel: 0845 60 222 60 Fax: 0845 60 333 60 Textphone: 0845 60 555 60 e-mail: [email protected]

Ref: 00505-2007BKT-EN

© Crown copyright 2007

Produced by the Department for Children, Schools and Families www.dcsf.gov.uk

The content of this publication may be reproduced free of charge by schools and local authorities provided that the material is acknowledged as Crown copyright, the publication title is specified, it is reproduced accurately and not used in a misleading context. Anyone else wishing to reuse part or all of the content of this publication should apply to OPSI for a core licence.

The permission to reproduce Crown copyright protected material does not extend to any material in this publication which is identified as being the copyright of a third party.

Applications to reproduce the material from this publication should be addressed to:

OPSI, Information Policy Team, St Clements House, 2–16 Colegate, Norwich NR3 1BQ Fax: 01603 723000 e-mail: [email protected]

Disclaimer

The Department for Children, Schools and Families wishes to make it clear that the Department and its agents accept no responsibility for the actual content of any materials suggested as information sources in this document, whether these are in the form of printed publications or on a website.

In these materials icons, logos, software products and websites are used for contextual and practical reasons. Their use should not be interpreted as an endorsement of particular companies or their products.

The websites referred to in these materials existed at the time of going to print.

Tutors should check all website references carefully to see if they have changed and substitute other references where appropriate.

AS

HFO

RD

CO

LOU

R P

RE

SS

LTD

09-

2007

school improvement partner programmewsassets.s3.amazonaws.com/ws/nso/pdf/d603c3fd4338cd311f...school...

Documents