The Role of the School Improvement Partner

1
The Role of the School Improvement Partner

• Diane Dockrell
• Consultant Headteacher/SIP
• West Sussex County Council
• Adviser to the DfES

2
Propose to Cover

• What is a School Improvement Partner?
• What does a SIP do?
• How is a SIP different?
• The experience of one SIP in one LA
• Emerging Issues for the future

3
NETWORKING COLLABORATION
CHALLENGE
SUPPORT
TRUST
4
The Purpose of a School Improvement Partner

• To act as a critical professional friend
• To help a schools leadership to evaluate its
  performance, identify priorities for improvement
  and plan effective change
• To help build the schools capacity to improve
• To provide challenge and support for the senior
  leadership team
• To provide information to a Local Authority and
  Governing Body on a schools performance

5
The guiding principles of a SIPs work

• Respect for the schools autonomy
• Focus on pupil achievement
• Professional challenge and support
• Evidence based
• Coherence
• Intervention in inverse proportion to success
• Confidentiality

6
School Improvement Partners will be assessed for

• Their ability to analyse a schools strengths and
  areas for improvement
• Their judgement of effective strategies for
  school improvement
• Their ability to interact effectively with school
  leaders in a variety of circumstances

7
School Improvement Partners in Secondary NRWS
Trials

• Trials in 62 secondary schools in 6 LEAs
• 29 SIPs
• 14 serving heads in their own or other LEAs
• 6 former or seconded heads
• 8 LEA school improvement staff
• 1 Member of the PMDU team (minimal teaching
  experience)

8
The Work of the SIP

• The SIP will have a limited number of exchanges
  with the schools leadership about how well the
  school is serving its pupils and how the school
  needs to improve.
• The nature of this dialogue will vary from school
  to school. Whilst it is likely to have a common
  core the SIP will make an evidence based
  professional judgement about what issues should
  become part of the debate.

9
INPUTS

• Schools self- evaluation, linked to SEF
• Schools development plan
• Data/exceptions report to identify areas of
  underperformance in groups of pupils
• Value for money comparisons
• Data on pupil well-being
• Most recent Ofsted report

10
FOCUS

• How well is the school performing?
• What are the key factors?
• What are the key priorities and targets for
  improvement?
• How will the school achieve them?
• Headteachers performance management objectives
  and LTV of schools performance management systems

11
OUTPUTS

• Report to Headteacher, governors and Local
  Authority on Self Evaluation, priorities and
  targets, action, package of support
• Recommendation on secondary specialist school
  re-designation
• Advice to governing body on headteacher
  performance management and LTV of schools P.M
  systems

12
West Sussex SIP arrangements 04/05

• 9/10 schools in the trials (one school
  technically without a SIP)
• 5 SIPs
• Consultant Head 5 West Sussex (and 2 Hampshire)
  schools
• 3 serving Headteachers taking one school each
• 1 member of Hampshire Advisory Service

13
My Experience as a SIP

• Attached to different categories of schools
  differentiated practice
• Core function very specific school issues
• Dynamic and creative relationship focused on
  school improvement (rather than monitoring)
• Natural development for SIP to become adviser to
  Governors on Headteachers PM arrangements

14
SIP Activities

• Establishing the relationship
• Getting underneath the skin of the school
  analysing the data/documentation/contribution to
  the ECM agenda
• Reviewing standards/debating targets
• Identifying priorities through reference to Self
  Evaluation
• Providing feedback on a schools SEF
• Contributing to a Leadership and Management Review

15

• Supporting the school planning process
• Providing effective high quality CPD
• Building overall capacity into the system by
  formalising the sharing of good practice
• Contributing to the Heads Performance Management
  process
• Providing feedback on a Specialist School Bid
• Agreeing a package of School Improvement
  Consultant support
• Investigating the extent of a schools budget
  problem

16
How is a SIP different?

• Will depend on current experience.
• Trials indicate
• A significant shift from monitoring to
  improvement assisted by more forensic data
• Improved credibility and quality of personnel
  carrying out an enhanced role (eg. specialist
  school re-designation, performance management
  role)
• May simply build on existing good practice

17
West Sussex roll out for 2005 - 2006

• Moved from 9 secondary schools to 40
• Mixed economy of SIPs 3 West Sussex Heads, 2
  consultant Heads, one Head from London borough, 4
  SIS staff
• 70 of secondary schools will have SIP with
  Headship experience
• Criteria for deployment agreed
• Full scale involvement in primary pilot

18
Criteria for Deployment

• Continuity of SIP (where possible and
  appropriate)
• Locality deployment of SIP (to aid local
  knowledge of community and enhance networking,
  partnership and sharing of good practice)
• Availability of SIP in relation to categorisation
  of school
• Personal experience/expertise of SIP to category
  of school

19
From a Local Authority Perspective

• The trials have provided an opportunity to help
  shape national policy
• LAs support the principle of making the best use
  of headteacher expertise in school improvement
  work
• The role of the SIP has potential to build
  capacity and add value to the whole system by
  sharing good practice

20

• The LA retains the key role of appointing,
  deploying, line managing and performance managing
  SIPs
• Strong LAs in a position to build on established
  practice
• There are longer term opportunities to join up
  national and local policies through SIP networks

21
Implications for Governors

• Engagement with the SIP/SIPs reports
• SIPs role in advising Governors in Headteachers
  PM arrangements
• SIPs (possible) involvement in Headteacher
  appointment process
• Governors involvement in the preparation of the
  School profile/SEF

22
Emerging Issues for the future.

• Managing the interface between the SIP and the
  Local Authority
• The role of the National Strategies Contractor
• The matching of SIPs to schools
• What happens when a school does not want a SIP,
  or when the relationship breaks down?
• What happens when the SIP judgements are
  different to Ofsted judgements?