Annual Reporting 2015 : Subject Reviews

Subject Reviews 2014-2015 BEST PRACTICES IN TEACHING, LEARNING AND ASSESSMENT

Annual Performance Report

Subject Reviews 2014-2015 BEST PRACTICES IN TEACHING, LEARNING AND ASSESSMENT

Annual Performance Report

Table of Contents

BEST PRACTICE IN TEACHING, LEARNING AND ASSESSMENT ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 3 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 3 Indicators of Best Practice ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 4 ART ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 7 PHOTOGRAPHY ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 9 VISUAL ARTS, DESIGN ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 11 ANIMATION/DESIGN STUDENTS .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 13 CAREERS ....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 16 GATEWAY ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 17 COLLEGE OF PRACTICAL DESIGN .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 20 DESIGN AND VISUAL COMMUNICATION .............................................................................................................................................................................................................. 20 COMPUTING ......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 22 FOODS / TECHNOLOGY ......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 24 HOSPITALITY ......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 26 TEXTILES ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 29 WOODWORK / HANDCRAFT / PRACTICAL SKILLS FOR TRADE ............................................................................................................................................................................... 32 ENGLISH ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 37 JOURNALISM ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 41 MEDIA STUDIES & FILM AND ELECTRONIC MEDIA ................................................................................................................................................................................................ 44 ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNING .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 50 MATHEMATICS ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 56 PERFORMING ARTS ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 63 DANCE .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 63 DRAMA ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 66 HAGLEY THEATRE COMPANY ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 69 MUSIC ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 72 PHYSICAL EDUCATION ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 76 HEALTH AND PHYSICAL EDUCATION ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 76 OUTDOOR EDUCATION ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 80 Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

1

SCIENCE ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 84 BIOLOGY ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 84 CHEMISTRY ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 86 HORTICULTURE .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 87 PHILOSOPHY / PSYCHOLOGY ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 91 PHYSICS ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 92 PRE-­‐HEALTH ......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 94 SCIENCE ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 96 SOCIAL SCIENCES ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 101 CLASSICS ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 101 EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION ......................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 103 ECONOMICS AND BUSINESS STUDIES ................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 106 GEOGRAPHY ....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 108 HISTORY STUDIES ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 110 LEGAL STUDIES ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 116 TOURISM ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 121

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

2

BEST PRACTICE IN TEACHING, LEARNING AND ASSESSMENT INTRODUCTION For the last six years, Hagley's subject leaders have completed an annual review of assessment and curriculum in their subjects. They are a key aspect of Hagley’s operation as a self reviewing school. Subject reports also form a central and well regarded aspect of the College's review processes in audits completed by two key external agencies ERO and NZQA. All subject leaders produce an annual review as a core professional function they undertake as a subject leader.

Subject reviews reflect how teachers are implementing best practice, in many instances how learning and assessment are treated in an integrated way in order to benefit student achievement.

The 35 individual reviews included in this document are grouped into nine major curriculum departments. Major trends seen across these reviews can be sourced in the Learning Futures annual portfolio report.

The subject reviews are part of the annual whole school review process presented to the Board of Trustees. They are central to a long term professional development initiative to review of curriculum and student achievement across learning areas and to set professional learning goals across the College.

The overall goal is that there is continued refinement of evidence-­‐driven practices to increase student engagement and achievement across all learning areas. The goal is closely aligned towards achieving two of the College’s strategic priorities: • Grow a strong evidence-­‐based model of teaching, learning and assessment • Develop and implement new models of educational delivery to achieve deep and sustained student engagement and achievement.

Progress towards the overall goal is documented under four indicators of best practice which are reviewed annually by each learning area and can be compared year by year. For each of the indicators of best practice, there is goal of continuous self-­‐improvement. This might be evidenced in different ways as appropriate for each subject area: for example, an improvement in NZQA managing national assessment data such as moderation results or in NCEA achievement; the increasing robustness of audit procedures for checking the appropriateness and validity of assessment materials; refinements in in-­‐school moderation practices; the strengthening of stategies used to ensure that the assessments remain accurate and consistent with national standards; improvements in teacher inquiry with a greater focus on targetted learners and research-­‐informed practice. Whatever the data source, self-­‐improvement must be evident.

In 2013, Hagley was placed on the top NZQA review cycle, a four year grading. In order to obtain that grading which very few schools attain nationally, NZQA assess whether self-­‐review is systematic and leads to a shared understanding and improvement in assessment quality. Indicators 1, 2 and 4, the assessment sections of annual subject reviews, are intended to provide school-­‐wide evidence of this at a subject level. Hagley's process of robust annual subject review, where all subject leaders scrutinise their own management of assessment and share best practice with their colleagues, senior leadership and the Board of Trustees, is regarded by NZQA as best practice. The Hagley Assessment Policy is closely integrated with these two indicators.

The Policy is reviewed annually and revised in accordance with NZQA recommendations.

ERO reports on the quality of the school’s systems for sustaining and continuing improvements. Again, our subject reviews were a major document during the 2011 ERO visit and ERO reviewers made reference to them when they were in the College. They said: "The college is very well placed to sustain and improve its performance. The senior leadership team has established a strong philosophy and model of self review for continuous improvement. This is supported by a comprehensive planning and reporting cycle." This comment reflects on both the subject reviews as well as other annual portfolio based reporting.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

3

This is where inquiry is critical in providing school-­‐wide evidence for Indicator 3, the curriculum section of the annual subject reviews. What we are placing in front of ERO is evidence from inquiries completed by Hagley teachers that answers ERO's key question in a school review: how effectively is this school’s curriculum promoting student learning – engagement, progress and achievement?

The College has a profound interest in a sustainable annual process of self review, reflecting and reporting on teaching, learning and assessment. We regard annual subject reviews, completed by all teachers in charge of subjects, as key professional statements. Subject reviews recognise the pedagogical expertise we have within Hagley. They reflect each subject’s professional status and are very much front line documents. The integration of self review with the school’s professional learning and appraisal process reflects the increasing synergies between key aspects of the College’s professional work.

Indicators of Best Practice The following indicators of best practice are used in each review, with evidence drawn from the following sources.

Indicator 1: Quality teaching, learning and assessment materials and procedures are used in programmes at all levels [Years 9 -­‐ 13].

Evidence from: 1. annual assessment audit which confirms assessment activities used are appropriate, fair and offer valid assessment opportunities against national standards. Through the audit process which follows NZQA moderation protocols, teachers check all activities against the indicators used by NZQA for external moderation.

2. confirmation that schemes and related resources are complete and in place for programmes from Years 9 to 13. These materials are aligned to The New Zealand Curriculum, reflect best practice in teaching, learning and assessment.

3. confirmation that outlines and practices for NCEA programmes follow the Hagley Assessment Policy.

4. description of effective moderation practices within a subject. It is optional for subject leaders to use annual NZQA moderation results [from activities and/or student work moderation] in their annual reports.

5. confirmation of internal moderation processes that all teachers in a subject have signed off that internal moderation has been completed. This is part of the NCEA results sign off process for each teacher. For subject leaders, this confirmation also includes that the annual three point moderation check [that moderation is occurring during the year] has been completed for each subject.

6. Indicator 2: Assessment is at the national standard.

Evidence from: 1. each subject leader’s ‘competent assessor’ statement in which they describe how they and teachers in their subjects ensure that assessments are accurate and consistent with national standards.

Indicator 3: Teacher inquiry is used to inform practice.

Evidence from: 1. 2014 teaching as inquiry project report: a summary of projects completed by teachers in this subject.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

4

2.

confirmation that annual curriculum focused appraisal has been completed for all teachers of each subject.

Indicator 4: Achievement Achievement data is used to inform practice.

Evidence from: 1. each subject leader’s commmentary on and responses to achievement data in their subject. This includes analysis of what the data reveals and actions taken to reach desired student achievement outcomes.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

5

ART HOD: Peter Gibson ART / HISTORY / PRINTMAKING / ART [LEVEL1,2] Subject Leader: Ken Cartwright DESIGN Subject Leader: Peter Gibson PHOTOGRAPHY Subject Leader: Gavin Hewitt

ART

Indicator 1: Quality teaching, learning and assessment materials and procedures are used in programmes at all levels.

Assessment materials audit For Art History, Printmaking and Art, all activities used have been checked against national standards. For new Level 3 Achievement Standards, existing activities have been modified to align with the changed assessment criteria using the published NZQA examplars as guides Level 1 activities have been externally moderated and modified, when required, as a result of NZQA feedback. Locally produced activities have been moderated within the department. Teachers use NCEA Art exemplars to aid in making assessment decisions. These are backed up by photographic record of previous years’ work.

Schemes and related resources Course programmes and tasks at all levels are based around the learning objectives in the four learning areas of The NZ Curriculum. Specific learning outcomes are linked to these. Resources for all subjects continue to be developed and modified to support assessment activities.

Course outlines and practices for NCEA programmes follow the Hagley Assessment Policy.

Art History, Printmaking and Level One and Two outlines include • the internal and external standards assessed in each subject and how these standards are integrated within the programme • conditions for assessment to ensure validity, authenticity • an opportunity for further assessment • absences policy • appeals policy

Effective moderation practices All internal moderation of photography standards is done within the Department by Gavin Hewitt, Peter Gibson and Ken Cartwright. Benchmark work from previous years is referred to, samples are kept and when available, previous moderated work is used as a reference. Moderation tracking sheets are filled out and signed by two teachers for each standard assessed. These are kept and filed in a moderation folder kept in the Art office.

Internal moderation processes The teacher has confirmed that internal moderation processes have been completed for results reported in 2014.

Indicator 2: Assessment is at the national standard.

Competent assessor statements describe how teachers ensure that their assessments are accurate and consistent with national standards.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

7

Competent assessor statement: Ken Cartwright Ken Cartwright ensures that assessments are accurate and consistent with the national standard by: • referring to nationally published activities, exemplars and NZQA publications such as SecQual circulars and National Moderator’s report • referring to feedback and moderation results from externally moderated materials and moderation occurring inside the school.

• developing a strong archive of assessment materials for each subject including assessed work, activities and internal and external moderated work.

• For Art [Level 1 & 2] as new content is introduced new , samples of moderated and verified(for externals ) colour photocopied to use as exemplars as resources • consulting subject associations,and Vis Art and Art History net online , colleagues in other schools and subject advisers.

• Ken has also been an NZQA moderator and verifier level two printmaking, painting and photography in 2014. My experience is used in the department to moderate assessment decisions across the different fields .

2014 moderation results: A.S. 901484L: Activity approved Assessed work agreed 8/8

Indicator 3: Teacher inquiry is used to inform practice.

Ken Cartwright My inquiry involved looking into the assessment results in joint Level 2 and 3 print class. There was a marked difference in the results of the level 2 compares to the level 3 students.

What I will implement in 2015: • Modify the assessment task to take away some choice and be more prescriptive in all working from a limited range of models and to work from subject matter available in the class.

• Instill a better understanding of print as drawing, to consider drawing in a broader sense, drawing on ideas and research, develop a habit of drawing through short exercises as a starting point each class as a warm up.

• Seating: I want to experiment with the space and class setting.

• Limit the range of technical models all working from the same examples. Limit decisions early on as work production is engaged with opening out some choices.

• The journal: all students to keep a workbook that will document the processes and their development of ideas and systematic thinking My inquiry will focus on these issues and document the effect and use data to compare from this year.

Annual curriculum focused appraisal has been completed for all teachers of this subject.

Indicator 4: Achievement data is used to inform practice.

Baseline Data / 11 Art: A comparison of data from 2013 to 2014 shows a drop in students achieving 14+ credits from 75 % to 65%.

I also observed a reluctance of students to engage and complete the first drawing based standard in the beginning of the year. Although 21 completed the assessment, most were at the achieved level 71% and 28% at merit.

Target: To engage students early in the year and become more productive.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

8

Action: In 2015 we have introduced a new internal standard 1.5 This involves creating a small sculpture based on a pop surrealist artist. It involves hands on making and doing and students are able to become engaged without the initial reluctance to draw.

Outcomes: An increased percentage of students gaining 14+ credits. With the early success in achieving the credits whether this will flow onto the increased confidence in the students and greater participation in the next internal assessment and an increase in performance achieving at a higher level. Once the assessments have been completed this will be evaluated and the 1.5 adjusted as required.

PHOTOGRAPHY SUBJECT LEADER: GAVIN HEWITT

Indicator 1: Quality teaching, learning and assessment materials and procedures are used in programmes at all levels.

Assessment materials audit All photography activities used have been reviewed and checked against national standards. Activities are externally moderated and modified when required as a result of NZQA feedback.

School produced activities are moderated within the department. Teachers use NCEA Photography exemplars to aid in making assessment decisions. These are backed up by records and visual exemplars from previous years.

Schemes and related resources Schemes and related resources are completed and in place for Photography programmes from years 12-­‐13. These materials are aligned to The New Zealand Curriculum, reflect best practice in teaching and learning and assessment, and are available for all staff. Course outlines, project briefs and assessment activities, as well as extensive resources are available to teachers and students on Clutha (Art Department Server) throughout the year.

Course outlines and practices for NCEA programmes follow the Hagley Assessment Policy.

Photography course outlines and practices for NCEA programmes follow the Hagley Assessment Policy. Detailed course outlines; including standards (internal and external), assessment dates, and assessment policy, are handed out to all students at the beginning of the year. Course outlines, project briefs and assessment activities, as well as extensive resources are available to teachers and students on Clutha the art department server, throughout the year.

Effective moderation practices Where one teacher is the only person assessing one or more standards in a particular subject within the College, their ‘competent assessor’ status verifies that student work is assessed at a standard consistent with national levels. If required moderation can be carried out through subject association contacts .

Assessment and student work is moderated within the department. Benchmark work from previous years is referred to, samples are kept and previous moderated work is used as a reference.

Subjects with two classes work is assessed together with both teachers.

Internal moderation processes The teacher has confirmed that internal moderation processes have been completed for results reported in 2014.

Indicator 2: Assessment is at the national standard.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

9

Competent assessor statements describe how teachers ensure that their assessments are accurate and consistent with national standards.

Competent assessor statement: Gavin Hewitt Gavin Hewitt assures that assessments are accurate and consistent with the national standard by: • Referring to nationally published activities, exemplars and NZQA publications such as SecQual circulars and National Moderator Reports • Referring to feedback and moderation results from externally moderated materials as well as moderation occurring within the school • Keeping archives of past assessment materials, including activities and work assessed / moderated both internally and externally • Consulting subject associations, subject networks, colleagues in other schools and subject advisors • Feedback from other teachers in the Department, or from teachers with assessment expertise within the school

Indicator 3: Teacher inquiry is used to inform practice.

Gavin Hewitt Managing to ensure all Year 13 photography students on individual programmes receive the attention they need to become independent in their photography and complete the folio to the best of their ability is always a challenge. Two areas to consider: monitoring every students progress in a digital environment and encouraging students to move from a state of dependence to independence in their photographic practice.

Annual curriculum focused appraisal has been completed for all teachers of this subject.

Indicator 4: Achievement data is used to inform practice.

Baseline data: Results in 13 Photography indicate that 75% of students earned 14 credits or more, suggesting that the external folio submission is still the main focus of photographic teaching practice and achievement within the classroom.

Whilst this is just short of the 80% target, of interest is the numbers of students achieving only one internal standard within the course. 55% of students achieved the folio and also achieved in one internal standard (3.2), with only 5% of students achieving in the folio and two internal standards (3.2 & 3.3). Why? Target: To provide greater opportunities and support for students to achieve two photography internals (3.2 & 3.3) and complete and achieve the photography portfolio (3.4).

Actions: Having identified the target group, we have modified the assessment activities for the 2015 class. This is in line with recommendations from NZQA 2014 moderation reports which suggest extending the activities for 3.1 directly into 3.2. To help students achieve the external 3.4 individual student plans were employed, and monitored through a visual “traffic light” system for each panel. Where students were not meeting deadlines, extra learning opportunities were offered.

Outcomes: By extending the activities of 3.2 into 3.3, and treating both assessment activities as one seamless task, it is expected students will have greater opportunities to achieve both. The task requirements of two separate activities will be condensed -­‐reducing student workload. Several parents were contacted and after school and weekend learning opportunities arranged. 16 folios were submitted, 15 achieving NCEA credits (7 of them at Excellence level).

Evaluation: In 2014 it was observed that students who only completed the one standard, took some time to gain the necessary self management and organisational skills required. Students then focused on the standard with the greater credit value -­‐ the folio. One student, despite learning opportunities offered, completed, but did not gain an achieved grade. Student organisational skills were a factor.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

10

Planning for follow on actions: This strategy will be monitored by reviewing student achievement data in January 2016.

VISUAL ARTS, DESIGN SUBJECT LEADER: PETER GIBSON

Indicator 1: Quality teaching, learning and assessment materials and procedures are used in programmes at all levels.

Assessment materials audit All design activities used have been reviewed and checked against national standards. Activities are externally moderated, and modified when required as a result of NZQA feedback.

School produced activities are moderated within the department. Teachers use NCEA Design exemplars to aid in making assessment decisions. These are backed up by records and visual exemplars from previous years.

Schemes and related resources Schemes and related resources are completed and in place for Design programmes, years 11 – 13. These materials are aligned to The New Zealand Curriculum, reflect best practice in teaching, learning and assessment, and are available for all staff. Course outlines, project briefs and assessment activities , as well as extensive resources are available to teachers and students on Clutha (art department server) throughout the year.

Course outlines and practices for NCEA programmes follow the Hagley Assessment Policy.

Design course outlines and practices for NCEA programmes follow the Hagley Assessment Policy.

Detailed course outlines, including standards (internal and external), assessment dates, and assessment policy, are handed out to all students at the beginning of the year. Course outlines, project briefs and assessment activities , as well as extensive resources are available to teachers and students on Clutha the art department server, throughout the year.

Effective moderation practices All internal moderation of design standards is done within the department by Peter Gibson and Gavin Hewitt. Benchmark work from previous years is referred to, samples are kept and when available, previous moderated work is used as a reference. Moderation tracking sheets are filled out and signed by two teachers for each standard assessed. These are kept and filed in a moderation folder kept in the Art office.

Internal moderation processes The teacher has confirmed that internal moderation processes have been completed for results reported in 2014.

Indicator 2: Assessment is at the national standard.

Competent assessor statements describe how teachers ensure that their assessments are accurate and consistent with national standards.

Competent assessor statement: Peter Gibson Peter Gibson assures that assessments are accurate and consistent with the national standard by: • Referring to nationaly published activities, exemplars and NZQA publications such as SecQual circulars and National moderators reports.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

11

• • • • • •

Referring to feedback and moderation results from externally moderated materials as well as moderation occuring within the school.

Keeping archives of past assessment materials for each subject, including activities, and work assessed/moderated both internally and externally.

Consulting subject associations, subject networks, colleaques in other schools and subject advisors.

Feedback from other teachers in the department, or from teachers with assessment expertise within the school.

Teachers responsible for subjects, support other teachers in their subject areas to develop and maintain understanding about assssment.

If in doubt, Ken Cartwright, who is a trained visual arts moderator, is consulted.

Indicator 3: Teacher inquiry is used to inform practice.

Peter Gibson 2014 Teaching Inquiry, Design: investigated and recorded student response to a new Level 2 Design programme that integrated the internals standards as one 12 week project. Issues arising were analysed and carried forward for practical inquiry in 2015: in particular, the need to find ways in which reflective writing could become a better integrated part of the design process, without compromising students’ creative and practical work flow.

Annual curriculum focused appraisal has been completed for all teachers of this subject.

Indicator 4: Achievement data is used to inform practice.

Baseline data: 2014 Level 3 Design, NCEA data review, missrepresents the success of that course as restructured for 2014 to improve student retention, engagement and achievement.

Target: Increase the number of students achieving 14 or more credits in L3 Design. 2013: -­‐ out of a class of 21 only 16 achieved results, and only 69% of those gained 14 or more credits Actions: I restructured the programme for 2014, making it more cohesive and manageable, by combining the internal and folio standards into one continual project, making successful completion of the folio’s more achievable. The folios alone are worth 14 credits.

The intention was to start folio projects in term one, (with internal standards) thus allowing more time for their completion.

Outcomes: Unfortunately, not much better than 2013. nd

2014: class of 22 (should be 21, see below *) only 16 achieved results, and 75% achieved 14 or more credits.* Out of the 22 students only 21 enrolled for L3 NCEA. The 22 student was an animation student who passed L3 the previous year. He stopped attending in term one.

By week three, term two, when the internals were due, 12 students in the class of 21 had completed enough work to pass at least one of the internal standards, and by doing this had also produced enough work to cover the first panel of their folio, which was a considerable improvement on previous years, time wise. The remaining 9 students had not at this stage produced enough work for assessment. Three of the 9; Tyrone, Loren and Josh, although producing standard work, presented serious attendance problems, attributed to external issues, (accommodation, health etc) that eventually led to their leaving Design altogether. Josh was the only one of this group who achieved any credits in design, and we later came to an agreement with him that if he was over-­‐committed, he could drop design and concentrate on his Photography folio, which he did with excellent results. Two students, Daniel and Amos were struggling to learn Photoshop, and understand requirements at this level. Neither completed the internals, but Amos did go on to complete a successful folio. Daniel abandoned the internals to concentrate on an animation/design folio. Four students; Kaitlin, Hannah, Keir, Nico, made it clear at this stage that they were not interested in the internals, didn’t like the set project, and wanted to start something different for their folios. I was able to negotiate individual folio projects to suit each student’s needs. Hannah and Kaitlin went on to complete successful folios, while Keir and Nico started work on combined animation/design folios.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

12

Animation/Design students There were 4 students also studying Animation who wanted to produce Design folios based around their animation work. Mid term two, HT and GN worked together to outline a parallel programme for these students in relation to folio requirements. By late September it became apparent that progress was problematic, they had a greater work load and were behind the rest of the class. It was suggested to them if they enrolled in the School of Animation 2015, they could take two years to complete their folios. All 4 are currently enrolled in School of Animation and will be completing their L3 NCEA this year.

Evaluation: Out of a class of 21 students, 12 completed and submitted folios in term four for external examination. 1 student, who achieved 8 internal credits, failed to complete his folio. All students who submitted, passed: 2+E, 6+M, 4+A. During term two: 4 students quit the programme; 3 left Hagley altogether, 1 dropped Design in order to concentrate on Photography , 2 left with no credits, 1 with 4 credits, 1 with 8 credits. All 4 students had serious attendance problems across all subjects, summarised on Kamar (total attendance rates) as follows; -­‐ 44%, 46%, 32%, 22% 4 students (all studying Animation) chose to disengage with design NCEA requirements in order to concentrate on their Animation projects. All 4 enrolled in the School of Animation 2015 where they will complete the same design standards as part of that course. 1 of these Animation students did however achieve 8 internal design credits 2014.

Conclusion: By term three, 13 students remained committed to the folio, which is worth 63% of the total credits offered. If we adjust the figures to include only those who committed to the whole programme, and exclude the 8 students who, either left the course half way through, or chose not to complete a folio this year, the outcome is more affirmative; 13 students completed the programme; 12 achieved 14 or more credits, = 92%

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

13

careers HOD: Kevin addison

CAREERS

SUBJECT LEADER: KEVIN ADDISON

Indicator 1: Quality teaching, learning and assessment materials and procedures are used in programmes at all levels.

Assessment materials audit Assessment activities used are appropriate, fair and offer valid, accurate assessment opportunities against national standards. All assessment tasks used have been checked against the national standards. Assessment tasks are commercially purchased materials which have gone through a rigorous internal moderation process before being made available for purchase. All units with version changes were upgraded in 2013 to reflect the new outcomes and evidence requirements. The Careers Department has purchased a number of further upgrades in 2014. All versions used are current. The HOD careers regularly attends CATE meetings (subject association) where assessment issues are explored.

Schemes and related resources are complete and in place for Employment Skills and Gateway. These materials are aligned to The New Zealand Curriculum and reflect best practice in teaching, learning and assessment.

Course outlines and practices for NCEA programme are linked to and comply with the Hagley Assessment Policy.They include the unit standards assessed and how these standards are integrated within the programme. The Careers Department Assessment Policy includes conditions for assessment to ensure validity and authenticity; opportunities for further assessment; absences policy and appeals policy.

Effective moderation practices Where more than one teacher assesses the same standard within the College, each teacher verifies that the assessment used and the student work assessed, is at a standard consistent with national levels for each internal standard offered. The Gateway, Employment skills and Learning skills teachers moderates two student work samples from each core generic unit standard offered within the subject. Teacher judgements are checked and modifications are made as a result of the internal moderation process as necessary. Expertise is also sought within the school where other departments are offering core generic unit standards to confirm activities and assessments are appropriate. Moderation tracking sheets for all unit standards are maintained and copies of all moderated work is filed within the department for a minimum of two years.

Internal moderation processes The teachers in this subject have confirmed that internal moderation processes have been completed for results reported in 2014.

Indicator 2: Assessment is at the national standard.

Competent assessor statements describe how teachers ensure that their assessments are accurate and consistent with national standards.

Competent assessor statement: Kevin Addison The Employment skills and Gateway teacher ensures that assessments are accurate and consistent with the national standard by: • referring to feedback and moderation results from externally moderated materials • consulting colleagues in other schools and attending subject association meetings (CATE) Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

16

• undergoing a moderation process within the department (the host department) and within other departments who are offering the same unit standards • consulting NZQA and TKI websites where appropriate

Professional Development opportunities are taken up as appropriate. All moderated material is retained for two years. Moderation reports for all standards selected confirm that activities and assessment practices are consistently at the national standard. Feedback and advice is sought and given within the department through liaison with the Careers Advisor and within other departments who are offering the same unit standards.

Indicator 3: Teacher inqiry is used to inform practice.

Kevin Addison My inquiry was directed towards gaining a greater understanding of how offering student’s choice around unit selection can influence achievement.

Annual curriculum focused appraisal has been completed for all teachers of this subject.

Indicator 4: Achievement data is used to inform practice.

Gateway Baseline data: Results in the Gateway classes indicate that the average credits per student who completed a work placement has increased from13 to 14.3 However this will need to be increased to 20 credits in 2015 to meet the new TEC requirements.

Target: To raise student achievement to 20 credits in Gateway.

Actions: From the inquiry project in 2014 we have reduced the amount of choice students are given and have started packaging units together.

Outcomes: The Gateway average has increased.

Evaluation: The increase is still not close to the new TEC target for 2015. It is going to take further course development to meet the target. We also have a number of students who benefit greatly from the work placement even gaining part time work. However they struggle with the theory components of the course. These students bring the average down.

Planning for follow on actions: The strategy developed from the inquiry project is going to have to be applied to more of the units in 2015 so students have a more manageable course to reach the Gateway target. We are also going to have to develop strategies to support the students who do not have the academic ability to complete the theory. We have updated some of the core units to include some literacy support which will hopefully improve achievement for these students.

Employment Skills Baseline data: Results in the Employment Skills class indicated that the average credits per student ranged from 5-­‐13. A third of students in the class transitioned out of the Employment skills class during the year without results in the subject. A group of 4 students achieved 14+ credits in the course.

Target: To raise engagement and retention in Employment Skills and continuing to raise achievement.

Actions: Arranging a number of industry visits during the year to enrich the Employment Skills program, improve engagement and promote retention. The more students that engage with the Employment Skills program, the more likely they are to achieve a larger amount of credits as well as gain valuable skills for entering the work place.

Outcomes: Not only has the Employment Skills class retained more students, but the success of these students has been noticeable since 2013.

Evaluation: The increase in engagement has helped to improve students success and has shown a marked increase in credits.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

17

Planning for follow on actions: This year we will continue to enrich the program with industry visits and encourage students’ engagement with the course inside and outside the classroom.

Students will be more likely to engage with a rich Employment Skills program that engages their interests and shows them that the skills they learn through the theory actually link to the real world. We will continue to support students with special learning requirements in the class and attempt to lift achievement.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

18

College of practical design HOD: Vicki Dixon DESIGN AND VISUAL COMMUNICATION Subject Leader: Ryszard Dybka COMPUTING Subject Leader: Tic H’sia How FOODS / TECHNOLOGY Subject Leader: Robyn Davison HOSPITALITY Subject Leader: Marc Alexander TEXTILES Subject Leader: Vicki Dixon WOODWORK / HANDCRAFT / PRACTICAL SKILLS FOR TRADE Subject Leader: Mary Latimer

COLLEGE OF PRACTICAL DESIGN

DESIGN AND VISUAL COMMUNICATION SUBJECT LEADER: RYSZARD DYBKA

Indicator 1: Quality teaching, learning and assessment materials and procedures are used in programmes at all levels.

Assessment materials audit For Level 1, assessment activities have been sourced from the TKI site and modified to incorporate the context. The activity is then internally moderated by Robyn Davison,the teacher with assessment expertise in Technology in regard to the achievement standard concerned. It is then used. After each year, teacher assessed student work and an activity nominated by NZQA is sent to NZQA for external moderation. Depending upon the outcome of that moderation, the activity can be refined so that it accurately relates to the heart of the achievement standard.

The graphics department is responsible for the teaching of Graphics (DVC) for Year 9 to Yr 11 level students.

Year9 Graphics: Regular observations are made of sampled classes and post class relective practice meeting discusses the good teaching model and competency links to the technology curriculum matrix.

Year 10 Graphics: As with the year 9 class. The key activities reinforce the underlying practice in numeracy and literacy. As such observations are made which consider the requirements of the Technology Curriculum and how well they are delivered through sound practice as described in the good teaching model.

Year 11: At the beginning of each year, previous years assessed work and teacher prepared activities are sent to NZQA for moderation. This exercise is the backbone to any professional development on achievement standard assessments which may occur during the year.

Schemes and related resources In close liason with Robyn Davison, teaching schemes for the Years 9, 10 and 11 subjects have had all work divided into units of work and resources and kept in the office space for all to use.

Course outlines and practices for NCEA programmes follow the Hagley Assessment Policy. The internal and external standards that are offered and assessed in each subject with information about how the standards are integrated into programmes are included. This is clearly communicated on a “Quick Glance” course outline which is attached to the outside of each students design folder. The students in the class are informed that a student would only be assessed when they are ready for assessment . The flexibility allows students to revisit work and not to be limited in advancing their learning. This flexibility does not undermine the importance that each student produce their own work.

Students set goals at the beginning and middle part of the course.

Effective moderation practice Internal moderation of student work for level 1 Graphics occurred during the year ending 2014 by Robyn Davison. The moderation process also highlighted that two of the students in the course were producing level2 DVC standard work. This was independently verified by a moderator at Riccarton High School.

Internal moderation processes The teacher in this subject has confirmed that internal moderation processes have been completed for results reported in 2014.

Indicator 2: Assessment is at the national standard.

Competent assessor statements describe how teachers ensure that their assessments are accurate and consistent with national standards.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

20

Competent assessor statement: Ryszard Dybka Ryszard Dybka ensures that assessments are accurate and consistent with the national standard through: • Teacher PD sessions are invaluable to hear from the moderator and fellow teachers as to their experiences. The moderator’s moderation results explained through externally moderated materials as exemplars and practical steps to moderate work are highly sought after pearls of wisdom.

• Work is archived in the department as per NZQA requirements. A selection of student work which demonstrates the broad spread of levels is presented in A3 portfolio folders. The key function of the portfolio is to allow at any time, teachers and students to view the range of work required and match the “mountain to the molehill”, the “molehill” being the moderated project interpreting the NZQA standard.

• Whenever clarification is required as to the interpretation of standard nomenclature, the Technology moderator at Hagley, shares her expertise willingly.

• Department meetings are invaluable to initialise and expound the requirement for department assessment consistency with colleagues.

• Because there are no other teachers in the Graphics department apart from the TIC, support is maintained by using PD resources and initiative of the TIC to develop and maintain understandings about assessment.

• Referring to nationally published activities, exemplars and NZQA publications such as SecQual circulars and National Moderator’s reports.

Indicator 3: Teacher inquiry is used to inform practice.

Ryszard Dykba As with the previous two years inquiries, the focus of the 2014 inquiry was centred on the understanding of design elements in the context of DVC (Design & Visual Communication).

With the added emphasis on strengthening Hagley teaching ties to New Zealand biculturalism, a comparative case study was constructed using New Zealand’s oldest complete Maori whare “Te Hau Ki Tauranga” to a broad range of world architectural structures.

The aim was to categorise the degree of similarity of influences in this Maori structure compared to many types of world structures. It was hoped that a conclusion could then be made as to how pure the influences in the Maori structure were based upon Maori architectural style & culture. The presentation was shown in power point to a year 11 DVC class.

The presentation concluded that there was a mixture of both Maori & Pakeha influences visible in the “Te Hau Ki Tauranga” whare. This conclusion has been hampered by the lack of specifications available of the “Te Hau Ki Tauranga”whare, which is partly due to the unhelpful nature of museum staff at Te Papa. They justified their lack of cooperation due to Maori protocols. Unfortunately the lack of credible information has consequently weakened the viability of this reports comparative conclusions. Questions were asked after the end of the power point presentation by the class students. Immediately afterwards two film clips concerning architecture as a university career were shown as well as the film of an existing Maori University graduate architect.

The resource was made available on the Hagley Library blog site below; https://www.blendspace.com/lessons/LzoYDAwH9KM9jQ/maori-­‐resources This resource can be viewed by anyone outside Hagley which could result in feedback from interested parties which will benefit me as a teacher in reflecting upon this work.

In conclusion I found this case study in architecture to be an useful resource to my future studies when describing the use of Maori influences in design.

Annual curriculum focused appraisal has been completed for all teachers of this subject.

Indicator 4: Achievement data is used to inform practice.

My continuing aim with DVC is to improve the grades of the students and credits gained. We are fortunate that the school provides data to show previous years’ achievements to allow year to year comparisons. This is is critical in order to meet the school’s requirements of a minimum credit threshold attainment of 12 credits from 85 % of students in each subject.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

21

Year ending 2014 data suggested that the overall attainment percentage was below this figure. It was soon obvious that the reason for this shortfall in credits was due to a 0% attainment in credits (63% achieved in 2013) in one of the two externals attempted (AS91053) and a 19% reduction in another (AS91063, from 63% acheieved to 44%). For the AS91063 reduction in credits, I examined the markers’ comments and compared these to the standard and national student exemplars. It soon became clear that the reduction was due to poor use of 2D drawing in contrast to the high standard of 3D produced.

As to the lack of credits in AS91053 I immediately advised Robyn Davidson of the discrepancy. She checked if the papers were not check marked or if they were from the same marker. This could suggest that the marking process may not have been conducted to the highest standards. These papers ( 7 of) were then sent back for reconsideration, after removing papers which were below the standard. Overall the medium grade in the course was Merit with credit attainment of 10 credits. Pending a positive outcome of the remarking of AS91053, would push the current attainment percentage level closer to the 12% level for 85% of the students.

At the 11 Graphics classroom level, my experience of missed credits due to lack of evidence in the students work has demanded an immediate re-­‐think of my understanding of AS91063 standards requirements, and how to furnish the students work with credible marker evidence. The students in this 2015 class have in most part limited experience in drawing, as well as having nil experience in combining drawings with design language styled commentary.

To hook the students’ design interest, I needed to present an idea at the primal level. To this end using the AS90153 kettle product design idea, I have drawn up an exemplar which show the key elements of AS90163 as block features. The context is ‘homeless hobo kettle’. The al dente palatability of the context and presentation style of the page seems to have paid off. Early on in 2015 I initially find the student progress in drawing to the standard of AS90163 to be stifling, but now find the students mimick the teacher’s design intention. The class is starting to make consistent inroads towards well considered DVC standards of work and hence consistent 2016 NCEA results.

COMPUTING SUBJECT LEADER: TIC H’SIA HOW

Indicator 1: Quality teaching, learning and assessment materials and procedures are used at all levels [Years 9 – 13].

Assessment materials audit Assessments used were pre moderated by NZQA and were from a reliable source (Instant). Assessments that were made in Hagley followed the TKI examples and were moderated by local members of the Computing Teachers Society (NZACDITT)

Schemes and unit plans are in place and available to all Computing teachers on the networked drive. They are also aligned to the new Technology and Digital Technology aligned standards.

Unit plans and schemes were created in collaboration with other experienced Digital Technology teachers in Christchurch during NZACDITT (New Zealand Association for Computing, Digital and Information Technology Teachers) meetings.

Course outlines and practices follow the Hagley Assessment Policy including: • A list of standards assessed (internal and external) • Conditions of assessment to ensure validity • Lists when opportunities will come around for further assessment • Appeals policy Assessments are done under teacher supervision to ensure authenthicity and validity. Assessments are also not given until the students have done all prerequisite learning.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

22

Effective moderation practices Teachers cross moderate between classes where standards were used by both classes. This included some standards from HALC. Other courses had assessments moderated by NZQA as well as teachers from other schools via NZACDITT and personal connections. Where assessments were written, they followed the TKI examplars or other paid resources (Instant) closely.

Internal moderation processes The teachers in this subject have confirmed that internal moderation processes have been completed for results reported in 2014.

Indicator 2: Assessment is at the national standard.

Competent assessor statements describe how teachers ensure that their assessments are accurate and consistent with national standards.

Competent assessor statement: Tic H’sia How Teachers in Computing ensure that assessments are accurate and consistent with national standards by: • Keeping in contact with and moderating with other local teachers of Digital Technologies • Using moderated resources and marking schedules from reputable sources • Joining subject association to share ideas and resources wih other teachers in the field and to update current knowledge of the subject area • Attending regular Professional Development sessions with experts in the teaching area • Any resources that are made, are moderated with other Digital Technologies teachers online.

Indicator 3: Teacher inquiry is used to inform practice.

Tic H’sia How My inquiry looked into effective teaching methods for combined year level classes as well as looking at some of the concerns raised by having combined year level classes. Some sustainability concerns were raised at the start of the year when a student asked “…if we have two classes in the same time slot and only one of you, how are we supposed to learn?” Students who were opting out of the class were also surveyed as to why they decided to leave. Main reasons included not having enough help in class (as teacher was focused on teaching ‘the other class’) and feelings of the teacher not covering material to a deep enough level as having to teach both classes in the same period.

Methods of teaching changed throughout the year to deal with these concerns as well as from what I could see was happening in the classroom and the lack of understanding (to a required level). Methods ranged from teaching the class as a whole then extending the Year 12s (Year 11 and 12 combined class) to having the Year 12s become models and tutors for the Year 11s to teaching one lot and getting them to work and immediately teaching the other lot and vice versa. These methods worked to some degree but was overall a let-­‐down. Ideas for 2015 will be looked at in the next section.

Annual curriculum focused appraisal has been completed for all teachers of this subject.

Indicator 4: Achievement data is used to inform practice.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

23

Based on information from last year, in 2015, I intend to look at some other methods of teaching a combined year level class. One idea that was suggested is to break down the 4 hours a week into 3 blocks – one 2 hour block and two 1 hour blocks. In the 1 hour blocks I will focus on one year level and teach the theory while in the 2 hour block, I will focus on practicals. This has apparently worked for another teacher and I am more than willing to give this a try in 2015.

Data from 2014 also suggested that there were a number of students who were not attaining 14 credits in classes. Upon closer inspection, a reason why the percentages were low was due to a number of students who had signed up to the course but withdrew, had low attendance or were not interested in attaining credits (such as adult student who were in class to learn rather than attain a certificate).

Given this data, I intend to focus on student engagement. I have looked at different topics and resources in order to keep up interest as well as the order of which topics are taught in. An example was that in the past, Digital Information Outcomes were taught at the start of the year due to the subject matter being more familiar to most students. This year I intend to teach Programming, a big leap for most, at the start in order to hook in students. The resource will have a game focus in order to engage the students.

FOODS / TECHNOLOGY SUBJECT LEADER: ROBYN DAVISON

Indicator 1: Quality teaching, learning and assessment materials and procedures are used in programmes at all levels.

Assessment materials audit The food and nutrition external specifications were altered and notified during the year which required teaching a new aspect so students were prepared for the exam. I have also checked to see which standards have had version changes and made sure work is planned to be assessed by the updated standards. Recently while checking up dates I found some snap shot activities that have been helpful with modifying units of work in Home Economics.

Technology curriculum standards have been reviewed and updated for Level 1 and 2, as a result I have reviewed the work for assessment and adjusted tasks as required.

Schemes and related resources I am in the process of updating schemes and classroom activities for Year 11,12 and 13 textiles and planning a new course for NZTextiles which is skill based and using two Level 1 Technology standards. There continues to be a need to scaffold from year 9-­‐11 Technology, in particular in textiles where there is no year 10 textiles class offered at present. This is impacting on Year 11 textiles achievement.

Course outlines I have continued to produce a small booklet for my classes that outlines the school assessment policy, lists the stadards that are offered and includes a calendar of assessment dates throughout the year. It was heartening to see that a number of students kept this booklet handy and reminded me that assessment dates were approaching or were able to plan their activities such as STAR courses around the dates I had planned.

Effective moderation practice With the increase in use of Technology Curriculum standards across the school by different subject areas there were more staff for me to liaise with to premoderate tasks and then more work samples for me to moderate. 2015 will see an increase in use of Technology standards with the introduction of the School of Apps.

During 2014 I was able to use staff from Riccarton High School to assist with moderation of technology work samples.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

24

Department meetings will be planned to enable cross marking and moderation of student work throughout the year in 2015.

Internal moderation processes The teachers in this subject have confirmed that internal moderation processes have been completed for results reported in 2014.

Indicator 2: Assessment is at the national standard.

Competent assessor statements describe how teachers ensure that their assessments are accurate and consistent with national standards.

Competent assessor statement: Robyn Davison During 2014 NZQA held a focus workshop on Technology External Standard 91049 which I was able to attend. This gave key information for teachers to focus their teaching on to assist students with writing their external reports that are focused and met the standard. It was useful for me in that we also focused on the “step up” required for Level 2 standards. I continue to receive the newsletter from the Technology Advisors Cheryl Pym and Neville Myers and am able to seek advice from them as required.

Indicator 3: Teacher inquiry is used to inform practice.

Robyn Davison In a recent Gazette I read about a new Best Practice Workshop: Collecting Evidence which aims to “explore diverse and valid methods of collecting assessment evidence to meet the varied needs of learners”. Although this is targeted towards NCEA I think this is what I have been trying to find out for myself – is pre test and post test the best way to evaluate what needs to be taught in Year 9 Textiles Technology or are there other tools that will be more useful for these short modules of work.

Issues related to year 9 textiles; • Short course length maximum 16 hours • Wide range of abilities, skills and knowledge • Negative experiences in year 7-­‐8 • ‘This is for girls only’ attitude from boys • I’ve already done this and don’t need it for my career choice • Maintenance of equipment – damage during year 9 classes • Do we make craft projects or garments • Everyone makes the same project.

Technological literacy has been a new focus for us and this is the area that I spend much time teaching about so I can use the pre test to build on during lessons. Improved achievement may be in diverse forms. It isn’t necessarily improved grades, although that can often be one result. It may be the development of a key competency like ‘managing self’, as seen in greater levels of independence, involvement or participation, or a shift to a more positive attitude.

Annual curriculum focused appraisal has been completed for all teachers of this subject.

Indicator 4: Achievement data is used to inform practice.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

25

In looking at the data from 2013 to 2014 in Food and Nutrition, I acknowledge that we are limited in the number of standards that are offered on the Home Economics Matrix which is also shared by the Year 11 Child and Family Class. Students are achieving a number of credits, however this tends to be at the Achievement level not at Merit or Excellence. The classes have a high number of literacy needs students who are supported with teacher aides so the focus will be on strategies for supporting students to write answers at a higher level to demonstrate knowledge and understanding at Merit or Excellence level.

The use of a practice exam time during the year certainly influenced the number of students who attempted the external in November and across both Foods classes there was more success in 2014. I will make use of the practice exam time again in 2015.

In Textiles Technology, classes are much smaller and the data shows high levels of success. However, in 11 Textiles absences and end of year panic influenced the results in externals. The advantage of externals in Technology is that they can occur at any time during the year so starting on the portfolio report earlier is essential so students have a higher chance of achieving.

HOSPITALITY SUBJECT LEADER: MARC ALEXANDER

Indicator 1: Quality teaching, learning and assessment materials and procedures are used in programmes at all levels.

Assessment materials audit Service I.Q. (formerly H.S.I.) an Industry Training Organisation, develops qualifications and arranges training for the service industry. The ITO provides unit standards upon which the activities are built and provided to students. They are multi-­‐faceted and modified from a range of resources such as those available on line; selected texts; individualised research projects; and Hagley generated hand-­‐outs. Evidence records are similarly from Service I.Q. subject to an annual assessment audit which confirms assessment activities used are appropriate, fair and offer valid assessment opportunities against national standards. Through the audit process which follows NZQA moderation protocols, teachers check all activities against the indicators used by NZQA for external moderation.

Schemes and related resources are complete and in place for programmes for hospitality students. These materials are aligned to The New Zealand Curriculum, reflect best practice in teaching, learning and assessment, and are available for all staff.

Course outlines and practices for NCEA programmes follow the Hagley Assessment Policy. All activities are continually reviewed internally for validity and applicability; and evaluated against external authoritative and industry sources. These are adjusted where required to ensure the benchmarks are authentic and the students are being accurately assessed against the national standards.These resources are aligned to The New Zealand Curriculum, the application of which, reflect best practice in teaching, learning and assessment.

Effective moderation practices within hospitality were primarily internal and evaluated against benchmarks set by the ITO assessment resources. Internal moderation was conducted in accordance to the requirements of best practice and Hagley assessment policy. These included: • Tutor partnering systems which operated consistently within the department. Minor adjustments, as necessary, were ongoing to ensure that all moderation criteria were met throughout the academic year.

• Assessment schedules (including exemplars) are provided by the ITO with which to evaluate the quality of assessed material – where these proved fallible, alternative modifications and corrections were made to confirm the integrity of the required learning outcomes.

• Teacher discussions relevant to moderation were constant and under consistent and continual review.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

26

Internal moderation processes The teachers in this subject have confirmed that internal moderation processes have been completed for results reported in 2014.

Indicator 2: Assessment is at the national standard.

Competent assessor statements describe how teachers ensure that their assessments are accurate and consistent with national standards.

Competent assessor statement: Marc Alexander To ensure that assessments of Hospitality and ITO units are accurate and consistent with the national standard, teachers refer to the annual I.Q. Moderator’s report and exemplars which are updated regularly on the I.T.O. website. Feedback from moderation reports have been followed up with alterations made as appropriate. Assistance, where needed, was provided by the subject adviser – and a schedule of peer moderation is on a consistent and ongoing basis. The ITO has, late in the academic year, signalled a change in the course curriculum for future years, which would necessitate some adjustments, but will not affect the 2015 academic year.

Indicator 3: Teacher inquiry is used to inform practice.

Marc Alexander 2014 teaching as inquiry project follows from previous years where: • a number of students coming into the course were ill-­‐equipped and ill-­‐prepared for vocational life after study • there was a lack of awareness of market expectations as well as the breadth of diversity in the opportunities offered within the hospitality industry • the dispositions and skills that are essential to the particular career trajectories that students sought to gain

This inquiry strived to bridge the gap between student expectations with the reality of opportunities afforded by the hospitality sector. Such data would then inform best teaching practice to: • Meet the educational needs of the students • To meet industry demands of today and in the future, and • To develop the capacity to use identified factors in wide-­‐ranging contexts to improve the disconnect between educational qualifications with industry demands

Data was gained through observation (practical skills acquisition, theory proficiency and attitudinal interactions with others); work ethic engagement; and questionnaire. Information was gathered on a range of questions including: • In the broadest sense what do you want out of life?

• What made you choose this course; how do you think it can help attain what you want to attain?

• What do you want out of this course?

• Do you think you put in enough energy & effort to gain what you want from the course (in order to achieve your goals)?

• What do you expect from the teacher to help you attain your goals?

The questions put to students included not only the positive ambitions (‘define the career you are aspiring to’) but also undesirable objectives (‘what career characteristics would you not want’). Overwhelmingly the students wanted a future within hospitality that: Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

27

Offered creativity; service; business opportunity to be their own boss; and working with others Identification of a deficiency in skills and knowledge to pursue their ambitions that they sought to address by enrolling in the course Recognition of – and dealing with – personal weaknesses such as procrastination, time management issues, loss of interest, concern over perceived failure, working for others, loss of personal control, and perceived deficiency in the ‘enjoyment’ of future work.

The inquiry affected my teaching practice: • Widening the scope of what the hospitality industry offers –for example, writing and photographing a cook-­‐book to cover the course content working with my students to do so • Introduction of a cheese-­‐making component to the course in response to a demand to widen our learning opportunities • Greater involvement of students in designing the menu’s for the theatre company, fashion school function, culinary competition and the BOT mid-­‐winter dinner • Use of digital technology to widen educational insights from other chef’s in terms of curriculum, practice, plate presentations

Annual curriculum focused appraisal has been completed for all teachers of this subject.

Indicator 4: Achievement data is used to inform practice.

Data is reviewed in accordance with targets found in the Hagley Community College Charter Document, Annual Key Activities and Achievement Objectives (p.32) where it states, “The ‘schools within a school’ programmes meet and sustain the following targets: to re-­‐engage all students; 90% gaining a national certificate; 85% leavers gaining NCEA L2+; 80% leavers transitioning to further study or employment.”

The following table compares our outcomes for both year 12 (12HOS) and year 13 13HOS over 2013/14.

Class 2013 Results 2014 Results 14 + Credits gained 14 + Credits gained 12HOS 80% (N=16) 90% (N=18) 13HOS 71% (N=10) 85% (N=11)

It should be noted that of those students who enrolled in 13HOS (our fulltime tertiary level programme), two withdrew for health reasons (one for mental health concerns while the other suffered a long and debilitating cancer treatment but who is now well enough to return in 2015). Moreover, our one student who identified as Pasifika succeeded and gained his level 3 qualification. Moreover, seven students completed the course gaining the tertiary level qualification – that is 53.4% of those who completed the full academic year.

These aforementioned results, in terms of informing future practice, suggest a number of strategies to lift achievement even higher. These are identified as follows: • Engaging earlier in the year with ‘one-­‐on-­‐one’ interviews to ensure I am fully cognisant of student individual needs in terms of: i.

Personal circumstances that might affect learning ii. Student ambitions that inform relevancy in the practical content made available iii. Focus on specific skill development sought by the student iv. Maintenance of these ‘audit’ sessions to update any changes in data accumulated • • •

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

28

• •

Increasing the emphasis of practical applications of skills and lessening the time taken up by theory – without dispensing the vital information required – through condensing relevant knowledge by increasing the tempo.

Spreading the evidentiary record acquisition more evenly throughout the year so students don’t get over-­‐loaded or data-­‐fatigued towards the latter part of the academic year.

TEXTILES SUBJECT LEADER: VICKI DIXON

Indicator 1: Quality teaching, learning and assessment materials and procedures are used in programmes at all levels.

Assessment materials audit In 2014 12 unit standards were called upon by the Industry ITO Compentnz for moderation. This was the first time in many years that these units were called due to the amalgamation of all the iTOs . This moderation was returned with no recommendations and reinforced the fact that that the work being offered an assessed was at the required standard. Over 2015 I have decided to rewrite the assessment tasks and have in place a moderation contact at Compentnz to moderate pre and post assessment. In regard to the technology standards used within the School of Fashion, Robyn Davison has moderated all tasks pre and post to ensure the task and marking is at the required national standard. This internal moderation continues to be of value and the system has been established to enable this ongoing process to succeed. From time to time Robyn and I will also team mark a set of work to enable us both to have live discussions on the standard and to ensure we are both on the same page in regard to interpretation of the standard.

Schemes and related resource materials In department teachers are asked to update annually their programme and a template is recommended to ensure consideration is taken to the alignment of the programme to The NZ Curriculum. Staff are requested to give a copy of their yearly plan and course outline to the HOD for filing.The appraisal system for staff is another check point to ensure this is a robust system of checks.

Course outlines and practices for NCEA programmes follow the Hagley Assessment Policy.

All staff are knowledgable of the Hagley assessment policy and on going P.D. is provided each year to keep all subject leaders familiar and updated on the policy. Teachers are requested to give a summary of the policy to all classes at the start of each year to ensure students and staff are on the same page when it comes to the expectations of assessment within Hagley.

Effective moderation practices The School of Fashion is subject to moderation in three forms. All units of work are pre moderated prior to the students being given the task. Internal moderation takes place at the conclusion of each technology standard. This moderation may take the form of team marking or individual moderation of the finished work via Robyn Davison. Lastly the unit standards are administered

by Compentnz and are subject to moderation by the ITO on a random selection basis. The ITO will also organise pre moderation on request and this will happen in the 2015 cycle due to the rewriting of many tasks to ensure they remain relavent to the students we are presented with. In 2014 all moderation was returned with both task and marked work meeting the required standard.Within the wider context of the college formal evidence of moderation is required to be lodged with Kerry Keats 3 times a year.

Internal moderation processes The teachers in this subject have confirmed that internal moderation processes have been completed for results reported in 2014.

Indicator 2: Assessment is at the national standard.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

29

Competent assessor statements describe how teachers ensure that their assessments are accurate and consistent with national standards.

Competent assessor statement: Vicki Dixon / Practical Design teachers In the textiles area, I work closely with Robyn Davison to ensure that all activities are written to the national guidelines and that they meet the requirements of the standard. These activities are internally moderated prior to their use. The completed work is marked jointly with Robyn to ensure the marking is accurate and to a the national standard, thus moderation is complete at the point of marking. Robyn has represented the dept at P.D. in Technology and holds a management unit in this area so is confident and competent in moderating these standards. Some industry standards have been informally moderated using Helen Adams at the YWCA Training course, as she has beem a moderator in the past.

Indicator 3: Teacher inquiry is used to inform practice.

Vicki Dixon How do I integrate bi-­‐ culturalism into fashion studies?

This question, and the lack of an answer to it, has haunted me for quite sometime. I wanted to do several things here, a) honour my contractual responsibility to deliver bi-­‐culturalism in my course b) to do this in an authentic way that would generate understanding of culture and celebrate it, and c) create a meaningful experience for the learner that was far removed from a token gesture or tick box exercise.

Having listened to the 4 P.D. sessions provided this year to staff, I began to gain an understanding of where to begin. I had gone along to the meetings expecting a toolbox of activities that would allow me to meet the criteria in the classroom. What I got was something quite different. I found that after each speaker I pondered what they said, I began to see a common thread in each very different delivery. I found myself no longer asking why our Maori people feel so deeply aggrieved about land confiscation and other treaty issues, to gaining an understanding of their connection to this land and therefore an understanding of how important these grievances are. I appreciated how each speaker had said they did not want guilt from Pakeha but empathy and understanding was the platform to move forward. I felt I was given permission to work my way through this complex topic and that if was going to be ok if it was not perfect, that it was a starting point.

I decided to use the design and development of a collection to be the context in which to launch this project and entitled it “MY SENSE OF PLACE”.

I created a power point presentation that began with the traditions of welcome and protocol used by Maori on the marae. By looking at why and what was intended by the mihi mihi, it started a journey of connection. If you were Maori the connection to place was clear-­‐cut. It was a connection that was celebrated often and with reverence, many of the other cultures in the room identified with this and were able to see where and what tied them to a place. I was able through presenting my own mihi mihi to show how although I did not have this strong culture for me I was clearly tied to and felt anchored by my place of birth. For my children not so much, they like so many in my class had lived in many places and did not feel an affinity to anywhere.

Some cultures found this grounding in religion but once again, for many of my students this did not feature. Where would they take this?

The results were surprising and for many emotional. This was the first time many of them had looked into what they create to find a common thread. Once the thread was identified they started to see that they too had a sense of place, somewhere or something that grounded them, gave them their safe place.

Two examples from with in the group.

One student said that the unit of work gave them the freedom to express their culture. Prior to this unit they had felt that they should tone down their cultural influences in order to be more accepted. The work became joyful and the results breathtaking. The second student found this task very emotional, as her life had not taken the pathway she had expected. In looking at the Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

30

design work and the things she held dear we noticed that the turtle was very prominent, she wore a turtle necklace, her designs wrapped the wearer up in a shawl or collar just a turtle might use his shell symbolising the taking of home “place” with you on your back.

In conclusion this unit of work opened my own eyes and created a meaningful and valuable unit of work for all of us on acceptance and understanding of difference and how everyone’s journey whether steeped in a strong cultural base or religious tradition or not has validation and is essential to who we are. Our Maori students are able to teach us this through their strong commitment to culture and this land Aotearoa. This unit of work based on reflection and looking more closely at Maori culture has changed my teaching. It has given me a new approach to embracing these issues and has created a bi cultural presence in my classroom. My first attempt at this has given me the courage to explore this further and I will continue to include and refine this unit of work in the future and in-­‐bed what I have learned into all of the work I deliver.

All other teachers with the exception of Jewellery are subject leaders, so will have out lined their report in their review.

Both Katrina and Monique chose to look at the issues of authenticity in design and the rules around being inspired by rather than coping a design. They approached this from two different angles and were comprehensive in their research and as a result came up with a sound strategy to use as an introduction lesson to ensure all students understood the need for originality and acknowledgement of source.

Annual curriculum focused appraisal has been completed for all teachers of this subject.

Indicator 4: Achievement data is used to inform practice.

As part of this process, it is important to not only note the feedback from the national moderators and make adjustments as required but also to look at the achievment patterns of the students. In a course such as Fashion School the data can vary markedly from year to year. It is therefore important to analyse the back story. Adolecent students are straight forward in some respect as they are aiming for UE . It is very clear what the requirements are and generally this is the focus with less emphasis on gaining national certificates. In 2013 , 1 UE pass and 13 national certificates were achieved, in 2014 2 UE passes and no national certificates. This is a direct reflection on the experience of the group the number of adolescents, and the desire to complete the course over two years. In 2015, it is expected that the number of UE passes will increase to 5 and with 5 returning students the national certificate total should be 15.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

31

WOODWORK / HANDCRAFT / PRACTICAL SKILLS FOR TRADE

SUBJECT LEADER: MARY LATIMER

Indicator 1: Quality teaching, learning and assessment materials and procedures are used in programmes at all levels.

Assessment materials audit Through the audit process which follows NZQA moderation protocols, teachers check all activities against the indicators used by NZQA for external moderation. Course outlines advise students of the unit and achievement standards planned for the year. Additional standards may be selected to suit the needs of an individual student. Each student starts the year with an individual learning plan and this is reviewed with the student each term. The achievement standards are based on the material provided through NZQA and Techlink etc. and developed to suit the course/s. Some are provided complete and pre-­‐moderated by BConstructive, who also does the external moderation. Language and graphics used in instructions are clear to students.

Feedback is sought from students, activities planned, and materials updated in response to their comments and new ideas at the beginning of the year. Assessment materials are checked for consistency against the curriculum, standard documents, moderator's report, and feedback from moderators. Material is pre-­‐moderated and post-­‐moderated internally with key staff and /or teachers from other schools.

Schemes and related resources are complete and in place for programmes from Years 9 to 13. These materials are aligned to The New Zealand Curriculum, reflect best practice in teaching, learning and assessment. Course schemes for each senior class are updated in Feb/March taking into account the focus of each four hour class, and also the individual student's pathway. The curriculum’s front half values and competencies are built into planning and course activities.Schemes are displayed on the workshop wall and checkmarked through the year. Junior schemes have been updated and the materials focus is now plastics at year 9 and metal and wood at year 10.

Course outlines and practices for NCEA programmes follow the Hagley Assessment Policy. Each subject has a course outline given to students in term one and this includes achievement and unit standard lists and the Hagley Assessment Policy. Portions particularly important to these subjects are explained in more detail to the class. From 2013, many more students have been taking a selection of classes and now each student has an individual learning plan detailing the standards they are aiming at and the qualifications they can earn. This is discussed with their teacher in an initial meeting and reviewed through the year.

Effective moderation practices Structured internal moderation occurred during 2014 using the Hagley supplied forms. 23 standards were assessed against and all were available for random checking. 11 standards (48%) were selected and then student work was also selected at random. Teachers from other schools were utilised in 2014 to moderate specialised work. This information is filed. Feedback and advice is sought from various colleagues throughout the school. BConstructive standards are pre-­‐moderated and come with ample support materials. BCats units are cross-­‐marked at random and all work filed.

Internal moderation processes The teachers in this subject have confirmed that internal moderation processes have been completed for results reported in 2014.

Indicator 2: Assessment is at the national standard.

Competent assessor statements describe how teachers ensure that their assessments are accurate and consistent with national standards.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

32

Competent assessor statement: Mary Latimer • Cluster meetings for Technology and BConstructive are attended wherever possible. In this way Mary meets with other practitioners to develop her knowledge and practice and is active in the subject association. Feedback from students is sought regularly.

• Mary keeps her skills and interest up to date through practice and growth of her craft and regularly introduces new ideas to the classroom work. New resources and activities are added to classwork regularly. Use of internet communities is now a major focus.

• All externally moderated materials are retained. A library of student work, kept as (annotated) exemplars, is continually added to.

• Moderation procedures used mean that on-­‐going discussion with colleagues about assessment and unit standards occurs regularly through the year.

• Linking with teachers at other schools where possible.

• Keeping up to date via available web sources (ie. NZQA and Techlink) is carried out.

• External Moderation results have shown that standards are being delivered and assessed at a high standard.

Indicator 3: Teacher inquiry is used to inform practice.

Mary Latimer My 2014 inquiry centered around the addition of four ipads to existing computing technology to use with headphones as research devices , cameras, and screens to individually watch the set videos. Key usage included: screen shot, camera, search techniques and use of image search, image manipulation, and using certain information apps. A security stand for the ipad2 was also supplied so that the larger device could be safely set up in the workshop with headphones. This was fantastic and heavily used. Students could screenshot what they had found and get back to work.

Surprisingly, I found that fairly evenly across the classes about 30% of students had not used an idevice. This inquiry taught me about usage patterns in each class for example, it turned out not to be very popular with the students to watch a movie individually with headphones, perhaps due to wanting to be social, but it was very effective to have the same visual video playing on multiple devices around the room with small groups watching. The ability to pause and rewind to view instructions again was utilized very well in particular exercises.

Many sources provide an app or a web page. It is my opinion that the apps are often a far superior, cleaner, and more educational user experience. Unfortunately loading an app to a school device is complex. There are several paths to develop in the future.

Annual curriculum focused appraisal has been completed for all teachers of this subject.

Indicator 4: Achievement data is used to inform practice.

Baseline data: CLASS

NUMBER OF STUDENTS

AVERAGE CREDITS

14 PLUS CREDITS

12 PLUS CREDITS

LESS THAN 12

% 14 PLUS

11/12 PST

17

23.22

13

-­‐

4

76

11 WWC

18

20.14

12

1

5

72 MORE THAN 12.

67 MORE THAN 14

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

33

12 WWA

14

7.9

4

-­‐

10

29

11 HAN

7

13.07

3

2

2

71 MORE THAN 12.

43 MORE THAN 14

12 HAN

14

11.29

5

-­‐

9

36

Results in several senior courses indicate that there is a group of very low performers when it comes to gaining credits. The obvious reasons include very poor attendance by some adolescents, adult students who select not to engage in credits, and some low ability students. Less obvious reasons include students who are in two or more classes and do better than expectations overall through the immersion programme, but have lower averages when splitting their totals across the classes, and some second year students focus on bedding in skills and creativity, following a very successful year 11 total. Lack of motivation was evident in several of the year 12 students in that cohort.

These four classes run with flexibility and individual learning plans within the programme structure. Features include mixed levels, age group, year group, academic record, ability, for example there are some students in year 12 classes who work more successfully with the level one standards and so that is where they begin. Data from the more successful students is consistently impressive.

Target for 2015: To focus on motivating the 12 WWA students who would rather not design their own individual projects.

Actions: Add more group work options for the year 12, second year students in 12WWA. During interview early in the year for learning plan, include some personality testing to establish groupwork aptitude etc.

Evaluation planned: Analyse the credits data using the same method. Analyse the cohorts ie. separate the adults, new students, returning students, high need students.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

34

ENGLISH HOD: ANITA YARWOOD/ FAITH OXENBRIDGE ENGLISH Subject Leader: Anita Yarwood / Faith Oxenbridge

JOURNALISM Subject Leader: Faith Oxenbridge

MEDIA STUDIES & FILM AND ELECTRONIC MEDIA Subject Leader: Andrew Tebbutt

ENGLISH SUBJECT LEADER: ANITA YARWOOD / FAITH OXENBRIDGE

Indicator 1: Quality teaching, learning and assessment materials and procedures are used in programmes at all levels.

Assessment materials audit The majority of assessment activities used by teachers in Levels 1, 2 and 3 English programmes are developed from the NCEA guideline activities for the aligned standards from the MOE TKI site. All English activities available on TKI are accepted by NZQA moderators as validly assessing their standards. Where teachers significantly modify TKI activities they submit them to the HOD for checking to ensure that the activiity complies with the requirements of the standard. Activities, such as the Writing Folio activity in Levels 2 and 3, which were independently developed have been successfully moderated by NZQA. All exemplars used initially are the TKI aligned standards exemplars. In some cases, however, where new exemplary material has not been adaquete, the HOD has selected departmental exemplars to be used by teachers.

Assessment activities for years 9 and 10 were developed by teachers within the junior department and designed to measure students’ progress within the New Zealand Curriculum. Year 9 activities were designed around level four of the curriculum. Year 10 activities were designed around level five of the curriculum. The literacy focus for year 9 students in Processes and Strategies. The year 10 literacy focus is Purposes and Audiences. Students were assessed through AsTTle and Fast Forward at the beginning of they year to evaluate gaps in their literacy skills and the results helped determine teacher focus for the year. AsTTle testing is also used throughout the year to measure student progress. The junior department used common assessment tasks developed by junior teachers, designed to allow students to target Ministry of Education descriptors, so they could demonstrate the expected skills at year 9 and 10. Staff used exemplars from the Ministry of Education site and exemplars developed from our own student work.

Schemes and related resources Year 11 – 13 course outlines have been developed for teachers and are given to all students at the beginning of their programme. These outlines include information about • The internal and external standards assessed in each subject and how these standards are integrated within the programme • How teaching and learning as well as standards within programmes are linked to the New Zealand curriculum • Opportunities for further assessment • Absences policy • Appeals policy • Conditions of assessment

The scheme for year 9 and 10 students uses criteria set out in The New Zealand Curriculum. As a department we focused on teaching and learning within both strands, Creating Meaning and Making Meaning. Teachers delivered introductory outlines to students informing them of the focus and expectations of their English course, including the expected skills outcomes at the end of each year. Junior English teachers used letters to caregivers, credit reports, interviews and bi-­‐annual assessment reports as a means of communicating student progress with parents.

Course outlines and practices for NCEA programmes follow the Hagley Assessment Policy. Year 11 – 13 students were entered into a range of internal and external standards within their English programme, however as the year progressed staff and students worked together to personalise approaches to assessment through regular goal setting meetings and updating student progress sheets. Students complete assessment tasks, if and when, they are ready to make a valid attempt to successfully complete an achievement standard.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

37

Authenticity was established by staff following the departmental policy, which ensures the validity of all student assessment against English achievement standards. This policy was effective in allowing students to make greater use of technology, without compromising the teacher’s ability to confirm authenticity of the student’s work.

Effective moderation practices All teachers of English internal assessment have confirmed that internal moderation processes have been completed for results reported in 2014. At levels 1, 2 and 3, English teachers moderate with the HOD (at an early stage of the teaching programme around this area of work) at least three samples of student work for each standard they offer. Where standards are assessed holistically or ongoing throughout the year, teachers moderate three early samples and at least three samples of the holistically assessed student work at the end of the year.

Moderation tracking sheets for each teacher are maintained and copies of all moderated work are filed. Updates showing moderation completed to date are issued at the end of term two and at the end of term three, to ensure teachers are up to date with moderation requirements. Hosting arrangements are in place with other users of English standards in ESOL. Increased moderation will occur within 2015, as a 3 point check will be used to support assessment practices within the English department. The English department will submit moderated work in terms one, two and three. Teachers will continue to sign a checklist confirming that moderation has been fully completed.

2014 NZQA Moderation: activities Standard Moderation result (activities) 91101 8/8 approved 91105 8/8 approved 91475 8/8 approved 91476 7/7 approved

Internal moderation processes The teachers in this subject have confirmed that internal moderation processes have been completed for results reported in 2014.

Indicator 2: Assessment is at the national standard.

Competent assessor statements describe how teachers ensure that their assessments are accurate and consistent with national standards.

Competent assessor statement: English teachers Teachers use NCEA activities and exemplars from the MOE TKI and English Online websites. Teachers also use Hagley exemplars that have been moderated by NZQA. All English activities available on both sites are accepted as validly assessing their relevant standards. New and modified activities, developed at Hagley, are checked by the HOD. The HOD has, where necessary, consulted with NZQA moderators. The department has had a strong external moderation history since 2002 with moderation reports for all standards confirming that activities and assessment practice are consistently at the national standard. Moderation procedures, used within the department, mean ongoing discussion with individual teachers about assessment standards occurs throughout the year.

Three teachers attended 2014 NZQA best practice workshops. The department has strong links with NZATE, CETA and local advisory services. Anita Yarwood is a member of the CETA committee, which is chaired by Marie Stribling, a teacher within the English department. Three staff facilited workshops for staff from Canterbury schools around developments in the New Zealand curriculum. Anita Yarwood presented at the NZATE conference in Rotorua. She also worked with staff from schools around New Zealand in the development of junior English programmes. Some staff in the department read and contribute to the English and literacy forums on English online and this helps to inform their understanding of assessing students’ work.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

38

National facilitator newsletters are shared within the department. The Level One external examination standard 90851 panel leader was a Level 1 English teacher and two members of the English department marked that examination.

2014 NZQA Moderation: student work Standard Moderation result (student work) 91101 8/8 approved 91105 8/8 approved 91475 8/8 approved 91476 7/7 approved

Indicator 3: Teacher inquiry is used to inform practice.

Di Wills: Investigating how to extend her awareness of effective teaching strategies when working with 11ENL students to improve literacy within this cohort.

Faith Oxenbridge: Investigating how to improve senior students’ ability to achieve success in external examinations.

Nik Densem: Investigating how to use strategies promoted in The Effective Teaching Profile to improve the engagement of year eleven boys in the English classroom.

Linda Moser: Investigating how to improve the resilience and self-­‐management of students working in a 12ENI programme.

Jahred Dell: Investigating how to improve reading engagement in students in a 12ENI programme, as a means of improving the completion rate of achievement standard 2.9.

Rebecca Donaldson: Investigating how to improve the retention of students in a 12ENA programme, as a means of improving the success rate of students completing internal and external standards. She used strategies developed in The Effective Teaching Profile.

Laura Borrowdale: Investigating how to use digital technology to improve the achievement / engagement of students in her gender studies class.

Anna Taylor: Investigating how to find strategies that were linked to The Effective Teaching Profile, to improve the effectiveness of her relationship with a 12ENI class, that she began to teach mid-­‐way through the academic year.

Monique Pettet: Investigating how to work effectively with year ten boys, so they were focused on English work as opposed to outside distractions.

Wendy Thomas: Investigating how to improve the confidence of students in 12ENI, so they had a stronger belief in their ability to achieve academic success.

Rachel Hawthorne: Investigating whether the use of structured and consistently high expectations would increase the engagement and academic success of repeating year 12 English students.

Stephanie Beth: Investigating how to work to engage students in the subject material through immediate success and incorporation of outside interests.

Anita Yarwood: Investigating the use of strategies promoted by The Effective Teaching Profile to enhance retention of at-­‐risk students in year 12.

Mike Fowler: Investigating how to improve students’ understanding and use of syntax.

Marie Stribling: Investigating strategies to create higher levels of independence in students’ editing processes in year 13 writing.

Confirmation of annual curriculum focused appraisal has been completed for all teachers of English and Languages.

Indicator 4: Achievement data is used to inform practice.

NCEA data was used to inform teaching practice within the English department. All staff were given a copy of their own NCEA data reflecting achievement in both internal and external standards. They were given departmental meeting time to analyse the data to help inform their teaching practice this year. This process was initially modelled by the HOD within a whole Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

39

department meeting. Staff used the data as a starting point to explore why some standards are used more successfully than other standards. This process was also completed in early August after the practice external examinations, with the data from these examinations also analysed by staff to ensure more effective preparation for the end of year external examinations.

Externals: 2014 (English) external results show an uptake – from 2013 -­‐ in both entries in externals and in students achieving or above in externals, particularly at year 11 and year 13. The department had a focus in 2014 on improving external participation and achievement through regular goal setting, integrating standards within the course to prepare students for externals, as well as setting aside class time for specific external practice.

Success at year 11 seemed to be connected to a strong literacy focus across classes – particulary in using a metacognitive approach to reading and writing – alongside an integrated programme of teaching and learning that supported strong content knowledge as well as a teaching/learning focus on one external in particular.

At year 13, the improvement was attributed to an increase to ongoing goal setting with students taking responsibilty for their learning outcomes, and more buy in to externals, particularly when students identified a desire for a sunject endorsement. At year 13 there was also a focus on teaching understanding of critical literacy which supported external achievement, as well as a focus on selection of standards to support a more focused programme of teaching and learning. In 2014 we also offered 3 subject-­‐focused courses – English & Media; English for Writers and English for Lovers of Literature, which may have supported achievement.

In 2015 we will continue to support external success in the department, but also attempt to increase uptake and achievement at year 12 by increasing teacher expectation of exam participation and success and working on building external study and practise into the year 12 course. Department discussion and reflection on the lower particpation and success rate at year 12 identified a number of next steps for this level: 1. Increase goal setting with year 12 students, with a particular focus on the importance of achieving UE Literacy, alongside an increase in teacher expectation.

2. Tighten standard selection and teaching focus to support external achievement.

3. Increase the use of metacognitive literacy strategies at year 12.

4. Continue to build in aspects of critical literacy.

All Results (Internal & External) A comparative analysis of results from previous years, showed an improvement in year 13 students achieving 14 or more credits, but little change or improvement in year 11 or 12 results, or retention. This year we will be working towards a retention rate of 85% and achievement rate of 80% of all students at all levels gaining 12 or more credits. To support these targets we will be: 1. Focusing on metacognitive approaches to the teaching of reading and writing at all levels.

2. Increase our focus on the teaching of the reading process in particular at all levels.

3. Practice and develop cultural sensitivity, and in particular, bi-­‐culturalism in the English classroom.

4. Increase integration of standards within our programmes to support achievement.

5. Increase selectivity of standards in programme planning to increase achievement 6. Increase goal setting at all levels and encourage student ownership of achievement.

7. Increase teacher expectation of student participation in externals at all levels.

8. Offer high interest, specialised courses at level 2 and 3 to increase engagement and student achievement. (Gender Studies, Popular Culture, Changemakers, Playwriting)

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

40

JOURNALISM SUBJECT LEADER: FAITH OXENBRIDGE

Indicator 1: Quality teaching, learning and assessment materials and procedures are used in programmes at all levels.

Assessment materials audit All Media Studies assessment activities used by teachers in Levels 2 and 3 Journalism programmes are developed from the NCEA guideline activities for the aligned standards, the NZQA website or from activities for the non-­‐ aligned standards from the TKI site. All Media Studies activities available on TKI are accepted by NZQA moderators as validly assessing their standards. Where teachers significantly modify TKI activities they submit them to Andrew Tebbutt – TIC of Media and an experienced National MS moderator -­‐ for checking to ensure that the activity complies with the requirements of the standard and assessment conditions. Several of the assessment tasks have been modified from TKI activities as they don’t all fit our Jouralism focus. Two of these tasks have been approved by NZQA through the external mderation process over the last two years, however, and another will be assessed by them this year.

Schemes and related resources are complete and in place. These materials are aligned to The New Zealand Curriculum, reflect best practice in teaching, learning and assessment, and are available for all staff.

Course outlines and practices for NCEA programmes follow the Hagley Assessment Policy.

Course outlines and practices for NCEA programmes follow the Hagley Assessment Policy.

Year 12-­‐13 Journalism course outlines have been developed by the TIC and are given to all students at the beginning of their programme. These outlines include information about: § the internal and external standards assessed in each subject and how these standards are integrated within the programme and a term by term breakdown of teaching, learning and assessment. § how teaching and learning, as well as standards, within programmes are linked to the NZC § conditions for assessment to ensure validity, authenticity § an opportunity for further assessment § absences policy § appeals policy § Assessment due dates

Effective moderation practices At levels 2 and 3, Journalism teachers moderate with the TIC of Media (at an early stage of the teaching progamme around this area of work) at least three samples -­‐ often more where the teacher feels the grade is borderline -­‐ of student work for each standard they offer. Where standards are ongoing throughout the year, teachers moderate three early samples and at least three later samples to ensure consistent application of the standards. Moderation tracking sheets for each teacher are maintained and copies of all moderated work are filed. The moderation process around the samples follows a process of the Journalism teacher marking the task against the assessment schedule, then chosing approximately 3-­‐5 exemplars of student work at various levels. The internal moderator then reads and either confirms and adjusts the grade. A discussion will follow this, as many of the Media Studies tasks require and indeed suggest a ‘holistic’ approach to grading, something that can’t always be scientifically or easily calculated.

Internal moderation processes The teachers in this subject have confirmed that internal moderation processes have been completed for results reported in 2014.

Indicator 2: Assessment is at the national standard.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

41

Competent assessor statements describe how teachers ensure that their assessments are accurate and consistent with national standards.

Competent assessor statement: Faith Oxenbridge Teachers use NCEA activities and exemplars from the MOE TKI and Media Studies Resources websites. Media Studies activities available on both sites are accepted as validly assessing their relevant standards. New activities developed or adapted at Hagley are checked by the TIC of Media. The TIC has, where necessary, consulted with NZQA moderators and other teachers. Moderation procedures used within the department mean ongoing discussion with individual teachers about assessment standards occurs throughout the year.

This year, the journalism teacher and TIC of Journalism taught both levels which was advantageous in that there are similarities between the Standards and teaching programme at both levels, allowing the teacher to build on and develop the assessment activities effectively. Some formalised marking meetings were held to ensure ongoing consistent application of the Level 3 aligned standards, but there were also ongoing informal discussions between the journalism teacher and moderator, Andrew Tebbutt. As well, the TIC of Journalism has an honours degree in Journalism and has, and continues to, work in the journalism industry. The TIC of journalism has regular contact with other Media Studies teachers to ensure professional development continues.

Indicator 3: Teacher inquiry is used to inform practice.

Faith Oxenbridge This year my inquiry focus arose out of observing an interest from several students at both levels in particiapting in the externals so as to achieve a subject endorsement.

After the mid year mock exams I noticed that senior students lacked confidence, and more importantly, the knowledge, of how to prepare and study for examinations. When I asked students how they typically studied for exams they said – at best -­‐ they just read through the handouts in their folders, or did no study and relied on class instruction.

I realised that a) Hagley students are ill prepared not just in exam technique but also in effective study techniques and b) that although we prepare our students in understanding content and to unpack and answer examination questions, we assume that they know how to organise and study their content effectively, when many don’t and c) that for whatever reason, many of our students just do not study for exams. All of the students except for one who had attended a private school said they had never had any ‘teaching’ around how to prepare for an exam and usually did little to no preparation.

HOW I FRAMED MY INQUIRY Generally when we prepare students for an external, we support them with understanding how to unpack and answer questions and how to structure and write an essay, but I was interested to see if teaching students how to study effectively as well would increase their confidence as well. Students universally said they had no idea how to take notes and/or study content for an external. The majority of students who opted to sit the exam were wanting an endorsement which meant the focus of the study skills sessions needed to also include covering aspects of deeper learning/understanding of content as well as study skills. There were 5 students who wanted to sit the exam and signed up for our six study skills sessions (2 hours each).

WHAT I DID ABOUT IT Although I had a plan for what I wanted to cover in the 6 two hour sessions on exam preparation, I also wanted to remain flexible and responsive to students’ needs and voice as we worked through each process. The aspects I wanted to cover were: 1. How to make/take effective notes, (Transforming content) including skim reading, paraphrasing, summarising, using bullet points, writing in fragments and bullet points.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

42

I modelled appropriate note taking on the board, as well as encouraging students to discuss what an appropriate note for an important point might look like as we worked through ideas.

I also encouraged students to use colour to differentiate info and highlighters in the reading/gathering part. I read research that shows students who take notes by hand are more likely to internalise material.

2. How to organise notes. I gave students a four page (blank) booklet with note-­‐taking scaffolds to fill in as we worked through the various content aspects. This was important as it placed boundaries around how many notes they could take and to make decisions about what was important and helped them ‘contain their notes. My goal here was for students to – if they do engage in individual preparation – to have an easily accessible, contained study pack.

3. Knowing yourself as a learner – what works for you? Visual, written or a combination of note-­‐taking styles; how does discussion help. We experimented with putting info into diagram form, particularly in the first class where we co-­‐constructed and overview of our topic. I modelled diagrams on the board and how a diagram might look to hold important info, but also encouraged students to create their own diagrams.

4. Planning an essay plan – thinking in paragraphs.

5. Timed Practice writing – just paragraphs.

6. Choosing and Unpacking questions I also wanted the how I covered these aspects to be collaborative and interactive; that the sessions become a journey of discovery and learning in a trusting and open environment that harnesses the power of peers. Dialogue, not monologue. (Hattie) To that end we sat in a small group and I sat with the group unless I was using the board. Students were encouraged to respond to questions, to argue & discuss as they might in an external, and to share their practice paragraphs. I gave priority to asking students questions and referencing their prior learning and knowledge.

HOW IT WENT and NEXT STEPS These intervention were, I believe, effective, and all the students who attended the workshops reported going into their exams feeling confident and well-­‐prepared. One of the most interesting and unexpected aspects of this inquiry, was the impact/output of working in a small group. Two students who had not contributed to class discussions all year, became surprisingly vocal. The physical proximity also seemed to promote sharing of ideas and collaboration as well as confidence to contribute to discussions.

This is something I will look at putting into practice more in all my classes next year, although this was something outside of ‘normal class’ group work. The inquiry has given me food for thought as to how I might break my larger classes into small workshop groups to support differentiation, especially where classes have a wide range of abilities and skills.

As well as this I will definitely run these (optional) exam study workshops again, as I think regardless of whether students sit the externals or excel in the externals, I witnessed high engagement in the learning in a way I hadn’t seen in this particular group when teaching the class as a whole.

Confirmation of annual curriculum focused appraisal has been completed for all teachers.

Indicator 4: Achievement data is used to inform practice:

Internal and external results from 2014 show that: • 80% of students with results in year 12 journalism received 12 or more credits, while • 83% of students with results in year 13 journalism recieived 14 or more credits.

While these results are pleasing, involvement in externals is still low and I will be looking at ways to integrate external and internal standards more in 2015 to support student confidence in stitting externals.

Internal results for both classes also show that students who achieve are more likely to achieve merit or excellence in an internal standard in year 12 and 13 Journalism, than an achieved, which indicates that students are performing at a high level in all internals and that assessment tasks and practice are both designed to support students to perform well. For example: Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

43

MS 3.8 Write a Media text to meet the requirements of a brief N/A Achieved Merit Excellence 0 2 – 16.7% 8 – 66.7% 2. 16.7%

MS 3.7 Demonstrate understanding of a significant development in the media N/A Achieved Merit Excellence 0 2 – 18.2% 4 – 36.4% 5. 45.5%

MS 3.8 Produce a media product N/A Achieved Merit Excellence 0 1 – 8.3% 9 – 75% 2. 16.7%

These results (patterns) are consistent across all internals which reflects an inquirty mindset around improving practice where results in the past have been varied across standards – see 2013 Journalism Inquiry.

This year, my focus will be on continuing to support students to achieve high grades in internals, but also working closely with students who potentially might fail to attempt an assessment through lack of skills or confidence. My goal – and potentially inquiry focus – is to not just get students achieveing well, but to get more students achieving even at a lower level.

MEDIA STUDIES & FILM AND ELECTRONIC MEDIA SUBJECT LEADER: ANDREW TEBBUTT

Indicator 1: Quality teaching, learning and assessment materials and procedures are used in programmes at all levels.

Assessment materials audit Assessment materials are checked and modified over the course of the year based on the following: • Close analysis of the requirements of the standard informed by TIC prior involvment in external moderation, standards revision and exemplar annotation, and attendance at Best Practice Workshops • Student ability, engagement and goals • Class culture • Practical factors such as available resourcing, time, and current events or local developments • Feedback from NZQA and from teachers at Hagley and from other schools • Reflection on successes and difficulties fromm previous work with student, as well as student reflections and evaluations

Assessment material development is an ongoing process. Materials are never finalised, as it is always possible to improve and refine approaches based on the many factors listed above. The new activities developed for the aligned standards require modification given their generic nature and inappropriate (for this school) contexts. Ongoing attendance at Media Studies PD Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

44

sessions of various types will be a vital way of accessing the latest thinking from stakeholders and the sector at large. We have always developed local activities that meet the standard and student needs and this process will continue.

Schemes and related resources are complete and in place for programmes from Years 9 to 13. These materials are aligned to The New Zealand Curriculum, reflect best practice in teaching, learning and assessment, and are available for all staff.

Course outlines include: • the internal and external standards assessed and how these standards are integrated within the programme • conditions for assessment to ensure validity, authenticity • opportunity for further assessment • absences policy • appeals policy

Effective moderation practice At Levels 1, 2 and 3, teachers moderate student work samples with Andrew throughout the year for each standard they offer. Teachers are encouraged to submit this material during the assessment process so that any changes necessary can be managed well. Moderation tracking sheets for each teacher are maintained and copies of all moderated work are filed.

In addition, staff meet at various points through the year to mark and discuss samples of work to share and develop understanding of the national standard.

Internal moderation processes The teachers in this subject have confirmed that internal moderation processes have been completed for results reported in 2014.

Indicator 2: Assessment is at the national standard.

Competent assessor statements describe how teachers ensure that their assessments are accurate and consistent with national standards.

Competent assessor statement: Andrew Tebbutt • Teachers use activities from the TKI website and locally developed activities, many of which have been approved by the external moderation process. New activities developed at Hagley are checked by Andrew Tebbutt for consistency.

• All externally moderated materials have been retained. There is a strong external moderation history from 2002. Moderation reports for all standards selected confirm that activities and assessment practice are generally at the national standard.

• Samples of work are from all assessors are checked by Andrew Tebbutt for consistency. These form the basis for discussion on the national standard where appropriate.

• Teachers are encouraged to attend the local cluster group meetings and the best practice workshops where available.

In 2014, some work submitted externally for moderation caused concern.

Standard Approve or Modify Work Agreed 91494 X 0/6 Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

45

91495 A 7/8

Following an appeal to clarify the decision on 91494, the report was ammended to: Standard Approve or Modify Work Agreed 91494 M 0/6

Media teachers are in the process of conducting a detailed critique of their practice in response to this.

Andrew has consulted with a moderator over interpretation of the standard.

Before materials are offered in 2015, the following will occur: • PD to build understanding of the requirements of the planning standards (led by Andrew) • Revision of activities-­‐ instructions, examplar (supervised by Andrew) • Attendance at a best-­‐practice workshop; learnings to be disseminated • Contact to be made with another school specialising in media production

Indicator 3: Teacher inquiry is used to inform practice.

One teacher completed an inquiry in these subject areas during 2014. They explored the barriers to successful production in senior media studies classes. The new approach tried was to suggest students try new genre to work with. The inquiry reported anecdotal success, but overall achievement in production standards remains low.

Annual curriculum focused appraisal has been completed for the teachers of this subject.

Indicator 4: Achievement data is used to inform practice.

Baseline Data: In 2014, a careful analysis of internal and external achievement data shows that there is significant and problematic under-­‐performance in achievement in Film courses.

How did Film perform?

In 11FTV, only 5 students of 22 with results gained 14+ credits. A further 5 students gained 0 credits or no results at all, out of the initial roll of 26.

In 12FTV, 0 students of 5 with results gained 14+ credits. A further 7 students gained 0 credits or no results at all, out of the initial roll of 12.

In 13FPP, 2 students of 5 with results gained 14+ credits. A further 15 students gained 0 credits or no results at all, out of the initial roll of 20.

Another way of quantifying these results is as follows.

Of 58 students who enrolled in senior film courses: • 27 (46.6%) gained no credits at all • 7 (12.1%) gained 14+ credits

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

46

The teacher of these courses commented that the 2014 cohort was an unusual one.

The figures for 2013 are as follows: Of 40 students enrolled at Year 12 and 13: • 17 (42.5%) gained no credits at all • 11 (27.5%) gained 14+ credits

The figures suggest that the 2014 cohort did not achieve at the top end as well as that for 2013, but there were a similar proportion who achieved nothing at all.

Actions: A comprehensive approach is required to improve this performance. Andrew will begin to work with the teacher concerned to make appropriate changes.

The primary goals must be to: • reduce the number of students achieving nothing • increase the proportion achieving 14+ to reasonable levels

Suggested targets for 2015: Reduce 0-­‐credits from 46.6% to 25% of enrollees.

Increase 14+ credits from 12.1% to 30% of enrollees.

Possible strategies include course design modifications, revision to assessment activities, offering more standards, and changing teaching practice. However, an added complication to all these strategies is that the teacher concerned is undergoing a competency proceeding.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

47

ENGLISH LANgUAGE LEARNING Manager: Lesley Cowie

ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNING SUBJECT LEADER: [NCEA] KAY MCGOWAN

Indicator 1: Quality teaching, learning and assessment materials and procedures are used in programmes at all levels.

Assessment materials audit Assessments in ELL are cumulative and contribute to NZCEL, in other subjects, NCEA, English and Literacy standards. The latest versions of all assessments that are used in Levels Foundation to 3 ELL are regularly updated and held in a central file. The materials used are from TKI, commercially aquired, and in-­‐school teacher-­‐generated assessments. These have been written by teachers, as well as by HOD and TICs as members of regional and national clusters and networks. There has been a continuing focus on building capacity across the department where teachers create relevant tasks that mirror NZQA approved assessments but are derived from classroom topics. Teacher generated assessments are verified and moderated externally by national moderators.

All ELL activities available on TKI are checked to ensure that they are accepted by moderators as validly assessing their relevant standards. An outline of the process that teachers need to adhere to, when preparing to provide the opportunity for students to attempt achieving a standard, is given to all teachers. It includes teacher familiarisation with the requirements of a standard, steps to take while teaching towards achievement of a standard, how to present student work for moderation, and storage of materials. There is an emphasis on accumulating a portfolio of work rather than a one off assessment activity.

From the beginning of 2014, the department offered unit standards as part of working towards gaining New Zealand Certificates in English Language from Foundation to Level 2. New EL unit standards at level 3 were offered in EAP classes. The department also introduced specific learning outcomes into EAP programmes that shadow the assessment criteria required for the Level 4 EAP standards for University entrance. In 13 EPA the learners were also offered learning outcomes that reflected the requirements for IELTS.

Schemes and related resources, course outlines and practices All courses have yearly updated schemes, that show assessments leading to qualifications. These are evolving documents that are revised, annually, by teachers. This occured at the end Term Four and will be revisited in the first three weeks of Term One. Included are learning outcomes appropriate to where students are at, and the students next steps. These next steps are directly related to the diagnostic testing at the beginning of Term One. Teaching materials for each course are annually added to, and updated, by teachers who develop units of work. These are stored in the ELL resource room and are available to all staff. Each unit of work directly relates to the learning outcomes as described in ELIP, and relect the values and key competencies in the NZC. Topics are chosen according to student interest and suitability for future pathways.

Students are made aware of what they are learning, why they are learning it, and their possible future pathways for community, workplace or academic study. This is done in a variety of ways such as initial placement tests, student interviews, part of the inquiry process, department documentation, and at classroom level by teachers using learning intentions. Internal and any external standards assessed in each course demonstrate the relationship between these standards and the learning that takes place throughout the course. In addition, students are made aware of the conditions for assessment to ensure validity and authenticity, opportunities for further assessment, the absences policy and the appeals policy.

Careers and pathways are essential to what we offer in ELL. Students are interviewed and a pathway plan is created as part of their learning. There are many pathways including; transition into careers and further study options.

Effective moderation practices For internal moderation of NCEA standards, all ELL teachers have at least four samples of student work moderated by the TIC before a credit can be awarded. If there is any uncertainty about a credit to be awarded or not, teachers may consult with the TIC or HOD. All reading and listening assessments are also checked by the TIC before grades can be given. Moderation is on-­‐going throughout the year Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

50

and after each task has been completed, as opposed to after all tasks have been completed. Moderation tracking sheets are kept by each teacher and updated. This shows moderation to be completed, and are submitted in August and September. Copies of moderated work are supplied by teachers to the TIC to keep on file.

On-­‐going professional learning takes place throughout the year and teachers teaching the same level are buddied, to ensure a standardised and consistent practice. This system is used to develop capacity among all staff in ELL so that teachers understand both the relationship between teaching programmes and assessment, as well as the national standard. A focus in 2014 has been on creating a more holistic approach to assessing students. A collection of student work is assessed against performance criteria, to show ability over several pieces of work. Hagley student exemplars are being gathered to show what work at the national standard looks like across all strands of the curriculum. These are discussed with buddies and in PLD groups.

In 2014, student portfolios will continue to be used to collect samples of work towards Literacy Level One, NZCEL, or progress as described in ELLP. This enables students’ progress to be captured over time, and enables students, teachers, and caregivers to share and celebrate student progress. The portfolios include student progress against ELLP (English Language Learning Progressions).

2014 NZQA moderation: activities Standard

Moderation result [activities]

US 17358

M

US 3482

A

US 17358 has been addressed within the department. We have noted that assessments must be done in another area if other students are practicing and/or using notes or the board must be cleared. In addition, we have noted that videos must be enlarged and viewed on a programme where they can be seen more clearly during moderation.

Internal moderation processes The teachers in this subject have confirmed that internal moderation processes have been completed for results reported in 2014.

Indicator 2: Assessment is at the national standard.

Competent assessor statements describe how teachers ensure that their assessments are accurate and consistent with national standards.

Competent assessor statement: ELL teachers Teachers use ELL activities and exemplars, when available, from the MOE TKI and ESOL online websites. All ELL activities on these sites have been accepted as validly assessing the relevant standards. Only the materials that have been accepted by National Moderators have been downloaded from TKI and held in the central file. All teachers using ELL unit standards check with the TIC or HOD before doing any assessments to make sure the assessment activities they are using are valid.

Throughout 2014 we have used the expertise of advisors, HODs of schools outside and within Hagley, and developed a core group of teachers with assessment expertise within the department.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

51

2014 NZQA Moderation: student work Standard

Moderation result [student work]

US 3482

4/4

US 17358

3/4

Indicator 3: Teacher inquiry is used to inform practice.

A wide range of teacher inquiry approaches were used and shared in ELL by all teachers. In general, these were centred around teachers trialling solutions to recurring problems and making changes to improve their classroom practice. Most importantly, the process brought teachers together to find and share new (and existing) knowledge, reflect with others, and set future actions and goals to help student learning and guide professional growth.

While teachers were all asked to identify a group of learners they could differentiate their teaching and learning with, they formed their own inquiry questions. This happened at various stages of the inquiry process and didn’t follow a neat linear sequence. Consistent with previous years, the process of inquiry was quite fluid and responsive as teachers engaged in gathering a wide range of evidence about their learners, gained new knowledge, and then reflected with others about what was happening with their target group. This apparent “messiness” appears to be particularly important when designing learning questions and looking into research, and is part of how ELL teachers have defined, and made sense of, their own inquiry experience and student outcomes.

The learning questions roughly fell into three categories.

• Questions driven from shared frustrations or problems around meeting the needs of a particular group of learners.

• Questions from curiosity as to how a “new learning” or an improved teacher practice could contribute to, or form, an effective new practice for themselves and their target learners.

• An investigation into an observation, outcome or learning from a previous inquiry project. As we teach two year programmes in ELL, this seemed valid, as teachers would have many of the same learners in the following year. The learners in the second year, are often the target group we wish to raise the achievement of.

2014 teaching as inquiry projects: a summary of projects completed by ELL teachers: Sarah Denny: How can task based learning improve learner’s critical and creative thinking skills?

Margaret Kirk: How can intensive teaching and learning of vocabulary enhance the ability of ELL’s to use the English language effectively?

Nathan Keys: How can an intensive spelling programme raise spelling competency of students who are almost achieving EL level 2?

Kay McGowan: How can I improve my students understanding and use of connectives to improve their writing and speaking?

Barbara Wilkinson: How can the teaching of numeracy lessons taught in topics throughout the year develop the cocabulary and build the confidence of students to live in NZ? Tara DeConinck: Will teaching the use of subject/verb agreeement to form a complete sentence improve lower level students’ writing of a basic text for practical purposes?

Rosaline Dey: Does oral language development have a significant impact on teh writing ability of students whose first language is not English?

Thomas King: How can the use of music and song facilitate a potentially greater “learning focus” for a specific target group?

Trish Ryan: How can restricting the use of electronic dictionaries impact students ability to write and speak English?

Lesley Cowie: How can the teaching of explicit editing strategies improve the writing of students who are at the top of the class.

Comment Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

52

In 2015, we plan to align our inquiries more closely to the Window into Practice document. We plan to shift our focus more to analysing our actions, and then the experiences and outcomes that directly result from them. We will then try to identify and collate what we individually and, as a community, have learnt from our investigations. This will help us make some links towards identifying “best practices”, specific to ELL at Hagley. We will still target individuals and groups of learners, and “research” ways to assist them, however we may focus less on the process of researching ie. finding something new, “banking it”, then applying it. We would like to look at our individual and collective knowledge as an outcome of the inquiry process over the last few years. We consider these practices need to be “captured”, and not lost, as they have addressed real concerns and motivations of teachers. These findings we believe will make an important contribution to further the development of ELL programmes and pedagogy.

Annual curriculum focused appraisal has been completed for the teachers of this subject.

Our appraisal process in 2014 was integrated into teaching and learning over the whole year. We used a process where teachers identified an area in their inquiry to focus on, then developed a range of resources and trialled them. The process included observations, gathering data/evidence, collecting student voice, filming, trialling strategies and approaches, and discussions around their expeiences and goals. These were shared in PLD and mentoring meetings throughout the year. The inquiry process was celebrated at the end of the year, where all teachers were given time to “make visible” and showcase their investigations and learning.

Indicator 4: Achievement data is used to inform practice.

Baseline data: Community Language Learning: 127 students were enrolled in our adult community language learning programme. Our target was for 85% of these students to be engaged in an assessment towards a qualification. Results in several senior courses indicate that 94% of our adult students gained an assessment towards NZCEL. In the academic programme, 15 students were engaged in our year 11 academic course. All 15 of these students gained credits at level 3 which enables them to engage in mainstream courses at Hagley or other institutions.

In the full time Studying at High School programme, 47 students were engaged. 22 of these students gained assessments which enabled them to transition from intensive English language learning to mainstream studies. 16 of the students out of the 47 began studying at Hagley in term 3 or later which means that that only 6 full year students stayed in the intensive programme.

Target: 85% or more of students to be engaged in an assessment that leads to a qualification. Within a 2 year period, students at workplace literacy (literacy level 1 core generic) gain this qualification. (date pending 2015) Actions: Having identified the target group, we intend to consider for 2016 a packaged programme that engages our academic students in studies that will allow then university entrance.

Outcomes: If we offer a university entrance programme in 2016 our students who are enrolling from other schools at age 20+ will have opportunity to gain NCEA as well as IELTS if they wish to go to university or CPIT or other tertiary institutions.

Evaluation: We need this because our students enrol during the entire year. Our other variance is that pre-­‐literate learners often take up to 2 years before they can participate in an assessment at level 1. In addition, coordination with mainstream subject teachers regarding assessment needs of ELL learners and appropriate pathways.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

53

Planning for follow on actions: •

The strategy is being sustained for the future and also extended to building more assessment activities so that adults can receive level 1 and 2 NZCEL certificates.

•

Coordination with mainstream subject leaders regarding ELL learners in year 13 subjects.

•

Ongoing liaison and transition for IELTS into tertiary courses.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

54

MAths HOD: Jon Crampton MATHS Subject Leaders: Jon Crampton, Bernie Frankpitt and Martine Carter

MATHEMATICS

Indicator 1: Quality teaching, learning and assessment materials and procedures are used in programmes at all levels.

Assessment materials audit The Mathematics Department uses a mixture of assessment tasks. Some have been written by the New Zealand Association of Mathematics Teachers (NZAMT), most have been provided by TKI/NZQA and we have written some of our own. All assessment tasks (from whatever source) are moderated internally before use, following the department moderation policy. This policy requires any teacher creating a new task to check it against the standard definition and get other teachers to check that the standard is met, solutions are correct, judgement statements are clear and that the questions are written in a form that is easily understood by students. An internal check sheet is completed for all new assessments. A folder is kept for each year level (L1,2,3) containing all our internal assessments and the moderation checklist for each of those assessments. Also included in the folder are each standard, any clarifications and the NZQA exemplars.

We use assessment tasks provided by NZAMT which have been written by other maths teachers at their annual writing camp in January. Martine Carter (responsible for NCEA assessments) checks that tasks are updated in line with any changes as they are announced. Teachers also look at the moderators’ reports each year to ensure that they pick up any significant issues. Tasks are also modified in the light of comments from external NZQA moderators. The addition of the ‘Resources’ section on the NZQA website has been very useful.

After a teacher uses an assessment task in their class or during department moderation meetings amendments may be suggested. Any further modification is carried out in consultation with other teachers. Each assessment is coded and dated when modification occurs so that teachers can ensure that they are using the most up-­‐to-­‐date version. These are then stored in the L1,2,3 folders mentioned above as well as in electronic form. Teachers only use assessments that have already been peer-­‐moderated and are therefore in these folders.

Schemes and related resources During 2013 and 2014 we undertook the rewriting of all the schemes of work for our courses from year 9 to year 13. The bulk of this work has been completed with each course having set achievement objectives and the elaborations on these. Our last step is to continue to gather and add in our best teaching resources. Especially in regards to strategies for teaching literacy in maths. Many of our students struggle with literacy so this was a major theme in the 2014 inquiry projects. Ideas learnt through inquiry have been shared with the whole department.

Also in 2014 we wrote new common assessment activities for the year 9 and 10 schemes of work. Each unit of work (9 year 9 units and 9 year 10 units) has a bank of assessment questions ranging from NZ Curriculum level 2 to level 5. Teachers use this to compile an assessment activity that matches the level of their class. Individual students in the same class may sit different assessments as our junior classes are streamed for literacy not numeracy and so have widely varied maths ability. The results of these assessments can be used directly on our school reports.

We will also keep a central record of the year 9 and 10 unit test marks for all classes (levels 3 – 5) so that we can monitor each student’s progress through year 9 and 10. This will allow us to put any necessary interventions in place, allow us to ensure correct placement of students at year 11 and to allow us to reflect on our teaching practice at year 9 and 10.

During term 4 of 2014 we introduced an end of year exam for our year 10 classes. This took the form of an achievement standard (AS 1.11 Investigating bivariate data). This standard is not used in our year 11 courses due to time constraints. The purpose of this was to focus our year 10 students on the level of work required to be successful in year 11 and also as a highly useful tool to help build their report writing skills. We were very pleased with the results. 83% of our year 10 students gained achievement or better.

Course outlines include: At the outset of each course that uses NCEA assessments we provide students with a course outline, a year planner, and an explanation of the school’s assessment policy. The outline provides the student with a list of the descriptive titles for the achievement standards that will be assessed during the course, their credit values and indication of whether a standard is internally or Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

56

externally assessed. The outline also advises the students of the equipment that they will need for the class, and the class’s homework policy. The year planner illustrates the duration of each topic in the course in calendar form and marks dates for internal assessment examinations and assessment report deadlines.

Since Hagley has significant new enrolments each year at each senior year level, it is common for teachers to tailor the topics in the course to suit the abilities and interests of the students. In this case the initial course outlines indicate the choices available and the outlines and year planners are adjusted as decisions about topics are made. The explanation of the school’s assessment policies describes the assessment forms used in the course. Where the course has an externally assessed component the document explains how practice exams provide evidence for derived grades in the case where students present an aegrotat. The explanation of the school’s assessment policy also describes the schools marking moderation, record keeping and reporting processes, the requirement for authenticity in student’s work and the school’s processes for handling cases of suspected cheating, and for handling students’ appeals for changes of grade.

Effective moderation practice The Mathematics Department moderates all assessments before use. All teachers that will use the standard are asked to check that the teacher guidelines, the assessment task and the marking schedule comply with the standard. The results of this moderation process are recorded on a standard form which is stored with a hard copy of the standard, the moderator’s comments, the task and the assessment schedule in our L1,2,3 folders mentioned earlier. The table below lists the standards that were moderated in 2014 and the judgement that the moderator made on each task’s compliance with the standard.

Standard

Moderation result [activities]

91029

Approved

91260

Approved

91575

Approved

The department’s staff moderate samples of their colleagues’ students’ work throughout the year. Each sample consists of the largest of 10% or three student scripts. The department holds a formal moderation meeting for each level when required, and at other times, student work is moderated on request. The department maintains moderation tracking sheets for each teacher for each course, and all student work, whether moderated or not, is retained for 2 years.

At the end of each year, teachers check the grades assigned on all student scripts from each class against a printed list of grades from the student information system. In addition, each teacher is required to submit their class lists to a peer teacher in the department. The peer randomly selects student names from the class list, and requires the teacher to present evidence of student scripts; the peer independently checks the marking on the scripts against the grades recorded in the student information system. Once this is done, teachers sign off on a department list which is then filed.

Internal moderation processes The teachers in this subject have confirmed that internal moderation processes have been completed for results reported in 2014. In 2014 we completed three NCEA cover sheets for three different standards as written evidence of our departments moderation checks. These were submitted to the school’s NCEA representative.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

57

Indicator 2: Assessment is at the national standard.

Competent assessor statements describe how teachers ensure that their assessments are accurate and consistent with national standards.

Competent assessor statement: Mathematics teachers During 2014 the Mathematics Department concentrated on reviewing and improving our stock of NCEA internal assessment materials. In particular we continue to work on improving the language in our assessments in order to make them more accessible to students with a wide range of English language skills, we continue to improve the marking schedules model answers and collection of exemplars, and we continue to look for new tasks to provide alternative assessments for students who need resits or who are repeating assessments from previous years. We have revised the tasks that we use with the adult numuracy standards using a combination of tasks from the NZQA website, and tasks we have written ourselves.

The members of the department continue to avail themselves of professional development opportunities including assessment best practice workshops run by NZQA, seminars and workshops run by the Canterbury Mathematical Association. We have encouraged all department members to attend external professional development that was appropriate to the levels that they teach and have successfully broadened the staff’s curriculum and assessment expertise. The NZQA seminar on writing new contexts for example standards helped us in our programme of improvements to our assessment materials. The Canterbury Mathematical Association Statistics Day continues to be a valuable professional development resource particularly to improve our understanding of the new senior statistics curriculum and the associated standards. The department has close ties to our local association. All our staff are members and one of our staff is on the CMA committee.

This year we have continued to coordinate our assessment marking and moderation through meetings that involve many of the teachers using a single assessment, but increasing assessment expertise has allowed us to successsfuly combine this approach with more flexible peer moderation. In the few instances where we have a sole assessor of a standard the staff member concerned has asked colleagues from other schools to moderate the assessment task and student work.

2014 NZQA Moderation: marking of student work: Standard 91029 91260 91575

Moderation result [student work] 8/8 8/8 8/8

The 2014 moderation report on marking student work produced excellent results that are summarised in the above table. The results are a testament to the time that we have put into department wide moderation meetings that strive to ensure uniform marking, solid justification of grades, and a clear delineation of grade boundaries. The investment in professional development, particularly sessions with direct communication between teachers and moderators, and the discussions with the NZQA moderator who reviewed our moderation policies in 2014 were also very helpful in achieving this result.

Indicator 3: Teacher inquiry is used to inform practice.

2014 summaries of teaching as inquiry projects: Mathematics Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

58

Jon Crampton Continued the literacy theme of 2013 with the year 10 literacy enhancement students. Jon further researched the work of Aaron Fisher especially looking at the importance of getting students to comprehend and produce text beyond their level of expertise. “High challenge, high support environment” otherwise you contribute toward the “Matthew Effects” where the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.

Angela Brett The amount of writing that our maths students are required to do has increased dramatically over the last few years. Angela attended Hagley Writers School to learn how writing is taught by someone who is trained in this. She wanted to bring back to her classes bits and pieces that she could mould into useable techniques for her math classes.

Martine Carter Noticed that a number of her students really struggled to read and understand the language used in many of the maths assessment tasks. (Many adapted from NZAMT).

This year she utilised the expertise of Pauline De Vere (spent 2013 investigating the language used in teaching and assessment) to help rewrite many of the year 11 assessment tasks into easier to read formats whilst still staying within NZQA requirements.

Bela Adash Noticed that a group of her social science students were casually racist on a regular basis during class discussions (racist slurs and common misconceptions). She found some research from the US on creating racism free classrooms and workplaces and tried to incorporate those strategies into her classroom.

Suhaylah Richards Wanted to improve the learning of the Maori students in particular, in her year 10 class. Attended a workshop run by Robin Averill on developing cultural competency in the classroom.

“Factors that contribute to strong teacher-­‐student relationships are vital to understand because of the influence these relationships have on achievement and motivation, particularly for minority group students”.

Tony Wright Wanted to improve the understanding of fractions for a group of 8 lower achieving students in 9YD. Tony researched the teaching of fractions, in particular good practice teaching and also common student misconceptions about fractions. The results were mixed – many of our students arrive at high school with a very weak knowledge base.

Catherine Taylor Catherine noticed that in her 12MAG night class they run out of time to complete as many problems as she would like. So she introduced the “flipped classroom” for the probability unit to see if that would solve the time issues. Students studied the content at home using internet videos/textbooks and completed the exercises at school.

Graeme Mark With many of his very weak year 10 students Graeme noticed “their apparent inability (or willingness) to try things when they become challenged”. He decided to implement similar strategies with this class that were so successful with his senior class last year. His goal was to establish the same risk taking culture with these reluctant students.

Nadeeka Idamegedera Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

59

Nadeeka noticed that her ESOL beginners had a very poor understanding of basic number facts coupled with the language barrier. Utilising the expertise of Pauline De Vere, Nadeeka tested the students using a primary school new entrant test to determine exactly where they were at. She then introduced new teaching strategies aimed at specific weaknesses found in the testing – including context based learning.

Bernie Frankpitt Bernie continued the statistical literacy work with his junior class that he began last year. He noticed that while students grow up with far greater exposure to communication technologies than the generation before them, they still need to be taught how to use technology processes that productively support their learning. He also introduced interventions learnt from previous department inquiry projects to aid students in their writing e.g. he moved students from heavily scaffolded tasks to tasks with little scaffolding.

Annual curriculum focused appraisal has been completed for the teachers of this subject.

Indicator 4: Achievement data is used to inform practice.

An analysis of the 2014 NCEA results showed that the percentage of students gaining 12+ credits in most classes is below the college target of 80%.

There are a number of issues in maths which make this a difficult target to achieve. For example: • Year 11 students who have the primary goal of achieving their 10 numeracy credits only • Year 11 and 12 students who gain around 10 credits from the internals and then choose not to sit the more difficult externals • Students in the evening classes who enrol during the year to catch up on a select few credits

We have targeted two courses in particular to try to address the first 2 issues in those courses. 12MAA maths had high SNA, ABS and N rates for the algebra and calculus externals (the most difficult standards). We have a number of students enter 12MAA each year with only an A in year 11 algebra (an M is preferable). But if we don’t allow them to take this course then we deny them the opportunity to study year 12 algebra and calculus. For some of these students the step up proves too great. In 2015 we will identify early in term 3 those students who are not at the level required to attempt the algebra and calculus externals. They will instead work on two more internals (sequences and trigonometry) whilst the remainder of the class study toward the externals.

11MAA maths had significant increases in merits and excellences for the algebra CAT exam but noticeably increased ABS and SNA for the graphing external (very difficult). 70% of the students gained 12+ credits and another 15% gained 10 or 11 credits. In 2015 we will identify those students who struggle with the graphing content taught in term 2 and the algebra content taught in a cyclic approach throughout the year. These students will then work on the measurement internal in term 3 whilst the remainder of the class study toward the graphing external.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

60

PERFORMING ARTS HOD: Cameron Mattox DANCE Subject Leader: Candice Egan

DRAMA Subject Leader: Fiona Browlie

HAGLEY THEATRE COMPANY Director: Cameron Mattox

MUSIC Subject Leader: Kevin Roberts

PERFORMING ARTS DANCE SUBJECT LEADER: CANDICE EGAN

Indicator 1: Quality teaching, learning and assessment materials and procedures are used in programmes at all levels.

Assessment materials audit All assessment activities in Dance (levels 1-­‐3) have been checked and assessed accurately against national standards. TKI resources have been used as a starting point by the teacher to develop her own assessment resources to support and implement the standards. These have been checked and moderated with other dance specialists from both Hagley and from the wider New Zealand dance community.

Schemes and related resources Dance coursework at all levels is planned against the New Zealand Curriculum, reflecting the language and intent of the New Zealand Curriculum.

Achievement objectives, key competencies and significant values are identified and communicated to students via the course handbook and module guidelines: • Course material reflects the Arts Achievement Objectives in the New Zealand Curriculum.

• Significant values to focus on in dance: excellence, innovation inquiry and curiosity, community and participation.

• Key Competencies to focus on in dance: participating and contributing, using language symbols and texts, managing self.

The following items are stored both digitally with the TIC of Dance and as hardcopies in the department office: • NCEA Dance handbooks and course guidelines/outlines.

• NCEA Dance achievement standards that are relevant to the Hagley Community College Dance programme.

• Overall curriculum plans for all levels.

Course outlines include: All course outlines and practices for the NCEA Dance programme follows the Hagley Assesssment Policy.

Year 11 – 13 course outlines in Dance include: • The internal and external standards assessed in dance.

• Conditions for assessment to ensure validity.

• Opportunities if appropriate or applicable for reassessment.

• Absences policy.

• Appeals policy.

Effective moderation practice Internal moderation for levels 1, 2 and 3 Dance assessment was completed via the following procedures: • Selected assessments were internally moderated with Wendy Lahy-­‐Neary and Fiona Brownlie who are Performing Arts specialists at Hagley College.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

63

• 2014 assessment was compared to previously moderated standards from other years. These are kept as a resource in the department office • Joint marking with colleagues from other schools was undertaken when borderline or questionable results were given.

Internal moderation processes The teacher in this subject has confirmed that internal moderation processes have been completed for results reported in 2014.

Indicator 2: Assessment is at the national standard.

Competent assessor statements describe how teachers ensure that their assessments are accurate and consistent with national standards.

Competent assessor statement: Candice Egan As a sole assessor in dance, Candice actively engages in methods relevant to this subject area to ensure that assessments are accurate and consistent with national standards:

• • • • •

Referring to feedback and moderation results from externally moderated materials.

Developing a strong archive of assessment materials in the form of videoed performances and student choreographies.

Consulting subject associations (Canterbury Dance Educators Network) network industry links (Dancenet) and in particular colleagues in other schools.

All externally moderated material has been retained.

Feedback from other teachers.

Indicator 3: Teacher inquiry is used to inform practice.

Candice Egan My inquiry project for 2014 was to action a different approach to teaching Choreography with particular focus on Achievement Standard 2.2 (Choreograph a Solo Dance) for the Level 2 NCEA Dance curriculum. I have noticed that students in Level 2 Dance struggle to feel motivated to reach their potential achievement within the choreography task.

TARGET GROUP AND BACKGROUND: My target group is level 2 dance students at Hagley College. Most of the students in the class have had one year of prior learning in the subject (Level 1).

For others, this was the first year that they had studied Dance. Discussions earlier in the year with the level 2 students indicated that they were all motivated to attempt and complete the choreography standard. For example, after viewing the Hagley Dance Company performance which included solos (level 4), students expressed that they were motivated to complete their own solos for assessment. Observation of the level 2 students in choreographic scaffolding tasks indicated that they were all capable of devising imaginative movement sequences. However, this was only when the task did not require them to order and structure the movement into a unified composition. Here is was identified that some students lacked confidence in recognising their work was imaginative and instead compared their work to popular culture and what they/their peers consider to be ‘cool’, favouring mostly unsophisticated ideas. The above information suggests an immaturity in dance choreography, participation and success. In turn affecting their long term motivation, confidence and resilience to reach their potential in the solo task.

A NEW APPROACH: The biggest change that I made this year to the solo standard was the task itself. Students were given a TKI adapted task, ‘On Your Chair’ which asked students to use and manipulate the chair as part of their choreography. Students also had to create an intention/meaning for the chair. This task enabled the students to work with a very clear stimulus, but with enough flexibility for them to find a movement theme that they could connect with.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

64

Scaffolding Tasks -­‐ prior to students receiving the solo standard, I provided them with a number of short and engaging choreographic tasks where they individually choreographed short sequences using a chair. Students created a strong choreographic sections, which was encouraging for me to see as this would directly lead into the solo task. Students recorded these sequences and were encouraged to use them for the solo standard.

A focus on building movement confidence and dance literacy through teaching the repertoire standard (6 credits) and the theatre dance (4 credits) was taken in order to prepare students mentally and physically for the solo task.

IMPROVED ENGAGEMENT AND ACHIEVEMENT : In 2014, five students out of the class attempted the solo standard. All of the students that attempted the standard, achieved the standard.

There was one excellence grade which was an improvement from the previous year. All students who received an achieved for the task did not use the original sequences from the scaffolding tasks. The two students that received a merit and excellence used the prior work. The demonstrates an immaturity and failure to recognise what is suitable material to help them reach their potential.

The main reason for students not attempting the standard was that they ‘don’t need the credits’ and lack of motivation to choreograph and perform by themselves.

SUMMARY AND FUTURE APPROACH: Students appreciate the end result of choreography, however, some students lack the necessary combination of skills such as problem solving, literacy and organisational with the required blend of creativity, resilience and ability to take risks in order to feel confident and motivated to reach their potential in this task. The following items may help to address some of these concerns: Individual teacher: • More emphasis on the aspect of structuring and ordering of movement for the solo. For example, adopting more of a theory based approach on how to organise movement similar to how an English teacher teaches essay writing and paragraph structure.

• Building more awareness of the challenges involved in creating a solo, without scaring the students, before they attempt the standard.

• Continue to provide examples of effective and imaginative solos to create interest and intrigue.

Hagley’s dance curriculum: The launch of a year 10 dance class in 2014 has provided a new platform to introduce students to dance choreography and engagement in the subject specific tasks. This will provide students with a possible two years prior experience in choreography before attempting choreographic tasks at level 2. Introducing a year 9 dance class at Hagley College would provide an additional year of skill development. A subject proposal for year 9 dance has been submitted by myself every year for the last three years. I am awaiting feedback on current and past proposals. The introduction of a year 13 dance class this year provides a stronger pathway for the subject. It provides a goal for students hoping to achieve in dance at the higher level and justifies the need to achieve and engage in choreographic tasks at lower levels.

National: NZQA has not held a best practice workshop for dance since 2012. There are no examples of NZQA approved, level 2 solos available

Annual curriculum focused appraisal has been completed for the teacher of this subject.

Indicator 4: Achievement data is used to inform practice.

Based on 2014 data, students in levels 1-­‐3 generally gain more credits and better results from the performance standards than from the choreographic standards in NCEA Dance. My inquiry project in previous years addresses this issue at level 2. This year, I will continue to explore, research and develop ways of motivating students to develop sophisticated choreography.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

65

Response to NCEA Level 2 data: The results below encourage me to continue offering an engaging level 2 dance programme: • 100% of students gained 14 credits or more • 62% gained 18-­‐22 credits

Response to retention rates in 2014: A number of students left the education system for a variety of reasons. Reasons include joining the workforce or attending to personal health issues. Some adult students left Hagley College for family reasons. Several students were wrongly placed into level 2 dance as they had injuries that restricted them from engaging in the class work. Inevitably they shifted to other subjects where they could do the work. I will continue to engage with each of my students and use the Kamar system to track, monitor and report student attendance and absence.

Response to NCEA Level 3 data: Student achievement in 2014: Many of the 2014 level 3 dance students have limited prior experience in the subject and so these successful results are a testament to the course that has been developed and encourage me to continue offering an engaging level 3 dance programme. 100% achieved over 12 credits annd 90% achieved 18-­‐30 credits.

Hagley Dance Company (HDC): Response to disparity in student achievement from 2013-­‐2014: In 2013 100% students gained over 14 credits versus 60% in 2014. The reason for this disparity is because 40% of students in 2014 had already obtained their UE and most level 3 dance credits at previous schools.

Student achievement in 2014: All student completing level 3 dance within HDC course gained 26 level 3 dance credits. I will continue to offer the opportunity to achieve level 3 dance credits to dance company students within the full-­‐time dance course.

DRAMA SUBJECT LEADER: FIONA BROWNLIE

Indicator 1: Quality teaching, learning and assessment materials and procedures are used in programmes at all levels.

Assessment materials audit All teaching topics, materials and learning from Year 9 to Year 13 are taken from the curriculum and are linked to each other so that a natural progression is in place. At NCEA levels 1, 2 and 3, care is taken to modify TKI available assessment tasks for our individual institution. As the students are unique at Hagley, some minor modifications are often needed after moderation. Assessment tasks and schedules and grades are reviewed and moderated within the department each year before use, and then again after the assessment period. With the introduction of new aligned standards, new assessment tasks and schedules have been produced and endorsed by NZQA. Closer use to these reliable resources should mean more tasks are approved rather than needing modification. All drama teachers attend cluster meetings, where drama teachers from around the South Island meet to discuss innovations and changes to assessment.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

66

Schemes and related resources All schemes and resources are updated and reviewed at the end and beginning of each year. Firstly, they are checked to examine whether or not they have been appropriate and have worked.

Secondly, they are analysed to ensure they are appropriate for each individual class. All schemes and resources are linked to the National Curriculum, and are created amongst the department staff.

Course outlines The drama department ensures that all outlines and practices for NCEA programmes follow the Hagley Assessment Policy. This policy is evident in the Drama Handbook, which students are given at the beginning of the year. The handbook clearly indicates all assessments available at each level in drama. It also details assessment issues such as re-­‐assessment, appeal of marks etc.

The course outline also covers the national curriculum and the key competencies, which are essential to drama.

At the beginning of the year, each student receives a year plan or course outline, which indicates the dates for assessments throughout the year. This is particularly important for the major productions, as many rehearsals are required out of class time.

Effective moderation practice Internal moderation is completed within the department. Internal moderation is also completed with our buddy school, Hillmorton High School. Hillmorton and Hagley share a similar range of diverse students, so this moderation is very useful in identifying issues and/or trends with assessment tasks and marks.

At levels 1-­‐4 teachers within the department moderate most of the standards completed during the year. It is not possible to moderate all of them, as teachers are sole assessors sharing the same domain. The work to be moderated is live performance, which is taped, as well as the supporting written work. Records are kept in a moderation folder with completed top-­‐sheets to ensure our assessment activities are fair and valid. As seen by the table below, neither of the moderation tasks needed to be modified before use.

Moderation of shared standards Moderation of standards that are shared across departments, such as English, Technology and Media Studies, occurs by two main steps: • The activity is verified by the teacher with assessment expertise prior to use • A sample of student work is then moderated with the same teacher to ensure a national standard.

2014 NZQA moderation: activities Standard Moderation result [activities] 91517

A

Internal moderation processes The teachers in this subject have confirmed that internal moderation processes have been completed for results reported in 2014.

Indicator 2: Assessment is at the national standard.

Competent assessor statements describe how teachers ensure that their assessments are accurate and consistent with national standards.

Competent assessor statement: Fiona Brownlie Teachers adapt current TKI assessment schedules to suit the specific group of students being taught. Examples of current student work are used in creating the judgment and evidence Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

67

statements. All externally moderated materials have been retained, including the written and visual evidence. Exemplars of student work are, at times, shared at cluster meetings and at the official Best Practice Workshop with the moderator. These exemplars are kept and used with the students.

Dialogue within the department also ensures that the national standards are attained, along with informal moderation with our buddy school, Hillmorton High School. For moderation, clear and well-­‐constructed supporting evidence is supplied to the external moderator, so that they are able to see the extent of evidence collated and the reason why the assessment grade has been awarded.

2014 NZQA Moderation: student work Standard Moderation result [student work] 91517 5/7

The external moderator agreed with most of the decisions made, but disagreed with two of the grades awarded. The moderator determined that two Excellence grades were actually at the lower grade of Merit.

Indicator 3: Teacher inquiry is used to inform practice.

Fiona Brownlie The project focused on raising the achievement, engagement and retention of Maori students in Drama. Using Year 10, Year 11 and Year 12 Drama students as the focus group, the project investigated how these factors can be improved. A socio-­‐cultural approach was taken, analyzing the student’s social, historical and cultural factors. The main objective was to establish a culturally responsive classroom environment, so as to gain a better understand of the student’s backgrounds, and develop meaningful relationships with them. While the initial target group was Maori Drama students, the same strategies were implemented for all drama students.

In many respects the investigation in to how to better engage with Maori students, and make them feel included and comfortable in a Pakeha-­‐dominated classroom, was successful, but the results are very hard to quantify. When analyzing Maori Drama student attendance records, in all but one instance Drama was the class they attended the most. The one Maori Drama student that attended another class more often attended Dance, another Performing Arts subject. Engagement definitely improved, but further attention still needs to be made to help improve achievement results.

The Drama Department’s Inquiry focus for 2015 will continue to address the issues surrounding Maori student’s achievement level, engagement and retention. More focus will be spent on gaining a better understanding of Maoritanga, the Treaty of Waitangi, and incorporating te reo in class, when and where appropriate.

Annual curriculum focused appraisal has been completed for the teachers of this subject.

Indicator 4: Achievement data is used to inform practice.

Performance in externals Poor attendance and poor results in all the drama external exams indicate that more attention needs to be spent on preparing students for this standard. In the past the Drama exams have been some of the final exams in December, so many students chose not to sit them. Other students decided not to sit the exam as they had already gained sufficient internal credits during the year. Fortunately, the 2015 Drama exam has been scheduled for an earlier time in November.

During 2015 it is the department’s intention to better scaffold the students’ understanding of how to discuss drama elements, techniques and conventions in an exam environment. We intend to: Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

68

• Introduce the exam content earlier in the year, and discuss the relevant theories conventions and concerns, as each internal performance standard is completed.

• Take student to more live theatre performances, to ensure the students have a wider repertoire to discuss and analyze in the exam.

• Spend more attention on how to use specific drama terminology to assist in their written responses.

These strategies will hopefully result in more students choosing to sit the exams, and give them a better understanding of how to respond to the exam questions, improving their academic results.

Poor Results In 12FTA The student results for 12FTA in 2014 were considerably lower than expected. There was a range of reasons for this. Many of the performance-­‐based unit standards used for this class in previous years have expired and been withdrawn. Because of this, compatible achievement standards needed to be found from other departments, such as Media Studies and Technology.

This resulted in the course taking on a more technical slant, and with less assessment emphasis on performance and screen acting technique. As the teacher was teaching a range of new standards from different departments, she was not as familiar with the assessment tasks and criteria as she would have liked.

To prevent this happening in 2015, the department has: • Enabled students to gain Year 12 Drama and Year 12 FTA credits in either class, giving students more performance and directing based assessment opportunities.

• Gained a better understanding of the new technology standards, so as to better scaffold the content and teaching scheme.

The 12FTA year plan has been restructured, linking assessment tasks together to make standards worth fewer credits more relevant and attractive. The timing of assessments has been changed, to enable students to gain credits earlier in the year.

HAGLEY THEATRE COMPANY DIRECTOR: Cameron Mattox

Indicator 1: Quality teaching, learning and assessment materials and procedures are used in programmes at all levels.

Course outlines The Theatre Company hands out course information outling all policies and assessment opportunities. This handout will be supported by individual tutors who outline their own method of assessment for each particular subject. The course outline for each post-­‐secondary subject involve key competencies from the National Curriculum.

Effective moderation practices Teachers place emphasis on integrating learning and assessment. The subjects that are offered for moderation are overseen by a variety of staff within the Theatre Company. Usual practice is for two teachers to internally moderate the subject with outside advice called upon of needed.

Indicator 2: Assessment is at the national standard.

Competent assessor statements describe how teachers ensure that their assessments are accurate and consistent with national standards.

Competent assessor statement: Cameron Mattox / Theatre Company tutors Tutors adapt current TKI assessment schedules to suit the specific task used and examples of current student work is used in creating the judgement and evidence statements. All externally moderated materials have been retained, including both written and visual and aural evidence. Dialogue within the company also ensures that national standards are atained along with Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

69

informal dialogue with external moderators. For example, clear and well constructed supporting evidence is given by the tutor to the external moderator so they are able to see the extent of evidence collated.

For the theatre company programme, external advice is taken from two other institutions. Toi Whakaari – National Drama School and UNITEC school of Performing Arts. Also advice will taken from Leaders in their fields e.g. For our playwriting course Brendan Bennets who will be a new tutor in this subject will have the advice of two other specialists we call on; Laura Borrowdale and Faith Oxenbridge who are former tutors of this subject.

Indicator 3: Teacher inquiry is used to inform practice.

Cameron Mattox: The proposed study was: In 2014 I wanted to focus on the standard of report writing that is given to students in the Theatre Company. In the year 2013 I was not satisfied with depth and standard of reporting and felt this could be improved substantially. Two surveys were undertaken throughout the year to ascertain what the second year students thought of the reporting. The first one looked at the what the strengths and weaknesses were of the current report writing and what they felt needed to be included. Once in-­‐service work had been carried out and the new style of reports were released the students were again surveyed as to their opinions.

Fiona Brownlie: Fiona took a socio-­‐cultural approach to her inquiry report, analyzing her students social, historical and cultural factors, as well as how they present themselves in her class. Her goal was to increase the number of Maori students choosing to study drama, as well improving their engagement, performance and academic results. Fiona has alsoattempted to establish a culturally responsive environment.

Kevin Roberts & Van Elkayem: A joint study which looked at raising student achievment in the Senior level. The proposal was to offer Level 2 & 3 students the opportunity to score, rehearse and record the best original compostions. As well as the recording, it was also aimed to retain students for the following year. Due to the work schedule and ambitious nature of the project, six of the twelve proposed scores were finished. It became evident that there is a need for a studio technician for the following years if they are to achieve 100% recordings.

Sue McLachlan: Sue undertook a inquiry which looked at the lack of general knowledge of students who came into the music classes. Many of the students came from a non-­‐musical background and didn’t have the training in the traditional junior music classes. Sue targetted Year 12 and 13 students in the school of music. All lacked the basic general knowledge.

With the reformatting lessons to allow for listening exercises, term 3 saw a much improved standard by the students.

Joe McCallum: Joe was inspired for his inquiry after working at Hornby High school as an ITM teacher of drumming. Using his time at the school, Joe explored the pacific rhythms with two students who had disengaged from exploring the tradition further. Using traditional and contemporary drumming beats, he attempted to engage them in further study. As the study grew, Joe saw an opportunity to incorporate Pacifica into teaching ITM drums. While there was some successes with the classes there were also some failures. He intends to continue with this inquiry in 2015

Todd Jones: Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

70

Todd’s inquiry focussed on the students completing a ten week practice diary which aimed to give them a structured regime which in turn should allow them to see the improvements in their performance. As the year progressed, less and less students undertook the opportunity to write in the diary. Todd felt this was due the course being part-­‐time and ‘hobby’ in nature. For the ones that completed the study, they could see the progression of skills.

Candice Egan: The purpose of her inquiry for 2014 was to action a different apporach to teaching a student to choreograph for the solo task at NCEA Level 2. Changes for the this year included using the standard TKI task, ‘Limitations’ which students were given the choice between 3 varying physical limitations. This enabled the students to work with a very clear stimulus.

In the second year of the inquiry, Candice found that some students lacked the necessary combination of skills such as problem solving, literacy, creativity and ability to take risks in order feel confident etc. She has made recommendations how to address this issue.

Annual curriculum focused appraisal has been completed for the teachers of this subject.

Indicator 4: Achievement data is used to inform practice.

Dance: Level 2: 100% students gained 14 credits or more, 62% gained 18 – 22 credits.

Retention rates in 2014 – a number of students left the system for a variety of reasons: joining the workforce, personal issues ie. family issues. Several students were wrongly placed due to injury that restricted their ability to fulfill the program. They were placed in other subjects.

Level 3: 100% gained over 12 credits, 90% achieved 18 – 30 credits.

Hagley Dance Company: In 2013 100% students gained over 14 credits as opposed to 60% in 2014 The reason for this is that students in 2014 had obtained their UE and most level 3 dance credits at previous schools. All students who attended a dance external, achieved the external.

Drama: In summary: Poor results and attendance in externals during 2013/14 indicate that more attention is needed to prepare students for this standard. After careful analysis, the teachers of drama at these levels will better scaffold students understanding of how to discuss drama elements, techniques and conventions in a drama exam. Introduction of the exam content throughout the year and the discussion of relevant theories, con ventions and concerns.

12FTA: Many of the performance based unit standards that had been used in previous years had been withdrawn or expired. Compatible AS had to be found from other departments such as Media. The course took on a more technical slant with less emphasis on performing and screen acting technique. In 2015 this will be overcome by gaining a better understanding of the new technology standards; enabling students to gain Year 12 drama and 12 FTA credits in either class; giving students more performance and directed based assessment opportunities. The year plan has been restructured, linking assessment tasks together and looking at the timing of assessments.

Music: Year 11: Student retention was excellent with 26% of students achieving between 5 – 13 credits and 68% of students achieving above 14 credits. The head of music felt that students who engaged in lessons inside school achieved better than those who took lessons outside of school. This will be addressed this year.

12 School of Music: 7% achieved less than 5 credits, 20% nachieved between 5 – 13 credits, 73% achieved 14 credits or above. Pastrol issues were felt to be the reason for the lower credits.

Otherwise this was a good result.

13 School of Music: 7% achieved 0, 14% achieved between 1 – 4 credits, 21% achieved 5 – 13 credits, 57% achieved 14 and above credits. The above statement of pastoral applies to Year 13HSM as well.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

71

12 Music: 6% achieved 1—4 credits, 31% achieved 5 – 13 credits, Retention was generally good with the class moving from 24 students to 16. This was due to a number of students enrolled that were year 13 students placed in the class due to timetable conflicts and was not a true reflection of HSM. Areas to improve is similar to that of Year 11 in relation to music tutition in and out of the school.

13 Music: 11% achieved 1 – 4 credits, 11% achieved 5 – 13 credits, 79% achieved 14 credits and above.

Overall good reasults.

MUSIC SUBJECT LEADER: Kevin Roberts

Indicator 1: Quality teaching, learning and assessment materials and procedures are used in programmes at all levels.

Assessment materials audit Locally produced activities have been moderated within the department. Teachers use music exemplars and intinerant in house t utors to ensure assessment decisions as well as outside meetings with cluster groups once a term to compare assessment results. Moderation meetings with a select group of schools in term four were conducted to compare end of year results over a selection of standards.

Schemes and related resources Achievement objectives, key competencies and significant values are identified and communicated to students via the course handbook and module guidelines. Course material reflects the Arts Achievement Objectives in the New Zealand Curriculum. Significant values focused on in Music are excellence, innovation inquiry and curiosity, community and participation. Key Competencies focused on are participating and contributing, using language symbols and texts, and self management. Document is reviewed yearly and updated as required.

Course outlines include: Year 11 – 13 course outlines in music include the following: § The internal and external standards assessed in music § Conditions for assessment to ensure validity § Opportunities if appropriate or applicable for reassessment. § Absences policy § Appeals policy § Student consent to assessment procedures and course content.

Effective moderation practice In department moderation . Four Hagley teachers and external moderation from ITM unit. Strengths of department are used in specialised areas. composition and arranging: Kevin and Sue, performance: whole department , research and theory: Sue , theory and arranging: Van , technology: Kevin.

Assessment of standards are often done “on the fly “ This is particularly useful when assessing solo and group work as the mark reflects the performance in the context of its setting and its effectivness. All composition work is team marked ( or a cross section of work is selected and shared amongst teaching staff for internal moderation. )

NZQA moderation results for 2014: Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

72

Standard

Moderation result [activities]

Moderation result [student work]

91418

Approved

7/8

Internal moderation processes The teachers in this subject have confirmed that internal moderation processes have been completed for results reported in 2014.

Indicator 2: Assessment is at the national standard.

Competent assessor statements describe how teachers ensure that their assessments are accurate and consistent with national standards.

Competent assessor statement: Music teachers A range of strategies are employed.The department is fortunate enough to have a wide variety of staff wiith various skills to call upon. This ensures that assessment of all standards (performance and composition / technology ) are accurate and meet national standards. Below are a list of strategies used for assessment: • exemplars from TKI site • Inhouse moderation disscussion / ( On the fly ! ) Standards are marked and logged , returned to students within a short time frame to insure opportunities for reassessment and to keep marking fresh and relevant to the task.

• past work from students for exemplars • connections with CPIT and other high schools for discussion .

• ITM unit • use of moderation results from past years.

Indicator 3: Teacher inquiry is used to inform practice.

Staff in the music department covered a wide selection of inquiry topics that were delivered in an open forum to the performing arts department during term 4.

Kevin Roberts Using the studio as a tool for composition ( Raising the standard of achievement. ) And Creating a CD Van Elkayem As Above .

Sue McLachlan The lack of general music knowledge in the school of music.

Todd Jones The use of a practice diary for achievement in performance.

Joe McCullum The use of pacific island rhythms to engage students in lessons.

Annual curriculum focused appraisal has been completed for the teachers of this subject.

Indicator 4: Achievement data is used to inform practice.

Year 11: data showed that student retention at year 11 was excellent with a 26% of students achieveing between 5 – 13 credits and a healthy 68% achieving above 14 credits. Areas outlined for improvement are to ensure that at level 1 and above all students are engaged in either instrumental tuition outside of school or inrolled in lessons in school. Students that tried to succeed Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

73

on there own abilities often fell short of reaching the required standard.

12 HSM: 7% achieved less than 5 credits. 20% achieve between 5 – 13 credits. 73 % achieved between 14 and above credits. The main factor contributing towards lack of achievement was attendance , often due to factors outside of the schools control. Jobs , life issues , lack of focus. This is an area that is pastoral and can only be solved on a case by case basis.General health and achievement of the class was good.

13 HSM: 7% achieved 0. 14% between 1-­‐4 credits . 21 % 5 – 13 credits . 57% between 14 and credits. The above statement for 12HSM applies for 13HSM. 12MUS: 6% achieved between 1-­‐4 credits , 31% achieved between 5 – 13 credits , 63% achieved 14 + above credits. Retention was generally good , data states that the class size was 24 dropping to 16. This is due a number students enrolled that were year 13 students placed in the class due to timetable conflicts and is not a true reflection of the official class size. Areas of improvement are similar to year 11 in regards to instrumental tuition. Those students who opted for no lessons struggled to achieve results. Solution is to encourage students to take lessons and monitor attendance in this area.

13MUS: 11% ahcieved between 1-­‐4 credits , 11% achieved between 5-­‐13 credits , 79 % achieved between 14 and above. Areas to are minimal. The quality of the year 13 class was high and this is evident in the percentage breakdown. The obsevations made for the above year levels are to be applied for 2015 as it is a generalisation and common factor in all year levels.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

74

PHysical Education HOD: Bridget Salkeld HEALTH AND PHYSICAL EDUCATION Subject Leader: Bridget Salkeld

OUTDOOR EDUCATION Teachers In Charge: Dave Hazelwood and Tony Wright

PHYSICAL EDUCATION HEALTH AND PHYSICAL EDUCATION SUBJECT LEADER: BRIDGET SALKELD

Indicator 1: Quality teaching, learning and assessment materials and procedures are used in programmes at all levels.

Assessment materials audit This audit has been completed in order to confirm that the assessment activities used are appropriate, fair and valid. The audit process continues throughout the course of the year, and is completed through an internal moderating procedure whereby the assessment tasks to be used are checked by another Health or Physical Education teacher prior to use. In this process the teacher checks all activities against the indicators used by NZQA for external moderation.

Achievement Standard activity tasks used in both Health and Physical Education are sourced from TKI and modified to suit the context and/or needs of our students, whilst retaining the intent of the standard. Activities/tasks published on TKI are approved assessments and are checked against the Achievement Standard published by NZQA. All modified materials are checked with the HOD or TIC before use, and where necessary further consultation occurs with other specialist subject teachers (within the school or from other schools) or specialist bodies (such as Volleyball New Zealand) and / or Mike Fowler.

Assessment tasks for junior programmes are developed by teachers within the Department and are aligned with the New Zealand curriculum. Marking schedules are developed to assist teachers with these assessments and are audited yearly.

Schemes and related resources are complete and in place for programmes and are stored as a hard copy in the PE Department (subject folders including curriculum links, learning outcomes and assessment links), as well as on the school network. Consolidation of the new courses implemeneted in 2014 (11OPE and 13SED) have taken place and updates will continue throughout 2015.

The Junior Health programme (both Year 9 and Year 10) is regularly reviewed and updated as part of our ongoing analysis process. A meeting is scheduled for the beginning of each term to ensure that all staff are familiar with the scheme of work and assessment for the term. Physical Education within the Junior College is reviewed annually and adapted in order to ensure that it is meeting the needs of students, and that the credit totals assess what is relevant to our students. Year 11 Physical Education also has meetings at the beginning of each term to confirm plans, resources and assessments as this subject is taught by more than one teacher.

Course outlines and practices for NCEA programmes follow the Hagley Assessment Policy.

Course Outlines for all subjects in the department at a senior level (Year 11 – 13) follow the Hagley Assessment Policy ensuring the following information is included: • key intended outcomes • authenticity of student work • assessment methods • due dates, missed and late Assessments • further opportunities for assessment • moderation • documentation of results • absences policy Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

76

• appeals policy • how NCEA results are reported, including information on accessing Live Results

Effective moderation practices continue to be implemented in the Department. The strength of this lies in the collegial support of the Department. There is a strong culture of both co-­‐ marking and peer marking within the department. For both Health Education and Physical Education, a sample of student work is peer marked by another specialist teacher after the subject teacher has marked it. If there is any variance in grades awarded this is then discussed, and if necessary a third assessor will also look at the work. The sample includes any work that the subject teacher would like feedback on. In the instance where there is a borderline grade feedback is sought, and work is generally co-­‐marked by two specialist teachers (the subject teacher and one other with experience in the subject) so that it can be discussed.

Work from previous years is kept to moderate against, as are externally moderated materials. The use of annotated exemplars published online are also used for comparison and internal moderation purposes. This helps to ensure efficacy as well as consistency between years or between staff. In the case of subjects or standards taught by more than one teacher, meetings are scheduled prior to the unit being run and assessment tasks and schedules are checked to ensure that all staff are assessing in the same manner. Once assessment tasks have been completed the classroom teacher initially marks class work. A sample of work is then cross-­‐marked and moderated in a cluster meeting to ensure that work has been assessed accurately.

In the case of practical assessments, wherever practicable, another specialist teacher observes the performance in order to moderate and confirm the results awarded. In the case of practical assessments such as 11PED Badminton a time is arranged for students from different classes to play one another in order to compare practical performances for moderation.

All internally moderated work and documentation relating to this is retained within the department.

Internal moderation processes The teachers in this subject have confirmed that internal moderation processes have been completed for results reported in 2013.

Indicator 2: Assessment is at the national standard.

Competent assessor statements describe how teachers ensure that their assessments are accurate and consistent with national standards.

Competent assessor statement: PE / Health Teachers In 2014 two standards were externally moderated for Physical Education. 16 pieces of assessed work were moderated, with 100% agreement by the external moderator (for both the tasks and student results). This continues to indicate success in the internal moderation processes happneing within the Department with 100% agreement between the external moderator and the class teacher of student results over the previous 4 years.

Health Education also had 1 standard externally moderated in 2014. 8 pieces of assessed work were moderated, with 6/8 assessed work agreed. A futher clarification was sought for 1 of these pieces of work. Although the reply justified the moderators initial judgement, the subject teacher will follow up the initial query at a Best Practice Workshop later in 2015 as the point is still disputed and needs further clarification.

Overall the level of agreement is a result of a range of practices that are in place to ensure that assessments are accurate and consistent with national standards. 11PED and 12OED are the only classes taught within the department that have more than one class that assess the same standards. However, there are a number of shared standards within the department with crossover occurring between 11OPE and 11PED, 12PED and 12SED, 13PED and 13SED as well as one standard also shared by 13OEX. These shared standards necessitate strong peer moderation procedures. The remaining standards within these subjects are taught by a sole assessor and therefore robust systems are required in order to ensure that assessors are supported to assess consistently and accurately.

In 2015, there is strong interest to attend the local Best Practice workshops to allow further clarification and opportunity to strengthen our assessment and moderation procedures.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

77

A range of the following policies and procedures are used to ensure that accuracy and consistency occurs: • feedback is actively sought from department members regarding assessment tasks and results.

• teachers use both Health and Physical Education activities and exemplars from the MOE TKI website. Activities available on this site are accepted as validly assessing their relevant standards.

• annotated exemplars from NZQA are referred to in order to provide clarification of the grade that should be awarded.

• where TKI activities are modified (this is most, if not all activities) consultation occurs within the department and, if necessary, with other specialists. This may be from other schools, subject associations, national sporting bodies, or Mike Fowler.

• work from previous years is stored and available for use as reference.

• national Moderator’s Reports are used to inform assessment practice.

• internal moderation processes ensures that assessment results are confirmed with another staff member.

• when standards are shared between classes meetings are scheduled prior to the unit being run and assessment tasks are checked. Meetings are also scheduled prior to marking. A sample of marking is then cross checked before final grades are given to students to ensure consistency between classes.

• in the case of practical assessments another teacher will observe some candidates and assess them to ensure that there is agreement with the classroom teacher (assessor). This is easier in Outdoor Education where there is two staff with the class.

Indicator 3: Teacher inquiry is used to inform practice.

In 2014 all staff in the Health and Physical Education Department completed a teaching as inquiry project. A number of the inquiry topics centred around biculturalism. A summary of each report follows.

Bridget Salkeld and Anna Williams worked cojointly on investigating whether enhancing cultural awareness and identity can influence participation in Year 10 Physical Education. We also wanted to discover if introducing more international games that had simplified rules and skills, more students would become more confident participants. Anna and I chose to collaborate on this issue and develop the project for both our classes. Research supports the idea that students who are more culturally connected have better self-­‐esteem and are more engaged.

Additionally Anna’s research discovered that Kapa Haka creates positivity, a connectedness, and enhances peer support and learning as a collaborative teaching and learning approach is required. Initiatives were trialed and implemented including Teira from Tu toka Tu Ariki (a health promoting agency) came into Hagley and taught 4 lessons (1 lesson per week). Within these lessons he introduced the students to some Te Reo, tikanga and Te Reo Kori using some basic traditional Maori games modified using modern, but minimal, equipment. Within each lesson, he taught the students the history and protocol involved as he built up to an introduction to Mau Rakau. The students were also introduced to a range of traditional games from other countries using a resource called ‘International Inspiration’. The students, in groups, learnt the game and were responsible for teaching it to their classmates. The second survey results confirmed their enjoyment and identified that when games, although competitive, were simple and required only a basic skillset, were more fun.

Dave Hazelwood looked at the retention of students in both Year 13 and Year 12 Outdoor Education. In 2013 both classes started with reasonable numbers however, dropped by more than 50% during the year. Dave wanted to find out what factors were causing this drop off. This is the second year of a two year project and based on the results of students surveyed appropriate changes will be made to the course design. The students who left the class and were surveyed left for a variety of reasons including the time commitment required, employment, illness, leaving school and disliking kayaking. In 2014 Dave implemented Strategies to keep the students engaged in Kayaking including: • Spending extra lessons in the pool getting comfortable under water in a Kayak • More time on Flatwater so the beginners didn’t feel out of their comfort zone Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

78

• More fun games so it was an enjoyable experience • Allowing students to sit out if it was getting too much.

Even though a number of these participants in Kayaking left the course soon after the Kayaking module, it wasn’t really due to them strongly disliking Kayaking and not engaging in the course, they gave it a good go but this module isn’t going to please everyone. An example of this was Aliesha who was terrified in both the Kayaking and Climbing modules and yet loved the course, the challenge and the class atmosphere that gets built up. (She also still received 18 credits for the year)

Amy Mitchell recognised students in the targeted learning class, who have a lack of confidence within Physical Education tend to withdrawal themselves from activities, participating as minimal as possible or will completely remove themselves, deciding not to engage in the context. It was hoped through adapted Physical Education skills taught through a direct teaching approach would enhance their confidence and in turn boost their engagement in class. The aim of the unit was to provide the class with adapted Basketball activities and teach them through a direct teaching approach, simplifying the task and keeping distractions to a minimum. She also continued to use Hellison and Templin’s Levels of Social Responsibility as a visual reference, this meant having laminated sheets stuck to a white board with the levels 1 – 5 definitions, also including the students faces which could be moved from level to level as they engaged or disengaged from the class. By simplifying the Basketball activities using adapted physical education principles and teaching the students through a direct teaching approach, the students were able to gain confidence while developing their basic motor skills. Amy saw a rise in the students engagement based on their levels of social responsibility, majority of the class was now working at level four – self responsibility, which includes working on activities independent of the teachers, shows respects and makes good choices.

Ilana Moir worked with a group of students from 11HED, having noticed that in the past 3 years students in year 11 Health there has been a range of students from all backgrounds that do not work well together. At times she has seen confrontation and arguments between groups of students and thus creating a negative teaching and learning environment in the classroom. She decided that she was going to incorporate some Adventure Based Learning activities during term so students can connect and she can help create a learning environment that is safe and enjoyable for all students. Through this and other interpersonal activities she was able to develop a supportive environment where all the students felt support by each other and also had no confrontation between class members the whole year. At the end of the year the feedback from students mentioned that they felt safe and supported in the classroom as well as feeling able to express their opinions in Health.

Alan Rose wondered how year 9s would receive a unit based solely around traditional Maori games and sports. Furthermore he wanted to see if there was any improvement in engagement from student who identified as Maori being able to engage with their culture in a physical context. The research found, all clearly stated that there is a disparity in education between Pakeha values and Maori customs and beliefs, and that in the past suppressing or banning Maori games was a method of suppressing the culture. The feedback from the students who said they were more engaged in class as a result of a number of factors including the co-­‐operative nature of Maori games, they were fun, more game based, level playing field as they were all new. Nearly all the students said they enjoyed the games, felt more connected with Maori culture as a result and would like to see more traditional games in PE. In addition the class became very engaged when they researched Ki O Rahi. They produced some fantastic work which ranged from comic strips and power points, to scale models of the game to teach others about the game and the values behind it.

Annual curriculum focused appraisal has been completed for the teachers of this subject.

Indicator 4: Achievement data is used to inform practice.

Analysis of NCEA data has begun to inform practice. Initial analysis indicates that the Department is working towards the Charter target of 80% of students gaining a mininum of 12 credits.

Staff have started to use this data already, to make course changes involving modifying the assessment opportunities offered and/or redeveloping how and when assessment takes place.

Further investigations will take place using this data to discover what alterations can be made to assessment materials and procedures to continue to make gains in achievement within each Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

79

subject area. One area that will be specifically investigated is the engagement of students in external examinations for year 12 and 13 Health Education. This is concerning when this exam accounts for 25% of the available credits for each of these courses.

OUTDOOR EDUCATION TEACHERS IN CHARGE: DAVE HAZELWOOD and TONY WRIGHT

Indicator 1: Quality teaching, learning and assessment materials and procedures are used in programmes at all levels.

Assessment materials audit We have purchased all relevant assessment materials and guidelines from Skills Active. This has been done at an affordable rate through the EONZ consortium -­‐ a flat rate for all resources.

Schemes and related resources are complete and in place for programmes for Years 12 & 13. These materials are aligned to The New Zealand Curriculum, reflect best practice in teaching, learning and assessment, and are available for OED staff via the OED folder on Amazon.

Course outlines include: • The external and internal standards offered and how these standards are integrated within the programme • Conditions for assessment to ensure authenticity and validity • Opportunities for further assessment • Absences policy • Appeals policy

Effective moderation practice The two Year 12 classes involve staff working very closely together to ensure that assessment is of the same standard as the other – it can be that the assessment is done by a teacher in the other class for practical assessments.

For practical assessment we now work with laminated class check lists (on the water) to ensure skills are achieved during the unit of work and at the assessment opportunities. Much of the theory is also being done orally ‘in the field’, as requested by Skills Active. This is done with a check list to ensure all aspects of the standard are meet and that it is relevant and real.

Internal moderation processes The teachers in this subject have confirmed that internal moderation processes have been completed for results reported in 2014.

Indicator 2: Assessment is at the national standard.

Competent assessor statements describe how teachers ensure that their assessments are accurate and consistent with national standards.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

80

Competent assessor statement: Dave Hazelwood and Tony Wright We are all continuing with our professional development and consequently will be exposed to the latest industry standard in each of our fields. The NZOIA qualifications need on going revalidation, every three years.

Summary of PD, awards held and revalidation dates.

Training: Bush Rock 1 incl lead Kayak 1 Alpine 1 climbing endorsement Tony Awarded 2012 Revalidated 2013 Revalidated 2014 Awarded 2011

Endorsement awarded 2013 Dave Awarded 2012 Revalidated 2013 Revalidated 2014 Revalidated 2012 Endorsement awarded 2013 Paul Awarded 2013 Revalidated 2013 PD 2011 Steve Next objective Endorsement Chapman & river awarded 2013 rescue course 2011 Mel Next objective Awarded 2013 PD 2011 Steve / Endorsement Chapman & river awarded 2013 rescue course 2011

All teachers assess the practicals together and the written component is moderated inter class and nationally by Skills Active NZ. Teachers refer to moderation comments, last year’s work and each others’ expertise.

Indicator 3: Teacher inquiry is used to inform practice.

See inquiry summaries for the department under the Physical Education section.

Annual curriculum focused appraisal has been completed for the teachers of this subject.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

81

Indicator 4: Achievement data is used to inform practice.

These courses are assessed by Unit Standards, as such students are only eligible for an ‘achieve’ or ’not achieve’. The exception to this is 91501 (PE 3.4 – Demonstrate quality performance of a physical activity in an applied setting).

Many standards have a 100% pass rate, this is attained as many students have a very realistic sense of whether they are working at the standard and therefore are ready to attempt an assessment.

Kayaking in particular presents some very real challenges to students who are not that confident in an aquatics environment. As the year progresses there can be students who don’t do well through lack of attendance but all engaged students experience a high degree of success as measured by credits attained.

For 2014, the big change was the addition of US 425 (Experience day tramps) and US 426 (Experience Camping) to the 12 OED course. These standards contribute an extra 6 credits to the course. When comparing 2013 and 2014 results: in 2014 all students gained some credits; other credits gained by percentage are similar however I think this is a reflection on the calibre of the student cohort. We would hope for a better credit tally with the new standards as part of the course. We are also hoping for better engagement in the course with an increase in emphasis on these less intimidating standards.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

82

Science HOD: Carmen Kenton BIOLOGY AND SCIENCE Subject Leader: Carmen Kenton

CHEMISTRY Subject Leader: Elvina Stephens

HORTICULTURE Subject Leader: Carol Gatehouse

PHILOSOPHY AND PSYCHOLOGY Subject Leader: Richard Tweedie

PHYSICS Subject Leader: Iain Chinnery

PRE-足HEALTH Subject Leader: Vicky Blake

SCIENCE BIOLOGY SUBJECT LEADER: CARMEN KENTON

Indicator 1: Quality teaching, learning and assessment materials and procedures are used in programmes at all levels.

Assessment materials audit Assessment activities used continue to be appropriate, fair and offer valid assessment opportunities against national standards. Through the audit process which follows NZQA protocols, activities are verified against the indicators used by NZQA for external moderation.

Schemes and related resources are complete and in place for programmes from Years 9 to 13. These materials are aligned to The New Zealand Curriculum, reflect best practice in teaching, learning and assessment, and are available for all staff. This year the science department has begun to review and update the schemes for learning across year 9, year 10, and adolescent ESOL science programmes. This aim for these three learning areas is for key teachers to review the current material, trial new ideas, and write the schemes and resources so they are ready for complete implementation by all staff teaching in these areas in 2016. The key teachers involved in this major re-­‐development of our non-­‐NCEA learning years will also be responsible for sharing their findings with other teachers of these areas as the year progresses so that all teachers of these learning areas have a sound understanding of the direction of the new schemes.

In 2015, NZQA released new versions of many of the Achievement Standards at level 1, 2, and 3 of NCEA. Teachers in Charge of those areas will review the new versions to make sure that our current teaching programme continues to provide a good quality learning for these NCEA assessments and they will make any adjustments necessary to learning programmes.

Course outlines and practices follow the Hagley Assessment Policy.

All course outlines have main assessment points for all NCEA courses plus there are assessment policy wall posters in each classroom for students to refer to as the year progresses. The Science Department Assessment Policy tightly follows the school’s assessment policy and highlights any variances involving practical/experimental and field trip assessments that are peculiar to the nature of assessment in a science department.

Effective moderation practices • Teachers mark assessments and internally moderate them as soon as possible after the completion of the task. Teachers mark their own students’ papers and then hold a meeting to co-­‐ mark boundary papers. Grades are not issued to the students until this internal moderation process is complete.

• All verified grades are loaded onto the Kamar student management system and go live so that students and caregivers can see the grades. This occurs as soon as practicable after the marking verification meeting.

• During this process, notes about improvements and changes that need to be made to the learning programme and to the assessment task are made and kept with the assessment task so that at the beginning of the learning programme in the following year, this task is pulled out and the learning changes can be checked to see that they are in place.

• All task development, final tasks and student work, plus assessment review notes are stored in a specifically marked filing cabinet, so that all those thoughts and ideas of review can be incorporated into the teaching and task development for the following year. The internal moderation cover sheet is completed and included wih the stored pack.

• This happens with every standard offered in this subject.

Internal moderation processes The teachers in this subject have confirmed that internal moderation processes have been completed for results reported in 2014.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

84

Indicator 2: Assessment is at the national standard.

Competent assessor statements describe how teachers ensure that their assessments are accurate and consistent with national standards.

Competent assessor statement: Science Teachers • Science teachers meet regularly, either formally in a scheduled meeting or casually chat over coffee in the office, to discuss teaching and learning of an approaching topic in an NCEA course.

• The task for NCEA assessment is checked early in the topic to make sure it honours the NZ curriculum, fits the learning in the topic or context, and meets the national Achievement Standard.

• We attended Best Practice Workshops in Christchurch whenever possible.

• Carmen Kenton is a member of the Canterbury Science Teachers’ Association committee and has discussions with HODs from other schools about standards. We share external moderation feedback with each other and these share tasks.

• Many of the science department regularly attend local cluster meetings in our senior subject areas and so have regular conversations with teachers from other schools around assessment. These conversations are then bought back to our science offie and shared with each other. This also provides us with a collegial network of local science teachers to call upon if we are undecided about grade boundaries or are taking on a new Achievement Standard not previously taught at our school.

• Some of our staff are or have in the past been involved at NZQA level with national moderation, writing NCEA exam papers, or marking NCEA exam papers and this increases our understanding of the national standard and provides guidance for all teachers.

• Carmen Kenton is a current member of the national executive committee for Biology Educator’s Association of New Zealand and so has discussions with other Biology teachers nation-­‐ wide.

Indicator 3: Teacher inquiry is used to inform practice.

Tina Dawson: Investigated how a small collection of information literacy strategies would impove learning outcomes for students in a year 9 next steps class.

Megan Turnbull and Carolyn Green: Investigated how an intervention to scaffold exam anser writing would bring students to the point of “no gaps in exams papers”. They used the same strategies with different classes so they could evaluate the effectiveness in a broader science context.

Simon Oakley: Investigated whether or not giving out his email address to students for them to get in touch with problems.

Carmen Kenton: Investigated whether co-­‐constructed learning and assessment templates would improve learning outcomes for students in 11SCEL next steps class.

Annual curriculum focused appraisal has been completed for the teachers of this subject.

Indicator 4: Achievement data is used to inform practice.

Baseline data: Results in 11HBI indicate that students are not buying into assessment as the class roll for 2014 was 28 and only 17 students earned any credits with 5 students earning over the 12 credit target (=18%). 11HBI is considered by the department to be an extension class.

Target: 2015 -­‐ 80% of the class reaching 12 credits or more.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

85

Actions: Identify reasons for the results: talk to teacher, past students still in the college. Consider modifying the programme of learning and assessment: consult students too; modifying the enrolment process into this class to make sure students are placed accurately; modifying the marketing and expectations of this course so that students opt into it with vision.

Outcomes: Staff gain a better understanding of why student outcomes have been so low. Students have input into how they learn and are assessed. Possibly: new programme of learning, assessment, enrolment processes, marketing by the department Student outcomes increase from 18% over 12 credits to 80% over 12 credits.

Evaluation: In 2015 we hope that the trend will increase from 18% to 80% (or close to %80) of students in the class earning 12 or more credits in this course.

Planning for follow on actions: Assess the outcomes and strategies again after mock exams, at the end of the year, and Jan 2016.

CHEMISTRY SUBJECT LEADER: ELVINA STEPHENS

Indicator 1: Quality teaching, learning and assessment materials and procedures are used in programmes at all levels.

Assessment materials audit All Chemistry schemes activities and assessments are being checked off against the current national standards. With special detail to the Level 2 Chemistry as new versions have been released this year. Tasks have been discussed with the University of Canterbury Science Advisor to ensure that the tasks were at the appropriate level. Moderation of tasks were carried out with Megan Turnbull at Christ’s College to ensure tasks and student work was at the national standard. The exemplars have been useful in maintaining the correct standard.

Schemes and related resources Schemes for chemistry are working documents that are continually being modified and updated to ensure they are aligned with the New Zealand Curriculum. With special detail to the Level 2 Chemistry as new achievement standard versions have been released this year. The schemes are still currently a work in progress and this will continue throughout the next year or two. New resources are continually being acquired and created to suit the different learning needs of the students within our classes.

Course outlines and practices for NCEA programmes follow the Hagley Assessment Policy. Assessment practices policy is displayed in every class room. All studnets have recived an outline with assessments offered and approximate dates they will be sat. For the statement of re-­‐sits in Chemistry every class has been briefed and its on the course outline with special emphasis on practical assesments. Also the outlines have reference to the science department assessment policy (displayed on walls in all labs), authenticity and online access to assessment results.

Effective moderation practices Chemistry standards taught across multiple classes, teachers have pre-­‐learning meetings to discuss the topic ahead and set out strategies for learning. With task checking or writing occurs before the learning so that the assessment is based on the standard and any quirks are picked up early. Initial marking of all standards is completed by the classroom teacher with marginal cases discussed. The teachers meet after the initial marking to talk about issues that arose in the marking and to set boundry grades for borderline papers and then continue marking. This is considered check marking and the next step is not also done for these standards. Check marking for sole teachers is carried out by another teacher in the dept who is familiar with the standard. Teachers are encouraged to share boundry papers with their check marker.

Internal moderation processes The teachers in this subject have confirmed that internal moderation processes have been completed for results reported in 2013.

Indicator 2: Assessment is at the national standard.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

86

Competent assessor statements describe how teachers ensure that their assessments are accurate and consistent with national standards.

Competent assessor statement: Elvina Stephens Elvina Stephens makes sure that the assessments used are accurate and consistent with the current national standard. She has gained feedback from Kapiti College, external moderation, the University of Canterbury Science adviser on a number of tasks as well as Megan Turnbull at Christ’s College. Elvina will keep up to date with moderator newsletters, and clarifications. Use exemplar resources to help guide boundry grades. External moderation reports from previous years will be kept and used to help us modify any tasks and marking. I regularly attend subject specific PD where best practice in regularly discussed and shared. I share this with my dept and we use any new ideas that would help us with moderation.

Indicator 3: Teacher inquiry is used to inform practice.

As a new staff member I didn’t complete a teaching as inquiry report per say. However at Kapiti College I lead a group of teachers in the early stages of doing an inquiry around the using ICT to change teaching practice.

Annual curriculum focused appraisal has been completed for the teachers of this subject.

Indicator 4: Achievement data is used to inform practice.

Going through the data I discovered that: • The percent students gaining 14+ credits in Chemistry though low (around 30%) is very similar to my pervious school and 2013 results the change in percentage is by 1-­‐2 students.

• The number of L2 students sitting standard 91164 (demonstrate understanding of bonding, structure, properties and engery changes) is supprising low – with a lot of students SNA Reasons that could have given these results: • Nationwide Senior Chemistry has low credit percentages mainly due to the cramming of content into external, to drop to three exams and a drive from universities to make the exams harder.

• Students not sitting structure and bonding is supprising and I would like to do an inquiry into why and how to encourage more to sti this standard.

Looking ahead for 2015: • Looking at these results I can see that early on I will need to identify Y13 students that want to use Chemistry for University Entrance so I can better support them getting enough credits.

• I will do an inquiry into Level 2 results and why so many didn’t sit structure and bonding also why 13% where within one standard of getting 14+ credits in 12 Chemistry.

HORTICULTURE SUBJECT LEADER: CAROL GATEHOUSE

Indicator 1: Quality teaching, learning and assessment materials and procedures are used in programmes at all levels.

Assessment materials audit

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

87

In 2014 12 horticulture was run for its second year, but was no longer combined with the NZG class. The course design was changed by the addition of one standard where accreditation had been gained the previous year. The new standard provided a greater unity in the programme and the topic was popular with the students. Assessment activities used in the course provided a range of assessment types, including largely practical based tasks, knowledge based assessments with a practical component, and a research project.

Most of course was based around unit standards from the Primary Industry Training Organisation. The assessments tasks provided by the PITO are pre-­‐moderated. For one standard. I wrote my own task and this was critiqued by the the Head of Department, Carmen Kenton. The information provided by the PITO on expectations for industry training carried out in schools was referred to, to ensure procedures were being followed correctly.

One achievement standard was used. The task used was a TKI task with an appropriate change of context. The National Moderator’s report was referred to, and instructions were checked for clarity, and for consistency with the explanatory notes in the standard. Carmen checked the final verlsion of the task against the list on the internal moderation cover sheet.

Schemes and related resources The schemes 12 Horticulture and year 11 New Zealand Gardening are complete but 12 Horticulture schemes are still in draft form. The schemes will be under development again for 2015 as 12 horticulture becomes the new Primary Industries pathway course.

The materials are aligned to The New Zealand Curriculum, with added links to the strands for Agriculture and Horticulture from the Agriculture and Horticulture science teaching and learning guide. The science capabilities are also in the process of being included as they are important for teaching and learning in a science subject.

As sections of the new schemes are completed for 2015 they are being placed on Science on Amazon along with other resources

Course outlines The 2014 course outlines were completed. (The new course outlines for the 2015 are now completed and will be placed on Amazon. A copy has been given to the HOD and staff concerned.)

The course outlines for 2014 include the standards assessed as part of the programme, times of the year for the assessments, and a reference to the science department assessment policy, which is displayed int all classrooms. Conditions for assessment are given with an explanation that certain practical assessments may not have a resit opportunity due to nature of the tasks. A statement about online access to assessment results is also included.

Effective moderation practices Student work and tasks for the horticulture standards are moderated with Carmen Kenton. (HOD) in the science department, Notes and relevant documents are filed with the student work, so they can be referred to in the following year. Moderated work is also filed for reference when changing or upgrading tasks. Student work is kept for 3 years.

In 2014 a couple of achievement standards were part of the courses. TKI assessments were used and modified as needed, exemplars were referred to when marking and Moderator’s reports were checked before using or marking the task. SecQual circulars are checked for any updates or changes.

The Primary ITO holds two cluster group meetings a year for moderation of the ITO standards. Groups are set up for peer moderation, and a moderator is present to assist or answer questions. The groups I worked with in May 2014 were very helpful. At first I worked with a tutor from Telford (Lincoln University) and other members of the group including a moderator. We marked assessments for level 2 Propagation standard that I had completed for the first time in 2013. (not used in 2014) Telford delivered this standard through an e mail link with students and it was interesting to compare different methods of delivery. The second group I worked with moderated assessments for a standard that I am hoping to deliver for the first time in 2015.

In the second meeting in 2014 Andew Donahue the Quality Manager/National moderator spoke to us about quality assurance and moderation. The Primary ITO’s person in charge of literacy needs of students also talked to us about providing support for our students. Finally there was a discussion and demonstration on best practice when assessing practical work.

NZQA external moderation results 2014 Standard

Moderation result [activities]

US 27708

Approved

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

88

Standard

Moderation result [student work]

US 27708

3/3

Internal moderation processes The teacher in this subject has confirmed that internal moderation processes have been completed for results reported in 2014.

Indicator 2: Assessment is at the national standard.

Competent assessor statements describe how teachers ensure that their assessments are accurate and consistent with national standards.

Competent assessor statement: Carol Gatehouse IN 2014 there are no other teachers using the horticulture standards. Occasionally the Gateway students may complete a horticulture standard through the Academy (NTA). These are usually not standards offered at Hagley and they carry out their own assessment.

To ensure that assessments are accurate and consistent with national standards I use the Primary ITO Crommon Assessment tasks, or tasks from TKI, with modification where needed.

Assessment tasks and student work are checked by Carmen, and ideas discussed, especially on ways of recording quality infomation as evidence for practical work.

The PITO tasks for selected standards and corresponding student work are checked and discussed at the cluster group/moderation meetings.

Teachers in the HATA network discuss standards and suitable activities, and the HATA website has useful information, There will be another conference in 2015 which I will attend.

Indicator 3: Teacher inquiry is used to inform practice.

Carol Gatehouse Using learning activities to increase scientific literacy and encourage development of study skills.

In two of my classes for 2014 there were many students who had not completed any educational studies in the last few years, and in the class I chose to focus on, only two had been to Hagley before, both for less than one year. The major part of the course content was new for these students and only two students had any recent background in science. The main gaol for the students in this class was to be able to transition to a tertiary course in the following year. They shared the same sense of purpose and were highly motivated, but initially not all felt competent to do what was expected of them.

As they had not been studying for a while, recall of knowledge was a challenge for many to begin with. There were several students who could not use the key terms or recognise them, and so could not confidently use them in answering questions in an examination paper.

I discussed study skills with the class, and introduced a structured note taking method. I started by taking a few minutes at the end of a lesson for students to write brief notes on what they had been studying. They could use the workbook, hand-­‐out or power point notes to help get their thoughts down. We then moved onto checking key words and writing questions. I went round at the start of the next lesson to ask for a few questions to use for a short test. I carried on with this method through the topic on scientific calculations.

I do not think this was an especially useful technique for these students, but it allowed me to look at the difficulty of note taking, and the volume of information and number of science terms that a student may have to be familiar with and remember. It would also be good to look at the assessments next year and how they are written.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

89

Annual curriculum focused appraisal has been completed for the teacher of this subject.

Indicator 4: Achievement data is used to inform practice.

11 NZG In 2013 the NZG class was combined with the new 12 Horticulture class as numbers were low in the horticulture class. The numbers in this combined class increased to more than 30 students.

In 2014 the NZG class was again separate and returned to being a level 1 class.

The course included 2 unit standards from the Primary ITO, and one achievement standard with a very large practical component suitable for students who are learning English.

There were 39 students enrolled in this course in 2014. Some students viewed the class as an option class that could be changed half way though the year. Students enrolled in the class throughout the year, some arriving very late and unable to complete assessments. 21 out of 39 students have results in the subject. (54%).

To improve this in 2015, I am going to try and complete all the sections of one standard in the first half year, and the separate sections of another standard in the second half year, so that students changing classes can complete one standard. Usually the separate sections are completed as fitting with the topics through the year. (based on the gardening year) For students arriving late in the year it will still not be possible to complete a standard, however many of these students have come back to the course in 2015.

The course offers 11 credits. As many of the students are just beginning to learn English , it is not possible to offer more than this. In fact only two of the students in 2014 felt they had enough English to attempt the diary for the standard; Grow and maintain plants in containers from seed. As one of them returned home before the end of the year, the assessment was only completed by one student. This may not be offered in 2015.

Many of the students are not ready to complete assessments and do not wish to. 20/21 students completed the two main standards (95%), with 30% gaining all six credits. The AS 90157 is a practical standard with very little written component. Although only 16 entered 62.5% gained excellence as these students are willing to work on their practical skills, but find any written component difficult.

12 Horticulture This course ran for the first time in 2013. The group increased quickly to 10 students, but it proved difficult to provide these students with ongoing support due to the large numbers of students in the NZG class and their high literacy needs. Retention however was good. It was also difficult to evaluate the new course and make changes for 2014. One unit standard proved to be a problem however, as it was completed in three sections, and students who did not achieve the first section did not find it easy to keep working towards a resit and the next section. This was dropped in 2014 The first agriculture standard Hagley was accredited for was trialled in 2014 and feedback from the students was really positive.

In 2014 10 students enrolled, but retention was low and only 30% had results in this subject. Reasons for leaving the class included difficulties with house moving (left school), unable to get to class in poor weather at age 63 (left school), getting a job in horticulture (left school) and reducing load for health reasons (still helping out in the hort plot at times). Two remained at school part time and one changed class.

The student changing class moved to a class that started with a very structured unit, with clear rules and guidelines. I considered that this would help to develop confidence with the work and provide a better transition from a year 11 to a year 12 programme. The year 12 Horticulture course started with the project based assignment on planting out crops. Students took some time to develop the skills for keeping a work record and I felt this may be better introduced a little later in the course. In 2015 the new classes in the Primary Industry pathway course have replaced the horticulture class. In each of these three classes I have thought very carefully about the design of the course to meet student needs, and especially about starting with a topic that would allow the students to take time to build skills needed for a level 2 course, and still provide an interesting introduction to the course.

Credits gained The data shows that 67% gained 19 or more credits. This is in part because one of the three students transitioned to the Biological Husbandry Unit at Lincoln university (2 days a week) and Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

90

chose to keep attending Hagley, but not complete assessments that had been started here. One student gained 19 credits and the other 23 credits.

These two students completed all internal assessment except for AS 2.3 Advanced Propagation techniques. This proved to be a challenge for one student did not feel confident enough to complete the report. The other gained achievement with excellence. This standard is not offered in 2015.

None of the students entered the external examination. They felt pleased in gaining 19+ credits in the internal assessments. Externals have still been included in two of the new courses in 2015, and students will be encouraged to build examination skills and confidence in working towards examinations. One student gained a merit in the examination in 2013.

PHILOSOPHY / PSYCHOLOGY SUBJECT LEADER: RICHARD TWEEDIE

Indicator 1: Quality teaching, learning and assessment materials and procedures are used in programmes at all levels.

Assessment materials audit Minor refinements made to YR 11 psychology standards; Continued the scaffolding of tasks for YR 12 & 13 philosophy assessments.

Sample assessment materials for YR 12 Philosophy were obtained from St Peter’s, Auckland. YR 12 & 13 Philosophy materials were shared and discussed with other Christchurch philosophy teachers. Student work check moderated in an exchange with another Christchurch School.

Schemes and related resources Course materials and resources are aligned with The New Zealand Curriculum via the Learning Outcomes of the Ministry of Education’s Teaching and Learning Guidelines for psychology and philosophy. Due to the continuing refinement of psychology assessment tasks and review of new internal standards for all YR 12 and 13 philosophy assessments, course schemes will need to be updated.

Course outlines All course outlines contain standardised statements on assessment, resubmission, resubmits, absences and appeals that are consistent with the Hagley Assessment Policy. Priority is given to clear communication with students about achievement criteria and open discussion around teacher assessment decisions. All submitted student work is kept in the psychology/philosophy office. Any Student work required for non-­‐NZQA auditing is photocopied or scanned.

Effective moderation practices Various practices are utilised: • closely reading, re-­‐reading and interpreting standard specifications particularly the explanatory notes and criteria for different grades • extracting further clues on standard requirements from NZQA resource materials • considering all possible angles in the interpretation of a standard • ensuring clarity of the tasks and the required achievement criteria for teachers and students • perusing and using materials from other schools where appropriate • consulting philosophy/psychology colleagues at annual subject conferences and by email • attending Best Practice Moderation Workshop for Social Studies • making use of NZQA National Moderator expertise.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

91

Internal moderation processes The teacher in this subject has confirmed that internal moderation processes have been completed for results reported in 2014.

Indicator 2: Assessment is at the national standard.

Competent assessor statements describe how teachers ensure that their assessments are accurate and consistent with national standards.

Competent assessor statement: Richard Tweedie In summary, ensuring assessments are accurate and consistent with national standards is the end result of a broad iterative process centered around the considerable knowledge and experience of the Psychology/Philosophy Department involving teacher relationships within and outside Hagley alongside the careful interpretation of NZQA and MoE documents relating to each specific standard.

Indicator 3: Teacher inquiry is used to inform practice.

Annual curriculum focused appraisal has been completed for the teachers of this subject.

Indicator 4: Achievement data is used to inform practice.

Responses to NCEA data analysis. Philosophy success rates are directly related to the peculiar demands of the assessment tasks and these problems are shared by philosophy classes at other NZ schools. The major issues of fitting not quite fit-­‐for-­‐purpose Achievement Standards to a philosophy course have been solved at the YR 13 level and the improving success rates reflect this.

Major difficulties remain with YR 12 philosophy assessment tasks which also reflects the use of Level 3 Standards at this level and currently, the student’s achievement rates reflect this. The goal for 2015, working in tandem with philosophy teachers from other schools is to improve the student accessibility to the a ssessment tasks by structuring step-­‐wise goals into the tasks. This is expected to lift student completion of the tasks.

PHYSICS SUBJECT LEADER: IAIN CHINNERY

Indicator 1: Quality teaching, learning and assessment materials and procedures are used in programmes at all levels.

Assessment materials audit In the standard moderated by NZQA this year (91172), the moderator had minor disagreements with the grade boundaries in two papers out of eight. The comments have been noted in marking the same standard this year.

Schemes and related resources are complete and in place for programmes from Years 12 to 13. These materials are aligned to The New Zealand Curriculum, reflect best practice in teaching, learning and assessment, and are available for all staff. Schemes on Amazon.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

92

Course outlines and practices for NCEA programmes follow the Hagley Assessment Policy. Outlines updated at start of year and they refer to Hagley Assessment Policy displayed on classroom wall.

Effective moderation practices In the standard moderated by NZQA this year (91172), the moderator had minor disagreements with the grade boundaries in two papers out of eight. The comments have been noted in marking the same standard this year.

Internal moderation processes The teacher in this subject has confirmed that internal moderation processes have been completed for results reported in 2014.

Indicator 2: Assessment is at the national standard.

Competent assessor statements describe how teachers ensure that their assessments are accurate and consistent with national standards.

Competent assessor statement: Iain Chinnery The Physics teacher meets, either formally in a scheduled meeting or in a casual chat over coffee in the office, with other teachers who have taught Physics to discuss assessment of an NCEA standard. The tasks for NCEA assessment have been checked by NZIP, who wrote them, to make sure they honour The NZ Curriculum, fit the learning in the topic or context, and validly assess the achievement standard. In the standard moderated by NZQA in 2014 (91172), the moderator had minor disagreements with the grade boundaries in two papers out of eight. The comments have been noted in marking the same standard this year.

The teacher has attended Best Practice Workshops in Christchurch.Iain Chinnery is a member of the Canterbury Physics Teachers’ Cluster and has been to a meeting at which standards were discussed. Iain Chinnery has in the past been a marker for national exams, which has given a good understanding of the standard of work required. He has also taught year 12 and 13 Physics for many years and understands the standard of work expected at this level.

Indicator 3: Teacher inquiry is used to inform practice.

Iain Chinnery The one teacher did an inquiry on ways of prepaing for scholarship and results were disappointing (nobody get Scholarship Physics), so the same project will continue through 2015.

Annual curriculum focused appraisal has been completed for the teachers of this subject.

Indicator 4: Achievement data is used to inform practice.

Students with results/number on markbook: 2013 -­‐ 80%, 2014 -­‐ 75% Students gaining 12 or more credits in L2 or L3 in 2014: 39% Standards achieved out of those who actually attempted them 73%

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

93

The main problem with students not reaching 12/14 credits is the number of them who did not even attempt the 3 external papers in the exam. Many decide near the end of the year that they will not do all (or any) exams. There seem to be two main reasons. Students reckon they can get “enough” credits without all externals; exams are too hard. In Physics, they can only gain 7 credits from internals and this is being pointed out right at the start of 2015.

PRE-­‐HEALTH SUBJECT LEADER: VICKY BLAKE

Indicator 1: Quality teaching, learning and assessment materials and procedures are used in programmes at all levels.

Assessment materials audit Pre-­‐health follows the assessment frame-­‐work endorsed by Hagley Community College as per NZQA guidelines. Students receive a copy of these guidelines at the start of the programme.

Internal moderation was completed this year with a specialist teacher, Sue Alexander. A new unit standard 27833 was introduced as part of an NZQA update so it was moderated following the first student assessment exercise.

Schemes and related resources are complete and in place for pre-­‐health practical component of pre-­‐health programme. Schemes are located on the school network Amazon under Science-­‐ Pre-­‐health. Work books have been updated as per outcomes from Inquiry project 2013.

Course outlines follow the Hagley Assessment Policy.

Effective moderation practices Pre-­‐health offers unit standards that are taken to the Industry Training Organisation (Careerforce) for twice yearly moderation. The expectation from moderation is to assess up to 10% of units offered in any programme over the year. Pre-­‐health offers up to 7 unit standards each year of which up to 4 standards are moderated each year (approx. 55% of programme).

Internal moderation processes The teacher in this subject has confirmed that internal moderation processes have been completed for results reported in 2014.

Indicator 2: Assessment is at the national standard.

Competent assessor statements describe how teachers ensure that their assessments are accurate and consistent with national standards.

Competent assessor statement: Vicky Blake Two samples of unit standards 20830, 23391, 23387 and 23386 were moderated in 2014 and all assessments received a ‘met’ outcome by the moderators. Assessment material was used from Careerforce ITO, additional material was added in for unit standards 23386 and 27833 to ensure full assessment of unit standards was covered. In the pre-­‐health subjects of human biology, chemistry, maths and pre-­‐health unit standards previous results have been compared and contrasted with this years achievements. This statistical information allows us to pick up difference and to investigate what this means for students achievements.

Indicator 3: Teacher inquiry is used to inform practice.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

94

Vicky Blake My action plan was to ”develop a revision to my teaching plan and students workbooks so that this group of (ESOL) students learning needs could be addressed to support their desired learning outcomes.” In 2014 my inquiry project is focussing on implementing changes to my teaching plans and workbooks in the unit standard work. I will evaluate these changes throughout the course of the year.

Discussion The results graph ( see full report) is restrictive and limited in reflecting and evaluating student performance based on strengthening the relationship between course material and assessment material. It is more useful to evaluate student understanding and performance from my observations and knowledge of student’s individual abilities and ability to achieve. This has been achieved throughout the year by talking with students, regularly asking for feedback with assessments and building relationships to understand students learning styles and barriers to learning. Therefore my results are based on an ongoing relational model of working with my students learning needs.

There were 17 students at the start of 2014. 10 students had explained reasons for not completing the unit standards. (see full report).

By the end of the assessment period, 7 students were actively pursuing unit standard achievement. One theme I noticed as the year progressed was that students were handing in assessments partly completed with the knowledge they had a second attempt. This had become a way of managing their workload. When I talked with these students I found that they were either having personal life issues that were interfering with their ability to set time aside for their work or they were working part time to support families.

As a result of this new trend I have decided to set assessment time in class and put a more structured frame around assessments as opposed to setting timeframes for students to complete in their own time. To encourage time management I started giving students diaries in 2013 and being specific in having them write important information down to organise their workload.

My observation is that generally students have found it easier to link course material with assessments although a new issue emerged where some students didn’t listen to instructions so needed to re-­‐sit a larger majority of assessment material. Changing assessments to be completed in class as opposed to outside school time will hopefully minimise this problem.

Annual curriculum focused appraisal has been completed for the teacher of this subject.

Indicator 4: Achievement data is used to inform practice.

Target: To engage and prepare adult students for tertiary study options predominately in the health field.

Actions: The pre-­‐health package course incorporates a science based academic component alongside a practical hospital placement with unit standards. Students (17) for 2014=Maori (17.6%), NZEuropean (53%), and other ethnicities (29.4%).

Outcomes: The PreHealth course is recognised by CPIT as entry to the various health related courses they run including the degree and diploma in nursing, vet nursing, technician's courses and medical imaging. In order to meet the academic requirement for the degree course students must attain 70% in the Human Biology component of PreHealth. To gain entry to the Enrolled nursing course (the diploma) students must attain 50% in Human Biology.

At the end of 2014 every student still attending the course gained the academic requirement for entry to the degree course at CPIT. Marks ranged from70% through to 86%. One student has entered the vet nursing course, and three others will be enrolling in the degree course starting midyear.

Students are also assessed against unit standards in one course component. 9 (53%) students attempted unit standards. 6 (35%) gained all 7 unit standards offered. 3 (17%) students completed between 1 and 4 unit standards.

Reason for variance: There were 17 students at the start of 2014. One student left in July as was accepted for CPIT nursing. Three students were exempt from doing unit standards. Two students left the course due to pregnancy. One student stopped her practical and unit standards to focus on science subjects to pursue a non-­‐nursing related academic tertiary goal. Three Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

95

students left the course for personal reasons. One international ESOL student joined the class in March for 4 months and returned to his country of origin as per his entry requirements. One Maori student joined the class in term 2 as she had been in pre-­‐health in 2013 and left due to pregnancy returning to finish the programme this year. Two students didn’t turn up for the programme despite being on the roll. By the end of the assessment period 7 students were actively pursuing unit standard achievement.

Evaluation: The purpose of my analysis has been to identify areas that I may be pro-­‐active in increasing retention and achievement of pre-­‐health students. Whilst my results show only a 53% attempt of unit standards this does not translate to lack of success. 5 students already had the unit standards or equivalent needed. 2 students left due to pregnancy and 3 students left for personal reasons impacting on their ability to study at present. This is an ongoing process.

SCIENCE SUBJECT LEADER: CARMEN KENTON

Assessment materials audit Assessment activities used continue to be appropriate, fair and offer valid assessment opportunities against national standards. Through the audit process which follows NZQA protocols, activities are verified against the indicators used by NZQA for external moderation.

Schemes and related resources Refer to this section in the biology review.

Course outlines and practices follow the Hagley Assessment Policy. All course outlines have main assessment points for all NCEA courses plus there are assessment policy wall posters in each classroom for students to refer to as the year progresses. The Science Department Assessment Policy tightly follows the school’s assessment policy and highlights any variances involving practical/experimental and field trip assessments that are peculiar to the nature of assessment in a science department.

Effective moderation practice • The task is written with up to date knowledge from nzqa website of the standard, clarifications document, suggested tasks, and exemplar student work plus any external moderation information from the moderator.

• The task is checked by another staff member prior to assessment • All teachers make sure they are delivering the task the same way when more than one class is involved in a standard by holding pre-­‐assessment meetings with all teachers.

• All teachers mark their own classes work • A check marking meeting is called of all teachers and all borderline student grades are discussed (not a selection) and boundaries are set.

• All teachers go and check mark their own classes in light of the borderline grade discussion.

• Papers are returned to students and any resubmissions are allowed at this time. Resubmissions are for quick “fix-­‐ups” and do not require any further teaching and will only take the student 5-­‐10 min to complete. Resubmissions on work could be for getting to A, M, or E grades; not just for getting to A grade.

• Grades are finalised for resubmitted work.

• All grades are published on Kamar.

• Task and student work is stored in a filing cabinet in the department in a plastic back that is well labelled with year, standard, teacher.

• Mock exams are purchased whenever possible. We purchase mock exams from NZIC, NZIP, CSTA, BEANZ, and Exams4U. In all cases the exams are written by a person and checked against the standard and for editing errors at a critiquers meeting. When we receive them we also check them against the standard and for editing errors.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

96

• • • • •

Mock exams are carried out in exam conditions as the NZQA exams; separate desks, no notes, no phones, silent.

Mock exams are marked by the teacher of the class and then check marked by another staff member or by a group of teachers.

Grades are posted to Kamar in case a student needs a derived grade.

Purchased exams are secure and schools are asked to abide by the secure rules. This means we hold all exam papers and answer scedules safe until after 1 November of the sale year.

After the 1 November we release the mock exam papers to the students and make the answer schedule available. This is to help them with their study for NZQA exams. All students are asked to keep their mock exam papers safe in case they need to apply for a derived grade.

Internal moderation processes The teachers in this subject have confirmed that internal moderation processes have been completed for results reported in 2014.

Indicator 2: Assessment is at the national standard.

Competent assessor statements describe how teachers ensure that their assessments are accurate and consistent with national standards.

Competent assessor statement: Carmen Kenton • Science teachers meet regularly, either formally in a scheduled meeting or casually chat over coffee in the office, to discuss teaching and learning of an approaching topic in an NCEA course.

• The task for NCEA assessment is checked early in the topic to make sure it honours the NZ Curriculum, fits the learning in the topic or context, and meets the national Achievement Standard.

• We attended Best Practice Workshops in Christchurch whenever possible.

• Science teachers attend PD provided by the South Island Science Advisors whenever possible.

• Carmen Kenton is a member of the Canterbury Science Teachers’ Association committee and has discussions with HODs from other schools about standards. We share external moderation feedback with each other and these share tasks.

• Many of the science department regularly attend local cluster meetings in our senior subject areas and so have regular conversations with teachers from other schools around assessment. These conversations are then bought back to our science offie and shared with each other. This also provides us with a collegial network of local science teachers to call upon if we are undecided about grade boundaries or are taking on a new Achievement Standard not previously taught at our school.

• Some of our staff are or have in the past been involved at nzqa level with national moderation, writing NCEA exam papers, or marking NCEA exam papers and this increases our understanding of the national standard and provides guidance for all teachers.

Indicator 3: Teacher inquiry is used to inform practice.

Refer to this section in the biology review.

Annual curriculum focused appraisal has been completed for the teachers of these subjects.

Indicator 4: Achievement data is used to inform practice.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

97

Baseline data: 11SCEL students prior to 2104 used US from the 189.. series of science unit standards. Attempts at sitting internal level 1 science standards met with low achieved grades for a small proportion of the class and not achieved grades for the rest.

Target: Our school was MOE directed to attend PLD delivered by the science adviors to move our teachers off relying on US and only using AS. So our target was to give each student in the class a fair chance at achieving 12 credits from AS. The target of 12 credits was chosen because the trades that require the most science credits need 12 and so this target would give the students the best pathway choices at the end of level 1 NCEA. Actions: Two staff members attended 3 PLD sessions during the year with regional Science Advisors. One staff member (teacher of 11SCEL) developed a learning programme with Chem1.1 Achievement standard as the end assessment using a Chunk-­‐Chew-­‐Check method of learning and assessment. Student input into assessment template development was sought.

After chem 1.1 the teacher introduced an acitivty that addressed fixed v growth mindsets and the idea of students breaking down their barriers that society and they put up for themselves.

Outcomes: Staff were exposed to new ideas and discussions around ways of teaching/learning and assessment. Science advisors became aware that the pilot study model, developed in 2013 in decile 10 schools with capable but internal pathway students , and presented to us was not going to work and so together we came up with a new model. Students felt valued and their buy-­‐ in to the learning increased. Their trust of the teacher also improved as their feedback was incorporated into the learning and assessment model regularly. 20 students began the learning, 3 not achieved, 11 achieved, 0 merit, 0 excellence, 7 gave up because they didn’t think they could do it. The next assessment, Sci1.15, resulted in 20 starting the learning, 5 not achieved, 11 achieved, 1 merit, 0 excellence, 3 giving up. The last assessment was Sci 1.1, resulted in 19 students beginning the learning, 0 not achieved, 15 achieved, 1 merit, 0 excellence, 3 absent, 0 giving up. 14/20 students got 12 NCEA credits in this class.

Evaluation: In evaluation of this project was that great pedagogy will go a some way to helping students with learning differences but addressing intrenched thinking of fixed mindsets and feelings of inadequacy in the students made more difference to their achievement outcomes.

Planning for follow on actions: The second teacher involved in the 2014 PLD is the teacher of 11SCEL in 2015 and is going to implement the same programme this year to find out how robust it is between different cohorts of students.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

98

Social Sciences HOD: Greg Morton CLASSICS Subject Leader: Andrew Tebbutt EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION Subject Leader: Jenny O’Sullivan ECONOMICS AND BUSINESS STUDIES Subject Leader: Paul Conner GEOGRAPHY Subject Leader: Mark van Dyk HISTORY Subject Leader: Greg Morton LEGAL STUDIES Subject Leader: Judy Hockley TOURISM / LEARNING SKILLS Subject Leader: Kim Swann

SOCIAL SCIENCES CLASSICS SUBJECT LEADER: ANDREW TEBBUTT

Indicator 1: Quality teaching, learning and assessment materials and procedures are used in programmes at all levels.

Assessment materials audit Assessment materials are checked and modified over the course of the year based on the following: • Close analysis of the requirements of the standard informed by TIC prior involvement in external moderation, attendance at Best Practice Workshops • Student ability, engagement and goals, class culture • Published activities • Practical factors such as available resourcing, time • Feedback from NZQA and from teachers at Hagley and from other schools • Reflection on successes and difficulties from previous work with students, student reflections and evaluations The preference is to develop local materials that best suit the interests and abilities of Hagley students and staff teaching the standards.

Schemes and related resources are complete and in place for programmes from Years 9 to 13. These materials are aligned to The New Zealand Curriculum, reflect best practice in teaching, learning and assessment and are available through the Social Sciences department website..

Course outlines and practices Outlines include: • the internal and external standards assessed and how these standards are integrated within the programme • conditions for assessment to ensure validity, authenticity • opportunity for further assessment • absences policy • appeals policy

Effective moderation practices At Levels 1, 2 and 3, Andrew relies on published exemplar and attendance at best practice workshops to develop an understanding of the standard. Efforts will be made in 2015 to seek out another subject expert to co-­‐moderate materials with. If other teachers offer standards in this subject area this year, then the following processes will be used: at Levels 1, 2 and 3, teachers moderate student work samples with Andrew throughout the year for each standard they offer. Teachers are encouraged to submit this material during the assessment process so that any changes necessary can be managed well. Moderation tracking sheets for each teacher are maintained and copies of moderated work are filed. In addition, staff meet at various points through the year to mark and discuss samples of work to share and develop understanding of the national standard.

Internal moderation processes Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

101

The teacher in this subject has confirmed that internal moderation processes have been completed for results reported in 2014.

Indicator 2: Assessment is at the national standard.

Competent assessor statements describe how teachers ensure that their assessments are accurate and consistent with national standards.

Competent assessor statements: Andrew Tebbutt • Teachers use activities from the TKI website and locally developed activities, several of which have been approved by the external moderation process.

• All externally moderated materials have been retained. There is a strong external moderation history from 2006. Moderation reports for all standards selected confirm that activities and assessment practice are consistently at the national standard.

• Samples of work from all assessors are checked by Andrew Tebbutt for consistency. These form the basis for discussion on the national standard where appropriate.

• Andrew Tebbutt will attend the best practice workshop for 2015, and connect to the local Classical teachers association in order to participate in moderation meetings.

• From 2015, moderating across subjects will be implemented in the Social Sciences department to support teachers in sole-­‐expert teaching areas.

Indicator 3: Teacher inquiry is used to inform practice.

In 2014, one teacher completed an inquiry in this subject area. Andrew Tebbutt investigated the impact of radical course change on performance levels in level three Classics. He achieved notable improvements, and also some shortfalls indicated below in the next section. This will provide impetus for his 2015 inquiry.

Annual curriculum focused appraisal has been completed for the teachers of this subject.

Indicator 4: Achievement data is used to inform practice.

Baseline Data: 13 Classics: A careful analysis of 2014 achievement in Year 13 Classics has indicated both success and some weakness in the course. Students overall achieved 11.54 credits per student, the teacher inquiry goal being to improve performance from 8.7 credits/student in 2013 to 12 credits/student (to allow students on average to achieve L3 NCEA over 5 subjects). So whilst improvement was significant, the overall goal was not met.

Another way of looking at the data is as follows: 13CLS in 2013 and 2014 2013: 31 enrolled; 14 achieved 0-­‐credits (45%); 6 gained 14+ credits (19.4%) 2014: 33 enrolled; 7 achieved 0-­‐credits (21%); 11 gained 14+ credits (33.3%) On both measures, there has been substantial improvement in performance in Year 13 Classics from 2013-­‐2014. However, there is still room for improvement.

A small group of students did not pass the single external standard offered course, required in Classics if it is to be counted as an approved subject for UE. For two students, this was the only barrier to their achieving UE. Andrew had concentrated on one standard to specialise the course and maximise the chance to practice and develop the appropriate knowledge and skills.

Actions: For 2015, a second external and further exam preparation strategies will be introduced. This will decrease reliance on the one external being accessible, and should increase external participation given that there will be more choice.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

102

Baseline Data: Classics in 11 History: Classics is currently offered in 11 and 12 History as a core component, with 2 internal standards in each class.

A basic comparison of achievement in 11 History with history standards is instructive:

Results Standards Results/Std (average) 11 History-­‐ History 11 History-­‐ Classics

84 41

3 2

28 20.5

There is less success with the classics standards. Possible reasons: • timing in year (T3) • length of time available (1 term; history has 2 terms) • complexity of context • difficulty of standards

Actions: Revisions to the activities, and an increase in time allocated will be trialled for 2015 to see if this improves success. The plan for 2016 is to write a full classics course to replace one of the 11 History courses, pending approval.

EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION SUBJECT LEADER: JENNY O’SULLIVAN

Indicator 1: Quality teaching, learning and assessment materials and procedures are used in programmes at all levels.

Assessment materials audit An internal moderation checklist indicating when units have been internally moderated is kept on file in Room 309. Units are adapted to reflect internal moderation. All units have been adapted to reflect advice from moderator’s reports. All activities used in level 1 to level 6 ECE have been checked against the items and assess accurately against national standards. ECE teachers work in a collaborative way that demonstrates the value they place on the importance of a team approach in delivery of the National Certificate Full time Course. The majority of units used at all levels in ECE are Hagley activities.

One commercial unit (10017 Resources ) is used at year 12 and Plunkets Tots and Toddlers is used in year 11 .As best practice a writing party when reviewing standards was the best approach.Included Celia King TIC Jenny O’Sullivan, Liz Bowley and Brenda Miller Hagley ECE teachers acknowledge the work of our Advisory Group who assisted and advised us. Teachers within the area meet regularly to moderate each other’s units.

Schemes and related resources Level 3 ECE Course scheme has been updated to incorporate level 3 Cultural Geography delivery in 2014 as part of the course. All standards to be used on course in 2015 are completed and have been updated to reflect improvements from delivery in 2014. ECE teachers acknowledge assistance of HOD Social Science Greg Morton for writing and providing (level 3 history and Geography units) and Mark Van Dyk TIC Geography for guidance and assistance with Geography units) that have been incorporated into the course. In 11Chi ,12Chi and 13Chi, new units have replaced expiring units and are aligned to the New Zealand Curriculum that reflects best practice in teaching, learning and assessment.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

103

Course outlines and practices At the start of the year, students in Year 11, 12 and 13 Child and Family Studies receive a course outline and students in the ECE package course are given a very comprehensive course booklet(copies on Hagley Sharepoint Web) both of which include: • the internal and external standards assessed in each subject and how these standards are integrated within the programme • conditions for assessment to ensure validity, authenticity • an opportunity for further assessment • absences policy • appeals policy • live reporting of assessment results policy

Effective moderation practice All ECE programmes focus on effective learning to help students develop skills and knowledge in Early Childhood Education and Care. Practicums and sessions with young children help students put theory into practice and reinforce items for assessment. In the package course all the units that the teachers are taking complement each other. For example each module all teachers are focusing on the same conceptual strands .The standards offered at all levels work well together to create coherent programmes.

The units delivered in Year 11 and Year 12 (Levels 1 and 2) form effective stepping stones for the knowledge and skills required to help form a solid base for managing the National Certificate in level 3 ECE course, as does level 2 English. The standards selected are appropriate for the students in each class. The programmes offer everyone opportunities for success in as many standards as possible. In 2014 introduction of cross curricular Level 1 and 2 literacy standards, as part of whole school initiative. The collection of assessment evidence takes place over time for identified units that are best suited to this method and students individual learning. Hosting arrangements are in place with Gateway and ECE teachers. Where more than one teacher assesses the same standard consistency is ensured by internal moderation of each teacher’s class assessments . Each teacher verifies that student work is assessed at a standard consistent with national levels for each internal standard offered.

Benchmark work assessed and discussed at meetings and retained for future reference.

In 2014 and again in 2015 11 CHI and 11 FOU classes both assessed 1 achievement standard the same to avoid disadvantaging any students and avoid students disengaging if they have already worked on this assessment and gained the standard. The 5 students in 2014 and 3 students in 2015 doing both 11CHI and 11FOU will be offered a level 2 ECE Unit in 11CHI so they can complete the shared unit in their 11FOU Class.This has been explained in writing to students and provides an opportunity for these students to be extended in the same topic [meals for a child] and gain 4 level 2 credits and the shared unit

Internal moderation processes The teachers in this subject have confirmed that internal moderation processes have been completed for results reported in 2014.

Indicator 2: Assessment is at the national standard.

Competent assessor statements describe how teachers ensure that their assessments are accurate and consistent with national standards.

Competent assessor statement: ECE Teachers

The teachers responsible for Early Childhood Education and Child and Family Studies stays informed about assessment through: • All moderated materials and student work have been retained and referred to.Changes from external moderators reports are promptly made when required.Central file in room 309 has been established for all 3 levels to archive assessment material. This includes assessed work activities, and both internal and external moderation reports.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

104

• • • • • • • • • •

Regular advisory meetings held next meeting scheduled for Monday 30th March 2015.

Feedback is given within the department as required. Regular meetings within social science department. Reference is made to assessment specialists such as Brenda Miller Teachers within the area meet regularly to moderate each other’s units. Brenda Miller was employed to assist with re writing new units in 2012 .Regular Cluster audit review of units is carried out. Work was thoroughly looked at and amendments made where agreed upon. Clarity was sought from NZQA where units were poorly defined.

In 2013 ECE teachers took opportunities to ask questions from NZQA ECE moderator for new standards written.

Networking , supervising staff at on site preschool Specialist guest speakers [eg home based care, special needs, Plunket] ECE Teachers members of Subject Association Child Forum . Weekly ECE updates and information Cross referencing each unit for consistency has been undertaken when more than one teacher is delivering the unit.

Subscriptions to professional journals.

Individual responsibility and having ongoing personnel passion and commitment to keeping informed

Early Childhood Education: external moderation has been 100% in agreement in the past three years.

Home and Life Science: follow up from External Moderation 2014 Report on Achievement Standard 91468 V1 Home and Life Sciences (2013 student work): Steps taken in 2014 and in the future regarding this standard being assessed consistently at the national standard: • After careful consideration of the report and students work an appeal and clarification was submitted. This reflected our acceptance of the majority of the report and willingness for clarity. Result from this was the 2014 Moderation Report was updated. The moderation results were not altered.

• Applied moderation feedback in our assessing of this standard during 2014.

• Applied an external cluster group moderation process to assess work in 2014 reflecting feedback from moderation. The other teacher using the same standard at Hagley was part of this external cluster group and was informed of the steps taken.

Indicator 3: Teacher inquiry is used to inform practice.

A summary of projects completed by teachers in ECE: Jenny O’Sullivan: how might the use of the theme " Empowering The Childcare Worker" allow cohesion in the course, this supporting retention and achievement. For full report please see sharepoint site.

Celia King: investigating how the introduction of homework tasks which require parent/ student engagement might improve achievement in Year 10 Social Studies. For full report please see sharepoint site.

Elizabeth Bowley: implementing a compliment strategy in the class environment that could enable students to feel comfortable using this strategy with children particularly with difficult behaviour . For full report please see sharepoint.

Barbara Verity: looking at the impact of class environment on student learning.

Annual curriculum focused appraisal has been completed for the teachers of this subject.

Indicator 4: Achievement data is used to inform practice.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

105

Baseline data and target: Results in several senior classes indicate that strategies are working well. Decided a focus would be 12CHI where it was thought some ground could be gained in both results and retaining students Actions: Ways to improve student credit totals in Year 12 Child and Family: 2014 student totals have been reviewed and the following strategies have been implemented as well as considered in order to try to improve 2015 results at this level.

Year 12 recognition awards to help motivation and give more incentive to achieve. Introduction of units from other subject areas that also can lead themselves to child and family topics. Students shall have the opportunity to complete a History Achievement standard with 5 credits attached. If they do succeed then a larger number of credits are gained in the one unit.The hope that this shall help them gain success early.

• Introduction of a new Home Economics Achievement standard that is a natural progression from the skills and knowledge gained in level 1 child and family studies where the same students were successful. It is hoped this will again appeal to the students who may see links and connections and have prior knowledge in this area from level 1.

• Order of unit delivery changed including teacher is trialling breaking the units into smaller assessment pieces. Keeping the class together and reviewing the order each element is completed in. Trying to pick the easier parts of the assessment before beginning the more challenging sections.

• Working on using group work for the research requirements so that students can buddy up and keep each other on task. Some students slow to settle but when placed with those who are working it is helping to get a better group output. Also helping with shared laptops as Teacher finds they focus more often on the research topic rather than internet sites not related to topics.

• Field trips to reward when term’s work completed and to allow students to review their progress and can feedback on different ways of achieving more credits.

Outcomes: An increased percentage of students gaining level 2 credits in this subject. Students maintaining a stong interest in this subject.

Evaluation: In 2014, the teacher in 12chi noticed and reported to TIC ECE their students lacking in motivation in the subject.The results reflected this . It was noticed that group work for research requirements and buddying up to keep each other on task was useful. Some students slow to settle but when placed with those who are working it is helping to get a better group output. Also helping with shared laptops as the teacher finds they focus more often on the research topic rather than internet sites not related to topics. In 2015, we hope that the trend will be an increase in motivation and enthusiasm for the subject.

•

Planning for follow on actions: Successful formula in 13ECE full time course (Ref Jenny O’Sullivan inquiry 2013 and 2014 share point in terms of strategies used and results. The strategy is being sustained for the future and also extended to focus on reviewing the achievement standards used in this course for ongoing improvements in delivery and order of delivery.

ECONOMICS AND BUSINESS STUDIES SUBJECT LEADER: PAUL CONNER

Indicator 1: Quality assessment materials are used.

Assessment materials audit has been completed for this subject.

Schemes and related resources All schemes have been updated for 2014 and are aligned with the new curriculum reflecting the Hagley best practice model for all levels.

Course outlines and practices All courses have been updated and reflect the Hagley Assessment Policy. Year 11 – 13 course outlines in Economics and Business Studies include the following: • The internal and external standards assessed and how these standards are integrated in the programme Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

106

• Conditions for assessment to ensure validity • Opportunities if appropriate or applicable for reassessment.

• Absences policy • Appeals policy • Student consent to assessment procedures and course content

Effective moderation practice At levels 1, 2 and 3 student work moderated and compared to work/material moderated from previous years. Where needed or applicable joint marking with colleagues from other schools is used especially when borderline or questionable marks are given. Consultation with Tic-­‐H'sia How who also teaches and is trained in the subject areas ensures standardisation of marks.

Internal moderation processes The teacher in this subject has confirmed that internal moderation processes have been completed for results reported in 2014.

Indicator 2: Assessment is at the national standard.

Competent assessor statements describe how teachers ensure that their assessments are accurate and consistent with national standards.

Competent assessor statement: Paul Conner The teacher responsible for Economics and Business Studies stays informed about assessment through: • NZQA and TKI materials are viewed: comparison with TKI assessment tasks, where relevant, provides relevant material. Own materials for Achievement standards are then created.

• All moderated materials and student work over the last 3 years of NCEA have been retained and referred to.

• Contact has also been sought and made outside Hagley for feedback and advice. Regular attendance at NZCETA meetings and the NZCETA newsletter provide relevant information for discussion about NCEA. There is also informal arrangement with a HOD economics teacher from another school for discussion and guidance.

• Where applicable staff in the department interact together to ensure that Modeartion standards are met and where issues arrive they work together to ensure national standards are met.

Indicator 3: Teacher inquiry is used to inform practice.

Encouraging risk taking in the classroom.

How I could develop a learning environment in my business classes where students would feel willing to interact fully in all discussion to the betterment of their learning. I’ve found that students are more reluctant to contribute in the business classes during discussions compared to students in my economics classes. I wanted to encourage academic risk taking. The class I decided to focus on was 13MMK but I did the same roll out with my combined class of 11ENT and 12BES. This was to correct a problem that I saw in each of my classes, where one or two students were more than willing to engage and contribute while others were happy to remain silent.

With emphasis on getting students to think more about their growth and the need to contribute I set about encouraging more participation in the classroom and academic risk taking. As the year progressed the students developed a greater vocabulary in the subject and this helped them to contribute.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

107

Annual curriculum focused appraisal has been completed for the teacher of this subject.

Indicator 4: Achievement data is used to inform practice.

Baseline data: Results in 12BES, 13ECO and 13MMK indicate that a low percentage of students are managing to acquire a reasonable amount of credits for their years’ work in these subjects.

Target: To engage students more fully in the program we need to adjust the timing of internal assessment to give opportunity to have success early on in the year Actions: With all three of these classes mention above, both teachers tresposible for them have changed their teaching to incorporate internal assessment in the front part of the year.

Outcomes: An increased percentage of students gaining credits in the beginning of the year which should lead to better retention and commitment for the whole year Evaluation: In 2015, we hope that the trend will be for students to reach the expected standard of credit accumulation.

Planning for follow on actions: Both teachers in the subject area will meet regularly over 2015 to ensure the aims are met and then will review data at the end of the year to gage success.

GEOGRAPHY SUBJECT LEADER: MARK VAN DYK

Indicator 1: Quality assessment materials are used.

Assessment materials audit Most of the internal assessment activities in Geography have been obtained from the TKI website and have been checked against the most recent version of the standard. Other assessment activities have been obtained from commercial companies and have gone through a moderating process. Where applicable, modifications have been made by me to these standards to ensure authenticity of student work: eg: changing the case studies for assessment so that students cannot access model answers from the website. Other modifications have been made so that the case studies for student work comes from the local and surrounding area and therefore the content is specific to that area. Any feedback/advice from the moderator is acted upon and changes made to the assessments/teaching as is appropriate.

Attending workshops and courses on assessment and planning activities, as well as belonging to Geography Teachers Association and building up a network of contacts from other schools have acted as another source of clarification and advice. These formal and informal approaches have been of great value for me as the sole teacher of geography.

Schemes and related resources are complete and in place for programmes from Years 9 to 13. All schemes and realated resources can be found in my office (205) or in my room (201). Some of this has been loaded onto the Hagley Social Science web site. All materials are aligned to The New Zealand Curriculum and follow the best teaching, learning and assessment.

Course outlines and practices The Geography course outlines and practices for Years 11, 12 and 13 follow the Hagley Assessment Policy.

Effective moderation practice Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

108

Within Geography at Hagley, moderation takes places at 2 levels. The first is the formal level where student work is sent away for moderation by NZQA, This has been an important source of feedback for me and given me clarification on some specific aspects of the assessments. The second level is more informal and is done though contacts at other schools. Last year’s moderation results shows that almost all of the grades that I gave were in agreement with the moderators grades. One of the standards sent away for moderation will need to have some minor modifications made to it and the comments of the moderator were very helpful for making the appropriate changes. Last year I sent in student work for moderation from classes that came from a range of classes ie the student work selected was not just from my class.

Internal moderation processes The teacher in this subject has confirmed that internal moderation processes have been completed for results reported in 2014.

Indicator 2: Assessment is at the national standard.

Competent assessor statements describe how teachers ensure that their assessments are accurate and consistent with national standards.

Competent assessor statement: Mark Van Dyk There are a number of ways that I have endeavoured to maintain competent assessor status: • Have previously worked as an external marker at all levels • Attending courses and conferences throughout the year • Membership of C.G.T.A. which allows me to keep in touch with other Geography teachers of Geography • Having contact with the Geography teachers at CBHS and St. Bedes. They have been very helpful with checking my marking when I may be in doubt over the final grade • Seeking advice from within the department and also from other teachers from other subjects • Regularly referring to the NZQA and TKI websites • As mentioned previously, last years moderation results were returned with a 16 out of 19 agreement, which shows that I am marking to the right level.

Indicator 3: Teacher inquiry is used to inform practice.

Mark Van Dyk The focus for my inquiry project was on improving student essay/paragraph writing skills and improving student confidence in their ability to sit the external exams. This has carried on into 2015 as I now have a new target group. I found that students benefited from explicit teaching of how to write a geography essay, and this had to be repeated throughout the year. One of the courses I attended last year was on how to improve student written responses in Geography and this gave me new ideas and approaches to use in my subject. Some of the students are now feeling more confident about writing paragraphs and essays. This year I have identified a small group of students from my year 9 social studies class as my target group. There are also some students with literacy problems in my year 11 geography class. As a result I now have a teacher aide to assist these students once a week.

Annual curriculum focused appraisal has been completed for the teacher of this subject.

Indicator 4: Achievement data is used to inform practice.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

109

From examining the NCEA results from 2014 there seemed to be a clear link between attendance and achievement, and this could be found at all levels in the Geography classes. I also noted that there were some exceptions, where a small handful of students had quite a good attendance record yet they were still not achieving a good number of credits in Geography. By “a good number” I looked at those who got 12 credits or more/less (14 for level 3). For those that had a good attendance but poor results, there was a clear link to completing all 4 internal standards for Geography at each level. Students who do only 1 or 2 internal standards are more likely to get fewer than 12 credits even if they pass 2 of the 3 externals.

I also went through the classes and compared their attendance record for the year.

• At level 1, apart from those who left part way through the year, of those who got less than 12 credits, only 3 had an attendance of over 70% for the year, and those 3 did not complete all the internals.

• At level 2, there was 1 student (he got 11 credits) who got less than 12 credits and an attendance of over 70% • At level 3, there were 3 students who had a good attendance but less than 12 credits; 1 had 11, 1 had 10 and the third got 8 credits from the only 2 Geography standards that she was going to complete. The rest of the students who got less than 12 credits had less than 50% attendance.

The issue now is to try and get the students with a good attendance to complete all internal assessments. This may involve a longer time frame allowed for completing all standards, which will then impact on the amount of time given to covering content for the external standards. Time is also given in the fourth term for completion of standards that students may have missed earlier in the year. I try to complete all the course work by the end of term 3, so that term 4 is used for exam preparation and catching up on any standards not completed.

I also have “checkpoints” throughout the year where I discuss with each student their achievement to date and what their plans and goals are, and therefore how many credits they need to get in Geography and in their course in general.

Time will also be given to explaining, very clearly, the link between attendance, achieving well in class (ie. getting enough credits) and completing all the internal standards in Geography.

The goal, this year, is to get the students to complete all internal standards.

HISTORY STUDIES SUBJECT LEADER: GREG MORTON

Indicator 1: Quality assessment materials are used.

The assessment activities used are appropriate and fair and offer valid, accurate assessment opportunities against national standards.

Evidence: Tasks consist of a. Achievement Standard Title b. Standard Number c. Version d. Source: Amended TKI/MOE tasks written by subject leader or tasks designed by Year 11 teacher: a Media Studies moderator Materials validly assess the standard 1. Instructions state standard number and version: provide a title, level and state number of credits. Where appropriate elements are numbered.

2. The language and explanations used in the task is clear.

3. The task is set at the appropriate level.

4. The task allows students to achieve all elements of the task, and to achieve across all three grade criteria.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

110

5.

6.

7.

The instructions are consistent throughout the task, and the assessment schedule meets the requirements of the subject standard.

Evidence statements are either those used in the approved TKI/MOE tasks or are examples from students who have previously attempted the task and achieved at the appropriate level.

The task is constantly reviewed, and issues identified internally or externally immediately acted on. Advice or modifications occur in the year they were identified.

Materials check; moderation practice 1. The same task format is used for each assignment given to students.

2. The format consists of a page 1 title page which fully describes the standard and a page 2 outline of Department assessment guidelines. These guidelines cover authenticity, due dates for the task, special notes, reassessment statements, and task specific details.

3. To ensure consistency, the task writer who has writing/designing tasks expertise is the internal moderator of all teachers using his tasks. He will only internally moderate tasks if they are his work, are an amended or original TKI/MOE approved subject task or were written by the Year 11 History teacher, also a proven expert.

Course Outlines 1. Schemes and related resources are complete, and are available to all staff teaching this subject through the subject website. The standards, tasks and contexts form modules of work which collectively are presented as a themed course at each level. Conflict (L1): Across the Ages (L2): Collateral Damage (L3) 2. Each module of work is effectively the time devoted to a task and module end is when the task should be submitted for marking.

3. Tasks are flagged if they will occur only once in a year. This occurs only with the large research standards.

Authenticity 1. Requirements written on each internal task hand-­‐out 2. External “mock exam papers” will be original, NZHTA papers, or composites of past NZQA papers.

Moderation Arrangements Teachers with Assessment expertise in a subject 1. Teachers with assessment expertise are designated for each set of subject standards used within the College. One teacher: the task writer moderates all work based on tasks written by him. He fully understands each task he created and can give both advice in how to teach to the task and how to mark the task based on experiences from his own classes. This notion is central to internal moderation in this subject and ensures that assessment is valid and at the national standard.

2. Internal moderation of his own task work occurs using History colleagues.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

111

Moderation arrangements across teachers/subjects 1. Teachers use the Expertise teacher’s tasks to ensure consistency, reliability and credibility.

2. Samples of work will be verified.

3. In a special situation where a teacher does not want to use a ‘expert’s task’ then the task that replaces it must be an approved TKI/MOE task, amended TKI task or task of the Year 11 teacher who is a Media Studies moderator. If this does not occur the expert will not moderate the work.

4. Where an expert from one subject writes a task in another subject area he/she will keep the subject leader in the loop as the work progresses and will moderate work presented with them.

5. To ensure consistency teachers in this subject only share standard tasks within the Department.

Sole Assessor 1. Sole assessors use methods listed under ‘maintaining competent status’ to ensure work meets national standards guidelines.

2. Verification occurs using the Department buddy system, outside contact, or linking with the assessment experts in the Department.

Moderation within large subjects 1. Sample checking by designated teacher with assessment expertise Assurance Procedures 1. Sampling of assessment work at three points across the year. One external: two internal. This was completed in 2014.

Authenticity of Work 1. Meets College Assessment and task requirements Opportunities for Further Assessment 1. Details are stated in each task under guidelines 2. Tasks are flagged as once only or unflagged.

3. Unflagged tasks may be attempted again but with new content and same deadline length.

4. Tasks are taught in a module system where task; context: skills and advice are integrated. Under this system the student acts immediately on knowledge, skills and advice and is rewarded with success.

Absences Meets Assessment Policy guidelines Storage Procedures Meets Assessment Policy guidelines

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

112

General Meets Assessment Policy guidelines Internal moderation processes The teacher sin this subject have confirmed that internal moderation processes have been completed for results reported in 2014.

Indicator 2: Assessment is at the national standard.

Competent assessor statements describe how teachers ensure that their assessments are accurate and consistent with national standards.

Maintaining Competent Assessor Status 1. Emphasis in this subject is placed on the quality and interest level of each task. This engenders engagement from students and increases academic success and task completion. Our task writers have proven credibility in this area, and in our case are proven in ‘out of school’ writing situations as well. They are national/international writers in a variety of fields or moderators. Work to our strengths and ‘keep writing great tasks’ is our most important technique and high student enrolment and academic success proves the system works.

2. By placing our faith in experts who over a period of time have shown they have a track history of well written, engaging tasks that have fared well in external moderation. Even when a task needs modification moderators have often commented on the quality of the activity presented to students and its innovation. External moderation comments are acted on as ‘useful advice’ rather than ‘critical analysis’. In this subject the views of the students towards a task are as important as the comments of the moderators as no students/no class.

3. Amending approved TKI/MOE tasks to ensure tasks are meeting high standards.

4. Referring to nationally published activities, exemplars and NZQA publications such as National Moderator’s reports 5. Seeking verification from NZHTA and colleagues 6. Developing a strong archive of past assessment materials 7. Using the NZHTA holistic marking external schedule to aid in the awarding of low and high grades.

Indicator 3: Teacher inquiry is used to inform practice.

2014 teaching inquiry project reports: a summary of projects completed by teachers in this subject.

Project 1: Subject Leader Focus for Inquiry = Meaningful education for habitual late comers to class or sporadically absent attenders.

Based on 25 teaching experience at Hagley College: 2013 Inquiry Project; visual education ideas of Andre Agassi; visible Learning and the Science of How We Learn: John Hattie and Gregory Yates; American Psychological Association: How Do I get My Students Over Their Alternative Conceptions (Misconceptions) for Learning 1 Nature of This Inquiry: ‘Reflection in Action’ : Reflection in Action is described as “the process of drawing on knowledge to make spontaneous decisions about events that happen.” It involves inner dialogue about teaching practice, and this self-­‐talk is a “cognitive tool the individual uses to reach a solution”.

Features include: 1. The identification of a problem of practice 2. Thinking what might be done to address it: based on research and past experience

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

113

3.

4.

5.

Prioritising approaches that might work, have worked before, or show potential Evaluating the effectiveness of the approach: analysing data Readjusting or tweaking the approach over time

“ERO considers that using reflection in action represents the most advanced phase in the development of inquiry as a way of o perating in New Zealand classrooms. Over time, and with good support from leaders, reflection in action could become the norm in New Zealand classrooms thereby leading to more responsive and successful teaching and learning.”

The identification of a problem of practice: Case Study Group: 12 History: 2014 • Class Size: February: 28: On time: 10 (64% of class arrive late or are absent from a class session) • Class Size: October: 17: On time 7 (58% of class arrive late or are absent from a class session) Inquiry Questions: 1. How do I teach content and present academic tasks to students who are absent that session, or arrive consistently late?

2. How do I provide meaningful lessons to absent or late arriving students so they have a realistic chance of achieving academic success?

The senior class attendance pattern above is one I have observed over a number of years at year 12 and 13, and seen mirrored in other classes and subjects. There has been little change in the pattern at the student end of the problem so change needed to occur at my end of the issue.

Project 2: Year 11 Teacher Section A: The Issue: Reportedly poor achievement in Year 13 classics. Alice Flett (13CLS previous teacher) was vocal in her disappointment of her year 13’s assessment performance in 2013. I wanted to see how I could try to address some of her concerns as a newcomer to the course. I started with the (somewhat arrogant) premise that a completely different approach might help improve achievement. Given the new UE requirements, live for the first time in 2014, there was considerable pressure from myself and students to deliver high levels of achievement. Overall, I wanted to lift achievement to meet the requirement of any Level 3 course that students achieve 12 credits in a full-­‐time programme per subject. This will allow the average student to reach 60 credits across 5 subjects and thus gain L3 NCEA.

Target Group: Year 13 Classics. Special focus on those who need 14 credits for UE, and Maori students Large class 2014: 2 classes in 2013 reduced to 1 2014; large class for 2014 (33 enrolled; 26 ‘live’ in November; see analysis of leavers below) As of 7-­‐11-­‐14, 15 students were relying on classics to provide 1 of the 3 approved subjects for UE. 5 students in class identified as having Maori ancestry.

Apparently unimpressive achievement in 2013: ‘Live’ students in November 2013: 23 This excludes students who left during the year or who did not attend at all in term 3/4.

Achievement: Internal Standard Credits # Total credits (7586) expiring 6 1 6 (7587) expiring 6 15 90 (90514) expiring 6 4 24 91397 6 1 6 91398 6 6 36 TOTAL 162 It is interesting to note that the vast bulk of credits achieved (120/162; 74%) were for standards that are no longer available following standards realignment.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

114

Average internal credits/ student: 162/23 = 7.04

Achievement: External Standard Credits # Total credits 91394 4 2 8 91395 4 0 0 91396 6 5 30 TOTAL 38 Average external credits / student: 38/23 = 1.65

Average credits / student: 200 / 23 = 8.7 Whilst it is arguable that this is a reasonable performance given the complex demands of level 3 standards, the teacher of this class in 2013 was not happy with this performance. Purely from a statistical perspective, to help students achieve a L3 NCEA, each subject in a standard full-­‐time programme should contribute 12 credits on average.

This course was not meeting that goal in 2013. There are a number of factors that contribute towards this issue…

1. High Stakes Challenging academic subject: High stakes-­‐ approved subject for UE 5 standards; 12 credits Internal, 14 external; to pass as ‘approved’ subject student must sit external 2. Problematic standards and activities: Standards some flaws -­‐ at times difficult to work with. Published activities of moderate quality-­‐ very poor work exemplars (incomplete) 3. Lack of prior knowledge or experience: Many students enter classics at L3 for this first time, with no background; about ¼ of the class in 2013 and 2014.

4. Nature of Hagley students at year 13: Second chance students, wide range of abilities, literacy issues, learning needs, slackness, complex lives, limited goals etc

Improving my teaching: I undertook an extended period of professional development in expanding my knowledge of appropriate contexts for study, and getting up to date with the latest thinking on and academic study of these contexts. his involved collecting resources, extensive reading, note-­‐taking and planning. I attended several university lectures given by respected academics (from a teaching perspective) to gain a wider sense of what classical studies involves.

Annual curriculum focused appraisal has been completed for the teachers of this subject.

Indicator 4: Achievement data is used to inform practice.

The growth of a strong junior self-­‐review model to improve student engagement, retention, achievement and transitions.

Focus: To set up an integrated year 9 and 10 Social Sciences programme that rewards student success, engages students, sets up ‘junior to senior’ course pathways, interacts with meaningful content and links internal and external assessment activities in a coherent and purposeful way.

Strategic Aim: To create courses that support the Department philosophy of Focus: Purpose and Energy. To reward success and show the link between the classroom, meaningful education and the world of qualifications and work.

Annual Aim: All students in the Chronicles Year 9 and 10 courses gaining more than 60 coupons of the 100 available in the Chronicles coupon books.

Baseline Data: Derived from Junior external 9/10 examinations (4 years thus far) Target: Purposeful Year 9 and 10 courses that encourage and reward success. Syllabus = Chronicles Content and Skills= One-­‐note work = Chronicles Books = Success Stamps = Coupons = Rewards = Conversion into Junior College credits = Evidence of Success = Skills tested in external exams = Certificates.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

115

Actions: Courses called Chronicles. A series of educational tales, in which students gain coupons as they work through the year: individual coupon books, success is rewarded with stamps which also equate to junior College credits. Annual examination testing skills that occurred in Chronicles course.

Outcomes: Achievement, Engagement, Reward, Interest, Purpose, Focus Pathway: Chronicles courses move on to senior Vitae and Passport courses offered in Years 11 to 13. Junior to Senior to Work/Qualifications flow.

Evaluation: Examination ,Chronicles Coupon Books, One-­‐note Responses/Exercise Books, Credits, Year 11 increased engagement, Teacher comments, Student thoughts Planning for Future: Passport and Vitae courses replacing Chronicles at Year 11/12 and 13. Not compulsory but offering a Social Sciences mix of subjects like Chronicles.

LEGAL STUDIES SUBJECT LEADER: JUDY HOCKLEY

Indicator 1: Quality assessment materials are used.

Assessment activities used continue to be appropriate, fair and offer valid assessment opportunities against national standards. Through the audit process which follows NZQA moderation protocols, teachers check all activities against the indicators used by NZQA for external moderation.

Schemes and related resources are complete and in place for programmes at all levels. These materials are aligned to The New Zealand Curriculum, reflect best practice in teaching, learning and assessment, and are available for staff.

Course outlines Outlines include: • the internal and external standards assessed and how these standards are integrated within the programme • A provisional timeline • conditions for assessment to ensure validity, authenticity • opportunity for further assessment • absences policy • appeals policy

Effective moderation practice Three of the Legal Studies assessments are ones previously used and externally moderated; the teacher has a virtually perfect External moderation record in these.

The remaining 4 are new Standards with A,M and E grades. The teacher has experience with these, having been on the NCEA Standards writing panel. One was changed from the version used the previous year, after informal discussions in 2013 with the Moderator. The other 3 also were written by the teacher. Two of the tasks were moderated by a Social Sciences colleague.

Year 13 Law uses Social Studies Assessments, The teacher received advice from a colleague when writing these assessments, and based them on materials and advice from Lincon High School, which has a very strong Senior Social Studies programme.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

116

The teacher’s policy is to familiarise herself with examples of the standard of work required for each grade, to build up confidence and competence in awarding grades.

For both Legal Studies and Social Studies marking, where she has doubts on the grade to be awarded in any case, she will consult either with HOD and experienced Social Sciences Assessor Greg Morton, or a colleague from another school.

2014 NZQA Moderation: activities Standard

Moderation result [activities]

8555v4

Approved

Internal moderation processes The teacher in this subject has confirmed that internal moderation processes have been completed for results reported in 2014.

Indicator 2: Assessment is at the national standard.

Competent assessor statements describe how teachers ensure that their assessments are accurate and consistent with national standards.

Competent assessor statement: Judy Hockley Judy Hockley ensures that assessments are accurate and consistent with the national standard by • Referring to feedback and moderation results from externally moderated materials.

• Developing a strong archive of assessment materials for each unit including assessed work, activities and externally moderated work.

• Discussing issues with colleagues in other schools. The teacher has been given access to graded student work from Lincoln High School.

• Discussions with and feedback from other teachers in the department, notably HOD Greg Morton who assessment expertise in the Social Sciences domain. In 2014 the teacher also consulted with Specialist Classroom Teacher Faith Oxenbridge.

• Moderation of a selection of Legal Studies Standards by Social Sciences colleague Paul Conner.

2014 NZQA Moderation: student work Standard

Moderation result [student work]

8555v4

4/4

Indicator 3: Teacher inquiry is used to inform practice.

The teacher’s 2014 Inquiry project related to the problem of lack of engagement in Social Studies standards by Year 13 students. While there were no grades below Achieved for those students who completed the assignments, the number who did not complete was unacceptably low. The teacher listened to student feedback and also received advice from the Specialist classroom teacher, and studied the use of templates in other subjects and at another school. The teacher’s findings were put into practice in the final Social Studies internal assessment of the year, and though the number of not-­‐completions was still high, nevertheless as a percentage of class numbers, it was an improvement. Lack of completion in the final assessment was more due to students’ strategic decisions on credit requirements rather than a lack of understanding of the task.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

117

Annual curriculum focused appraisal has been completed for the teacher of this subject.

Indicator 4: Achievement data is used to inform practice.

Year 12 Law 24 credits, all internal, were available. 78% of the classes achieved at least some credits. The average per student was 13.8 credits. 5 students achieved all 24. A very noticeable trend was that very few students who attempted a whole assessment actually failed it. Lack of success came from not turning up for, or failing to complete, assessments. Only 61% of students gained at least 12 credits. However, this figure would have been been higher had a number of students not decided towards the end of the year that they would attempt no futher standards, as they already had Level 2 NCEA. It is noticeable that the last 2 assessments of the year were attempted but only 8 and 5 students respectively, compared to the usual number of between 12 and 15. It is difficult to see how anything can be done about this – it is an inevitable part of the NCEA system.

Year 13 Law 24 credits were available, 16 internal Social Studies, 4 external Social Studies, 4 internal Health. Only 45% of students achieved credits. The average number was 10.5 credits. 1 student achieved all 24. Only 42% of achievers achieved 12 credits or more. Only 3 students attempted the external assessment. The 2 who gained Achieved in this, had actually taken part in the lessons on how to achieve this Standard. The one who failed had taken no part in these lessons. Features of the year: a large number of students in the class who left the school throughout the st year (after March 1 ) with no, or virtually no, credits in any of their subjects. The ample class time given for working on their assignments on class laptops, was simply frittered away.

In each internal assessment, it was noticeable that every student who actually completed and handed in any assessment, did actually gain Achieved. The tasks are long and complex, and many students simply gave up. The plan for 2015 is to “hold students’ hands”more for these long and complicated assessments. Templates were used in 2014, but these will have to be even more detailed. It is to be hoped that these spoon-­‐feeding templates will not be rejected by the external Moderator.

TOURISM / LEARNING SKILLS SUBJECT LEADER: KIM SWANN

Indicator 1: Quality assessment materials are used.

Annual assessment audit Tourism All tourism tasks used at both level 2 and 3 tourism have been written and moderated by ServiceIQ (formally know as ATTTO). These are updated annually on the ServiceIQ website and ServiceIQ seeks advice from Industry and teachers to help them update and improve assessment tasks. Kim Swann participates in workshops annually and ensures that the latest copies for all units are used in the Year 12 and 13 Tourism programme each year.

Learning Skills At the beginning of each year Kim Swann reviews all tasks used in the course and ensures that the latest version is being used. Any updates required are made in accordance with the NZQA unit standards guidelines and website. The assessment activities used are appropriate and fair and offer valid, accurate assessment opportunities against national standards.

Schemes and related resources Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

118

Tourism Approprate resources are purchased directly from when updates are required. These have been aliigned with The New Zealand Curriculum and have been designed by ServiceIQ. Also Kim Swann updates personal schemes and related resources to ensure they align with the tasks updated on the website.

Learning Skills At the end of each year Kim Swann reviews all tasks and makes appropriiate changes based on updates from NZQA website. Kim Swann also seeks out student feedback on all tasks and makes appropriate changes where required. At the end of 2014 and the beginning of 2015 tasks and resources are being added to OneNote. Students have the option to complete tasks and veiw material on line. A LSK and Tourism 12 and 13 website has been set up.

Course outlines and practices for NCEA programmes follow the Hagley Assessment Policy. Kim Swann attends Best Practice workshops yearly and ensures that Hagley and Social Science policy is followed for both Tourism and Learning Skills. Couse outlines are given to all students and are offered on the Tourism website. Any new school wide practices are implemented into the Tourism programmes. She seeks advice from Head of department when required.

Effective moderation practices Tourism Internal moderation is undertaken within Hagley Community College. Within Hagley Kevin Addison, Jahred, Natalie Collier and Celia King moderate tasks in their area of expertise. ServicesIQ moderates task in November each year. They usually request 3 pieces of work for 3 unit standards. They also require internal moderation for samples of work for (2 – 4 ) Unit Standards each year. Units are randomly selected by ServiceIQ and Kim Swann sends 3 pieces of student work at the end of the school year.

In 2014 they deviated from this practice and only requested two unit standards. 24725 and 23764. I was only able to send in work for 24715 as I did not have students samples to send in as students did completed the unit for the last two years. Only one student choose to complete 24725 in 2014 so I could only provide one student sample.

2014 external moderation results Standards Moderation result [student work] 24725 1/1

Learning Skills In 2014 Kevin Addison and Jahred Dell met on seven occations throughout the year to discuss internal moderated tasks. During this time 4 tasks were internally moderated for Kim Swann. In 2015 Kevin Addison and Jahred Dell will meet with Kim Swann to internally moderate student work for a selections of core skills tasks. Three for each teacher. Kim Swann will also seperately meet both Natalie Collier to internally moderated Tourism units and with Celia King to moderate 7118 and make updates to this unit standard.

NZQA requires the teacher in charge to produce 3 samples of student work for randomly selected Unit Standards from throughout the college. In 2014 one unit standard was moderated for the learning skills course.

2013 external moderation results Standards Moderation result [student work] 7118 3/3

Internal moderation processes Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

119

The teacher in these subjects has confirmed that internal moderation processes have been completed for results reported in 2014.

Indicator 2: Assessment is at the national standard.

Competent assessor statements describe how teachers ensure that their assessments are accurate and consistent with national standards.

Competent assessor statement: Kim Swann Tourism ServiceIQ undertakes to update all Unit Standards taught in the Tourism course. The teacher in charge attends an annual workshop and in updated by email of any new developments.

Learning Skills The teacher in charge monitors Unit Standards on NCEA website. Moderation procedures are undertaken on an annual basis. Advice has been sought regarding the layout of activities and the development of tasks. Any NCEA moderators’ feedback has been taken implemented immediately. Also see procedures outlined under ‘Effective moderation practices’ above for both subjects.

Also see procedures outlined under ‘Effective moderation practices’ above for both subjects.

Indicator 3: Teacher inquiry is used to inform practice.

Focus for Inquiry: to offer students 24 hour access to course materal. My learning inquiry was aimed at engaging students that required extra help understanding course material, those with low attendance, and students that struggled to concentrate and gain knowledge during my teaching sessions.

My aim in 2014 was to develop websites for Learning Skills and year 12 and 13 Tourism. I wanted to make it easier for my students to complete tasks outside of class time and make classroom resources easy to access at the end of the year when students are highly motivated.

I have a high percentage of students who, due to inconsistent attendance, have large amounts of incomplete work at the end of the year. I felt if I set up a website where I could add notes and video clips I would be able to communicate better with these students. I felt it would make it easier for students to go back and complete work they had begun earlier in the year if the resources were easy to access from home.

In 2014 I began to develop a Tourism and LSK websites. I ran into many difficulties and as a result the website was not set up until early 2015

Annual curriculum focused appraisal has been completed for the teacher of this subject.

Indicator 4: Achievement data is used to inform practice.

Learning Skills: Baseline data: Date from 2014 has highlighed a decrease in students who gained between 10 -­‐ 12 credits in this course. I had a larger number of students in 2014 who gained between 0-­‐5. I feel this is due to a new material addition to the course in 2014. Glenyse Hyland came into the course and introduced a new program called Passages. I feel it was very successful for all Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

120

students but it was particularly useful for a small group of students who I feel I would have left the course otherwise. These students did not engage in written work but attended the course for the social and spiritual aspect of the Passage program one day a week. They only attended on this day.

Target: To engage students in both self development aspects of the course and link it more with the written tasks to gain credits.

Actions: I have met with Glenyse and we have linked written tasks with the Passage sessions. I will follow her sessions with written activites and tasks. We have also linked her sessions with unit standards (i.e. Listening Skills) that will enable students to gain credits with minimal written work.

Outcomes: Students will be more motivated to complete work they are engaged in. I can encourage students to complete tasks that they started and are working on in the Passage sessions.

Evaluation: I feel in 2014 I was able to retain students that would normally have left the course due to the Passage program. However I was not able to encourage them to complete written work and gain at least 12 credits.

Planning for follow on actions: I will continue to develop the Learning skills course to combine self development and credits gaining. Glenyse Hyland and I will meet on a regular basis and combine our material to motivate students to complete written work so they can obtain credits for the work they are doing with Glenyse.

Tourism Baseline data: Tourism 12 and 13: My general pattern for Tourism is that student either gain (30-­‐40 + credits) or students will gain between (0-­‐5) in my classes. My 2014 data showed that more of my students gained between (0-­‐5) credits then usual and less students gained between (20 + credits). A high percentage of my students take year Tourism 13 after taking one of my year 12 courses. Many of these students take a year with me to settle into good work habbits and will do very well the next year (20+ credits). Students have no motivation the first year may come back and gain +30 the following year. Many do work over two years. Often students that gain (0-­‐5) credits improve study habits and find career pathways but are not interested in gaining tourism credits. Credits do not motivate these students and they do not gain many credits with me. I do however ensure they spend class time gaining more insight into what they do want to do and get them ready to return the following year to continue and complete work they started in the previous year. As a result my data is hard to interpret.

In 2014 I worked (in my role as a Vocational advisor) with my more able year 13 students. I was in better communication with their teachers and generally encouraged these students to complete work in other classes at the end of the year rather then offer them extra credits in my course. I feel this was reflected in my data as a decrease in +20 credits gained in my for 2014.

I feel that althgouh this was bad for my data it was positive for my students as students were gaining too many credits with me as they are easier to gain then in other areas but not as useful as having more diverse range of credits.

Target: I aim in 2015 to have less students gain (0-­‐5 credits). And more gaining between 12 – 30 credits in my courses. I feel my website will enable my students who have poor in class study habits and attend less consistantly gain credits. Students with less concentration spans who find it hard to work during class time may work at home using class resources on the website.

Actions: Set up a class website containing course resources and current whiteboard teaching notes. These will be avaliable 24 hours a day and will help students who attend inconsistantly more opportunity to engage and complete tasks.

Outcomes: I want more of my students to gain 12+ credits and less students gain between (0-­‐5 credits). I want to engage my students with no or little motivation to gain credits in my class. I want students to complete work the first year rather then do twice as much the second year.

Evaluation: Students being encouraged to gain credtis in other classes and not being offered extra credits in the course without exploring other options first. Students being enrolled in the course but not gaining credits for large projects till the following year. Students taking the course to find themselves and find future directions and having no motivation to gain tourism credits.

Planning for follow on actions: I believe the Tourism website will raise achievement in my class. I am hoping it will assist students that are currently gaining (0-­‐5) the most. I will continue to develop the site so students can communicate with each other outside of classtime and use the site to stay connected when they are away from school. I will also continue to encourage students to gain credits from a variety of courses to keep career options open.

Subject Review Performance Report: Hagley College 2015

121

510 Hagley Avenue | Christchurch 8011 | New Zealand PO Box 3084 | Christchurch 8140 | New Zealand Telephone 0508HAGLEY or (03) 364 5156 | Facsimile (64 3) 379 3134 Email: info@hagley.school.nz | Website: www.hagley.school.nz