christian education network community of learning ... · christian education network community of...

Christian Education Network Community of Learning

Te Ropu Whakapono o Waitaha1

Achievement Plan

Vision

“To be a community of faith in which our pupils encounter Christ, excel in their learning and are equipped to serve.”

Whakatauki

E kore hoki te aho takitoru e motu wawe A cord of three strands is not quickly broken (Eccl 4:12)

1 "a group of faith" in Canterbury

Christian Education Network COL (CENCOL) Achievement Plan P a g e | 2

Our Community – Profile and Background

There is a strong history of cooperation between the schools within this community. The first four schools listed below have been part of the Christian Schools Network (CSN) in Christchurch which was seeded in 2003 and approved as a network by the Minister of Education in 2008. A strong bond of trust and collaboration across all spheres of school leadership has been built on this relationship. Christchurch Adventist School has a growing connection with CSN schools via regular New Zealand Association for Christian Schools S.I. Principals’ meetings, and since 2012 as part of the Christian Schools Network Learning Community Cluster (CSN LCC).

The CSN LCC was established in 2012 as part of the earthquake recovery programme in Christchurch. Its purpose was to work together to develop a CSN LCC Plan aimed at providing a seamless high quality Christian education from ECE to Tertiary level for Christchurch families. Initiatives in the plan focused on transitioning students into school from ECE and into Year 11 Senior College in Middleton Grange, curriculum collaboration in maths, science and languages (Mandarin), and IT – managing IT risk in a Special Character environment.

Over 2015 and into 2016 CSN LCC Principals and Boards of Trustees discussed the possibility of forming a Christian Schools Community of Learning. These discussions focused on strengthening and broadening collaboration across schools to continue lifting student achievement and increase good practice, and the clear pathways that exist within the network of Christian schools. There was also discussion with two ELCs and two Tertiary Institutions exploring their interest in being part of a Christian Community of Learning.

The two Cornerstone Christian Early Learning Centres are co-located with Aidanfield Christian and Middleton Grange schools and there is a strong pathway from them into the respective schools. There are growing connections with the two tertiary institutions with Vision College providing some courses for Gateway students and Laidlaw applying to provide Christian teacher training.

The Minister of Education accepted the expressions of interest of 5 schools, 2 ELCs and 2 Tertiary institutions and approved the formation of a Community of Learning in December 2016. Rolleston Christian School was established in 2015 as part of the CSN. In June 2017 its Board of Trustees expressed its interest in becoming part of this COL.

Aidanfield Christian School (ACS) Year 1-10

Emmanuel Christian School (ECS) Year 1-10

Hillview Christian School (HCS) Year 1-10

Middleton Grange School (MGS) Year 1-13

Christchurch Adventist School (CAS) Year 1-13

Rolleston Christian School (RCS) Year 1 - 8

Cornerstone Christian Early Learning Centre Aidanfield

Cornerstone Christian Early Learning Centre Middleton

Laidlaw College

Vision College

Our Community of Learning includes over 2,600 students from Year 1 – 13, with individual school sizes ranging from 110 to 1,290 domestic students. There is a clear pathway from the Year 1-10 schools into Year 11 at Middleton Grange with in excess of 85% of students making this transition. Rolleston Christian as a new school is yet to establish a clear pathway, but it is likely this will also be into another CSN school at Year 9. As an area school CAS provides its own pathway of learning from Year 1-13 with little crossover into the other schools.


Our school communities are diverse

Denominationally

Ethnically2

TOTAL EUR MAO PAS ASI MELAA OTH

School Name N % % % % % %

Aidanfield Christian School 273 56.0% 6.2% 2.6% 23.8% 9.9% 1.5%

Christchurch Adventist School 224 32.1% 4.5% 22.3% 25.9% 12.1% 3.1%

Emmanuel Christian School 167 59.9% 9.0% 3.0% 14.4% 10.8% 3.0%

Hillview Christian School 532 74.6% 12.8% 7.0% 3.0% 2.1% 0.6%

Middleton Grange School 1280 68.4% 4.6% 4.3% 17.0% 5.2% 0.5%

Rolleston Christian School 110 62.8% 7.3% 3.6% 11.8% 11.8% 2.7%

Economically – with many families making considerable sacrifice to secure a Christian education for their children

Our school deciles range from 5 to 9

Our Structure

Our community currently operates under the following structure3:

Leadership Group – the principal of each school and a Head Teacher representing ELCs. This group is working to gather and analyse data and develop the achievement plan. It reports to the Stewardship Group.

Stewardship Group – is made up of a BOT delegate from each school and a delegate from the Cornerstone ELC Board of Management. Stewardship Group members have delegated decision making authority from their respective boards to streamline the decision making in the set up phase of the COL. They report to their boards and seek input as required. This group has been meeting to establish operating structures and processes for the COL, provide oversight of the Leadership Group and to monitor development of the achievement plan.

Our Process for engagement

Working together with other schools on strategic goals and collaborating on curriculum is not new to the schools in our COL because of the development of the Christian Schools Network (CSN) and the CSN LCC. Our school communities were intensively consulted at the onset of these initiatives, and continue to be consulted around charters etc, so COL Leaders are very aware of their communities’ desires and aspirations. This is being fed into COL development.

The Leadership Group have met a number of times to discuss possible achievement challenges. Principals were allocated one of the achievement challenges to prepare the narrative, targets and data analysis in consultation with relevant stakeholders or expertise in the field. Draft plans were circulated to the Stewardship Group for initial feedback. Suggested changes were incorporated. Feedback was also sought from the MOE COL advisers. Once the achievement plan was finalised by the Leadership Group it was submitted to the Stewardship

2 Based on July 2016 Roll returns, domestic students only

3 See Appendix 1 for diagram of organisational structure


Group for approval. Stewards have kept their respective boards informed and consulted with them as appropriate through this process.

Specific consultation with school communities re COL at this time is seen mainly as conveying information (keeping parents up to date on COL development) via newsletters and providing opportunity for feedback on this. As time goes on, a plan for common communication across schools will be developed. We plan to ‘relish and enjoy the success as it is realised’4.

A launch date (7 August 2017) of the COL is planned to present and engage staff from all the schools in the rationale for the achievement challenges and begin the process for implementation.

Our Achievement Challenges

Our shared Christian faith drives our purpose of ensuring every student makes the most of their God-given talents, encounters Christ in the curriculum and is equipped to serve him in society. Our concern is for the academic achievement of our students (head) and for how learning shapes their attitudes (heart) and actions (hands). It is this that drives our vision: “To be a community of faith in which our pupils encounter Christ, excel in their learning and are equipped to serve.”

We have identified learning challenges across our COL concerning achievement in writing in the middle years and our ability to equip the growing number of ELL students in our schools to succeed. The two schools with senior colleges have identified NCEA endorsements as an area of challenge.

We have looked for an underlying theme in these challenges that could help us determine a high-level strategy to address them. The recurring theme that arose throughout our discussions was building ‘deep thinking’. Not only will this strategy assist in our identified learning challenges, but it has potential to impact all curriculum areas and year levels.

We have also identified some inconsistencies in data collection and assessment tools used across our COL, so one of the early tasks of the COL Lead Principal and Across School Teachers will be to identify what data is required for each achievement challenge and how it will be collected. This will enable more accurate analysis of the current position of learners and the progress they make against targets set by the COL.

As a Community of Learning, with clear educational pathways through our schools we recognise that when it comes to addressing these challenges we are stronger together than alone – “E kore hoki te aho takitoru e motu wawe” [A cord of three strands is not quickly broken (Eccl 4:12)]

We also recognise that all educational initiatives our schools participate in have at their core the Special Character overlay and the achievement challenges should be understood in this light.

The expected length of time for each Achievement Challenge to be accomplished varies according to the magnitude of the challenge and the expected level of pedagogical change needed.

4 Refer MOE Kāhui Ako Personalised Pathways Kit – Iwi Partnerships


For example, in Writing, all schools have trialled various strategies over the past five years to improve Writing, with limited success. In order to achieve the shifts in student achievement we will have to research, identify and embed significantly new approaches to the teaching of Writing. Year 7 is also an entry point to a number of schools in the Community of Learning which means extra measures need to be identified for assessing the entry point of the students’ achievement. This is why this Achievement Challenge looks out to 2022 completion date.

The ELL Achievement Challenge has a shorter length of time. One area to focus on first is the correct identification of these students. Then there are two years of strategy implementation for two Year levels in the schools to ensure the strategies implemented can be rolled out to other Year levels in future years.


Background

We know that Literacy is integral to students’ learning in all learning areas. It is imperative that our students are able to communicate not just orally but also through written language. Unfortunately, this area of learning does not seem to be a real strength for New Zealand students from Year 1 – 8. Historically, New Zealand-wide National Standards data has indicated that achievement levels in Written Language have been consistently lower than in Reading and Mathematics, and that boys achieve at a lower level in writing than girls. Longitudinal National Standards data for our COL (Tab. 1) confirms that these national trends of lower achievement in writing and of boys achieving at a lower level than girls in the National Standards in Writing across Years 1 – 85 are evident in our Community of Learning. Table 1

Percentage of CENCOL students at or above in National Standards in Writing

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

All students 79.7% 79.2% 78.1% 78.8% 75.5%

Girls 85.4% 85.4% 83.4% 84.4% 84.1%

Boys 73.6% 72.9% 72.9% 73.3% 66.9%

Breaking down 2016 National Standards data by year level shows lower achievement in writing for students in Years 7 and 8 compared to students in Years 1 to 66. We also identify that students in Years 9 and 10 are less likely to be at the expected New Zealand Curriculum (NZC) levels for writing. It would appear that nationally there is an increasing gap between NZC expectation and the achievement of students in writing in Years 7 to 10. This increasing gap is also seen in the achievement levels within our COL7. Further analysis by gender also highlights a significant disparity between the achievement of boys and girls in writing (Tab. 2). Table 2

2016 Written Language - % At and Above

All Boys Girls Variation

Year 7 67.6% 49.6% 85.0% 35.4%

Year 8 57.0% 43.3% 69.5% 26.2%

Year 9 42.8% 36.0% 48.7% 12.7%

Year 10 65.1% 58.2% 72.0% 13.8%

Year 7-10 58.2% 47.1% 68.6% 21.5%

5 MOE supplied data re COL NS Achievement. (Rolleston only included in 2016 data due to very recent join up).

6 See Appendix 2 Table 1


ACHIEVEMENT CHALLENGE 1 Written Language


To lift overall achievement in Year 7 to 10 written language, our data supports a targeted focus on improving the engagement and achievement of boys. Collated National Standards data8 points to a possible additional focus on the achievement of Māori students in Writing with 99 of 144 (68.8%) achieving at or above National Standards, but insufficient information is available at this time in terms of Year level and gender breakdown of Māori students to determine where this focus would be. It is expected this gap in data will be addressed by the potential actions listed after the table on the following page.




10 Note all numbers are calculated on 2016 rolls – these will vary from year to year.

Achievement Challenge To lift achievement in written language for all students in Years 7-10 with a particular focus on boys.

Achievement Targets 20169 Baseline

201810 2019 2020 2021

2022

1. To lift the written language achievement of Year 7-10 students so 73% are AT or ABOVE the appropriate curriculum level by 2022. This is a shift of 128 students.

58%

(502/862)

61%

(526/862)

64%

(552/862)

67%

(578/862)

70%

(603/862)

73%

(630/862)

2. To lift the written language achievement of Year 7-10 boys so 62% are AT or ABOVE the appropriate curriculum level by 2022. This is a shift of 62 boys.

47%

(196/416)

50%

(208/416)

53%

(220/416)

56%

(233/416)

59%

(245/416)

62%

(258/416)


Potential Actions In order to achieve our target of lifting the level of achievement of boys in Years 7 – 10, the central focus of our inquiry will be to lift the learning achievement of Year 3 – 8 boys in Written Language, as most of these students are likely to be part of our Middle School programme in the next 5 years. While the focus will be on boys, we believe that all students will benefit by positive changes to teaching and learning across the Christian Education Network Community of Learning. Schools that have been involved in successful professional development initiatives (e.g. accelerated literacy learning (ALL) or similar literacy programmes) will be identified in order that professional learning is shared collaboratively across the community. A Literacy Leader, with highly effective strategies, will be appointed from within the COL to assist the designated In-school Lead Teachers to:

carry out an in-depth analysis of achievement in Writing

analyse achievement data across students within the COL, including the year and gender breakdown for Māori students to identify where there are patterns within/across cohorts and priority learners requiring assistance

scope current best practice in data gathering and applied analysis

develop a shared understanding and synergy amongst teachers of best practice in the teaching and learning of Writing

collaborate with teachers in their own schools/across schools to enhance and transform classroom writing practice, with a focus on strategies to engage and progress students in their learning of Writing

adopt culturally responsive practices for Māori to improve literacy


Background

Of the 6 schools within the Christian Education Network Community of Learning, 2 are full Year 1 – 13 Area Schools delivering NCEA Qualifications, namely, Christchurch Adventist School (CAS) and Middleton Grange School (MGS). At face value, and measured solely by NCEA results, both schools are performing to a very high standard. Both schools are well above the former Better Public Service goal of “85% of 18 year olds will have achieved NCEA Level 2 or equivalent.” While this target has been removed by the government it sets a good benchmark for schools. Pass rates for CAS and MGS range from 93% to 100% across Levels 1 – 3.11

In determining what might be a reasonable and valid Curriculum Achievement Challenge for NCEA students, increasing the % pass rate from 93% to 95%, while admirable, is investing considerable resource to move 2 or 3 students from Not Achieved to Achieved. This is significant for those individual students however we believe that a focus in another aspect of NCEA performance would capture those students as well.

We also felt it important not to have a rigid or narrow focus on pass marks alone. It is not just the ‘quantity’ of students passing that is important, but also the ‘quality’ of their work, the depth of their critical thinking that is as important. The benefits to society, to the students’ future contribution in their vocation can be enhanced when students are required to think broadly and deeply about the curriculum.

This depth of thinking is reflected within the NCEA Framework, where each Curriculum Achievement Standard provides 3 levels of attainment:

Achieved

Achieved endorsed with Merit

Achieved endorsed with Excellence

The requirements for achieving the Standard with Merit or Excellence increase in expectation of the understanding of the curriculum. An Achievement Standard from Level 2 Religious Studies provides a good example of the greater depth of thinking required:

Achieved – Explain the key beliefs of two religious traditions in relation to a significant

religious question:

• outlining the key beliefs of two religious traditions including their meaning and source • explaining the similarities and differences between the key beliefs

Merit – Explain in detail the key beliefs within two religious traditions in relation to a

significant religious question involves requirements for Achieved level PLUS:

• explaining the significance of the key beliefs within each religious tradition.

11

See Appendix 3 Table 1

ACHIEVEMENT CHALLENGE 2 NCEA Endorsements


Excellence – Comprehensively explain the key beliefs within two religious

traditions in relation to a significant religious question involves requirements for Merit level PLUS:

• explaining the wider implications of the key beliefs of the two religious traditions

This would also go to some way to addressing observations made by our Tertiary Partners (Laidlaw College, Vision College) that for some students the ability to critically reflect and make links between disparate topics is lacking. While a relatively small number of students currently have a pathway to these Tertiary Institutions we are hoping this will increase over time. With a focus on thinking skills as a key strategy to enhance student achievement across NCEA we will see benefits not only for our Tertiary partners but any Tertiary Institutions students study in.

Analysing 2016 NCEA data highlights a gap between female and male achievement at endorsement level12.

Total Endorsements

Females Males

Level 1 84% 58%

Level 2 69% 55%

Level 3 64% 36%

Therefore, targeting male student achievement is an essential part of lifting overall endorsement rates.

Māori and Pasifika student cohorts will also be targeted to raise achievement levels to match the whole cohort targets. It needs to be noted that the number of Māori and Pasifika students is low and this can skew achievement percentages from year to year.

It should be noted that it is a given that the high rates of overall achievement through all year levels of NCEA that have been obtained through focused initiatives and development over the last number of years must be maintained while making a shift to the increased number of students achieving the endorsements that the achievement challenge points to.


Achievement Challenge To raise NCEA endorsement levels across the curriculum for Year 11-13 (Level 1 - Level 3) students, with a particular focus on males.

Achievement Targets 201612 Baseline

201813 2019 2020 2021 Target

1. To raise the NCEA endorsement levels of Year 11 (Level 1) students from 70% (132/188) in 2016 to 84% (158/188) in 2021. This is a shift of 26 students.

Total 70% (132/188) 74% (139/188) 77% (145/188) 80% (150/188) 84% (158/188)

Merit 42% (79/188) 44% (83/188) 45% (85/188) 46% (86/188) 48% (90/188)

Excellence 28% (53/188) 30% (56/188) 32% (60/188) 34% (64/188) 36% (68/188)

2. To raise the endorsement levels of Year 11 male (Level 1) students from 58% (57/98) in 2016 to 84% (82/98) in 2021. This is a shift of 25 students.

Total 58% (57/98) 64% (63/98) 7114% (70/98) 78% (76/98) 84% (82/98)

Merit 39% (38/98) 41% (40/98) 44% (43/98) 46% (45/98) 48% (47/98)

Excellence 19% (19/98) 23% (23/98) 28% (27/98) 32% (31/98) 36% (35/98)


Total 62% (139/223) 65% (145/223) 67% (149/223) 73% (163/223) 79% (176/223)

Merit 36% (80/223) 37% (83/223) 38% (85/223) 41% (92/223) 44% (98/223)

Excellence 26% (59/223) 28% (62/223) 29% (64/223) 32% (71/223) 35% (78/223)


Total 55% (56/102) 59% (60/102) 66% (67/102) 73% (74/102) 78% (80/102)

Merit 39% (40/102) 39% (40/102) 41% (42/102) 43% (44/102) 44% (45/102)

Excellence 16% (16/102) 20% (20/102) 25% (25/102) 29% (30/102) 34% (35/102)


Total 52% (93/180) 53% (96/180) 56% (100/180) 63% (113/180) 67% (121/180)

Merit 34% (62/180) 36% (64/180) 37% (66/180) 40% (72/180) 42% (76/180)

Excellence 17% (31/180) 18% (32/180) 19% (34/180) 23% (41/180) 25% (45/180)


Total 36% (28/78) 41% (32/78) 46% (36/78) 56% (44/78) 67% (52/78)

Merit 24% (19/78) 27% (21/78) 29% (23/78) 36% (28/78) 42% (33/78)

Excellence 12% (9/78) 14% (11/78) 17% (13/78) 21% (16/78) 24% (19/78)

12

See Appendix 3 Table 1 13

Note all numbers are calculated on 2016 rolls – these will vary from year to year. 14

Due to rounding, percentages may not total exactly 100%


Potential Actions

Knowing that pedagogical change takes time for staff to embed and effect change in learning outcomes we have decided to focus on Level 1 in the first year of the achievement plan, progressing to Levels 1 & 2 in the second year, and finally to all NCEA Levels in the third year of the plan. This allows staff to focus on pedagogy and curriculum across one level at a time. It also means that students in Level 1 will take those new learning strategies with them into Level 2 and subsequently Level 3.

Our approach could be described as ‘slow burn big bonfire’!

Some of the ‘high level’ strategies to achieve this challenge could include:

Higher order thinking frameworks e.g. surface to deep thinking using SOLO as a taxonomy

Pedagogical instruction around several ‘high effect size’ strategies that have particular relevance for Senior College students for example, Conceptual Change programmes (higher order thinking) and Collective Teacher Efficacy are two areas where teacher can improve learning

Reducing ‘within school variation’ – primarily focussed within a single unit school, but can be judiciously applied to ‘within COL variation’. (David Reynolds research: data, pupil voice, quality of teaching/learning, building professional capacity).

More specific strategies will be identified in consultation with schools, across school teachers and within school teachers.


Background

The schools within Christian Education Network Community of Learning (Te Ropu Whakapono o Waitaha) have experienced significant growth in the numbers of English Language Learner (ELL) students. Such growth adds to the fabric of each school and the Community of Learning which adds a complexity to the overall achievement outcomes for the COL. Notwithstanding each ELL student is an individual with their own goals and aspirations that are of value in and of themselves, each learner also has an impact on the overall achievement rates of the school and COL. ELL students who are hindered from making fast (or comparative) progress towards academic English mastery are limited in their ability to engage with and make progress in the opportunities a wide curriculum offers. Many of these students speak their mother tongue at home and often in community settings where they gather with families of the same cultural background. For many, school is the one consistent place that they encounter spoken and taught English. The spread of languages is wide, with no dominant group. The more prominent languages spoken as a mother tongue are: Mandarin Chinese, Tagalog, Japanese and Afrikaans. Historic data also highlights ELL student learning as a priority for the COL. e.g. when looking at trends from ELL MOE funding data for the COL up to and including 2016, it is evident that 32% (84/261) ELL students ceased MOE funding due to reaching the maximum number of terms, in comparison to 68% (177/261) exceeding the benchmark15. This highlights that a number of ELL students across the COL may not have made expected progress in their acquisition of English language across each of the literacy domains (reading, writing, speaking and listening) within their MOE funding period. Programmes to support ELL students vary in depth and quality across the COL. The opportunity to align practice and accelerate learning for ELL students can impact on each individual’s progress through the years of learning and on their learning pathway through the COL. The Achievement Challenge reflects both a process/strategy focus and achievement targets which are working hand in hand. Culturally responsive practice English Language Learners can be New Zealand Māori, children from the Pacific region, New Zealand born children of migrant families or children of newly arrived migrant families. A focus on the growing number of ELL students will foster the development of cultural inclusiveness in classrooms across the COL. This increasing understanding of the

15

Appendix 4 Table 1

ACHIEVEMENT CHALLENGE 3 English Language Learners


cultural learning needs of such students will benefit all students. By developing effective practice around second language acquisition we will enhance access to the curriculum for a large group of learners. The voice of data In reviewing the data on ELL student achievement, it becomes apparent that the accuracy of the use of English Language Learning Progressions (ELLP) assessment varies markedly between schools across the COL. The data shows that some junior children are likely scored incorrectly against the ELLP learning pathway. Some children appear to score higher than is possible for their year level band. This highlights a likely misunderstanding across schools in the use of the assessment tool. The data also shows a disparity between the number of students being identified within schools across the COL. The Christchurch demographic is shifting significantly towards a higher number of migrant families. Anecdotally (qualitatively), it would appear some ELL students are unidentified. This has led to some question of the validity of ELL data presented within the achievement challenge. Observations suggest schools identify obvious needs in students with limited English but miss the needs of students who, on the surface appear to have a suitable grasp of spoken English language. These students can lack the structure and academic English to perform to a suitable level in the New Zealand curriculum. This has the potential to impact on their progress through and achievement in the curriculum and therefore on their goals and aspirations. Early identification allows early support and monitoring, which begins to address the language barrier for these students. Because of the disparity in data, the COL believes it is not getting accurate data on ELL student progression across the COL and this has provided the rationale for a COL focus and the strategy goal to ensure all students who are eligible for ELL support are identified and funding is applied for. We predict the number of identified ELL students will increase on current trends and on improved identification practices. Cohort focus Currently there are 166 students who are identified as ELL across the COL. Of these, there are 107 students in Years 1-3, 39 in Years 4-8 and 20 in Years 9-13. The focus on Year 1 to 3 ELL students is deliberately intended to introduce a compounding effect over the three years of the target. As each ELL student starts at a different time and with varying mastery of English, the measuring of the target becomes fluid with pupils starting and completing their allocated MOE funding period at varying times. Therefore, for the sake of a baseline cohort the COL determined to measure MOE funded Year 1 to 3 students identified as Foundation Stage (total ELLP score of equal or less than 3), Stage 1 (total ELLP score of 4-7) or Stage 2 (total ELLP score of 8) using March 2017 funding figures. The ELL students in Years 4 to 8 are all at differing stages, which makes the setting of a robust target for them problematic. However, this group is expected to benefit from the focus on culturally responsive teaching practice, including second language learning through the implementation of the strategy. Thus, while the numbers of ELL students appear to be low in the initial baseline cohort, the focus on teacher practice is expected to impact significant numbers of students both in the Year 1 to 3 levels but also into all year levels in the primary areas of the COL. The focus at Year 1 also has the opportunity of involving the Early Learning Centres as they too work with an increasing number of ELL students.


16

See Appendix 4 Table 2 17

Due to rounding percentages may not total exactly 100%

Achievement Challenge To ensure all MOE funded Year 1-3 students at foundation stage in 2017 are at stage 2 ELLP by 2020 (cohort standard).

Achievement Targets Stage March 201716

Baseline 2018

November 2019

November 2020

November

1. To lift the achievement of Year 1 ELL students from 0% (0/38) in 2017 to 89% (34/38) having achieved Stage 2 (total ELLP score of 8) by 2020. This equates to a shift of 34 students by 2020.

At foundation 95% (36/38) 50% (19/38) 13% (5/38) 0% (0/38)

Achieved stage 1 5% (2/38) 50% (19/38) 74% (28/38) 11% (4/38)

Achieved stage 2 0% (0/38) 0% (0/38) 13% (5/38) 89% (34/38)

2. To lift the achievement of Year 2 ELL students from 0% (0/35) in 2017 to 100% (35/35) at having achieved Stage 2 (total ELLP score of 8) by 2020. This equates to a shift of 35 students by 2020

At foundation 69% (24/35) 34%17 (12/35) 14% (5/35) 0% (0/35)

Achieved stage 1 31% (11/35) 54% (19/35) 31% (11/35) 0% (0/35)

Achieved stage 2 0% (0/35) 11% (4/35) 54% (19/35) 100% (35/35)

3. To lift the achievement of Year 3 ELL students from 9% (3/34) in 2017 to 100% (34/34) having achieved reach Stage 2 (total ELLP score of 8) by 2019. This equates to a shift of 31 students by 2019.

At foundation 18% (6/34) 9% (3/34) 0% (0/34)

Achieved stage 1 74% (25/34) 53% (18/34) 0% (0/34)

Achieved stage 2 9% (3/34) 38% (13/34) 100% (34/34)


Potential Actions

Strategy Goal: 2018: Ensure all students who are eligible for ELL support are identified and funding applied for. Within the Christian Education Network Community of Learning (Te Ropu Whakapono o Waitaha) there is a developed set of expertise for addressing the needs of English Language Learners. However, this is not yet being shared across the schools to the benefit of all ELL students. The structure of the COL will facilitate the use of the existing knowledge and professional relationships and multiply this across all schools. To achieve this collaboration, it is thought a teacher with experience in adult education and a deep understanding of the system of support needed for ELL students will be appointed to assist schools. Other potential actions include:

Carry out a review of current identification strategies within each school

Develop teacher knowledge and skill on best practice for identification/assessment of ELL students

Develop a shared understanding and synergy amongst teachers of best practice in the teaching and learning for ELL students

Collaborate with teachers in their own schools/across schools to enhance and transform classroom practice with cultural inclusiveness as a focus. This will also benefit our Māori and Pasifika students

Raise achievement of ELL students to at least that of same age cohorts in line with the approved targets.


Appendix 1:

Christian Education Network Community of Learning – Organisational Structure


APPENDIX 2 – Writing Data

Table 1 : Overview 2016 CENCOL National Standards – Achievement in Writing18

CENCOL (Collated) National

Standards Writing 2016

At and Above

Grouping Total # # %

All Students 1475 1113 75.5%

Female 731 615 84.1%

Male 744 498 66.9%

Maori 144 99 68.8%

Pasifika 90 67 74.4%

Asian 241 179 74.3%

Other 104 87 83.7%

European/Pakeha 896 681 76.0%

Table 2 : CENCOL Writing 2016: Year 7 – 10 (Year 7/8 NS19, Year 9/10 other) [Table Redacted]

Table 3: Breakdown of individual school point shifts for writing challenge

Writing – Year 7-10

Total

students

Baseline Target Shift Required

Number Percent Number Percent Number % point

Aidanfield 62 30 48% 45 73% 15 25%

Chch Adventist 80 27 34% 58 73% 31 39%

Emmanuel 59 38 64% 43 73% 5 9%

Hillview 200 106 53% 146 73% 40 20%

Middleton 453 295 65% 331 73% 36 8%

Rolleston Christian 8 6 75% 7 88% 1 13%

Total 862 502 58% 630 73% 128 15%

18

Sourced from 2016 NS data reporting to MOE 19

Internal data extracted from SMS’s retrospectively, resulting in some inconsistencies with Years 7 & 8 NS data reported to MOE as per previous table (App 2 Tab 1). This represents a best estimate of breakdown of 2016 data by gender and year with data available at this time.


Writing – Boys Year 7-10

Total

students



Aidanfield 33 13 39% 20 62% 7 23%

Chch Adventist 34 9 26% 21 62% 12 36%

Emmanuel 28 13 46% 17 62% 4 16%

Hillview 93 39 42% 58 62% 19 20%

Middleton 223 119 53% 138 62% 19 9%


Total 416 196 47% 258 62% 62 15%

Note: due to rounding, totals may be slightly different to the sum of the parts.

Appendix 3: NCEA Data Table 1: CENCOL Schools - NCEA Achievement 2016 [Table Redacted] Table 2: Breakdown of individual school point shifts for NCEA challenge

NCEA Level 1 endorsements

Total

students



Chch Adventist 17 10 59% 14 84% 4 25%

Middleton 171 122 71% 144 84% 22 13%

Total 188 132 70% 158 84% 26 14%

NCEA Level 1 endorsements - Male

Total

students



Chch Adventist 12 7 58% 10 84% 3 26%

Middleton 86 50 58% 72 84% 22 26%

Total 98 57 58% 82 84% 25 26%


Total

students



Chch Adventist 23 9 39% 18 79% 9 40%

Middleton 200 130 65% 158 79% 28 14%

Total 223 139 62% 176 79% 37 17%



Total

students



Chch Adventist 9 3 33% 7 78% 4 45%

Middleton 93 53 57% 73 78% 20 21%

Total 102 56 55% 80 78% 24 23%


Total

students



Chch Adventist 9 4 44% 6 67% 2 23%

Middleton 171 89 52% 115 67% 26 15%

Total 180 93 52% 121 67% 28 15%


Total

students



Chch Adventist 4 X X X X X X

Middleton 74 X X X X X X

Total 78 28 36% 52 67% 24 31%

Note: due to rounding, totals may be slightly different to the sum of the parts.

Appendix 4: ELL Data Table 1: Cumulative MOE ELL funding data – cessation of funding

COL ACS CAS ECS HCS MGS

# % # % # % # % # % # %

Exceeded Benchmark 177 68% 14 50% 79 64% 21 78% 9 60% 54 79%

Completed Max Terms 84 32% 14 50% 44 36% 6 22% 6 40% 14 21%

Total 261 28 123 27 15 68

Table 2: CENCOL ELL Progressions Scores Years 1-3 2016 [Table Redacted]


Table 3: Breakdown of individual school point shifts for ELL challenge

ELL Year 1

Total

students

Baseline20 Target Shift Required


Aidanfield 18 0 0% 16 89% 16 89%


Emmanuel 0 X X X X X X

Hillview 2 X X X X X X

Middleton 10 0 0% 9 90% 9 90%


Total 38 0 0% 34 89% 34 89%

Note x= data has been redacted

ELL Year 2

Total

students



Aidanfield 12 0 0% 12 100% 12 100%


Emmanuel 0 X X X X X X


Middleton 10 0 0% 10 100% 10 100%


Total 35 0 0% 35 100% 35 100%


ELL Year 3

Total

students



Aidanfield 8 0 0% 8 100% 8 100%

Chch Adventist 6 3 50% 6 100% 3 50%

Emmanuel 6 0 0% 6 100% 6 100%


Middleton 10 0 0% 10 100% 10 100%

Rolleston Christian 2 X X X X X X

Total 34 3 9% 34 100% 31 91%


20

At Stage 2

christian education network community of learning ... · christian education network community of...

Documents