khda annual report 2013_english

The performance of private schools in Dubai

Dubai Schools Inspection Bureau

AnnualReport

In the name of Allah,

Most Gracious, Most Merciful


The Performance of Private

Schools in Dubai

Annual Report

2013


Annual Report 2013

© 2013 Knowledge and Human Development Authority, Dubai, UAE. All rights reserved.

In the interests of enhancing the value of the information contained in this report, you may download, print, reproduce and distribute any material contained in the report so long as KHDA is acknowledged

as the source.

Dubai Schools Inspection Bureau Annual Report 2013

8

Dr. Abdulla Al KaramDirector General and Chairman of the Board of DirectorsKnowledge and Human Development Authority

This year marks the fifth year that KHDA has been inspecting schools in Dubai. In that time, the city has seen many changes. It has emerged as a more dynamic, robust economy which is once again going through great growth.

Since 2008, the private education sector has grown not just in size, but in quality. Results from international assessments such as PISA, TIMSS and PIRLS have corroborated inspections findings that student outcomes are improving across the sector.

Partnerships with international accreditation and quality assurance bodies such as British Schools Overseas and New England Associations of Schools and Colleges are also ensuring that the quality of education offered by Dubai’s schools is comparable to the best in the world.

In the past five years of inspections, we have identified many strengths in Dubai’s schools sector, ranging from teaching and learning, to leadership and student wellbeing, to name just a few. We are committed to concentrating on these strengths and encouraging schools to share them with each other, so that all students have access to high quality education.

We believe we will continue to transform education in Dubai through collaboration, greater engagement with parents, teachers and students, and reinforcing the strengths and positive practices of every school in Dubai.

9Dubai Schools Inspection Bureau Annual Report 2013

Jameela Al MuhairiChief of the Dubai Schools Inspection Bureau Knowledge and Human Development Authority

I am proud to welcome you to the fifth Annual Report of the Dubai Schools Inspection Bureau (DSIB). We have continued to carry out our annual inspections of all the private schools in Dubai and to gather vital information about the progress of the schools since inspection began. We have been able to generate a comprehensive picture of school performance which directly influences parents, school leaders and government policy.

Our information shows an improving picture over time, not perhaps as dramatic this year as in the earlier years, but nonetheless steady and assured. In 2008-9, fewer than a third of students attended good or better schools. This year, the number has improved yet again and now almost exactly half of our students now go to schools that are judged to be good or better. Consequently, there are fewer students in acceptable or unsatisfactory schools. DSIB continues to focus its energies and resources to raise standards in the less effective schools. We value the partnerships that we have created with all schools and acknowledge the commitment and hard work of staff and leaders.

It is our custom to develop and refine our approaches to inspection and expectations of schools, as well as addressing particular issues. In 2012-13, there have been distinct focuses on students’ personal development and the provision for students with special educational needs. We have also looked closely at how well Emirati students perform. In addition, we have established self-evaluation procedures as a fundamental part of inspection, so that schools can play a full part in the process and be more responsible for their own improvement.

In the coming year, we will continue to focus on students with special educational needs and Emirati students. Following a current emphasis on the provision for Arabic as a first language, each inspection this year will gather key information. Inspection reports will feature short sections on all of these three themes. As an added dimension, inspectors will be checking how well schools use international assessment data to influence their performance.

We remain very grateful for all the support and input from everyone involved in school inspection. We are heartened by the continuing successes in Dubai schools and we will continue to do our best to champion excellent practice and minimise poor provision so that all students in Dubai can benefit from good quality schools. We look forward to working alongside all stakeholders to promote and ensure further successes.

My colleagues and I wish you every success for the coming year.


10


ContentsIntroduction 12

Part One: Inspection Findings 2008-2013

Chapter 1: Trends in the performance of schools over five years

- Overview 18

- Overall performance 20

- Performance against the quality indicators 30

- The overall performance of schools offering different curricula 82

Chapter 2: Tackling unsatisfactory performance

Chapter 3: Early years learning

Chapter 4: The views of parents, teachers and students

Chapter 5: Thematic investigations

- Developing provision for students with special educational needs 146

- US schools in Dubai 186

Chapter 6: Challenges for the next five years

Part Two: The Development of DSIB’s Organisation and Methods

Chapter 7: The framework for inspection

Chapter 8: The role of self-evaluation in school inspection

Chapter 9: Collaboration with other organisations and local partnerships

Chapter 10: DSIB in the media

Part Three: School Performance Tables


12

Introduction The close of the academic year 2012-13 marks the end of the fifth year of private school inspections in Dubai. The initial quality inspections in 2008-09 followed several months of preparation, involving research into best practices and working with schools and external agencies to create an inspection framework and method to meet the needs of Dubai. Since then, Dubai Schools Inspection Bureau’s (DSIB) core team of international staff, together with several hundred associate inspectors from around the world, have enabled DSIB to fulfil its mission “to contribute to the improvement of educational outcomes and parental choice by providing independent, comprehensive, authoritative assessment of education quality in Dubai”. Inspectors have carried out approaching 10,000 separate analyses of data and documents, have conducted around 20,000 interviews with school staff and students, and observed in excess of 60,000 lessons.

The framework for inspection in 2008-09 was useful for the initial quality inspections. It informed schools and other stakeholders of the basics of the school inspection process, the Key Questions and the Quality Indicators that were used to evaluate provision and outcomes. In subsequent years we have continued to ask the same seven Key Questions but in greater depth and with more rigour. The precision and clarity of the quality indicators have been developed considerably; and the quality descriptors are now much more detailed so that there is little room for ambiguity.

The story of school inspection from the autumn of 2008 to the present day – the evolution of the framework, the response of schools to inspection, DSIB’s involvement with other organisations, and the reaction of parents, other stakeholders and the media – is the subject of this review of the first five years of DSIB.


The structure of this reportPart One presents a detailed analysis of the findings resulting from inspection activity over the five years since 2008.

Chapter 1 describes trends in the performance of private schools, first generally in relation to each of the quality indicators employed by inspection teams; and then with regard to each group of schools that offer the different curricula available in Dubai.

Chapter 2 is concerned with how KHDA has encouraged improvement in schools whose performance has been rated unsatisfactory in inspections.

Chapter 3 describes DSIB’s findings about Early Years learning.

Chapter 4 presents a summary of the views expressed by parents, teachers and students in the surveys of opinion that have become part of the inspection process.

Besides inspecting and reporting on individual schools, DSIB is mandated to investigate how well Dubai schools are performing in terms of key educational themes, in order to inform policy decisions. Reports of three of these thematic investigations appear in Chapter 5.

Chapter 6 presents a discussion of the main challenges facing private schools in Dubai over the coming period, based on the evidence gained from the experience of five years of inspection and reporting on education quality.

Part Two describes how some of DSIB’s essential practices have evolved and developed over the last five years in the light of continuing experience of inspecting schools.

Chapter 7 records how the inspection framework has altered in response to changing priorities, while maintaining its original emphasis on producing authoritative evaluations of school effectiveness.

Chapter 8 is concerned with the developing role of school self-evaluation in the inspection process, as well as with its demonstrable importance in the effective leadership and management of schools.

Chapter 9 outlines DSIB’s work in partnership with other organisations and Chapter 10 recalls some examples of how school inspection activity has been reported in the media.

Part Three contains a table of the overall performance over the period of the report 2008-2013


14

PART OnE:

Part One:


Part One:

Inspection Findings 2008-2013

1ChAPTER:


Trends in the performance of schools over five years1


18

Overview The numbers of private schools and students in Dubai have increased over the five years. There are now thirty four more schools providing for around 107,000 more students. Compared with 2008-09, there are three times the number of outstanding schools, fifty per cent more good schools and fewer unsatisfactory schools. However, analysis of findings from year to year shows that improvement has not been equal across all types of school, nor has the rate of improvement been steady from year to year. Schools that have improved the most are those offering a UK-based curriculum. The group of schools that has been slowest to improve offer the MoE curriculum.

The greatest period of change was seen over the two years following the initial quality inspections. After that, improvement has slowed; the proportions of schools in the “acceptable” and “good” categories have remained broadly the same although the number of outstanding schools has continued to increase. Nevertheless, taken overall, there has been an upward trend in the quality of education provided and in students’ academic and personal development.

Improvements in students’ achievements in the individual key subjects have differed. Greatest improvement has been seen in English, mathematics and science. There has also been improvement in Islamic Education, although overall attainment levels still lag behind those in the other three subjects. In Arabic, however, there has been no improvement over the last three inspection cycles and even a decline in attainment and progress in Arabic as a first language. Attainment and progress in Arabic as both a first and an additional language are at much lower levels than in the other key subjects.

Students’ personal and social development has improved throughout the five years. It is important to note, however, that the aspects of personal and social development inspected and the inspection method have both been revised significantly since the first inspections.

Improvements have been seen in the quality of teaching, learning and assessment. However, there have been significant variations in the rates and types of improvement between the age phases and between schools offering different types of curricula. Improvements have been most notable in all phases of UK-style schools. There have also been noteworthy improvements in phase 4 of schools offering MoE and Indian curricula but phases 1 and 2 of these schools have been slowest to respond.

The quality of the curriculum has improved most in UK, US, IB and French schools. There has been no overall improvement of the curriculum in private MoE schools.

Provision for the health and safety of students improved rapidly in the two years following the first inspections. It has remained static since then, with most schools providing a good or outstanding level of care. Similarly the quality of support got better in the same early period but then appeared to decline slightly. However, that decline coincided with a revision of this quality indicator which now places a greater emphasis on the identification of, and provision for, students with special educational needs.

All aspects of leadership and management were better in the last round of inspections when compared to the first. In keeping with trends in other quality indicators, the quality of leadership, self-evaluation and improvement planning, governance and management improved until 2010-11 then levelled out. In contrast, partnerships with parents and the community have continued to improve year on year. Most schools now have good and better partnerships, and in a third of all schools partnerships are outstanding.


After five years of inspections, KHDA and DSIB now have a reliable and detailed view of the strengths, trends and aspects for improvement in private schools in Dubai. This information is guiding DSIB in its plans and strategies for the next five years.

What has changed for the better

There are now more good and outstanding schools and more students attend these schools

Students’ attainment and progress have improved in most key subjects

Students are consistently well behaved and demonstrate strong personal and social development

There is good quality teaching, learning and assessment in more schools

Far more schools fulfil the MOE statutory requirements

There are better arrangements for the health and safety of students

More schools are led well

More schools have effective governance arrangements

More schools have created effective partnerships with parents

Where improvement has been less pronounced

A persistently high proportion of schools are rated no better than acceptable overall

There has been very little improvement in students’ attainment and progress in Arabic

Students’ investigative skills in mathematics and science are still insufficiently developed

A persistently high proportion of teaching is rated no better than of acceptable quality

Weak teaching and learning is common in kindergarten classes

Students have too few opportunities to use ICT to help them learn

Some schools still deny their students opportunities to gain internationally recognised qualifications

Provision for students with special educational needs remains weak in half the schools

There are persistent weaknesses in leadership in too many schools

Too many schools have weak self-evaluation and improvement planning processes

International AssessmentsThe quality of education is one of the most fundamental priorities for a country’s present and future and the implementation of international assessments alongside the inspection process has been a significant development in helping Dubai evaluate the quality of schools. These assessments provide an international comparison of what Dubai can do compared with international peers. The first international assessment Dubai students participated in was TIMMS in 2007. Two years later, Dubai participated in PISA 2009. In 2011, Dubai participated in the joint cycle of TIMMS and PIRLS. This cycle allowed Dubai to benchmark achievement trends. In Chapter 1, international assessments and student attainment and progress are discussed and linked.


20

Overall performance

Context Most private schools have been inspected five times. Indian and Pakistani curriculum schools were inspected for the first time in 2009-2010.

The number of private schools in Dubai has grown from 109 to 143 since 2008-2009, a 31 per cent increase.

The number of students attending private schools inspected by DSIB has almost doubled over the same period.

2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

114,111

177,013 187,905199,394

221,332

Students in inspected private schools

The fact that Indian and Pakistani schools were not inspected in 2008-2009 accounts only partly for this increase: the number of students has risen in private schools offering all types of curriculum.


Numbers of students in private schools inspected in 2012-2013

69,666

Others*

French

IB

MOE

US

Indian

UK (51 schools)

67,579

46,790

(23 schools)

(32 schools)

16,085 (13 schools)

5,574 (6 schools)

3,762 (4 schools)

11,876 (14 schools)

* The title ‘Others’ refers to six schools which follow an Iranian curriculum, three schools following the Pakistani National Curriculum, two schools which follow a Philippine curriculum and three further schoolswhich provide German, Russian and Japanese curricula


22

UK

US

Private-MOE

IB

French

Other *

UK

US

Indian

Private-MOE

IB

French

Other *

UK

US

Indian

Private-MOE

IB

French

Other *

UK

US

Indian

Private-MOE

IB

French

Other *

UK

US

Indian

Private-MOE

IB

French

Other *

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

49

30

16

64

4

49

30

2015

64

7

51

31

2115

64

8

50

30

21

14

64

14

51

32

23

13

64

14

Insp

ecte

d pr

ivat

e sc

hool

s ov

er th

e fiv

e in

spec

tion

year

s - b

y cu

rric

ulum

139

priv

ate

scho

ols

insp

ecte

d in

201

1-20

12

143

priv

ate

scho

ols

insp

ecte

d in

201

2-20

13

109

priv

ate

scho

ols

insp

ecte

d in

200

8-20

09

131

priv

ate

scho

ols

insp

ecte

d in

200

9-20

10

136

priv

ate

scho

ols

insp

ecte

d in

201

0-20

11


Overall quality ratings

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Unsatisfactory

Acceptable

Overall rating of schools

Good

Outstanding

Students in private schools between 2008-09 and 2012-13

2008-2009

2009-2010

2010-2011

2011-2012

2012-2013

More students attend

'outstanding' schools

More students

attend 'good' schools

Fewer students attend

'unsatisfactory' schools

Fewer students attend

'acceptable' schools

2011-2012

Percentage of students

Lower proportions of the student population now attend unsatisfactory and acceptable schools than in 2008-09. Higher proportions of students now attend good and outstanding schools.


24

numbers of private schools achieving different quality ratings 2008-09 to 20012-13

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2010

-201

1

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2010

-201

1

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2010

-201

1

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2010

-201

1

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3

Unsatisfactory Acceptable Good Outstanding

17 17 1613 13

54

6965 65 67

34

4349 49 51

4 26

11 12

Quality of Private Schools Inspected

Note: Indian and Pakistani schools were not inspected in 2008-2009

Fifty-one private schools in Dubai now offer a good quality of education, compared with 34 in 2008-2009. The number of unsatisfactory schools has fallen from 17 in 2008-9 to 13 in 2012-2013. The number of schools rated acceptable has changed very little: between 65 and 69 in each of the last four inspection cycles. Schools of all the major curriculum types are amongst this group. Nevertheless, three times as many private schools in Dubai now provide education of an outstanding quality than they did in 2008-09.


Proportions of students in private schools with different quality ratings 2008-09 to 20012-13

14% 8% 5% 6% 6%

56%56%

51% 47% 45%

27% 35%41%

38% 40%

3% 1% 3% 9% 9%

2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

Students in private schools over inspection years


49%47%44%36%30%

The student population now attending private schools is almost twice the number it was in 2008-09. Almost half of the current students are receiving a good or outstanding quality of education compared with less than a third in 2008-09.


26

numbers of students in private schools with different quality ratings 2008-09 to 20012-13

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2010

-201

1

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2010

-201

1

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2010

-201

1

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2010

-201

1

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3


15,7

57

13,2

43

9,98

3

10,9

88

14,0

49

64,0

69 99,1

71

95,5

62

95,2

49

99,1

85

31,1

87

62,3

94 76,1

83

77,1

76 87,6

63

3,09

8

2,20

5

6,17

7 18,5

46

20,4

35

Numbers of students in inspected private schools

Note: Indian and Pakistani schools were not inspected in 2008-2009

The number of students attending unsatisfactory schools has fallen from 15,757 (14 per cent) in 2008-2009 to 14,049 (6 per cent) in 2012-2013.

The number of students attending outstanding schools has risen from 3,098 in 2008-2009 (under 3 per cent) to 20,435 (9 per cent) in 2012-2013.


Changes in schools’ overall ratings

Changes in the overall rating of schools betweentheir first inspection and 2012-2013

45

18 Declined

Improved

During each of the past five years, the ratings of more schools have improved than declined. However, the movement toward higher overall ratings has slowed in the past year, after increasing steadily for the first four years.

Although the schools whose overall ratings have altered from one inspection round to the next have been relatively few in number, inspectors have recorded changes in the quality of different aspects of the work of many more. These changes in ratings have mostly been in an upward direction.

It is also important to note that the criteria against which school provision and outcomes are judged have evolved over the five years of inspections. DSIB has increased the levels of expectation in several ways over the five years in response to inspection findings. It has consequently become, in some important respects, increasingly demanding for schools to achieve each quality rating.


28

The importance of leadership The significant role of effective school leadership and management is widely acknowledged in education research. The quality of leaders and leadership is critical if schools are to produce the best possible outcomes for their students. Inspection results have shown that not only do schools need skilful teachers to improve students’ outcomes, they also need leaders who are able to plan and use resources to assist teachers and the rest of the school in making improvements.

Inspections over the five years have shown that leadership and management are important factors that affect schools’ overall improvement. Inspection ratings for leadership, self-evaluation and teaching are closely inter-related. The charts which follow demonstrate the impact of improved leadership on:

• The quality of the teaching in schools;• The attainment and progress of students.

Improved leadership and improved overall performanceThe quality of leadership is a key indicator in the inspection framework for determining the overall performance of schools. Schools that have good or outstanding leadership are likely to be rated good or outstanding overall. Chart 1, below, illustrates how improving leadership over time is matched to the improving overall performance of 45 schools since 2008-09. The graph indicates that it takes more than one year for the overall rating to improve in line with the grade given for leadership. This link between leadership and overall performance is also shown in Chart 2 with schools that declined in their overall performance rating since 2008-09.

Chart 1

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

Inspection year

Leadership in schools that have improved their overall performance since their first inspection (45 schools)

Leadership

Overall rating

Perc

enta

ge o

f 'g

ood'

and

'ou

tsta

ndin

g' r

atin

gs


Chart 2

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

Perc

enta

ge o

f 'g

ood'

and

'out

stan

ding

' rat

ings

Inspection year

Leadership in schools in which the overall performance has declined since their first inspection (18 schools)

Leadership

Overall ratings

In addition to leadership, the quality of teaching and its subsequent effect on students’ progress are other factors. Good leadership results in good teaching, which leads to good progress.

Chart 3 shows how leadership, teaching and students’ progress have improved in parallel in the schools where leadership (QI 6.1) was rated good or outstanding in 2012-2013.

Chart 3

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013Perc

enta

ge o

f 'g

ood'

and

'out

stan

ding

' rat

ings

Inspection year

Teaching and students' progress in schools in which leadership is 'good' or 'outstanding' in 2012-2013

Leadership

Teaching

Progress


30

Performance against the Quality Indicators Students’ attainment and progress in five key subjects

Islamic EducationIslamic Education is a statutory requirement for all schools in Dubai. It is one of the five key subjects inspected and reported on in private schools regardless of the curriculum offered. Inspectors evaluate Islamic Education against the curriculum standards and expectations set by the UAE MoE in the National Curriculum Document for Islamic Education (updated in 2011). Inspectors make judgements on students’ attainment and progress in seven main areas of the subject: Holy Qur’an, Seerah, Principles of Faith, Islamic Rulings & Forms of Worship, Islamic Values, Islamic Culture & Identity, and Universal Values and Concepts from an Islamic Perspective. The curriculum depth and detail, as well as expectations for the memorisation of Holy Qur’an are taken into account when making evaluations of the attainment and progress of non-Arab Muslim students.

20% 12% 8% 7% 5%

51%57%

48% 53% 54%

28% 30%43% 39% 40%

1% 1% 1% 1% 1%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

Islamic Education - Attainment


29% 31%44% 40% 41%


22 19

92 1

1913 12 10 8

2 410

512

25

43

14 14 12

100

1811

3340

4558

57 7472

5255

5150 54 68

36 2942

65

46

27

36

29

7162

55 57

50

37

28

43 4338

64

56

5850

31

22

31

2224 28 32

37 40 3830

64 6758

25

50

70

57

68

2938

45 4338 38

29

43 4350

18

33

9 102 1 3 2 3 1 4 3 2 3

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

UK US Indian Private MOE IB French Others

Islamic Education - Attainment - by curriculum


Islamic Education - Progress


22%13%

6% 6% 4%

49%56%

42% 45% 44%

28% 30%

50% 47% 51%

1% 1% 2% 2% 1%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

29 31%

52% 49% 52%


32

2515

7 2 1

1914 11 11 8 8 2

127 8 7 6

25

43

14

100

36

25

40

47 64

5256

51

4954

3743 47

53

30 33

41

60

50

30

36

24

7161

64

3644

37

28

43

5750

37

67

6730

2619

38 39 47

31 32

5245 45

40

70 6556

28

46

67

55

74

29 3136

5750

3829

43 4350

2733

8

30

2 2 3 3 1 1 1 2 2 4 3 2 2

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2011

-201

220

12-2

013

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2011

-201

220

12-2

013

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2011

-201

220

12-2

013

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2011

-201

220

12-2

013

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2011

-201

220

12-2

013

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2011

-201

220

12-2

013

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2011

-201

220

12-2

013


Islamic Education - Progress - by curriculum


2010

-201

1

2010

-201

1

2010

-201

1

2010

-201

1

2010

-201

1

2010

-201

1

2010

-201

1

Students’ attainment and progress in Islamic Education improved in the first three years of inspections but has remained static since then. There was a remarkable decline in unsatisfactory attainment and progress in the subject during the first three years of inspections. Equally, there was a significant increase in the proportion of good attainment and progress in the same period. Approximately half the progress recorded in 2010-2011 was judged to be good or better and this has been maintained since then. However, the proportion of good and outstanding attainment judgements has remained at around 40%. There has been almost no change in the small amount of outstanding attainment and progress.

Students’ understanding of the direct meaning of verses of the Holy Qur’an and of Hadeeth remains secure. The best progress was made in the development of students’ knowledge of the Prophet’s Seerah and key forms of worship and Islamic rulings. This, however, has been at the expense of developing students’ ability to recognise and establish links between what they are learning and their everyday lives. The Holy Qur’an recitation skills remain within the expected levels for the majority of students, with the pronunciation of verses being mostly clear but not necessarily following the appropriate recitation rules.

Most improvement has been achieved by students in the primary phase, a trend particularly noticeable in MoE curriculum schools. Overall progress has been best in MoE schools and this has been broadly matched by attainment. However, further progress in the subject in this group of schools is hindered by the excessive focus on learning facts and recalling information, together with the insuffcient opportunities for developing high-order thinking skills.

A generally positive trend is also evident among UK schools. There is far less unsatisfactory attainment


and progress than in 2008 and, in the primary phase, attainment and progress are appreciably better since the first inspection cycle. Overall, progress has been good, although attainment has yet to catch up. The proportions of good and outstanding attainment are still low in UK schools, particularly in the primary and secondary phases.

In US curriculum schools, students’ attainment and progress have steadily improved, most noticeably in the elementary phase. However, in the middle and high school phases, there has been only a slight improvement and this remains a significant area of attention for this group of schools for both Arab and non-Arab Muslim students. The proportion of unsatisfactory attainment and progress has fallen but remains too high.

Overall progress in IB and French schools has been good. Attainment has not been as good and significant minority of judgements are still unsatisfactory. There has been little change in both attainment and progress in the middle and secondary phases. Improvement has been evident in the primary phase in French schools since 2008-2009.

There was initially a remarkable improvement in attainment and progress across most phases in Indian schools although this has not been maintained in recent years.


34

ArabicStudents’ attainment and progress in Arabic as a first and as an additional language have been evaluated separately since 2010.

DSIB has inspected Arabic since the first cycle of inspections. For the first two years of inspections, evaluations of attainment and progress were made together for all students, Arab and non-Arab students, and were reported in one category. Since then, DSIB has refined its inspection processes so that separate evaluations have been made for students studying Arabic as a first language and those studying Arabic as an additional language.

Arabic as a first languageAll Arab students are required to study the subject as a first language. The purpose is to give sufficient focus to the study of Arabic as a main element of Emirati and Arab culture and identity. Evaluations in this subject have been made against the age-related curriculum standards and expectations set by the UAE MoE which are published in the National Curriculum Document for Arabic Language. Inspectors also take account of international standards and expectations for other first language learners in similar age groups. Inspectors examine and evaluate students’ attainment and progress in the four key aspects of the language: listening, speaking, reading and writing.

Arabic as a first language - Attainment


Note: In 2008-2009 and 2009-2010 Arabic as a First Language and Arabic as an Additional Language were inspected together as one subjec.

17% 18%6% 5% 5%

54% 54%

56% 60% 62%

27% 27%36% 33% 31%

2% 1% 2% 2% 2%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

38% 35% 33%28%29%


23 25

7 7 715

10 6 7 6 2

23

714

80

54

4854

68 72 75 6160

55 53 5764

42

30

4139

46

38

7077

80

33

43

57 5750

20

46

100

50

2620

22 18 1522 30

39 40 37 36

55

67

5558

54

3930

2313

67

43 43 4350 50

100

3 1 3 3 3 2 3 3 2 3

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2010

-201

1

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2010

-201

1

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2010

-201

1

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2010

-201

1

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2010

-201

1

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2010

-201

1

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3

UK US Private MOE IB French Others

Arabic as a first language - Attainment - by curriculum

Unsatisfactory Acceptable Good OutstandingNotes:- In 2008-2009 and 2009-2010 Arabic as a First Language and Arabic as an Additional Language were inspected together as one subjec.- Only one school in “Others” [The German International School] offers Arabic as a First Language.

18% 19%

6% 3% 5%

54% 50%

48% 52%56%

26% 30%

44% 43%38%

2% 1% 2% 2% 1%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

Arabic as a first language - Progress


46% 45%39%

31%28%



36

23 24

8 3 815

1021 22

9 5 2

23

7

80

62

5053

6059

61

6160

5949

64

59

42

27

4847

69

38

50

38

60

33

57

43

2937

20

15

50 50

2321

2935

3022 30

2029 27

36

55

70

48 50

3139

50

62

33

67

43

57

7163

23

50 50

100

4 2 3 3 1 2 3 3 2 3

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2010

-201

1

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

9

2010

-201

1

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

9

2010

-201

1

2012

-201

3

UK US Private MOE IB French Others

Arabic as a first language - Progress - by curriculum


Notes:-In 2008-2009 and 2009-2010 Arabic as a First Language and Arabic as an Additional Language were inspected together as one subjec.-Only one school in “Others” [The German International School] offers Arabic as a First Language.

2010

-201

1

2010

-201

1

2010

-201

1

2009

-201

0

2011

-201

2

2009

-201

0

2011

-201

2

There has been very little overall change in students’ attainment and progress in Arabic as a first language. The proportions of outstanding and unsatisfactory attainment have remained almost unchanged since 2010-2011 and the overall proportion of good attainment has declined.

There has been some improvement in the primary phases, where unsatisfactory attainment and progress have decreased since 2010 and around half the progress is now good or better. Improvements in this phase have been strongest in UK curriculum schools, where unsatisfactory attainment has almost been eliminated and almost all students now reach acceptable or better levels. However, in spite of this improvement, the proportion of good and outstanding attainment in the UK curriculum schools remains around at about 20 per cent only. There are more notable improvements in schools that offer the French curriculum or the German curriculum where attainment and progress in the primary phase are now all at a good level.

Apart from in the primary phase, there has been no improvement overall and even some decline in attainment and progress in some types of school. There has been hardly any improvement in the US, private MoE or French schools in the middle phases in this subject and slight declines have been noted in UK and IB curriculum schools in the same phase. The trend is mostly negative in the secondary phase, with US and French schools showing no or limited improvements, while MoE, UK and IB schools saw slight declines. In private MoE schools nearly half the attainment ratings are currently unsatisfactory in kindergarten compared to around a quarter in 2010-11.

With the exception of the primary phase, where key language skills are steadily improving, students’ skills in reading and writing remain significant areas for improvement. While basic reading skills,


for example to find specific information, are secure, deeper levels of reading are not sufficiently developed. Writing skills remain the weakest of the four key skills in the language across all school categories. Younger students’ skills in letter and word formation in the primary phase are developing well. Their skills in writing simple, short texts to convey basic information and to summarize or re-tell a familiar short story are within the range of expected levels. However, middle and secondary phase students are not developing their creative writing skills to a sufficient level in a significant proportion of schools. Insufficient attention is often given to helping students understand the process of writing, and limited feedback from teachers and poor guidance restrict students’ abilities to improve the quality of their writing.

The “Progress in International Reading and Literacy Study” (PIRLS) tests the reading skills of Grade 4 students. When Dubai participated in PIRLS 2011, students in only nine schools were tested in Arabic. All of these schools were private MoE schools where Arabic is the language of instruction. The average score of students from only one of these nine schools was above the international scale average (500). The average of both female and male students in this school was above Dubai’s PIRLS average.

Arabic as an additional languageStudents’ attainment and progress in Arabic as an additional language were evaluated as part of the ‘collective’ evaluation for all students in the first two cycles of inspection. They have been evaluated separately since then. Evaluations in this subject, across all curricula, are made against international standards and expectations for Modern Foreign Languages and are related to the number of years of study for the different groups of students. Inspectors expect schools to use the MoE resources for Arabic as an Additional Language, although DSIB encourages schools to enrich the curriculum with a wider range of resources to enable students to meet international expectations. Inspectors examine and evaluate students’ attainment and progress in the four key aspects of the language: listening, speaking, reading and writing.


38

Arabic as an additional language - Attainment



17% 18% 18% 19% 13%

54% 54%66% 61% 70%

27% 27%16% 20% 16%

2% 11% 1%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

16% 20% 17%28%29%

23 2520 18 14 15

10

21 22

9 9

2318

23

10 10 914

80

54

2721 18

4854 63 63 68

61

60

5949

64

64

42

81

7175

46

38

90

7082

33

43

83 83 83

20

46

64 76 78

2620

17 19 1822 30

2029 27

36

55

10 6 7

54

39

20

9

67

43

17 17 179

3 43 1 2 3

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2010

-201

1

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2010

-201

1

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2010

-201

1

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2010

-201

1

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2010

-201

1

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2010

-201

1

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3

UK US Indian IB French Others

Arabic as an additional language - Attainment - by curriculum




Arabic as an additional language - Progress


18% 19%13% 15% 11%

54% 50% 61% 52% 62%

26% 30%26%

32%26%

2% 1% 1% 1%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

26%33% 27%31%28%


23 24

12 9 612 8

16 178 5

1220 20 23

10 10

80

62

27 24 21

5053

62

48 54

60

55

56 5364

59

42

63 51

67

69

38 6050 73

33

57

83 83 83

20

15

5566 68

2321 26

41 38

2637

28 30 2836

55

25 29

13

3139

3040

27

67

43

17 17 1723

1810 11

4 2 2 2 2 3

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3

UK US Indian IB French Others

Arabic as an additional language - Progress - by curriculum



2010

-201

1

2010

-201

1

2010

-201

1

2010

-201

1

2010

-201

1

2010

-201

1


40

There have been slight improvements in attainment and progress in Arabic as an additional language. While there has been no significant change in the proportion of good or better attainment in this subject overall, unsatisfactory attainment has reduced since 2010, although by no more than five percentage points.

A positive trend has been noted in the primary phases of UK and US curriculum schools. In addition to a reducing proportion of unsatisfactory attainment, there has been a slight improvement in the proportion of good attainment in the US curriculum schools over the last three years. Improvements were noted in students’ skills in letter and word script shaping, and in decoding and pronouncing Arabic script. Some progress in the recognition of a limited range of spoken familiar phrases was evident. Improvements in students’ abilities to use the language to communicate simple information in writing have been modest.

Attainment in the middle and secondary phases has remained mostly static, and in the Indian schools the proportion of unsatisfactory attainment has increased. In the middle phase, there has been little improvement in the progress of the majority of students who have been studying the subject for many years. They still struggle to communicate in Arabic at a basic level.

Schools that were rated outstanding overall showed very different rates of progress made by first and additional Arabic language learners. These schools have made genuine efforts in recent years to improve their provision for additional language learners, which has resulted in better progress. Nevertheless, progress among first language learners in these schools remains at a far lower level.

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013Perc

enta

ge o

f 'g

ood'

and

'out

stan

ding

' rat

ings

Inspection year

Students' progress in Arabic in schools rated good in 2012-2013

Progress in Arabic as a first language

Progress in Arabic as an additional language

Note: In 2008-2009 and 2009-2010 Arabic as a First Language and Arabic as an Additional Language were inspected together as one subject.


0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013Perc

enta

ge o

f 'go

od' a

nd 'o

utst

andi

ng' r

atin

gs

Inspection year

Students' progress in Arabic in schools rated 'outstanding' in 2012-2013

Progress in Arabic as a first language

Progress in Arabic as an additional language



42

EnglishEnglish is the medium of communication in most private schools. When making judgements about students’ attainment and progress, inspectors make evaluations about speaking, listening, reading and writing. In some schools, where English is not the first language of many of the students, inspectors take into account expectations for those learning English as an additional language.

Both attainment and progress in English improved in the two years following the first inspections. Since then, the pace of improvement has slowed. Nevertheless, despite the combined good and outstanding ratings appearing to dip slightly in the last two rounds of inspections, the proportions of outstanding attainment and progress have continued to improve and the percentage of unsatisfactory ratings has declined.

18%7% 2% 5% 2%

38%

46%

38%39% 41%

35% 39%

50% 41% 41%

9% 8% 10%15% 16%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

English - Attainment

44% 47%

60% 56% 57



122 1 3

26

7 2 8 102 3

2516 13 14 13

7

17

34

3427 24

22

35

5152

46

52

55

3135

39

45 63

58

67 67

50

3944 45

33

56

45

62

55

20

70

80

38

48

5046

51

3536 43

3939

33

6548

44

3021

29

19 20

43

6156

45

57

22

33

67

56

30

28

80

3017

16 1622

27 27

4 6 37 9

2 4

15 1410 10

22 22

33

44

70

38

3

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2011

-201

220

12-2

013

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2011

-201

220

12-2

013

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2011

-201

220

12-2

013

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2011

-201

220

12-2

013

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2011

-201

220

12-2

013

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2011

-201

220

12-2

013

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2011

-201

220

12-2

013


English - Attainment - by curriculum


2010

-201

1

2010

-201

1

2010

-201

1

2010

-201

1

2010

-201

1

2010

-201

1

2010

-201

1

14% 7% 2% 4% 2%

42%

37%

30%35%

34%

32%48%

57% 46%45%

12% 8% 11% 15% 19%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

English -Progress

44%56%

68%61% 64%



44

93 1 4 1

19

6 2 612

1 2

2416

11 12 13 1017

3

40

28

2018

16

43

4141

42

40

46

31 29

38

5058

50

70 69

1422 19 20

24

50

22

6233

20

6567

35

52

5851

53

31

47 53 44

49

41

63

55

46

26 26

39

16 13

64

78

7565

62

20

56

67 67

30

0

50

80

35 25

16 1721

27 30

7 6 48 11

1 6

15 14

2 5

22

6

15 1420 22

33 33

70

38

5

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

020

10-2

011

2011

-201

220

12-2

013

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

020

10-2

011

2011

-201

220

12-2

013

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

020

10-2

011

2011

-201

220

12-2

013

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-20 1

3

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

020

10-2

011

2011

-201

220

12-2

013


English - Progress - by curriculum


Students’ attainment and progress in English improved in the first three rounds of inspection. Improvement has been slower since then, although the proportions of outstanding attainment and progress have increased. The proportion of outstanding attainment has almost doubled since 2008-09. There has also been a significant decrease in the proportion of unsatisfactory attainment, and these judgements in 2012-13 were at minimal levels. Progress is now good or better in the majority of schools and has developed at a slightly faster pace than attainment. However, attainment has tended to follow the improvements in progress year on year.

Attainment and progress in English have improved spectacularly in French schools. Students are articulate and expressive, using a wide range of vocabulary and, by the Secondaire phase, most are skilled bilingual or trilingual learners.

English is generally a strong subject in the UK curriculum schools, particularly at the secondary phase. Students in UK and US schools have improved their capacities to write well because they are now better at individual expression, breadth of vocabulary, creating imaginative storylines. Performance in English tends to be weaker in the US schools, particularly in the elementary phase. In half of the US schools, the curriculum has not been sufficiently modified to meet the needs of the significant number of students who are learning English as an additional language.

Students’ attainment and progress in English in Indian schools improved radically in the early part of the inspection period but performance has levelled off in the last two years. In IB schools, attainment in English has improved markedly over the last three years, mainly in the Middle Years Programme. Students’ performance in English is weakest in MoE schools. The proportion of unsatisfactory attainment and progress has reduced only slightly since 2008-2009 and there is too little that are good or outstanding.


Over five inspection cycles there have been improvements in students’ attainment and progress in the four skills of listening, speaking, reading and writing. However, development in these skills has varied widely over time among the different kinds of schools. Most development has been in listening and speaking and less in reading, with slowest development in writing skills. Students make rapid progress in schools where there is a strong understanding of language development in all phases, and of the difference between first language acquisition and additional language acquisition.

Over time, students have shown improving capacity to listen actively and show understanding of what they have heard. Their listening has been developed because sufficient time is allowed to consider and respond rather than only repeat what is heard. Listening has not been well developed when teachers talk for too long and move quickly to the next idea with few opportunities for students to explain by themselves or in groups, what they have heard. This is less common among older students.

Most development of speaking skills has been when students have had ample opportunity to practise speaking for themselves, through dialogue, oral presentations, self-correction and correcting each other. Students showing least progress are expected to answer in only one or a few words, often only to the teacher,and have few opportunities to talk spontaneously participate with their peers. Teachers dominate the talk and on occasion finish sentences for the student. This approach in Kindergarten and primary has slowed development considerably.

Most progress in reading has been when it is encouraged from the first year of school, and there is a wide choice of what to read and many opportunities to do so. Where attainment and progress are good or better, access to reading material is an integral part of learning and is featured across all subjects in the school. Students read for pleasure both in class and at home. Reading development has been slowest where textbooks are the only reading available and little additional reading material is provided. Often, older students read more widely but have not consistently developed the habit of reading beyond the curriculum.

The skill of writing has shown least development during the five years of inspections in the majority of schools and across all phases. In a minority of schools, writing is valued as an extremely important element of language development. Writing is seen as an integral part of a child’s academic, social and emotional development. Students are given opportunities to write independently and broadly across all areas of the curriculum. However, many schools continue to provide few opportunities for student-initiated writing. Writing is often seen as an opportunity for students to demonstrate grammar skills and little else. There are few opportunities for students to write extended pieces of text, for different purposes and different readers.

More than 60 per cent of Dubai’s students were tested in English in PIRLS 2011. Those in over half of Dubai’s sampled schools achieved above the international average of PIRLS (500) and students from 29 schools achieved at the high international benchmark or above. These students were competent in making inferences to explain relationships between intentions, actions, events, and feelings. A further six per cent of students could distinguish and interpret complex information and give text-based support to their arguments.


46

MathematicsInternational curricula in mathematics include problem solving and analytical thinking as well as competence in data handling, calculation, understanding of number, and shape and space. Students are expected to be able to use mathematics in everyday life. Inspectors make judgements on students’ attainment and progress and check whether or not the curriculum expectations match international standards.

11% 6% 1% 4% 2%

45% 51%

46% 42% 42%

35% 36%

40% 41% 43%

9% 7%13% 13% 13%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

Mathematics - Attainment

44% 43%53% 54% 56%


A largely positive overall trend in students’ attainment and progress in mathematics is evident across private schools in Dubai. In the first year of inspections, less than half the attainment ratings were good or better and about a tenth were unsatisfactory. This year, a clear majority of judgements was good or better and very few judgements were unsatisfactory. This represents an average increase of three percentage points year on year. The proportion of outstanding attainment has also increased over the five years of inspection. Nevertheless, this strong overall picture masks considerable variation between schools.


94 3 1

138 2 7 1

91

127 10 7 6

21

40

3938 30

25

48 56

55

59

5749

33 29

45

5887

71

7274

64

67 56

40

2833

2030

47

6050

44

3741

34 4048

3635

4129

37 41

5656

41

30

13

2921

16

29 3338

60

67

4580

10090

82 20

21 4050

56

14 16

28 27 26

3 1 2 5 5 111 15 13

5

22

1018

50

11

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3


Mathematics - Attainment - by curriculum


In the French schools all inspection ratings for mathematics have been good or better for the last three years. In UK and IB curriculum schools a solid majority of students’ attainment is now good or better and there is little unsatisfactory attainment. More than half the ratings for mathematics are now good or better in Indian schools, but this represents an appreciable decline from the previous year and has halted the upward trend. Improvement has been minimal in schools offering a US curriculum and performance in mathematics has shown a slight decline in MoE schools, where 10 per centof ratings are unsatisfactory and most remain no better than acceptable.

Trends in progress in mathematics are broadly similar to those seen in attainment. The most marked improvements were seen in UK, IB and French curriculum schools.


48

11% 6% 1% 4% 3%

46%51%

42% 36% 36%

35% 37%

46%47% 49%

8% 6%11% 13% 12%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

Mathematics - Progress

43% 43%

57% 60% 61%


Attainment and progress have improved because students’ good mathematical knowledge has been underpinned by a strong sense of number and problem-solving skills. Where too much reliance has been put on mechanical, routine tasks, this has limited students’ scope to be versatile in their application of mathematics to solve problems.


7 6 2 1

17

5 3 5 29

1 4

1712 10

21

5

41 42

33 2619

44

5447

5251

48

3626

39

6892

74

67 74

50

61

3125 24

44

2030

47

67

3033

41 39

4247

55

35 4248 35 42

39

56

58

46

158

2621

16

50

39

6975

71

45

80

10090

82 20

2133

65 67

11 13

25 25 25

3 28 5 4 8

15 115

11 1018

50

11

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2011

-201

220

12-2

013

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2011

-201

220

12-2

013

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2011

-201

220

12-2

013

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2011

-201

220

12-2

013

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2011

-201

220

12-2

013

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2011

-201

220

12-2

013

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2011

-201

220

12-2

013


Mathematics - Progress - by curriculum


2010

-201

1

2010

-201

1

2010

-201

1

2010

-201

1

2010

-201

1

2010

-201

1

2010

-201

1


50

In 2011, the Trends in Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) showed that students in Dubai were performing better in mathematics compared to those in 2007, when Dubai students participated for the first time in TIMSS. In 2011, over 20 per cent of Grade 4 students in Dubai could apply their knowledge and understanding to solve problems, and over 23 per cent could use their knowledge in a variety of complex situations. Both Grade 4 and Grade 8 students in UK and Indian schools made most improvement compared to students in other types of school.


ScienceInternationally, scientific skills are considered to be key components of overall academic success. The ability of students to apply their scientific knowledge and skills to real life situations is important in preparing them for further education and employment. Inspectors make judgements about students’ attainment and progress in science across all school phases. They also evaluate students’ scientific awareness and understanding of the global issues around them, and their abilities to think of innovative solutions to scientific problems. Expectations of science education vary from one curriculum to another. Inspectors check schools’ science curriculum plans and the opportunities that schools provide for students to learn practically and use science beyond the classroom.

10% 8% 2% 4% 3%

48% 56%

50% 44% 43%

34%30%

38%40% 43%

8% 6% 10% 12% 11%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

Science -Attainment

42%36%

48% 52% 54%



52

6 6 3 2 0

169

28 4

132 3 5

113

9 13 10

23

37 4038

3226

4566

65 57 62

58

3845

48

89

84 79 63

69100

4450

30

14

40

10

33

65

5348 50

4039

3843

53

37

2332 32 30

29

52 3536

16 1828

18

56 44

65

76

75

30

8090 91

67

12

4752 50

17 1521 23 21

2 2 1 3 4 817

116 5

10

2520

10 10 9

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3


Science - Attainment - by curriculum


There have been improvements in attainment and progress in science over the five years of inspections. This has been seen across all phases in most schools. In over half the schools, attainment and progress are now at a good or better level compared with less than half in the first round of inspection.

12% 11% 2% 5% 4%

44% 50%

42% 38% 37%

38%35%

49%46% 48%

6% 4% 7% 11% 11%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

Science - Progress

44% 39%

56% 57% 59%



Most improvement in progress was seen in Phase 4 (post 16). In the lower phases in all curricula, attainment in earth science was strong, whereas attainment in physical and biological sciences tended to be less securely developed. In the higher phases in most curricula students’ attainment in chemistry was the strongest element while attainment in biology, physics and earth science varied between curriculum types.

8 92 2

15 121 8 4

21

3

1610 10

23

40 38

30 2822

3954

5246 51

16

2 38

79

81

7447 59 75

3325

10 14

40

10

33

59

5360

50

40 43

5148

53

43

33

45 43 41

55

38

4141

1626

3731

25

67

69

85 76 100

30

8090 91

67

18

4740

50

12 1017

22 25

3 1 2 3 4

29

5439 40

6 510

2010 10 9

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2011

-201

220

12-2

013

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2011

-201

220

12-2

013

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2011

-201

220

12-2

013

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2011

-201

220

12-2

013

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2011

-201

220

12-2

013

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2011

-201

220

12-2

013

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2011

-201

220

12-2

013


Science - Progress - by curriculum


2010

-201

1

2010

-201

1

2010

-201

1

2010

-201

1

2010

-201

1

2010

-201

1

2010

-201

1Different trends have become apparent across the five years of inspections in schools offering different curricula. Attainment and progress have remained consistently good in French schools. In UK and IB schools there has been a steady improvement. Schools offering a US curriculum have remained somewhat static over the five years in terms of tends in science attainment and progress. Nevertheless their students are now making better progress in science in KG and the secondary phase than they did five years ago. Most students in schools offering the MoE curriculum continued to make only acceptable progress and the proportion of students making unsatisfactory progress increased in the last two years. Students in Indian curriculum schools made much better progress in 2010-11 inspections than was found in their first inspections. However, since then, the proportions of good and outstanding progress have declined. This has been particularly notable in Kindergarten and the primary phase where the quality of teaching and learning has also weakened.

In general, improvement has been strongest where critical thinking and enquiry skills are routinely developed in science lessons, as in many UK curriculum schools and in most IB programmes. Attainment and progress remain at only acceptable levels in schools that have yet to adopt a strong focus on conceptual understanding and investigation across all aspects of the science curriculum.


54

In TIMSS 2011, students in UK and IB schools performed above the international average in science. Approximately six per cent of the Grade 4 students in Dubai displayed advanced skills in applying knowledge. They understood scientific processes and relationships, and the method of scientific inquiry. A similar proportion of Grade 8 students had a good understanding of concepts in biology, chemistry, physics, and earth science. They understood the basics of scientific investigation and could combine information from different sources to solve problems and draw conclusions.


Students’ personal and social developmentAttitudes and behaviourThis quality indicator takes into account students’ self-discipline, their attendance and punctuality, relationships with other students and school staff and the extent to which they adopt a healthy life style. These features of attitudes and behaviour have strengthened throughout this five year period. Most ratings were good or better in 2008-2009; now almost all are. Unsatisfactory attitudes and behaviour have all but disappeared.

4% 1% 1%

19%15%

10%14%

8%

45% 62%

59% 47%50%

32%22%

31%38% 42%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

Attitudes and behaviour

77% 84%90% 85%

92%


7 1 2 2 7 3

33

1611 8 4 8

3

2931

2126

14 16

29

32

813

33

18

6

17

27

10 8

37

56

5137

38

44 56

6458

69 65

54 4840

57

9287

58

77

7178

75

4029

67

80

20

60

50

40

52 58

52

3645

55 59

2012 15 14 17 19

46 50 51

92 2

2922 19

6071

20

80

100 100

40

17

3338 34

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2011

-201

220

12-2

013

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2011

-201

220

12-2

013

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2011

-201

220

12-2

013

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2011

-201

220

12-2

013

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2011

-201

220

12-2

013

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2011

-201

220

12-2

013

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2011

-201

220

12-2

013


Attitudes and behaviour - by curriculum


2010

-201

1

2010

-201

1

2010

-201

1

2010

-201

1

2010

-201

1

2010

-201

1

2010

-201

1


56

Inspectors have noted the mature and sensible behaviour and attitudes towards learning shown by most students in the great majority of schools. Students’ relationships with their peers and with teachers remain overwhelmingly respectful and positive. Students, especially the older ones, are showing more responsibility in schools and are less reliant on adults to take the lead in all matters. More students are making wise choices about their overall health and well-being although this remains an area for improvement. Food preferences remain something of an issue and not enough students take regular exercise. Attendance has generally improved and this has had a discernible influence on attainment and progress.

Attitudes and behaviour have improved and have been outstanding for the past two years in French schools. There have also been clear improvements in US, IB and Indian schools. Outstanding attitudes and behaviour are now evident in most IB schools. In the majority of UK schools, attitudes and behaviour have remained outstanding. In MoE schools, these attributes have remained consistently good but there is little outstanding behaviour among students. Attitudes toward work have also been noticeably below those of students in other schools. Attendance has also not shown sufficient improvement.

Understanding of Islamic values and local and global cultureThis quality indicator and the method used to evaluate the key aspects have been revised over the five years of inspections. Inspectors evaluate how well students appreciate the role and values of Islam in the modern society of Dubai. In addition, they judge the students’ respect and understanding of the UAE heritage and culture, and of wider world cultures.

4% 1% 1%

31%26%

15% 14% 13%

46% 63%

66% 63% 64%

19%10%

19% 22% 23%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

Students' understanding of Islamic values and their local, cultural and global awareness

65%73%

85% 85% 87%



4 3 1 2 3 1 6 110

5

34

25

10 7 5

3831

21 19 24 16

1018 15

1934

2121

157

166

20 2030

50

20 2028

40 66

6666 66

3862

6965 57

58

4636

48

71 58

6865

82

64

67

75

7581

100

80 80

80 82

70

50

73 7767

22

9

24 27 2921

6 813

18 20

44 4636

8 11 93

29

17 1925

19 20 187 3 5

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2011

-201

220

12-2

013

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2011

-201

220

12-2

013

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2011

-201

220

12-2

013

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2011

-201

220

12-2

013

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2011

-201

220

12-2

013

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2011

-201

220

12-2

013

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2011

-201

220

12-2

013


Students' understanding of Islamic values and their local, cultural and global awareness-by curriculum


2010

-201

1

2010

-201

1

2010

-201

1

2010

-201

1

2010

-201

1

2010

-201

1

2010

-201

1

Students’ understanding of Islamic values and their local, cultural and global awareness have improved significantly over the five years of inspection in all categories of schools. Most understanding is now good or better and there is very little that is unsatisfactory. Increasing numbers of students have developed an appreciation of the impact of Islamic values on society in Dubai. Their knowledge of UAE culture and heritage has been frequently evident in their independently researched project work. Ratings for students’ understanding and appreciation of other cultures across the world have improved appreciably over the period of inspections, although further development in this area is still needed in a small minority of schools.

Students have made the best progress in their understanding of Islamic values and local and global culture in IB, Indian and UK curriculum schools. Almost all the ratings have become good or better, notably in the IB and UK schools. Indian school students have the most outstanding understanding of culture. Ratings in US and MoE schools have improved, although only a relatively small proportion are outstanding. The same is true of French students but, in these schools, all ratings are good or better. In schools with other curricula, there has been little change in the ratings over the past five years. Students’ understanding has been good but very little has been outstanding.


58

Community and environmental responsibilityOver the five years of inspection, this quality indicator has been modified to take closer account of the work ethic of students and their personal involvements in community and environmental activities.

11%4% 1% 2%

36%

33%

22% 22% 30%

35%46%

54% 50%46%

18% 17%23% 26% 24%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

Community and environmental responsibility

53%63%

77% 76% 70%


112

94 2 4 1 6

22

5 5

177

25

19

9 10 10

4849

3727

44

19

15 15

27

52

63

58

67

61

21

3930

20

6033

13 30

55

43

58

58 5260

25 34

4752

37

52

4841

35

26

24 42

28

36

7244

8175

67

22

40

8030

55

4050

73

67

42

21 21

3338

30

1813 14 17 18

23

3744

38

8 3 717 19

2533

78

3020

5045

7 3 3

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2011

-201

220

12-2

013

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2011

-201

220

12-2

013

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2011

-201

220

12-2

013

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2011

-201

220

12-2

013

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2011

-201

220

12-2

013

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2011

-201

220

12-2

013

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2011

-201

220

12-2

013


Community and environmental responsibility - by curriculum


2010

-201

1

2010

-201

1

2010

-201

1

2010

-201

1

2010

-201

1

2010

-201

1

2010

-201

1


The quality of students’ community and environmental responsibility has been less well developed than other aspects of students’ personal and social development in most schools. The proportion of good or better rose at first but then levelled out in the last three years. This has been due in part to higher inspection expectations of students’ practical engagement in community and environmental activities. Students have been increasingly taking the initiative and making independent decisions via students’ councils in many schools but this is still an area for improvement in some schools. Other aspects for improvement include the practical involvement of students in their local communities and in conservation activities.

Improvement has been consistent in most categories of schools but not quite so evident in US, MoE and ‘other curricula’ schools. Many of their students do not take enough personal responsibility or show commitment socially and environmentally. By contrast, at least a third of students in Indian, French, UK and IB schools have an outstanding sense of responsibility.

Teaching, learning and assessmentTeaching and learning did not improve immediately following the initial quality inspections. However, in the third round of inspections, approximately half the teaching and learning was rated good and outstanding. In the two years since then, the proportions of outstanding ratings have increased. Similarly, after the second round of inspections the quality of assessment steadily improved.

Teaching and Learning

Teaching for effective learning

10% 11%1% 7% 3%

41%51%

49% 42%42%

43%35%

45% 44%46%

6% 3% 5% 7% 9%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

49%38%

50% 51% 55%



60

10 101 4

11 83 7 2

19

2 2 7 1021 18

39

10

40 40

3726

23

47 5459 50

54

55

3847

46

57

9589

6562

7

28 3125 24

11

30 30

50

73

67

72

3742

51

5356

4138 38

40 39

26

5848 44

33

511 14

20

93

72 6370 71

89

70

100 10091

70

11

27 2328

138 11

17 21

1 3 5 2 3 3 6 5 5 9

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3


Teaching for effective learning-by curriculum


12% 9%1% 5% 2%

47% 52%

48% 45%43%

35% 34%46% 42%

45%

6% 5% 5% 8% 10%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

Quality of students' learning

41% 39%51% 50% 55%



11 8 1 4

178 3 5 2

122 7

14 16 13

39

10

4241

36 2925

55

5661

52 54

59

35

5047

5995

89

7067

14 17 19 20 24

11

30 30

44

73

70

75

3739

5149

54

2536 36

40 39

29

63

4243

27

511 14

20

7978 75 75 71

89

70

100 100

82

50

1727

2025

10 12 1218 21

3 3 5 2 6 3 7 5 6 5 5

18 20

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3


Quality of students' learning-by curriculum


The quality of teaching and learning in private schools has improved since the first cycle of inspections. Very little of it is now unsatisfactory. Well over half of the ratings for teaching and learning are good and better and the proportion of teaching rated outstanding has increased to approximately 10 per cent.

The most significant improvement in teaching has been a sharper focus by teachers on what students learn. This has meant that teachers have increasingly made better use of assessment information to plan work that meets the different needs of all students. In doing this, teachers have realised just how much they can expect from their students. Teachers have also been linking learning between subjects and to real life situations so that students can understand new concepts more clearly. Consequently, the rate of students’ learning has increased.

Nevertheless, the proportion of teaching and learning rated no better than acceptable has remained at more than 40 per cent overall throughout the five year period. Further improvement in teaching and learning is clearly required if students’ attainment in key subjects is to improve appreciably.

Limitations to improvement stem mainly from the fact that too many teachers have little understanding of the features of high quality teaching and learning. They still employ too narrow a range of teaching strategies and do not understand how to structure lessons to meet the needs of students of different ages, interests and abilities. Many school leaders have a similarly limited appreciation of international best practice and are consequently unable to bring about improvements through effective monitoring and well targeted training.


62

The very limited use of information and communications technology (ICT) by students to help them learn is another persistent weakness in many schools. There are, on the other hand, examples of excellent practice in the use of ICT in a few schools, which contribute strongly to the outstanding progress the students make.

These weaknesses in teaching and learning apply in some schools of all types, and particularly to those offering Indian and MoE curricula, where there has been something of a decline in quality overall.

In UK curriculum schools, the overall trend is one of improvement in teaching and learning in all phases with increases in the proportions of outstanding and good ratings. In US curriculum schools teaching and learning have remained mainly static in phases 1 and 2 and have improved slightly in phase 3. Nevertheless, more than half remains no better than acceptable. In phase 4, teaching and learning have remained better than in the other phases in US curriculum schools. In MoE and Indian curriculum schools, the proportions of good teaching and learning have declined in phases 1 and 2. In the majority of schools, teaching and learning in these phases are now no better than acceptable. In MoE curriculum schools, in phase 3, teaching and learning have improved slightly but there are still some unsatisfactory ratings. Teaching and learning in Indian schools are best in phase 3 with about half the ratings good and better. In phase 4, in both these two types of schools, teaching and learning have improved over the five years. This is because the style of teaching favoured in these schools is more appropriate to the learning needs of older students.

Most teachers in Indian curriculum schools still have only a limited understanding of how students learn best. They use only a narrow range of teaching strategies and rarely plan to meet the needs of learners of all abilities and interests. In lessons, inspectors reported that few resources are used other than text books. Often kindergarten children, especially, spend long periods of time listening to the teachers rather than learning through more appropriate activities.

It is clear from inspection evidence that despite generally enthusiastic, motivated and engaged students there has been a continued decline in the quality of learning from good to acceptable in Indian schools. In the weakest lessons, students lack independence and rarely take responsibility for their own learning. This means that they mostly make passive responses. Also clear is that students still only make limited use of ICT to support and develop their learning. In too many lessons, learning continues to be dominated by excessive teacher talk and passive unengaged students.

The quality of teaching and learning in MoE curriculum schools requires urgent improvement. In these schools, the incidence of good quality teaching is currently around 20 per cent. Inspectors did not report any phase of any school as having outstanding teaching. The majority of the teaching in these schools is of only acceptable quality and nearly one in five lessons are still unsatisfactory. Teachers in these schools, typically, do not promote active learning based on students’ investigative and problem-solving capacities.


AssessmentThis quality indicator takes into account the range of assessment systems and processes that schools use, the accuracy of the data and information gained about the students’ attainments and progress, the use of this knowledge to modify the curriculum and teaching to support students in their learning, and the quality of teachers’ feedback to students.

26%15%

3%11%

5%

50%62%

57%49%

49%

18% 18%

33% 31%34%

6% 5% 7% 9% 12%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

Assessment

24% 23%

40% 40%46%


32

143

91

19 154

122

27

814

35

23 23

7

1911

3039

17

37

57

42 34

29

66

5768

5968

61

6051

47

60

100 97

7769

29

56

31

25 24

89

90

10

33

60

70

86

22 16

4039

44

828 24 22 23

12

3833

5 3 8

6433 44

70 71

10

90100

91

70

28

40

13 149 13 15 18

26

7 4 7 7 28 5

116 5 5 9

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3


Assessment-by curriculum



64

The overall quality of assessment in private schools has improved over the five years. The data show a generally positive and encouraging trend. In the first cycle of inspections, over a quarter of the ratings were unsatisfactory and equal proportion was good or better. Over the ensuing four years, good assessment practices have become more common, while unsatisfactory assessment has declined to a small proportion. However, the overall improvement to assessment has been much less distinct in the past three years and, in the majority of schools, the ratings are still only acceptable or lower.

Assessment, therefore, remains a key area for improvement. In too many schools, the collection of assessment data has not been routine or efficient enough. Internal testing is very variable in its quality and so the resultant data are often unreliable. In the most effective schools, assessment is linked closely to recognised benchmarks and results are standardised by thorough monitoring. Results are also skilfully analysed. Too often, however, schools do not have procedures that accurately record or analyse students’ progress, which often leads to their having an inflated view of students’ actual attainment and progress.

The most important area of development, however, is the use of assessment data. In the most effective schools, and especially the UK, IB and French schools, teachers have increasingly made good use of all available data to help them plan work that meets different students’ needs. This has meant that students can make good or better progress. Often, though, in other schools, teachers neglect to use the data in a meaningful way and give all students more or less exactly the same work.

In addition, oral and written feedback to students is a persistent weakness in too many schools. Teachers’ support for individual students and their approach to marking books has been too variable. Students often are unclear about how well they are doing and what they need to do next in order to improve.

In US schools, assessment judgements have improved mainly because of improved systems for recording assessment data. In Indian schools, assessment has not improved at all. In fact, there has been a rise in unsatisfactory ratings and there is very little outstanding practice. Weaknesses continue to exist in using assessment information to plan the next steps in learning. The accurate evaluation and understanding of students’ progress in relation to international benchmarks remains underdeveloped in almost all Indian schools.

The persistently poor quality of assessment in MoE schools is similarly worrying. In these schools, the assessment of learning is rarely good and there has been no discernible improvement over time. Only a few of the ratings reflected good practices and almost all were just acceptable or unsatisfactory. In fact, assessment was evaluated as unsatisfactory in almost a quarter of the inspection judgements. As with teaching and learning, assessment of what students learn still requires urgent improvements in MoE schools in order to ensure that better quality assessment fully supports students’ progress.

Schools with other curricula have shown little improvement over time. The unsatisfactory assessment has been eradicated but most ratings are no higher than acceptable.


Curriculum qualityOver the five years of inspections, the overall quality of schools’ curricula has significantly improved. In 2008-09, the majority of ratings were unsatisfactory or acceptable. Five years later, the majority are good or better. Approaching a fifth of ratings are now outstanding and very few are unsatisfactory.

18% 14%2% 6% 2%

50%48%

46% 41%40%

25% 33%

43%39%

40%

7% 5% 9%14% 18%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

Curriculum quality

32%38%

52% 53% 58%


16 121 4

2517

4 4 1

17

4 1 5

25

5

21

8

39

10

47

43

35 25

21

49

46

5041

40

54

46 55 50

65

8282

65

79

57

22

44

20 1911

30

60

50

60

7586

24 36

48

49

47

2237

45

5153

29

4223 26

10 1318 14 13

43

50

25

3543

89

70

10090

73

40

11

40

15 1413 916

2232

4 1 4 6 8

21 1928 31

4538

10

27

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3


Curriculum Quality - by Curriculum Type



66

A key strength of effective curricula has been noted where a strong basic framework is enriched and modified to suit the particular needs of the students. Typically, teachers plan rich learning experiences in lessons that include cross-curricular links and the use of real-life examples. A wide range of extra-curricular activities enables students to develop their knowledge and skills. Many schools provide work experience opportunities for older students to strengthen their learning and life experiences. These strengths are found in most of the UK schools where the curriculum has improved emphatically and is mostly good. A significant minority of ratings are outstanding. The time allocated for Arabic and Islamic subjects now fulfils the MoE requirements in almost all of them. However, a small but diminishing number of schools still do not base their work sufficiently on the English National Curriculum.

There has been a similarly strong improvement in US schools. The majority of judgements are now good, although only a very few are outstanding. The alignment with the US Common Core State Standards in mathematics and English Language Arts in many schools has provided a valuable boost. However, alignment to international standards in other subjects remains inconsistent. The main concern continues to be the lack of opportunities for students to choose from a variety of tasks, courses and activities inside and outside their classrooms.

The curriculum in MoE schools has shown only limited improvement over the five year inspection period. Only about ten per cent of ratings have remained good or have improved from acceptable to good. The curriculum in almost all MoE schools continues to be relatively narrow and provides low levels of challenge to most students. Opportunities for the development of enquiry, research, investigation and independent learning skills are still insufficient. Almost all schools do very little to modify the curriculum appropriately to meet the various needs of students.

Despite an overall positive trend in IB schools, especially after the first year of inspection, ratings have not improved quickly. However, there has been an increased number of outstanding ratings. IB schools that offer only the IB diploma have improved transition arrangements and the most effective schools now modify their curriculum for younger students in preparation for the diploma programme.

The curriculum in French schools has remained consistently good. By contrast, the progress made by Indian schools has been slow. After an initial improvement, ratings have not changed a great deal and the majority remain only acceptable or lower, although a significant minority are outstanding. In Indian schools, the curriculum has tended to be taught in a rigid way with little enrichment and insufficient regard for students’ individual needs. The same is true to a large extent of schools which have other curricula. Although these schools have no unsatisfactory ratings, far too many of the curriculum ratings continue to be no better than acceptable.


Protection and support for studentsThe evaluation of the arrangements for the protection and support of students is a very important feature of school inspection. If they were to be found unsatisfactory, then the overall performance of a school could be rated as unsatisfactory, irrespective of the judgements of other quality indicators. Protection and support for students comprises two quality indicators; the provision for the students’ health and safety, and the quality of support for all students, including those with special educational needs.

health and safetyHealth and safety are high priorities. Inspectors check the arrangements for safety and security in all parts of the school and on school transport. They look at the suitability and quality of the maintenance of the premises and facilities. They also judge how well the school promotes healthy living and the extent to which child protection procedures are known and followed by staff and students.

18%11% 1% 3% 4%

26%

23%

17% 18% 18%

38%

43%

51% 45% 38%

18% 23%31% 34% 40%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

Health and safety


56%66%

82% 79% 78%


68

10 1019

3 3 6 10

60

39

10 9

72

10

2619

914

6

28

24 219

19

40

19 23

15

22

16

37

56

56

33

60

30

0

4722

58

3843

56 46

39

36

52

47

4936

38

52 45 41

18

4553

2331

71

11

35

19

67

40

70

5055

70

28

53

68

42

26 2835

40

55

1724

3239 42

16

29 32 34

12 13

29

89

100

65

81

30

5045

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3


Health and safety-by curriculum


There were substantial improvements in the two years following the initial quality inspections in the arrangements to ensure students’ health and safety in private schools. After that, the position has remained static, although the proportion of schools with outstanding provision has increased. The DSIB inspection framework in 2009-2010 identified the need for all schools to attend to students’ health, fitness, diet and exercise. Most schools have responded positively with greater attention given in assemblies, in the curriculum and in planning special events and activities to promote healthy lifestyles.

Arrangements for health and safety are now good or better in more than three quarters of the schools and there is very little unsatisfactory practice. This improvement is a consequence of schools’ prompt responses to identified weaknesses, particularly in the arrangements for transport, supervision and management of behaviour. Better staffing levels and training of staff have helped to identify potential hazards at an early stage.

The arrangements for the transport of students to and from school have continued to improve. In 2009-10 the development of Road and Transport Authority (RTA) guidance and specific requirements regarding staffing levels helped ensure better quality of facilities and safer arrangements across all schools. In response to these requirements, most schools have developed their own effective procedures to manage the safe collection of students.

Health and safety arrangements are a particular strength of US curriculum schools: most have sustained or improved health and safety at good or outstanding levels.


Quality of supportIn evaluating the quality of support, inspection teams assess how well the school promotes good attendance and punctuality. Inspectors make judgements on the quality of staff-student relationships and the advice and support provided to all students. In addition, inspectors judge how well the school identifies and provides for students with special educational needs (SEN).

14%5% 2% 4% 2%

44%

41%33% 33% 38%

32%

40%

45% 43% 41%

10% 14%20% 20% 19%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

Quality of support


42%54%

65% 63% 60%


70

133 2 3

16

2 4 29

310

22

5 3

148

33

10

42

37

28 2626

46

4834

4742

35

2527

37

61

6968

5677

21 19

511

30 30

39

47 25

67

32

40

4640 42

2846

5036

42 36

44

53

45

1726 29 30

15

72

6119 55 48

89

70

100

8073

50

17

40 60

33

1320 24

31 32

104

12 15 16 20

31

178 7

39

63

45 48

2027

2011 13

5

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3


Quality of support - by curriculum


There were substantial improvements in the quality of support in the two years following the initial quality inspections. The number of outstanding ratings doubled and there was hardly any unsatisfactory provision. After that, the position has remained static. More schools have understood the importance of not just supporting students academically but also attending to their personal and emotional needs, including those of students with special educational needs. The management of students’ behaviour has significantly improved; physical punishment has been almost totally eradicated. Many schools have been slow to offer comprehensive careers guidance, however, and this remains an area for development.

The quality of support is strong and has shown the greatest improvement over time in IB curriculum schools, in more than three quarters of which provision is either good or outstanding. All the French schools now provide at least a good level of guidance, protection and support in all phases.

Over the last two years of inspection, there has been an increasing emphasis placed on identifying and meeting the needs of students with special educational needs. The framework was modified to reflect these requirements, which are the weakest elements of the support provided in most schools. The downturn in quality of support over the last two years is a reflection of these expectations.

The quality of support in schools offering a MoE curriculum remains a concern. Around one in ten schools still provide an unsatisfactory level of support to students. Moreover, inspections in 2012-2013 registered a significant decline in the quality of support in a few MoE schools. This deterioration is mainly related to the lack of good quality provision and support for students with special educational needs. In 2009-2010 DSIB identified the need for better arrangements to give students ready access to well informed advice and guidance about their future careers and higher educational opportunities. Progress in this aspect in the majority of MoE curriculum schools has been limited.


Leadership and managementLeadership and management responsibilities are inter-related and shared by many school stakeholders. School leadership comprises of the senior and middle leaders who are part of the team which sets the vision and direction of schools. Management is regarded as mainly concerned with the operational aspects of schools, although those involved with management often have leadership roles. Governors also have a leadership role. They share in setting the direction of the school, make strategic decisions and hold the school leaders and managers accountable for the progress they make. Leaders, managers and governors should be involved in the processes of self-evaluation and improvement planning. A further aspect of leadership and management is seen in the ways in which schools create partnerships with parents and the community.

LeadershipIn the current framework inspection teams assess how effectively leadership responsibilities are devolved and shared among the staff, how well school leaders communicate with other stakeholders, and the leadership’s capacity for further improvement.

17% 11%3% 5% 4%

38%

37%

29%36% 34%

37%41%

53%42%

43%

8% 11% 15% 17% 19%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

Quality of leadership

45%52%

68%59% 62%



72

12 92 6

23

7 3

20

516

9

26

8 715

2533

3534

1919

17

35

39

3248 45

30

2816

39

67

75

75 64

62

33

17 20 1725 25

0

33

40

8373

3736

58 48

52

3954

5438

38

45

5652

30

717

25 2923

50

50 40 50 83

75 75

100 100

75

75

17

40

8 2716

21 2127 31

311 14 17

511

1622

17

3340

33

1725

17 209

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3


Quality of Leadership - by curriculum


High quality leadership results in good and outstanding outcomes. In highly effective schools, leadership is shared among the senior staff. Their leaders are characterised by their constant pursuit of continuous improvement and their determined responses to the recommendations of their school inspection reports.

The quality of leadership in private schools has improved over the five year period. Most improvement was seen in the first three rounds of inspection. The first inspections (2008-2009) judged leadership to be no better than acceptable in over half of the schools. In a minority of schools it was unsatisfactory. By 2011, only 3 per cent of schools had unsatisfactory leadership and the proportion of schools with good and outstanding leadership had risen to a sizeable majority. In the two years since then, the proportion of schools with outstanding leadership has risen to around a fifth, although the proportion of schools in which leadership is good and outstanding has fallen slightly.

In the initial quality inspections, it had been evident that there was a direct link between good leadership and good student progress. In schools that were led well, principals and other senior staff had a clear vision and a good sense of priorities. In the best performing schools there were well developed middle management structures that supported high quality teaching and learning. Although this remains true, leadership criteria have been developed over the last five years to include improved systems for managing the performance of all staff and for helping them to develop professionally. The expectation for effective lines of responsibility has been made clearer. There is also a requirement for greater clarity of purpose and more thorough medium and long-term planning.

The quality of leadership in UK, French and IB schools has followed an upward trend over the five years of inspection. No IB or UK school is currently rated unsatisfactory in this respect. In all IB and French schools, and in most UK schools, leadership is at least good. It is outstanding in almost a third of the 51 UK curriculum schools.


No unsatisfactory leadership was reported in US curriculum schools in 2012-2013. However, only half of them enjoyed good or better leadership.

Leadership in schools offering an Indian curriculum presents a mixed picture. Around half of the schools are now judged as having good and better leadership. This was the same in the first round of inspections. Nevertheless, over the five years, the proportion of Indian schools with outstanding leadership has risen from a twentieth to a fifth, and the proportion with unsatisfactory leadership has dropped from a fifth to about a tenth.

In many of the MoE curriculum schools, the “flat” management structure has reduced the impact that school leaders can make and, consequently, whole school improvement has been slower. Although there was a positive trend over the first three years of inspection, the last two years have seen a decline in the quality of leadership in these schools. The proportion of schools with good leadership is not more than a quarter of the total number. The proportion of unsatisfactory leadership has increased significantly, particularly in 2012-13. This is mainly because schools have failed to address key areas for improvements over the past few years, resulting in three schools dropping to the unsatisfactory category in their overall performance. In particular, school leaders have had little success in improving students’ learning outcomes.

Self-evaluation and improvement planningFor improvement to take place, school leaders must first have an accurate knowledge of their school’s strengths and weaknesses. Inspectors evaluate the school’s processes for school self-evaluation and the impact of school improvement planning on overall improvements within the school.

28%15%

8%17% 13%

40%

45%

43%36%

38%

26%33%

45% 39% 41%

6% 7% 4% 8% 8%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

Self-evaluation and improvement planning

32%40%

49% 47% 49%



74

28

154 6

29

7 7

2417

30

1116 13

33

17 17

50 46

33

2025

50

1727

33

42

34 27

21

49

53 54

35 45

35

33

37

57

67

8375

4346

17

33 33 3325

25

17

10075

64

3130

5150

60

19

3639

38 3535

56 42

26

8 7 8

33

50 80

67 6775

100 100 100 100

50

33

8 9813 11

17 19

3 4 3 3 5 4

17 17

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3


Self - evaluation and improvement planning - by curriculum


The quality with which private schools evaluate their own performance and, as a result, plan to develop their provision has improved since the initial quality inspections. Improvement in this aspect of leadership and management was particularly marked in the first three years of the period. Whereas in 2008-2009 self-evaluation and improvement planning were rated good or better in only 32 per cent of schools, by 2010-2011 the figure was 49 per cent. Improvement has subsequently slowed and the figure has remained more or less constant over the last two years. Self-evaluation and improvement planning have remained no better than acceptable in a persistent 40 per cent or so of schools. Although the proportion has halved over five years, these essential processes were rated unsatisfactory in 13 per cent of schools in 2012-2013.

DSIB inspections have placed increasing emphasis and importance on assessing schools’ capacity to evaluate their own performance and take effective action. The minimum expectation in the second year of inspections was that all schools should have an improvement plan based on some evidence (including the first inspection report) and that schools had begun monitoring progress towards meeting agreed targets.

In the first two years, schools’ action planning tended to be in response to the most recent inspection report. Better schools had modified their improvement plans to incorporate the key priorities identified by the inspectors. However, improvement planning was seldom the result of schools’ own rigorous, evidence-based self-evaluations. Therefore DSIB placed increasing emphasis on the importance of school self-evaluation in subsequent years.

The US curriculum schools showed marked improvement at this early stage: around a third had been unsatisfactory in the first year and this dropped to less than one in ten in the second. The slowest to respond were the MoE curriculum schools.


In many schools, with different curricula, improvements in self-evaluation were linked to improvements in leadership and governance. Inspectors found that school leaders had used a range of evidence to obtain a clearer and more accurate understanding of their schools’ strengths and weaknesses. This had enabled them to take prompt action to make necessary improvements.

Since 2011, all schools have been encouraged to complete a review of their own performance against the inspection quality indicators and to submit that information to DSIB in advance of the next inspection. When schools have used self-evaluation tools, such as the DSIB on-line resource, the outcomes of self-reviews have been more accurate, coherent, comprehensive and effective. Recent inspections have confirmed that self-critical and self-confident schools are the most successful, and that accurate self-evaluation is a pre-condition for school improvement.

The outcomes of the last two rounds of inspections have been disappointing. Judgements were weaker than in the previous year. The percentage of schools in which self-evaluation was judged as unsatisfactory more than doubled (from 8% in 2010-2011 to 17% in 2011-2012). Not enough schools linked their action planning to improving outcomes for students. The weakest schools were those offering the MOE curriculum, half of which were unsatisfactory in their self-evaluations. Part of the reason was due to the changed framework in which expectations were now more ambitious than previously.

At the same time, the proportion of schools whose self-evaluation was judged outstanding doubled in this period (from 4 to 8 per cent). All of these schools were rated outstanding overall. Self-evaluation has improved most in UK, IB and French curriculum schools.

There is a strong correlation between the effectiveness of self-evaluation and improvement planning, and the quality of teaching because leaders in the most effective schools closely monitor teaching and learning. Common factors that contribute to weak self-evaluation include frequent and often rapid changes of teachers and leaders, transient student populations and unreliable (often over-optimistic) evaluations of provision and outcomes. Many schools still fail to analyse attainment data accurately, retain unrealistic views about the quality of their provision and consequently are unable to set accurate priorities to improve teaching, learning and students’ progress.


76

Partnerships with parents and the communityEnabling parents to help their children get the best from their education is an important aspect of all schools’ work. Inspection teams evaluate the extent of parental involvement in their children’s education and how well schools communicate with the parents. Inspectors also assess the extent of the partnerships that schools have with the communities they serve.

6% 6% 3% 2% 1%

40% 36%

26% 23%16%

36% 40%

46%45%

51%

18% 18%25% 30% 32%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

Parents and the community


54% 58%

71% 75%83%

4 4 2 6 4 4 310 13 17

9

3331 28

1917

6

5253

39

24 28

40

33

16 13

60 50

3357

31 33

1625

50

2520

33 36

3938

47

37

44

3636

3655 52

40

39

4257

2733

58

43

69

33

67

4017

33

75

50

100 100

50

50

60

58 55

26 30 32

46 50

611

21 17 1710

28

42

30 34 33

6067 67

50

75

17 209 9

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3


Parents and the community - by curriculum



This aspect of leadership and management has improved considerably over the five year period of school inspections. The proportion of schools with outstanding practice has doubled to roughly one in three and there are now good or better partnerships in more than eight out of ten private schools. Scarcely any schools are now rated unsatisfactory in this respect.

The development of the parent as a partner with the school is encouraging. Good and outstanding judgements have focused on aspects of the school’s work where parents and school personnel co-operate and directly encourage better outcomes for the students. While the trend is positive, more remains to be done for older students in particular in this regard. Inspectors have seen the development of positive relationships more clearly in Kindergarten and primary sections of schools. Innovative approaches to how schools can partner with parents to enhance outcomes for more senior students remain underdeveloped.

Partnerships with parents are generally better developed and more effective than those with schools’ local communities. Not enough schools foster genuine partnerships with local organisations, businesses and other institutions.

Partnerships have been consistently good or better in most UK curriculum schools; they are now outstanding in half of them. Parents have been kept generally well informed about their children’s progress and they support learning well at home. They appreciate the interaction with teachers. They know their opinions matter but have some concerns that they are not involved enough in decision making. Community links have also been mostly good.

The quality of partnerships has remained largely unchanged in almost all US curriculum schools. More than two-thirds of schools are good or better in this aspect of leadership and very few have been rated unsatisfactory.

Improving partnerships with parents and the community have been a feature of French curriculum schools since the first inspection cycle. Two schools are now rated outstanding in this respect.

A weaker picture prevails in many of the schools offering “other” curricula. Most of these schools need to be more effective in communicating with parents and involving them in decision making processes.


78

GovernanceGovernance comprises several distinctive aspects: provision of advice, accountability, representation of the school community and the expectation that the governing board should respond to stakeholders’ views.

28% 24%

10% 8% 5%

38% 46%

50%42%

39%

26%24%

36%45%

46%

8% 6% 4% 5% 10%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

Governance


34% 30%40%

50% 56%

26 23

11 11

35

14 11 104

35

5 5 9

4033

914

817

5040

18

38 45

47

31

33

39

68

61 59

48

45

67

32

43

40

33

5857

54 33

17 2025 25

50

16

0 8355

1919 38

52

54

2618

28 31

48

1017

53

35

20

34 33 2938

50

83 80

83 83

75 75

100 100

75

50 17

40

818

17 134 6

13 10 11 10 13 17 1725

17 209 9

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3


Governance - by curriculum



At the time of the first round of inspections the concept of governance was unknown to many schools. Over the five years since then the quality of school governance has improved considerably. More than half the private schools in Dubai now benefit from governance rated good and better, with a tenth rated outstanding in this respect.

Schools offering different curricula have responded at different rates, although all show an upward trend in the quality of governance.

Governance is now at least good in all the IB schools, French schools and the German school, in two thirds of UK curriculum schools and in around half of the US and Indian schools. Governance is not better than acceptable in almost two thirds of private schools offering the MoE curriculum. It is variable in Indian curriculum schools.

There are two main reasons that prevent many schools from improving their governance inspection ratings. The first is the absence of parents on the governing board. Most schools now consult parents about issues relating to school improvement but many private school owners restrict parental representation in the decision-making process. Although parents may be present on some schools’ “advisory boards”, parents are not included when making decisions about the future development of schools.

The second reason is that too many governing boards do not hold school leaders sufficiently to account for how well students succeed. Often the governors accept, at face value, data and information provided by their schools. They do not check it rigorously or compare it with international benchmarks. In these cases, the governance does not ensure that the school achieves the best possible outcomes for the students.


80

Management of staffing, facilities and resourcesEffective management of the day to day life of the school is essential to ensure that the environment is conducive to learning. The provision and deployment of suitably qualified staff, and qualities of the premises and the range of resources available are evaluated.

22% 15%3% 5% 4%

43%45%

45% 45%40%

22% 29%

34% 30%34%

13% 11%18% 20% 22%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

Management, including staffing, facilities and resources


35% 40%52% 50% 56%

1813

4 2 2

29

3 3

20

5 5 4

2733

9

22

817

25

50

209

18

39

27

28 3125

39

61

4645 48

60

5647 48

6058

83

71

69

33

20 17

50

75

50 50

25

75

50

80

83 64

25

45

43 38

38

2225

36 31 35

15

28

32 31

13 9 8 7

23

17

67

40

33

50

50

25

50 50

50

81818 15

25 2935

10 1118 21 17

511

16 17

33 3340

50 50

25

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

920

09-2

010

2010

-201

120

11-2

012

2012

-201

3


Management, including staffing, facilities and resources - by curriculum



The overall improving trend paints a positive picture. The proportion of schools judged good or better in their management of staffing, facilities and resources has risen from around a third to over half in the five years of inspections. The greatest rate of improvement was seen in the two years following the initial quality inspections. Equally important, the proportion of schools rated unsatisfactory in this aspect dropped from over a fifth to under a twentieth during the same period.

Inspectors have reported an increasing number of schools that run smoothly on a day to day basis. The most successful schools tend to have excellent premises with a wide variety of specialist facilities. Early years facilities include ample space for free-flow activities, learning centres, group space and outdoor learning environments. Specialist libraries, science laboratories, art, drama and multimedia centres as well as extensive physical education facilities support a variety of curricula. They employ well qualified, experienced teachers attuned to the learning needs of students and supply regular, high-quality training to staff. They invest in extensive learning resources including comprehensive classroom ICT and internet facilities.

In the less effective schools, small classrooms inhibit learning, especially that of the youngest children. Investment in staff training and resources is limited. There are minimal ICT resources to support learning. In Indian, US and “other curriculum” schools in particular, staff turnover is high, which is often detrimental to the continuity of students’ learning.


82

Trends in the overall performance of schools offering different curricula

Overall performance of schools offering different curricula

Trends in schools' overall ratings by curriculum

* ‘Others’ category includes: German, Iranian, Japanese, Pakistani, Philippines and Russian

3

2

3

2

5

3

3

1

1

3

3

3

2

2

5

3

4

2

3

6

5

4

5

3

3

5

9

10

1

2

3

1

2

2

2

11

12

12

13

9

10

7

10

12

17

19

20

19

21

22

22

19

13

13

3

1

1

2

2

3

2

4

4

4

3

5

4

4

4

1

7

11

7

7

8

8

7

8

7

17

20

22

24

26

2

2

1

1

4

2

6

8

9

2008-2009

2009-2010

2010-2011

2011-2012

2012-2013

2008-2009

2009-2010

2010-2011

2011-2012

2012-2013

2008-2009

2009-2010

2010-2011

2011-2012

2012-2013

2008-2009

2009-2010

2010-2011

2011-2012

2012-2013

2008-2009

2009-2010

2010-2011

2011-2012

2012-2013

2008-2009

2009-2010

2010-2011

2011-2012

2012-2013

2008-2009

2009-2010

2010-2011

2011-2012

2012-2013

Oth

ers*

Fren

chIB

Priv

ate

MO

EIn

dian

US

UK

Indian schools were not inspected in 2008-2009



Private schools offering a UK curriculum have shown the most improvement in overall performance since 2008. The proportion of these schools achieving good and outstanding ratings has risen from 42% in 2008-09 to 68 per cent in 2012-2013.

The majority of schools offering the IB curriculum have maintained a good overall rating. Two Indian schools are now rated outstanding whereas none were in the first round of inspection. All the French curriculum schools have successfully maintained the good quality of education they provide for their students.

Schools offering a US curriculum have remained almost static in terms of overall performance, although one is now rated outstanding. Private schools that offer the MoE curriculum have shown no real improvement in overall performance since the first cycle of inspections in 2008-2009. A significant proportion of these schools still offer an unsatisfactory quality of education and almost all are rated no better than acceptable. However it was pleasing to note that one school improved sufficiently over the last year and is now rated good overall.

UK curriculum schoolsOf the different types of private schools in Dubai, those providing a UK curriculum continue to offer the best overall quality of education to their students. The largest number and highest percentage of outstanding and good schools offer a UK curriculum, which has been the case in each of the last five years.

The proportion of UK schools in Dubai rated outstanding and good overall increased in each of the last five years, while the proportion rated acceptable and unsatisfactory decreased.

In the first two years of inspection, less than half of the schools were judged to be good or better. Now, over two thirds of the schools are good or outstanding. In addition, there has been a sharp rise in the number of outstanding schools which now account for almost a fifth of the total. However, the rate of improvement slowed in 2012-13.


84

12% 10% 8% 10% 6%

35% 41%

43%48%

51%

8% 4%12% 16% 18%

2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

Overall performance of UK schools over the inspection years


45% 45%37%

26%25%

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2010

-201

1

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2010

-201

1

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2010

-201

1

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2010

-201

1

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3


6776

4241

2437 45

26

2488

2839

9

2920

3

2634

7

1990

6

2125

6

1393

7

1902

2

2306

9

2910

5

3618

5

3098

2205

6177 85

66 9737

Number of students in UK schools over the inspection years


Key strengths• Teaching and learning have continued to improve in most schools, leading to better progress and

sustained high attainment in English, mathematics and science;• Students in almost all schools offering a UK curriculum benefit from the high quality of the care

provided and from effective partnerships between schools and parents;• High quality leadership is the key strength of the outstanding UK curriculum schools; • Increasingly effective self-evaluation keeps leaders well aware of how they can improve their schools.

Persistent issues• Low attainment in Arabic as first and second languages remains in the secondary phase;• A small number of schools still do not base their school curriculum as firmly as they claim on English

National Curriculum programmes of study and attainment targets;• Deficiencies exist in the leadership of the small number of unsatisfactory schools and those whose

overall performance is only acceptable; • A particularly high turnover of teachers has a negative impact on the quality and continuity of

students’ learning in a few schools.


86

Kings’ Dubai is a private school offering the Early Years Foundation Stage Curriculum for Foundation Stages 1 and 2, and the English National Curriculum at the primary and secondary phases to 765 students. In 2012-13 twenty-nine nationalities were represented in the school, with the largest group of students coming from the United Kingdom.

Kings’ School Dubai is the only school that has been rated outstanding in its overall performance by DSIB each year since inspections began in 2008. At the time of the 2012/2013 inspection, the school had a significant increase of 58 per cent of students. A new secondary department had been established, 31 new teachers had joined the staff and the senior management team had been expanded. The school has managed to address these challenges and maintain an outstanding level of performance.

2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

Kings Dubai

Management, including staffing, facilities and resources Overall judgement

Outstanding

The process: The senior leadership has consistently maximised its communication with all new staff. High value is placed on what each member of staff can add to the school, regardless of their years of employment. There is a belief in the development of a learning community where students and teachers are all expected to think critically, share and respect ideas through meaningful conversations and contribute to the concept of “Kingsification”.

School context:

Improvement journey

Teacher Induction Programme:Ensuring new Teachers continue to deliver outstanding outcomes at Kings’ Dubai


Personalised coaching and support for teachers reflect the school’s mission to achieve “Results the right way”. Team building exercises, using creative challenges, encourage new teachers to reflect and to be innovative in their teaching. Such methods have been successful in creating a school community with a very strong culture of learning.

Recruit

Settle in to Dubai

Understand what high expectations and outstanding

learning look like

Multi-level delivery of the school's respect for

everyone's contribution

Exploit the talent of all forall...

Maintain "excitement forlearning" ethos

Listen, Reflect, Empower,Deliver

Kingsification-Peoplewant to and can....

Summary: One of the pillars of this school’s continuing excellent performance is the approach to staff management. Through specific success criteria and a truly inclusive professional culture, the school authorities enable all new and established staff members to communicate very effectively. Every voice is heard, respected and welcomed.


88

US curriculum schoolsThe overall performance of the 32 US curriculum schools remains largely unchanged across successive inspection cycles, except that the proportion performing at an unsatisfactory level has declined from 16% to 9%. The proportion of schools performing at a good or better level is similar in 2013 to what it was in 2008-09.

More than two-thirds of US curriculum schools perform at an acceptable level overall and about one quarter are good or better. Three schools are still unsatisfactory overall.

16%10% 13%

7% 9%

57%63%

64%63% 66%

27% 27% 23%27% 22%

3% 3%

2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

Overall performance of US schools over the inspection years



2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2010

-201

1

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2010

-201

1

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2010

-201

1

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2010

-201

1

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3


3808

1919

2553

1219

1088

1967

9

2394

7

2843

3

2751

7

3222

7

1374

3

1329

3

1037

8

1280

5

1123

9

2169

2236

Number of students in US schools over the inspection years

Key strengths• Some schools, although a minority, offer a curriculum of outstanding breadth, which helps students

grow and develop;• Arrangements for ensuring the health and safety of students have improved considerably;• Most schools have begun to review and improve their provision for students with special educational

needs.

Persistent issues• Arabic reading and writing skills remain generally weak;• Applying mathematics to real life problems and practical skills of scientific investigation remain

underdeveloped among many students;• A significant proportion of teachers still lack sufficient professional understanding to ensure that their

students learn effectively, particularly in Kindergartens and the lower elementary grades;• Only a minority of schools assess learning in relation to standards developed in the US and by means

of international standardised tests;• Students with special educational needs make no more than acceptable progress.


90

Indian curriculum schoolsLess than half of Indian schools have been rated good and better overall in all but one year during the past four years. Except for 2010 -11, over half has been rated at best acceptable overall. In 2011-2012 two Indian schools were rated to be outstanding overall and in 2012-2013, seven other schools provided a good quality of education.

15% 14% 9% 9%

50%

33% 48% 52%

35%

53% 33% 30%

10% 9%

2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

Overall performance of Indian schools over the inspection years


Note: Indian schools were not inspected in 2008-2009


2009

-201

0

2010

-201

1

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3

2009

-201

0

2010

-201

1

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3

2009

-201

0

2010

-201

1

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3

2009

-201

0

2010

-201

1

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3


2277

1955

1265 43

26

2793

3

2034

4

2404

2

2566

4

2429

4

3553

3

2750

0

2912

7

0 0

7811

8462

Number of students in Indian schools over the inspection years

Note: Indian schools were not inspected in 2008-2009

Key strengths• Older students continue to perform well in external examinations in English, mathematics and science; • Students’ behaviour and attitudes to learning are notably strong features of most schools.

Persistent issues• There has been little change in the levels of student attainment and progress in English, Arabic and

Islamic Education;• Less than half of the schools still provide teaching rated good or better overall;• Kindergarten teaching remains weak;• There is poor provision in all schools for students with SEN; • Leadership in nearly half of the schools is rated acceptable or unsatisfactory.


92

MoE curriculum schoolsThere are currently 13 private schools providing the MOE curriculum serving over 16000 students in Dubai. Most schools in this category have been inspected over the 5-year period. In all schools, the MoE curriculum is delivered in Arabic, although a few run parallel classes in a few grades where the medium of instruction in mathematics and science is English. This category does not include schools which are licensed to offer a US curriculum but have sections within them where they offer the MOE curriculum.

A smaller proportion of MoE schools are now rated unsatisfactory than in 2008-2009 and one school is now rated good overall. However, the quality of the education provided by almost all MoE schools has remained no better than acceptable throughout the last five years.


31%20% 20%

7%

21%

69%80% 80%

93%72%

7%

2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

Overall performance of MoE schools over the inspection years


2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2010

-201

1

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2010

-201

1

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2010

-201

1

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2010

-201

1

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3


4128

1083

826

293

3747

1318

1

1531

4

1527

2

1590

4

9846

0 0 0 0

2492

0 0 0 0 0

Number of students in MoE schools over the inspection years

Key strengths• Students’ attainment and progress in Islamic Education and Arabic are good in the majority of schools;• The quality of arrangements to ensure the health, safety and protection of students has improved

over time.

Persistent issues• Attainment and progress in English, mathematics and science are no better than acceptable ; • Students’ skills of investigation, enquiry and application are still particularly weak;• Poor teaching and provision exists in kindergartens;• Assessment in almost all schools remains unaligned with international standards and expectations;• The curriculum in almost all schools remains relatively narrow and provides low levels of challenge

to most students;• Weak and inaccurate self-evaluation leads to poor improvement planning in most schools.


94

IB curriculum schoolsCurrently there are five schools in Dubai offering an “all-through” International Baccalaureate (IB) curriculum. As last year, for the purposes of this report, an additional school is included in this category. This is because, in addition to the IB programmes offered in phases 3 and 4, an alternative “international” curriculum is offered to the younger students. There are seven other schools that combine one of the three IB programmes with a UK curriculum, plus two more combining the US and IB curricula. Taken together, fifteen schools offer at least one of the three IB programmes (PYP, MYP and DP). In 2008-2009 there were equal proportions of good and acceptable IB curriculum schools. Now the proportion is two to one, good to acceptable.

None of the IB curriculum schools has improved its overall performance in the last two years of inspections. In the last five years of inspections, two schools have improved their performance from acceptable to good and two schools have declined from good to acceptable. While the overall rating of none of the IB schools changed in 2012-13, there has been a slight improvement in a number of key aspects across all IB schools, most often in the Kindergarten phase.

The common features which contribute to an overall judgement of acceptable are weaker teaching, learning and assessment in the MYP and, in one case, the IBDP sections of the school.

50%

17%

33% 33% 33%

50%

83%

67% 67% 67%

2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

Overall performance of IB schools over the inspection years



2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2010

-201

1

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2010

-201

1

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2010

-201

1

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2010

-201

1

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3


2311

178 44

0

1335

1399

948

3673

3886

3799

4175

Number of students in IB schools over the inspection years

Key strengths• Outstanding attitudes to learning, assisted by high quality support and guidance for students;• Most of the teaching is now good or better in the Kindergarten and primary phases; • Tracking the progress of individual students is performed thoroughly and accurately;• Good or outstanding leadership in all schools; • Good self-evaluation in the majority of schools.

Persistent issues• Attainment and progress in Arabic are weaker than in the other key subjects;• Teaching and assessment in key subjects, and consequently attainment and progress, are weaker in

the secondary (MYP and IBDP) phases than for younger students.


96

French curriculum schoolsOver the five years of inspections the key feature of the four French curriculum schools has been steady improvement. In the last three years all have been rated as providing a consistently good quality of education. Individual schools have made specific improvements in a number of key aspects of their work. Improvement in attainment and progress has been noted in all key subjects.

25%

50%

75%

50%

100% 100% 100%

2009-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

Overall performance of French schools over the inspection years



2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2010

-201

1

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2010

-201

1

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2010

-201

1

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2010

-201

1

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3


499 10

25

2307

1924 31

58 3381 37

62

Number of students in French schools over the inspection years

Key strengths• Attainment and progress in English, mathematics and science are good and better;• Attitudes to learning are positive and there is a strong work ethic;• Environmental and community responsibility is well developed;• Leadership is effective, self-evaluation is accurate and governance is outstanding.

Persistent issues• Teaching, attainment and progress remain weaker in Islamic Education and Arabic than in other key

subjects;• Provision for students with special educational needs (SEN) remains limited and lessons do not always

meet the needs of all students.


98

Schools offering ‘other’ curriculaCurrently, there are 14 private schools in this group, which serve around 11,358 students in Dubai. The composition of the group has changed since 2011-2012. Since then the group has included schools that offer the German, Japanese, Russian, Filipino, Iranian and Pakistani curriculum.

All schools have maintained their overall performance rating since 2011-2012 with the exception of one Pakistani curriculum school, which has improved its overall performance to acceptable from unsatisfactory. The German and Japanese schools have continued to provide a good quality of education. Two Pakistani schools remain unsatisfactory since last year. All other schools provide an acceptable quality of education.

Overall performance of other schools over the inspection years

25%

43%

25% 22%14%

43%

62% 64%72%

75%

14% 13% 14% 14%

2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013


* The title ‘Others’ refers to six schools which follow an Iranian curriculum, three schools following the Pakistani NationalCurriculum, two schools which follow a Philippine curriculum and three further schools which provide German, Russian and Japanese curricula

Key strengths• The German and Japanese schools continue to provide a good quality of education overall;• The German school has good provision for learning Arabic;• Attainment and progress in the language of instruction are good and outstanding in the Filipino,

Russian, German and Japanese schools.

Persistent issues• Attainment and progress in Arabic as an additional language remain only acceptable in most of the schools;• Teaching is of only acceptable quality in most of the schools;• Most schools still do not fulfil MoE requirements for the teaching of Islamic Education and Arabic as

an additional language;• Most schools are unable to make appropriate provision for students with special educational needs.


100

Dubai International School-Al Quoz is a private school for boys and girls aged from three to 18 years. The school employs 145 teachers. In the last year, 35 teachers were new to the school.

The school follows a US curriculum model, aligned to the Virginia State Standards. Students take termly assessments with a minority sitting for the IBT external test. Older students can take a range of external examinations that include the SAT, TOEFL and standardised tests in Islamic Education and Arabic. Emirati students make up about 67 per cent of the roll and the remaining population is mainly from regional countries and North America.

Emirates International School–Meadows Emirates International School (EIS) Meadows offers an IB curriculum to 1,567 students, representing over 80 nationalities. Less than two per cent of the students are Emiratis. There are 153 teachers, all of whom have appropriate qualifications, and 29 teaching assistants. There are two Principals, for the primary and high school phases respectively.The school offers three programmes of the International Baccalaureate (IB) for students aged three to 19 years,

The journey to Good: what do the two schools have in common?

Dubai International School – Al Quoz: A major asset to our journey from an acceptable status to a good one is the stability of the leadership as well as the staff. This journey has had three phases: From year 2000 until 2006 the school was building its foundationsFrom year 2006 until 2010 the school was establishing its strategic plan which included the school priorities. From 2010 until 2013 saw the implementation stage of the plan. Each stage was closely monitored and evaluated.Our journey towards a “Good” status could not have been completed without the strong determination of the leadership to set up robust foundations which included policies and procedures that paved the way to the creation of sustainable systems in the school. Continuous professional development has empowered all staff to believe in and share the leadership vision that is the driving force towards improvement. Supportive governors and involved parents were a strong asset in this journey.

Early in the journey, we were fully aware that school improvement is not a “quick fix”. We knew that it is a process that should be followed with full commitment from all concerned. Accordingly, our process started with evaluating the whole school and the whole system that existed. We regarded data as a major source of information on which we could base our improvement planning. This

School contexts:Dubai International School-Al Quoz

Two improvement journeys

From Acceptable to Good: a whole school approach - Dubai International School,Al Quoz and Emirates International School Meadows


led us to creating policies, tracking the impact of the newly established systems and amending the policies as necessary. Such policies showed the need for capacity building and professional development, as well as focusing on setting the foundations for a strong curriculum.

Over the years, we have found that the feedback we have received from the DSIB inspection reports and their recommendations played a significant role in our school’s success.”

EIS-Meadows: “In 2010, the school was facing a period of significant change. The two previous inspections pointed to a school which was entrenched in the “acceptable” category and the summer of 2010 saw significant turnover in staff and leadership at the school. In September 2010, two new Principals were appointed, one for the High School and another for the Primary School. They immediately set about stabilising the campus, meeting with teachers and parents to listen to their concerns and to refocus the school on learning outcomes. They adopted a deliberate eight point plan, jointly leading all staff through each step while, at the same time, systems were reviewed with an aim to establish a sound base of procedures and practices geared towards raising students’ achievements.

By the next inspection there was recognition of significant improvement, although not well enough embedded at that time to move the school to a judgment of “Good”. However the journey had begun. The next year, whole school meetings continued but were becoming less of a necessity as groups worked more organically on key areas for improvement. The improved systems for data tracking and monitoring which had been introduced were now an increasingly developed feature in informing practice and the year was launched with specific professional development on improved strategies for teaching and learning. In 2011/12 the school was rated as “Good”.


102

During the process the notions of sustainability and building capacity were also addressed. This last year 34 middle leaders have followed an in-house leadership programme. Similarly, where and whenever possible, we used coaching and mentoring to enable and empower others in their roles. The idea behind this was around continuity, sustainability and ongoing staff development.

In 2012/13, two and a half years on, the school is a very different place with high expectations set and achieved. An increased number of judgements in the most recent inspection were “Outstanding”, including the teaching, learning, assessment and curriculum. Noticeable improvements have been seen across all phases and all QIs. As research shows and as would be expected, school improvement is about the process, the journey never really ends.”


DIS

Stability in leadership (growing and maturing)

Stability of teaching staff

Three phases of improvement, a long term journey .

Common actions

Rigorous self-evaluation and improvement planning

Clear policies and procedures

Tracking, monitoring and evaluation systems (esp. students' progress)

Professional development and capacity building

Strong curriculum

EIS

New leadership team

Hiring qualified teachers in the areas of weakness

Eight point system to whole school improvement approach

One improvement plan for CIS, IB and DSIB

Summary School improvement is a long, structured process. Schools that aspire to have success after starting their journey towards better performance need to convince all the parties of the improvement process. Administration, staff and the community need to be fully aware of the school’s clear vision and objectives. Schools should have confidence in utilising different forms of data in order to measure continuously, and evaluate the outcomes their students achieve.


104

GEMS Jumeirah Primary School ( JPS) is a private school providing education for boys and girls from Foundation Stage to primary, aged three to 11 years. The school follows the National Curriculum of England.

The chart below shows JPS’s journey and the shift from the 2009-2010 good rating to the 2010-2011 outstanding rating. Fourteen separate ratings improved, almost all from good to outstanding.

Good Good Outstanding Outstanding Outstanding

Total number of improvements in qualityindicators

2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

Inspection year

The journey to Outstanding

Improved quality indicators:-Teaching -Attainment and progress-Curriculum-Personal development

Outstandingleadership over the

five inspection years

The school context

Improvement journey

From Good to Outstanding: Jumeirah Primary School


The Journey:JPS already had outstanding leadership prior to the 2010-2011 inspection, further strengthened by empowering more teachers to take leadership roles. As such, their full potentials have been utilized to maximise not only students’ achievement but their own development as well. The leadership team, teachers and staff focus sharply on the school’s core business, which is teaching and learning, as the main drivers for improvement.

Teachers are encouraged to be reflective practitioners, while keeping the inspection findings as their measurement tool. To create a more learner-centred approach, the school offers its teachers a custom made programme of professional development, based on the individual needs of teachers. The effectiveness of professional development activities is measured by informal lesson evaluation and more rigorous evaluations of students’ achievements. Best practices have also been shared and adopted at all levels of the school. This process is a continuous one, which has maintained its momentum.

After the 2010-2011 inspection and the achievement of the outstanding rating, JPS has further strengthened its status by keeping a focus on its students’ achievements while engaging with and involving parents and stakeholders in their journey towards excellence. The school has summarised its current success as follow:

“JPS remains on a journey. It will always be that it is a journey without an arrival, because to feel that you have arrived is to encourage complacency and complacency leads to a lack of focus and lowering of standards. The current section of our journey encompasses a focus on the recommendations of DSIB inspection and the involvement of stakeholders, such as children and parents, in school development planning. We have a sense of shared pride in what we can achieve together.

Just as our goals are co-constructed between inspectors, staff, children, parents and GEMS Corporate, so are the pathways to reach those goals. This year, for example, a Mentoring Matrix has been introduced to give all teachers the opportunity to share their areas of expertise for the benefit of all. Parents are now actively involved through the Parent Engagement Council and their ideas and expertise are helping the school to change and improve still further.”

Summary:JPS‘s success can be attributed to a clear and defined approach, deployed and effectively implemented with continuous and rigorous assessment and improvement. Focused leadership has the confidence to delegate and empower everyone. Key priorities were determined and acted upon.

2ChAPTER:


2 Tackling unsatisfactory performance2008-2013


6

Key messages from inspection over five years• The number of unsatisfactory schools has declined over five years, from 17 schools in 2008-2009 to

13 for the last two years;• There is now a smaller proportion of students attending unsatisfactory schools than in 2008-2009;• Of the 17 schools rated unsatisfactory in 2008-2009, only three have remained unsatisfactory;• Of the six more schools rated as unsatisfactory in 2009-2010, only one remains unsatisfactory in

2012-2013;• In the most recent school inspections, four schools improved from unsatisfactory to acceptable;• Unsatisfactory schools providing private MoE and US curricula account for a significant proportion of

the students enrolled in unsatisfactory schools.

Please refer to Part 3 Performance Tables.

Over five years of inspections of schools, a total of 33 schools have been rated as unsatisfactory. Five of these have since closed. The lowest number of unsatisfactory schools has been in the last two years of school inspections, 2011-2013. The highest number of unsatisfactory schools was in the first year of inspections, 2008-2009. The number of unsatisfactory schools has, therefore, steadily declined over five years, from 17 schools in 2008-2009 to 13 in the last two years. Given the sharp rise in the number of schools in operation in Dubai between 2008 and 2013, there are now proportionally far fewer unsatisfactory schools. The proportion of unsatisfactory schools in 2012-2013 is less than 10 per cent compared to more than 15 per cent in the first year of inspections.

Of the schools that were found to be unsatisfactory overall in 2008-2009, only 3 have remained unsatisfactory. Eight schools have improved to the acceptable category, one school now provides a good quality of education and five have closed. Of the schools that were found unsatisfactory, about a third have been so for one year and a further one third have been so for two years.

14%8% 5% 6% 6%

86%92% 95% 94% 94%

2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

Students in private schools over inspection years

Unsatisfactory schools Other schools

(15,757) (13,243) (9,983) (10,988) (14,049)


The year 2009-2010 was the first in which the 23 Indian and Pakistani schools were inspected. In this year there was much movement in overall performance ratings with a further six schools evaluated as unsatisfactory but also five schools moved from unsatisfactory to acceptable. Of the six more schools rated as unsatisfactory in 2009-2010, only one remains unsatisfactory in 2012-2013.

Of the schools that have been or still are unsatisfactory, the failure to achieve an acceptable overall rating is more prevalent in those offering Pakistani, MoE, US and Indian curricula. All three Pakistani schools have been rated unsatisfactory and two remain in this category in 2012-2013. Over a third of the private MoE schools are currently unsatisfactory, and a fifth of US curriculum schools were found to be providing an unsatisfactory quality of education for at least one year since the first inspection cycle in 2008-2009. These schools account for a big proportion of the students enrolled in unsatisfactory schools in Dubai.

Despite the declining number of unsatisfactory schools in Dubai, there are still more than 14,000 students in 13 unsatisfactory private schools in Dubai in 2012-2013.

In almost all unsatisfactory schools the key recommendations made in inspection reports have been to improve teaching, school leadership and self-evaluation. Along with these key issues in almost all unsatisfactory schools, inspectors also found health and safety and quality of support for students were often very weak. Acceptable levels of student attainment and progress are also almost always lacking in unsatisfactory schools. All these weaknesses were found consistently in unsatisfactory schools in all five years of school inspections.

In the most recent school inspections, four schools improved from unsatisfactory to acceptable. All four schools had made strategic decisions either to replace one or more school leaders or had made significant changes in leadership and key personnel. Another main factor was a determined effort by key stakeholders (school leaders and staff, parents, teachers, students and the Board of Governors) to work cooperatively to improve the school. They prioritised the key aspects of the school which needed to change then acted to bring about the necessary changes. They focused on addressing the recommendations made over a number of years of school inspections. There was a strong sense of collective responsibility throughout the school to work together to achieve positive change. Schools responded to their previous inspection recommendations with strong, determined action that had positive outcomes for the whole school and for students. The school leaders concentrated on improving learning experiences for students so teaching and leadership at all levels were major areas for improvement.

how does dsib monitor unsatisfactory schools?Once a school has been rated as unsatisfactory by inspectors it is no longer included in the regular inspection cycle. Instead, it becomes part of the Follow-Through inspection cycle. This means that the school receives more regular visits from inspectors. Schools rated as unsatisfactory continue to receive Follow-Through inspections until it is considered that they have met all the recommendations and are ready for a full inspection. Unsatisfactory schools that do not meet the recommendations within three years automatically join the full inspection cycle at the end of the three year period.

Each Follow-Through inspection involves a team of inspectors working alongside school leaders. The inspection team assesses whether or not the action taken by the school has met the recommendations. When a school is evaluated as meeting the recommendations it becomes part of the regular cycle once again and receives a full inspection.


8

2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

Overall inspection rating

Pakistan Education AcademyLittle Flowers English schoolUnited International Private School

Acceptable

Unsatisfactory

Pakistan Education AcademyLocated in Oud Metha, the Pakistan Education Academy is a private school catering for 1,730 boys and girls from Kindergarten to Grade 12, aged four to 18 years. It follows the National Curriculum of Pakistan and the local statutory requirements for Islamic Education and Arabic.

The process The reinstatement of the Pakistan Educational and Cultural Board In April 2011 and the process of employing qualified and committed personnel to lead the school and drive change started the journey towards success. From February to September 2012, 75 new, well qualified teachers were employed and intensive training sessions were conducted. Professional development ranged from workshops on lesson planning, teaching and learning, to observations by senior staff and peers, and visits to other, better performing schools. In addition, volunteers from a variety of professions supported key areas of change. Regular one-day Follow-Through inspections by KHDA supported and guided the school on its way to becoming an ‘acceptable’ school.

Three improvement journeys

The following improvement journeys show how three schools with different curricula achieved success in moving from an unsatisfactory to an acceptable standard.


Leaders and staff working

with DSIB

Intensive training for

all staff

Student leadership and Parent

Council Established

Upgrading of infrastructure

April 2011 -New Board of

Governors

Upgrading the infrastructure started once funds became available and led to a positive feeling of change and genuine commitment to do so from leaders. Additional playing areas were established, computer laboratories were installed and projectors were made available in each classroom along with new furniture and laptops for all staff. Home economics laboratories were added to facilitate greater enrichment of the curriculum. More school transport was provided to enable students to access opportunities in the school.


10

Changing perceptions among the disaffected student population and encouraging greater parental involvement was a concern for the new leadership team. Wisely, they knew that change would not happen overnight. The establishment of a Student and Parent Council coupled with the leadership team’s willingness to listen and respond to suggestions in a positive way, led to success. Now, more students are actively involved in the life of the school. Activities range from school decision making, guiding and supporting younger students, and active engagement with societies and clubs. A greater sense of identity and ownership is now shared by students and parents of the school.

Little Flowers English SchoolLittle Flowers English School is located in Hor Al Anz. It serves a population of approximately 840 students from Kindergarten to Grade 6 – aged 3 to 12 years of age. The school considers that DSIB inspections have helped to open up exceptional opportunities to improve the quality of education it offers.

The ProcessAfter three years of unsuccessful performance in the inspection cycles, the Governing Body of the school appointed a new principal and senior leadership team. Their journey of change began with a thorough process of self-evaluation. In doing so, the school was able to identify a number of weaknesses which outweighed its strengths. A comprehensive action plan was drawn up, involving all the stakeholders and with clear guidelines to address the various issues.

Professional development of teachers was an immediate priority. An intensive training programme was undertaken, initially with the help of volunteers who were all experts in their fields. This was followed by peer training, model lessons and a structured system for lesson observation and feedback. At the same time the Principal delegated a greater range of roles and responsibilities amongst his staff. The new vertical and horizontal leadership structure ensured greater accountability, ownership and more effective management.


New principal and senior leadership

team

Intense staff training

Better teaching, Learning,

assessment and progress

A more inclusive school

Community service

Discussions also highlighted the need for greater intellectual and social development for students. To date a significant feature of this has been the school’s commitment to a Community Service programme. This programme has reached out to the local and wider community through activities such as, the ‘Adult Literacy Programme (ALP)’ which received widespread appreciation and, more recently, ‘The Power of One - Random Act of Kindness’ (RAK) charity programme. Alongside this, parental engagement has also been optimised through carefully planned programmes. In doing so, the school agrees that it has been able to identify areas of development that had previously been overlooked.


12

United International Private School The United International Private School (UIPS) is one of two schools in Dubai offering the National Curriculum of the Philippines. It provides an acceptable quality of education to its 1,709 students.

The Process

From Unsatisfactory to Acceptable

Committed Governing Body, new Leadership Team and a commitment to addressing key recommendations from DSIB

inspections.

High expectations of achievement and behaviour

of students.

Extensive involvement in the wider community in Dubai and in projects to support areas and people in the

Philippines.

Committed teachers who value and accept strong

professional development

A much stronger 'Acceptable' rating with significant

improvements in many key aspects of the school.

Many features of UIPS have contributed to its improvement over the past three years. Most have been led and encouraged by the drive of the governing body, senior leadership team, teachers and professionals in the school, as well as guidance from inspectors.

The school has been fully committed to the professional development of its teachers. Training has taken a variety of forms, including participation in conferences, visits to others schools, sharing of best practices and observations of teachers with feedback for improvement. Now students at all levels are engaged in cooperative learning and interactive discussions. Teachers have devised various assessment methods to help them plan more accurately to meet the students’ next steps in learning. They have also enabled students to develop the skills to evaluate their own and each others work against clear and agreed criteria.

Along the journey, high expectations of students’ behaviour have received particular emphasis. All students are expected to demonstrate good manners and treat every person in the school with dignity and respect. These expectations and standards are modelled and reinforced by all staff and owners. Student leaders, as young as the 4th grade, can be seen helping to manage others in the school. Grade 9 students assist the youngest children to carry their bags from the buses to the classrooms. These initiatives have contributed to the outstanding students’ behaviour and attitudes evaluated by DSIB inspectors for the last two years.


The UIPS believes that the hallmark of their school is more than academic success and part of the journey has been to draw on partnerships with the local and wider community. As a result, students have become more active in inter-school competitions and have been invited to show their talents in different organisations. They have become actively involved in the school’s “Dubai Appreciation and Promotion Programme” and have gained a wider understanding of the rich culture of Dubai and the diversity of other cultures.

SummaryWhen a school is rated ‘unsatisfactory’ it begins a journey of recovery. The process should not be a lonely one and all these schools made a commitment to work in partnership with DSIB through the Follow-Through inspections and through Guidance Visits.

Newly appointed leadership teams shared the desire to be successful. They offered support and guidance but also held their school to account for change. Recruitment, induction, training, accountability and retention were key elements in the journey. Common features prevailed in these schools such as, high academic, social and emotional expectations, and a commitment from students to support their local and wider community in Dubai and in their home countries.

Of equal importance was that each school became more skilful in winning the hearts and minds of all its stakeholders, so that its vision was shared and its promise to parents and students was kept. As the Principal of UIPS stated, all three schools have become more “optimistic to face further challenge as we continue our journey towards improvement.”


14


ChAPTER: 3


3 Early years learning


16

Early years learning in Dubai As part of promoting lifelong learning to fulfil Dubai’s aspirations, the Knowledge and Human Development Authority (KHDA) has a mandate to identify learning opportunities and reform the education sector at all levels. The authority has had an interest in early childhood education since its inception. The interest is based on over thirty years of research that has identified the early childhood period as the foundation stage for health, well-being and personal and social skills.

The learning opportunities that young children experience at a very early age form the basis of their social and emotional development, their capacity to understand and use language, and acquire knowledge throughout life. International assessment reports have emphasised the importance of good quality early years provision on the achievements of students in their later years.

Rat

e of

ret

urn

to in

vest

men

t in

hum

an c

apit

al

Post-school

Job training

Schooling

Preschool programs

programs targeted towards the earliest years

Age

school4-5

pre-school0-3


Educationalists and economists agree that investment in children below compulsory school age is the most effective form of educational outlay.

In 2009 it was clear that not enough information was available about the quality of early childhood provision in Dubai. To assist with strategic planning and decision making, KHDA commissioned a world renowned early childhood expert to conduct a study of the early childhood centres in Dubai.

The study resulted in the publication of “Early Childhood Education and Care in Dubai, an executive summary” and a growing interest by KHDA to improve the quality of the early childhood education sector. The recommendations were to create a strong quality assurance model to promote best international practice in early years, and to invest in improving the quality of teachers in the early years’ sector.

Currently, there are about 1,830 classes serving KG1 and KG2 children in Dubai’s private schools. These classes contain about 43,000 young children. Ensuring that each child receives the best possible education is a key element in the work of KHDA. The significance of a wide range of high quality early learning experiences on the development of young children cannot be overstated. Children need opportunities to engage with the world around them and the broader the range of enriching physical, communicative, aesthetic, sensorial and cognitive experiences children have, the better developed they become.

What do inspections tell us about how well young children have progressed since 2008?

Over a five year period, DSIB has published reports summarising the results of the inspections of all private schools. These reports provide specific messages to schools about their achievements, as well as the improvements that are required in their Kindergartens. Inspections will continue to monitor and report on the provision and outcomes of the Kindergartens.


18

how good is the progress by children learning English, mathematics and science?

11% 9% 4% 8% 6%

47%

34%

29%29% 30%

28%49%

56% 47%42%

13%8% 12% 16%

22%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2008 - 2009 2009 - 2010 2010 - 2011 2011 - 2012 2012-2013

English–Progress in Kindergarten


13% 11%3% 6% 4%

45% 45%

42% 36% 41%

34% 40%

46%46% 41%

8% 4%9% 12% 14%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

Mathematics-Progress in Kindergarten



19%

3% 8% 8%

46%

48% 38% 38%

31%

41%41% 41%

4% 8%13% 13%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2009 - 2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

Science –Progress in Kindergarten



20

Inspectors now see more children using English, mathematics and science activities to develop their communication, expression, data handing and thinking skills. Problem-solving abilities are improving as well. When children are given the opportunities, they demonstrate the capacity to meet complex challenges. However in some kindergartens, children are too passive and not challenged in ways that maximise their development. It is clear that further work is required to increase the proportion of young children developing these important skills.

Features of the best KindergartensOver five years of inspections, we have identified some common features:

• All teachers in the Kindergartens have good understanding of how young children learn; • The curriculum is carefully planned and based on international best practice. It is diverse and places

emphasis on active learning through play and exploration; • Environments are rich in resources that are freely available to children;• The skills of critical thinking, creativity, problem-solving and research are planned and actively

promoted, with links to the children’s lives;• Assessment practices and lesson planning are linked, so that daily curriculum modifications are made

in light of what the adults observe children doing.• All adults, including assistants, support the children’s acquisition and development of personal, social,

emotional and communication skills: - Children are actively engaged throughout the day; - Children are intensely curious about the world around them; - Children work cooperatively with their peers and adults; - Children demonstrate empathy and consideration for others; - Children can work for sustained periods without adult direction and supervision; - Children can describe what they are doing and why; - Children contribute ideas and opinions that help to shape what is taught.

What is the quality of teaching and learning in Dubai’s Kindergartens?

Almost all schools in Dubai offer education for children who are too young for Grade 1 (age 5 or 6). However, the quality of teaching and learning is varied. Too often, teaching quality, and thus children’s learning, is poorer than in the main school. During the 2012-13 academic year, 15 schools were found to provide an unsatisfactory quality of teaching in their kindergartens. Half of them were Indian curriculum schools, one was a US curriculum school and the rest were MoE private schools. By contrast, over the five years since 2008, there has been a steady increase in the number schools where teaching in Kindergarten has been judged to be outstanding. In 2012-13 there were 16 schools with outstanding teaching in Kindergarten. The outstanding teaching is seen across various curricula: the UK, US, Indian and IB. There are no Kindergartens where teaching or learning is judged to be outstanding in private MoE schools.


When teaching and learning are judged as unsatisfactory or only acceptable, inspectors’ reports invariably cite the need for more interactive teaching approaches and more opportunities for children to learn through play. When kindergarten teaching is rated as good or better, these elements are strong features of the early years programmes. In addition, the children engage in many activities which allow them to: develop actively, use their language and learn social skills such as collaboration with their peers, make decisions and take responsibility for their own learning. In the best early childhood settings, children are provided with a rich range of opportunities to imagine, create, think and communicate in an environment where both independent and collaborative work is possible.

What is the quality of assessment in Dubai’s Kindergartens?

30%21%

4%12% 8%

41%49%

50%43%

43%

20% 22%

37% 32%33%

9% 8% 9% 13% 16%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2008 - 2009 2009 - 2010 2010 - 2011 2011 - 2012 2012-2013

Assessment of learning in Kindergartens


As with the progress of children in key subjects, the assessment of learning improved in the two years following the initial inspections but has levelled off since. There is still assessment practice of only acceptable quality in the majority of schools . However, the UK, IB and French curriculum schools have, over the last four years, made positive gains in the ways in which teachers assess learning and use the resulting data to modify the curriculum and their teaching practices.


22

Effective assessment procedures include:• A developmental approach is used to evaluate young children’s progress;• A variety of methods are used to assess how well children are developing their social, communicative,

linguistic, cognitive and physical skills;• A range of understandable and useable information is provided to parents;• Children are involved in assessing how well they are doing and planning the next steps to make

further progress.Schools with effective assessment procedures understand that young children develop according to their experiences. Holistic assessments often identify high levels of understanding that might not be evident using conventional assessments of young learners.

What is the quality of the curriculum in Dubai’s Kindergartens?

19% 20%

3%11%

6%

47%36%

43%32%

33%

25%38%

41%39%

38%

9% 6%13%

18%23%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

Curriculum quality in Kindergartens


Inspectors found that kindergartens now provide a much broader range of opportunities for children to learn compared to the findings in the first year of inspections. More kindergartens use child-focused topics to develop language, self-confidence, peer interaction, thinking and problem-solving skills. When the curriculum provided for young children is planned well, the learning environment enables children to make independent decisions about what they want to learn. Over the four


years since the initial inspections, the UK, French and IB curriculum schools have made the most significant improvements in curriculum development within their kindergartens. Schools following the US and MoE curricula, as well as those offering their own national curricula, have made a fewer improvements over the same period of time. Little progress has been made in some of the Indian curriculum schools. More work is needed to provide a broad range of experiences that will enable children to develop across all aspects of learning.

Recommendations from inspection reports since 2008 have targeted improvements in:

• teaching;• the curriculum; • the quality of leadership and management. Inspection reports indicate that it is highly unlikely that improved teaching, learning and assessment will be possible unless the leadership in kindergartens improves. The presence of experienced leaders, who are conversant with best practices and able to promote them, is essential for the improvement of kindergartens. Good kindergarten provision creates strong learning foundations upon which the school can build to ensure continued progress by all students. An effective kindergarten also helps to establish high expectations for the rest of the school community.

The overall picture reported by five years of inspections in kindergartens is likely to be similar to the situation in all early childhood education centres, whether they are part of a school or stand-alone, and there is a need to take a closer look at these centres. The inspection findings and recommendations will continue to drive improvements in the early years’ sector and contribute to improved competitiveness of Dubai as a location for parents to bring up their families. Good early years provision will improve the productivity of those living in Dubai and provide children with a better start to their future achievements.


24

The German International School opened in 2008. It is a private school under the auspices of the Standing Committee of German Ministers of Culture. It offers the curriculum of the German federal state of Thuringia to students from Kindergarten to Grade 12, ages three to 19 years. The students speak a range of first languages and all Kindergarten children learn to speak German and English as well as Arabic. Every child’s journey begins in a purpose built Kindergarten which combines well designed shared areas with individual classrooms. The learning environment is based on the principles of excellent early childhood education. Children learn by doing and enjoy choices and variety while learning. Teachers combine direct teaching with expert facilitation to ensure that children acquire strong communication skills in three or more languages.

In the words of the Principal, “In our mixed age group Kindergarten, the children develop into self-confident individuals. We sensitise their understanding of other cultures and ideologies. Non-native German speaking children learn to understand and speak German through short playing sequences. Native German speakers follow a similar, but different programme to develop their language skills. All children learn English through a sequence of English Conversations in whatever context they find themselves. The school prides itself on playful learning of foreign languages which starts in Kindergarten, proceeds with the pre-school and continues up to Arbitur. In our intercultural environment we appreciate the integration of foreign languages and hence benefit from the opportunity to inspire the children early to learn about other cultures and languages.”

The School Context

Improvement journey

A Trilingual Approach: The German International School


“The children move seamlessly from German, to English and to Arabic as necessary. During breakfast they will converse in English, on the playground they speak German or their own mother tongue; in lessons they speak German and English, depending on who is teaching. They also attend Arabic lessons in preparation for Grade 1 learning. This means that children’s own languages are respected and developed alongside the main teaching medium of German.”

The process of improved language development

In 2012 the Principal gave the aims and objectives of the school’s language programme greater clarity. A significantly higher profile for the learning of English in the Kindergarten was conceived. The school introduced a fully integrated approach to teaching. A highly skilled specialist was timetabled to work with every class for two 90-minute sessions weekly to develop the English skills of the children. This specialist teacher joined the different contexts in which the children were working. She also engaged in conversations with them during breakfast and break times. The children only speak to her in English. This means that they are using English beyond the formal lesson times.

Small group language sessions ensure that all children benefit from focused instruction in German and English, based on their individual language


26

needs. The children are also prepared well for their move to the primary school by means of the intermediate provision in the pre-primary section. When children are ready to attend the pre-primary they spend some of their week there, which is situated in the main school away from the Kindergarten. This intermediate stage enables them to adjust well to the more formal expectations of Grade 1. Lessons are planned around sensory activities such as music, play, singing, art and movement. Children love learning and engage well with the wide range of languages. Skilled language practitioners support the process and lessons are exciting and wholly suitable for young learners.

Inspectors found that students in the higher phases of the school made good or better progress in Arabic, German and English after attending the Kindergarten and pre-primary phases. The flexible and all-inclusive approach to language learning led to high levels of linguistic confidence at an early age.

SummaryThe German International School has embarked on a whole-school approach to the development of multi-lingual students. The excellent provision provides a strong platform from which young children embrace three different languages. Effective leadership and a commitment to investing in resources, both human and physical, have been keys to success. The recent appointment of a new Head of Kindergarten has enabled partnerships to be developed with another school to further the multi-cultural links. However, leaders understand that this remains a journey without a final destination. As the demographic profile of the student population changes, so will the quest to address the students’ wider language learning needs.


28


4ChAPTER:


Surveys – seeking the views of parents, teachers and students


30

KhDA inspection surveys Over the last five years, Dubai Schools Inspection Bureau has embarked on a process to give a voice to parents, students and teachers through pre-inspection surveys. Through these surveys, KHDA has created a partnership with the most crucial stakeholders. The surveys provide valuable information to inform KHDA’s research and policy making process. They also contribute to the evidence base upon which inspection judgements are based. For example, if a common theme or concern emerges from the surveys, the inspection team will investigate further during the inspection. The students, parents and teachers are seen as valuable sources of information about the schools.

In addition, DSIB has worked closely with the media; in part to raise the public consciousness of its work but also to be clear and open about DSIB processes. A sample of the outcomes can be found in Chapter 10.

Since 2008-9, the processes, questions, analysis and interpretation of the data have evolved and the numbers of stakeholder responses have increased. Student surveys were not introduced until 2011. Currently these are only distributed to students in Grades 10 to 12.

Participations in DSIB surveys over inspection years

2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

Parents Teachers Students

16,231

46,59949,993

53,878

65,348

During the first year of inspection, 20 per cent of parents were randomly chosen and sent hard copies of a questionnaire which had to be returned to DSIB. However, since 2009-10, automation of the surveys has enabled access to all parents, offering them opportunities to express their opinions on line. This dramatically increased the number of respondents over the years. A number of schools have taken the initiative to assist parents who do not have access to computers, by providing this facility in school


The following diagram shows the process through which the survey responses travel, prior to the inspection of the school:

1. Survey is designed based on the framework of inspection and needs.

4.Analysis is shared with the inspection team.

7. Lead inspectors share key themes and recurring

comments with the school leaders.

8. DSIB shares specifccomments with the school if

respondents give permission.

5. Inspectors evaluate findings, identify key

concerns and strengths, and create audit trails based on the analysis and common

themes.

2. Inspection support team sends surveys to schools

and follows up on participation rates with reminders to the school.

3. The surveys are returned and statistically analysed.

6. Inspectors validate the comments through meetings

and evidence collected during the inspection

process.

9. A summary of the survey findings is shared in the final

inspection report.

DSIB conducts further analysis of the information obtained from all surveys. The information obtained is used for research and policy discussions.

Overall satisfaction with education in Dubai Providing high quality education in Dubai schools is one of the priorities of the Dubai government. DSIB has been reporting on the quality of education provided by private schools for the last five years. Publishing the reports of inspection has been one of the milestones in creating a climate of transparency and accountability within the predominantly private education sector. The following graphs show that an overwhelming majority of parents is satisfied with the quality of education their children are receiving in schools.

Nevertheless, there is a significant mismatch between the satisfaction levels of parents, teachers and students compared to actual inspection findings. There may be many reasons for this. The overall satisfaction demonstrated by the parents, teachers and students may well not take account of the wide range of aspects of the school’s work evaluated during an inspection. Inspection reports reflect very detailed evaluations of the work of schools as well as the outcomes of the students. In the more effective schools, survey responses show that parents have a more accurate knowledge of school quality. This might be because they are kept more directly involved in the work of the schools


32

by the school leaders or simply that the schools actually do match the parents’ high perceptions. The “loyalty factor” of students, parents and teachers towards their schools may also be a factor in the discrepancy between inspection findings and stakeholder perceptions.

Parents

2012-2013

2011-2012

2010-2011

Overall parents' satisfaction

34%

33%

29%

59%

59%

65%

6%

7%

5%

1%

1%

1%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree

Students

2012-2013

2011-2012

Overall students' satisfaction

32%

34%

55%

54%

9%

8%

4%

4%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%


Teachers

2012-2013

2011-2012

Overall teachers' satisfaction

51%

51%

46%

45%

2%

3%

1%

1%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%



how do parents’ views in 2013 compare with inspection findings?As well as a positive view of overall performance, responses from parents, students and teachers demonstrate a very optimistic view of school quality. The chart below shows a significant mismatch between parents’ views on their children’s academic attainment and progress compared to that evaluated by inspectors. Again, this could be due to many factors, not least of all a lack of understanding of what good levels of academic performance look like.

Parents’ views

My child is making good progress in Science

My child is making good progress in Mathematics

My child is making good progress in English

My child is making good progress in Arabic as an additional…

My child is making good progress in Arabic as a first language

My child is making good progress in Islamic Education

How well do you think your child is doing academically ?

36%

38%

39%

19%

30%

29%

58%

56%

56%

65%

50%

57%

5%

5%

4%

12%

15%

10%

1%

1%

1%

44%%

55%%

44%%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%


Inspection Findings

11%

12%

19%

1%

1%

1%

48%

49%

45%

26%

38%

51%

37%

36%

34%

62%

56%

44%

4%

3%

2%

11%

5%

4%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Science

Mathematics

English

Arabic as an additional language

Arabic as a first language

Islamic Education

Students' progress in keys subjects -2012-2013 inspections

Outstanding Good Acceptable Unsatisfactory

Parents are generally more satisfied with the progress their children are making in English, mathematics and science than their progress in Islamic Education and Arabic. DSIB findings support the parents’ views that progress is better in these subjects. Nevertheless, findings also show that academic performance is not as good as parents believe in these subjects when compared to international standards. Inspectors report that the majority of schools still need to improve students’ progress in Arabic as a first and additional language and that students’ progress in these subjects is less well developed than in English, mathematics and science.


34

Parents’ Views

Most teachers make sure my child knows how to improve.

My child uses a wide range of technology toolsto support his/her learning

Teaching and learning are good at this school.

How good are the teaching and learning ?

35%

32%

36%

55%

55%

58%

9%

11%

5%

1%

2%

1%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%


Inspection Findings

12%

10%

9%

34%

45%

46%

49%

43%

42%

5%

2%

3%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Assessment

Quality of students' learning

Teaching for effective learning

Teaching, learning and assessment-2012-2013 inspections


Five years into inspection, only a small majority (55%) of the ratings for teaching and learning are good or outstanding. However, most parents are happy with the quality of teaching and learning. Parents often have little on which to base their opinions of teaching and learning quality because they rarely visit classrooms. Inspectors, however, spend around 60 per cent of inspection time in lessons evaluating the quality of teaching and learning using internationally recognised best practice indicators.

Care and Support Most parents are very satisfied with the safety of their children and with the level of care and support they are receiving. The majority of parents believe that schools are dealing well with bullying, and are guiding their children in future education choices. According to DSIB findings, a majority of schools are providing good or outstanding safety measures for children so it would seem that there is consensus between survey respondents and inspection findings in relation to protection and support of students. In DSIB findings, 60 per cent of schools provide good or outstanding support for students. A majority of parents express the view that schools welcome students with special needs, and that the support provided to them is helping their children make good progress. However, there is a significant mismatch between parents’ perceptions and inspection findings as inspection evidence shows that most students with SEN make only acceptable progress even in schools where SEN provision is of a good quality.


Parents’ views

The school guides my child well in future educationalchoices and career pathways

My child is respected and valued in school

There is an adult in school my child trusts and can talk to

The school deals well with incidents of bullying

The school treats my child fairly

My child is safe while on school buses

My child is well looked after and safe at school

How well is your child cared for?

33%

36%

34%

35%

37%

41%

45%

58%

61%

56%

58%

58%

55%

52%

7%

2%

8%

5%

4%

3%

2%

2%

1%

2%

2%

1%

1%

1%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%


My child receives the support needed to make good progress

The school involves parents well in planning the supportfor our children

The school identifies special educational needs accurately

The school welcomes students with special educational needs

How well does the school provide for students with special educational needs?


32%

32%

28%

34%

53%

55%

56%

56%

12%

10%

12%

7%

3%

3%

4%

3%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Inspection Findings

19%

40%

41%

38%

38%

18%

2%

4%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Quality of support

Health and safety


School protection and support -2012-2013 inspections


36

how helpful have inspections been? After five years of inspections, most of the teachers stated that inspection has led to improvement in their schools. Large majorities of parents and students think the same. Most teachers also believe that the inspection has improved their own practice.

Sixty per cent of students know what the inspection reports say about their school. The majority of parents and teachers think that inspection reports reflect their schools accurately.

Views on the inspection reports

Inspection has led to improvements inmy child’s school

The last inspection report reflected thisschool accurately

Parents' survey

38%

29%

55%

62%

5%

7%

2%

2%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%


Inspection has led to improvements inour school

The last inspection report reflectedour school accurately

Inspections have helped improve my practice

Teachers' survey

47%

35%

39%

48%

53%

49%

4%

10%

10%

1%

2%

2%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%


I know what inspectors said about my school

Inspection has led to improvementsin my school

Students' survey

32%

38%

50%

43%

10%

11%

8%

8%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%



The comments received most frequently in the different surveys KHDA has given parents the opportunity to express their opinions and voice their individual needs and expectations through a comments section in the survey. Over the years KHDA has received more than 104,000 comments from parents, 11,900 comments from teachers and 20,600 comments from high school students. An analysis of the responses has been conducted to identify the most frequently recurring themes expressed by respondents. The following tables show the recurrent themes.

Students’ SurveyComments

Schools need to have more activities, extra curricular activities

Need better teachers, teaching staff

Fair, equal treatment should be given to all students

Satisfied with the quality of education

Parents’ SurveyComments

Wonderful school, happy with the school, best school

School staff needs to improve their overall services

Need to have more extra-curricular activities in school

Need to improve support for students with SEN.

Teachers’ SurveyComments

Prefer having workshops, training, proper tools for staff to enhance teaching

Inspection process needs to be longer, spend more time at the school

Too much work pressure, stress given to teachers

The task of improving the quality of education in Dubai relies on establishing effective partnerships between the different stakeholders. KHDA has created a number of channels of communication that give stakeholders opportunities to provide direct feedback, send complaints and make suggestions. The pre-inspection surveys are one such channel.

KHDA takes parents’, teachers’, principals and students’ views very seriously and, when appropriate, attempts to provide innovative ways to deal with persistent or recurring issues. The analysis of survey responses carried out by DSIB contributes to the overall analysis of data from inspections. This leads to the incremental changes in the inspection handbook, which ultimately result in better outcomes for the students of Dubai.


38

Founded in 1989, Al Sadiq Islamic English School offers a UK curriculum from Kindergarten to Grade 11. The school serves 1,911 students mainly with Pakistani, Indian and Arab origins. DSIB has judged the school as acceptable in the last five years of inspections.

Over the last five years the parents’ response rate to DSIB inspection surveys has significantly improved.

2008-2009 2012-2013

2233%%

6611%%

Parents' survey response rate Al Sadiq Islamic English School

The Journey Since the inception of DSIB five years ago, the parents have received a detailed parents’ questionnaire just before the school inspection. The easy-to-answer on-line questionnaire, which covers every aspect of the school has brought the school and parents even closer. This exercise has provided an insight into the school from the perspective of parents.

Al Sadiq Islamic English School has always encouraged the parents to answer DSIB questionnaires because it believes that knowing itself through parents is important. The school tries hard to convince the parents not to miss the opportunity to express their opinions, which not only helps their children but also the school. The school sends circulars and reminder texts. It makes telephone calls and arranges meetings with parents to explain the importance of their opinions.

School context- Al Sadiq Islamic English School


Parental cooperation in completing the KhDA survey for school inspection - Al Sadiq Islamic English School and the Japanese School


Year(s) DSIB Actions School Actions Parents Responses

2008 & 2009 Surveys sent to schools Circulars sent to parents ▪Low response rates due to high percentage of parents lacking the appropriate language skills▪Some parents thought that surveys were not important

2010 Response rates included in inspection reports

▪Meetings with parents▪SMS reminders▪Circulars

▪Increase in parents’ responses▪Some parents still believed that nobody would read their re-sponses

2011 & 2012 Daily updates on parents’ responses were sent to the school before the inspections began

▪Telephone calls and SMS messages▪Messages on school website▪Encouraging students to remind their parents ▪Meetings with parents during drop-off time▪Explaining the process in orientation meetings▪Providing on-site com-puters and language support

▪Increase in parents’ responses▪Students helped their parents with limited language skills in fill-ing out the surveys at home▪Parents think that KHDA takes their opinions in consideration▪Parents’ confidence in the process has im-proved


40

The Japanese School in Dubai is a small school in Al Wasl with students, aged six to 15 years , from Grade 1 to Grade 9. The school follows the Japanese MoE curriculum. Most students, after Grade 9, return to Japan to complete their education.

Over five years of school inspections the Japanese School in Dubai has registered a good response rate from parents to the on-line KHDA survey. The response from parents in the most recent 2012-2013 inspection was 71 per cent.

2008-2009 2012-2013

28%

71%

Parents' survey response rate The Japanese School

The journeyEach year when the school is informed of DSIB’s inspection, it encourages parents to cooperate in every way with the inspection. The school views its interactions and conversations with DSIB during school inspections in a very positive way. In a letter to parents about the DSIB survey, the school tells parents the inspection is very important and parents’ cooperation in completing the survey is needed to provide a complete evaluation of the school and its work.

The school strongly urges parents every year to complete the parents’ survey. School leaders view the inspection as an opportunity to improve their understanding of their school. They present the survey to parents as an ideal opportunity for parents to voice their opinions. The school provides clear directions and guidance to parents to complete the questionnaires.

Parents are involved in everything related to their children’s education and wish to support all aspects of improvement. The school welcomes parents’ comments and responses in positive and constructive ways as another important view of the school.

School context - The Japanese School


SummaryThe efforts of Al Sadiq Islamic English School and the Japanese school to improve parents’ response rates to DSIB surveys over the last five years have been successful. Schools are encouraged to build a culture that welcomes the parents’ opinions and to consider them an opportunity for growth.

To achieve high response rates, schools could encourage and convince all parents to participate in the survey through regular and informal meetings, various forms of communications, and providing on-site technical support. Students can also be encouraged to remind parents and help them at home if they lack appropriate language skills. This school-wide approach will improve parents’ confidence in the survey process, provide the school with a good insight into parents’ views, and strengthen the school’s relationships with students and parents.


42

5ChAPTER:

55Part One: Inspection Findings 2008-2013


Thematic investigations


44

Thematic investigation 1Developing provision for students with Special Educational needs

Context

The Special Educational needs (SEn) Landscape in Dubai’s Private Schools The global perspective on children with special educational needs has shifted towards an entitlement to education, where possible, alongside their peers. Leading international human rights and educational organisations promote the concept of enabling all students to grow as active citizens, who enrich social capital with the same rights as their peers.

In response to the growing understanding of individuals with special needs and their rights, the United Nations (UN) adopted in 2006 the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UN CRPD). The CRPD, which received a wide acclaim from the international community, is the first comprehensive human rights treaty of the 21st century, the Salamanca Treaty, which affirms that individuals with all types of special needs and disabilities must enjoy human rights such as education.

In the same year, an important shift was taking place in the UAE, as the first law (Federal Law 29 -2006) guiding the rights of people with disabilities, was issued and announced publically. This was the first time a federal law in the UAE had targeted the inclusion of people with disabilities and their rights. This law publically was re-visited in 2008, when the UAE signed the CRPD and joined other countries in advocating rights of people with SEN and disabilities.

Since its inception in 2008, DSIB has ensured that students with special educational needs and disabilities are taken into consideration as an important group of students within the school community who receive equal opportunities in learning. A gradual increase in the expectations placed on schools in this respect has been seen in the Inspection Handbook during the period 2008 to date. The quality indicators against which schools are evaluated by inspectors include the need for schools to ensure differentiation in teaching, learning, assessment and the curriculum as well as high quality support for students identified with special educational needs and disabilities. In 2011-12, DSIB introduced internationally recognised categories to support the identification process.

As a part of the 2012-2013 inspection process, a closer look was taken at the main aspects of provision for SEN across all schools that received full inspection visits that year. Inspectors visited schools prior to inspection to discuss the categories, share information on the inspection process and gather information from schools on the provision for students with SEN. Data was collected through interviews with school personnel, parents and students, through observations and questionnaires and the information gained from these visits informed the inspection process related to this aspect.

The purpose of this report is to provide parents, teachers, school leaders, students with SEN and the rest of the school community, with an overview on the nature and quality of SEN provision provided by Dubai’s private schools. It summarises the work of DSIB in evaluating schools’ provision for students with SEN, highlighting best practice and areas requiring improvement. It also presents further steps for improvements to guide schools in working with students with SEN.


Inspection of Special Educational needs (SEn)

What do inspectors mean by special educational needs?

UnESCO (2011) defines Special Education as:‘Education designed to facilitate the learning of individuals who, for a wide variety of reasons, require additional support and adaptive pedagogical methods in order to participate and meet learning objectives in an educational programme.’

The DSIB uses a definition of SEn as follows:

‘Educational needs that are different from those of the majority of students. They include those who need additional support or challenge in their learning.’

DSIB will continue to place emphasis on inspecting the quality of provision for students with SEN. The current categories of need used by the majority of schools are detailed below. These categories provide insight into what sort of additional needs a student may have. The range is very wide and some students fall into more than one category. Schools are currently asked to identify all students with SEN and their primary need. This information is then submitted to DSIB prior to inspection using a spreadsheet provided for this purpose.

It is expected that whilst some students will have ongoing needs, others will overcome their difficulties with effective support; yet others may develop special needs as they progress through school. DSIB is particularly interested in the accurate identification of students with SEN as early intervention is key to a student overcoming difficulties. The earlier a student is identified as having a need beyond the majority of students, the earlier the schools will be able to take the required action to meet that need. This may mean a modified curriculum, teaching and assessment, additional support in class or specialist support on a withdrawal basis. It may also mean referral to a professional to gain further insight into the needs of the student.


46

DSIB Definition of Special Educational needs (SEn) Educational needs that are different from those of the majority of students. They include those who need additional support or challenge in their learning.

Special education needs could mean a child has difficulties with:

• all of the work in school; • reading, writing, number work or understanding information; • expressing themselves or understanding what others are saying; • making friends or relating to adults; • behaving properly in school; • organising themselves, completing tasks or focusing on activities. OR

• some kind of sensory or mobility needs that may affect them in some or all school activities

Type of need Description Compiled from a range of international best practice and using the DSIB definition and UAE School for All guidance.

Behavioural, Social, Emotional

Students whose behaviour presents a barrier to learning. Students who are experiencing emotional problems such as depression, eating disorders, attention deficit disorder or attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADD/ADHD) and syndromes such as Tourette's.

Sensory and Physical

• Blind students or those with partial sight • Deaf students or those with partial hearing • Students who are deaf and blind

Medical Conditions or health Related Disability

Medical conditions may lead to an associated ‘special need’. These conditions may be temporary but are more likely to be ongoing and include such illnesses as asthma, diabetes and allergies.

Communication and Interaction This does not include students with additional language needs.

Students who cannot speak well enough to be understood or who stutter or have a speech impediment such as a lisp. Students who find it difficult to respond to language and so cannot follow simple instructions or make themselves understood. Autistic Spectrum Disorder (ASD) is a range of communication disorders related to students who find it difficult to:

• communicate with others; • understand social behaviour; • think and behave flexibly.


Learning Specific Learning Difficulty (SpLD) - students who have specific difficulties with any of the following:

• reading, writing, spelling • using numbers • writing

General Learning Difficulty 1 - students’ whose attainment is well below expected levels in all or most areas of the curriculum. General Learning Difficulty 2 – students experiencing significant learning difficulties which have a major effect on their participation in the mainstream school curriculum, without support. Profound and Multiple Learning Difficulty (PMLD) – students who have been identified by a professional as having severe and complex learning needs as well as other significant difficulties. These may include physical disabilities or a sensory impairment. These students are likely to require a high level of adult support.

Gifted Gifted students are those who demonstrate outstanding ability or aptitude in one or more areas of creative or academic achievement. These students would demonstrate performance which is distinct from their peers who are in the same age group.

Talented Talented students are those who demonstrate special talents and outstanding abilities in areas such as poetry, drawing, sport or drama.

Disabled Disabled students are those who have any permanent or temporary condition resulting from illness or congenital disorder. A disability would impact on a student’s ability to carry out everyday tasks such as speaking, hearing or moving like other individuals.


48

What is DSIB looking for? DSIB poses the following questions in every school:

Q1. how good is the progress of students with SEn in key subjects? Inspectors devise a sample list of students identified by the school as having SEN. They then track these students in the lessons they observe and evaluate their progress. Progress for all students relates to the ‘gains in their learning over time.’ This might be during a lesson or a series of lessons or over a term or even a year. The important thing is that progress may only be measured accurately if there are clear starting points. This means that for students with SEN, their progress may not always be clear in one lesson. When defining a student’s starting points, it is important for schools to consider what the student knows, understands and can do, relative to their individual needs. This requires high quality and appropriate assessment tools. The assessments used to define starting points are dependent on the age and stage of development of the student as well as the nature of difficulty.

In schools where the identification of students with SEN is accurate, there are clear starting points used as a basis for learning. These may lead to the preparation of individual educational plans (IEPs). These are plans which identify what a student knows, understands and can do and what he or she still needs to achieve. The plans detail the targets for improvements and the support mechanisms to help the student make progress.

Inspectors also look at work samples and individual records to support evaluations on progress in key subjects. They will ask searching questions about how schools know the starting points of students and will consider the accuracy of these.

In schools where starting points are clear and support plans in place, it is easier for inspectors and parents to see what a student knows, can do or understands at the start and what targets he or she is working towards. It is therefore possible to evaluate the progress over time against the student’s own starting points.

Q2. how accurate is the identification of students with SEn? Inspectors make judgements about the accuracy with which schools identify students with SEN. The identification of special educational needs can be extremely challenging for schools with limited SEN expertise amongst their staff. Nevertheless, more and more schools are understanding the need to identify accurately students’ needs using a number of supporting tools.

This year KHDA provided schools with resources to assist in this process. Inspectors also visited schools prior to inspection to enable them to have a better understanding of the inspection process related to students with SEN as well as to share the resources for future use. Some learning difficulties may be identified initially by the class teacher who will use experience and comparisons to highlight the fact that a student is not making the expected progress and has specific areas of weakness. It is important that schools have systems that enable teachers to refer students about whom they have concerns to someone who has more experience of dealing with issues relating to SEN. The resources provided to schools provide many references which can support in the initial stages of the identification process. However, in schools where identification is well developed, the leaders for SEN build very positive relationships with medical and support organisations which have the relevant expertise to make an accurate diagnosis of need.


Once a student’s needs are identified, the school may then create an Individual Education Plan (IEP) and modify the teaching and curriculum to better meet their needs. Inspectors examine the accuracy of identification as well as the steps schools have taken to obtain external advice and guidance.

Q3. how effectively are parents involved? The involvement of parents in the education of their children is a very important factor in educational success. When students are finding learning challenging, it is crucial that parents are involved in planning decisions about their education. It is expected that schools will begin to develop strategies to engage with parents of children with SEN before a student is admitted to the school. This requires clear admission policies which encourage parents to discuss their child’s needs at the registration stage. By working closely with parents, positive relationships may be built which lead to early identification and improved provision. Often this is a key aspect of leaders’ work in schools, as many parents are concerned about admitting that their child has needs in case they are denied a place at the school of their choice. Inspectors look at the strategies implemented by schools to engage parents in the process of identification and support for students.

DSIB evaluates the quality of partnerships between the school and home as well as the local community. This is achieved through a number of inspection activities such as:

• Analysis of data from parents’ surveys prior to inspection;• Analysis of parents’ comments prior to inspection;• Meetings with parents during inspection; • Scrutiny, during inspection, of a sample of the school’s communications with parents;• Discussions with students;• Evaluation of parents’ input to individual education plans.

Q4. how well is the curriculum modified to meet the needs of all learners? Inspectors evaluate the extent to which the curriculum meets the needs of all students, including those with SEN. The structure of the curriculum is the responsibility of schools. This means that there is an expectation on schools to consider the curriculum and how it can be delivered or modified to suit the needs and interests of learners. Where schools modify the curriculum well, students with SEN benefit from:

• Differentiated activities in lessons; • Peer support; • Additional 1:1 tuition; • Reduced or flexible timetables; • Assessment considerations; • Inclusion of extra numeracy or literacy lessons; • Additional language lessons such as intensive English; • Access to information communication technology to assist their learning; • A scribe or reader for exams; • Extra time in assessments;• Plus a range of other modifications which help them access learning and make good progress.


50

Q5. how well does the school monitor the progress of students with SEn? Monitoring progress is the process by which schools check the gains students are making in their learning. In the most effective schools, there are school-wide systems in place to monitor students’ progress and additional systems to monitor the progress of students with SEN. As students with SEN often make slower progress and require their learning to be broken down into small achievable steps, it is important for teachers and leaders to know exactly how much progress is being made and to modify teaching or provide interventions if they notice a lack of progress.

Inspectors evaluate the usefulness of the systems used to track progress. They consider the extent to which teachers use assessment information to see how well a student is doing. It is not always essential to have an IEP in place for every student identified with SEN. Most schools where provision is effective use IEPs for students who have a clear diagnosis of a learning difficulty. Other ways to track progress include student portfolios which show key milestones which have been reached. Some schools use personal learning plans (PLPs) which identify targets and the extent to which they have been reached. The monitoring system has to suit the needs of the student so that at any one time, the student, the teacher and the parent knows how well the student is doing in relation to his or her starting points.

These students have very different needs but learn in similar ways. Here they are learning about fractions.


This student learns practically, where possible, and receives support for writing.


52

What did inspectors find out in 2012-13? The 143 private schools, offering different curricula, were inspected in 2012-2013. During each inspection visit, inspectors ask five guiding questions related to provision for students with SEN. They gather evidence from a wide range of sources which include:

• Lesson observations; • Scrutiny of students work and records; • Discussions with students, teachers, parents and SEN leaders; • Analysis of assessment information; • Scrutiny of IEPs; • Consideration of progress tracking information. This evidence contributes towards judgements made by the inspection team under Quality Indicator 5.2 – the quality of support. The evaluation of SEN provision is only part of this judgement. Nevertheless, inspectors collate evidence around all five key questions, although this is not published.

Inspectors gather evidence related to provision for students with SEN using an audit trail. The designated inspector for SEN compiles a sample list of students from the school’s own SEN list. All members of the inspection team then track individual students in the lessons which they observe as part of their usual inspection activities. Evaluations are made about the progress of the students in lessons as well as what the teacher does in order to best meet their needs. The important thing is that students with SEN are able to access the curriculum and make good progress in lessons.

Inspectors look for any support provided to the student either from the teacher, other students or from a teaching or learning support assistant or ‘shadow teacher.’ They also consider the level of the objectives for the student and the extent to which these are appropriate. Inspectors speak to students to find out how they feel they are progressing and to see if they understand what they are learning. During an inspection evaluation the emphasis is on ‘progress’ rather than levels of attainment.

The topic of provision for students with SEN is addressed in every inspection team meeting and the audit trail is used to guide discussions and reach team judgements on the quality of provision.

As well as observing in lessons, the designated inspector for SEN will speak to the leader for SEN, teachers and students to gain an understanding of the levels and type of support available. They will also look at a sample of IEPs or other student records. They will ask how the curriculum, teaching, learning and assessment are modified to ensure that students with SEN achieve success and make progress.


Q1. how good is the progress of students with SEn in key subjects?

28% 36% 23% 13%

Students progress in key subjects


Students with special educational needs make broadly acceptable progress in the key subjects, irrespective of the curriculum they are following, but often make slower progress than their peers. In a few schools where progress for students overall is good, the progress for students with SEN does not follow the same pattern and is no better than acceptable.

The progress of students with SEN is good in only one third of schools. In these schools, accurate identification, together with a modified curriculum with various types and levels of support, enables teachers to work more closely with students. In the more successful schools, IEPs with clear learning goals are shared and acted upon by all partners in the learning process. Teams of specialists are often well trained and knowledgeable about each student’s skills and needs. They, in turn, play an active role in supporting other teachers to meet the needs of SEN students and boost the development of progress levels for each child.

A majority of students with special educational needs make better progress in English, mathematics and science than they do in Islamic Education and Arabic. This is often due to weaker planning of lessons designed to meet the needs of learners in these subjects. A significant minority of students with SEN achieve good or outstanding levels of progress in English, mathematics and science, whereas far fewer achieve the same levels in Islamic Education and Arabic.

Q2. how accurate is the identification of students with SEn?

28% 40% 20% 12%

Accuracy of identification


There are significant weaknesses in the processes for the identification of students with SEN in a majority of private schools. Accurate identification was observed in only a third of schools.


54

Only 75 per cent of schools use the KHDA categories to identify students with SEN. Although many schools have worked harder this year to identify their students who may have barriers to learning, only a minority of schools have good or better identification processes. The inaccuracy of identification in a majority of schools means that students with SEN do not always receive the support they need to make good progress.

Accurate identification of students is very dependent on the levels of expertise and understanding of the SEN team in the school. In most schools, this expertise is limited. This is especially the case for students with specific learning difficulties such as dyslexia.

Schools with processes that accurately identify students with SEN have recruited teachers with high levels of expertise. Key staff understand a wide range of SEN and use appropriate assessment tools to evaluate the areas of strength and weakness of individual students. In these schools, if there is a lack of school-based expertise in a specific type of need, the leaders secure the services of professionals outside the school, to ensure an accurate diagnosis.

The most effective processes of identification exist where schools have a clear policy of inclusion and admit students into their schools known to have SEN. Steps to identify any students with barriers to learning are often an integral part of their admissions process. These schools are also usually fully aware that in any given population there will be a certain percentage of SEN students, whose learning needs have to be addressed with strategies that are different from those used for the majority of students.

These schools also produce an Individual Education Plan (IEP) as part of the process of identification for each student with SEN. Successful plans usually record different stages of learning, interventions, targets to be set and when they have been achieved. In the more effective schools, parents of children with SEN are actively involved from the beginning in all aspects of the admission process, including the development and support of IEPs and specific targets relating to their children.

Schools with weaker identification processes lack many of the features mentioned above. Around 60 per cent of schools still do not have a policy of SEN/inclusion or a full understanding of the categories for SEN or the needs of students. Inspectors noted too, that despite DSIB’s preliminary SEN visits to schools this year, that there are still schools that refuse to acknowledge that they have students with SEN among the student population. In a few schools, inaccurate identification of students with SEN still occurs because of an absence of rigour in admissions processes and the absence of specialist expertise.


Q3. how effectively are parents involved?

13% 42% 31% 14%

Invovlement of parents


The arrangements schools make to engage the parents of students with SEN in the education of their children is improving steadily. Parents are involved effectively in 45 per cent of schools.

This year, inspectors found that the majority of schools were more active in engaging parents of children with SEN in the educational process and provision for their children. Schools offering the UK or IB curricula continue to achieve such involvement at a good or even an outstanding level. These schools involve parents with the design and implementation of IEPs although the plans still vary in quality and outcome. The most successful IEPs were seen in schools that had included the parents and students themselves in identifying targets and tracking their own progress. The active engagement of parents supports the educational process and helps to ensure that these students make good or better progress.

The more effective schools involve parents extremely well in the admission and support of their children. Often in these schools, involvement of parents begins before admission and continues through to when a student moves on to higher education or work.

Inspectors found that, while the majority of schools were more active this year than last in engaging parents of children with a SEN, this is still an area which requires development in most schools. Schools often cite the lack of engagement of parents as a significant barrier to accurate identification and effective support.

Where schools fail to address the issues of parental involvement, they leave parents feeling excluded from supporting and understanding their child’s progress. A few parents expressed concern to inspection teams that, once their children were enrolled in school, the school failed to engage them fully in their child’s learning. A few were surprised that additional support for their child came with substantial extra financial cost. Parents also commented on the lack of effective support for students with behavioural difficulties arising from a special educational need.


56

Q4. how well is the curriculum modified to meet the needs of all learners?

25% 35% 29% 11%

Modification of the curriculum


The majority of schools do not modify the curriculum adequately to meet the needs of learners with SEN. This is a key weakness in schools rated acceptable or unsatisfactory overall.

Only a minority of schools this year – mostly IB and UK curriculum schools – were able to accomplish this to a better standard. In the best schools, a range of curriculum, teaching, learning and assessment are in place, which enable students with SEN to achieve success in their learning and make good progress against their starting points.

In most lessons in less effective schools, teachers do not plan activities for the wide range of learners in their classes. This means that students with SEN are often unable to engage effectively in learning and therefore fail to make progress.

In schools offering the MoE curriculum and ‘other’ curricula, leaders cite ‘examination demands’ as a barrier to modification. Often, students with SEN in these schools continuously experience failure as assessment processes are not designed to meet their needs.

Inspectors continue to find that the most effective curriculum modifications for students with SEN are planned carefully, effected regularly and are based on the accurate assessment of their needs. Schools demonstrating the best international practice involve most of the key staff, parents and students in the planning, with SEN leaders co-ordinating the work at every stage. Training for other teachers is also given to build their understanding and awareness of needs of the SEN student so that modifications may be made in lessons.

In schools where the curriculum is insufficiently modified to meet the needs of SEN students, IEPs are unclear or not in place at all. Often class teachers lack an understanding of how to adapt their teaching to meet a range of learners’ needs, other than providing additional worksheets at a different level of difficulty. These teachers often expect students with learning difficulties to attain similar levels to their peers at the same rates of progress. In schools – frequently Indian, Iranian, MoE and Pakistani - where curriculum modifications are limited or ineffective, teachers have low levels of understanding of SEN and do not benefit from training or systems of support to help them.


Q5. how well does the school monitor the progress of students with SEn?

11% 53% 30% 6%

Monitoring of progress


Monitoring the progress of students with SEN is the area requiring most improvement in our schools. In the majority of schools monitoring processes are only acceptable or unsatisfactory. A minority of schools have more effective systems for monitoring.

These more effective schools have clear baseline assessment data which ensures that teachers understand what the students know, understand and can do. This information enables them to plan learning at the level which is suitable for the student with SEN. In these schools, students with SEN have carefully considered targets designed in small, achievable steps, to ensure success at an optimum rate. As a consequence, information about students’ progress is more secure. In a majority of schools, a lack of accurate assessment information means that teachers are unsure about what a student knows, understands and can do, so targets are not set at the appropriate level for students. This impedes progress in learning.

Successful systems for monitoring the progress of students with SEN have several common characteristics. Substantial amounts of assessment and observation data are collated and analysed and clear starting points are established. IEPs are drawn up according to needs and starting points, and a common understanding is developed about how to track the students’ progress. As a result, teachers are able to amend their plans and strategies as necessary to meet the needs of the learners. This leads to a clear understanding of the rates of progress of individual students. Where IEPs form an integral part of effective planning and monitoring, students with SEN understand exactly what they are learning and what they need to do to improve. Parents are clear on the progress their children are making and the next steps in learning for their children.

The majority of the schools delivering the Indian, Iranian, MoE and Pakistani curricula are less than effective in monitoring their students’ progress, despite showing a genuine care for them. Inspectors noted that monitoring systems in these schools are generally weak for all students, and teachers and leaders often do not know what to do with the information they collect. These schools tend to rely only on students’ results from written tests to track progress. In these schools, the only support given to students who consistently ‘fail’ tests is repeat lessons using the same strategies. Consistent failure experienced by these students was noted by inspectors to have a detrimental effect on self-esteem and confidence.


58

This student is dyslexic and benefits from using information communication technology to support his learning.


What are the key elements to successful inclusion of students with SEn?

Developing leadership for inclusion and diversity

Positive Attitudes One of the most important factors when developing schools which provide well for ALL students, is the attitude of the school leaders and owners towards students with SEN and their commitment to admitting students with a range of needs and providing the support needed to enable them to make good progress.

In schools where leaders welcome students with a range of learning difficulties, the quality of provision is often high as there is a focus on meeting the needs of all learners. Only 14 private schools in Dubai are evaluated by inspectors as having excellent provision for students with a wide range of SEN. All of these schools have principals and governors who support the admission of students irrespective of need and who encourage parents of children with SEN to share information about their child from the start of the admission process.

There are also a number of schools who readily admit students with SEN but do not always have the capacity to meet their needs effectively.

Leadership of SEn Of the 143 schools inspected this year, 121 have appointed a lead person for SEN. The quality of leadership is highly variable and depends on qualifications and expertise as well as experience. Often schools appoint the most ‘obvious’ member of staff to lead SEN provision, but these are not always the most appropriate. For example, in a majority of schools, counsellors with very little experience of SEN are expected to lead planning and provision for these students. In many cases, these people lack the time to carry out this important aspect of their role. In the schools where leadership of SEN is weak, the provision for these students is left to the SEN team, and class teachers have little or no idea of how best to meet their needs in lessons.

In the few schools providing good or outstanding quality of provision for students with SEN, leaders are highly qualified, experienced individuals who understand best international practice and are committed to inclusion. In these schools, teachers become highly adept at modifying their teaching to meet the needs of all learners because they have the support of experts.

Qualifications, experience and expertise In the majority of schools, the leaders for SEN, whilst often very committed, lack any relevant qualification or expertise. This means that the needs of most students identified, are not met either in lessons or in withdrawal sessions. Consequently, students fail to make good progress.

Inspection findings show that, on the whole, schools with leaders who have positive attitudes towards inclusion provide for students with SEN more effectively than other schools. Leaders in these schools understand SEN and build capacity better among teachers and support staff to meet the needs of all learners. These qualities are seen in schools of different curriculum types but are more prevalent in schools offering a UK or IB curriculum which have high levels of expertise amongst their staff.


60

high expectations and achievement for all The progress of students with SEN is good in only about a third of schools. In these schools, accurate identification, together with a modified curriculum with various types and levels of support, enables teachers to work more closely with students. In the more successful schools, IEPs with clear learning goals are shared and acted upon by all partners in the learning process. Teams of specialists are often well trained and knowledgeable about each student’s skills and needs. They, in turn, play an active role in supporting other teachers to meet the needs of SEN students and boost the development of progress levels for each child.

Nevertheless, most students with SEN in most schools make only acceptable progress in key subjects, irrespective of the curriculum they are following. This often means that they make slower progress than their peers. Even in a few schools where progress for students overall is good, the progress for students with SEN does not follow the same pattern and is no better than acceptable.

Schools often fail to monitor the progress of students with SEN effectively. Consequently they and their parents are unsure of how well they are doing. This means that targets set for these students are not always achievable or do not include enough challenge to ensure the best progress. This shows that more work is needed to ensure that the needs of students with SEN are met to enable them to make good progress.

Transparent Admissions Policies A few of the most effective schools welcome students with a wide range of special educational needs and provide excellent support, enabling them to make good or better progress.

Most schools claim to have open enrolment policies and say that they welcome applications from students with SEN. However, inspection findings show that many parents still find it extremely difficult to find a school for their child. Groups of students who face significant difficulties in securing school places include those with Down syndrome, cerebral palsy, autism and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Nevertheless, schools find that students with these difficulties, once admitted, often do well and bring considerable value to the school.

A common claim from leaders and teachers of the schools which include students with complex needs is that the school community benefits greatly from their admission. Schools who see the admission of students with complex needs as an asset to their school’s ethos often work unstintingly to ensure that not only are their needs met but that the school community learns from the experience. These schools do not dwell on the challenges but concentrate on finding solutions.

A growing number of parents in Dubai are seeking places for students with SEN in regular classes.

A large minority of Dubai’s private schools have specific admission policies for students identified as having SEN. Evidence from visits to schools shows that these policies do not always allow the admission of these students. In a majority of cases, the policies restrict children with SEN from gaining places as there are clauses which enable schools to reject applications from students with SEN. Fortunately, more and more schools are beginning to understand the benefits of including students with a wide range of needs. More and more school owners are starting to consider the issue of inclusion, and many more leaders are beginning to build capacity within their schools by recruiting teachers with expertise in specific areas relevant to SEN. Schools are also beginning to seek advice from each other through growing partnerships.


Entrance tests Most private schools in Dubai assess students’ levels of attainment prior to admission. Entrance tests are mostly with pen and paper, covering English, mathematics and, in a few cases, science and Arabic. A few schools use these tests purely for placing students in specific classes or to determine their needs. A few of the higher quality schools use a system whereby the admission of students with SEN is dependent on the proportion of students with SEN already admitted to the class. This means that schools are able to ensure the needs of students are met within the existing resourcing levels. Parents become very concerned at being unable to find a school which uses a wider means of assessment than traditional tests.

Student assessment Most schools with good and outstanding provision for students with SEN consider all available information before admitting a student with SEN to ensure they can best meet that student’s needs. However, schools that have lower levels of understanding about SEN either admit any child irrespective of SEN and then find they are unable to meet the student’s needs, or they deny the child a place because they do not understand how to meet the needs. The most inclusive of Dubai’s private schools design their admission procedures around the needs and abilities of the student and place emphasis on the ‘whole child’ rather than attainment levels in key subjects. These schools use informal and formal observations, student and parent discussions and a range of assessment tools to evaluate the student’s needs in order to prepare an individual education plan and ensure appropriate support.

A majority of schools implement early screening tests on entry to ensure each student has a clear baseline against which to evaluate progress. Nevertheless, the quality of these screening tests is variable and in a majority of schools, students, including those with SEN, do not have a clear valid baseline against which teachers can evaluate progress.

Specialist staff A growing number of schools are appointing highly qualified, specialist staff to support the identification of and provision for students with SEN. However, these high quality staff are concentrated in schools which provide outstanding quality of support for students overall and high quality provision for students with SEN. Where such specialist staff are employed, students benefit from a wide range of therapies and specialisms. There is an improving picture across schools in relation to the recruitment of specialist staff as well as training for existing staff.

Around half of the inspected private schools have appointed teachers with special education qualifications at degree level. There are currently 237 qualified SEN teachers in these schools. These teachers teach individuals and groups and advise colleagues in how to plan activities to meet students’ needs. The expertise of these teachers ensures that effective strategies are developed to include students with SEN in the life of the school. Often the SEN teachers have additional expertise related to a particular disorder, learning difficulty or syndrome.


62

Specialist Staff in Dubai’s 143 Inspected Private Schools

Role no. of schools no. of people % of schools with this role.

Speech and Language Therapist (SALT) 20 20 14

Physical/Occupational Therapists (OT/PT) 10 10 7

Dyslexia Specialists (SpLD) 38 42 27

Educational Psychologists (EP) 27 27 19

SEN Teachers/Special Educators 78 237 55

Learning Support Assistants (LSA) 64 450 44

Shadow Teachers 68 130 50

The most effective schools are increasingly appointing therapists and specialists to work with students and staff to ensure that students’ special educational needs are met. The advantage to families of having on-site therapy is often cited as the most positive feature of SEN provision. Many parents experience great difficulty in finding appropriate therapists outside of school. Offering therapies in school within the school day, means that students and their parents do not have to spend valuable learning time, travelling to providers within the community. Where there is a co-ordinated approach to learning and therapy, students make the best progress. Excellent examples of such a co-ordinated approach may be seen in outstanding and good schools, which balance specialist therapies with targeted support and high levels of differentiated learning in lessons to ensure the often complex needs of students are well met. A few of these schools provide specialist eye-tracking evaluation through a reputable international provider and follow up evaluations with eye tracking exercise therapy for students experiencing vision problems. There are also a small minority of schools rated as acceptable that are providing well for students with SEN.

Educational Psychologists Around 20 per cent of the inspected private schools have in-house educational psychologists. Students with SEN in these schools have benefited from comprehensive assessment of their needs, often leading to accurate identification of a learning difficulty. In these schools, parents are confident that any SEN will be quickly identified and provided for with their involvement. Using a battery of tests these schools are able to identify needs even prior to admission. This means that leaders are able to plan for the admission of a student with SEN prior to entry.

SEn Teachers/Special Educators Just over half of the schools have recruited teachers with special education qualifications to provide individual withdrawal or in-class support to students with SEN. The expertise of these people varies significantly. Nevertheless, often these people provide helpful support to students and also provide teachers with much needed guidance on how to meet students’ needs in regular lessons. Where the quality, experience and expertise is high, these staff provide essential support for students and high quality professional development for teachers and support staff.

Learning Support Assistants In 64 schools, assistants are appointed to support the learning of students with SEN in lessons or


on a withdrawal basis. There are around 450 learning support assistants in these schools. In the schools providing the highest quality of education to students, including those with SEN, learning assistants are highly trained individuals who understand how children learn. They often have a wealth of experience in certain categories of special need and provide excellent support to enable students to access the curriculum effectively and make good or better progress. The value of these assistants in these schools is significant. School leaders recognise that value and invest time and money in training them. In a few schools, specialist learning support assistants work alongside teachers to provide excellent support for students with complex or multiple needs.

In less effective schools, learning support assistants lack experience, training and even language skills and are unable to provide the support often needed by students. In these cases, the assistants become little more than ‘nannies’ who over-support students who need to gain independence.

A few schools are ensuring their learning support assistants attend in-house training and gain qualifications in supporting students with SEN. This may be achieved through on-line or distance learning courses as well as in-house or consultancy training.

Shadow Teachers Around half of the inspected private schools employ ‘shadow teachers’ to provide 1:1 full-time support for students with SEN. Most shadow teachers are appointed and paid for by parents with the schools approval and, for most students, the engagement of the shadow teacher is a condition of admission.

Shadow teachers in a few schools are highly trained individuals who add value to the experiences of the students they work with. In these schools, the shadow teacher ensures that students are given opportunities to be independent in learning. Such schools employ highly skilled shadow teachers as a means to integrate students with multiple or complex special needs successfully into regular classes.

The SEN team in these schools assesses students’ needs and develops an effective plan for the shadow teacher to work closely with the class teacher within the classroom setting. In these cases, the role of the shadow teacher is often to empower students to become increasingly more functional - emotionally, socially, behaviourally and academically. The levels of support are gradually decreased to encourage full independence where possible. The ultimate goal in these schools is for a student not to need a shadow teacher and they therefore have a clear plan of when shadowing should be phased out.

In the few schools where the use of highly trained shadow teachers is effective, the role has many dimensions. The shadow teacher often acts as a link between the class teacher and the students to facilitate smoother learning within the class. In a few of the most effective schools, their responsibilities include:

• Using strategies to help the student maintain attention; • Encouraging participation; • Encouraging interaction with the student’s peers; • Ensuring the student is able to seek help when necessary; • Developing the student’s coping skills in social situations; • Enabling the student’s classmates to understand his or her needs better.


64

Concerns over ‘shadow teachers’ In most cases the shadow teacher has few, if any, educational qualifications and the majority have little previous experience of working with students with SEN. The result is that students become dependent on adult support but still do not make good progress. Often, shadow teachers are used as a replacement for well-planned, differentiated learning activities designed to meet the needs of all students. In most schools, shadow teachers do not work closely enough with class teachers to ensure positive learning experiences for students.

Despite excellent practice in a few schools, shadow teachers are more commonly used as a means to ensure the student completes the activities expected and does not disrupt lessons. Where shadow teachers are untrained and unskilled, the negative effects outweigh the positive. The presence of a shadow teacher in less effective classes allows teachers to avoid assuming responsibility and ownership for the education of students with SEN. Inspectors identified several negative consequences when untrained shadow teachers were present in classes:

• Class teachers abdicated responsibility for students’ learning; • Students with SEN were separated from their classmates; • Students with SEN became highly dependent on adult support; • Shadow teachers interfered in the instruction of other students; • Shadow teachers intervened unnecessarily and exerted too much control over the students’ responses; • Limited interactions between the class teacher and the student with a shadow teacher, proportionately

less than those with other class members; • Shadow teachers often dominated the interactions when teachers assigned students to work in pairs

or small groups.

Physical Resources

Resource rooms and learning centres Around one third of Dubai’s inspected private schools have a designated room for learning support and SEN. These rooms vary significantly in quality. In the most effective schools, learning centres are integral to the life of the school. Students are able to self-refer to the centre to receive support in any aspect of their learning. At the same time, the learning centres provide specialist support and resources to students with a wide range of special educational needs. In outstanding schools, these centres are well resourced with an excellent range of high quality accredited resources; the centres are used well and seen as an invaluable support for students and teachers. The staff provide advice and guidance to teachers, parents and students and in a few cases constitute centres of excellence for inclusive education.

Learning resources A few schools are beginning to recognise the value of developing resources to support students’ learning as well as supporting teachers. Nevertheless, SEN leaders are often unsure which resources to invest in to support students best. A few schools that are at the development stage have consulted with schools that have well-established learning centres and high levels of resourcing to help them decide on the sort of resources they might invest in. Often in the schools at the development stage, teachers seek advice and support that SEN leaders are unable to provide. A small minority of schools in this position have engaged the services of external providers to assist in setting up learning centres and developing resources. The success of partnerships such as these is wholly dependent on the quality of the provider.


The most effective schools provide laptops and iPads for the sole use of students with SEN. The benefit of these additional IT resources to students who experience challenge in their learning is often profound. Using a laptop unlocks the creativity of students who find writing a significant challenge due to dyslexia. Using a touch screen enables the child with limited fine motor control to communicate. The use of assistive technology is being used in a small minority of schools to develop speech and language skills. There are also a few schools using sophisticated software designed to develop listening and language processing skills.

Adaptive furniture There are around 100 students currently using adaptive furniture in Dubai’s inspected private schools: tables, chairs and other furniture that encourages social interaction as well as gross and fine motor skill development. Seating discs, wriggle and air cushions are all used in the best developed schools to ensure students’ individual needs are met.

Special equipment The minority of schools that welcome students with complex needs ensure that special equipment is available to support them. This may include Braille readers, voice assisted technology, radio aids, sloping desks, eye tracking equipment, listening centres and dexterity aids.

This student develops her fine motor skills with her friend.


66

This student enjoys a balance of in-class and withdrawal support to meet her learning needs.


Where is the best provision for students with SEn?

Differences in curricula Inspectors noted significant differences in the quality of the provision for students with SEN supplied by schools offering different curricula. High quality provision was most evident in schools with good or outstanding overall ratings. However, there were three schools, identified as acceptable overall, that provided good support for students with SEN which enabled them to make good progress in the majority of key subjects.

Schools offering UK or IB curricula Overall, schools offering UK and IB curricula, as well as having the largest number of students identified with SEN, achieved the highest rates of progress for the majority of their students and in most key subjects. The majority of these schools cater successfully for a wide range of learners and respond positively to the admission of students with more complex or multiple needs. In these schools, identification is mostly accurate and parents are involved well in the planning and provision for their children. Careful monitoring of progress and creative modifications to the curriculum mean that students identified with SEN in these schools make good or better progress across most key subjects.

School offering UK and IB curricula have more effective systems for monitoring than other schools and, as a consequence, they measure student progress more reliably. This means that students with SEN are more likely to understand exactly what they are trying to achieve, how well they are doing and what to do next.

French Schools While the overall quality of support is good or better in all of the French schools, the identification and support for students with SEN requires further development in three of the four schools. Inspectors noted a lack of expertise and understanding of SEN shown by teachers in all of these schools, despite positive attitudes towards inclusion.

Schools offering a US curriculum The identification of SEN is a developing feature of schools offering a US curriculum. The involvement of parents of students with SEN follows a similar pattern. This group of schools is beginning to modify their curricula well to meet the needs of students with SEN, but further work and greater flexibility are now needed. Many of these schools still find it difficult to identify, plan appropriately and monitor the progress of these students.

Outstanding schools All 12 of the schools rated as outstanding in 2012-2013 provide well for students with SEN, although even within this group of schools, aspects of provision varied in quality. In the best schools, students make mostly good progress; identification is accurate; the involvement of parents is effective, curricula are well modified to meet the needs or the learners and their progress is monitored well. Nevertheless, not all outstanding schools admit students with a wide range of needs nor do they admit students with complex needs.


68

Which schools need to make better provision for students with SEn? A key factor in developing best practice in the provision for SEN is ‘owner commitment.’ This in turn leads to high levels of dedication to inclusive practices from school leaders. Positive attitudes from leaders are also reflected in high levels of human and physical resources. Unsurprisingly, appropriate resources support the process of development of high quality provision and ensure that students with SEN make good progress.

There are a few UK curriculum schools which need to achieve greater accuracy in the identification of SEN. In these schools, provision is less well-developed than the majority of schools in this group.

Most US schools do not modify the curriculum well enough to enable students with SEN to make good progress. There are also weaknesses in monitoring the progress of students with SEN in these schools. Students are often unsure of how well they are doing and confused about how to improve. While a majority of schools offering a US curriculum involve parents well in the provision for their children, the weak monitoring of progress leaves parents unsure about how well their children are doing.

Very few schools offering an Indian curriculum provide well for students with SEN. The low levels of understanding of teachers and leaders of SEN means that identification processes lack accuracy and the much needed modifications to the curriculum are not made to enable learners with SEN to make good progress. Indian curriculum schools also had weak procedures for monitoring the progress of students with SEN. The involvement of parents in the planning and provision for their children was no more than acceptable in most of these schools.

In Indian schools, a significant barrier to identification and support for these students is the parents themselves. Often parents of students in Indian curriculum schools prefer not to have their children identified with a special educational need.

The quality of support is weakest in schools offering the MoE curriculum. Only 15 per cent of these schools provided a good quality of support for students with SEN. There are significant weaknesses in almost all of the schools in this group. Inspectors noted the limited expertise of teachers in planning activities for different groups and individuals in these schools. Students with SEN made only acceptable progress in key subjects in 50 per cent of the schools. In the other 50 per cent, their progress was mostly unsatisfactory. Inspectors identified some key factors contributing to these poor rates of progress:

• unsatisfactory identification processes in almost all schools; • very limited modifications to the curriculum in almost all schools; • teachers’ lack of understanding of how to meet the needs of students with SEN in lessons.

Students with SEN made good progress in only one of the schools which offered ‘other’ curricula. Significant weaknesses were identified in almost all of these schools, particularly in the identification of students with SEN and the extent to which the curriculum was modified to meet their needs.


70

What do parents, students and teachers think? There are four questions within the survey for parents which are specific to parents of students with SEN. The responses to these questions may be seen below.

Parents’ views Overall, parents with children who have SEN are satisfied with the education provided. Most parents who responded feel that their child’s school welcomes students with SEN, although around 18 per cent of parents did not know whether the school is welcoming or not.

Most respondents feel that the school involves them well in the education of their children. A similar proportion of parents agree that the school their child attends accurately identifies the needs of students, whilst 12 per cent of parents did not feel that this was the case. Around 12 per cent of parents did not feel their child’s schools provide support to enable them to make good progress; however, most parents were pleased with this aspect.

My child receives the support needed to make good progress


The school involves parents well in planning the support for our children


Parent responses to survey questions related to SEN

32%

28%

32%

34%

53%

56%

55%

56%

12%

12%

10%

7%

3%

4%

3%

3%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%


In their written comments, parents expressed anxiety about: • Rates of progress; • Wanting more help from the school as to how they can support their children at home; • Additional fee charges for students with SEN, especially those related to shadow teachers.

Parents were positive about: • Modifications made to enable hearing impaired children access the curriculum; • Improved systems for monitoring progress;

Typical comments made by parents ‘Identification of special needs by a qualified psychiatrist should be done in-house, rather than asking parents to pay for external assessments. The approach to special needs should be holistic, not just a halfway action to conform with KHDA guidelines in order to secure a better rating.’

‘I appreciate that this school gives an equal opportunity to my child, who has special physical needs, and has the right facilities to accommodate her. More schools and colleges should have the same.’


‘The school has exceeded my original expectations with the support that is now available for my son who had ADHD. They have really helped to turn around my son’s behaviour: they have worked with us as parents and his teachers to ensure that he is given the right support.‘

‘In general, I would like to see more choices available in the private education system for children with special educational needs. It is very, very difficult to find schools willing to accept children with special educational needs, even mild ones.’

‘Unfortunately, not all teachers provide the personal attention needed to enable each student with SEN make good progress.’

‘Schools needs to be better able to identify and support gifted and talented students.’

‘I believe that for schools to achieve an outstanding award, they really should be showing that they can provide an outstanding education to the full range of children, including children with SEN, and not just a selectively chosen few high achievers, who will achieve in any educational environment.’

Students’ viewsThe students’ survey is issued to Students in Grades 10-12. The one question relating to SEN is asked of all students in this group.

Our school welcomes students withspecial educational needs

Students' views

39% 48% 8% 5%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%


Teachers’ viewsAll teachers are asked to complete the survey which includes two questions related specifically to provision for students with SEN. The responses below suggest an unrealistic view by teachers of the quality of provision in schools.


72

My teaching meets the needs and interests of all students in mylessons

Students receive targeted support outside of my lessons to helpthem make good progress

I have the support I need to ensure students make good progress inmy lessons

The school involves parents well in planning the support for theirchildren



Teachers' views

58%

46%

50%

55%

49%

55%

41%

48%

44%

42%

46%

41%

1%

5%

5%

2%

4%

3%

1%

1%

1%

1%

1%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%



Working towards inclusion

Dubai English Speaking College (DESC) – May 2013. Inclusion is seen by DESC as a process by which the school develop its cultures, policies and practices to include students and remove barriers to participation and learning.

Dubai English Speaking College is proud of being a progressive, inclusive school. Currently, one per cent of the students across DESC is on the Learning Support Register, with varying degrees of need. DESC believes that all these young people deserve, and therefore receive, a tailored individualised approach to their learning.

DESC’s ‘Support for Learning Vision’ underpins the overall school Mission and is:

‘..to develop a whole school approach to support for learning and provide the necessary support for all children to access the curriculum thereby, ‘Maximising Potential through High Performance.’

Clear and concise special educational needs (SEN) policies, procedures and resources are easily accessible to all and ensure high status is given to the effective and individualised support provided to all students.

Overall inspection ratings since 2008 – 2009

2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

Good Good Good Good

Outstanding

Unsatisfactory

Outstanding

Acceptable

Good

The process towards inclusion In 2011, the direct support of the Principal gave the aims and objectives of the Learning Support Department at the DESC greater clarity and a significantly higher profile. From 2011, the department began to build its profile across the school. The drive towards inclusive practices provided teachers with greater levels of support and a fuller understanding of the aims of learning support aligned to the needs of students. Teachers’ confidence increased and contributed effectively to the plan.

The journey began with an increased resource allocation which enabled leaders to employ, in addition to the Special Educational Needs Coordinator, (SENCO) a Learning Support Teacher, a Counsellor and an additional six Learning Support Assistants. Through regular whole staff in-service training, along with increased personnel and training, DESC streamlined its admission process.


74

The process of identification starts effectively at the admission stage, where a link with curricular teams enables DESC to support students’ needs successfully. The team uses pre-admission assessment to identify strengths and areas of need for each individual student. This, together with parent information, specialist reports and discussions with previously attended schools, also helps to cement the process and determine type and levels of support.

As the need arises, further in-depth assessments and observations as well as discussions or collaboration meetings are carried out with the student at the centre of every step of the process. This enables the student to access a specifically tailored and directed support programme in addition to a well-differentiated approach to their day-to-day learning. Electronic dictionaries, audio visual equipment, laptops, iPads and e-readers are among the variety of technical support resources available for students with SEN.

Although standard Individual Education Plans (IEPs) are put in place for more intensive needs related to core skills, every student with SEN also has a Personalised Learning Plan (PLP). School leaders believes that by including all stakeholders in the planning and provision for each student’s development it ensures that all partners in the process work together in a holistic way with a focus on the academic, social and emotional needs. The College also believes that this structure enables the teaching and support teams to focus exclusively on the needs of each individual student.

‘I have difficulties with language as

I am slightly dyslexic and I learnt

English as an additional language. I

get the support I need to enable me

to get my thoughts down on paper.

The 1:1 support helps me organise

my work much better and respond to

deadlines.’ .’so I don’t panic.’

Don, age 15

‘In this school, I feel supported.

I have everything I need to help

me to achieve at a high level.

My teachers all understand how

hard it is for me to write. I am

now writing much better than

I did before and I am no longer

embarrassed.’

Ross, age 14

‘Teachers help us

all the time, they

somehow know when

we are struggling.’

Katie, age 12

DESC is now better at analysing students’ outcomes related to their own needs and in line with their IEPs. Clear starting points ensure progress is tracked carefully and plans are adjusted.

The following are some of the challenges the team foresees as part of their journey of inclusion over the next academic year:


• It must continue to embed effective differentiation across every department, in every lesson and on every day;

• It must continue to ensure that there is a balance between individual and curriculum need; and, through this, it should achieve good or better examination results for the students in DESC;

• As DESC develops its enhanced tracking system, intense and more effective monitoring of student progress will enable greater precision with each PLP.

The message to schools – Improvement in the provision for students with SEN is dependent on:

1. A positive drive for improvement from the school leaders;2. Enhanced resources;3. Increased understanding of SEN by teachers.

DESC embraced and embarked on a whole-school approach to support for learning and in doing so is providing the required support to children to access the curriculum, irrespective of need. The College has led development from the governance, leadership and within, to drive change.

A commitment to invest in resources, human and physical, has been a key driver to success. However, leaders also understand quite clearly that this remains a journey with a destination far from being reached. Wisely, the leadership team and SEN department in particular, are aware that there will be constant challenges as DESC grows and needs of young people are to be met. Students’ feedback is very positive and it is clear that these young people appreciate the support they receive and understand their own needs well. DESC is developing students who may have learning challenges but who understand their right to support which enables them to achieve their best outcomes.

Summing up, Dubai English Speaking College’s aim to develop, ‘resilient learners who respond to challenge and aspire to reach their full potential … developing self-worth, mutual respect and enjoyment in the process of learning as these qualities are vital in preparing our learners for the diverse challenges of tomorrow’. They believe that this mantra applies as much to the learning support department at DESC, as any other part of the school.


76

Developing a curriculum to meet the wide range of learner needs

Greenfield Community School – May 2013Schools that are leading the way in encouraging innovation and change have overall ratings as outstanding, good and acceptable. However, they have common features which include a learner-centred approach and a willingness to take the risks needed to promote innovation and change. Their openness towards diversity and willingness to go the extra mile in order to include students faced with complex learning or physical challenges has created contexts which provide positive learning environments for all their students.

Greenfield Community School prides itself on a flexible approach to curriculum planning to meet the needs of learners. With this in mind they have enriched the Middle Years Programme to include design and technology and food technology as additional vocational subjects.

Leaders at Greenfield Community School recognise that the school’s IB mission and curriculum framework are designed to support inclusive teaching and learning. IB curriculum guidance to schools quotes: ‘If I can’t learn the way you teach, will you teach me the way I can learn?’ The recognition that students learn in different ways is central to the school’s ethos and planning. The role of the teacher is to find those ways and tailor the learning so that students can be successful across all phases of the school. Teachers provide individual, small group and large group learning experiences through inquiry.

In Grades 11 and 12, Greenfield offers two of the IB Programmes. One, the IB Diploma, to meet the needs of students who want to study subjects in depth and have a focus on a full academic programme leading to University acceptance, and the other, the International Baccalaureate Career Certificate (IBCC). This enables students who desire a more vocational or industry focused programme within an academic framework, which also can lead to University acceptance.

The IBCC is a relatively new programme and one which Greenfield adopted to serve the needs of students who tend to be kinesthetic learners and take a more ‘hands on’ approach to learning. The course requires the student to take a Vocational qualification such a ‘B Tech’ as well as the required Diploma subjects. They are also required to obtain a work placement that gives them experience in dealing with the real world. This has been of huge benefit to students, not only giving them practical experience but developing their self-esteem, presentation and time management skills - all crucial 21st Century skills.

Greenfield’s teachers and support teams are expected to be responsive to the needs of all, including learners of English, gifted and talented and those with physical and complex learning needs. A firm belief that children learn best when they learn with others, and from each other, pervades the school.

The school admits only those students for whom it believes it will be able to provide a productive learning environment; yet by developing the skills of teaching and support teams they are able to open their doors to a number of exceptional and unique students.

The IB Curriculum, being inquiry based, is an ideal vehicle for students with additional learning needs as it can be differentiated to suit the requirements of most students. Students requiring higher levels of support to access the curriculum are assessed on an individual basis to decide if


the school’s resources can offer the necessary support. Students are assessed for knowledge, skills and understanding through a range of different assessments and the more traditional examination and testing of specific knowledge. Similarly, the range of subjects in the curriculum offers scope for individuals to be successful. At Greenfield, as well as a strong Information and Design Technology Programme, leaders have introduced Food Technology to develop planning and practical skills in students who learn in different ways. These subjects are very popular and ensure that all students experience success in an area of particular interest.

Greenfield Community School is a school that believes in developing the potential of ALL students to enable them to be successful. This is achieved by offering an enriched curriculum that provides differentiation and support in equal measure.


78

The commitment of leadership team has led to the inclusion of many students with SEN including a blind five year old who is now included in a KG 2 class with support. The inclusion of this student has led to an increased awareness by staff of how best to accommodate a student with significant physical and intellectual needs. It has also enabled young children to begin to understand the complexity of difference and to accept the diversity life brings. Very young children show care and consideration towards Gabriel and are developing skills in guiding and using their voices to enable him to ‘see’ through sound and touch.

The principal believes, ‘the richness of the school’s cultural diversity enhances the ethos and allows our community to value our similarities and differences. Our goal is to help all students become international citizens equipped with 21st century skills.’

Wisely the school knows that there are challenges for the future in continuing to develop and adapt all provision to meet the needs of their learners. Expanding further curriculum choices and opportunities for students within the IBCC will be key for all, but especially for those students who find more traditional approaches towards academic learning challenging.

Expansion of the successful IBCC and BTEC in Information Technology is just one way in which curriculum change has been used to meet a wide variety of skills and needs of the students. Furthermore, the development of different technology with the school is paving the way for further choice, change and diversity.


“Gabriel had his best ever year and made tremendous progress, from his self-confidence, socialization, independence to his understanding of the rules and social structures expected from him. These achievements wouldn’t have been possible should he had not been given his chance to go to a school. They had helped us save Gabriel from his little dark world, and have helped us bring light and meaning into his life.”


80

how can schools improve their provision for students with SEn? Most schools understand that every student is unique and needs to be provided with a safe, caring and stimulating environment in which to learn and grow emotionally, intellectually, physically and socially. Most schools also demonstrate a commitment to teach all students and provide an environment to enable them to make good progress. Nevertheless, it is accepted that there are greater challenges faced by schools in relation to some students. It is in these cases that a school needs to draw on its own resources as well as the resources of the local community to meet the students’ needs. Schools need to use all available resources to plan, implement and monitor the provision for students with SEN to ensure these students receive an education which meets their needs and enables them to fulfil their potential. Where this expertise is not apparent within the school, measures may need to be taken to build capacity and develop the skills of teachers in meeting learners’ needs. This is an extended process rather than a ‘quick fix.’

next steps towards improvement1. Ensure that admission policies for students with SEN are clear, transparent and in

line with Federal Law 29 (2006). Schools should ensure that students with SEN are treated fairly;

2. Continue to break down the barriers to identification of students by working more closely with parents to ensure they understand what constitutes a special educational need: parents need to feel confident that their child will not be marginalized because of a special educational need;

3. Develop procedures to identify students with SEN to achieve greater clarity and precision. Partnerships with outside agencies need further development to ensure accuracy of identification;

4. Ensure early intervention – to enable students who have difficulties in learning to receive the help they need as soon as possible;

5. Remove barriers to learning to ensure that teachers understand SEN and plan lessons which meet the needs of all learners, including those with SEN or special gifts and talents;

6. Raise expectations and achievement so that levels of challenge meet learner needs ensuring that all students make good progress;

7. Many schools need to be more flexible in the range and choice of subjects they offer, so that the needs and interests of all students can be met;

8. Review assessment processes to ensure that all students have clear starting points and experience success in their learning;

9. Recruit staff with expertise in SEN or develop the skills and understanding of existing staff more effectively; partnerships with outside agencies would support accurate identification and improve understanding;

10. Use the resources provided by KHDA to help ensure that their policies and practices meet the needs of all learners; these schools should explore opportunities for partnership working with schools with more well-developed practice.

11. Develop lasting partnerships with professional organisations which can assist in the identification and support of students with SEN.


Issues and SolutionsConcerns related to students with SEn, arising from inspection

Key Messages from schools with good and outstanding SEn provision

Students with SEN do not make as good progress as their peers in key subjects. Often rates of progress are too slow. Those with special gifts and talents rarely make the progress of which they are capable.

In the best schools all students have clear starting points against which rates of progress are monitored carefully. Students with special gifts or talents are identified using agreed criteria and their needs are met well through challenging and enriching learning activities. Teachers are skilled in recognizing individual needs and adjusting their teaching to meet them.

Many parents with children who have SEN find it very difficult to find a school placement which meets their child’s needs.

Inclusive policies together with clear and transparent admission criteria support parents in selecting the appropriate school for their child. Inclusive schools investigate individual cases and analyse the support needs of the child before admission. In these schools, every effort is made to include students with SEN and provide the relevant support.

Attitudes towards students with SEN are not always positive, mainly as a result of poor understanding by school leaders. Despite ‘open’ enrolment policies, students with SEN are often not admitted. In a few schools, students with SEN are admitted easily but their needs are not carefully determined and rarely met.

Outstanding schools examine each case for admission individually and use a battery of assessments to determine a student’s starting points and needs. Plans to include a student are well thought out and effective, ensuring good progress.

The majority of schools do not have the expertise to identify students with SEN or those with gifts and talents, accurately.

Leaders in outstanding schools have the expertise and resources to identify students’ needs accurately. They establish strong and effective partnerships with outside agencies to support this process. Recruitment processes ensure teachers have inclusive attitudes, understand SEN and can employ a range of teaching strategies.

In the majority of schools, leaders of SEN are ill-equipped to plan support for students with SEN.

Leaders of SEN in the best schools are well-qualified, well trained and understand the needs of a wide range of learners. Consequently, support plans are effective and students make good progress. Consideration is given to developing the independence of students within a supportive environment.


82

Concerns related to students with SEn, arising from inspection

Key Messages from schools with good and outstanding SEn provision

The behaviour needs of students with SEN are often not well met. Teachers and support staff rarely use effective strategies to support students with behavior difficulties. At times, the actions of teachers create behaviour problems.

Staff in the most effective schools employ a wide range of positive strategies to deal with negative behaviour. They understand the possible impact of learning difficulties on behaviour as well as the behaviours characteristic of particular categories of need.

Support staff are often unqualified, inexperienced and poorly trained. Often, support creates dependency in students. Parents may be paying for support which is impeding rather than enhancing progress.

Support in the best schools is given by highly skilled practitioners, who ensure students gain independence in their learning. Leaders in these schools place a high emphasis on developing the knowledge and expertise of all the staff in the SEN field.

Modifications to the curriculum, teaching, learning and assessment do not ensure that the needs of students with SEN are met. Students with SEN are often not accommodated to enable them to access the curriculum and experience success in their learning. Inflexible approaches to assessment mean that students with SEN experience failure too often.

Schools with good or outstanding provision for students with SEN create flexible curricula which respond to the needs of a wide range of learners. The curricula are reviewed frequently and adjusted to meet learners’ needs and interests. Teachers plan activities which meet the needs of all learners and are adept at modifying their teaching to address specific needs. Assessment practices ensure that all students experience success and are given useful feedback to enable them to improve. Students are accommodated in external examinations to ensure fair access.

Lack of suitably qualified staff is a key concern in the development of provision in Dubai’s private schools.

In the best schools, owners support school leaders in recruiting experience and skilled staff with understanding of SEN. They analyse skills and expertise of existing staff and use these people to provide training to others. They also seek out high quality training from other organizations and encourage staff to engage in on-line learning which often leads to helpful qualifications.


SEn TerminologyGlossary of Terms

Special Educational needs

Educational needs that are different from those of the majority of students. They include those who need additional support or challenge in their learning.

Inclusion A process by which schools and early childhood centres develop their cultures, policies and practices to include students and actively seek to remove barriers to participation and learning.

Learning Support Assistant (LSA)

An assistant providing in-school support for students with special educational needs. An LSA will normally work with a particular student or students providing close support and assistance to those responsible for teaching him/her.

Shadow Teacher An educational assistant who works directly with a single special needs child. These assistants understand a variety of learning disabilities and how to handle them accordingly. Providing a shadow teacher allows the child to attend class while receiving the extra attention that he needs. Shadow teachers are extensively trained to help the student interact with others and to assist with the child’s schoolwork

Specific Learning Difficulties

Term used to cover a wide variety of learning difficulties, which can affect literacy skills (e.g. aspects of reading, spelling and writing skills), short term memory, processing of information and sometimes motor skills. These include dyslexia, dyspraxia, dyscalculia and dysgraphia.

Special needs Co-ordinator (SEnCO) or Special needs leader

A teacher who has responsibility for the day-to-day management of special educational needs in a school. This person often has practical and professional experience of teaching children with special educational needs. They are responsible for liaising with parents and other professionals in respect of children with special educational needs. They also provide support and advice for teachers.

Individual Education Plan (IEP)

A written plan which outlines the additional help provided to a student, the targets set and the arrangements for reviewing progress. This is a working document for all teaching staff recording key short-term targets and strategies for an individual student. IEPs should be discussed with parents and the child and they should be consulted as part of the review process

Accommodations Accommodations offer alternative ways for students to acquire information or share what they have learned with the teacher. Accommodations do not lower the difficulty level nor expectations for the student’s achievement, although there may be changes in teaching materials used, testing materials, or even in the instructional environment. Educators often make accommodations for individual students informally as they teach, but children with special needs may require the formal documenting of a specific accommodation through an IEP.

Modifications Modifications to the curriculum involve combinations of altered content knowledge, conceptual difficulty, educational goals, and instructional method in order to better meet the needs of the learner.


84

Thematic investigation 2“United States” curriculum schools in Dubai

IntroductionDuring the first four years of inspections, DSIB found that less than a third of schools in Dubai offering a “United States” (US) curriculum were providing learning experiences similar to that provided in the US. A majority of schools did not use curriculum standards from the US for teaching and learning. They did not use assessment standards to track students’ progress. Inspectors established that only a minority of US curriculum schools awarded their graduates a qualification that would be recognised by higher education institutions in the United States.

As a part of the 2012-2013 inspection process, a closer look was taken at the main aspects of provision in 32 Dubai schools that advertised a US curriculum. Detailed data were gathered to provide parents with better knowledge to inform their choices and their decisions for school selection and to help policy makers in their review of current regulations.

Inspectors collected and analyzed data organised around six key questions. Data were collected through surveys, interviews, observations, discussions with parents, teachers, leaders and students, and document and data analysis. About 5,000 parents responded to a survey offering statements about the schools. More than 3,000 lessons were observed and many school documents were collected. Inspectors interviewed almost all school leaders and about 500 students in Grades 11 and 12, a balance of boys and girls.

This focus area provides an historical context of US curriculum schools in Dubai, a brief overview of Kindergarten to Grade 12 education in the US, detailed information about provision in US schools in Dubai, and information about best practice in the United States.

The history of US curriculum schools in Dubai In 1966, the first spacecraft landed on the Moon, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) was five years away from its founding, and the Dubai Petroleum Company opened the first US curriculum school in Dubai, the American School of Dubai in Jumeirah 1. For three decades it was the only school in Dubai that fully prepared students for entry into colleges and universities in the United States.

In 1975, Al Ittihad Private School was opened in Mamzar, offering students a curriculum with enriched English language instruction in mathematics and science using resources from the US. In 1979 the first Al Mawakeb School opened its doors in Garhoud. The decade of the 1980s saw a total of five additional US-style curriculum schools open their doors across Dubai. A further eight US-style schools opened in the decade of the 1990s. By the year 2000 there were 18 schools offering some form of US curriculum to students in Dubai. Since the beginning of the new millennium, an additional 17 such schools have been established throughout Dubai. Currently, 35 schools offer a curriculum that is classified as being from the US making this type the second most prevalent in Dubai. Of the 35, 32 schools were inspected in the 2012-2013 inspection cycle, because the four new schools were not eligible for inspection.

Since 2008-2009, student enrolments at US curriculum schools have increased from about 37,000 to approximately 47,000, which is about a 27 per cent increase. The growth rate is similar across


all Dubai’s private schools. The total student population in US curriculum schools in 2013 ranked third overall in private schools in Dubai; only UK and Indian schools had higher student populations. However, US schools had the highest number of Emirati students. Emiratis constituted 47 per cent of the total number of students in US curriculum schools. US schools attracted 70 per cent of all Emiratis enrolled in private schools in Dubai.

When the Dubai Schools Inspection Bureau (DSIB) began inspecting schools annually in 2008-2009, no US schools were found to be offering an outstanding quality of education. Twenty-seven per cent of US curriculum schools were rated good overall, 57 per cent were rated acceptable overall, and 16 per cent were unsatisfactory overall. In 2013 more than three-quarters of US curriculum schools performed at an acceptable level overall and one quarter were good or better. Three schools were unsatisfactory overall. Only one US curriculum school was judged as performing at an outstanding level in 2013.

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2010

-201

1

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2010

-201

1

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2010

-201

1

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2010

-201

1

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3


53

42

3

17

1920

19

21

8 87

87

0 0 0 1 1

Inspection rating of US schools over the inspection years


86

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2010

-201

1

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2010

-201

1

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2010

-201

1

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2010

-201

1

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3


3808

1919

2553

1219

1088

1967

9

2394

7

2843

3

2751

7

3222

7

1374

3

1329

3

1037

8

1280

5

1123

9

2169

2236

Number of students in US schools over the inspection years

A brief overview of K-12 education in the United States of AmericaThe United States of America (US) does not have one national curriculum, but 50, one for each state. Each state has its own department of education that sets guidelines for the schools of that state. Variations in guidelines include curriculum standards, curriculum development, approved textbooks, course offerings, hours of instruction per day and per year, assessment tools, graduation requirements, teacher certification requirements, and ages for compulsory education.

In the US, the age of entry to compulsory education varies between five and seven years, with age six being the most common. Almost all children begin their elementary education with Kindergarten and finish their high school education with Grade 12. However, education is only compulsory for all students until ages 16 to 18 depending on the individual state. Schools in the US are divided into three phases: elementary, middle and high. Elementary school usually takes children from Kindergarten through to Grade 5 or 6. High school begins either Grades 9 or 10 through to Grade 12.

Answers to key questionsWhile trying to determine the common practice in US curriculum schools in Dubai, DSIB inspectors sought answers to six key questions:

1. What is the curriculum provision like in US schools in Dubai?2.How is students’ learning assessed?3. Who leads these schools?4. Who teaches in US schools?5. Who are the students?6. Why do parents send their children to US schools and what do they think about them?


1. What is the curriculum provision like in US schools in Dubai?The curriculum in the majority of US schools in Dubai was broad, with courses covering the five key subjects of Islamic Education, Arabic, English, mathematics, and science. Also offered were art, music, drama, ICT, physical education, social studies and modern foreign languages. However, 10 per cent of US schools did not offer any creative arts courses in their high school phases. About half of the US curriculum schools in Dubai offered no elective courses in their high school phase from which students could choose.

Excluding Islamic Education and Arabic, the US schools in Dubai aligned all their curriculum standards for subjects with a minimum of two states and a maximum of 13 states. In 86 per cent of US schools in Dubai the curriculum was aligned with the US Common Core State Standards (CCSS) in mathematics and 89 per cent in English Language Arts. About half of US schools aligned with textbooks, which were resources written to help students meet the CCSS. The majority (69 per cent) of US schools aligned their science curriculum with California standards. As yet, there are no US Common Core State Standards in science.

The following charts reflect curriculum alignment information that was provided by the 32 US curriculum schools in Dubai and validated by DSIB inspectors.

Math curriculum aligned with the Common Core State Standards

Aligned Not aligned

86%

14%

89%

11%

English curriculum aligned with the Common Core State Standards

Aligned Not aligned


88

Approximately 90 per cent of US schools in Dubai aligned their Islamic Education and Arabic curricula with the MoE standards of the United Arab Emirates. Most US schools were compliant with the statutory weekly time requirements, but three schools were not compliant in Arabic as a first language, and one was not compliant in either Arabic or Islamic Education.

Less than 15 per cent of schools aligned all their non-key subjects with one state in the United States. More than 50 per cent aligned their non-key subjects with a variety of states and associations, and a few followed their own standards.

Curriculum maps, unit plans and lesson plans were developed for the key subjects and used consistently across the phases in approximately 70 per cent of US curriculum schools in Dubai. These documents facilitated continuity of topics and progression in the levels of challenge students were given. However, more than 10 per cent of US schools simply used the chapter titles from textbooks as their written curriculum. It should be noted that teachers in more than half of the US schools were using the textbooks as ‘recipes’ for the delivery of the curriculum, not as instructional resources. They did not enrich the curriculum to meet all learners’ needs. In a few schools, the non-key subjects had no yearly unit or lesson plans.

Although the curriculum was planned to address the needs of most learners, differentiated tasks for the same topics were rare. In 65 per cent of US schools, the levels of challenge were not well matched to what the students already knew. The curriculum did not provide sufficient opportunities for higher-attaining students or the gifted and talented. Such students were frequently under-challenged by the work they were asked to do.

Curriculum for students learning English as an additional languageIn almost half of US schools, the curriculum was not consistently adapted to meet the needs of students who were learning English as an additional language and consequently did not provide appropriate levels of challenge. The textbooks used in these US schools for English, mathematics and science had levels of English that were too difficult for significant numbers of students. Similarly, other educational resources, including tests and examinations, used English that was not understood by some students. As a consequence of these shortcomings, significant numbers of students could not access the curriculum and did not make the progress of which they were capable.

Levels of challenge in the curriculumOnly a small minority of US schools in Dubai provided further academic challenge to students in high school by offering Advanced Placement (AP) courses or the International Baccalaureate Diploma Programme (IBDP) in preparation for their future. Only six schools (19 per cent) offered AP courses. Seven per cent of US high schools in Dubai offered the IBDP.


19%

81%

US curriculum schools offering Advanced Placement (AP) courses

Offering AP Not offering AP

7%

93%

US curriculum schools offering the IBDP

Offering IBDP Not offering IBDP

The US curriculum schools in Dubai that offered Advanced Placement (AP) courses were not consistent in their admissions criteria or in the number of AP subjects they offered. In schools that did not provide AP courses or the IBDP for high school students, academic challenge was added to the curriculum in other ways.

Curriculum enrichmentAll US curriculum schools in Dubai offered enrichment activities to enhance their curricula. A variety of activities across all phases was offered during and after school hours. Throughout the academic year, more than 75 per cent of US schools provided assemblies, special events, theme days, guest speakers, field trips, competitions, charity events, and/or club meetings during school hours. The number and frequency of the activities to extend learning varied from school to school. A third of the schools also provided opportunities for students to participate in clubs, sports competitions, varsity sports and charity events after classes ended or on the weekends. Less than 10 per cent of the schools provided opportunities for their students to participate in projects, sports and activities abroad. The opportunities for students to serve the wider community locally, nationally and abroad were generally limited.


90

Time given to delivering the curriculumThe number of days per academic year that US curriculum schools in Dubai devoted to instruction varied from 170 to 186 days.

11%

25%

25%

0%

14%

4%

21%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%

170 - 174

175

176

177

178

179

180 +

Percentage of schools

Num

ber

of D

ays

Time Given to Delivering the Curriclum

The majority (64% per cent) of schools devoted 175-178 days to instruction and testing. The time that schools devoted to instruction each week varied from 21 hours to 35 hours. Sixty-three per cent of schools devoted 26 to 30 hours to instruction per week. Ten per cent of schools devoted more than 33 hours per week to instruction. However, one school devoted less than 22 hours to instruction.

Student guidanceAlmost all US curriculum schools had at least one guidance counsellor to support their students. However, most often that one person had responsibility for personal counselling, course counselling, and college and career counselling for students in Kindergarten through Grade 12. Students in most US curriculum schools received appropriate college and careers guidance and a few schools did this very effectively. In the few schools that did not have support systems, students had to rely on the advice and goodwill of a few teachers who offered informal college and career guidance. The lack of provision of qualified individuals to give proper college and careers advice was a hardship for students wanting to prepare for and apply to institutions of higher education particularly if the institution was abroad.


Best practice in the United States

CurriculumEvery state in the United States has standards for each subject taught in Kindergarten through to Grade 12. Each state has developed criterion-referenced assessments to measure students’ progress towards meeting state standards. Forty-five of the 50 states in the United States have adopted the US Common Core State Standards (CCSS) in mathematics and English language arts, making them a part of their own state’s curriculum standards. Texas, Virginia, Alaska and Nebraska have not adopted the CCSS. Minnesota has adopted the English Language Arts standards but not the mathematics standards.

The CCSS were the result of an initiative sponsored by the National Governors Association and the Council of State School Officers that sought to provide a consistent, clear understanding of what students are expected to learn, so teachers and parents know what they need to do to help them.

In elementary schools, students usually have a single teacher for the core subjects of English, mathematics, science and social studies, and have subject specialists for music and modern languages. Subject specialists become more diverse in the middle grades. High school students are required to take a wide variety of courses in English, mathematics, science and social science. They are also often required to take a foreign language and physical education. In addition to required courses, elective or free choice courses are offered. Elective courses usually include music, art and theatre.

The written curriculum in each US school is planned to meet the needs of all learners including students with special educational needs and students who speak English as a second or additional language. To meet the needs of students who require further academic challenge, Advanced Placement (AP) courses and the International Baccalaureate Diploma Programme (IBDP) are offered. The College Board, an association in the United States, developed AP courses and examinations to provide motivated and academically prepared high school students with the opportunity to take college-level courses and achieve college credit or advanced placement. AP helps students to stand out in college admissions, earn college credits, and skip introductory courses. High schools can choose from up to 34 AP courses in arts, English, history and social science, math and computer science, sciences, and world languages and cultures. These courses provide students with the knowledge and skills to help them in higher education. In addition, students scoring well on the AP Exam can earn credit and advanced placement at college or university.

The IBDP is offered in 796 schools in the US and also provides high school students with challenge and helps students to stand out in the college admissions process.

The implemented or taught curriculum carries through the planned curriculum. There is an expectation that the planned and implemented curriculum will contribute to the cognitive, personal, social and physical development of all students. There is also an expectation that the development of the ‘whole student’ will be supported by a variety of co-curricular and extra-curricular activities.

A major characteristic of US schools is the high priority given to extra-curricular activities. They typically include sports, clubs, and organisations. Some high schools also require students in engage in a minimum number of hours of service to the local, national or international community.


92

Time given to delivering the curriculumThe number of days devoted to instruction or the delivery of the curriculum during an academic year in schools in the US varies from 170-180 days. However, schools in most states devote 180 days to instruction. The hours devoted to instruction per year vary from 900-1260. Most of the states in the United States require more than 902 hours of instruction per academic year and nearly half of the states require more than 1,020. Texas requires 1260 hours of instruction per academic year. The hours per week devoted to instruction vary from 25 hours to 32.5 hours excluding recess and lunch times.

Guidance counsellorIn the US guidance counselors offer personal, academic and career counselling. Often high schools in the US have at least one counsellor that is dedicated to offering career and college counselling. She/he helps students to explore career options and take steps to make the transition from high school to college or career including preparation of college and university applications.

2. how are students assessed in US curriculum schools in Dubai?In schools with a US curriculum in Dubai, learning was continuously assessed throughout the year and report cards were issued to parents at regular intervals, usually quarterly. In almost all schools, the focus and weight on internal assessments was greater than the focus and weight on external assessments.

Internal assessmentInternal assessments in US schools included both formative and summative assessments. The goal of formative assessments was to monitor student learning and provide ongoing feedback that could be used by teachers to improve their teaching and by students to improve their learning. Formative assessments were to help students identify their strengths and weaknesses and target areas that need work. They are to help faculty recognise where students require assistance or further challenge.

The use of formative assessment in US curriculum schools in Dubai was variable. In most schools, it included oral questioning, observation, worksheets, quizzes, problems, journal entries, portfolio checks and self-assessment. Formative assessments informed both teachers and students about students’ understanding, at points when adjustments could be made. However, only about half of the schools used formative assessment to adjust what was being taught as a result of feedback.

Summative assessments were used in all US curriculum schools in Dubai periodically to determine what students knew and could do. Presentations, projects, exhibitions, end-of-unit or chapter tests and end-of-term or semester tests were used as summative assessments. In many schools the chapter and semester tests were not created by the teachers; they were taken directly from teachers’ textbook guides or textbook test banks. Often the readymade tests did not measure students’ progress toward the curriculum standards. On occasions, students were being tested on information that had not been taught. The level of English used in the readymade tests was often too difficult for


students who were learning English as an additional language (EAL). The tests were not modified to determine accurately students’ capacities in the subject because of their EAL difficulties. As a consequence of this shortcoming, significant numbers of students could not adequately demonstrate the progress they had made.

External assessmentAll US curriculum schools assessed learning by using external examinations. However, the frequency of exams varied a great deal. No US school in Dubai administered the US state assessment with which it was aligned, so students in Dubai were not benchmarked against students in the US following the same state curriculum standards. Seventy-five per cent of US curriculum schools in Dubai were not assessing students’ learning against state standards.

The following chart reveals assessment information that was provided by the 32 US curriculum schools in Dubai and validated by DSIB inspectors.

25%

75%

Schools which assess learning against state standards

Assessed against state standards Not assessed against state standards

United States curriculum schools in Dubai assessed learning using internationally benchmarked tests including the SAT I, Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL), International English Language Testing System (IELTS), Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) and Progress of International Reading and Literacy Study (PIRLS).

Thirty-eight per cent of US schools required their high school students to take the SAT 1 prior to graduation.


94

38%

62%

Schools which require all students to take the SAT prior to graduation

Required Did not require

Only 35 per cent of US schools in Dubai required their high school students to take either the TOEFL or IELTS prior to graduation. A little less than half of the US schools offered a specific preparation course for either the TOEFL or IELTS.

35%

65%

Schools which require Grade 11 or Grade 12 students to take either the TOEFL or IELTS

Required Did not require

More than 6,000 students from both public and private schools in Dubai participated in TIMSS 2007. The results demonstrated that students in Dubai outperformed students in other participating MENA countries. However, their overall average was below TIMSS international average in both Grade 4 and Grade 8 in mathematics and science. Variation within Dubai was found nevertheless, and TIMSS 2007 data therefore provided KHDA with baseline information about the range of achievement levels of students at schools throughout Dubai.


For the first time, the TIMSS and PIRLS cycles coincided in 2011 resulting in a joint implementation of both assessments. Although most countries sampled only a number of their schools for the assessment, Dubai was in the unique position of having tested all of its eligible schools.

In the TIMSS 2011 Dubai’s average scale scores for mathematics and science in Grade 4 and Grade 8 were below the TIMSS scale centre point. Analysis of data from US curriculum schools in Dubai, showed underperformance against the Dubai averages for all four testing areas. For instance, in Grade 4 mathematics, where the Dubai average scale score was 468, the Dubai US schools’ average scale score was 449.

Further analysis of these data from US curriculum schools in Dubai showed strengths in knowledge but weaknesses in applying and reasoning. Too many teachers spent excessive time developing knowledge of facts, procedures and concepts that students needed to know, at the expense of deeper understanding of applying and reasoning. Students’ holistic development required the development of application of knowledge and conceptual understanding to solve problems or answer questions. Reasoning needed to go beyond the solution of routine problems to include unfamiliar situations, complex contexts, and multi-step problems.

The TIMSS 2011 US average scale score for Grade 4 mathematics was almost 100 points above the Dubai US curriculum schools’ score. The Grade 8 mathematics average scale score in the US is around 50 points higher than the Dubai US curriculum schools’ average scale score. A similar pattern of results occurred in Grade 4 and Grade 8 science.

TIMSS and PIRLS 2011

TIMSS Grade 4 Mathematics

TIMSSGrade 4 Science

PIRLS TIMSSGrade 8 Mathematics

TIMSSGrade 8 Science

USA Overall Average

541 544 556 509 525

Dubai US Schools Average

449 438 452 465 464

When PIRLS average scale scores for reading from schools in the US were compared with average scale scores of Dubai US curriculum schools, more than a 100 point difference was noted.

Although the context and populations were different in US curriculum schools in the United States of America and in US curriculum schools in Dubai it should also be noted that students in schools in the United States are not all US citizens. Also the native language of students in many schools in the United States of America is not English.

Schools in Dubai following a US curriculum collected a tremendous amount of data related to their students. However, data were not used effectively to support students’ progress and attainment. A large percentage of schools lacked the capacity to interrogate and analyse the resulting data. As a consequence, critical trends concerning weaknesses were not used to influence curriculum. For example, where literacy information was provided, schools had not recognised inherent weaknesses in vocabulary development and forms of comprehension. Consequently, appropriate remedial programs were not put in place across the schools.


96

Grading scales to evaluate learningHigh school students in most US curriculum schools in Dubai received percentage scale grades on homework, projects and tests. At the end of each academic term, the percentages were converted to letter grades and A (excellent), B (above average), C (average), D (below average) or F (failing) was recorded on an official transcript for each high school course taken. However, there was variation of up to five percentage points between schools on what percentage point spread constituted a particular letter grade.

The standard alpha grading scale used in a majority of US curriculum schools in Dubai was as follows:

A 90%-100%B 80%-89%C 70%-79%D 60%-69%F Below 60% is a failing grade*[*In Islamic Education and Arabic failure is a grade below 50%]

A significant minority (41 per cent) of US high schools converted the A-F grading scale to a four-point Grade Point Average (GPA) scale that could be used on college and university applications. There was variance on what points were assigned to letter grades, especially when the letter was accompanied by either a plus or minus.

Graduation requirementsThree quarters of US curriculum schools in Dubai had clearly stated requirements for the courses and the number of credits that must be earned to graduate and receive a high school diploma. However, what constituted a ‘credit’ in Dubai US schools varied, as did the time required to earn one. Fifty-seven per cent of US curriculum schools required students to earn at least 21 credits by the end of Grade 12 to graduate. A significant minority (32 per cent) of schools allowed students to graduate from high school with 17 or fewer credits.

57%

11%

32%

Academic credits or units required for graduation from US high schools in Dubai

21 or more credits 17-20 credits Less than 17 credits


Most US curriculum schools in Dubai required students to take and pass the following courses to earn a high school diploma:

• English • Science • Mathematics • Social Studies/Social Science • Modern Foreign Languages • Creative Arts • Computer Studies • Physical Education However, the number of courses required in each subject varied from school to school. A few schools did not require courses in the creative arts. Approximately half (52 percent) of US curriculum schools required all high school students to take the same courses to qualify for graduation with a high school diploma; they offered no electives. Most US high schools in Dubai did not offer Advanced Placement (AP) courses or examinations.

In addition to completing a set number of courses and earning a set number of credits, students in a minority of US curriculum schools in Dubai were required to take the Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL) or the International English Language Testing System (IELTS) examination as a graduation requirement. The SAT I (mathematics only) examination was a requirement for graduation in a minority (38 percent) of US curriculum schools. No US curriculum schools in Dubai had a minimum Grade Point Average (GPA) requirement for graduation. However, in all schools students must achieve a final grade of at least 60 percent in all courses except Arabic and Islamic Education (50 percent or better) for these courses to count toward the graduation requirements.

Last year, almost all graduates from US schools in Dubai attained a high school diploma at the end of Grade 12; only four out of 1,768 seniors left without a diploma from their schools. The majority of students, in US schools in Dubai which compute GPA, achieved GPAs between 3.0 to 4.0 points; a minority achieved in the 2.9 - 1.0 range.

GPA of 2011 -2012 Graduates

5%

24%

51%

12%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

1.0 - 1.9

2.0 - x2.9

3.0 - 3.9

4.0

Percent of the total number of students


98

Of the minority of schools that computed Grade Point Average (GPA), 12 per cent of the students achieved a 4.0 GPA; 51 per cent attained a GPA in the range of 3.0 – 3.9; 24 per cent earned GPAs of 2.0 - 2.9; and 5 per cent achieved a GPA of only 1.0 - 1.9.

AccreditationAccreditation is an expression of confidence in an educational institution’s mission, educational programs, performances, and human and financial resources. It is a system of accountability through peer review that is ongoing, voluntary and comprehensive in scope. Accreditation is based on standards that are developed and regularly reviewed, and that define the characteristics of good schools.

The majority (72 per cent) of US curriculum schools in Dubai were accredited by at least one agency from the US that attested to the quality of provision. Two were accredited by the Middle States Association of Colleges and Schools (MSACS), and seven were accredited, or were candidates for accreditation, by the New England Association of Schools and Colleges (NEASC). Almost half (14) of them were accredited by AdvancED, a consortium representing the North Central Association, Commission on Accreditation and School Improvement (NCA-CASI), the Northwest Accreditation Commission (NWAC), and the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Council on Accreditation and School Improvement (SACS-CASI). Nine of the 32 US schools, where data were gathered, had not been accredited by an external agency from the United States.

Comparison of school accreditation and overall school performanceAll schools accredited by NEASC were rated either ‘Good’ or ‘Outstanding’ overall by the DSIB in the 2012-2013 academic year. The two schools accredited by the MSACS were rated ‘Good’ overall during 2012-2013. Most (80 percent) of the schools accredited by AdvancED were rated as ‘Acceptable’ overall by the DSIB during 2012-2013. Two AdvancED accredited schools were rated ‘Good’ overall and one was rated ‘Unsatisfactory.’ Of the schools with no external accreditation, none was rated ‘Good’ overall.


School name Main Curriculum Main Curriculum Accrediting Body

Dubai American Academy US/IB Outstanding NEASC

Al Mizhar American Academy Private School for Girls

US Good NEASC

Dubai National School - Al Barsha US Good NEASC

Dubai National School - Al Twar US Good NEASC

Al Ittihad Private School- Jumeirah US Good (NEASC-Candidate)

American School of Dubai US Good MSACS

Universal American School US/IB Good MSACS

Dubai International School - Al Quoz US Good AdvancED

Greenwood International School US Good AdvancED

Al Ittihad Private School - Al Mamzar US Acceptable (NEASC-Candidate)

Bradenton Preparatory Academy US Acceptable (NEASC-Candidate)

Al Maaref Private School US Acceptable AdvancED

Al Mawakeb School - Al Barsha US Acceptable AdvancED

Al Mawakeb School - Al Garhoud US Acceptable AdvancED

Dubai International School - Al Garhoud US Acceptable AdvancED

American International School US Acceptable AdvancED

Dubai Modern Education School US/MOE Acceptable AdvancED

Al Khaleej National School US Acceptable AdvancED

International School of Arts and Sciences US Acceptable AdvancED

North American International School US Acceptable AdvancED

Sharjah American International school US Acceptable AdvancED

Philadelphia Private School US Acceptable AdvancED

International Academic School US/MOE Acceptable Not accredited

International School of Choueifat - Dubai SABIS/UK/US Acceptable Not accredited

Mirdif Private School US Acceptable Not accredited

Nibras International School US Acceptable Not accredited

School Of Modern Skills US Acceptable Not accredited

Collegiate American School US Acceptable Not accredited

Dubai Arab American Private School US Acceptable Not accredited

Dubai American Scientific School US Unsatisfactory AdvancED

New Academy School US Unsatisfactory Not accredited

Al Hesn Private School MOE/US Unsatisfactory Not accredited


100


AssessmentIn the United States, learning is continuously assessed throughout the year and report cards are issued to parents at regular intervals; both formative and summative assessments are administered. In almost all US schools, the focus and weight of internal assessments are greater than the focus and weight of external assessments.

One type of external assessment that students in the US take is a state assessment, which is developed and administered by the state in which they reside. Each state has developed criterion-referenced assessments to measure students’ progress toward meeting state standards, which in 45 states include the Common Core State Standards in mathematics and English Language Arts. Criterion-referencing measures students’ understanding of each part of the curriculum. Also high school students, usually in Grade 11, take either the SAT I or ACT examination to determine their readiness for careers and college and universities. The SAT I, formally known as the Scholastic Aptitude Test, assesses critical reading, writing skills, and mathematics; the ACT, formally known as the American College Test, assesses English, reading, mathematics and science reasoning, and includes an optional writing test. Students who complete Advanced Placements courses take one or more AP examinations.

Graduation requirementsAt the high school level, students usually accumulate credits or units toward a high school diploma for graduation. Grades are recorded for each course at the end of each semester on an official transcript. The grading scale is A (excellent), B (above average), C (average), D (below average) and F (failing). A quantitative figure representing a student’s accumulated grades is also computed and recorded on official transcripts. Each letter grade is assigned a number of points: A = 4 points, B = 3, C = 2, D = 1 and F = 0 points. A grade point average (GPA) is calculated by adding all of the points earned for each course grade and dividing the total points by the total number of courses taken. For example, a GPA of 3.0 is a “B” average for all of the courses taken. The official transcript of grades is required when high school graduates apply for employment or admission to higher education.

Criteria for university admissionAfter graduation, students opting to pursue higher education have the choice of attending a variety of post-secondary institutions including universities. Although admission policies vary from university to university in the United States, most determine admission based on several criteria: high school course of study, high school GPA, participation in extra-curricular activities, score earned on either the SAT or the ACT examination, the Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL) or International English Language Testing System (IELTS) examination score if required, a written essay, and possibly a personal interview.

3٫ Who are the leaders of these US curriculum schools in Dubai?Eighty per cent of senior leaders in US curriculum schools in Dubai had an administrator’s qualification, but only a minority, about 30 per cent, had school administrator’s qualifications from the United States. About half of the senior leaders had qualifications from another country and the remaining 20 per cent had no formal qualification for school administration.


29%

51%

20%

Leaders with administrative certification

Certification from United States Certification from Other countries No certificate

22%

78%

Leaders with K-12 teaching experience

Taught in a K-12 school in the United States. Taught in a K-12 school outside the United States.

Most leaders brought teaching experience from outside the US to their work as school leaders in Dubai. Less than a quarter of school leaders had teaching experience in the US. Similarly, only a minority were certified to teach in the US. The majority, 68 per cent, was certified to teach in another country. About a tenth of school leaders had no teaching certificate.

In terms of the stability of school leadership, more than half of the leaders had been in their schools for six years or longer. More than a quarter had been in their jobs for over a decade, but about a fifth of the leaders had only one full year of experience in their current schools. A majority, 60 per cent, of senior school leaders spoke Arabic as their first language and the balance spoke English.


102

Best Practice in the United States

School LeadersThe Department of Education in each state in the United States sets requirements for its school leaders including superintendents and principals. Almost all states in the US require that their administrators or leaders hold professional certificates from their states, which cannot be earned without a minimum of a master’s degree and three years teaching experience in a K-12 school. School leaders in the US are often also required to speak the native language of the majority population in their schools, in addition to the language of instruction of their schools.

4. Who teaches in US curriculum schools in Dubai?More than 90 per cent of teachers had earned a university degree, but only a minority had a teaching qualification. Teachers were often teaching subjects for which they also had no university preparation. For example, a teacher with an undergraduate degree in accounting was teaching mathematics and another with a degree in economics was teaching English.

Similarly, most teachers in the US curriculum schools in Dubai were not native speakers of English, but among the teachers of English, about 62 per cent were native speakers. The proportion of native speakers was highest (about 72 per cent) in the elementary phases of schools and lowest (about 40 per cent) in the Kindergartens. Among the 38 per cent of English teachers who were not native speakers, there were teachers who spoke English at a near-native level and provided good modelling of the English language.

62%

38%

Teachers of English

Native English Speaker Non-native English Speaker

Assessment of teachersIn all 32 US curriculum schools in Dubai, where data were gathered, leaders observed teachers in classrooms to assess the quality of their work. Most schools also used student achievement data and teachers’ self and peer assessments. About half the schools used students’ evaluations of their teachers as part of teacher performance appraisal.



TeachersIn almost all states in the United States, teachers are required to have a bachelor’s degree and possess a teaching certificate from the state where they are employed. Teachers in the United States must prove that they possess good subject knowledge, knowledge of how students learn and develop, skills that will help them to deliver instruction effectively and assess learning through a variety of methods, and the disposition to support the learning needs of all students. In many states, teaching certificates are not issued unless minimum scores have been earned on the Praxis tests.

The Educational Testing Service (ETS) developed Praxis tests to measure teacher candidates’ knowledge and skills. The tests are used for licensing and certification processes, and include:

• Praxis I Pre-Professional Skills Tests (PPST) that measure basic skills in reading, writing and mathematics and include multiple-choice questions and an essay question on the writing test. The tests are designed to evaluate whether or not candidates have the academic skills needed to prepare for a career in education. Colleges and universities may use the Praxis I tests to evaluate individuals for entry into teacher education programmes. The assessments are generally taken early in college. Many states also require Praxis I scores as part of their teacher licensing process.

• Praxis II Subject Assessments that measure knowledge of specific subjects that K–12 educators will teach, as well as general and subject-specific teaching skills and knowledge. Individuals entering the teaching profession take the Praxis II tests as part of the teacher licensing and certification process required by many states. Some professional associations and organisations require Praxis II tests as a criterion for professional licensing decisions.

Each state and licensing organisation determines its own certification requirements including Praxis passing scores. In a few states, teaching certificates will not be issued for any subject unless minimum scores or levels are earned on examinations that assess spoken English. Teachers of English in the United States are required to speak English at native or near native levels.

Teaching certificates issued by the states in the US specify which subject or subjects a teacher is qualified to teach and the phase or phases where he/she is qualified to teach. Schools employ and deploy teachers based on their teaching qualifications. Teachers are to be assigned only to subjects and phases they are certified to teach.

5. Who are the students in the US curriculum schools in Dubai? Citizens of 147 countries attended US curriculum schools in Dubai. Only one school in Dubai had a majority of students who were US citizens. Four of the 32 schools had significant minorities of US citizens, but six schools had no citizens of the US in attendance. Forty-seven per cent of students attending US curriculum schools in Dubai in 2012-2013 were citizens of the United Arab Emirates.


104

47%

7%6%

5%

5%

30%

Nationalities of students in US Curriculum Schools

United Arab Emirates

Jordan

United States of America

Syrian Arab Republic

Egypt

Others

Students’ English language skillsThe students in these 32 schools can be characterised as being mostly second-language English speakers. Only a few students spoke English as a native language in the elementary phases of 20 schools, in the middle phases of 21 schools, and in the high school phase of 22 schools. By comparison, almost all students were native speakers of English in the elementary and middle phases of only two US curriculum schools and in the high phase of just one school.

Students’ descriptions of US curriculum schools in DubaiMost students attending US curriculum schools described them as friendly, welcoming places that provided a challenging curriculum and supportive teachers to prepare them for university study. US schools were often described as a “friendly place” or “an easy place to make friends.” Students compared their US schools to welcoming families, with statements such as “We have many nationalities but we are a big family.” “Students think of others as ‘students’ not as people from other countries” and “There is respect for the religions of others… …there is no real line between religions.”

Most students also described their teachers as welcoming, supportive and knowledgeable. Students said their teachers were “very respectful and welcoming,” “friendly and supportive,” and “helpful.” A few students noted that “teachers are also available to help during break or after school.” Almost all students described their teachers as knowing their subjects well. Most described their teachers as making their subjects interesting or, at least, “not boring.”

According to students, many courses at the US schools in Dubai were “interesting”, “challenging” and “provide good college prep.” The courses that were considered good preparation for college or university included those that required critical thinking and writing. Some courses were deemed challenging because “the focus is on understanding not memorising. It is harder work, but easier to learn.” Other courses were viewed as interesting because the teacher “tells stories” and “makes connections with the real world.”


Students provided numerous examples of UAE connections, including “In English we compare books about women in different societies to women in the UAE;” “My economics teacher is always connecting what we are studying to the UAE;” and “We connect almost everything in Islamic and Arabic to the UAE.” Connections to the UAE enriched the curriculum in most schools. The majority of students also stated that co-curricular activities, including celebration of the UAE National Day and extra-curricular activities, enriched the curriculum. For example, one student said, “The activities provided during and after school make school a more interesting place.” Another student said, “We have good opportunities to participate in after-school activities, like athletics.” However, a few students reported concerns such as, “The school has limited activities and does not respond to our requests for more activities” and, “We have no sports!”

The majority of students who participated in clubs, sports or other physical activities did so on their own outside their schools. Only a minority of students participated in school organised activities. Students said they enjoyed playing basketball, football (soccer), swimming, lifting weights, walking, horseback riding, running and exercising. A minority of students also reported playing video games after school and participating in clubs and organisations. A few played musical instruments daily after school.

Almost all students reported spending time after school preparing for school the following day. Most students devoted one to two hours to homework, which did not include study time for quizzes and tests. A few students spent more than four hours on homework daily. Class work and homework helped to prepare students for direct entry into careers, colleges or universities. Almost all students stated that they planned to attend college or university directly after high school. There was the assumption on the part of almost all students that their US curriculum school had prepared them effectively for their chosen further education and future career path.

Graduating students’ choices for further studyApproximately 33 per cent of the most recent UAE graduates from US curriculum schools had been admitted to colleges and universities in the United Arab Emirates. Seventeen per cent of graduates had joined institutions of higher education in the United Kingdom and less than seven per cent were enrolled in the United States. Ten per cent of graduates had been admitted to colleges and universities in Canada, Europe, and Australia. Another 33 per cent of graduates were enrolled in institutions in other countries, but very few were admitted to schools in the wider Middle East region.

6. Why do parents in Dubai choose US curriculum schools and what do they think about them?

Parents choose US curriculum schools for a variety of reasons, including academics and preparation for higher education. Twenty-six per cent of parents cited the English language as the main reason, and another 23 per cent believed that these schools offered a US curriculum that prepared students for higher education in the US. Only a few parents emphasized the importance of extra-curricular activities in their choice. The school’s reputation, recommendations by friends, and the school’s location were reasons behind a few parents’ decisions. Other reasons for choosing US curriculum schools included affordable fees and admission of students with special education needs.


106

3%

4%

5%

12%

13%

14%

23%

26%

It had less focus on external examinations

Other

It had less focus on homework

It offered a wide variety of extra-curricular activitiesincluding sports

It was recommended by a relative or friend

It was located closest to my home

It will prepare my child to attend an American college or university

The language of instruction was English

Why did you choose to send your child to a US curriculum school?

In US curriculum schools, most parents believed that teachers used a variety of methods to involve students actively in classes and provided good modelling of the English language. One parent commented: “My children are happy at classes and enjoy writing. The credit for this goes to the English teacher.” While most parents had positive views about teaching methods and English, they had concerns about the teaching of Arabic and the development of critical thinking. Comments by parents included, “[the] Arabic language program uses poor teaching methods” and “The Arabic teachers are very strict,” and “Parents [who are not Arabic speakers] have no way to help their kids with homework.” Another parent wrote: “[The] school does not concentrate on developing critical thinking because they [the teachers] have to cover the curriculum.”

Teachers provide good modelling of theEnglish language

Teaching in your child's school

37% 55% 7% 1%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%


Only 36 per cent of parents thought that their children could choose from an appropriate range of elective courses. Parents commented that the students want more choices. Similarly, only 38 per cent believe that there is a range of extra-curricular activities.


My child can choose from an appropriate range of electivecourses.

The school offers a wide range of elective courses.

Courses and subjects

20%

21%

48%

50%

24%

22%

8%

7%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%


In respect to assessment, 53 per cent of parents knew about the external examinations offered in their children’s schools. More parents knew more about SAT and TOEFL than any other tests. Parent comments included, “I would like to know how my children are measuring up with others when they take the SAT and TOEFL [tests].”

Only a few parents wanted these US curriculum schools to prepare their children for direct entry into the job market. Most parents wanted them to prepare students for admission to colleges and universities in the US or the UAE. 92% of parents confirmed that the schools did this.

The school helps my child to prepare college and university admissions applications

Next steps in education

37% 55% 6% 2%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%



108

SummaryParents’ beliefs about the quality of provision in US schools in Dubai did not match well with the findings of this investigation on some key aspects. For example, parents believed that teaching was of good quality overall in their children’s schools, yet this was true in only a minority of the schools. Parents’ stated reasons for choosing a US curriculum school for their children included post-secondary destinations in the US, but the record of placements shows that the US was among the least likely destinations of Grade 12 students following graduation.

Too many leaders lacked qualifications and the necessary English skills to lead a US curriculum school effectively. Most lacked teaching and administrative experience in the US. The consequence was that leadership was a key aspect in need of improvement in more than half the US curriculum schools in Dubai.

Similarly, teachers in these schools too often lacked teaching certification. More importantly, teachers of English were often still learners of English and lacked the skills and experience to deliver courses of English to their students. As a consequence, the progress of students learning English as an additional language was too slow.

The curriculum in these schools was often too narrow and textbook-based rather than adapted to meet the needs of students. Although some schools offered outstanding breadth of provision, many schools did not provide a range of opportunities to help students grow and develop. The level of difficulty in text books and other learning resources was often too high for students learning English as an additional language. Again, the consequence was that their progress was too slow, not only in English but in mathematics and science as well. In the majority of US schools, the levels of challenge were not well matched to what the students already knew. The curriculum did not provide sufficient opportunities for high-attaining students or the gifted and talented ones.

The weight on internal assessments was greater than the weight on external assessments in most US curriculum schools in Dubai. Only a minority of schools administered internationally benchmarked assessments. Few US curriculum schools assessed learning against their chosen curriculum standards. A minority used standardized tests such as the SAT and TOEFL to assess students’ readiness for careers, college or university. As a result, students and their parents were frequently misinformed about how well they were doing in terms of the expectations of similar students in the United States.

Only a minority of US curriculum schools had recognised, reputable accreditation for their overall provision and to certify their students’ high school diplomas. Students who graduated from US curriculum high schools without accreditation had their future education choices restricted and their career opportunities limited. When comparisons were made between what some US curriculum schools advertise, what parents and students believed was being provided, and what was actually provided by the schools, significant discrepancies became evident.

Although, over five years of inspections, progress has been made in the overall quality of provision by US curriculum schools in Dubai, there is still much work to be done. Most schools do not offer an educational experience to their students similar to that of a school in the United States. With that fact in mind, we offer five recommendations for improvement:


Recommendations• Leaders at US curriculum schools should be required to have a school administrator’s qualifications;• Teachers at US curriculum schools should be required to have a proficiency level in English;• Where necessary, the curriculum that schools offer should be modified to meet the needs of students for

whom English is an additional language;• Schools should assess learning using external examinations so that students and parents know how

progress through the curriculum compares to that of students in the United States;• US curriculum schools in Dubai should seek and gain accreditation by a regional body from the United

States.

next StepsKHDA has entered into a strategic partnership with the New England Association of Schools and Colleges (NEASC), which is the oldest of the six regional accrediting bodies in the United States, to collaborate and exchange information on US curriculum schools and higher education institutes in Dubai. It should be noted that the only US curriculum school in Dubai judged to be outstanding was NEASC accredited. All schools accredited by NEASC were rated either ‘Good’ or ‘Outstanding’ overall by the Dubai Schools Inspection Bureau (DSIB) in the 2012-2013 academic year.


110

Comparing practices of US curriculum schools in Dubai and best practices in the US

Practices of US schools in Dubai Best practices in the United States

• AccreditationOnly a minority of schools in Dubai have recognised, reputable accreditation to enhance provision and validate students’ high school diplomas.

US High School Diploma

Students graduating from US curriculum high schools with a diploma that is not recognised by US colleges and universities, have their future choices restricted and their career opportunities limited.

• AccreditationSchools in the United States are accredited by one of the US regional accrediting bodie

US High School Diploma

Students who graduate from high school earn diplomas recognised by colleges and universities in the United States and abroad.

• CurriculumThe curriculum in the majority of schools is broad, with courses covering the five key subjects as well as art, music, theatre, computers, physical education, social studies and modern foreign languages.

Not all high schools provide their students with elective courses.

In most schools, the curriculum is aligned with the US Common Core State Standards in mathematics and English Language Arts.

In the majority of schools in Dubai, the science curriculum is aligned with standards of one US state.

In a minority of US schools the curriculum is not consistently adapted to meet the needs of students for whom English is an additional language and does not provide good levels of challenge.

Almost all US schools in Dubai offer enrichment activities to enhance the curriculum.

TextbooksThe use of textbooks in US schools is often inappropriate for students learning English as an additional language.

• CurriculumThe curriculum is broad and includes required and electives courses. Fine and performing arts courses are a part of the curriculum.

The curriculum is aligned with the standards of one US state, which has incorporated the Common Core State Standards in mathematics and English Language Arts.

All schools in the US align science and other subjects with state standards.

Curriculum is adapted to meet the needs of students for whom English is an additional language and provides high levels of challenge.

The curriculum includes quality extra-curricular activities that address the broad spectrum of student interests, at no or minimal additional cost to students.

TextbooksTextbooks are used appropriately for students learning English as an additional language.


• Qualifications of leadersMost school leaders in Dubai possess a master’s degree but only a third have a school administrator’s qualifications from the US.

• Qualifications of leadersAll school leaders possess a teaching certificate, at least a master’s degree, as well as a professional administrative certificate.

• Qualifications of teachersAlmost all teachers possess bachelor’s degrees, and the majority hold recognised teaching qualifications.

Few teachers gained their degrees and teaching qualifications in the United States.

Few teachers have experience teaching in the United States or in American international schools.

Few teachers are native speakers of English.

• Qualifications of teachersAll teachers possess bachelor’s degrees and teaching certificates.

Almost all teachers are native speakers of English.

• ChallengeIn the majority of US schools, the levels of challenge are not well matched to what the students already know.

Few schools offer Advanced Placement (AP) to high school students.

• ChallengeThe levels of challenge are well matched to what the students already know.

Advanced Placement (AP) and honors courses are offered to high school students.

• External examinationsOnly a minority of Dubai schools use standardized tests such as the SAT and TOEFL to assess high school students’ readiness for future careers and higher education.

• External examinationsHigh school students are encouraged to take the ACT or SAT to assess their readiness for future career paths and higher education.

• Career and college guidanceOnly a limited number of US curriculum schools have a designated person to assist students with transition from high school to either the workforce or higher education.

• Career and college guidanceOne or more guidance counsellors are available to assist students with transition from high school to either the workforce or higher education.


112

School Context Al Mizhar American Academy provides education for 659 students from pre-Kindergarten to Grade 12, aged three to 18 years, with over twenty nationalities on roll. Just over 60 per cent of the students are Emirati and most students have Arabic as a mother tongue. The school offers an American curriculum and is fully accredited by the Council of International Schools and the New England Association of Schools and Colleges.

International assessments An equal number of Emirati and non-Emirati students participated in TIMSS and PIRLS. The students achieved results above the international average and the school recorded the smallest gap between the performance in the tests of the two groups of students.

The Journey “Al Mizhar American Academy strives to maintain a high level of expectation for our students in all grade levels. In our early years programmeme we emphasise a dual learning programme. This allows Emirati students to have a firm foundation in both their mother tongue and in the primary language of instruction – an essential tool for reading, writing and speaking.

In Grades 1-12, girls are developing their literacy skills by writing and reading across the curriculum. Teachers of all subject areas are promoting, encouraging and requiring both reading and writing activities within their lessons. In humanities, the writing process is taught using Step up to Writing and the 6+1 Writing Traits. Literacy and research skills are emphasised across English and Social Studies. The school has adopted a workshop style literacy programme within the classrooms that allows teachers to differentiate their instruction and students to receive an individual learning plan. All students are supported, based on their individual needs. This holistic approach to learning allows students to grow and achieve in all subjects and grade levels.

The school provides equal opportunity to all of its students and encourages them to celebrate their own culture and religion. Our students are highly active, continuously supporting the Dubai community and celebrating their national identity.

We have bridged the gap between the Emirati and expatriate students by encouraging them to realise they are one and the same; strong, independent young ladies who are striving for the best education and a better UAE.”

Improvement journey

Al Mizhar American Academy: Closing the gap between Emirati and non-Emirati students in international assessments


• Equal opportunities for all.• Change in school timetable to allow more time for learning.• New KHDA self-evaluation form, helped to use the data from the previous exams to measure the gap in performance between the different groups including Emiratis.• Support from governors.

Whole school

• A number of literacy initiatives.• Modified teaching techniques to promote differentiation and meet the needs of students.• High expectations from all students.• Extensive communications with parents and students.

Curriculum

• Improved girls' dispositions towards learning.• Smart, individual goals for students.• The one gender school: very high motivation.

Students

6ChAPTER:

66


Challenges for the next Five Years


116

Messages for schools DSIB has now completed five successful years of working with schools to improve educational provision in Dubai. Over that period, stronger leadership and self-evaluation skills have led directly to better outcomes for students. Schools have become safer and more caring places where students can relax, feel valued and enjoy learning. Curricula have become less rigid; increased enrichment and diversity have raised students’ levels of interest and work ethic. Better progress in lessons has gradually influenced attainment in the key subjects. However, DSIB recognises that there is still work to be done.

DSIB believes that all schools are capable of improvement but accepts that schools will improve at different rates. The desire to improve needs to be shared by all stakeholders. There must be an understanding of how children learn best and all teachers must be highly focused on what children actually learn. Most importantly, senior leaders must be experienced, enlightened and successful professionals. Their role in leading change in the schools is critical and must not be underestimated.

This report, taken together the Key Findings from the 2012-13 inspections, gives rise to a number of recommendations as to how schools might wish to develop over the coming years. These suggestions may not be applicable to all schools, especially the most effective ones. However, they comprise key pieces of advice, especially for underperforming schools and those that are keen to move to the next level.

The teaching of Arabic continues to be a weakness in many schools, especially for those students who learn it as an additional language. Lessons are too often dull sessions in which students are expected to learn the language in a formal way through a narrow range of methods. Schools should consider that a key factor of effective language teaching is to create opportunities for students to learn in real-life situations, as they naturally learn their first language. An initial focus on speaking and listening is more productive than learning alphabets and script. Reading is a weakness for first language learners, thus undermining their access to other subjects. The most successful schools treat the teaching of Arabic in the same way as they treat the teaching of other modern languages.

Leadership is crucial. When a school is rated outstanding, it is because the senior leaders are the driving force. When schools are not performing well, senior leaders usually lack a clear understanding of education, or the ability to influence change, or the willingness to do so. It is important that leaders at all levels are competent, professional in their approach and play a full part in school development. Furthermore, owners and governors have a vital duty to ensure that schools fulfil their promises to students and their parents and that they are properly funded and resourced.

Self-evaluation has become an integral part of school inspection. It is not fully understood in all schools that self-evaluation is far more than an inspection tool. It is a vital element of school improvement, upon which effective action plans should be based. Less effective schools have a tendency to gloss over weaknesses or use inappropriate criteria to make judgements. Accurate self-evaluation is difficult, but the more informed, objective and honest it is, the more useful it is to schools.

The quality of teaching has improved appreciably but there are still too many schools where it is mediocre. To improve teaching, teachers should expect more from their students and plan work that is sufficiently challenging for their abilities. This would particularly help the less and more able students, as well as those with special educational needs. To do this, the assessment of students’


progress in gaining knowledge and skills should be routine and rigorous. Teachers must make sure of students’ existing knowledge and abilities in order to set the right kind of work. Teachers should focus less on delivering standard-issue, set lessons. Students should be taught to learn for themselves.

Schools should deliver the curriculum that they promise to parents. Some lower performing schools do not do this. They should rely less on using textbooks alone and ensure that all elements are carefully planned in a proper programme of learning. In addition, schools should enrich the curriculum as much as possible and relate learning to real life. Lessons should be brought alive with interesting resources, innovative activities and links with other subjects. In addition, all schools should strive to offer activities outside lessons to meet students’ individual interests and aptitudes.

Investigative skills are key features of effective learning. In underperforming schools, a common weakness is teachers’ narrow approach to learning. Teachers talk, students listen. Teachers tend to dispense knowledge without enabling the students to put it into practice and develop their learning for themselves. More emphasis is required on students being able to apply their knowledge for themselves in practical situations. Students should be able to develop reasoning and other skills. They should be able to go beyond the solution of routine problems to include unfamiliar situations, complex contexts and multi-step problems. They need, for example, to be able to use scientific equipment confidently, carry out investigations independently, and evaluate and analyse data.

Special educational needs remain a key priority for schools. Considerable progress has been made but there is still much to do. Not all schools understand exactly what is meant by special educational needs. Not all schools want to admit students with these needs, and this contravenes government policy. Schools must ensure that all staff are sufficiently aware of the needs of all their students through rigorous training. There should be a senior member of staff who is appropriately qualified. Schools must provide each student with special educational needs with an informed and realistic curriculum, through well-planned lesson activities or support outside lessons. Close links with parents are also crucial.

The provision for Kindergarten education is weak in too many schools in Dubai. International best practice shows that children develop well when they learn through play, investigation and a hands-on approach, with scope for thinking critically and creatively. Children need extended opportunities to find things out for themselves and to explore possibilities. They need time to enjoy a wide range of activities and learn to concentrate, persevere and achieve what they set out to do. They benefit from opportunities to develop their own ideas and make links in their thinking with things around them, and time to choose ways to do things.

The quality of facilities and resources is variable in schools. Schools should do their utmost to provide a range of carefully designed specialist rooms that promote students’ development in all subjects. Students learn best in premises that have libraries with many reference sources, ready access to the internet, a wide range of computer technology, science laboratories, and arts and sports facilities. It is expected that schools will invest, and continue to reinvest, in up-to-date ICT that will be used increasingly to assist both teaching and learning; to motivate students and provide a strong boost to their academic and personal progress.

Students’ involvement with the community is very variable. All schools have links with the local community but these should involve more than occasional visits and visitors. Not enough schools


118

form genuine partnerships with local organisations, businesses and other institutions. Experiences with the wider world could be greatly expanded, to reflect the global partnerships that Dubai enjoys. Such links bring a wider dimension to students’ experiences and broaden their horizons.

Students’ interaction with environmental issues is underdeveloped. Too few schools are genuinely ecologically aware and active in conserving resources. Clean-up activities in the locality and recycling projects are worthy activities. However, schools should prioritise conservation of key resources, as well as the flora and fauna that live in Dubai, even in the school grounds.

Governance has improved a lot over the past five years. Owners of schools have recognised the value of stakeholders’ views and the best schools have responded constructively to them. Given the enterprise culture of Dubai, it is accepted that it is not always appropriate to have representation from all stakeholders on a governing board. One solution adopted by many schools is the creation of an advisory board. This is successful when there is a two-way flow of communication and consideration. However, it is the responsibility of each school to find the most effective system for itself.

Staff turnover is a key issue for many schools in Dubai. In most schools, the school year starts with a significant number of new teachers as result of teachers moving on and increased need to meet the expansion. This should produce a positive impact as schools try to improve their provision, but more usually the impact is a negative one. All schools, and especially the students, benefit from a stable and happy workforce. Schools are becoming increasingly creative in the ways they try to retain teachers, but many schools are not so thoughtful. Casual recruitment, low salaries and poor working conditions tend to be key factors when staff leave schools. Not all schools understand that to provide teachers with training, support and fair terms of employment is a vital investment strategy.

The expected standard for all schools in Dubai is that they will be good schools. Although we are still some way off achieving that ambition, most schools are improving. There is now a greater proportion of good and outstanding schools than there was in the first round of inspections. Almost half the students attending private schools in Dubai now receive a good or outstanding quality of education. Five years ago, less than a third of the students did so. However, it is fair to say that without regular inspection this rate of improvement would have been unlikely. Nevertheless, in five years’ time, if this rate of improvement were to continue, we can expect that most students attending schools in Dubai will be receiving a good, or better, quality of education.

Part Two:

PART TWO:

Part Two:

The Developmentof DSIB’s Organisation and Methods

7ChAPTER:

77

Part Two: The Developmentof DSIB’s Organisation and Methods

The frameworkfor inspection


124

The framework of quality indicators: A model of excellence for schools in Dubai

The DSIB Framework focuses on both the provision and outcomes of a school. The key aspects of provision determine the quality of the school’s educational services. The outcomes are the results; that is, the measures of students’ academic performance and overall achievement. The inspection framework elaborates on the quality criteria expected for all key aspects. It also provides a common language for all schools in Dubai.

PROVISION

-Teaching

-Assessment

-Curriculum

-Protection and Support

-Leadership & Management

OUTCOMES

-Students' attainment and progress in key subjects

-Students' learning skills

-Students' personal and social development

- Overall school performance

School Improvement &

Action Plans

School Self-evaluationSchool Inspections


The design and approach of inspections have yielded improvements over time. The results of five years’ work show positive improvement trends in almost all key aspects. The regular development of the Framework is based on evidence, including school inspections and interactions with the local and international communities. With its aim of continuous improvement, DSIB follows an ongoing cycle of planning, devising enhanced approaches, evaluating, and looking at the effects of changes.

Stakeholder

Engagment

International Aspirations

Transparency & Knowlege

Sharing

Transparency is key in the process of educational improvement. All schools’ individual reports and the Annual Reports are available in the public domain on the KHDA website. Stakeholders are engaged to participate throughout the inspection process. Success stories and best practices are portrayed in the Annual Report to reflect Dubai’s different school populations.

DSIB currently conducts inspections with the help of international partners experienced with the various curricula. These partners improve the rigour of inspections and enhance DSIB’s impartiality. In many ways, these partners have increased the rates of improvement in schools, moving us towards fulfilling the aspirations of Dubai, its society, businesses and people.


126

Looking forward, the Framework is a diagnostic and improvement tool which will enable schools to evaluate their strengths and areas of development. Schools are encouraged to work within an ethos of collaboration, innovation and creativity to deliver high quality educational services for students. Excellence does not have an end and the journey of development is ongoing. DSIB will continue its aspirational and progressive approach to ensure that children benefit from their schooling opportunities and experiences in Dubai.

The DSIB Inspection handbook 2008-2013Through our inspections, we aim to ensure that all our students enjoy a high quality of education. Over the past five years, we have developed our knowledge and sensitivity towards the different systems of schooling in the Emirate. The process has evolved to allow us to apply common standards of inspection, based on international best practice, to tell the individual story of each school.

The DSIB Inspection Handbook is the tool used by all inspectors to consistently evaluate the performance of schools. It was developed in-house, alongside the method of inspection. The first Inspection Handbook was published in 2008/09 and was the product of years of research, studies of international best practice in inspections, discussions with the inspectorates of a number of leading countries and by shadowing live inspections. Studies of national inspectorates included those of England, Scotland, Singapore, the Netherlands, Hong Kong and New Zealand. The Inspection Handbook has come a long way since the first year.

At the end of each round of inspections, KHDA relies on feedback and information from a range of sources to refine the quality of the Inspection Handbook and method of inspection. These sources include inspection findings, feedback from stakeholders, best international practice and the influence of federal and government priorities. Inspired by UAE Vision 2021, KHDA ensures that schools are challenged to constantly improve the quality of their provision and the outcomes of the students. This is achieved by continuously raising the bar of expectations in the Inspection Handbooks.

Progressively increased expectationsThe Handbook developments result from careful analysis of school performance and serve to increase the expectations placed on schools to continually evaluate their own performance and bring about improvements in the quality of education provided to Dubai’s students.

Over the years, the Inspection Handbook has seen an increased focus on leadership and the quality of teaching and learning as key factors in school improvement. It is commonly accepted that good leadership and high quality teaching and learning lead to better students’ outcomes. Increased attention has therefore been given through inspection, to both provision and students’ outcomes in a number of areas. These include Arabic as a first language and an additional language; the provision and support for students with special education needs; the support for and progress of


Emirati students; school self-evaluation processes and the role of governing boards and leadership in improving the schools.

The year-on-year incremental developments in the DSIB Inspection Handbook have continued to meet with positive responses from most schools as they embrace the recommendations given for improvement. Whilst increased expectations make it more challenging to evaluate trends over time, incremental developments have served to bring about rapid change in the quality of our schools.

DSIB Inspection handbooks 2008 - 2013


128

The first inspection round 2008-9The original DSIB Initial Quality Inspection Handbook was published in September 2008 and included a “framework of quality indicators” to be used for evaluating the provision and outcomes of schools in Dubai. This framework was based upon global research into the essential aspects of good schools. There were five key subjects: Islamic Education, Arabic, English, mathematics and science. Islamic Education and Arabic are inspected alongside other key subjects to ensure schools work to meet the expectations of Dubai and the UAE, and to show their importance for the local context. This first framework was applied to a number of schools in Dubai as part of a field trial, and then modified prior to the first school inspections in October 2008.

Inspection 2009-10Following the first year of inspections of both public and private schools, the framework of quality indicators was reviewed in the light of initial evidence from inspection. This was done by consulting with private schools and other stakeholders, and after a thorough review of the results of the first inspections. Some significant developments were made to the framework in response to this review. These included:

• Greater clarity in the wording related to students’ attainment with reference to students’ knowledge, skills and understanding;

• A greater emphasis on the development of students’ civic responsibility within the section related to personal and social development;

• Higher expectations in the quality of students’ learning;• Improved focus on the curriculum providing guidance to students on future education and careers;• The inclusion of self-evaluation and students’ attainment and progress as key indicators of overall

school performance.

Inspection 2010-11With two years of inspection information, a further review of the Inspection Handbook led to a greater emphasis on the following aspects:

• Students’ healthy living choices and the school’s role in promoting these;• Provision for students with special educational needs and the progress they make;• Reporting effectively to parents about students’ progress as part of the school’s partnership with

parents.At this stage, the key indicators for overall performance were also developed further to include the quality of teaching and learning. The key aspects of attainment and progress were also separated to provide added weighting to these important outcomes in the evaluation of overall performance.

Inspection 2011-12The analysis of inspection findings in 2010-11 led to further refinement of the Inspection Handbook in 20011-12. This led to:

• A greater emphasis on the attainment and progress of different groups of students and the extent to which the curriculum meets the needs of these groups of students. This resulted in schools having to review their curriculum more carefully in order to evaluate the extent to which it was appropriate to the wide range of students’ abilities and interests.


• An increased expectation that students would make good progress in lessons as well as over time;• Higher expectations of students’ understanding of wider world cultures;• Increased demands on schools to support students with special educational needs;• Increased expectation that schools would pay particular attention to the progress of Emirati students;• The promotion of critical thinking and independent learning as key aspects of teaching for effective

learning;• An expectation that schools would enrich its core curriculum;• Clarity on the importance of effective communication as a key component in good quality leadership;• Increased expectation that school leaders would know how well the school had improved over time

and how well governors listened to stakeholders’ views.

Inspection 2012-13At this stage, the Inspection Handbook continued to evolve in the light of four years of inspection information and with a very clear idea of the key strengths and weaknesses of schools.

• Students’ personal and social development now included a reference to work ethic, and enterprise was added to place greater emphasis on students taking responsibility for their own development;

• Schools were expected to identify students with special educational needs accurately and provide well for them.

The journey of development seen through the Inspection Handbook reflects the areas of concern and the strengths identified through inspection. By incrementally increasing expectations on schools through the quality indicators against which they are evaluated, KHDA hopes to continue to improve the quality of education available to students and their families.

8ChAPTER:

88


The role of self-evaluation in school inspection


132

By definition, a school is an institution delivering on an educational mission promised to parents and other stakeholders in its community. As such, it is similar to other organisations and institutions in being accountable for quality: in this regard, quality in the outcomes achieved by its students.

As with any type of established institution, schools cannot move forward or improve without accurately measuring the quality of their outcomes against agreed standards. Accurate self-evaluation is a pre-condition for school improvement. Without it, leaders do not have a realistic view of their schools’ strengths and weaknesses.

When assessing performance in any system, assessors rely on agreed quality standards of good practice as a reference or benchmark to judge against. These standards were the quality indicators included in the initial DSIB Handbook of 2008 -2009. The quality indicators reflected international best practices in the running of effective schools. Not only were inspectors to evaluate aspects such as outcomes in key subjects, the teaching, learning and curriculum, which are fundamental to any school system, but they were also to assess how effectively schools identified their strengths and weaknesses and planned to improve.

The approach of DSIB in this respect is similar to that of other international school inspection, accreditation and authorisation systems. For example, the application document for the British Schools Overseas inspection system is a comprehensive self-review form. Schools are asked to rate different aspects of their performance and cite evidence in support. The New England Association for Schools and Colleges (NEASC) accreditation process expects schools to spend well over an academic year preparing their self-study documents. Schools are to engage representatives from all their stakeholders to take part in this essential exercise. Similarly, a main objective of the school visits undertaken by representatives from the International Baccalaureate Organisation (IBO) is to validate the self-study submitted by candidate schools.

All organisations that appraise schools’ performance stress the significance of self-evaluation. Most expect schools to submit their reviews regularly at varying intervals as a method for keeping them on the track of development and improvement.

The first pages of the initial DSIB Handbook of 2008-2009 set out the vision for the future role of school self-evaluation in the inspection process:

‘In line with international good practice in school inspections, DSIB will place increasing emphasis on the role of self-evaluation. The transition will be deliberately managed in line with the schools’ growing familiarity and confidence with the processes of self-evaluation and improvement planning ………… Over time, DSIB expects self-evaluation to become a key element in the inspection of an increasing number of schools, with the aim of adopting a significantly self-evaluative approach to inspection in most schools.’

Initial DSIB Inspection FrameworkThis set the scene for the development of school self-evaluation over the next five years of the inspection cycles.


Inspection Year 2008-09Self-evaluation and improvement planning formed one Quality Indicator. At that time, it had three key aspects:

• Processes for school self-evaluation;• Monitoring and evaluation of the school’s performance, including teaching and learning;• The process and impact of school improvement planning.

The first inspections of schools found that:

‘Almost all schools do not have sufficiently thorough and detailed systems to review their own work. They do not always accurately identify their strengths or aspects requiring improvement. Because so many schools do not know themselves well, improvement planning is often weak and resources are often used ineffectively.’

A key message was that self-evaluation and improvement planning were unsatisfactory in more than a quarter of private schools.

Inspection Year 2009-10Consequently, DSIB placed an increasing emphasis on self-evaluation in the following year’s inspections. In 2009-10, it became an expectation that all schools should have post-inspection plans in response to the recommendations of the first inspection report. To facilitate this, the third key aspect was extended to read ‘The process and impact of school improvement planning, including post-inspection plans’ and extended illustrations of outstanding and acceptable self-evaluation and improvement planning were included. The minimum expectation in the second year of inspections was that all schools should have an improvement plan based on some evidence (including the first inspection report) and that schools had begun monitoring progress towards meeting agreed targets.

The inspections of 2009-10 found improvements in self-evaluation across all schools, although many self-evaluation reports were found to be descriptive rather than judgemental. The US curriculum schools showed marked improvement – around a third had been unsatisfactory in the first year and this dropped to less a tenth. The slowest to respond were the (private) MoE curriculum schools.

In many schools, with different curricula, improvements in self-evaluation were linked to improvements in leadership and governance. Inspections found that school leaders had used a range of evidence to obtain a clearer and more accurate understanding of their schools’ strengths and weaknesses. This had enabled them to take prompt action to make necessary improvements.

Action planning tended to be in response to the most recent inspection. Better schools had modified their own improvement plans to incorporate the key priorities identified by the inspectors. However, improvement planning was seldom the result of schools’ own rigorous, evidence-based self-evaluations. Therefore, DSIB placed increasing emphasis on the importance of school self-evaluation in the following year.

The 2010 Annual Report included an appendix that provided guidance on how to use the inspection framework for school self-evaluation and an example for schools to follow. It included reference to the need for action plans with criteria that are specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and time constrained (SMART).


134

Inspection Year 2010-11The 2010-11 inspection framework was largely unchanged for self-evaluation from the second year of inspections. There was a minor, though significant, change to the wording of the extended illustrative descriptor of outstanding practice. The sentence ‘The objectives of the action plan arising from the previous inspection report are being met’ was replaced with ‘The school’s planning, including its response to the previous inspection report, has led to improved outcomes for students’. For outstanding self-evaluation, DSIB was now looking for its impact on attainment, progress, learning skills and personal and social development. To help schools in their process of self-evaluation, DSIB produced an on-line resource for schools to use in their self-evaluations. This was directly linked to the quality indicators in the DSIB inspection handbook so that school leaders could evaluate their schools against the inspection framework. The SEF therefore became an important document for discussion between the inspectors and the senior leaders during the inspection.

The DSIB Annual Report published at the end of the 2010-11 academic year indicated a significant advance in self-evaluation and improvement planning across all schools; around one half of all private schools were judged as good or outstanding in this respect. Where schools had used self-evaluation tools, such as the DSIB on-line resource, the outcomes of self-reviews were more coherent, comprehensive and effective. The inspections confirmed that self-critical and self-confident schools are the most successful, and that accurate self-evaluation is a pre-condition for school improvement. The 2011 DSIB Annual Report contained a short, dedicated section on Self-evaluation: A way forward and the key to future success about the impact and success of self-evaluation on the rate of school improvement over the first three years of inspection.

Inspection Year 2011-12Since 2011, all schools have been required to complete a review of their own performance against the inspection quality indicators and to submit that information to DSIB in advance of the next inspection.

There was a significant revision of the self-evaluation quality indicator for the 20011-12 inspection framework. An additional key aspect was created so that inspectors would evaluate ‘improvement over time’. The expectation became for schools themselves to conduct systematic and rigorous self-evaluations that would lead to the identification of key priorities, and not rely solely on inspection recommendations. Linked to this was a requirement for schools to use an effective performance management system to address the professional needs of staff and create improvement plans that are both ambitious and achievable. The illustrative descriptors were also revised. Self-evaluation and improvement planning were tied more closely to addressing the professional needs of staff and students’ performance. It was now expected that schools would continually monitor their own performances and respond quickly and successfully, with the involvement of stakeholders, in managing school improvement.

Judgements were weaker than in the previous year. Around half the schools were at least good


in each of the two years but the percentage of schools in which self-evaluation was judged as unsatisfactory more than doubled (from 8% in 2010-11 to 17% in 2011-12). The weakest schools were those offering the MoE curriculum; half were unsatisfactory in their self-evaluations. Nevertheless, the proportion of schools whose self-evaluation was judged as outstanding doubled in this time (from 4% to 8%). All of these schools were rated as outstanding overall. Self-evaluation improved most in UK, IB and French curriculum schools.

There was a strong correlation between the effectiveness of self-evaluation and improvement planning, and the quality of teaching because leaders in the most effective schools closely monitored teaching and learning. Common factors that contributed to deteriorations in self-evaluation judgements included frequent and often rapid changes of teachers and leaders, transient student populations and unreliable (often over-optimistic) evaluations of provision and outcomes. Many schools failed to analyse attainment data accurately. Schools offering a US curriculum had unrealistic views about the quality of their provision. Almost 60% were no better than acceptable and 25% were unsatisfactory. Consequently, they were not able to set accurate priorities to improve teaching, learning and progress, so improvement was slow. Not enough schools linked their action planning to improving outcomes for students.

Inspection Year 2012-13The 2012-13, the quality indicator for self-evaluation remained unchanged from the previous year.

Inspection in 2012 – 13 has shown little improvement in school self-evaluation. Around half of the schools are no better than acceptable for self-evaluation and the proportions of good and outstanding schools have remained the same. Nevertheless, inspection data show that, in UK and French curriculum schools, the quality of self-evaluation is now mostly good or better. Self-evaluation processes in MoE, Indian and US schools remain least effective and self-evaluation in Indian curriculum schools has not improved over time.

At the end of the fifth year of inspections, the quality of school self-evaluation appears to have remained static.

Impact and correlationInspection findings in 2012-2013 have shown a strong correlation between the quality of schools’ self-evaluation and improvement planning and their overall performance rating. The chart shows that all schools rated unsatisfactory overall were also rated unsatisfactory for self-evaluation and improvement planning. On the other hand, 85 per cent of outstanding schools had outstanding self-evaluation practice.

Almost all good schools were rated good for self-evaluation and improvement planning. One in five schools rated acceptable overall were rated unsatisfactory for self-evaluation and improvement planning.


136

1%

85%

9%

94%

15%

71%

5%

100%

20%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%


Percentage of schoolsby self-evaluationratings in 2012-2013

Overall rating in 2012-2013

Self-evaluation judgements in each category of schools inspected in 2012-2013


School leaders are expected to provide more sharp and focused evidence to support their findings or judgements. They are to move away from describing ‘what has happened’ to a more evaluative ‘this is the impact of what happened.’ Schools should use and depend on internationally-recognised, external benchmarks when evaluating the impact of their action on outcomes for students. School should focus on ensuring that their evaluations are drawn from reliable sources and that a wide enough range of stakeholders are involved in the process. Through a better and more focused self-evaluative approach to inspection, both schools and DSIB will be able to achieve their common objective: school improvement.


138

Approximately 500 boys and girls, representing thirty nine different nationalities, attend Horizon School. The English National Curriculum is taught from Foundation Stage to Year 6 by qualified teachers.

There is a total commitment to continuous improvement. In the first, second, third and fourth rounds of inspection the school was rated good, and in the fifth round it was rated outstanding. A detailed analysis of Horizon’s performance against key quality indicators shows that the school’s overall performance rating improved in step with the rating for self-evaluation and improvement planning:

Horizon School

2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

Self-evaluation judgement Overall judgement

Outstanding

Good

School context

Improvement journey

Self-Evaluation: From Good to Outstanding - horizon School


The Journey:Over the four years since the first inspection, the school has developed its self-evaluation processes, which have been refined by the outcomes of successive inspections.

The first inspection advised the school of the need for more effective monitoring of new initiatives. This was followed, in subsequent years, with recommendations about the need for clear success criteria in action planning, for school leaders to become fully informed about student outcomes, and to make better use of data to ensure the accuracy of self-evaluation against the DSIB inspection framework.

Horizon School leaders have acted on the recommendations and have gained a thorough understanding of the strengths of their school and aspects for development. Consequently, they are able to provide focused and targeted professional development for teachers, and this has led to whole school improvement.

Concurrently, through the consistent attention to self-evaluation and improvement planning, the quality of leadership has also improved and is now outstanding. The ethos of sharing and mutual support has enabled the school to develop a strong distributed leadership structure that reinforces the school’s vision for independent, self-managing learners who relate well to others and contribute to the community.

“The journey from good to outstanding has been inspiring, soul searching, challenging and the culmination of years of hard work and enthusiasm by staff and children, many of whom no longer work at Horizon School. Being a good school is hard work. It means doing your very best at all times, but being outstanding needs something more; a rigorous and regular review of systems, attitudes and leadership.“


140

The improvement journey can be summarized in the following table:

Year: 2008 – 09Judgement: Good

Key strength: A positive and inclu-sive school ethos

Recommendation: Monitor new initia-tives effectively and link them to school improvement.

êProgress: The school developed an extensive programme of self-evaluation activities, which had positive impact on the learning process. Nevertheless, action planning required further development, particularly in the establishment of clear indicators and sources of evidence of achievement of planned objectives.


Key strength: A supportive school ethos

Recommendation: Develop action plan-ning to include clear success criteria and outcomes.

êProgress: The school made significant progress in relation to the recommendations and was creating an inclusive and positive learning environment for all students and staff. There was a strong commitment to ongoing improvement and the capacity to improve further was well developed.


Key strength: Outstanding relation-ships … in a very positive, inclusive and safe environment

Recommendation: Refine self-evalua-tion and assessment procedures so that senior leadership is more fully informed of student outcomes.

êProgress: The school made good progress towards addressing the recommendations of the previous inspection. Throughout the school, teachers were observing other teachers in classes, to spread good practice and raise the overall quality of teaching.Senior leaders knew each child well and were aware of their achievements and progress.


Key strength: The strong leader-ship of the headteacher and deputy headteacher in promoting the vision of the school.

Recommendation: When planning school improvements, make better use of attainment data to ensure that teach-ers focus specifically upon what needs to be improved.

êProgress: Better use of attainment data helped teachers focus more closely on what was needed to help improve students’ progress and attainment.

Year: 2012 – 13Judgement: Outstanding

Key Strength: Strong distributed leadership across the school which fully achieved the school’s mission statement.


Summary:Horizon’s success in achieving excellence is a result of a dedicated and committed team of leadership and staff. Over the five years of inspection, Horizon’s mechanisms for self-evaluation and improvement planning went through multiple phases of development. Year after year the process became more rigorous, focused and its results were acted upon.

999 ChAPTER:


Collaboration with Other Organisations and Local Partnerships


144

International Perspectives As part of KHDA’s commitment to high standards in all its schools, it has entered into an agreement with the Department for Education in England, through the strategic partnership with CfBT Education Trust, to carry out the British Schools Overseas (BSO) inspections.

In the academic year 2012-2013, British curriculum-based schools in Dubai have elected to participate in BSO inspections. Schools are inspected against standards that are equivalent to those for independent schools in the UK, taking into account local requirements. Dubai College was the first school in Dubai to undertake a joint DSIB/BSO inspection. KHDA has also entered into a strategic partnership with New England Association of Schools and Colleges (NEASC) to conduct synchronised inspection and accreditation visits at US curriculum schools, beginning in the autumn of 2013. In addition, plans are in place for joint evaluation visits with the International Baccalaureate Organisation (IBO) to schools aspiring towards IB authorisation. Partnerships such as these are seen as a crucial development in ensuring alignment to universally accepted international standards.

Joint DSIB – BSO inspections: the Dubai College experienceKHDA is establishing strategic partnerships with recognised international organisations to help secure high quality education in the private schools of Dubai. One such partnership is with the Department for Education in England (DfE) to conduct joint British Schools Overseas (BSO) and DSIB inspections. This agreement began in 2012, and the first school to apply for this form of joint inspection was the Dubai College.

School context Established in 1978, Dubai College is a private, not-for-profit school that follows the National Curriculum of England. Currently, there are 819 students on roll, aged from 11 to 18 years. The school has two phases: secondary (11 to 16 years) and post-16 or sixth form (16 to 18 years).

The Process for a joint BSO/ DSIB inspection:The school submitted an online application and received the approval using the link provided on the KHDA website at: http://www.khda.gov.ae/CMS/WebParts/TextEditor/Documents/REGISTRATION-FORM.docx


Initial enquiry to KHDA

Application considered

Registration process

BSO application not accepted

BSOapplication accepted

DSIB inspection to proceed

Inspection visitInspection visit

Separate DSIB and BSO written reports

Combined BSO/DSIB inspection to proceed

Written DSIB report


146


“Our main concern was that the school would be subjected to two distinct inspection processes with little coordination between the two bodies. This was far from the case. To us the process was seamless. As far as the staff were concerned they experienced one Inspection even though there were two distinct Inspection teams in the school at the same time. It was certainly, overall, a very positive and professionally rewarding experience. It also directly led to driving the school forward as the pre-inspection self-evaluation phase encouraged us to strengthen and update policies and procedures associated with British Independent schools.”

A senior member of the staff also commended the process in that the staff did not have to prepare for two separate inspections. Lessons and activities at the school were one and the same for both inspections. More importantly, it was a very rewarding and professional methodology by which both teams used the same evidence base and school documentation to carry two distinct yet equally professional and rigorous inspection processes.

Summary: For Dubai College, the benefits of a joint BSO/ DSIB inspection were numerous. One inspection visit fulfilled the requirements of two distinct processes for two different purposes. The joint inspection demonstrated the high quality of the college’s provision and confirmed its promise of delivering a “British” educational experience.

The process highlighted the important balance that private schools must maintain between preserving the quality and integrity of the curriculum they offer (in this case the National Curriculum of England) and the need to recognise and derive benefit from the distinctive cultural context of the country in which they operate.


148

The Festival of LiteratureIs a celebration of literature in all its forms for students in DubaiReading good quality literature provides students with enjoyment, relaxation and time for reflection. It excites and enriches their imagination. It helps them understand their own feelings and experiences and that of others. It broadens their understanding of language and the many ways to use language.

Schools play an extremely important role in providing a variety of literature for students as well frequent opportunities for them to read.

Reading capacity is strongly linked to academic success. The most recent PIRLS results for Dubai and the UAE show overall low levels of reading ability compared to other countries. When asked about their reading habits, such as in the questionnaire in PISA, many UAE students state that they do not read outside of school for personal interest and pleasure.

KHDA is one of the partners in promoting the Festival of Literature. This annual festival is an opportunity for students to meet world famous authors, attend literary debates, listen to readings and participate in workshops. Sessions are provided simultaneously in Arabic and English.

The festival offers a number of competitions for students. The 2013 Readers’ Cup Challenge competition involved 22 government and private schools. Sixty-one groups of students participated in 2013.There were 56 participants from several age groups for the Poetry Competition.Many different age groups were catered for in the Short Story writing competition.There were 155 entries for the poetry and short story competitions.On Arabic Education day there were two visits by authors. Approximately 1000 students attended the Arabic sessions.


The Dubai Electricity and Water Authority (DEWA)The Dubai Electricity and Water Authority Conservation Award is presented to schools providing best practice in electricity and water conservation. The award, made in partnership with KHDA, promotes a culture of conservation and encourages initiatives to combat global warming and climate change. It recognises the initiatives of educational institutions in Dubai.

DEWA and KHDA announced the launch of the 8th Conservation Award 2012/2013 for the educational sector: the ‘Conservation Award - For a Better Tomorrow’. The award gives recognition to educational institutions in Dubai for best practices in electricity and water consumption and usage. It highlights the achievements of individual students and staff, members of faculty and participating institutions.

In line with Dubai’s resolve for environmental sustainability, the conservation award received the 2009 Dubai Government Excellence Program (DGEP) Award for achieving outstanding savings in electricity and water consumption, and for its growth in participation within the educational sector. The ‘Conservation Award - for a Better Tomorrow,’ motivates the participants and instils a culture of conservation among the learning community.

Five private schools in Dubai were recognised this year:• Horizon English School• Al Shorouq Private School• The Kindergarten Starters• Dubai International School - Al Garhoud• Al Diyafah High School• Al Ittihad Private School, Jumeirah Branch

Schools in Dubai Go Green and Stay Green

There has been a picture of increasing responsiveness and action in schools with regard to community and environmental issues over the last five years. Schools have made environmental sustainability a more integral part of students’ learning, development and personal responsibility. Many schools now have effective programmes that raise awareness and encourage positive action by students. Schools with outstanding environmental awareness and sustainability provide opportunities for students to initiate their own ideas of environmental issues, and follow through with action. They do this both within their school and beyond it.

KHDA has developed strong partnerships with a number of community organisations involved with schools and students to promote community and environmental understanding and responsibility.


150

Dubai Schools CAREDubai Cares is an organisation committed to improving children’s primary education in developing countries through universal access to primary education, including gender equality. Dubai Cares was established in 2007 by His Highness Sheikh Mohammed Bin Rashid Al Maktoum.

Dubai Cares School Awareness Campaign, in collaboration with KHDA, raises awareness about the challenges that prevent children in developing countries from accessing primary education.

Schools which participate in this campaign help their own students’ personal development by raising the students’ awareness of the needs of others and by helping them to understand their social responsibilities. In good and better schools, students are provided with many opportunities to support their school communities, their local communities and, in some cases, the international community.

Dubai Cares Student FairIn partnership with KHDA, Dubai Cares Student Fair was launched in 2012. The fair invited students to create inspired fundraising methods in their schools in support of global primary education.

Dubai Cares held a ceremony to recognise the efforts of 41 schools in Dubai that participated in the Dubai Cares Student Fair. Seven schools, The Winchester School, The Kindergarten Starters, Jumeirah College, Our Own Indian School, Al Khaleej National School, Our Own English High School and GEMS Winchester School were commended by KHDA for their involvement with Dubai Cares in 2012. The Kindergarten Starters received a special award in appreciation for raising the highest amount of money for the cause – 100,000 AED.

Dubai Cares Student ClubLaunched with the support of KHDA in 2012, Dubai Cares pioneered the Dubai Cares Student Club to promote a spirits of charity, generosity and social responsibility among students.

As members of Dubai Care Student Club, students had the opportunity to:

• learn about the education needs of children in developing countries;• raise awareness within the UAE about the challenges that needy children face

in developing countries;• become more responsible and develop their understanding of humanity and

compassion; • gain practical experience in operating and managing an organisation;• become Dubai Care ambassadors in their schools.


152

GEMS Wellington International School is a private school providing education for boys and girls from Foundation Stage to Year 13, aged three to 18 years. The school follows the English National Curriculum from Foundation Stage to Year 11 and IB diploma in Years 12-13. Community and environmental responsibility has been rated outstanding over the last five years and across all age phases.

GEMS Wellington International School

• OutstandingOverall

• OutstandingFS

• OutstandingPost-16

• OutstandingSecondary

• OutstandingPrimaryCommunity andenvironmentalenvironmentalresponsibility


DSIB inspections base judgements of quality indicator 2.3 on the extent to which students:

• understand their responsibilities in school and are involved as members of a wider community;• develop their personal skills to deal with the world of work;• understand local and global environmental issues.

This improvement journey explores the approaches of two schools offering different curricula and with different overall inspection ratings.

ContextGEMS Wellington International School

Students’ outstanding community and environmental responsibility


The journey:“It’s the life of our school.”

GWIS described its approaches as “a move from teacher-directed activities to a system where students have ownership of a number of directives-both as part of courses but more often reflecting the moral responsibility within them as members of a school and local community.

Our community and environmental initiatives are an integral part of our students’ holistic development; students of all ages are empowered to make choices that bring benefits to both the local and global communities.”

The school attributes excellence in this key aspect of students’ development to its wide-ranging curriculum, and to maintaining high quality by initiating and updating projects that involve students of all ages. Strong partnerships with local authorities such as DEWA support all areas of this development. The emphasis is on providing students with continuous opportunities to meet their expectations and challenging them as they progress through the school. Examples of these projects are below:

Outstanding Foundation Stage• Child-initiated learning and

opportunities to apply EYFS skills

• GWIS learner profile• Cross-school community work,

sharing with older students

Outstanding Primary• Elected students’ parliament,

student voice• Challenge task at end of each

term• Ecological understanding in

science curriculum• PSHE curriculum

Outstanding Secondary• Committees and

environmental work• Charity work• Future initiative• Enterprise initiative• Business networks, women

in leadership


154

The new Indian Model School – school context The New Indian Model School opened in 1980 in Al Garhoud. It has 6,765 students aged from three to 17 years. The school follows the Indian Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) curriculum. A Montessori curriculum is offered in three Kindergarten classes, and the international CBSE-i is followed in six grades.

The school has been inspected four times and its overall performance has been rated acceptable on each occasion. However, the students’ community and environmental understanding has consistently been judged outstanding.


New Indian Model School

• AcceptableOverall

• OutstandingKG

• OutstandingSecondary

• OutstandingMiddle

• OutstandingPrimaryCommunity andenvironmentalresponsibility

The Journey:Although the curriculum is rated acceptable overall, it has several strengths. One main strength is the strong enrichment opportunities provided to students in all phases of the school. Key aspects of students’ personal and social development are integrated into work in a range of subjects. A series of events has been organised in and out of the school premises to strengthen students’ understanding of community and environmental responsibilities. Girls have made posters to raise awareness of breast cancer as part of a ‘protect your Mom’, campaign which was displayed around the school and published on Facebook. Many other activities have been organised, such as visits to centres for the elderly and long term care facilities. These activities have brought mutual benefit to students and the centres. Other activities to raise students’ environmental awareness have been undertaken.

Summary:These schools are rated very differently for their overall performance but both have an outstanding rating for students’ understanding of community and environmental responsibilities. A theme common to both schools is in giving students the chance to make decisions and take personal responsibility for their community and for environmental projects. Opportunities such as these result in outstanding personal and social development.


1010

ChAPTER: 10

10ChAPTER: 10

DSIB in the Media1010


158

DSIB In ThE MEDIASince its establishment in 2008, DSIB has appeared as a regular topic in different media channels. Each year, in accordance with its policy for transparency, KHDA announces the school inspection ratings and key findings to the public and, by doing so, emphasises the importance of sharing knowledge with schools and providing parents with information to help them make choices. DSIB also works with media to showcase the excellent practice identified through inspections. In addition, media plays a vital role in highlighting stakeholders’ views and discussing inspection ratings.

Analysis of media articles concerning DSIB shows that both the Arabic and English media have found school inspection ratings to be a popular topic since 2008-09. Newspapers and local websites have published annual inspection ratings and hosted discussions on success stories and about schools that are making less progress than the rest. International media channels have also mentioned school inspections in Dubai and discussed them as an example of the remarkable educational reforms that are taking place in this region.

At first, because educators and parents in the UAE were unfamiliar with the idea of school inspections, the media voiced many critical views. Schools and parents regarded DSIB more as a controlling regime than a system for monitoring the quality of education. However, within a short space of time, headlines in the local media began to target improving school quality:

“Time to improve education”

“Schools need to work harder”

“Addressing school failings”

“Parents’ voice”

“Hard lessons for our schools”

Since then, school inspections have been accepted by the media as a system for assuring the quality of education, and ensuring that schools in Dubai provide all students with improved learning opportunities.


TransparencyDSIB’s role in working with schools and improving the quality of education has become transparent

through the media. With the annual publication of inspection results, parents in Dubai are now

more informed about their children’s education and are able to make better choices. Gradually,

the media started to understand the transparency of DSIB, not only inspection ratings but also

in the inspection reports on individual schools that are freely accessible on KHDA’s website.

In addition to school inspection reports, KHDA publishes the inspection framework

and ensures that is accessible to stakeholders. The inspection framework and

any new areas of focus are always featured in local media channels before

the start on each round of inspections.


160

A new system for improving education in DubaiWith the launch of DSIB in 2008, the local media

announced that a new entity that would soon start to

inspect schools and the services they provide. News

stories highlighted the new approach of transparency.

Views of stakeholdersMedia channels also voice the views of teachers,

schools and parents. These have changed over

the five inspections cycles. Teachers and schools

are keener now to learn from inspections and

parents use inspection ratings and reports to be

better informed about schools in Dubai.


Impact of inspectionAs part of its role in ensuring the quality of education, DSIB’s

impact on schools and its role in driving improvements

has become evident over time. Every year, local media

publish statistics of schools which improve their ratings

and highlight the role of school inspections in ensuring

that more students receive a better education.

Quality of education DSIB is now seen as one of the main forces for

improving the quality of education in Dubai.

The outcomes of the annual inspections

assist in the introduction of important issues

that affect the quality of education and about

which stakeholders might otherwise

be uninformed.


162

Arabic language DSIB’s emphasis on improving students’ Arabic language skills is another popular media

topic. The importance of Arabic as a national language and an essential part of Emirati

culture is often discussed and now receives wider public attention. The number of media

articles about teaching and learning of Arabic language has increased. The public

is now better informed about weaknesses in teaching the Arabic language

and the need to improve students’ Arabic language skills.


Special educational needsProvision for students with special educational needs is one of the major areas identified

as requiring immediate attention and improvement. Cases of such students now feature

regularly in the media. This has helped to make more schools aware of the

importance of creating learning environments that are more inclusive.

Part Three:

PART ThREE:

Part Three:

School PerformanceTables


166

Overall performance of private schools in DubaiSchool Name

Main Curriculum

2012-2013 overall rating

2011 - 2012 overall rating

2010 - 2011 overall rating



Kings Dubai UK Outstanding Outstanding Outstanding Outstanding Outstanding

GEMS Wellington International School

UK/IB Outstanding Outstanding Outstanding Outstanding Good

Jumeirah College UK Outstanding Outstanding Outstanding Good Outstanding

Jumeirah English Speaking School

UK Outstanding Outstanding Outstanding Good Outstanding

Dubai College UK Outstanding Outstanding Outstanding Good Good

GEMS Jumeirah Primary School

UK Outstanding Outstanding Outstanding Good Good

Jumeirah English Speaking School - Arabian Ranches

UK/IB Outstanding Outstanding Good Good Outstanding

GEMS Dubai American Academy

US/IB Outstanding Outstanding Good Good Good

The Indian High School Indian(CBSE) Outstanding Outstanding Good Good Not inspected

GEMS Modern Academy

Indian(CISCE) Outstanding Outstanding Good Good Not inspected

Dubai English Speaking College

UK Outstanding Good Good Good Good

Horizon School UK Outstanding Good Good Good Good

Jebel Ali Primary School

UK Good Outstanding Good Good Good

Lycee Francais International

French Good Good Good Good Good

Lycee Georges Pompidou High School

FRENCH Good Good Good Good Good

Uptown Primary School IB Good Good Good Good Good

Japanese School in Dubai

Japanese Good Good Good Good Good

Dubai English Speaking School

UK Good Good Good Good Good

GEMS Wellington Primary School


The English College - Dubai


Repton School Dubai UK/IB Good Good Good Good Good

Al Mizhar American Academy Private School for Girls

US Good Good Good Good Good

American School of Dubai


Dubai National School - Al Barsha


Dubai International Academy

IB Good Good Good Good Acceptable

GEMS World Academy IB Good Good Good Good Acceptable

Cambridge International School

UK Good Good Good Good Acceptable


Dubai British School UK Good Good Good Good Acceptable

GEMS Royal Dubai School


Star International School - Umm Al Sheif


The School of Research Science


Emirates International School - Jumeirah

UK/IB Good Good Good Good Acceptable

Universal American School

US/IB Good Good Good Good Acceptable

Delhi Private School Dubai

Indian(CBSE) Good Good Good Good Not inspected

GEMS Our Own English High School


Rajagiri International School


The Indian High School - Branch


The Millennium School Indian(CBSE) Good Good Good Good Not inspected

Lycee Libanais Francophone Prive

French Good Good Good Acceptable Good

Raffles International School South Campus

UK Good Good Good Acceptable Good

Lycee Georges Pompidou Primary School

FRENCH Good Good Good Acceptable Acceptable

Dubai Gem Private School

UK Good Good Good Acceptable Acceptable

Dubai Scholars Private School


Regent International School


Greenwood International School

US Good Good Good Acceptable Acceptable

Al Ameen Private School

UK Good Good Good Acceptable Unsatisfactory

Our Own High School - Dubai

Indian(CBSE) Good Good Good Acceptable Not inspected

GEMS Our Own Indian School

Indian(CBSE) Good Good Good Acceptable Not inspected

Raffles World Academy UK/IB Good Good Acceptable Good Acceptable

German International School Dubai

German Good Good Acceptable Acceptable Good

Al Salam Private School

UK Good Good Acceptable Acceptable Good

Al Ittihad Private School - Jumeirah

US Good Good Acceptable Acceptable Good

Al Diyafah High School UK Good Good Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable

The Winchester School UK Good Good Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable

Deira International School

UK/IB Good Good Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable

Emirates International School - Meadows

UK/IB Good Good Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable


168

Dubai International School - Al Quoz

US Good Good Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable

Jumeira Baccalaureate School

UK/IB Good Good Not inspected Not inspected Not inspected

St. Mary’s Catholic High School

UK Good Acceptable Good Acceptable Good

Al Safa Private School UK Good Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Good

Al Rashid Al Saleh Private School

MOE Good Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable

Pristine Private School UK Good Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable

GEMS Wellington Academy - DSO

UK Good Not inspected Not inspected Not inspected Not inspected

Dubai National School - Al Twar

US Acceptable Good Good Good Good

Deira Private School UK Acceptable Good Acceptable Not inspected Not inspected

Greenfield Community School

IB Acceptable Acceptable Good Good Good

Queen International School

UK Acceptable Acceptable Good Good Good

Star International School - Mirdif

UK Acceptable Acceptable Good Acceptable Good

The Elite English School Indian(CBSE) Acceptable Acceptable Good Acceptable Not inspected

JSS International School

Indian(ICSE) Acceptable Acceptable Good Not inspected Not inspected

Dar Al Marefa Private School

IB Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Good Good

The International School of Choueifat - Dubai

SABIS(UK/US) Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Good Good

Philadelphia Private School

US Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Good Acceptable

Dubai Carmel School UK Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Good

Al Ittihad Private School - Al Mamzar

US Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Good

Al Basateen Kindergarten - Al Khawaneej

MOE Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable

Al Eman Private School MOE Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable

Dubai Police Children Kindergarten - Bur Dubai


Dubai Police Kindergarten - Deira Branch


Islamic School for Education and Training



National Charity School MOE Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable

The Private Religious Institute


International Academic School

MOE/US Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable

Al Sadiq Islamic English School

UK Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable

The City School International


The Sheffield Private School


The Westminster School


Al Khaleej National School

US Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable

Al Mawakeb School - Al Barsha


Al Mawakeb School - Al Garhoud


American International School


Dubai International School - Al Garhoud


International School of Arts and Sciences


North American International School


Nibras International School


School Of Modern Skills


Sharjah American International school


Dubai Modern Education School

US/MOE Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable

Al Shorouq Private School

MOE Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Unsatisfactory

Arab Unity School UK Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Unsatisfactory

Star International School - Al Twar

UK Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Unsatisfactory


170

The Oxford School UK Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Unsatisfactory

Al Maaref Private School

US Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Unsatisfactory

Mirdif Private School US Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Unsatisfactory

Emirates English Speaking School

Indian(CBSE) Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Not inspected

Gulf Indian High School Indian(CBSE) Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Not inspected

New Indian Model School


The Central School Indian(CBSE) Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Not inspected

The Kindergarten Starters


United International Private School

Philippine Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory

The Phillippine School Philippine Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Not inspected Not inspected

Bradenton Preparatory Academy

US Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Not inspected Not inspected

Al Basateen Kindergarten - Hatta

MOE Acceptable Acceptable Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory

Dubai Arab American Private School

US Acceptable Acceptable Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory

Global Indian International School

Indian(ICSE) Acceptable Acceptable Not inspected Not inspected Not inspected

Adab Iranian Private School - Boys

Iranian Acceptable Acceptable Not inspected Not inspected Not inspected

Adab Iranian Private School - Girls


Khadija Al Kobra Iranian School for Girls


Salman Al Farsi Iranian School


Towheed Iranian School For Boys


Towheed Iranian School for Girls


Russian International School

Russian Acceptable Acceptable Not inspected Not inspected Not inspected

Apple International School

UK Acceptable Unsatisfactory Acceptable Unsatisfactory Acceptable

Buds Public School Indian(CBSE) Acceptable Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory Not inspected

Little Flowers English school

Indian(CBSE) Acceptable Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory Not inspected

Pakistan Education Academy

Pakistani Acceptable Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory Not inspected

JSS Private School Indian(CBSE) Acceptable Not inspected Not inspected Not inspected Not inspected

The Indian International School

Indian(CBSE) Acceptable Not inspected Not inspected Not inspected Not inspected

GEMS Winchester School

UK Acceptable Not inspected Not inspected Not inspected Not inspected

Collegiate American School

US Acceptable Not inspected Not inspected Not inspected Not inspected


Al Arqam Private School

MOE Unsatisfactory Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable

Al Thuraya Private School


New World Private School


Crescent English School Indian(CBSE) Unsatisfactory Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Not inspected

Gulf Model School Indian(CBSE) Unsatisfactory Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Not inspected

His Highness Shaikh Rashid Al Maktoum Pakistani School

Pakistani Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory Acceptable Acceptable Not inspected

Al Worood Academy Private school

UK Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory Acceptable Not inspected Not inspected

New Academy School US Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory Acceptable Acceptable

English Language Private School

UK Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory Acceptable

Al Hesn Private School MOE/US Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory

Grammar School UK Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory

Dubai American Scientific School

US Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory

Al Farooq Pakistani Islamic School

Pakistani Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory Not inspected