Evaluation overlaps with action research in a number of ways. They are both within what we call qualitative research and have all the standard features outlined in your previous course. It is when action research involves consulting other colleagues, and it often does to one degree or another, that it begins to become what could be called evaluation. Much of the literature on evaluation is about programme or project evaluation in which an external evaluator is commissioned to study a programme, often innovatory in nature.
It is unlikely that the reader will be engaged in such a study. Most readers will be evaluating their own place of work and will be what has been called an 'Insider Evaluator'. Plainly this role is not far away from that played by an action researcher. The central difference in this case is that the focus is not the individual's classroom or practice but what might be called a system. This might be a [subject] department in a school, a year group, the work of the SEN department in the school or could be the whole school The evaluation literature remains useful. It is likely that you will produce some kind of summative report for your colleagues but the formative [as opposed to summative] element assumes greater importance.
In most cases it is the formative part of evaluation that practitioners find most important. This requires the evaluator to act as 'information broker' taking the views of one individual or person and discussing them with another group gradually improving everybody's understanding of the event taking place. Moving between different practitoners the evaluator is permanently astride the gap between being 'inside' and 'outside' of the practitioners involved.
But let us not move ahead. A good way of learning about a new topic is to read an example. Here is an evaluation carried out by a student from a previous year who was also a practicing teacher at the time his report was written.
This is a report on the evaluation of the system that manages welfare assistants and their individual work, in a Middle School of 200 children (Years 4 - 7).
The school is divided into eight classes with two classes for each of the four years and there are from 20 to 30 children per class.
The school - a Victorian building sharing a site with the neighbouring First School - is situated very close to the City Centre and takes in children from a very varied housing area including council houses and flats and private housing of all sizes.
The staff consist of a total of nine class teachers (this includes the Deputy Head and a job share), the Headteacher and in the Resource Base, one full-time teacher and full-time welfare assistant.
The temporary staff include an additional teacher (mainly covering special needs) for 0.8 of the week.
The other three welfare assistants are on temporary contracts (two part-time, one full-time). These temporary contracts are reviewed annually by the Head and Governors.
The Resource Base was set up in the school six years ago. Children with a visual impairment are able to attend the school from all over the county.
There are several reasons why, at the moment, the role of assistants in school is undergoing changes.
The demands on teachers have increased as a result of demanding and rapid curriculum development which has resulted from the introduction of the National Curriculum and assessment requirements. These greater demands involve all staff in school, including assistants.
The Head and Governors are now managing the finances of the school following the introduction of L.M.S. in schools. This has meant that there is a new level of flexibility in the employment of assistants.
At the County level, changes in the allocation of funding to statemented children now means that the role of assistants in schools requires review.
In this school, in the area of special needs, the staff are presently introducing a structured special needs assessment scheme ("Pathway" Halliwell and Williarns (1991)) which generates action plans and regular evaluation. The work load involved in this may have implications for the assistants as teachers question their use of time.
The literature (and presumably the research) on the work of classroom assistants is veryslender. It is also quickly out of date, given the rapid shifts in this area. For exampie Leslie, in 1986 (in Marland 1986, Page 65) wrote dismissively of general assistants as:
"an odd category of staff employed on an hourly rate of pay in term time only whom you might well employ to assist supervision at other times rather than the lunch hour."
Since then, there has been a review of non-teaching staff in schools by HMI (1992). It identifies many of the issues that have also arisen in the present evaluation. Where this occurs, I have provided references to the HMI Review.
I have also come across two locally based research projects, in this area, both not published. Burrell and Thatcher (not dated) have examined the implications of support teaching in the classroom. Potter (1991) (as part of an MA at UEA) has researched the confusion and controversy surrounding the employment of non-teaching assistants.
Choosing the focus
When choosing the focus, I wanted to select one that was not only of interest to myself but was also perceived by the Head as being of value to the school generally and this hopefully meant of value to all staff.
I felt it was necessary to feel justified in negotiating with staff for their time and cooperation.
Their time for interviews would inevitably be snatched during playtimes, lunchtimes or after a day's teaching.
I would be asking for their co-operation in focussing upon something that may not, at that time, be high on their agenda.
At my initial short talk with the Head, I suggested three alternative foci and together we had no hesitation in agreeing on one. This was; to evaluate the way welfare assistants were used in the school.
For the purpose of this piece of work I shall refer to welfare assistants as assistants.
My own interest arose from an awareness of the increasing number of assistants being employed in the last few years. Also, as a full time class teacher, I had had experiences of working with assistants that had led me to question both their role and my own.
The ethics of negotiating access
In comparison to the task of an external evaluator, I could negotiate access with greater ease. I knew the staff I was negotiating with and had many opportunities during the week when it was possible to discuss the proposed interviews.
Initially I was concerned that staff might feel threatened. I was aware that my status as Deputy Head might be perceived by some as contributing to this. As I hoped for open and honest interviews, it was essential to clarify the underlying code of confidentiality and to make this explicit. This included:
In addition interviewees were assured of their right to check my notes that were written either during or after an interview. This provided the interviewee with the opportunity to consider whether the notes were a fair, relevant and accurate account of what had been discussed.
Not only were the staff extremely co-operative with this evaluation they were also, I felt, very honest. For this I am extremely grateful and wish to thank them for the time they willingly gave up.
A lot of the interviewing focused upon the working relationships between the class teacher and assistant. Careful handling of this evidence is essential if it could damage or hurt anyone's interests, needs or feelings.
Insider/outsider evaluator
Working witihin my own school as an insider evaluator I became aware that I was embarking upon an often ambiguous role.
I was engaged in evaluating what was happening within one part of the school system, but this was a system of which I was a part. The more people I lnterviewed, in itself, created a change in the system. What started as an evaluation grew to feel more like shared staff development.
This created an uncertainty, for me, as to where the boundaries were to be drawn for this evaluation. For example, sitting in the staffroom one playtime I was listening to two teachers negotiating about changes to the reading support that an assistant was giving. I felt it was necessary to ask the staff involved if I could make use of this kind of 'casual' evidence. It was relevant, I felt, but not collected during the arranged interview.
As an insider evaluator, I became aware of spin-offs from this activity which related to the professional development of myself and colleagues.
The benefits may be summarised:
Work Completed
I interviewed all of the assistants (i.e. four) in the school and the teachers (i.e. nine) that they worked with, in addition to the Headteacher. This in effect meant every member of staff except for two.
The interviews lasted 30-60 minutes during which time I took notes or used a tape recorder with the Headteacher. I then hoped to discover recurring themes and issues that could then be taken up with the Headteacher in his interview.
This sequence is, I consider, a simplification. Issues were still emerging beyond this point and some of these extend beyond the school itself and involve taking a wider perspective in order to understand the position of low paid part-time women employees.
I then prepared a discussion paper for a staff meeting of all teachers, summarising the evaluation issues. I hoped this would encourage a whole staff discussion and might lead to agreement on Action Plans.
I also hope to report back to the assistants, as a group, and summarise the results of this evaluation. This latter meeting has not occurred yet but will, I hope, in the future.
In this evaluation report, I have separated the interview evidence from the matters arising, which I have numbered.
The following is a timetable of interviews completed:
| 5/11/92 | Initial discussion with Headteacher |
| 9/11/92 | Interview with assistant, Pat |
| 11/11/92 | Interview with assistant, Jean |
| 18/11/92 | Interview with assistant, teacher (special needs) 1 |
| 25/11/92 | Interview with assistant Judy |
| 3/2/93 | Interview with teacher 2 |
| 3/2/93 | Interview with teacher 3 |
| 4/2/93 | Interview with teacher 4 |
| 4/2/93 | Interview with teacher 5 |
| 10/2/93 | Interview with teacher 6 |
| 10/2/93 | Interview with teacher 7 |
| 25/2/93 | Interview with Head teacher |
| 26/2/93 | Interview with teacher 8 |
| 26/2/93 | Interview with assistant |
| 1/3/93 | Interview with teacher 9 |
| 1/3/93 | Staff meeting (3.30-4.30pm) |
Interview with Pat, an assistant
The first interview was with Pat, one of the assistants.
She worked in the school for three years (having previously been a voluntary helper). Her job has changed, both as the needs of the child (that she was originally supporting) changed and with each new year, as the class teacher changed. She has moved "up" the school, supporting the same class each year.
She painted a picture of her job increasing in complexity, from supporting one child to supporting many others in the class. Also, from initially "doing what was asked" by the teacher to taking more initiative and having increasing influence as to what she does and how she does it.
When she was first employed in the school she was specifically working with one child who holds a statement for medical, behavioural and learning difficulties.
This involved her in working in the classroom and extra playground supervision.
A year later she said she started to notice that his behaviour was,
"no worse or better than plenty of others."
She then questioned the need to continue to supervise him on the playground.
Because she has moved with the class she said she knows the children well, in comparison to the new teacher who may be meeting the children for the first time at the beginning of a new year.
When starting to work with a new teacher she described the ways in which her classroom activities got sorted out.
She said she values openness and honesty in this situation and will make use of comments from the teacher.
She said
"l have asked him to tell me if there are any problems."
She also sees this as a two way process when she says...
"I have to be very honest."
Sorting out her role in the classroom activities involves her in making judgements about how she might support children. The extent to which a teacher directs in this, varies from teacher to teacher, she added.
She said of one,
"initially he was unsure how to use me. If I'm not told what to do I'll look and see what needs to be done to give the most help."
With this teacher, she is in the classroom supporting during maths. She said it is an activity she enjoys because she likes maths and considers herself to be good at it. She responds to requests from individual children for help, moving from desk to desk. She has developed her own system of listing children as they put up their hands, to ensure fair waiting times. She said she explains work to children, sorts problems and marks work depending on the children's needs..
The teacher, she says, is based at his desk and he may be working to a list or selecting "children who are not working." But she says she is "not quite sure what his system is."
Occasionally, a teacher has left her alone with the full class. She said...
"the children would start chatting and get off their work. I can whizz round but what frightens me most is speaking to a class as a whole."
She said strongly that what is not needed is a set of rules about her job. Working with different teachers in different situations and responding to the needs of individual children requires, she said, a less rigid approach. She said...
"our job is loose. We have to slot in and that is something I'm happy with."
Last year Pat said she was working in the classroom alongside the same teacher every day of the week. She described a problem that built up in that classroom.
She said...
"I felt the teacher was having problems for more than a year before I could do anything about it... I was having to shout to the person (I was working with) next to me. Eventually though I felt I couldn't ignore what seemed to me to be, although not in anyway qualified as a teacher myself, a problem that needed outside help."
She summarised...
"The teacher never found the authority."
She said that she eventually "got closer to the teacher" and was able to "break the ice." By broaching the subject with the class teacher she was eventually able to involve other members of staff in dealing with the problem.
I discussed the problem with Pat, during the interview. She felt she was in a position of conflict. She wanted to support the class teacher but did not want to be thought of as interfering or being critical in a negative way or of undermining the the teacher.
Matters arising 1
This example of an increasingly difficult situation developing over time, emphasises the need for all staff (teachers and assistants) to know who on the staff can be approached for support and guidance.
It also highlights how, through the best motives (loyalty, remaining positive) staff may live with a perceived problem for some time before going public."
Matters arising 2
When the child's needs on the playground changed, she was the first to notice and state this clearly.
The assistant is not only responding to the child's needs by pursuing tasks identified by the teachers but is also critically aware of the child's learning and changing needs.
How then, in the school, can this sort of informal, but very important and useful assessment of children be fully utilised? what structures exist in the school to link together review and assessment of children's needs? Do these structures allow welfare assistants to contribute their assessments?
Matters arising 3
When an assistant moves with a class to a new teacher they carry with them all of their acquired knowledge about individual children with whom they have been working.
By keeping the same assistant with a class, they can become a potential means of ensuring continuity of learnmg for children, if the class teacher encourages discussion in this way.
Matters arising 4
This interview provides some insight into the role of the assistant.
In this case Pat describes a flexible role in which she is open to guidance from the teacher and also benefits from the opportunity to make judgements and decisions for herself.
Her comment that she is "not quite sure what his system is," underlines the need for successful communication between assistant and teacher, to clarify roles, tasks, systems, expectations and problems.
The following question summarises this point. How can this communication be encouraged and supported, to ensure that opportunities are there for assistants and teachers to regularly review what is happening in their classroom?
Matters arising 5
Pat has rejected the idea of a set of rules that might define her tasks, in favour of a more fluid alternative in which she is responding to the specific situation.
The advantages (for an experienced assistant) are presumably to do with retaining a sense of flexibility, sharing a sense of control, being able to change task easily and being able to shift priorities.
There may be implications here, concerning the position of new assistants and their induction and also concerning support for teachers who may be inexperienced in defining and sharing tasks with assistants.
While the Head said that a job description did exist for assistants, it was not detailed or referred to.
The HMI Review (1992), (page 13), found that the existence and quality of job descriptions varied considerably. In comparison they found (page 13), "most of these staff developed an understanding of their role through working closely with, and under the guidance of, qualified teachers."
Interview with Jean, an assistant
The second interview was with Jean who is an assistant working 29 hours per week with these hours split between five classes.
She described her job, at times, as 'doing exactly the same as the teacher." An example is when she helps with maths. She described the complexity of tasks that this involved.
"There's never enough time and pairs of hands. Moving from child to child I'm always having to change Peak book. I am getting the child to read instructions, work through examples and often marking work."
She, too, has moved through the previous years with the same children and as a result has a full knowledge of the class. Equally, the children know her well. She said...
"They will ask anything," not differentiating between the assistant and the teacher.
She contrasted the pleasure of her work when she was working as a valued member of the classroom team, with the lack of enjoyment she experienced with a teacher who was not communicating well with her and who did not develop a team approach.
For example, as part of a successful classroom team, she was told by the teacher;
"before the day starts, what we're doing during the morning. I then know what to expect. The teacher says things like, you start one end I'll start the other. You might look up during a busy lesson. Your eyes will meet (those of the teacher) and exchange an understanding of mutual frustration or disbelief."
In contrast, she described the difficulties she was experiencing working with another teacher.
"At first I didn't know much about him. He's never had a talk with me about what I'm doing. I daren't do too much. He's not had help before and now he's inundated. He didn't know what to do. I don't enjoy it. There's never a thank you. I don't feel part of a useful team."
I asked her about training for the job and attending courses.
She had been on one course for welfare assistants organised by Norfolk County Council staff. She was keen to go on courses but this one was disappointing and was not relevant to her particular situation and age range of children with which she worked.
I asked her if the situation had improved. She said that they had a meeting (the assistants, class teacher and teacher for the visually impaired) at which it was decided that no more than two helpers would be in the room together.
She was aware of difficulties here and said...
"you have to be diplomatic and not raise people's heckIes."
She also said...
"it's not my part to say anything"
...but she thought that the Headteacher needed to be told about the situation and she hoped that this research project might help in that respect.
Matters arising 6
All four of the assistants interviewed wanted to take advantage of training opportunities and hoped that courses would become available.
Jean criticised one course that she had been on but also said that she thought courses could be provided within school, organised by staff.
She identified two areas of need for herself; managing children's behaviour and an opportunity for a general discussion group for all assistants to attend.
Matters arising 7
The statement "it's not my part to say anything" raises the question as to whose responsibility it is to tackle this type of difficulty and to decide which members of staff (up the management line) need to be involved.
Matters arising 8
The importance given to creating a successful team approach in the classroom is a theme that appears in much of the interview data, not only from the assistants but also from the teachers. In whatever field, some people are better team workers than others.
If it is felt that team working skills can be learned and improved, then there may be implications here for school INSET future policy. Also, if it is accepted that some people are at the outset, better team workers, then there are implications for future appointment policies and selection criteria.
Matters arising 9
All four assistants spoke strongly about the label given to their post.
They unanimously rejected the title "welfare assistant", with comments like
"welfare assistant suggests you put plasters on cuts and make sure lunches are on the table."
One assistant said...
"one teacher called us 'ancillary staff'. That sounds very derogatory. I looked it up. It said subservient. I thought we're in for a good year here."
They preferred to be called "special needs assistant" or "classroom assistant".
I would suggest that the title of "welfare assistant" has not kept up with a rapidly changing job and does not acknowledge (in the eyes of the assistants) the compiexity and importance of their work.
Interview with Judy, an assistant working with a child with a visual impairnent
The children with a visual impairment are based in the mainstream classes and are taught both in their classroom and withdrawn for some 1:1 work.
The Resource Base (for children with a visual impairment) is staffed by two permanent members of staff (a teacher and an assistant). In addition, another (temporary) full time assistant.
Judy makes up a three-some of staff linked to the Resource Base.
I interviewed all three of these members of staff.
Judy has worked with one child, Hannah, throughout her First School years and up to the present time, (i.e. 5 years), moving classes with the child and supporting both in class and withdrawing the child for 1:1 activities such as learning Braille. Hannah is totally blind and is undergoing treatment for Leukaemia.
During the interview, Judy described her hopes in the area of training and courses.
She said...
"I've had no specific training for this job. I've learned about Braille because I chose to. There should be specific training and not just be left to get on with it."
She also said that she would like to be able to visit other schools. She mentioned her needs for courses in the area of art (to learn about ideas for the blind child such as tactile activities) and in technology (to be able to use computers more in her work).
She felt that when she first joined the Middle School, she was not clear as to whether assistants were expected to attend staff development days. Due to this uncertainty she had missed one (on the cross curricular use of music, art and drama) which she would have found useful.
She described a working relationship with which she was happy. In it she:
She described ways in which her job may be made more difficult or undervalued. These included:
Matters arising 10
Judy has taught herself Braille in order that she can support the teaching that
Hannah is receiving from the teacher of the visually impaired. Whereas this teacher has been funded to attend a course in the teaching of Braille, due to lack of funding Judy has not.
As an assistant she needs to be equally at home in the teaching of Braille in order that she can support Hannah's learning.
I gained additional information about Judy's background during a staff room conversation with her, which she was happy for me to refer to.
It demonstrates that although the job does not formally require any qualifications, some post holders may hold many and show considerable commitment to INSET and professional development.
She has passed several 'O' levels and completed 2 'A' level courses in addition to holding a CPQS qualification. Before joining her present school, she worked as a Nanny then became a voluntary school helper and later a paid helper, doing cooking.
Until her marriage (three years ago) she had considered training as a teacher. But she now says that she is:
"Happy not to have a job that spills over into my home life."
Matters arising 11
The level of willingness and demand for INSET that has been expressed by all of the assistants interviewed, suggests that school INSET planning may benefit all staff by becoming broader and encompassing the needs of assistants.
The following questions and suggestions may be of help.
When whole school INSET is assessed, who has responsibility for assessing the needs of the assistants?
When the staff appraisal scheme is under way this may present an opportunity to access the needs of the assistants.
The school has already benefitted from its post-LMS independence to employ the mid-day supervisors (lunchtime staff) to attend an in-school INSET on behaviour management.
The clustering of schools for INSET purposes may make these occasions more financially feasible.
Are assistants invited to attend staff development days and is the possible relevance of these days explained?
The HMI Review (1992) shows that this lack of in-service training is a widespread deficiency.
It states (page 13)
"It was quite rare to find a school which analysed carefully its training needs and even where schools had started some form of staff appraisal it was uncommon to find non-teaching staff included. Few funds were set aside for use by schools or local authorities for training.
Interview with the Headteacher
The Head teacher said that, like all resources in education, the assistants are a limited resource requiring compromises when allocating them. He feels that, ideally, there should be a full-time assistant for every year group which would mean one assistant, per class, 50% of the time. But with the present school budget this, he said, could not be done.
The reality is that, per week, the assistant hours are budgeted as follows:
45 hours (special needs)
30 hours (school allocation)
The Head teacher alIocates, each September, a certain number of hours (of assistant time) to each class teacher. He does this by looking at the needs of individual children (including those with Statements) then secondly at the class as a whole.
He pointed out that, in the past, there has been an allocation of assistant time (per hour) targeted to specific Statemented children.
When allocating the time, he is aware that the level of need changes from year to year and also during the year. However, he also tries to put assistant time into Year 4, to help the teachers with new children to the school.
In September, the class teacher and assistants then sort out, in pairs, the timetable details, in what one teacher called a "free for all."
The Head agreed with that description, but said that the three or four weeks when people were not fully utilised was justified. After that, he felt that they were working very efficiently with specific jobs allocated to them by class teachers.
He said that the alternative of him dictating timetables, would create a very rigid structure for managing the school. But he did contemplate alternatives and hoped that this evaluation might cast some light on these. He said that we may find that assistants need to be very structured as to what they are doing.
He also hoped that research would find out (a) how the assistants themselves are seeing their job and (b)whether they are being used effectively.
He was aware that certain teachers had struggled to actually find a reason to have an assistant in the classroom. Remembering his time as a class teacher, he found this astounding, as he was always grateful for another pair of hands. He also said that he was aware that working with an assistant was, at first, "very odd and foreign".
As Head teacher, he is appointing the assistants. So what is he looking for?
He said that he needs to have people who are quite independent with great integrity so they are not wasting time. He also expects them to work as hard as he considers everyone else works in the school. He said he looked for self discipline and a professional sense of responsibility. This quality was one that he considered important when the teacher and assistant were involved together in monitoring the effectiveness of their work with the children.
Matters arising 12
Allocating a limited resource to where it is most effective is the aim of the Headteacher. His concern that he might need to dictate timetable details more specifically was echoed by one teacher. This is referred to later as a discussion point in the staff meeting. The effectiveness of the assistants depends partly on the ability of the teacher to enable successful negotiation to occur between themselves and the assistant.
Matters arising 13
One implication of the level of resourcing is that an assistant's time is shared between several classes. This changing from class to class (although not complained about by the assistants) may be a factor to consider when the assistants are referring to difficulties of establishing a working team relationship with teachers.
Matters arising 14
The HMI Review (1992) endorses the Head's statement about lack of resources.
Referring to non-teaching staff (page ix)
"almost all the heads wished that they could increase their hours."
and (page 1)
"many schools would benefit by having more non-teaching support."
The time scale for allocating assistants emphasises the inevitable employment uncertainty that is an underlying feature of their job. This is a consesquence of unavoidably tight budgeting.
Matters arising 15
The Head's description of qualities that he looks for when appointing an assistant, echo the nature of the job that they do and have described. At times their work overlaps that of the teacher. Their lack of formal qualifications, level of pay and status contrast with their commitment to their jobs despite increasing expectations
(see HMI Review: Non teaching Staff in Schools 1992) as to what they might be asked to do. As the assistants have pointed out, recognition within the school, of what they do, is very important to their self esteem.
The teacher's perspectives:
Due to the large number of teachers interviewed, I am summarising the evidence from the interviews in two case studies. Although all of the characteristics and opinions attributed to these fictional teachers are accurate and have originated in the interviews, it would not be possible to find all of the evidence in just one interview.
Jill is a confident and experienced teacher with an open attitude towards sharing ideas and planning. She works closely with her partner teacher in a parallel class.
She has had a lot of experience of working with other adults in the classroom including parent helpers, student teachers and assistants and is happy to have others in the room with her. Through this she has learnt to include, in her planning, the management of assistants. They enter into her planning of classroom activities, her timetabling, the organising of resources and in her choice of teaching style (individual, groups or full-class) and decisions about withdrawing groups from the classroom.
She considers herself to be a fairly good team worker and tries to create a team approach with the adults with whom she works. She is aware of the importance of acknowledging the efforts of others and is generous with her praise.
She is very grateful for the help she is presently getting from the assistants which she describes as "fantastic" and indicates the quality of it when she says "often they are like another teacher." She says the assistants enable her to do all sorts of things that, by herself, she otherwise could not do.
It is not always that straightforward.
There are times when she has realised that an assistant has been involved in a teaching situation for which she is not skilled and times when she has had to accept that an assistant is not willing to be involved in a task in which she lacks confidence.
Jill has learnt to be a successful negotiator This is apparent at the beginning of the year when she is sorting out her timetable and how the assistants will support her class.
During the year she will ask for more help if she feels the class needs it. This involves her in justifying her request to the Head teacher.
She never feels she has enough time to liaise with the assistants and yet manages to snatch moments in the classroom and staffroom to keep up a sufficient level of communication.
Sheila is also an experienced teacher, who works in a more independent way. She has always worked alone in the past, planning her teaching by herself. She is willing to share ideas with other teachers but this is usually when they approach her. She is happiest working in the classroom by herself and prefers to have the classroom door shut.
Sheila feels ambivalently towards having assistants to help in the classroom. She is on the one hand relieved that there is an offer of help when she is feeling the work load of a teacher is increasing yearly. But she has never had so much help before and it is an uncomfortable feeling for her to ask people to do what she feels she should do. Nevertheless, she speaks very highly of them and their abilities.
She is learning to work with an assistant, although she was not sure what she could expect of them, at first. This meant that negotiating a timetable with the assistants at the beginning of the year, was a difficult task for her.
She now uses this time in many ways which includes; helping with resources and helping children in the classroom during maths and creative writing. But she is realistic in what she asks for and says it is no good asking them to do what they are not good at.
She talks with them after school and in lessons, but feels that there are times when a more formal meeting with teachers and assistants would be useful to discuss timetabling and tasks.
Matters arising 16
Each class teacher described how they received help from up to five support staff in the course of a week. (If their class included a child with a visual impairment), this would mean, in the course of a week, they would be managing
2 assistants
the assistant for the visually impaired
the teacher for the visually impaired
the special needs support teacher
This, on top of full time class teaching, tests managing skills fully.
It requires very efficient planning, time management, communication and negotiation.
There may be implications here, in terms of management training for teachers, especially for those teachers who have not previously had the opporturnty to develop these skills.
Matters arising 17
Some teachers expressed uncertainty about what the assistants might be involved in doing. This is, I think, reflected in the uncertainty about the title for their post. Most teachers negotiated the tasks successfully with the assistant and there was a very great range of activities from the menial to those paralleling the teacher. I return to this issue later in my report about the staff meeting.
It is relevant to note here some of the tasks of the special needs assistant listed in the HMI Review (page 8)
These include:
"Sustain and improve the quality of interaction between people and teacher "
"maintained records of the pupils performance for assessment purposes"
"increased the child's participation"
"met the educational psychologist and physiotherapist"
"assisted with therapy"
Matters arising 18
Much of the assistants time is available due to the resourcing of children with special needs. During their comments on negotiating timetables and finding time to liaise with the special needs teacher, the teachers questioned the role of the special needs co-ordinator.
This is presently one of the part time teachers, although the teacher of the visually impaired has, at times, coordinated some of the special needs provision.
Given the number of support staff now working in the school, the task of special needs co-ordinator may need to be reviewed. The Head has agreed that the task may need to be divided between more than one teacher.
In addition, it might be considered useful for an assistant to act as team leader for the assistants in the school.
The staff meeting
The staff meeting was attended by all nine class teachers, Head, special needs teacher, teacher for the visually impaired on 1st March 1993, from 3.30 pm to 4.30 pm.
The agenda for the meeting had been displayed on the staffroom noticeboard so that it was common knowledge that the purpose of the meeting was to discuss the issues around the working together of classroom assistants and teachers.
I presented the following discussion paper and spoke briefly before each question.
A discussion paper
The interviews suggest that the successful working relationship between teacher and classroom assistant depends upon skills that are being learned and improved all the time.
These skills were referred to: -
Some questions that might be considered:
Q1 How/when do we negotiate with classroom assistants and support teachers?
Q2 How/when do we communicate with support staff about individual children?
Q3 How, at the end of each year, do teachers pass on information on children's special needs?
Q4 How do we create a team approach with our classrooms?
In the interviews, teachers praised the commitment and good work done by classroom assistants and support teachers.
Q5 How do we communicate this?
The interviewing highlighted the complex staff timetables (due to the sharing of classroom assistants between classes) that gets the extra help to the children.
Q6 How can we make the children's experiences with support as continuous, day to day, as possible?
The tasks that teachers and classroom assistants do, may overlap or at times be identical.
Q7 How do we deal with this?
The label "welfare assistant" was felt (by classroom assistants and teachers) to be one that did not-reflect the true nature and value of their work.
Q8 Can we agree on a better label?
The major areas of agreement were:-
1.We agreed on a timescale for planning and reviewing special needs children. This involves a structure (which we have not had previously) of regular meetings with certain agenda items already in place.
2.The classroom assistants would be present at the first of these meetings. This is also a new structure as previously, any similar meeting would have been attended only by teachers.
3.The first of these meetings will require preparatory work by those attending. It is hoped that this will create fair negotiations for classroom assistant time. Unlike previous practice, it requires all staff to gather together information and consider needs as one team.
4.The planning and reviewing timescale document is to be written by myself and will be distributed to all. teachers and assistants and will provide an annual structure for reviewing our use of 'Pathway' and the work of classroom assistants in the school.
5.It was agreed that following the discussion about the title for assistants that in future their chosen label of "classroom assistant" would be adopted.
Timescale for Special Needs Planning and Reviewing following Staff Meeting of 1st March 1993.
Autumn Term Planning meeting for all classroom assistants and teachers.
First Staff Development Day (Monday pm)
Fortnightly Class teachers (with special needs teacher) plan and review Action plans for individual children (3.15-4.00 pm)
Half termIy Regular special needs planning and reviewing meeting attended by all teachers
Half termly Records to be, completed for children with statements or on 'Pathway'.
Details and suggestions for the Autumn Term Staff Development Day special needs planning and reviewing meeting.
To be attended bv:
All teachers, Head, Special Needs Support teacher, Visually Impaired staff, classroom assistants.
Aim:
Agenda:
Condusion:
This evaluation project does not, I feel, have a tidy ending (such as the handing over of an external evaluators report).
Working as an insider evaluator has precipitated debate and change which will hopefully continue.
For example, it has been possible to encourage others to pursue the goals they have referred to. Agreed plans will continue to need to be monitored.
l am also aware that data that may have been overlooked as unimportant could later turn out to be early evidence of changing attitudes or perceptions, which in time is very important.
A Wider Issue
The work of the assistant (often demanding and parallel to the teacher) is greatly valued in the school. Yet their status in the broader field of education is at best ignored or set alongside that of voluntary helpers.
The HMI Review (1992) is concerned with maximising the effectiveness of nonteaching staff. But whilst praising their contribution, they do not address the question of whether their work is fairly rewarded in terms of status and pay.
Looking at their work reveals, I feel, a conflict between status and role. The following factors may contribute to this:
1) The majority of assistants are women who have initally come into the school at a time when their children are attending the school. Their initial experiences have usually been as volunteer helpers (joining day trips, listening to reading). When a vacancy for an assistant has arisen these parents have been the first to be considered.
By this time they have acquired a wide knowledge of how the school works, individual teachers and the requirements of individual children.
2) Although often having no formal training in the area of child care or education, they have learnt the job by doing it.
3) Their part time employment remains very uncertain.
At first, they are usually targeted at specific children whose time at school will be limited to four years (in a 7-11 Middle School).
If they move 'up' with the child then the renewal of their contract becomes threatened as they approach the time when the child leaves school.
Also, as the child improves, their assistance may not be needed anymore.
4) Legally their employment position is not strong. David Utting - The Guardian 16/3/93 - "Part timers cleaned out," has drawn attention to the weak and discriminatory legal position of part time women workers in Britain.
He points out that part-time staff (8-16 hours per week) need to have served a minimum of five years before they can claim statutory redundancy pay or lodge a complaint of unfair dismissal.
Britain, he says, out of the E.C. countries, has the largest part time work force and 5 million out of the 5.7 million part timers are women.
He reports that the EquaI Opportunities Commission sought (unsuccessfully) to get a judicial review of the laws treatment of part time staff which amounted to indirect discrimination against women.
Burrell, D and Thatcher, A (not dated). The implications of support teaching in the classroom (Unpublished discussion paper)
Halliwell, M. and Williams, T. (1991) Pathway, Making decisions about the education of pupils giving concern. NFER NELSON
HMI Review (1992). Non-teaching staff in schools London: HMSO
Leslie, I. (1986) Working with Non-teaching staff. In Marland, M. (1986) (Ed) School Management Skills. Heineman.
Potter, T.E. (1991) Non teaching assistants. (Unpublished part M.A., UEA)
Utting, D. (1993) "Part timers cleaned out" The Guardian 16/3/93