1. Gauteng East District
Under-performing High Schools
Presenter: Dr Muavia Gallie (PhD)
Institute of Education Policy, Planning and Implementation @ University of Pretoria
IEPPI@UP
20 May 2009
Springs
1

2. Success rate = 8,1%
•Success-rate of the system = 8,1%
•Of every 12 learners starting Grade
One, only 1 learner attains what the
system is promising them - data 2005!
2

3. Dysfunctionality vis-à-vis Under-performance
Figure 10: Three levels of school functionality in relation to the support needed by
schools
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
-10%
-20%
Basics
Non-Functioning Low-Functioning High-Functioning
-20% – +20% 21% - 60% 61% - 100%
3
Gallie 2006

4. Questionnaire on School Functionality (SFI)
A. School Ethos Responses
Questions Yes No I don’t know
1. Are attendance, discipline and vandalism by learners major problems in school?
B. Vision, Aims and Strategic Planning Responses
1. Do the principal and you, as staff member share a common vision about the school’s future development?
C. The Principal Responses
1. Does the principal provide strong leadership and a definite sense of direction through a clear vision based beliefs and values?
D. The Principal and the Senior Management Team Responses
1. Are they working well together as a team through clearly defined roles and responsibilities known to staff?
E. Structures, Roles and Responsibilities Responses
1. Is there a clear organisational structure that is appropriate for meeting the school’s aims?
F. Decision Making and Communication Responses
1. Are staff meetings used for the discussion of major policy issues?
G. Professional Working Relationships Responses
1. Is there a good team spirit?
H. Links with Parents and the Community Responses
1. Are teachers working to build and maintain good relations with parents?
I. The Governing Body and Department of Education Responses
1. Are the staff and governing body enjoying a positive and harmonious relationship?
J. Managing Change Responses 4
1. Is the school receptive to innovation and change?

5. Summary of Analysis of Questionnaire responses
Y = Preferred response (both Yes and No)
Summary
Y=n A. School Ethos Responses Pos Percentage
Yes No Don’t Diff. % Don't
Y=p Questions know Yes No know
1.1 Are attendance, discipline and vandalism by learners 23 1 0
n major problems in school? 2 4 96% 4% 0%
1.2 Are most of the parents proud that their children are 4 4 16
p attending this school? 2 17 17% 17% 67%
1.3 Is there a general concern through the teaching and 19 3 2
p learning process to provide quality education? 2 79 79% 13% 8%
1.4 Is a questioning, critical attitude actively encouraged, 11 10 3
and a complacency attitude actively discouraged among
n staff? 2 46 46% 42% 13%
1.5 Is there a continual striving for improvement and growth 10 9 5
p among teachers? 2 42 42% 38% 21%
1.6 Are teachers holding high expectations of learner 4 15 4
behaviour and achievements through displaying confidence
p in them? 3 17 17% 65% 17%
p 1.7 Is there an open atmosphere for change in the school? 8 9 6 3 35 35% 39% 26%
p 1.8 Are teachers talking freely about professional matters? 16 6 2 2 67 67% 25% 8%
1.9 Are learners and teachers feeling safe and secure at 4 17 2
p school? 3 17 17% 74% 9%
1.10 Are teachers working in a stimulating, enjoyable and 1 21 2
p satisfying atmosphere? 2 4 4% 5
88% 8%

6. Entire summary
6

7. Results 1 Graph 9 - School Ethos Graph 10 - Vision, Aims and Strategic Planning
1
100
1
100
10 80 2
10 80 2
60 60
40 40
9 793
17 9 21 20 3
20 4
4
8 13 38
17
0
13 0
13 25
46
67
8 17 4 8 4
35
42 38
52
54
7 5 7 5
6 6 Results 2
Graph 11 - The Principal Results 3 Graph 12 - The Principal and SMT
1 1
100 100
10 2 10 80 2
80
60 60 63
50
40 21 4025
9 3 9 29 3
20 17 33 20 43
42 42
0 0
33 25
42 39
8 4
8 30 4 38
38 46
42
63 7 5
7 5 7
6
6 Results 4

8. Graph 13 - Structures, Roles and Responsibilities Graph 14 - Decision Making and Communication
1 1
100 100
96
10 80 2 10 80 2
60 67 60
54
40 33 39 40
9 3 9 3
20 78
25 8 20 39 92
0 0
35 58 61
67 8 4
8 26 4
38 26 33
54 52
7 5
7 5
6 Results 5 6
Results 6
Graph 16 - Links with Parents and Community
Graph 15 - Professional Working Relationships
1
1
100
100
10 2 10 80 2
80
60 50
60
38 40
40 9 29 3
9 29 3 20 67
17
20 38 8
42 67
0 0
21 0 4
54 42 74
8 4 8 4
35
46
75
7 70 5 7 5
8
Results 7 6 6 Results 8

9. Graph 17 - The SGB and DoE Graph 18 - Managing Reform
1 1
100 100
10 80 2 10 80 2
60 54
50 60
43 40
9 3 40
9 3
20 8 54 17 20 17
00 21 33
0
25 4 0 0 21 14 4 21
8 4 13
8 21 4
7 5
7 5
6 Results 9 6 Results 10
A. School Ethos 32.8 Graph 19 - Level of school Functionality A
B. Vision, Aims and Strategic Planning 27.5
C. The Principal 38.4 School Ethos
Managing Change 100
D. The Principal and the Senior Management Team 37.7 90
80 Vision, Aims and Strategic Planning
70
E. Structures, Roles and Responsibilities 33.6 SGB and DoE
60
50
40
F. Decision Making and Communication 64.5 30 The Principal
20
G. Professional Working Relationships 44.0 10
0
Links with Parents and Community
H. Links with Parents and the Community 36.6
The Principal and SMT
I. The Governing Body and Department of Education 20.5
J. Managing Change 21.5 Professional Work Relationships
Structures, Roles and Responsibilities
Decision making and Communication
9
Average 35.7

10. Graph 20 - Level of School Functionality B
100 School Ethos
90 Vision, Aims and Strategic
Planning
80 The Principal
70 The Principal and SMT
60 Structures, Roles and
Responsibilities
50 Decision Making and
Communication
40 Professional Work
Relationships
30 Links with Parents and
Community
SGB and DoE
20
Managing Change
10
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Level of School Functionality (SFI)
10
Requests for use of the SFI - eduquest@movingup.co.za

11. Conceptual Argument -
Types of Functionalities (relating to the Core Purpose)
Non- Low High
Functioning Functioning Functioning
Schools Schools Schools
(NFS) (LFS) (HFS)
Leadership Level 1
Management Level 2
Administration Level 3
11

12. 4. Measuring Teaching Quality i.r.t.
different school functionalities
Non-Functioning Low Functioning High Functioning
Schools (NFS) Schools (LFS) Schools (HFS)
Performance
Management and
Reward Systems
Evaluation and
Appraisal
Systems
Supervisory and
Accountability
systems
12
The Judgement of Quality is dependent on the Quality of the Judgement.

13. 5. Focus of the measuring tool ..
Non-Functioning Low Functioning High Functioning
Schools (NFS) Schools (LFS) Schools (HFS)
Getting them Performance
to perform Management and
‘optimally’ Reward Systems
Getting them Evaluation and
‘to do Appraisal
something Systems
extra’
Getting them Supervisory and
‘to do their Accountability
job’ systems
13

14. 5. Keeping their ‘eye’ on achieving …
Non-Functioning Low Functioning High Functioning
Schools (NFS) Schools (LFS) Schools (HFS)
Getting the Performance
OUTCOMES Management and
right Reward Systems
Getting the Evaluation and
PROCESS Appraisal
right Systems
Getting the Supervisory and
INPUT right Accountability
systems
14

15. Did your school close
early on the 21 April
2009 (the day before
the Elections), and on
the 30 April 2009 (the
day before May day)?
15

16. Defining Dysfunctional schools
• Schools who continue to function, but do not accomplish the purpose
for which they were created;
• Schools exist to help each child realise his or her fullest potential as a
human being;
• Schools become dysfunctional when they stop serving the needs of the
individuals with them;
• School can take on a life of their own where their main objective
becomes self-preservation;
• One of the key indicators that a school has become dysfunctional is the
‘no talk rule’. Those within the school are not permitted, and do not
permit themselves, to speak (or even think) critically about the school
• Critical thinking begins with the question “why?” Why are we doing this?
Why are things arranged this way? Why do we do it this way and not that
way? These kinds of questions are not allowed in a dysfunctional group;
• The other indicator is the evolution of a priestly caste whose allegiance
is more strongly tied to the school than it is to the learners the school is
meant to serve - this means the teachers and administrators within the
school 16

17. Logistics of Teaching and Learning 1
Previous Year Current Academic Year
30% 20% 10% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
HFS
LFS
NFS
17

18. Logistics of Teaching and Learning 2.1
Previous Year Current Academic Year
30% 20% 10% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
School Readiness
HFS
Components
30%
LFS
NFS
18

19. Logistics of Teaching and Learning 2.2
Previous Year Current Academic Year
30% 20% 10% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
School Readiness
HFS
Teaching
Components
40%
30%
LFS
NFS
19

20. Logistics of Teaching and Learning 2.3
Previous Year Current Academic Year
30% 20% 10% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
School Readiness
HFS
Teaching Learning
Components
40% 50%
30%
LFS
NFS
20

21. Logistics of Teaching and Learning 2.4
Previous Year Current Academic Year
30% 20% 10% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
School Readiness
HFS
Assess-
Teaching Learning
Components ment
40% 50% 10%
30%
LFS
NFS
21

22. Logistics of Teaching and Learning 2.5
Previous Year Current Academic Year
30% 20% 10% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
School Readiness
HFS
Assess-
Components
30%
Teaching
40% 90% Learning
50%
ment
10%
Time-on-Task
LFS
NFS
22

23. Logistics of Teaching and Learning 3.1
Previous Year Current Academic Year
30% 20% 10% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
School Readiness
HFS
Assess-
Components
30%
Teaching
40% 90% Learning
50%
ment
10%
LFS
NFS
23

24. Logistics of Teaching and Learning 3.2
Previous Year Current Academic Year
30% 20% 10% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
School Readiness
HFS
Assess-
Components
30%
Teaching
40% 90% Learning
50%
ment
10%
School Readiness
LFS
Components
30%
NFS
24

25. Logistics of Teaching and Learning 3.3
Previous Year Current Academic Year
30% 20% 10% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
School Readiness
HFS
Assess-
Components
30%
Teaching
40% 90% Learning
50%
ment
10%
School Readiness
LFS
Assessment
Components 20%
30%
NFS
25

26. Logistics of Teaching and Learning 3.4
Previous Year Current Academic Year
30% 20% 10% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
School Readiness
HFS
Assess-
Components
30%
Teaching
40% 90% Learning
50%
ment
10%
School Readiness Disrup-
LFS
Assessment
Components tions 20%
30% 10%
NFS
26

27. Logistics of Teaching and Learning 3.5
Previous Year Current Academic Year
30% 20% 10% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
School Readiness
HFS
Assess-
Components
30%
Teaching
40% 90% Learning
50%
ment
10%
School Readiness Disrup-
LFS
Teaching Assessment
Components tions
30% 20%
30% 10%
NFS
27

28. Logistics of Teaching and Learning 3.6
Previous Year Current Academic Year
30% 20% 10% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
School Readiness
HFS
Assess-
Components
30%
Teaching
40% 90% Learning
50%
ment
10%
School Readiness Disrup-
LFS
Teaching Learning Assessment
Components tions
30% 20% 20%
30% 10%
NFS
28

29. Logistics of Teaching and Learning 3.7
Previous Year Current Academic Year
30% 20% 10% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
School Readiness
HFS
Assess-
Components
30%
Teaching
40% 90% Learning
50%
ment
10%
School Readiness Disrup-
LFS
Teaching Learning
50%
Assessment
Components tions
30% 20% 20%
30% 10%
Time-on-Task
NFS
29

30. Logistics of Teaching and Learning 4.1
Previous Year Current Academic Year
30% 20% 10% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
School Readiness
HFS
Assess-
Components
30%
Teaching
40% 90% Learning
50%
ment
10%
School Readiness Disrup-
LFS
Teaching Learning
50%
Assessment
Components tions
30% 20% 20%
30% 10%
NFS
30

31. Logistics of Teaching and Learning 4.2
Previous Year Current Academic Year
30% 20% 10% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
School Readiness
HFS
Assess-
Components
30%
Teaching
40% 90% Learning
50%
ment
10%
School Readiness Disrup-
LFS
Teaching Learning
50%
Assessment
Components tions
30% 20% 20%
30% 10%
School Readiness
NFS
Components
30% 31

32. Logistics of Teaching and Learning 4.3
Previous Year Current Academic Year
30% 20% 10% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
School Readiness
HFS
Assess-
Components
30%
Teaching
40% 90% Learning
50%
ment
10%
School Readiness Disrup-
LFS
Teaching Learning
50%
Assessment
Components tions
30% 20% 20%
30% 10%
School Readiness
NFS
Learning for
Components Assessment
30% 20%
32

33. Logistics of Teaching and Learning 4.4
Previous Year Current Academic Year
30% 20% 10% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
School Readiness
HFS
Assess-
Components
30%
Teaching
40% 90% Learning
50%
ment
10%
School Readiness Disrup-
LFS
Teaching Learning
50%
Assessment
Components tions
30% 20% 20%
30% 10%
School Readiness Disruptions
NFS
Learning for
Components & Chaos Assessment
30% 20% 20%
33

34. Logistics of Teaching and Learning 4.5
Previous Year Current Academic Year
30% 20% 10% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
School Readiness
HFS
Assess-
Components
30%
Teaching
40% 90% Learning
50%
ment
10%
School Readiness Disrup-
LFS
Teaching Learning
50%
Assessment
Components tions
30% 20% 20%
30% 10%
School Readiness Disruptions
NFS
Learning for
Teaching
Components & Chaos Assessment
20% 20%
30% 20% 34

35. Logistics of Teaching and Learning 4.6
Previous Year Current Academic Year
30% 20% 10% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
School Readiness
HFS
Assess-
Components
30%
Teaching
40% 90% Learning
50%
ment
10%
School Readiness Disrup-
LFS
Teaching Learning
50%
Assessment
Components tions
30% 20% 20%
30% 10%
School Readiness Learn- Disruptions
NFS
Learning for
Teaching
Components ing & Chaos Assessment
20% 20%
30% 10% 20% 35

36. Logistics of Teaching and Learning 4.7
Previous Year Current Academic Year
30% 20% 10% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
School Readiness
HFS
Assess-
Components
30%
Teaching
40% 90% Learning
50%
ment
10%
School Readiness Disrup-
LFS
Teaching Learning
50%
Assessment
Components tions
30% 20% 20%
30% 10%
School Readiness Learn- Disruptions
NFS
Learning for
Teaching
Components
30%
20% 30% ing
10%
& Chaos
20%
Assessment
20%
36
Time-on-Task

37. Is your school Dysfunctional?
• Ten critical questions for every school leader
1. Does every teacher teach everyday in every class for 196 school days in the year? [10]
2. Do you as school leader regularly observe teachers teaching in their classrooms? [10]
3. Do you spend at least 70% of your time in school on matters of teaching and learning?
[10]
4. Do you regularly visit parents of learners in their homes? [10]
5. Is your school consistently clean, ordered and well-decorated in ways that convey
positive sentiments about the learning environment? [10]
6. Do more than 95% of learners pass the highest grade in the school every year for the
past five years? [10]
7. Do more than 98% of learners enrolled attend school everyday? [10]
8. Does every learner have a textbook in every subject? [10]
9. Does your school bring in at least R100,000 every year in external (private) funds e.g.
the business community? [10]
10. In the case of High Schools, do at least 80% of your learners go on to
university/university of technology? In the case of Primary Schools, do all your
learners go on to high school?
Prof. Jonathan Jansen (Executive Leadership Programme 2008)
37

38. Functionality Score
for your school
100 A Functional School
80 A Moderately Functional School
60 A Marginally functional School
40 A Seriously Dysfunctional School
20 A School?
38

39. 8 School Readiness Components
Previous Year Current Academic Year
30% 20% 10% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
School Readiness 8 School Readiness Components
HFS
Components Indicators of NFS SRC Component
30%
School Readiness
LFS
Components
30%
School Readiness
NFS
Components
30% 39

40. School Readiness Components 1
Previous Year Current Academic Year
30% 20% 10% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
School Readiness 8 School Readiness Components
HFS
Components Indicators of NFS SRC Component
30% 1.1 High rate of staff absenteeism 1. Teacher and Learner
1.2 High rate of learner absenteeism Attendance
School Readiness
LFS
Components
30%
School Readiness
NFS
Components
30% 40

41. School Readiness Components 2
Previous Year Current Academic Year
30% 20% 10% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
School Readiness 8 School Readiness Components
HFS
Components Indicators of NFS SRC Component
30% 1.1 High rate of staff absenteeism 1. Teacher and Learner
1.2 High rate of learner absenteeism Attendance
2.1 High rate of staff turnover 2. Teacher Information
2.2 Negative school atmosphere
School Readiness
LFS
Components
30%
School Readiness
NFS
Components
30% 41

42. School Readiness Components 3
Previous Year Current Academic Year
30% 20% 10% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
School Readiness 8 School Readiness Components
HFS
Components Indicators of NFS SRC Component
30% 1.1 High rate of staff absenteeism 1. Teacher and Learner
1.2 High rate of learner absenteeism Attendance
2.1 High rate of staff turnover 2. Teacher Information
2.2 Negative school atmosphere
School Readiness 3.1 Low learner performance 3. Learner Information
LFS
Components 3.2 High dropout rates of learners
30%
School Readiness
NFS
Components
30% 42

43. School Readiness Components 4
Previous Year Current Academic Year
30% 20% 10% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
School Readiness 8 School Readiness Components
HFS
Components Indicators of NFS SRC Component
30% 1.1 High rate of staff absenteeism 1. Teacher and Learner
1.2 High rate of learner absenteeism Attendance
2.1 High rate of staff turnover 2. Teacher Information
2.2 Negative school atmosphere
School Readiness 3.1 Low learner performance 3. Learner Information
LFS
Components 3.2 High dropout rates of learners
30% 4. High level of disruption and violence 4. Annual Planning
School Readiness
NFS
Components
30% 43

44. School Readiness Components 5
Previous Year Current Academic Year
30% 20% 10% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
School Readiness 8 School Readiness Components
HFS
Components Indicators of NFS SRC Component
30% 1.1 High rate of staff absenteeism 1. Teacher and Learner
1.2 High rate of learner absenteeism Attendance
2.1 High rate of staff turnover 2. Teacher Information
2.2 Negative school atmosphere
School Readiness 3.1 Low learner performance 3. Learner Information
LFS
Components 3.2 High dropout rates of learners
30% 4. High level of disruption and violence 4. Annual Planning
5. Unclear academic standards 5. Implementable and
flexible timetable
School Readiness
NFS
Components
30% 44

45. School Readiness Components 6
Previous Year Current Academic Year
30% 20% 10% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
School Readiness 8 School Readiness Components
HFS
Components Indicators of NFS SRC Component
30% 1.1 High rate of staff absenteeism 1. Teacher and Learner
1.2 High rate of learner absenteeism Attendance
2.1 High rate of staff turnover 2. Teacher Information
2.2 Negative school atmosphere
School Readiness 3.1 Low learner performance 3. Learner Information
LFS
Components 3.2 High dropout rates of learners
30% 4. High level of disruption and violence 4. Annual Planning
5. Unclear academic standards 5. Implementable and
flexible timetable
6. Quarterly Teaching
School Readiness schedules
NFS
Components
30% 45

46. School Readiness Components 7
Previous Year Current Academic Year
30% 20% 10% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
School Readiness 8 School Readiness Components
HFS
Components Indicators of NFS SRC Component
30% 1.1 High rate of staff absenteeism 1. Teacher and Learner
1.2 High rate of learner absenteeism Attendance
2.1 High rate of staff turnover 2. Teacher Information
2.2 Negative school atmosphere
School Readiness 3.1 Low learner performance 3. Learner Information
LFS
Components 3.2 High dropout rates of learners
30% 4. High level of disruption and violence 4. Annual Planning
5. Unclear academic standards 5. Implementable and
flexible timetable
6. Quarterly Teaching
School Readiness schedules
NFS
Components 7. Organogram
30% 46

47. School Readiness Components 8
Previous Year Current Academic Year
30% 20% 10% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
School Readiness 8 School Readiness Components
HFS
Components Indicators of NFS SRC Component
30% 1.1 High rate of staff absenteeism 1. Teacher and Learner
1.2 High rate of learner absenteeism Attendance
2.1 High rate of staff turnover 2. Teacher Information
2.2 Negative school atmosphere
School Readiness 3.1 Low learner performance 3. Learner Information
LFS
Components 3.2 High dropout rates of learners
30% 4. High level of disruption and violence 4. Annual Planning
5. Unclear academic standards 5. Implementable and
flexible timetable
6. Quarterly Teaching
School Readiness schedules
NFS
Components 7. Organogram
30% 47
8. Learner and Teacher
support materials

48. Research - High Poverty
Schools 0
2007 48

49. Research - High Poverty
Elements of High-Performing, High-Poverty Schools Nationally:
Schools 1
Mass Insight’s “Readiness” model
49

50. Research - High Poverty Schools 7
What’s Stopping You?
Create a map of the design challenges in your way
Human capacity
– Adequacy of teacher workforce
– Adequacy of top and distributed team leadership
– Adequacy of outside support system (all partners and TA)
Operating conditions
– Freedom to act: authority over key resources (money, time, people,
programming) to make mission- and data-driven decisions
– Freedom from unproductive or overlapping compliance burdens
– Incentives that drive adult (and student) behavior
Resources
– Adequacy of time for learning
– Adequacy of time for teacher planning, collaboration, PD
– Adequacy of resource support in general (class size, facilities, etc.)
50

51. Research - High Poverty Schools 8
So: What would reform that incorporates
all three sides of the triangle look like?
The 3 ‘C’s of comprehensive, coherent,
transformative reform
1 Conditions Change the rules and incentives governing
people, time, money, & program
2 Capacity Build turnaround resources & human
capacity in schools and lead partners
3 Clustering Organize in clusters by region, need,
or type -- where new conditions apply
and states/districts create special
capacity
51

52. Research - High Poverty Schools 9
Conditions Change:
Outside-the-system
approaches, applied
inside the system
52

53. Operation of the NCS in schools
• Working week
Macro • Timetable time
level School • Staffing numbers
issues • Rooming
• Class-size-ratio
• Timetabling
• Assessment - Recording - Reporting
• Continuous Teacher Professional Development
• Governance involvement
Meso
level Departments Learning Areas/Subjects
issues
Micro
level Teacher * Planning * Time * Delivery * Testing
issues
53

54. Time-on-Task 1
Previous Year Current Academic Year
30% 20% 10% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
HFS
Teaching
40% 90% Learning
50%
LFS
Teaching Learning
30% 50% 20%
Learn-
NFS
Teaching
20% 30% ing
10% 54

55. Time-on-Task 2.1
Previous Year Current Academic Year
30% 20% 10% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
HFS
Teaching
40% 90% Learning
50%
•4.5 days p.w.
•176 days p.a.
LFS
Teaching Learning
30% 50% 20%
Learn-
NFS
Teaching
20% 30% ing
55 10%

56. Time-on-Task 2.2
Previous Year Current Academic Year
30% 20% 10% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
HFS
Teaching
40% 90% Learning
50%
•4.5 days p.w.
•176 days p.a.
LFS
Teaching Learning
30% 50% 20%
•2.5 days p.w.
•98 days p.a.
Learn-
NFS
Teaching
20% 30% ing
56 10%

57. Time-on-Task 2.3
Previous Year Current Academic Year
30% 20% 10% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
HFS
Teaching
40% 90% Learning
50%
•4.5 days p.w.
•176 days p.a.
LFS
Teaching Learning
30% 50% 20%
•2.5 days p.w.
•98 days p.a.
Learn-
NFS
Teaching
•1.67 days p.w.
20% 30% ing
57 10%
•65 days p.a.

58. Time-on-Task 3
Previous Year Current Academic Year
30% 20% 10% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
HFS
Teaching
40% 90% Learning
50%
4.5 days p.w.
LFS
Teaching Learning
30% 50% 20%
2.5 days p.w.
Learn-
NFS
Teaching
20% 30% ing
58 10%
1.67 days p.w.

59. Learning: From Past to Future
59

60. 5 Levels of Learning
Level Teaching Type of
Days Teaching
1 35 Facts
2 70 Information
3 105 Know-How
4 140 Comprehension
5 175 Wisdom
60

61. Bloom’s Level of learning and
Thinking
1. Know - Define, match, repeat, memorise, label, outline,
record, recognise, state, sort, list
2. Understand - Restate, show, illustrate, summarise, predict,
locate, paraphrase, describe, explain
3. Apply - Demonstrate, solve, test, use, manipulate, organise
4. Analyse - Examine, debate/defend, compare/contrast, refute,
relate, generalise, classify, research
5. Synthesise - Propose, design, construct, invent, formulate,
plan, imagine
6. Evaluate - Judge, recommend, critique/criticise, justify,
choose 61

62. School shake up - Video
62

63. Quote!
If you don’t change,
change will change
you, or change will
replace you.
63