The use of effective self-evaluation supported by robust monitoring, review and evaluation (MRE) processes to develop leadership and lead school improvement.
Quick links:
Information about the school/provider
St. Julian’s School in Newport is a large, diverse, and inclusive comprehensive school serving 1,428 pupils aged 11-18. The school hosts a local authority resource base centre, the Learning Development Centre (LDC), for pupils with moderate to severe learning difficulties. The school has an above national average percentage of pupils receiving free school meals. Nearly half of the school’s cohort live in areas with the highest levels of deprivation in Wales. Compared to the national average, a much higher proportion of pupils at the school have either an individual development plan (IDP) for additional learning needs or special educational needs. The number of pupils who speak English as an additional language is significantly higher than most schools in Wales. The school has faced significant challenges in recent years. In November 2014, it was placed in the statutory category of significant improvement by Estyn, and in June 2017, it was placed in special measures. In April 2020 a new headteacher was appointed which led to a restructuring of the leadership team. The school was successfully removed from special measures in November 2021. St. Julian’s continued its upward trajectory, culminating in a positive Estyn inspection in May 2024, which highlighted numerous key successes and recognised the school’s progress and achievements.
Context and background to the effective or innovative practice
Following the Estyn inspection in November 2014, two key leadership recommendations emerged, which were to improve the school’s self-evaluation and development planning processes and to strengthen the role of middle leaders, ensuring they are fully accountable for standards, provision, and quality assurance within their departments. A primary focus for the new senior leadership team (SLT) was to embed an ethos of continuous improvement focused on ‘improving rather than proving’. Senior leaders focused on developing a rigorous self-evaluation cycle, supported by effective monitoring, review, and evaluation (MRE) processes and driven by meaningful and manageable improvement plans which would positively impact pupils’ education. Another key approach to school improvement adopted by senior leaders was ‘autonomy with accountability’. This concept aimed to ensure that all teachers had the professional freedom to make decisions about their teaching while still being accountable for pupils’ outcomes and progress. In line with this approach, senior leaders set out to empower middle leaders to take responsibility to lead improvements in their own subject areas.
To ensure middle leaders concentrated primarily on school improvement, senior leaders established five key expectations of the role. These expectations (self-evaluation; development planning; support, challenge and professional learning; monitoring, review and evaluation; and curriculum development) provided clarity on the key tasks required for effective leadership of departments and people. They were regularly reinforced and used by senior leaders to develop and hold middle leaders to account. Leadership meetings focussed on professional development to support middle leaders’ ability to carry out these tasks as well as providing opportunities to share good practice.
Description of nature of strategy or activity
The school’s improvement strategy consists of three specific elements that are integral to each other:
- self-evaluation
- development planning
- monitoring, review and evaluation (MRE)
Self-evaluation
The school has developed a bespoke self-evaluation (SSE) document using the Welsh Government’s ‘National Resource: Evaluation and Improvement’ guidance and the Estyn inspection framework. Although a self-evaluation report is no longer required prior to inspection, senior leaders feel it is vital to thoroughly evaluate all aspects of the school’s work to ensure the appropriate identification of the priorities that would impact most on school improvement, particularly pupils’ learning.
The school self-evaluation (SSE) document is updated termly considering evidence from previous school development plan (SDP) evaluations, the current SDP evaluations, national priorities, on-going MRE and stakeholder views gathered throughout the course of the year. Strengths and areas for development are then identified and inform the selection of key priorities for improvement. The SSE comprises five sections (learning and pedagogy, curriculum, student support, inclusion and equity, and leadership) that are evaluated using a number of key questions.
At department level, middle leaders consider a series of evaluative questions focused on learning and pedagogy, curriculum and leadership. They then identify key strengths and areas for development for each section on the department self-evaluation.
Development Planning
The school development plan (SDP) process is structured around the key improvement priorities identified from the SSE. Success criteria, actions, timescales, people, evidence and resources/costing are then considered to support the implementation of the plan. To ensure SDP priorities are aligned with the SSE and have been carefully considered as the area for development that will have the most impact on pupils’ education, a rationale is included for each priority on the SDP. Each term, senior leaders evaluate each of the SDP priorities that they are responsible for against the success criteria set out at the start of the cycle, adjusting, removing or adding actions throughout the course of the academic year.
Middle leaders use their department self-evaluations to identify key improvement priorities and take the same approach to form department development plans.
Monitoring Review and Evaluation
To support evaluations in the SSE and SDP with robust and accurate evidence, the school has established a structured multi-layered quality assurance process. There are three strands to the school’s MRE process: learning reviews, leader MRE and soft intelligence.
Leader MRE – Senior and middle leaders engage in a range of regular MRE activities, focused on evaluating all aspects of school life. The type of MRE activities vary depending on the evidence that is being sought and these are carefully planned out at the start of each improvement cycle to align with improvement plans. Joint MRE between senior leaders and middle leaders supports an ongoing professional dialogue around how to evaluate and improve learning.
Soft Intelligence – Senior leaders rely on soft intelligence to support self-evaluation, this form of informal MRE may include lesson pop-ins or general conversations with different stakeholders. It allows all leaders to gain an informal picture of the school’s strengths and areas for development, and supports the formation of key lines of enquiry that may be followed up through the school’s two other strands of MRE.
Learning Reviews – The third strand to the school’s MRE process is aimed at forensically evaluating teaching and learning to gather an accurate picture of the quality of teaching for departments and the whole school, as well as providing development support for individual teachers. Learning reviews are conducted during two six-week windows in early autumn and spring. These reviews are formal activities that involve a five-stage process. One class on a teacher’s timetable is chosen by senior leaders as a focus for all activities. To ensure consistency, MRE tasks are conducted jointly with middle leaders leading the process, whilst senior leaders support and quality assure. Leaders have been provided with professional learning to help them to effectively conduct these MRE tasks, and comprehensive guidance for each activity has been produced. The process is as follows:
- Step 1 – Teacher Self-Evaluation: Teachers use a self-evaluation toolkit devised by the school to assess the impact of their teaching on learning, focusing on the chosen class. Teachers also revisit development areas from previous cycles. A professional dialogue takes place between the middle leader and teacher to discuss their self-evaluation, identifying strengths and areas for development.
- Step 2 – Work Reviews: Leaders jointly review all pupils’ books/work in the class focusing on the appropriateness of activities (teaching), pupils’ responses to activities (learning), the quality of feedback, and the response to teacher feedback.
- Step 3 – Learner Discussions: A representative sample of five pupils participates in a discussion with leaders. Questions assess the level of pupils’ knowledge acquisition and retention, pupils’ use of subject terminology, and pupils’ ability to apply knowledge.
- Step 4 – Lesson Observations: A 30 to 60-minute observation evaluates the effectiveness of teaching.
- Step 5 – Feedback and Coaching: Middle leaders, observed by senior leaders, provide coaching-based feedback, engaging teachers in reflective dialogue. Strengths and development areas are jointly agreed upon, with differentiated follow-up plans.
The outcome from each learning review is documented in an individual report and shared with the teacher, the middle and senior leaders, and the headteacher. Leaders use a ‘cause and effect’ style of evaluation to emphasise the impact of teaching on learning. The 5-step process gives a complete/holistic picture of the quality of learning and teaching, which one or two MRE activities would not give alone.
The findings of each review are then used for two different purposes:
- Firstly, middle leaders are responsible for following up on individual teacher development areas, with support from senior leaders as needed. The MRE activities used for follow-up are differentiated according to the teacher’s individual development point. The follow-up activities and timings are noted on the individual learning review reports. Scheduled meetings between middle leaders and teachers take place at key points during the academic year to allow teachers to reflect on their progress and provide evidence to middle leaders of the progress against the specific development actions. In turn, senior leaders meet with middle leaders regularly to discuss individual and department progress from the learning reviews. Support is provided by middle and senior leaders to individuals who need further help to make progress against their identified development points. Finally, a meeting between the headteacher and heads of departments takes place at the end of the academic year to discuss the impact of the middle leader’s support and challenge to teachers, and the effectiveness of any department professional learning provided.
- Secondly, the deputy headteacher responsible for school improvement, creates a summary report using all the learning reviews’ findings, highlighting strengths and areas for development and an ongoing evaluation of the process to ensure that it continues to be highly effective. This summary is used to update the SDP and SSE. General feedback is given to all staff, with concerns addressed through professional learning, advice or reminders. Some areas for development may be noted for future development plans. Effective individual or department practices are also shared with colleagues.
What impact has this work had on provision and learners’ standards?
As a result of forensic and robust ongoing self-evaluation and MRE processes, leaders are able to accurately evaluate. Subsequently, they have become adept at identifying appropriate improvement priorities and specific actions for securing improvement. The rigorous monitoring of school and department improvement plans, including the follow-up of individual learning reviews, has led to significant improvements in teaching and learning.
The implementation of clear school improvement processes led by middle leaders whilst supported and quality assured by senior leaders, has significantly strengthened the role of middle leaders at St Julian’s School. Nearly all middle leaders now have a comprehensive understanding of their department’s strengths and areas for development. This has improved their ability to monitor, review, and evaluate their departments, leading to the implantation of effective actions for improvement. In addition, they are now far more confident when discussing their work with stakeholders. As middle leaders have become more accountable and empowered, they have become pivotal in driving school improvements and ensuring high standards across the school.
How have you shared your good practice?
The school has shared this practice with the local authority, consortia and other schools through network meetings and professional discussion.