The effect of support staff on pupil engagement and individual attention

Despite an unprecedented increase in classroom-based support staff, there are confusing messages about their appropriate deployment and a lack of systematic evidence on their impact. This article addresses the deployment and impact on pupil engagement and individual attention of support staff, commonly known as teaching assistants (TAs), in terms of: (1) a comparison between TAs and teachers; (2) differences between pupils with and without special educational needs (SEN); and (3) differences between primary and secondary schools. Systematic observations of pupil behaviour in 49 primary and secondary schools showed that support staff presence resulted in increased individualisation of attention and overall teaching, easier classroom control, and that pupils showed more engagement and a more active role in interaction with adults. This supports teachers’ positive view of support staff, but their presence also meant pupils’ contact with teachers declined and at secondary level there was less individual and active interactions between teachers and pupils.     

Double standards and first principles: framing teaching assistant support for pupils with special educational needs

Teaching assistants (TAs) are part of a growing international trend toward paraprofessionals working in public services. There has been controversy over TAs’ deployment and appropriate role when supporting the learning of pupils with special educational needs (SEN) in mainstream schools. Such debates have been transformed by findings from a large study of school support staff in the UK (the DISS project). The findings from this study show that TA support has a negative impact on pupils’ academic progress, especially pupils with SEN. The findings render the current system of support for SEN highly questionable: TAs have inadvertently become the primary educators of pupils with SEN. This paper sets out the likely explanations for the negative effects in terms of three ‘frames’ – deployment, practice and preparedness – and then uses these frames to identify specific implications for pupils with SEN. We offer suggestions on how to make the most productive use of TA support.     

The evolution of school league tables in England 1992–2016: ‘Contextual value‐added’, ‘expected progress’ and ‘progress 8’

Since 1992, the UK Government has published so‐called ‘school league tables’ summarising the average General Certificate of Secondary Education (GCSE) ‘attainment’ and ‘progress’ made by pupils in each state‐funded secondary school in England. While the headline measure of school attainment has remained the percentage of pupils achieving five or more good GCSEs, the headline measure of school progress has changed from ‘value‐added’ (2002–2005) to ‘contextual value‐added’ (2006–2010) to ‘expected progress’ (2011–2015) to ‘progress 8’ (2016–). This paper charts this evolution with a critical eye. First, we describe the headline measures of school progress. Second, we question the Government's justifications for scrapping contextual value‐added. Third, we argue that the current expected progress measure suffers from fundamental design flaws. Fourth, we examine the stability of school rankings across contextual value‐added and expected progress. Fifth, we discuss the extent to which progress 8 will address the weaknesses of expected progress. We conclude that all these progress measures and school league tables more generally should be viewed with far more scepticism and interpreted far more cautiously than they have often been to date.     

To assist or not to assist? A study of teachers’ views of the roles of learning support assistants in the provision of inclusive physical education in England

This paper examines teachers’ perceptions of their working relationships with learning support assistants (LSAs) when seeking to incorporate young disabled people and pupils with special educational needs (SEN) within mainstream physical education (PE), an area that has been a largely neglected aspect of research in inclusive education. The findings indicate that teachers spoke positively of these relationships when LSAs were perceived as making a positive contribution to the development of pupils’ learning and when they supported teachers as they did in other school subjects. Conversely, when LSAs and other support staff failed to provide teachers with information that was related to pupils’ needs in PE, and when LSAs did not possess the required skills, knowledge and expertise of the subject, teachers were rather critical of their relationships with them. In this regard, LSAs were seen as placing a particularly significant constraint on teachers’ ability to meet the needs of pupils in PE lessons. It is concluded that teachers’ perceptions of the constraints they experience from working with LSAs to help support pupils, and the extent and quality of support they receive, cannot be understood adequately unless they are located within the context of the relational constraints experienced by teachers.     

Promoting the social inclusion and academic progress of Gypsy,Roma and Traveller children: a secondary school case study

The aim of this study was to identify support strategies used to promote “social inclusion” and “academic progress” of Key Stage 3 and 4 Gypsy, Roma and Traveller (GRT) pupils. The study used an interpretivist approach, incorporating an embedded single case study with several participant groups, namely GRT pupils, GRT parents, school staff and supporting professionals. The data were collected using interviews, focus groups and questionnaires and were analysed using explanation building – a pattern matching technique which uses theoretical propositions (generated from existing research) to guide analysis and organise data. The study identified one consistent strategy (focussed staff support) to promote both the social inclusion and the academic progress of GRT pupils, and several additional strategies to address each of these areas. The focussed staff support consisted of a dedicated staff member employed to support GRT pupils and families, and act as a consultant for other members of school staff.     

Why ‘science for all’ is only an aspiration: staff views of science for learners with Special Educational Needs and Disabilities

Teacher and support staff perceptions of science learning, and specifically engagement with science outreach, by pupils with Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND) were ascertained through questionnaires. The responses indicated that science is seen as serving distinctive learning purposes when undertaken by learners with SEND. Staff who accompanied SEND pupils to science outreach events expressed more positive views about separate outreach events for SEND pupils than other respondents, in line with current policy expectations of differentiated classroom practice. The desire for different provision for SEND learners also appeared to be associated with the staffs’ pastoral concerns about their pupils and their reluctance to let their pupils ‘fail’. The data suggests that, despite policy and legislative reform in the UK, curriculum science is still viewed primarily as a means to career progression for an able minority, rather than as an educational and cultural entitlement for all.     

The educational experiences of pupils with a Statement for special educational needs in mainstream primary schools: results from a systematic observation study

Findings from the Deployment and Impact of Support Staff project showed that day-to-day support for pupils with special education needs (SEN) in mainstream UK schools is often provided by teaching assistants (TAs), instead of teachers. This arrangement is the main explanation for other results from the project, which found TA support had a more profound, negative impact on the academic progress of pupils with SEN than pupils without SEN. There is, however, surprisingly little systematic information on the overall support and interactions experienced by pupils with the highest levels of SEN attending mainstream schools (e.g. those with Statements). The Making a Statement project was designed to provide such a picture in state-funded primary schools in England (e.g. schools attended by children aged between five and 11). Extensive systematic observations were conducted of 48 pupils with Statements and 151 average-attaining ‘control’ pupils. Data collected over 2011/12 involved researchers shadowing pupils in Year 5 (nine- and 10-year olds) over one week each. The results, reported here, show that the educational experiences of pupils with Statements is strongly characterised by a high degree of separation from the classroom, their teacher and peers. A clear point to emerge was the intimate connection between TAs and the locations, in and away from the classroom, in which pupils with Statements are taught. The currency of Statements – a set number of hours of TA support – is identified as key factor in why provision leads to these arrangements, and appears to get in the way of schools thinking through appropriate pedagogies for pupils with the most pronounced learning difficulties.     

Can ‘Philosophy for Children’ Improve Primary School Attainment?

There are tensions within formal education between imparting knowledge and the development of skills for handling that knowledge. In the primary school sector, the latter can also be squeezed out of the curriculum by a focus on basic skills such as literacy and numeracy. What happens when an explicit attempt is made to develop young children's reasoning—both in terms of their apparent cognitive abilities and their basic skills? This paper reports an independent evaluation of an in‐class intervention called ‘Philosophy for Children’ (P4C), after just over one year of schooling. The intervention aims to help children become more willing and able to question, reason, construct arguments and collaborate with others. A group of 48 volunteer schools were randomised to receive P4C (22 schools) or act as a control for one year (26). This paper reports the CAT results for all pupils in years 4 and 5 initially, and the Key Stage 2 attainment in English and Maths for those starting in year 5. There was no school dropout. Individual attrition from a total of 3,159 pupils was around 11 percent—roughly equal between groups. There were small positive ‘effect’ sizes in favour of the P4C group in progress in reading (+0.12) and maths (+0.10), and even smaller perhaps negligible improvements in CAT scores (+0.07) and writing (+0.03). The results for the most disadvantaged (free school eligible) pupils were larger for attainment (+0.29 in reading, +0.17 writing and +0.20 maths), but not for CATs (–0.02). Observations and interviews suggest that the intervention was generally enjoyable and thought to be beneficial for pupil confidence. Our conclusion is that, for those wishing to improve attainment outcomes in the short term, an emphasis on developing reasoning is promising, especially for the poorest students, but perhaps not the most effective way forward. However, for those who value reasoning for its own sake, this evaluation demonstrates that using curriculum time in this way does not damage attainment (and may well enhance it and reduce the poverty gradient in attainment), and so suggests that something like P4C is an appropriate educational approach.     

Teachers talk about inclusion… but can they implement it in their classroom? Exploring teachers’ views on inclusion in a Scottish secondary school

Although there is much research regarding the inclusion of pupils with additional support needs (ASN) in mainstream secondary education, there is little research specifically exploring the perspectives of staff who support and teach this population. This small-scale exploratory study in a Scottish secondary school investigated staff perspectives, aiming to provide unique insights and personal accounts of issues pertaining to inclusion. The findings suggest that there is a need to increase the skills of staff in order for them to be suitably equipped, competent and confident to meet all pupils’ needs.     

The Dutch policy of integration put to the test: differences in academic and psychosocial development of pupils in special and mainstream education

After several failed attempts to rein in the growth of special education, the Dutch government made a start in 1991 with a policy to accommodate pupils with problems in regular education and to put a stop to the growth of special education. This paper examines a large-scale study conducted by our research group at the University of Amsterdam which attempted to answer the question whether pupils with problems are better off in special education where there are more resources and they can get more attention than in mainstream schools. It was expected that the pupils in special education would do better due to the specialist care and individual attention. However, with a few exceptions, few differences were found when comparable at-risk pupils in regular schools were compared with their counterparts in both types of special schools. There was a conspicuously large measure of variability in both regular and special education. All school types had both at-risk pupils who were doing well from an academic and/or psychosocial perspective and pupils whose progress left much to be desired. There is little evidence to support the idea that at-risk pupils make less progress, in either their academic or psychosocial development, in regular schools compared with pupils in special schools. The general assumption that at-risk pupils will do better in special education does not seem to account for its attractiveness. Contrary to the policy theory, the dual system, as it exists in The Netherlands, does not appear to be an obstacle to the provision of adequate care for pupils with special educational needs. However, the policy to equip regular schools to accommodate this category of pupils appears not to be realized as simply as that. It has not proved possible to demonstrate the effects of the varying levels of specialist help provided by regular schools on the development of at-risk pupils.     

Literacy Acceleration and the Key Stage 3 English Strategy – comparing two approaches for secondary-age pupils with literacy difficulties

Literacy for pupils in the secondary phase of education is a key concern for practitioners and policy makers alike. Tony Lingard is the SENCo at a large comprehensive school in the south-west of England but he is also involved in staff development and school improvement initiatives across the UK. Literacy Acceleration is an intervention strategy for pupils with literacy difficulties that he and his team at school have been developing over many years. He undertook the research reported in this article at a comprehensive school where Literacy Acceleration was well established and being delivered by experienced staff. The research found that Year 7 and 8 pupils with literacy difficulties who followed Literacy Acceleration made significant progress with reading and spelling while similar pupils, who only had access to National English Strategy classes, did less well over the period of the study. The research also found that most of the pupils who experienced Literacy Acceleration in small groups, as well as mainstream English lessons, preferred being taught in smaller Literacy Acceleration groups where they also felt that they were making more progress. In concluding his article, Tony Lingard argues that pupils with literacy difficulties need specific, targeted interventions and that it may be a mistake to assume that the normal secondary English curriculum effectively meets their needs. This small-scale study therefore offers a challenge to a widely accepted policy. It suggests that abandoning strategies that focus on addressing the particular needs of pupils with literacy difficulties (of which Literacy Acceleration is one example) may not best serve the interests of a significant group of learners.     

The impact of school SES composition on science achievement and achievement growth: mediating role of teachers’ teachability culture

ABSTRACT

Previous studies have shown that schools’ socioeconomic-status (SES) composition has an impact on the academic performance of pupils. Less attention has been given to the explanation of this effect. This study examined whether the teachability culture among the school staff (teachers’ collective beliefs about how teachable their pupils are) mediated the school SES effect on science achievement and achievement growth. Multilevel analyses were conducted with data from 1,761 pupils and 1,255 teachers across 66 primary schools in Flanders. First, the analyses indicated that there was a positive association between school SES composition and teachability culture: Even after controlling for cognitive ability and performance of pupils, there was a more pessimist culture in socioeconomically disadvantaged schools. Second, the association between school SES and academic performance was explained/mediated by the teachability culture. However, no school effects or mediation effects were found for achievement growth as the covered period of academic growth was too short.     

School effects and ethnic,gender and socio-economic gaps in educational achievement at age 11

There are long-standing achievement gaps in England associated with socio-economic status (SES), ethnicity and gender, but relatively little research has evaluated interactions between these variables or explored school effects on such gaps. This paper analyses the national test results at age 7 and age 11 of 2,836 pupils attending 68 mainstream primary schools in an ethnically diverse inner London borough. The groups with the lowest educational achievement and poorest progress were both Black Caribbean and White British low SES pupils. White British middle and high SES pupils made substantially more progress than White British low SES pupils, significantly increasing the SES gap over time. However low and high SES Black pupils made equally poor progress age 7–11. School effects on pupil progress were large, but there was no evidence of differential school effectiveness in relation to SES, ethnicity or gender. Low SES pupils in the more effective schools performed significantly better than high SES pupils in the less effective schools, but all pupils (both low and high SES) benefit from attending the more effective schools and so these schools do not eliminate the SES gap. The limits to change that may be achieved by schools alone are discussed.     

Inclusive provision options for pupils on the autistic spectrum

In the last decade, there has been a dramatic increase in the number of pupils with autism spectrum disorders (ASD) attending mainstream schools. However, particular concerns have been expressed about their inclusion, focused on an increased risk of peer rejection and lack of staff knowledge about appropriate teaching approaches. Parental views of inclusive placements are consistently more positive where there is an ASD resource base in the school. This study was designed to investigate characteristics of the provision available to pupils with ASD in mainstream schools with and without a specialist ASD resource base. Information was gathered from semi‐structured interviews with staff in 26 schools about levels of inclusion and support, about the strategies used to support pupils with ASD, both at an individual and whole school level, and about changes considered desirable. Interviewees were also asked to describe how they would respond to scenarios depicting situations that are commonly experienced in working with pupils who have ASD. Findings confirmed that the features of mainstream placements identified as important by parents of children with ASD were more likely to be found in schools with ASD resource bases. However, it was found that comparable provision could be made across settings given appropriate staff training. Scope for further development across settings was also identified, particularly in the use of evidence‐based peer‐mediated strategies.     

Welcoming the stranger: a qualitative analysis of teachers' views regarding the integration of refugee pupils into schools in Newcastle upon Tyne

The arrival of refugee pupils in UK schools has presented significant challenges to staff, pupils and families. The aim of this study was to record and analyse the views of teaching staff regarding their experiences of integrating these pupils into schools in Newcastle upon Tyne. A questionnaire was sent to 53 schools in the city known to have pupils who are refugees or asylum seekers. Questions focused on key issues identified by the Local Education Authority Working Group for Refugees and Asylum Seekers, including the dissemination of information prior to the arrival of new pupils, staff training and the response of the school community as a whole. Twenty‐four questionnaires were completed (response rate 45.3%), from two nurseries, 13 primary schools, seven secondary schools and one special school. The overwhelming need identified was for improved access to interpreting services, and more reliable information about pupils’ backgrounds. It was evident that integration is approached differently by individual schools depending on their overall ethnic mix and the availability of resources and support networks.     

Can learning beyond the classroom impact on social responsibility and academic attainment? An evaluation of the Children’s University youth social action programme

Disadvantaged pupils in England tend to have lower average attainment than their peers. They are also less likely to be involved in wider learning and opportunities for experience beyond the classroom walls. Approaches which support learning activities beyond the traditional classroom might assist in overcoming the persistent achievement gap of disadvantaged pupils, as well being valuable in their own right. This paper presents impact evidence of a school programme called Children’s University (CU) for pupils in primary schools which combines outdoor learning activities, after-school clubs and community social action. The evaluation funded involved 1840 year 5 pupils in 68 primary schools, randomised into treatment and waiting-list control (business-as-usual) groups. The programme was delivered for two consecutive years after which the academic and non-cognitive outcomes were re-assessed. The findings suggest that after two years of opportunity to participate in out-of-school hour activities and social action there is a link to slight progress in pupils’ reading and maths performance (‘effect’ sizes of 0.12 and 0.15). A smaller improvement in non-cognitive outcomes of ‘teamwork’ and ‘social responsibility’ was also found (‘effect’ sizes of 0.02 and 0.07). The gains in teamwork and social responsibility results for disadvantaged pupils eligible for free school meals (FSM) were better than the overall figures, suggesting that this intervention may have a role to play in reducing the poverty gradient in such social ‘skills’. It is only fair that wider opportunities at school are made easier for disadvantaged pupils, they may have others benefits. However, if changes in attainment alone are the primary goal, these relatively small effect sizes suggest that there will be more cost-effective routes than the one described in this paper.     

THE ATTITUDE OF PART‐TIME DAY. RELEASE STUDENTS

Matched groups of pupils from consecutive intakes of a recently opened boys’ grammar school were compared as to academic performance at GCE ‘O’ level and as to attitude to school, while the school, which began by being rigidly streamed, was gradually being unstreamed. The main conclusion has been that significantly more boys have done well at GCE ‘O’ level (gaining five or more passes) as a result of less streaming but slightly at the expense of the brightest pupils, not as to the number of passes these boys have obtained but as to the quality of those passes. There has also been social gain under conditions of less streaming: the behaviour of the boys has improved in general, although the overall attitude to school, as measured by analysis of questionnaires, has not altered.     

Do some schools narrow the gap? Differential school effectiveness by ethnicity,gender, poverty,and prior achievement

This study analyses the educational progress of an entire national cohort of over 530,000 pupils in England between age 7 in 2000 and age 11 in 2004. The results show that Black Caribbean boys not entitled to free school meals, and particularly the more able pupils, made significantly less progress than their White British peers. There is no evidence that the gap results from Black Caribbean pupils attending less effective schools. There is also no evidence of differential effectiveness in relation to ethnic group; schools that were strong in facilitating the progress of White British pupils were equally strong in facilitating the progress of Black Caribbean pupils. There was some evidence of differential school effectiveness by pupil prior achievement, gender, and poverty, but the absolute sizes of the effects were small. The results suggest the poor progress of Black Caribbean pupils reflects a systemic issue rather than the influence of a small number of “low quality” schools.