*Layer 1* Layer 1 is intended to enable teachers first to gain a quick overview of strengths and development areas in relation to challenges in the classroom for *all* pupils, and then for gifted and talented pupils.
1. Are all areas of classroom practice sufficiently addressed across Features 1 to 7?
Yes / No If not, what more should be included?
YES. The seven features are sufficiently broad to embrace aspects of practice comprehensively. Additional features would make the framework more cumbersome. It is more important to ensure that the prompts enable teachers to address key elements in their provision for learners.
2. Do the prompts provide sufficient support to enable teachers to make an initial judgement of the main strengths and development areas?
Yes / No If not, what adjustments or additional prompts would be helpful?
NO. Naace members will be surprised that there is no reference to ICT in any of the Layer 1 prompt questions. It is widely recognised that ICT has a central role to play in personalised learning and in effective teaching. For example, Naace would expect a prompt in the Conditions for learning section on ready access to appropriate resources, including ICT. Similarly for the Planning section, we feel the prompt about improving outcomes is too general; we would prefer to see a prompt about planning for the availability and deployment of resources, including ICT. The Links beyond the classroom section would be incomplete without an ICT-related prompt, since online technologies in particular are becoming standard components of extended learning and of encouraging support from parents and the wider community.
Naace would also like to point out that in the subject-specific enhancements for Layer 2, the use of ICT appears inconsistently across the English, Maths and Science documents; in most cases, standardisation in the descriptors would be sensible. In some features, use of ICT is particularly pertinent. Naace suggests that all three subjects should refer consistently to the use of ICT in their enhancements for Conditions for learning, Development of Learning, Engagement, and Links beyond the classroom. Alternatively, ICT-specific references could be included in the generic Layer 2 descriptors.
In addition, it will be essential to ensure that these standards are consistent with the Becta Self-Review Framework for ICT (SRF). Schools using the CQS should be encouraged to use their self-evaluation as part of their evidence for SRF, especially if they are seeking the ICT Mark accreditation.
3. Would it be helpful to include some suggestions of what to look for, in terms of evidence, in the last column?
Examples are always helpful as long as they open up thinking rather than narrow it.
4. Are there any prompts that are not needed to support teachers in assessing provision at the classroom level?
As stated under Q2, we feel the prompt about improving outcomes would be less helpful than something about resource planning.
Classroom Quality Standards (CQS) consultation survey - Subject amplification: ICT http://www.standards.dfes.gov.uk/secondary/keystage3/issues/wholeschool/ws_cqs_gt_consultation/ws_cqs/ws_cqs_subspec_amp_cons/
The consultation on the Classroom Quality Standards for gifted and talented education seeks to gain feedback from teachers and practitioners on the drafts of subject-specific amplification statements in the context of English, mathematics, science and ICT.
*Layer 2* Layer 2 should enable teachers to locate classroom practice as Entry, Developing or Exemplary for any (and each) Feature in relation to gifted and talented provision and outcomes for pupils, and to decide on areas for development and next steps.
1. Is there a sufficiently clear progression across the descriptors at each of the three levels, Entry Developing and Exemplary?
Yes / No If not, which particular Features and/or prompts could be improved? Please suggest why and/or how.
NO
Conditions for Learning
The examples given do not necessarily represent progression and there is not always a sense of what would be distinctive about the experience of a gifted or talented child. For example, under Developing/Highly Motivated, contributing to discussion is not necessarily a high-level activity. Exemplary/Develop new ideas refers to concept-mapping software which can be used by most children. In both cases, it is the challenge of the task and the quality of response which can provide differentiation, rather than the specific ICT application being used. The examples do not always provide this kind of focus and can be distracting. The descriptors need to relate much more directly to the key characteristics of the level.
Development of Learning
Most of the descriptors in this section are not ICT-specific and it is sometimes difficult to understand what represents progression. For examples, it is not obvious how the references to role-play and project planning constitute the Developing level; they could easily be placed elsewhere.
Engagement
The same descriptors have been inserted for each level! In any case, the notion of developing independence is an underlying principle for all pupil's learning in ICT through KS3.
The "grouping" descriptors should consider the extent to which some G+T learners may need to use ICT individually and intensively as well as collaboratively.
Beyond the Classroom
Progression in collaborative activity is not necessarily about geographical range; it should be about the sophistication and challenge of the tasks being undertaken.
2. Do the Features and/or prompts offer good levels of support to teachers in all phases? Yes / No If not, for which phases would further support be helpful and what form should it take?
NO
Besides our comments in the previous question about the limitations of the descriptors and examples, We have anxieties about the usefulness of some of the prompts. In many cases, the relevance of the detail depends entirely on the topic being studied at a particular point in time. The text headed ICT learning looks like this may be more helpful and manageable for teachers.
3. Would it be helpful to include the generic statements from Layer 2 alongside the ICT amplification? Yes / No
YES
There is a danger of overloading teachers with text, but if this framework is to have a practical value, it will be important that the relationship between a subject-specific descriptor or example and the corresponding standard is clear and direct.
Refine