Year 10 Science Program Development

Year 10 Science Program Development Evidence Set Annotation

Standards: 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4, 3.6, 4.2, 4.3, 4.4, 4.5, 5.1, 5.2, 5.4, 5.5

Synopsis of Evidence Set

Programming, assessing and delivering Science at Galilee School has been an ongoing challenge due to limited resources, risk management in a trauma informed framework, student preconceptions about the subject and a lack of teachers with experience in teaching high school level content. In 2017, in consultation with the Head of Teaching and Learning, I offered to take on teaching a previously unexplored Year 10 Science content area (Physics) and to mentor other teachers to use this as an exploration tool to develop innovative programs of learning, methods of assessment and authentic educational experiences within a trauma informed classroom. This further developed into support for different assessment approaches as well as reporting and tracking student engagement. In 2021, I have been working with a teacher new to the school to support management of student behaviour and planning in his Science classes.

Artefact 1

The email communication evidenced in Artefact 1 includes evidence of supporting teachers from 2018-2020 to co-deliver learning programs, review and evaluate assessment methods as well as support for a teacher new to the school in 2021 with lesson planning and risk assessment documentation (4.4) while sharing from my own repertoire of trauma informed practices to support staff managing challenging behaviours (4.3). The emails demonstrate my capacity to develop a culture of high expectations for all students by modelling and setting challenging learning goals both in individual lessons and over time (3.1) and supporting colleagues with, creating, selecting and using a wide range of resources, including the safe and ethical use of ICT, to engage students consistently and positively in their Science lessons (3.4, 4.5). Also evident is ongoing, in-depth support for colleagues to broaden their teaching and assessment approaches to ensure inclusive practices for students with imputed and diagnosed disabilities and to increase student engagement (4.1). Artefact 1 outlines my ongoing work over an extended period with multiple colleagues to plan, evaluate and modify teaching programs to ensure productive learning environments that engage all students, as well as exploring different ways to utilise student feedback and student assessment data in planning and assessment (3.2, 3.6). The extensive email correspondence demonstrates ongoing communication with colleagues and how this has supported them to construct accurate, informative and timely reports on learning and achievement for carers (5.5). This was particularly evident during the remote learning period when staff to plan, assess, moderate, co-mark and report on student achievement in line with reporting timelines without in person contact (5.2, 5.3).

Artefact 2

Artefact 2 includes two Science program documents created using different school templates based on changes within school processes over time. Both documents were shared with staff as model documents (Artefact 1) to support colleagues to review their own programs (3.6) and as an exemplar of how a flexible repertoire of behaviour management strategies can lead to purposeful student engagement in more abstract subjects such as Science (4.2). These programs supported staff - some new to the school, some very experienced but struggling with student engagement - to select and apply effective teaching strategies to develop knowledge, skills, problem solving and critical and creative thinking in trauma informed classrooms (3.3). Both programs also modelled different ways for staff to use the Australian Curriculum to establish challenging learning goals while developing and maintaining a culture of high expectations within a Special Assistance School (3.1). The variety of lesson options, content and assessments, and the inclusion of appropriate adjustments for students further demonstrates my ability to select from an effective range of strategies to provide targeted feedback based on each student’s current needs to progress their learning in a timely manner. These programs also modelled inclusive practices to support engagement of all students in their learning (4.1, 5.2).

Artefact 3

The use of tests as a form of assessment have previously been a strongly debated issue among staff at Galilee School with some teachers adamantly retaining them as part of their teaching program despite school frameworks being trauma informed and not requiring weighted assessments in Years 7-10. The collection of student feedback data (Artefact 3) and sharing of it with colleagues (Artefact 1) demonstrated application of student feedback and data to support colleagues with understanding curriculum applications and school processes around assessment (3.6). I also encouraged colleagues to use this data to evaluate their learning and teaching program and consider modifying their practice to be more inclusive and foster higher levels of engagement (4.1, 5.4). Artefacts 1-3 all demonstrate the consideration and application of a variety of different assessments strategies for students with individualised learning needs in line with both the Australian Curriculum and Galilee School’s policies, as well as extensive work with colleagues to evaluate the effectiveness of their approaches to assessment (5.1).

Impact

Artefacts 1-3 demonstrate my committed and sustained dedication to mentoring other staff to improve curriculum planning and development, assessment, and reporting in the subject of Science across Galilee School. As a result of this ongoing support for colleagues, as well as my open sharing of different approaches, classroom strategies and student feedback, a variety of assessment types and pedagogical approaches are now more widely used which allows for a more trauma informed and inclusive approach to student learning and higher levels of student engagement.