The department has a good balance of very experienced staff (including the head of department) as well as teachers at various stages of their careers. They are all qualified in the subject and, above all, passionate about it and keen to develop themselves and the subject. There is strong encouragement for members of the department to show initiative and many have willingly undertaken projects and tasks. Several have other responsibilities in the school but it is testament to their love of the subject that they give a high priority to their teaching and learning.

A range of impressive systems and processes are in place. There are regular weekly departmental meetings which are thoroughly recorded and actions followed up. There is an impressive development plan underpinned by a detailed assessment of need. Even feedback from parents’ evenings is recorded and acted upon. The department is skilled at bidding for capitation and has been able to fund resources and training that would be the envy of many other schools such as; Masters qualifications and additional resources, including ipads for all staff that uses a range of IT applications.

Whilst focusing strongly on its own success, the department is far from isolated within the school. It plays an integral part working closely with other subject areas such as science (Mary Rose project), English (World War 1) and psychology (soldiers in War). Outside the school, it has good links with other schools and is part of various clusters. There have been projects with some local state primary schools including a Great War one. An impressive aspect of these meetings is an assessment of how the department can develop as a result. The same applies with records associated with training such as assessing what they have learnt from the different sessions at the HA Conference. Departmental members are encouraged to develop their skills and expertise, eg. writing articles, examination marking or running training courses for other organisations. Overall, through the encouragement and support of the head of department and the senior leadership team, the history teachers have a high level of awareness and skill. Whilst staff professionalism is recognised there is a clear and reliable system of classroom observation using very clear criteria and an effective system of staff appraisal.

• Evidence for Criteria 2 (1.94 MB PDF document)

A unit approach is adopted focused on enquiries. This includes some interesting local history in Year 7 through a cross-curricular “Portsmouth curriculum”. There are schemes of work but no single approach to lesson planning. The units are taught in isolation but the experience of the teachers helps ensure that links and connections are made across many of the units. There is the occasional synoptic unit. There is regular consideration of the reasons for studying history and how history is constructed even down to separate historiography clinics for older students. Discussions with students indicated a high level of awareness of historical methodology.

The popularity of the subject (some 60% of the cohort for GCSE) and large post-16 numbers (there are currently 38 in Y12) means that choices are available post-14. Two GCSE specs are offered and at A-level, an early modern and modern option. Careful thinking and preparation has gone into the new examination courses. Also offered is the International Baccalaureate in which history is a major contributor. It has led to some very high quality personal studies on a range of topics such as the Wars of the Roses and Zionism. Consistently history (and its associated politics) has been the most or nearly most popular option.

• Evidence for Criteria 3 (2.5 MB PDF document)

This comparison includes those with similar schools and, in the vast majority of cases, the department performs better or much better than those in similar schools. The recent 77% A* to A at GCSE is not untypical. At A-level in 2015 there was a 100% A and B grade success rate. The department produces a high number of university applicants including one of the highest proportion of Oxbridge graduates in the school. It is perhaps a testament to the respect of the department that one of the history teachers is a former student. IB results are also impressive.

Close attention is paid to student progress in Key Stage 3. In part this is achieved through a series of common assessment tasks, eg. on the Black Death. Student progress is carefully monitored. Detailed comments and marking takes place and a particularly impressive aspect is the student’s personal comment and feedback which is often well-thought out. The department is also excellent at identifying issues affecting individual students and these are given proper attention at departmental meetings.

Classroom displays celebrate student success and enrichment.

• Evidence for Criteria 4 (830.4 KB PDF document)

These include a History society with some well-known academics and personalities visiting the school (such as Richard Holmes, Anne Curry, Carl Bridge and Vince Cable), a History and Politics Society, a History Film Club plus a range of revision clinics and additional historiography sessions. The students are also well-supported by booklets and guides. They have the opportunity to contribute to a blog (Portsmouth Point) and the school’s VLE system. There are an exceptional number of visits including a family history trip to Ypres and visits to places as varied as China, Argentina, USA, Latvia and Belarus. Examples of parental feedback showed an extremely high level of satisfaction with the range and quality of history experiences.

• Evidence for Criteria 5 (1.62 MB PDF document)

• Was it worth it?
• Why did we do it?
• Was it fair?
• What advice to other schools considering going for the Quality Mark Award?

Firstly it was definitely worth it! To have our achievements recognised by an independent, supportive but astute professional body helps self-esteem all round in a department. Colleagues from other departments as well as SMT have been warm and positive in their praise. If I’m honest, I think it may encourage a few other departments to seek out similar pathways.

Why did we do it?

We did it not because we needed departmental bonding or building up. The department is large and well integrated (8 colleagues all subject specialists) and successful in terms of uptake and academic criteria and results. The HOD has also been in post for nearly 20 years so it was hardly the case of a young enthusiast wanting to make his/her mark and it on to their cv. We did it firstly because it was available and achievable (having looked at the criteria and case studies already on the HA website) and secondly because it helped us all as professional colleagues to focus on a specific target that was celebrating what we already achieve, offer and promote. It encouraged self reflection as well as tracking down data, examples and collating the evidence. Fundamentally we did it because we wanted to. We were also aware of the increasing demands on schools of all types for ongoing evidence of excellence and achievement when it comes to inspections. Putting on a ‘show’ for inspectors is rightly much less in vogue than the SEF or self evaluation forms which include a degree of external validation. The HA Quality Mark seemed to tie in very well with that approach. I should add though that this was very much a ‘journey’ we as a department began, developed and concluded. SMT were approached initially, were fully supportive including practically, but the initiative was very much bottom up not top down.

Was it fair?

Was it fair? Most assuredly yes. But with a Gold Award ‘we would say that wouldn’t we’ to slightly paraphrase that often quoted comment by Mandy Rice-Davies. But even so, we felt that particularly our assessor visit, was an extremely positive and affirming affair. We very much had the impression that we were being judged by the right criteria, appropriate to our particular situation and resources. Many of our ‘achievements’ were rightly viewed as ‘a given’ such as consistently strong academic results in an academically selective school. Much more of interest were the co-curricular aspects – our trips including those that are a bit different, the take up of history and related subjects at university level, the sense of departmental cohesion: unity of purpose within diversity of execution. Pupil feedback, co-curricular opportunities and even departmental administration were ranked alongside perhaps above raw academic outcomes. We were judged primarily by what we said about ourselves – was our self-perception borne out by reality, or was it merely self-delusion?

Advice to other schools

As for advice to other schools, we would offer the following pointers:

Ensure the entire department is behind the goal; it can’t be the passion or ‘trophy ambition’ of the HOD or subject leader. Where possible, delegate. We found a lot of the work and preparation was administrative – if there are personnel available to assist with that, it does make life much easier. From our experience, having a share of a Gap Year student’s time and a colleague returning from maternity leave in the last part of the summer term without a full timetable were both invaluable.

SMT need to be supportive and fully behind it, but certainly not driving it.

Don’t be put off by being a small department, being in a ‘less academic’ school etc. It is all about what a department can do with the resources available within their educational establishment. You will be assessed realistically not by criteria that are unachievable ‘for a school like ours.’ We didn’t find any other schools directly comparable (large co-ed independent secondary day school) to ours on the existing case studies, but weren’t put off though did muse whether it was quite meant for our type of school; it was, and is for many other types besides. It really is an award accessible to all schools that value, promote, innovate and achieve in history irrespective of catchment, locality, size or raw results.

Don’t try out new initiatives once you have begun the journey, in order to gain an award. Embark on new initiatives if you want to for sure, but get them reasonably established, and then go for the award.

Don’t think the assessor’s visit is like an Ofsted or ISI inspection. It’s much more friendly, positive and affirming. It is very much about confirming via observation and discussion that the written evidence is accurate and a true reflection of the department. There were no nasty surprises.

If and when you get your award, generate a bit of publicity internally and externally (liaising with your school’s normal channels for this) and display your certificate with pride!

Simon Lemieux, Head of History and Politics, The Portsmouth Grammar School