Quality In All Day Schooling

Author(s):

Patricia Schuler(presenting / submitting)Frank Brueckel(presenting)Monika Dietiker Reto Kuster

Conference:

ECER 2013

Network:

11. Educational Improvement and Quality Assurance

Format:

Paper

Session Information

11 SES 08 B, Family Involvement and Schooling to Family Help

Paper Session

Time:

2013-09-12

09:00-10:30

Room:

D-311

Chair:

Antonio Medina

Contribution

All-day schooling is often seen as a great solution as it provides a stimulating learning and socialization environment, as well as allows parents to actually manage their family and professional lives (Holtappels, 2006). The effectiveness of all-day schools was shown clearly in the first two longitudinal studies in German speaking countries – Switzerland and Germany – in the StEG study (Fischer, Kuhn & Klieme 2009) and the EduCare study (Schüpbach 2010). These studies showed that positive impacts on the individual academic achievement and socio-emotional development due to regular participation in high quality extracurricular activities occurred (Steiner & Fischer, 2011).

In contrast to other European countries the implementation of all day schools is one of the core issues of the current and future school improvement debate in Germany and in Switzerland. In both countries, innovative concepts of all-day schooling include more than school lessons and lunch, it is also important to combine all different kinds of holistic learning. The primary aim of all day schooling is to create better conditions for a new learning culture and to focus on the pupil taking into account his/her individual strengths, interests and circumstances (see German Federal Ministry of Education and Research, 2013).

Especially in Germany the Federal Government has supported the regions in their development and expansion of all-day schooling through the investment program "The Future of Education and Care" (IZBB) from 2003 to 2009. Among other things, the question of quality is one of the main focuses of the professional debate. For this reason some universities in Germany developed quality models which are widely recognized (Strätz et al 2008, Tietze et al 2003, Tietze et al 2005).

In Switzerland, however, in terms of quality in all-day schooling there is currently no generally accepted model. For this reason, a group at the Zurich University of Teacher Education is working on the question of quality in all-day schools. The aim is to develop a quality instrument to manage accountability and quality insurance that can be used by schools and local school boards to transform from a regular to an all-day school.

Method

For the development of such an instrument, a multistage method was chosen. − Review of the relevant literature: In a first step, the current literature on the topic «Quality in All-Day-Schools» published in Germany and Switzerland (Strätz et al 2008; Tietze et al 2003 & 2005; Swiss association for all day schooling 2010) was reviewed. Besides that a review of general educational quality models that are relevant in Switzerland but not specifically focused of all-day-schools was chosen (Bragger & Posse, 2007; Bruggmann 2012; Landwehr & Steiner, 2010). Out of these models we extract those parts which are relevant for all day schooling. Comparing the reviewed literature we managed a conceptual narrowing, differentiation and specification of relevant dimensions concerning all day schooling. − Involvement of stakeholders: In a next step we discussed this theoretically derived conceptualization with various stakeholders (local school boards, authorities, universities, principals, teachers, educators, parents, etc.) in regard to the practical relevance and adjusted the dimensions. − Development of the instrument: In a third step the final product was defined as a quality instrument to support authorities, principals and teachers to further develop their schools toward becoming an all-day school.

Expected Outcomes

The paper presents the current state of the discussion concerning quality in all-day schools and discusses overlaps and differences between different quality models. This results leads to eight different dimensions divided into quality of structure, quality of process and quality of outcome. In a second section we present the results of the discussions with the stakeholders and demonstrate a possible version of the instrument and finally show how schools can be supported by such an instrument.

References

Brägger Gerold, Posse Norbert (2007). Instrumente für die Qualitätsentwicklung und Evaluation in Schulen IQES. Bern: h.e.p. Bruggmann Guido (2012). Qualitätskonzept: Für die Entwicklung und Sicherung der Qualität in den Volksschulen der Stadt Zürich (QEQS). Schul- und Sportdepartement der Stadt Zürich Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (2013). Bildung für mehr! Ganztagesschule der Vielfalt. Zugriff unter http://www.bmbf.de/de/1125.php [31.01.2013] Fischer Natalie, Kuhn Hans Peter, Klieme Eckhard (2009). Was kann die Ganztagsschule leisten? Wirkungen ganztägiger Beschulung auf die Entwicklung von Lernmotivation und schulischer Performanz nach dem Übergang in die Sekundarstufe. In: Zeitschrift für Pädagogik. 54. Beiheft, S. 143–167. Holtappels, H.G. (2006). Stichwort: Ganztagsschule. In: Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft 9, Heft 1/2006, S. 5-29 Landwehr Norbert, Steiner Peter (2010). Q2E. FHNW, Pädagogische Hochschule Nordwestschweiz Schweizerischer Verband für schulische Tagesbetreuung (2010). Qualitätsrahmen für die schulische Tagesbetreuung. Zürich: Eigenverlag Schüpbach Marianne (2010). Ganztägige Bildung und Betreuung im Primarschulalter. Qualität und Wirksamkeit verschiedener Schulformen im Vergleich. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. Strätz Rainer, Hermes Claudia, Fuchs Ragnhild, Kleinen Karin, Nordt Gabriele & Wiedemann Petra (2008). Qualität für Schulkinder in Tageseinrichtungen und Offenen Ganztagesgrundschulen (QUAST) – ein nationaler Kriterienkatalog Mannheim: Cornelsen Steiner Christine & Fischer Natalie (2011). Wer nutzt Ganztagsangebote und warum? In: Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft, 14. Jg., Sonderheft 15, S. 185-203. Tietze Wolfgang, Viernickel Susanne, Dittrich Irene, Grenner Katja, Groot-Wilken Bernd, Sommfeld Verena & Hanisch Andrea (Hrsg.) (2003). Pädagogische Qualität in Tageseinrichtungen für Kinder. Nationaler Kriterienkatalog, Cornelsen, Scriptor Tietze Wolfgang, Rossbach Hans-Günther, Stendel Martina, Wellner Beate (2005). Hort- und Ganztagsangebote Skala (HUGS). Feststellung und Unterstützung pädagogischer Qualität in Horten und ausserunterrichtlichen Angeboten (Beobachtungsinstrument)

Author Information

Patricia Schuler (presenting / submitting)

University of Teacher Education Zurich

R&D

Zürich

Frank Brueckel (presenting)

University of Teacher Education Zurich, Switzerland

Monika Dietiker

University of Teacher Education Zurich, Switzerland

Reto Kuster

University of Teacher Education Zurich, Switzerland

Search the ECER Programme

Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
Search for authors and in the respective field.
For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.

Session Information

Contribution

Method

Expected Outcomes

References

Author Information

Search the ECER Programme

Navigation

Info for