26 June 2007
1. The inspection
2. Continuous improvement
3. Progress towards meeting the main points for action|
4. Conclusion
How can you contact us?
HM Inspectorate of Education (HMIE) published a report on the inspection of Bonar Bridge Primary School in August 2005. Working with the school, the education authority prepared an action plan indicating how they would address the main points for action identified in the original HMIE inspection report.
HM Inspectors revisited the school in May 2007 to assess the extent to which the school was continuing to improve the quality of its work, and to evaluate progress made in responding to the main points for action in the initial report.
There had been several changes in staffing since the inspection. Pupils in the Gaelic medium class had been temporarily relocated to another school due to the long term absence of the Gaelic medium teacher. P1 to P3 pupils had experienced several staff changes since the class teacher transferred to a new post. This had had a negative impact on the continuity of pupils’ learning in these classes.
The headteacher had worked closely with local primary and secondary schools to organise a wide range of culture and sports activities for pupils. A French language assistant from Dornoch Academy had ensured the systematic development of P5, P6 and P7 pupils’ skills in French. P4 to P7 pupils enhanced their performance skills through participation in a Scottish Opera workshop and costumed performance. Teachers had made effective use of new resources and software to support improvement in pupils’ skills in using information and communications technology (ICT).
The initial inspection report published in August 2005 identified three main points for action. This section evaluates the progress made with each of the action points and the resulting improvements for pupils and other stakeholders.
3.1 Develop further pupils’ skills in problem solving and in information and communications technology (ICT).
The school had made good progress in meeting this main point for action.
Pupils’ skills in problem solving were improving. The headteacher worked regularly and effectively with P4-P7 pupils on a range of problem solving tasks. Pupils at P4 to P7 could now identify strategies and recall how they had tackled mathematical problems. P1 to P3 pupils did not yet have sufficiently frequent opportunities to consolidate their skills in problem solving. Across the school, pupils’ skills in using ICT were developing well. Staff had made effective use of a new interactive whiteboard and additional resources to motivate pupils to learn new skills. A visiting specialist had enhanced pupils’ skills in using ICT, particularly in creating and using graphics. More remained to be done to develop pupils’ skills in using databases and spreadsheets to collect and display information. P6 and P7 pupils made effective use of the Internet to research the lives of The Victorians in an interesting historical project. As a result of the improvements made, pupils’ skills in solving problems and in using ICT were better developed.
3.2 Improve procedures to monitor and evaluate the work of the school and the quality of learning and teaching.
The school had made adequate progress in addressing this main point for action.
The headteacher monitored the quality of learning, teaching and attainment more effectively. She sampled pupils’ written work across a range of areas and provided useful written feedback on teachers’ forward plans. The headteacher had visited classes to observe and evaluate the quality of learning and teaching. These visits were not yet sufficiently regular or systematic. The classroom visits and evaluations appropriately recognised key strengths in aspects of learning and teaching within the school. They were not sufficiently well focused on agreeing areas for improvement and ensuring that these were implemented consistently. Overall though, as a result of the improvements made, teachers had begun to monitor the quality of pupils’ learning experiences more effectively.
3.3 Ensure that tasks and activities present sufficient challenge to meet the needs of all pupils.
The school had made weak progress in addressing this main point for action.
Teachers shared learning targets for writing more effectively with pupils, who were responding well. Almost all pupils worked well without supervision. The visiting support for learning teacher provided helpful assistance to pupils experiencing difficulty in their learning as well as to higher attaining pupils. The needs of higher attaining pupils were not always being met sufficiently, particularly in mathematics. Teachers’ plans were too limited and took insufficient account of pupils’ learning needs. Lessons were too teacher directed and the tasks set were insufficiently demanding. These tasks included textbook exercises which were not placed in a relevant context for the pupils. Teachers did not make consistent use of effective questioning to challenge pupils to think for themselves. They did not yet set a consistently appropriate pace for most pupils’ work. More remained to be done to ensure that the learning needs of all pupils were being met effectively.
The school and education authority had made good progress in meeting one of the three main points for action. They had made adequate or weak progress in addressing two main points for action. The uncertainty caused by staff absences had limited the school and education authority’s capacity to improve aspects of the school’s work. School staff, with the continuing support of the education authority, had the capacity to improve the school further. HM Inspectors have asked the education authority to provide, in May 2008, a report on the school’s progress in improving self-evaluation procedures and in ensuring that tasks set for pupils are sufficiently challenging. Parents will be informed of the progress made by the school.
June Graham
HM Inspector
26 June 2007
If you would like an additional copy of this report
Copies of this report have been sent to the headteacher and school staff, the Director of Education, Culture and Sport, local councillors and appropriate Members of the Scottish Parliament. Subject to availability, further copies may be obtained free of charge from HM Inspectorate of Education, Longman House, 28 Longman Road, Inverness, IV1 1SF or by telephoning 01463 253115. Copies are also available on our website: www.hmie.gov.uk.
HMIE Feedback and Complaints Procedure
Should you wish to comment on any aspect of follow-through inspections, you should write in the first instance to Annette Bruton, HMCI, HM Inspectorate of Education, Denholm House, Almondvale Business Park, Almondvale Way, Livingston EH54 6GA.
If you have a concern about this report, you should write in the first instance to our Complaints Manager, HMIE Business Management Unit, Second Floor, Denholm House, Almondvale Business Park, Almondvale Way, Livingston, EH54 6GA. You can also e-mail HMIEcomplaints@hmie.gsi.gov.uk. A copy of our complaints procedure is available from this office, by telephoning 01506 600200 or from our website at www.hmie.gov.uk.
If you are not satisfied with the action we have taken at the end of our complaints procedure, you can raise your complaint with the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman (SPSO). The SPSO is fully independent and has powers to investigate complaints about Government departments and agencies. You should write to the SPSO, Freepost EH641, Edinburgh EH3 0BR. You can also telephone 0800 377 7330 (fax 0800 377 7331) or e-mail: ask@spso.org.uk. More information about the Ombudsman’s office can be obtained from the website: www.spso.org.uk.
Crown Copyright 2007
HM Inspectorate of Education
This report may be reproduced in whole or in part, except for commercial purposes or in connection with a prospectus or advertisement, provided that the source and date thereof are stated.