Follow-through Inspection by HM Inspectorate of Education of
New Elgin Primary School Nursery Class
The Moray Council

6 June 2007

New Elgin Primary School Nursery Class
Bezack Street
New Elgin
Elgin
IV30 6DP

In carrying out this follow-through inspection, HM Inspectors take account of National Care Standards, Early Education and Childcare up to the age of 16, and The Child at the Centre. The following standards and related quality indicators were used in the recent inspection.

Evaluations made using HMIE quality indicators use the following scale, and these words are used in the report to describe the team’s judgements:

excellent: outstanding, sector leading
very good: major strengths
good: important strengths, some areas for improvement
adequate: strengths just outweigh weaknesses
weak: important weaknesses
unsatisfactory: major weaknesses

Introduction

New Elgin Primary School Nursery Class was inspected in March 2007 as part of a programme of follow-through inspections carried out by HM Inspectorate of Education. The nursery had been inspected by the Care Commission and HM Inspectorate of Education as part of a programme of integrated inspections in March 2005, and a report was published in June 2005. The education authority, working with staff, had prepared an action plan indicating how the recommendations identified in the integrated inspection report would be addressed. The purpose of this follow-through inspection is to evaluate the progress made by New Elgin Primary School Nursery Class in achieving improvements based on the recommendations set out in the integrated inspection report.

Overview of progress achieved

Staff had made significant improvements to playroom areas. They had created a popular interest table related to nursery topics and attractive book areas. Children could now access information and story books easily. Staff provided imaginative play areas, including a space shelter, rocket ship and fairy castle, which were very effective in stimulating role-play. Children were keen to dress up in a range of attractive costumes to create interesting characters. They had played daily with sand and water. More indoor energetic play for children would be beneficial. Children had improved opportunities to express their own ideas and feelings using a wide range of easily accessed art and craft resources. A variety of games and jigsaws were motivating children to learn to count, match and sort.

Staff had successfully reorganised the daily programme to ensure activities were less adult led. All children were able to choose independently from the full range of activities, both inside and outdoors. The welcome activity with staff was now shorter and more effective. Children sang their welcome song in two languages to make their friends with English as an additional language feel at home. There was room for further improvement in the balance of activities to ensure a few children were sufficiently challenged.

Staff interaction with children had improved. They sensitively encouraged children to develop their role-play and art work. They asked children to explain what seeds needed in order to grow into healthy plants. They needed to continue to improve their questioning to extend and challenge a few children’s learning.

Staff had begun to respond to children’s interests in planning appropriate learning experiences. They recorded children’s learning and progress regularly but observations were not sufficiently focused to plan appropriate next steps in children’s learning. Planning did not effectively link to assessment information.

Curricular programmes were improving, particularly children’s expressive and aesthetic development. Children expressed themselves creatively in role-play in the stimulating play areas where they played at length and interacted well with staff. They produced attractive art and craft work which recorded their individual responses well. They were able to sing many action songs and make music and explore the sounds of musical instruments. Children were developing independence in preparing and serving their own snacks. They did not always persevere with their chosen activities. Children experienced regular, varied outdoor energetic play which included crawling through tunnels, climbing up the climbing frame, descending slip poles, playing parachute games and riding wheeled toys. More indoor physical play was needed. Children planted cress seeds and observed their growth. They were learning to count, sort and match through play activities and resources. The outdoor area was not sufficiently developed to encourage children to explore nature and solve simple problems. Staff encouraged children to make marks and express their thoughts in their drawings. They wrote secret notes to each other in imaginative play situations. Children discussed their experiences briefly but staff did not sufficiently interact to extend children’s conversations.

Self-evaluation remained at an early stage of development. Staff were not sufficiently involved in evaluating and planning improvements. The headteacher held regular inter-agency meetings to review and evaluate the progress of children with additional support needs. She had begun to monitor playroom practice more formally. However, there was little systematic monitoring and evaluating of ongoing improvements and the impact of playroom practice on the quality of children’s learning experiences.

Other Issues - Response to recommendations or to requirements made at the last Care Commission singleton inspection.

The headteacher and staff had addressed the requirement and two recommendations made at the previous Care Commission singleton inspection satisfactorily. The recommendation about improving monitoring and evaluating procedures has still to be fully addressed.

Conclusion

New Elgin Primary School Nursery Class had made adequate progress in overtaking the key recommendations set out in the report of June 2005. As a result of the progress achieved, HM Inspectors will request a progress report from the education authority within one year of the date of this report.

June Graham

HM Inspector

HOW TO CONTACT US

If you would like an additional copy of this report

Copies of this report have been sent to the headteacher, staff and the education authority. Copies are also available on the Care Commission website: www.carecommission.com and HMIE website: www.hmie.gov.uk.

If you wish to comment about pre-school inspections

Should you wish to comment on any aspect of pre-school inspections, you should write in the first instance to Kenneth Muir, HMCI, at HM Inspectorate of Education, Denholm House, Almondvale Business Park, Almondvale Way, Livingston EH54 6GA.

Our complaints procedure

If you have a concern about this report, you should write in the first instance to Hazel Dewart, Business Management Unit, HM Inspectorate of Education, Second Floor, Denholm House, Almondvale Business Park, Almondvale Way, Livingston EH54 6GA. A copy of our complaints procedure is available from this office or by telephoning 01506 600 258 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. The Scottish Public Services Ombudsman is fully independent and has powers to investigate complaints about Government departments and agencies. You should write to The Scottish Public Services Ombudsman, 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: 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.