1. Background
2. Key strengths
3. What are the views of parents and carers, pupils and staff?
4. How good are learning, teaching and achievement?
5. How well are pupils supported?
6. How good is the environment for learning?
7. Improving the school
Appendix 1 Indicators of quality
Appendix 2 Summary of questionnaire responses
How can you contact us?
Miller Academy Primary School was inspected in June 2005 as part of a national sample of primary education. The inspection covered key aspects of the work of the school at all stages. It evaluated pupils’ achievements, the effectiveness of the school, the environment for learning, the school’s processes for self-evaluation and capacity for improvement. There was a particular focus on attainment in English language and mathematics.
HM Inspectors examined pupils’ work and interviewed groups of pupils, including the pupil council, and staff. Members of the inspection team also met the chairperson of the School Board, representatives of the parent-teacher association (PTA), and a group of parents.
The school serves an area of the town of Thurso. At the time of the inspection the roll was 384, including 44 children in the nursery class. Around a third of pupils were from outwith the school’s designated catchment area. The proportion of pupils who were entitled to free school meals was well below the national average. Pupils’ attendance was in line with the national average.
The nursery class was inspected earlier in the year and is the subject of a separate report.
HM Inspectors identified the following key strengths.
HM Inspectors analysed responses to questionnaires issued to a random sample of some parents, P4 to P7 pupils, and to all staff. Information about the responses to the questionnaires appears in Appendix 2.
Parents were satisfied with the work of the school. Almost all thought that the school had a good reputation in the community and that they were made to feel welcome by the staff. They appreciated the regular and informative school newsletters and felt homework activities were useful. They believed that the school library should be improved and preferred appointments at parents’ evenings to the more open arrangement recently trialled. Staff were positive about most aspects of school life. Teachers felt they had a good working relationship with pupils and that they set high standards for them. Staff thought that communication within the school was not as effective as it might be. The teachers were all very unhappy with the arrangements for reducing the time they spent teaching and wanted improved opportunities for continuous professional development in the local area. Pupils enjoyed being at school and felt that teachers explained things clearly. Almost half felt that the behaviour of several pupils in the school was not good. Older pupils enjoyed their role as buddies to younger ones and felt school trips were very good. Pupils wanted the playground improved.
Pupils’ learning experiences and achievements
The school did not provide pupils with a sufficiently broad and balanced curriculum. Most teachers provided pupils with an appropriate range of planned learning experiences. However, they did not always ensure the steady development of pupils’ skills, knowledge and understanding within English language and mathematics. The school lacked effective programmes for these curriculum areas. In physical education there was no guidance for teachers on what was to be taught. Too little attention was given to the development of pupils’ skills in art and design. Across the school there was inconsistent use of information and communications technology (ICT). Parents had not been involved in reviewing the best use of curriculum time. The quality of teaching varied too much. Most teachers were well organised, gave clear explanations and made good use of questioning to reinforce learning and check pupils’ understanding. In most classes, interactions between pupils and teachers was good. During writing lessons, teachers had begun to share expectations with pupils. However, across the curriculum, teachers did not all share learning targets with pupils and sometimes did not challenge pupils enough. The quality and range of homework activities provided by teachers was inconsistent. Most lessons involved teachers rehearsing the answers to worksheet and textbook exercises with pupils.
The quality of pupils’ learning was fair. The pace of work was too slow for a significant minority of pupils. At P1-P3, pupils were developing good early literacy and numeracy skills and worked well together during set tasks in collaborative play. Generally, pupils were diligent in completing tasks, but were not actively engaged in their learning. A few teachers gave pupils good feedback about the quality of their work, but pupils were often unclear about what they needed to do to improve. The majority of pupils worked well in the absence of close supervision, but others were more easily distracted and were unable to work without support. Across the school, pupils had limited opportunities to work together or learn from each other. The quality of pupils’ handwriting and presentation of work was not of a sufficiently high standard.
The pupil council had been active in improving the use of the school grounds, including solving a litter problem. Pupils in P7 had regularly supported younger pupils in class on a regular basis, including teaching them the rules of board games. They also ran a tuck shop supported by the janitor and had used ICT effectively to manage their budget. Across the school, pupils were becoming more aware of healthy eating. Pupils in P1 could separate and sort healthy and unhealthy food and drink items. Pupils, staff and parents had raised money for a number of charities and through which pupils had learned of the needs of others. Pupils had developed good knowledge about living in the past. In P3, they had learned about the impact left by Viking settlers in the local area. Pupils in P5 had learned some Caithness dialect words and those in P6 could recall important events in the life of Mary Queen of Scots. The school had been very active in the local music festival. Choirs representing all classes had performed in competitions in Wick and achieved great success.
English language
The overall quality of pupils’ attainment in English language was fair. In recent years, the school had not improved the standards attained in reading and writing. Across the school, the majority of pupils achieved appropriate national levels of attainment in listening and talking, reading and writing. Almost all pupils in P1 and P2, and the majority from P3 to P7, were making good progress with their coursework. A significant number were capable of achieving higher standards. Pupils who were experiencing difficulties with aspects of reading and writing were making variable progress. At all stages, those pupils with English as an additional language were making very good progress in their language work. Pupils in P1 to P3 responded well to teachers’ questioning and were good at following instructions. By P7, only a majority of pupils were able to discuss their ideas and opinions clearly. At the early stages, pupils read fluently and with enthusiasm. Across the school pupils were familiar with a range of authors and many read widely for pleasure. By P7, most pupils could identify their favourite authors and talk about the content of the books they had read recently. Pupils’ writing skills were not sufficiently well developed and many lacked skills in writing at length for a variety of purposes.
Mathematics
The overall quality of pupils’ attainment in mathematics was fair. In recent years pupils’ attainment in mathematics had declined. Although the majority of pupils were attaining appropriate national attainment levels in key aspects of mathematics, a significant number were capable of achieving higher standards. The majority of pupils were making progress in their classwork, but across the school there were gaps in pupils’ knowledge and understanding of mathematics. Pupils had a good understanding of graphs and information handling, but had insufficient skills in using computers to handle information. The majority of pupils had a good understanding of basic number work and could confidently carry out written calculations, but their skills in oral number work were less well developed. Pupils had few opportunities to use practical equipment in measuring and by P7 their skills in this area were limited. Most pupils could identify a range of shapes and discuss their properties. Pupils’ skills in problem solving had not been consistently developed and most pupils could not identify or apply problem solving strategies.
The school had good arrangements for the care and welfare of pupils. Staff knew the pupils well and were aware of their physical, social and emotional needs. The school’s procedures for child protection were well understood and applied by staff. Pupils knew whom to speak to if they had any concerns, but there was little opportunity for pupils to raise personal concerns with staff. The popular football, netball, badminton and dance clubs, held outwith the normal school day, helped to develop pupils’ physical fitness. There was a good range of activities to support children moving from nursery to primary education. The school had good links with the secondary school and in transition arrangements for pupils moving from P7 to S1.
There were a number of important weaknesses in meeting pupils’ learning needs. Pupils’ progress was hindered by the lack of effective systems for assessment and suitable programmes of study. Staff did not make effective use of assessment information to identify and plan next steps in pupils’ learning. There was an over-reliance on core schemes of textbooks. The school had identified differences in attainment between boys and girls but, had done too little to address this matter effectively. Class teachers and pupils were very well supported by the support for learning teachers, auxiliaries and classroom assistants. However, the system of deploying these staff was ineffective and not targeted well enough at meeting the needs of specific pupils. In addition, the means by which pupils requiring additional support were identified were not effective. Parents were not involved early enough in the identification process. Learning support staff supported groups of pupils and individuals very effectively and related well to them. They worked with pupils both in and out of class, providing advice to class teachers where appropriate. Learning support staff did meet often enough to discuss pupils’ progress or to plan how best to meet their needs. Appropriate systems were in place for managing Records of Needs. Overall, the support for learning provision had not been well managed by the senior management team. The school and education authority also required to review the system for allocating support staff to the school.
Aspect |
Comment |
Quality of accommodation and facilities |
The overall quality of accommodation was good. The school comprised a large main building and several classes in hutted accommodation. An additional separate building was used for expressive arts and assemblies. This offered pupils appropriate space and equipment for completing their learning activities in art, music and drama. Issues relating to the security of the buildings were drawn to the attention of the headteacher and the education authority. Throughout the school, there were interesting displays of pupils’ work. The main school building was well maintained and kept clean. The grassed area provided very good facilities for play. Improvements to playground tarmac surfaces had begun. Teachers did not make enough use of the computer suite to develop pupils’ ICT skills. The building was not suitable for users or visitors with restricted mobility. |
Climate and relationships, expectations and promoting achievement and equality |
Visitors to the school were made welcome. Pupils’ behaviour was generally good. However, relationships between staff and pupils were not always positive. Staff morale was low. Staff, pupils and parents did not all share a common sense of identity or loyalty to the school. Strategies to promote positive behaviour and good manners were not consistently applied. There was limited use of praise across the school and staff expectations of pupils’ achievement were not high enough. The school did not yet do enough to increase pupils’ understanding of racial equality and discrimination. The school held regular assemblies to promote religious observance and issue certificates to highlight pupils’ achievements. The headteacher had identified that there needed to be increased opportunity for whole-school gatherings. |
Partnership with parents and the community |
The school had good relationships with parents, the School Board and the PTA. Parents had campaigned successfully to improve playground surfaces and road safety arrangements outside the school. The staff provided regular helpful newsletters and informative annual reports. They held two meetings with parents each year to discuss their children’s progress and share pupils’ work. An open evening had provided an effective way for pupils, parents and staff to meet informally. The school had appropriately consulted P6 parents on sensitive health issues. The school made good use of parent helpers to support trips and escort pupils to swimming. Pupils were regular visitors to the local library and used the local area well to enhance their learning in environmental studies. |
Appendix 1 provides HM Inspectors’ overall evaluation of the work of the school.
Miller Academy Primary School did not provide a consistently good standard of education or a sufficiently stimulating climate for learning. There was some good and very good teaching in the school. However, there were also important weaknesses in the quality of learning and teaching in the school. Pupils’ levels of attainment in English language and mathematics were not good enough. Pupils across the school were capable of achieving higher standards in all aspects of their learning. Teachers did not make effective use of assessment information. They did not all set consistently high standards for pupils’ behaviour, attainment or achievement. They needed to improve the pace of learning, the level of challenge, and arrangements for supporting pupils experiencing difficulties in their learning.
The headteacher had only been in post for four weeks. She had begun to get to know the pupils and staff. She had recognised that the schools’ approach to the use of assessments was inconsistent and that attainment information was unreliable. She
knew the community well and had successfully begun to forge links with other local schools. The headteacher was developing an appreciation of the emerging priorities for the school. The depute headteacher had provided a good level of support to the staff in the day-to-day running of the school. She had improved the range of teaching materials available to early years staff. In recent years the school had not been well supported or challenged by the education authority. The work of the school had not been systematically monitored. The school development plan had no focus on learning and teaching, and staff development opportunities had not been targeted on the schools’ priorities for improvement. Staff had not had the opportunity to engage in professional discussions with managers about their work or the progress of pupils. They had no experience of rigorous self-evaluation and had not been challenged to take responsibility for their own development. Overall, the schools’ approach to tracking and monitoring pupils’ attainment was unsatisfactory. To further improve the school, the headteacher should work closely with the education authority and staff to raise attainment and ensure that the needs of all pupils are met fully.
Main points for action
The school and education authority, in liaison with HM Inspectors, should take action to ensure improvement in:
What happens next?
The school and the education authority have been asked to prepare an action plan indicating how they will address the main findings of the report, and to share that plan with parents and carers.
HM Inspectors will engage with the school and the education authority to monitor progress. They will publish an interim report on progress within one year of the publication of this report. Thereafter, HM Inspectors will continue to engage with the school and the education authority in monitoring progress, and will undertake a
follow-through inspection. This will result in another report to parents and carers, within two years of the publication of this report, on the extent of improvement that has been achieved.
Susan R Duff
HM Inspector
25 October 2005
We judged the following to be very good
We judged the following to be good
We judged the following to be fair
We judged the following to be unsatisfactory
Important features of responses from the various groups which received questionnaires are listed below.
What pleased parents and carers most |
What parents and carers would like to see improved |
|
|
What pleased pupils most |
What pupils would like to see improved |
|
|
What pleased staff most |
What staff would like to see improved |
|
|
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 & 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 .
If you wish to comment about primary inspections
Should you wish to comment on any aspect of primary inspections, you should write in the first instance to Chris McIlroy, Acting 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 600258 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, 4-6 Melville Street, Edinburgh EH3 7NS. You can also telephone 0870 011 5378 or e-mail enquiries@scottishombudsman.org.uk. More information about the Ombudsman’s office can be obtained from the website: www.scottishombudsman.org.uk
Crown Copyright 2005
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.