Mount Pleasant Primary School
Thurso
The Highland Council

27 February 2007

Contents

1. Background
2. Key strengths
3. What are the views of parents, pupils and staff?
4. How good are learning, teaching and achievement?
5. How well are pupils’ learning needs met?
6. How good is the environment for learning?
7. Leading and improving the school
Appendix 1 Indicators of quality
Appendix 2 Summary of questionnaire responses
How can you contact us?

1. Background

Mount Pleasant Primary School was inspected in November 2006 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 innovation, and its 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-staff association (PSA) and a group of parents¹.

The inspection team also evaluated aspects of the school’s progress in implementing national recommendations related to improving aspects of school meals provision.

The school serves an area of Thurso. At the time of the inspection the roll was 211, including three pupils with complex support needs in the Resourced Base and 42 children in the nursery class. The headteacher had been in post for two years after a period of instability in leadership. 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 work of the nursery class was not included in this inspection.

2. Key strengths

3. What are the views of parents, pupils and staff?

HM Inspectors analysed responses to questionnaires issued to a sample of parents, P4 to P7 pupils, and to all staff. Information about the responses to the questionnaires appears in Appendix 2.

Parents, pupils and staff were very positive about almost all aspects of the school. Parents felt that the school was well run, and that staff were friendly, caring and supportive. They thought that their children had very good relationships with staff and enjoyed being at school. Pupils felt the school helped them to keep safe and healthy. They felt teachers praised them for doing well and gave them assistance when they were having difficulty. Staff liked working in the school. They thought that the school was well led and morale was high.

4. How good are learning, teaching and achievement?

Pupils’ learning experiences and achievements

The quality of the curriculum was good. There was a strong focus on the development of pupils’ personal and social skills. Visiting specialist teachers of music, physical education and technology enhanced pupils’ experiences. Teachers allocated additional time to developing pupils’ literacy skills which had contributed to the improvement in attainment. Recent improvements to the literacy and mathematics programmes had been successful in promoting positive attitudes to reading, discussing texts and mental calculations. The planning and assessment of listening and talking was not sufficiently consistent to ensure continuity and progress in pupils’ learning. The development of pupils’ citizenship skills through whole school enterprise activities was at an early stage. Although teachers did not allocate sufficient time for physical education, all pupils benefited from swimming sessions at the local pool during the school year. There was insufficient breadth and balance in the curriculum in the Resourced Base. In the school as a whole, teaching approaches had many strengths. Teachers gave clear explanations and made good use of praise to build pupils’ self-confidence and reward their achievements. They made effective use of direct, interactive teaching, particularly in reading and mental mathematics. Most teachers were skilled in using questions to check pupils’ understanding. They shared with pupils what they were expected to learn from their lessons, especially in writing. In a few lessons, teachers did not make consistent use of questions to extend pupils’ responses. Teachers did not consistently encourage pupils to ask questions or share with others what they had learned. Homework tasks were set regularly but were not always sufficiently varied.

Almost all pupils were well motivated and were positive in their approach to learning. They were able to apply themselves effectively in a range of learning situations, including when working in reading trios and in groups. At P1, for example, pupils worked well in pairs learning Scottish dances. In science, pupils at P6 were able to work cooperatively in groups to investigate the properties of different materials. Pupils were able to reflect on aspects of their learning. They were developing a good sense of what they needed to do to improve their learning and work. The pace of learning was appropriately challenging in most cases.

At all stages, pupils were making very good progress in developing their confidence and self-esteem. The school took good steps to help pupils develop their wider achievements. Across the school there were stimulating displays of pupils’ work in art and design. Pupils demonstrated skills and confidence in making music and performing. At P4 to P7, pupils were improving their awareness of what it means to be a good citizen through participation in the pupil council and School Nutrition Action Group. Others served as playground helpers, ran the school tuck-shop or supported younger pupils to settle into the school. Pupils took part in a range of after-school clubs and competitions including, football, netball and rugby. They had a very good awareness of the importance of healthy eating and exercise. Pupils regularly held fundraising events and contributed to a variety of charities. This had developed their understanding of the needs of others. In the Resourced Base, pupils’ personal and social skills were developing well, although personal learning targets needed to be more measurable for some pupils. They were highly motivated by group activities such as horse-riding and swimming and were appropriately included in whole school assemblies and recreational activities. Staff in the Resourced Base made consistent use of praise to encourage pupils’ achievements.

English language

The overall quality of attainment in English language was good. In recent years the school had made significant progress in improving pupils’ attainment. Most pupils in reading and almost all in listening, talking and writing were achieving appropriate national levels. At almost all stages, pupils were making good progress in the development of their literacy skills. Pupils with additional support needs were making good progress. Almost all pupils responded well to teachers’ questions and listened well to each other in small group situations. They reported back well to their class on a range of topics. Pupils’ progress in reading was good. At the early and middle stages, almost all enjoyed reading for pleasure. At the upper stages most pupils enjoyed reading. At all stages, pupils were able to find information from a variety of resources. They demonstrated appropriate skills in writing for a variety of purposes. Across the school pupils demonstrated a good knowledge about language and presented their work neatly. However, standards of spelling were not high enough.

Mathematics

The overall quality of attainment in mathematics was very good. Attainment had improved steadily over recent years and almost all pupils were attaining appropriate national levels. Many achieved national levels earlier than would normally be expected, although a few required more consolidation in their learning. Pupils not attaining appropriate levels were well supported and making good progress. Almost all coped well with their classwork. Across the school, pupils were able to handle information effectively using an appropriate range of graphs and charts. From P4 to P7, they used computers effectively to create simple databases and spreadsheets. Throughout the school, pupils performed mental and written calculations very well. They were skilled in solving calculations involving number, money and time. At all stages, pupils could identify a wide range of shapes and fully describe their properties. Their skills in problem-solving and enquiry were developing well. Pupils worked effectively together in groups and made good use of a range of strategies to solve problems. They presented their written calculations neatly.

5. How well are pupils’ learning needs met?

The school’s approaches to meeting pupils’ learning needs were good. Most pupils were well supported in classes by appropriate tasks and resources. The organisation of groups for mathematics in a few classes did not always take sufficient account of pupils’ individual learning needs. English language texts lacked sufficient challenge for a few pupils. Support for learning staff were well used to support individual pupils experiencing difficulties with their learning. Effective arrangements included substantial consultation between teachers, the additional support teacher and auxiliaries. The school fully involved parents in setting learning targets and kept them well informed about their children’s progress. There were effective arrangements to support children moving from nursery to P1 and from P7 to Thurso High School.

Staff in the Resourced Base had a very good understanding of the significant additional support needs of pupils. Teachers and auxiliaries worked well together matching activities to pupils’ individual needs. However, pupils were not always sufficiently challenged in their learning. Further integration with mainstream classes in specific curricular areas was needed.

6. How good is the environment for learning?

7. Leading and improving the school

Appendix 1 provides HM Inspectors’ overall evaluation of the work of the school.

The school provided good quality education for its pupils within a caring and supportive environment. Teachers and support staff were very successful in encouraging all pupils to develop positive attitudes to learning. Overall, pupils were attaining high standards in mathematics and making very good progress in their personal and social development. There was scope for further improvement in English language.

The headteacher led the school well. She promoted the celebration of pupils’ achievements very well within the whole school community. She was highly respected by pupils and parents. Her approachable and inclusive style of leadership had greatly improved staff morale and promoted effective staff teamwork. She had led improvements in setting learning targets and sharing these with pupils which had contributed to the considerable rise in pupil attainment. However, leadership of the Resourced Base needed further improvement. The recently-appointed depute headteacher provided a model of good practice in her teaching. She was making effective use of her skills and expertise in leading further improvements to spelling approaches across the school. The principal teacher carried out her remit, which was clearly focused on improving pupils’ learning at the early stages, conscientiously and enthusiastically. The school’s approaches to ensuring continuous improvement were adequate. The headteacher involved staff in reviewing the work of the school and in identifying appropriate priorities for development. She monitored and evaluated learning and teaching using a number of procedures. These included providing teachers with oral and written feedback on their plans and making formal visits to classes. The sampling of pupils’ written work was not sufficiently well focused. The headteacher tracked pupils’ attainment regularly and discussed individual pupils’ progress with teachers. However, staff did not yet set regular, focused targets to continue to raise pupils’ attainment. Procedures did not yet sufficiently involve teachers in evaluating their teaching formally or pupils in evaluating their own progress and setting targets for their learning. Procedures for monitoring and evaluating learning and teaching in the Resourced Base were too informal. With the continuing support of the education authority, particularly on improving the Resourced Base provision and management, the school has the capacity to further improve.

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. Within two years of the publication of this report parents will be informed about the progress made by the school.

June Graham
HM Inspector

27 February 2007

Appendix 1 Indicators of quality

The sections in the table below follow the order in this report. You can find the main comments made about each of the quality indicators in those sections. However, aspects of some quality indicators are relevant to other sections of the report and may also be mentioned in those other sections.

This report uses the following word scale to make clear judgements made by inspectors:

Appendix 2 Summary of questionnaire responses

Important features of responses from the various groups which received questionnaires are listed below.

How can you contact us?

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, 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, 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.

Footnotes

1. Throughout this report, the term ‘parents’ should be taken to include foster carers, residential care staff and carers who are relatives or friends.