Golspie High School
The Highland Council

10 June 2008

Contents

1. Background
2. Key strengths
3. How well does the school raise achievement for all?
4. How good is the environment for learning?
5. Leading and improving the school
Appendix 1 Indicators of quality
Appendix 2 Summary of questionnaire responses
Appendix 3 Performance in Scottish Qualifications Authority (SQA) National Qualifications
How can you contact us?

1. Background

Golspie High School was inspected in February and March 2008 as part of a national sample of secondary education. The inspection covered key aspects of the school’s work at all stages. HM Inspectors evaluated how well the school was raising achievement for all pupils, taking into account the extent to which pupils’ learning needs were met by the curriculum and teaching. They analysed pupils’ achievement in national examinations (see Appendix 3) and other areas, the school’s processes for self-evaluation and innovation, and its overall effectiveness and capacity for improvement. HM Inspectors focused particularly on English, mathematics, geography, and religious and moral education. The inspection team also evaluated aspects of the school's progress in implementing national recommendations related to improving aspects of school meals provision.

HM Inspectors observed teaching, learning and achievement in lessons and other contexts and examined pupils’ work. They analysed responses to questionnaires1 issued to a sample of parents2 and pupils and to all staff. They interviewed groups of pupils, including representatives of pupil councils, and staff. Members of the inspection team also met the chairperson of the Parent Council and a group of parents.

Golspie High School is a non-denominational school serving the village of Golspie and the surrounding area. At the time of the inspection, the roll was 327. The percentage of pupils entitled to free school meals was in line with the national average. Pupils’ attendance was in line with the national average.

2. Key strengths

HM Inspectors identified the following key strengths.

  • The joint working with other agencies in the Golspie area.
  • The commitment of staff to providing a wide range of out-of-school hours activities for pupils.
  • The quality of learners’ experiences in creative and aesthetic subjects.

3. How well does the school raise achievement for all?

To evaluate how well the school was raising achievement for all, HM Inspectors considered the extent to which the learning needs of all pupils were met through the curriculum and teaching. They evaluated the impact of the school on the learning and personal development of all pupils in lessons and in other, broader contexts. They also considered pupils’ achievement in examinations and other areas, and the school’s overall success in sustaining improvements in performance.

Curriculum

The quality of the curriculum was good. The school had a clear rationale which had led to well-considered changes. Staff ensured that the curriculum took appropriate account of distinctive features of the school’s location and the need to provide pupils with the necessary skills to work in the local economy. Particular features of the curriculum included the following.

Teaching and meeting learning needs

Overall, the quality of teaching was adequate although this varied across the school, with a few examples of very good teaching. Most teachers had created a positive classroom ethos and gave clear instructions and explanations. A few shared the purposes of lessons with pupils but this was not yet consistent in all lessons. There were some good examples of effective questioning. Too often, teachers took too strong a lead in lessons and pupils did not have enough opportunities to take responsibility for their learning. A few departments used ICT effectively to motivate pupils. A few teachers regularly discussed their learning and progress with individual pupils. They provided useful feedback to help pupils improve their work. The quality of feedback to pupils varied from weak to very good across the school. In most classes, homework tasks were not well planned and did not sufficiently challenge pupils.

The school’s arrangements for meeting pupils’ learning needs were weak. In a few lessons activities were varied and well managed, and enabled all pupils, including those with additional support needs, to make appropriate progress in their learning. Support for learning staff gathered useful information from associated primary schools which enabled them to identify pupils’ learning needs and share this information promptly with teaching staff. A few pupils benefited from following flexible curriculum arrangements. A few departments organised classes effectively according to pupils’ prior attainment, to provide additional support to lower-attaining groups of pupils. Class teachers did not always recognise their particular responsibilities towards meeting the learning needs of individual pupils. In most lessons, tasks set were often too easy for the majority of pupils or too difficult for the least able pupils. The school had good arrangements in place for pupils with additional support needs, when they transferred from primary school. Support for learning staff provided appropriate help for pupils undertaking Scottish Qualifications Authority (SQA) tasks. They developed appropriate individualised educational programmes (IEPs) for those pupils who required them. Teachers, pupils and parents were not sufficiently involved in setting the targets within these IEPs. Most teachers provided appropriate support to meet the needs of pupils with specific learning difficulties, such as dyslexia. A few higher-attaining pupils at S3/S4 were undertaking courses which did not provide sufficient challenge. The work of pastoral care teachers did not consistently focus on ensuring that the learning needs of all pupils were met. Overall, approaches to meeting pupils’ needs were not well planned and staff across the school did not share a clear understanding of their responsibilities for meeting pupils’ needs. As a result the school did not always meet the needs of pupils effectively.

Impact on learners

This section provides an evaluation of the extent to which the school was successful in raising achievement for all pupils. It refers to pupils’ learning experiences, personal development and aspects of their achievement in examinations and other areas.

Learners’ experiences and personal development

The quality of pupils’ experiences was adequate. In most lessons, pupils were engaged in their learning and cooperated well with their teachers. They responded enthusiastically when they were given opportunities to learn independently. The library provided a welcoming environment for study and pupils made good use of the facilities for Internet research. Pupils had insufficient opportunities to be involved in decisions about their learning. The school had introduced an effective system of target setting for pupils in S4 and there were plans to extend this to other year groups. Pupils were not sufficiently aware of their progress or strengths as learners. They often had low expectations of their achievements. Around a fifth of pupils did not like being at the school.

The school provided pupils with a very good range of opportunities for personal development. Pupils following courses in hospitality were developing their confidence and skills by providing catering for a number of events attended by members of the local community. Other pupils achieved success in local and national competitions, such as the UK Schools’ Film Award. Most pupils were increasing their awareness of environmental issues through the school’s successful partnership with the Golspie Recycling and Environmental Action Network garden and recycling projects. The rural skills class gained valuable experience of the world of work through links with local employers. Large numbers of pupils were increasing their skills and sharing their talents with others through musical activities, including the pipe band and orchestra. These pupils gave regular performances in the community, which helped to develop their confidence. Senior pupils were developing their leadership skills and contributing to the development of younger pupils’ talents through the Sports Leadership Award scheme. The extensive range of sports clubs was well attended. Pupils were learning to challenge themselves, work in teams and support each other through activities such as mountain biking. Individual pupils achieved success at national and international levels in athletics, golf, cross-country running and football. A small number of pupils had contributed to improving the school environment through making and refitting benches and engaging in a mural project. The pupil council had recently become more active. Thirteen pupils were working successfully towards the Duke of Edinburgh’s Award. Pupils exhibited artwork locally and two had created artwork for a local environmental garden. S6 pupils acted as "buddies" for S1 pupils but there were few opportunities for pupils in other year groups to develop as leaders or to gain experience of taking on roles of responsibility within the school.

English

Overall, in English, the quality of teaching for effective learning, arrangements for meeting pupils’ learning needs and learners’ experiences were weak. Performance had declined, overall.

Pupils responded positively and made good progress when teachers explained what they would learn and the skills they would develop. Effective open questions helped pupils to explore issues, for example in texts they were studying, and to express and justify their opinions confidently. Teachers did not use these effective practices consistently. Overall, teachers had not created a sufficiently strong climate for learning which stimulated and celebrated the effective use of language. Working closely with the librarian, teachers encouraged pupils to develop good reading habits and research skills. Well-targeted help from support for learning staff and a classroom assistant helped pupils with additional needs to make good progress. Overall, pupils did not have enough opportunities to be actively involved in their learning and to show initiative. They were beginning to evaluate their own and each other’s work and to offer constructive advice on how to improve.

Overall, pupils had made variable progress from their prior levels of attainment. The majority of pupils attained national levels in listening, talking, reading and writing by the end of S2. Those pupils who had not attained national levels made good or very good progress in their coursework. In 2007, all pupils attained a General or Credit award at Standard Grade. The proportions of pupils attaining A-C grades at Intermediate 2 and Higher remained well below national averages and too many pupils failed to gain awards. New resources, the introduction of media study and more challenging activities for higher-achieving pupils were beginning to improve learners’ experiences, meet needs better and raise attainment. Pupils responded well to opportunities to use their language skills in other areas of the curriculum, for example reading for research and making presentations.

Mathematics

Overall, in mathematics, the quality of teaching, arrangements for meeting pupils’ learning needs and learners’ experiences were adequate. Performance had declined, overall.

Teachers gave clear explanations and generally sustained pupils’ motivation through well-paced lessons. They explained clearly to pupils what they were going to learn, and recapped main points well at the end of lessons. At times, they used ICT very well to enhance pupils’ learning, and used questioning techniques very effectively to assess pupils’ understanding and develop their reasoning skills. In a few lessons pupils enjoyed practical work or work in groups. This good practice needed to be more consistent across classes. Pupils were increasingly being helped to evaluate their own learning. Teachers did not monitor pupils’ progress rigorously enough or provide clear enough feedback on how to improve. They matched tasks well to pupils’ learning needs. Teachers and learning support specialists gave effective support to individual pupils to help them to improve their work. They also provided a range of tasks to meet the needs of all pupils within classes. A number of pupils benefited from entering and gaining success in national mathematics competitions.

Attainment by the end of S2 had dipped over the past two years. Less than half of pupils attained national levels in 2007. At S3/S4, pupils consistently performed less well in mathematics than in their other subjects. At S5/S6, the proportion of pupils presented at Higher level was broadly in line with the national average. The proportion attaining A-C grades was too variable. The proportion attaining A-C grades at Intermediate 2 level was below or well below the national average. Only around half of the small numbers presented at Intermediate 1 or Advanced Higher attained A-C grades.

Geography

Overall, in geography, the quality of teaching and learners’ experiences was good. Arrangements for meeting pupils’ needs were adequate. Performance had improved.

Teachers gave clear explanations and made very good use of questioning to check pupils’ knowledge and understanding. They shared the purpose of most lessons with pupils and provided them with helpful feedback and advice on how to improve. Teachers used ICT and audio visual materials appropriately. They planned activities to build on prior learning and adjusted some tasks to meet the needs of individual learners. Teachers were beginning to make good use of real life contexts in their teaching. Pupils responded enthusiastically to a brisk pace of learning, and when they had the opportunity to work together on research tasks and practical activities. Homework tasks which were carefully linked to coursework helped pupils to develop their skills in independent learning. Staff carefully linked fieldwork activities to develop pupils’ investigative skills and increase their understanding of coursework.

At S1/S2, pupils were making good progress in their coursework. They had good recall of prior learning and demonstrated a clear understanding of key geographical concepts. At S3/S4, performance was regularly above and well above the national average. In most years, at S5/S6, the proportion of pupils attaining A-C grades at Higher was above or in line with the national average. The number of pupils studying Intermediate 2 was low but all pupils had performed successfully.

Religious and moral education

Overall, in religious and moral education the quality of teaching and learners’ experiences was adequate. Arrangements for meeting pupils’ learning needs were weak. Performance had not improved.

Teachers used an appropriate range of approaches. These approaches included some effective use of ICT to motivate pupils and increase their knowledge and understanding of relevant religious and moral issues. Teachers communicated instructions clearly but they did not explain new ideas plainly enough to enable pupils to understand. Tasks and activities did not match pupils’ needs well, particularly those pupils with additional support needs. Across all stages, pupils were not aware of their progress in religious and moral education (RME) or how to improve their achievements. Feedback to pupils was not sufficiently focused on helping them to make progress in their learning. Teachers encouraged pupils to take responsibility for their own learning but this was not always effective. Most pupils were well behaved and attentive, and contributed to lessons by asking appropriate questions. They had well-planned opportunities to experience learning in contexts outside the classroom, which they found motivating.

The majority of pupils in S1 and S2 were making adequate progress with their coursework. Most pupils at S3/S4 were confident in expressing their opinions and were improving their knowledge and understanding of contemporary moral issues. Across all stages pupils were not developing sufficient knowledge of beliefs, values and traditions in the major world religions, including Christianity.

Achievement in national assessments, examinations and other areas

Information about the subjects inspected has been given earlier in the report. Across the school, particular features of pupils’ progress, results in examinations and other qualifications, including those awarded by the SQA within the Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework (SCQF)3 for the three year period 2005-2007, are included below.

Particular features of achievement in national assessments and other areas by the end of S2 included the following.

Particular features of achievement in examinations and other areas by the end of S4 included the following.

Particular features of achievement in examinations and other areas by the end of S6 included the following.

Across the school, pupils achieved in a range of experiences. Those pupils participating in the rural skills course grew a range of vegetables and developed their entrepreneurial skills by selling them to staff and the community. Most pupils had a good understanding about global citizenship through participation in activities such as a Fairtrade café and fashion show. Levels of pupil exclusions were low. The percentages of pupils leaving for higher education and employment were increasing.

4. How good is the environment for learning?

Aspect

Comment

Care, welfare and development

There were important weaknesses in the school’s approaches to pupils’ care, welfare and development. Teaching staff were vigilant to changes in pupils’ attitude and behaviour. Through close work with the associated primary schools pupils were well prepared socially for life in secondary school. Office staff operated efficient procedures to identify pupils whose attendance was a cause for concern. The "drop-zone" facility for pupils to discuss any problems and joint agency meetings enabled specialists to work effectively with the most vulnerable pupils. The school promoted healthy lifestyles for pupils well. School staff had made significant improvements to the lunchtime service and managed to increase uptake of meals. Pupils’ work experience logs demonstrated a good understanding of their developing skills for work. The school monitored pupils’ care, welfare and development through regular updates from class teachers. While pupils at S1 knew whom to approach if they had a problem, at other stages pastoral care procedures were not satisfactory. Too many pupils did not know who their pastoral teacher was and a significant number of pupils had not had contact with a pastoral teacher in the past year. Pastoral records were not maintained efficiently. A lack of clarity about the responsibilities of pastoral teachers and senior managers had resulted in confusion about who was responsible for some pupils. Not all pastoral teachers were using effective systems to record regular contacts with pupils and help them to reflect on their learning. The quality of support pupils received with important pastoral matters varied widely. As a result, the school’s approaches to supporting pupils were weak.

Management and use of resources and space for learning

The management and use of resources and space for learning were adequate overall. Particular features included the following.

  • The high quality displays at the entrance to the school and in the main corridor made visitors feel welcome and promoted pupils’ achievements.
  • Good use was made of the local environment including a new mountain bike course and the local environmental garden.
  • The library was a lively and stimulating learning environment.
  • Technology rooms offered very high quality accommodation for pupils.
  • Security arrangements were not sufficiently robust.
  • In a few areas, water ingress onto electrical equipment was causing health and safety concerns.
  • The school had too many outdated textbooks and too much of the equipment was in a poor state of repair.

Equalities, expectations and engagement

Most staff were motivated and gave willingly of their time to support a wide range of study support and school events. A few staff did not feel valued by the headteacher. The school had developed some effective strategies to celebrate pupils’ achievements. Across the school, pupils’ achievements were celebrated at year assemblies and through an electronic notice board. Most teachers used praise well to motivate pupils. Teachers’ expectations about pupils’ attendance, behaviour and effort varied widely. When teachers set high standards, pupils responded with high expectations of themselves. Target setting was not used effectively to help pupils raise their expectations. The school was beginning to record pupils’ wider achievements but this information was not used to help pupils to develop as individuals. The school worked with a range of partner agencies to ensure pupils at risk of missing out on education were treated equally and fairly. Fundraising activities, including Children in Need activities and the annual sponsored walk, developed teamwork and a sense of pride amongst pupils and staff. A few staff did not promote a strong sense of equality and fairness in their dealings with pupils. The school did not offer pupils sufficient opportunities for religious observance. The headteacher worked hard to promote the values of the school but he was not always effectively supported in this by all staff.

The school’s success in involving parents

The school was increasingly aware of the important role parents, carers and families could play in improving the school. The Parent Council both supported and challenged the headteacher and was active in improving aspects of the school. Events organised by the school were well attended. Parents had made suggestions for improvements through a committee looking at homework. Most parents were happy with the way their concerns were dealt with. Parents had significant concerns about the quality of education in some departments of the school. Just over a half of parents surveyed thought the school had a good reputation in the community. About a half would like clearer information about the school’s priorities for improving the education of pupils.

5. Leading and improving the school

Golspie High School lacked clear leadership and commitment by all staff to improving the quality of education for, and raising the achievement of all pupils. Pupils benefited from a good range of opportunities to excel in sporting, cultural and community activities. Most pupils were well behaved, confident and responsible in their actions. A few pupils showed little pride in the school. Pupils were keen to have a greater say in improving the school. Partnership agencies thought highly of the school and its commitment to pupils at risk of missing out on education. Not all staff worked with the senior management team to ensure the new management structures were successful in driving forward school improvements. Some pastoral staff still needed to develop the necessary skills to ensure the care and welfare of pupils. Overall, the school required significant support from the education authority in order to improve.

The headteacher was highly motivated and committed to the staff, pupils and parents of Golspie High School. Staff appreciated the fact that he consulted them and gave them plenty of time to implement developments. However, this resulted in a slow pace of change and improvement. The headteacher did not hold staff sufficiently accountable when improvements were taken forward too slowly. Senior management team (SMT) and extended board of studies meetings focused too much on routine business rather than strategic decisions which would lead to change. The depute headteachers had insufficient opportunity to take strategic responsibility for areas of the school’s work. Principal teachers supported their departments well but did not consistently challenge them to improve. The headteacher was committed to developing leadership capacity and building effective partnerships and there were several examples of effective partnership working. Almost all teachers were members of working groups. The remits of these groups needed to be clearer, and include specific and timed targets for action.

The school did not review its work and performance effectively. The measures taken to identify strengths, areas for improvement and strategies for change had had only limited impact on the quality of the school’s work. The headteacher and SMT were developing new approaches to self-evaluation. They reviewed attainment and had commissioned a survey of parents’ and pupils’ views on the quality of education. They did not visit lessons to evaluate the learning experiences of all pupils. There was inconsistency in the extent to which principal teachers reviewed the work of departments and supported the SMT in improving pupils’ experiences and achievement. Improvement planning was too complex and slow to impact. It needed to be more clearly linked to improvements in teaching and in the learning and achievements of all pupils.

As well as building on the strengths and addressing the issues raised throughout this report, the school and the education authority should address the following main points for action.

Main points for action

Continue to raise achievement by:

  • evaluating and improving the quality of teaching and pupils’ learning experiences at all stages;
  • monitoring arrangements for the care, welfare and development of pupils to ensure they are consistently applied and effective;
  • more rigorous monitoring and tracking of achievement to identify where improvements are needed; and
  • improving the effectiveness of leadership at all levels.

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. 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 a report to parents, within two years of the publication of this report, on the extent of improvement that has been achieved.

David Gregory
HM Inspector

10 June 2008

Appendix 1 Indicators of quality

The following quality indicators have been used in the inspection process to contribute to the evaluation of the overall effectiveness of the school in raising achievement for all pupils.

Section 3. How well does the school raise achievement for all?

The curriculum

good

Teaching for effective learning

adequate

Meeting learning needs

weak

Learners’ experiences

adequate

Improvements in performance: S1/S2

weak

Improvements in performance: S3/S4

adequate

Improvements in performance: S5/S6

adequate

Section 4. How good is the environment for learning?

Care, welfare and development

weak

Management and use of resources and space for learning

adequate

The engagement of staff in the life and work of the school

adequate

Expectations and promoting achievement

adequate

Equality and fairness

adequate

The school’s success in involving parents, carers and families

adequate

Section 5. Leading and improving the school

Developing people and partnerships

weak

Leadership of improvement and change (of the headteacher)

weak

Leadership of improvement and change (across the school)

weak

Improvement through self-evaluation

weak

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

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

Appendix 2 Summary of questionnaire responses

The following provides a summary of questionnaire responses. Key issues from the questionnaires have been considered in the inspection and comments are included as appropriate throughout the report.

What parents thought the school did well

What parents think the school could do better

Around a quarter of parents responded to the questionnaire. They were positive about a number of aspects of the work of the school.

In particular they thought that:

  • school reports gave helpful information about children’s progress;
  • their children were treated fairly and staff showed care and concern for all pupils;
  • staff made them welcome in the school; and
  • parents’ evenings were helpful and informative.
  • Around a third of parents thought their children did not find school work stimulating and challenging.
  • Just under a half of parents thought the school did not have a good reputation in the local community.
  • About a half of parents did not have a clear idea of the school’s priorities for improving the education of pupils.
  • Around a third of parents thought the school was not well led.

What pupils thought the school did well

What pupils think the school could do better

All pupils surveyed responded to the questionnaire. They were positive about most aspects of the school, and felt that:

  • teachers expected them to work to the best of their ability;
  • they felt safe and secure in the school; and
  • the school helped them to keep safe and healthy.
  • Around a fifth of pupils did not like being at the school.
  • About a fifth of pupils did not think that any teacher knew them well.
  • Just over a third of pupils thought teachers did not listen to what they said.
  • Just over a half of pupils felt they were treated fairly in the school.

What staff thought the school did well

What staff think the school could do better

  • Staff worked hard to maintain good relations with the local community.
  • Teachers provided constructive feedback to pupils on their work.
  • Teachers set high standards for pupils’ attainment.
  • Staff were caring towards pupils and there was mutual respect between staff and pupils.
  • Around a half of teachers and two thirds of support and auxiliary staff thought time for continuous professional development could be used more effectively.
  • Just over a half of teachers and two thirds of support and auxiliary staff thought that standards set for pupils’ behaviour were not consistently upheld in the school.
  • Just over two fifths of teachers and a third of support and auxiliary staff thought the school was not well led.

Appendix 3 Performance in Scottish Qualifications Authority (SQA) National Qualifications

This data is used alongside evaluations of teaching for effective learning, meeting learning needs, expectations and promoting achievement, and the overall quality of learners’ achievement, to inform the overall evaluation of improvements in performance.

Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework (SCQF) levels:
7: Advanced Higher at A-C/CSYS at A-C
6: Higher at A-C
5: Intermediate 2 at A-C; Standard Grade at 1-2
4: Intermediate 1 at A-C; Standard Grade at 3-4
3: Access 3 Cluster; Standard Grade at 5-6

Percentage of relevant S4 roll gaining awards by end of S4

2005

2006

2007

English and Mathematics @ Level 3

Golspie High School

93

96

94

Comparator schools4

95

94

94

National

90

91

92

5+ @ Level 3 or better

Golspie High School

96

93

98

Comparator schools

93

94

93

National

90

91

91

5+ @ Level 4 or better

Golspie High School

76

82

89

Comparator schools

78

78

77

National

76

77

76

5+ @ Level 5 or better

Golspie High School

27

34

18

Comparator schools

32

34

30

National

34

35

33

Percentage of relevant S4 roll gaining awards by end of S5

2005

2006

2007

5+ @ Level 4 or better

Golspie High School

92

79

85

Comparator schools4

80

82

79

National

78

78

79

5+ @ Level 5 or better

Golspie High School

50

44

45

Comparator schools

44

43

45

National

45

45

46

1+ @ Level 6 or better

Golspie High School

45

32

34

Comparator schools

38

37

37

National

39

38

39

3+ @ Level 6 or better

Golspie High School

27

23

18

Comparator schools

19

20

19

National

23

22

22

5+ @ Level 6 or better

Golspie High School

11

6

8

Comparator schools

8

7

7

National

10

10

10

Percentage of relevant S4 roll gaining awards by end of S6

2005

2006

2007

5+ @ Level 5 or better

Golspie High School

48

55

46

Comparator schools4

45

46

45

National

47

48

47

1+ @ Level 6 or better

Golspie High School

44

50

34

Comparator schools

41

42

41

National

43

43

42

3+ @ Level 6 or better

Golspie High School

25

34

32

Comparator schools

28

26

27

National

30

30

29

5+ @ Level 6 or better

Golspie High School

9

22

20

Comparator schools

18

17

16

National

19

20

19

1+ @ Level 7 or better

Golspie High School

1

14

7

Comparator schools

13

11

10

National

12

13

12

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 & 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, 1st Floor, Endeavour House, 1 Greenmarket, Dundee DD1 4QB or by telephoning 01382 576700. Copies are also available on our website at www.hmie.gov.uk.

HMIE Feedback and Complaints Procedure

Should you wish to comment on any aspect of secondary inspections, you should write in the first instance to Frank Crawford, HMCI, at HM Inspectorate of Education, Europa Building, 450 Argyle Street, Glasgow G2 8LG.

If you have a concern about this report, you should write in the first instance to our Complaints Manager, HMIE Business Management and Communications Team, Second Floor, Denholm House, Almondvale Business Park, Almondvale Way, Livingston, EH54 6GA. You can also email 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 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 2008

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. See Appendix 2
  2. Throughout this report, the term ‘parents’ should be taken to include foster carers, residential care staff and carers who are relatives or friends.
  3. Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework (SCQF) levels:
    7: Advanced Higher at A-C/CSYS at A-C
    6: Higher at A-C
    5: Intermediate 2 at A-C; Standard Grade at 1-2
    4: Intermediate 1 at A-C; Standard Grade at 3-4
    3: Access 3 cluster; Standard Grade at 5-6
  4. Comparator schools are the 20 schools statistically closest to the school being inspected in terms of the five socio-economic characteristics of the school population and surrounding areas.