Gairloch High School
The Highland Council

15 January 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 Attainment in Scottish Qualifications Authority (SQA) National Qualifications
How can you contact us?

1. Background

Gairloch High School was inspected in September 2007 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 also analysed pupils’ attainment in national examinations (see Appendix 3), the school’s processes for self-evaluation and innovation, and its overall effectiveness and capacity for improvement. Inspectors focused particularly on English, mathematics, modern languages, music and the provision for Gaelic. 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 the pupil council, and staff. Members of the inspection team also met representatives of the Parent Council and the school chaplain.

Gairloch High School is a non-denominational school serving Gairloch and the surrounding rural area. At the time of the inspection, the roll was 194. The percentage of pupils entitled to free school meals was in line with the national average. Pupils’ attendance was well above the national average.

2. Key strengths

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 effectiveness of the school in promoting the learning and personal development of all pupils in lessons and in other, broader contexts. They also considered the standards attained in specific aspects of learning.

Curriculum

The quality of the curriculum was good. At all stages the school provided an appropriate range of subjects for most pupils. It had yet to take sufficient innovative steps to address all pupils’ needs, for example through more flexible timetable arrangements, or increased choices including practical, skills-based programmes. Particular features of the curriculum included the following.

• A residential week at Nethy Bridge for pupils in S1 provided an important opportunity to promote a range of important skills, such as personal confidence and working in teams.
• The timetable at S1/S2 was too fragmented. Pupils had too many different teacher contacts each week. In some areas, staff had not collaborated sufficiently to improve the coherence of experiences for pupils.
• Programmes in most subjects did not build sufficiently on pupils’ learning activities at primary school.
• The school successfully promoted pupils’ skills in ICT and understanding of health, enterprise and citizenship through a number of subjects and out of class activities.
• The curriculum at S3/S4 was sufficiently flexible to enable pupils to study more than one modern language, and up to three sciences. Choices in the arts and in more practical, skills-based programmes were limited.
• Effective timetabling had enabled a very successful programme of outdoor education and fitness to be provided for senior pupils. This enabled some pupils to gain the Community Sports Leadership Awards.
• The school had enabled individual senior pupils to pursue specialised interests. This included the use of distance learning from a variety of providers, and a parent member of the community supporting the teaching of psychology.
• Curricular and vocational guidance was very effective. School guidance and Careers Scotland staff provided knowledgeable advice to assist pupils with applications for work and further education.
• A well developed work experience programme effectively developed pupils’ skills for work by giving them opportunities to apply for and record their work experience.
• Insufficient time was allocated to physical education at the middle and upper stages and to religious and moral education at all stages.

Teaching and meeting pupils’ needs

Teaching was good overall. Teachers explained work clearly and made good use of questioning and praise. Lessons were well focused and most pupils had a clear understanding of what they were expected to do. Teachers maintained appropriately high expectations of pupils’ behaviour. ICT was used effectively in many lessons to support teaching and to enrich learning, and in a few cases practice was outstanding. Teachers in a few lessons did not provide effective feedback to challenge pupils, for example through questioning or by commenting sufficiently on how they might improve their work. Homework was used inconsistently across the school. In a number of subjects, teachers’ approaches provided insufficient opportunities for pupils to work together. From S3 onwards, very small classes sometimes resulted in an over-reliance on individualised activities. The school had sought to implement Assessment is for Learning (AifL) strategies to help teachers improve learning and teaching. As yet, implementation was inconsistent and impact insufficient.

The school’s arrangements for meeting pupils’ needs had important strengths with some areas requiring improvement. A particular strength was the quality of provision for pupils with additional support needs. Teachers and support assistants were caring and effective in supporting pupils pastorally and in guiding them to make good progress in learning. Staff used effective mechanisms for identifying and meeting the needs of pupils who required additional support with their learning. Pupils were assisted by support staff in mainstream classes and through well-targeted group programmes. Effective systems were in place to set and review targets for pupils requiring individualised educational programmes (IEPs), resulting in good progress for pupils. Teachers were given helpful information and training about the needs of specific pupils, such as those with autism spectrum disorders. Staff across the school had recognised the need to improve the way they met the needs of pupils with a range of abilities. They had yet to take effective steps to bring about consistent improvement, particularly at S1/S2. As a result, a minority of lessons provided insufficient challenge to stretch able pupils and insufficient scope for other pupils to consolidate their learning. The role of support for learning staff in classes was not yet appropriately developed through effective joint planning with class teachers. The school received information about pupils’ prior attainment from primary schools. In most cases, staff did not use this information effectively to plan learning pathways or to evaluate pupils’ progress during S1-S2. Further work was needed to broaden the range of skills based, practical programmes for pupils whose needs were not met through largely academic programmes.

Learning and personal development

Overall, the quality of learning was adequate. Across the school, pupils were co-operative and well-behaved, and for the most part they engaged well in the tasks set. Pupils’ learning experiences varied too much in quality across the school. Too many tasks lacked pace and challenge. In a few subjects the emphasis on creativity, real life situations and independent learning strongly motivated and enthused pupils. In such lessons, pupils were clear about what they would learn in active and engaging tasks, often using ICT. Staff aimed to give pupils better information about what they had done well and what they needed to do to improve. This had yet to make an impact on pupils’ progress in learning, particularly in S1 and S2. Arrangements for classes or individual pupils to use the school library were not working well. As a result, opportunities to enhance learning experiences and promote a range of learning skills were being missed, and in some cases individual teachers were organising library areas in their own rooms.

Pupils’ personal and social development was very good. Pupils were very courteous, friendly and helpful. Senior pupils accepted a variety of duties very responsibly and the school had supported them by providing relevant and well-timed training for specific roles. At all stages, pupils had opportunities to engage in activities that helped them develop as confident individuals and responsible citizens, for example through a wide range of charitable activities. From S3 to S6, many pupils took part in the Duke of Edinburgh’s Award Scheme, and senior pupils had also been able to gain Community Sports Leader qualifications. Enterprise activity and competitions in sports and the arts helped pupils develop skills in team-working, problem-solving and calculated risk-taking. These activities also helped develop appropriate values about participation and contribution. Senior pupils had organised end-of-term activities for others, such as a very popular Christmas Quiz and a Fashion Show. The school had created a wide range of activities to promote active lifestyles, which included a range of sport and fitness programmes. A team of S1/S2 pupils had won a national award from Friends of the Earth for its work on environmental and conservation issues. The school had its own wind turbine which was further developing pupils’ awareness of renewable resources. The personal and social education (PSE) programme covered appropriate topics from S1 to S6. Pupils were developing positive attitudes and citizenship skills through regular opportunities to be actively involved in their learning in PSE. The structure of the course provided flexibility so that activities could respond to topical issues. The delivery of the programme through PSE lessons was not yet monitored sufficiently closely to ensure that the quality of pupils’ experiences in PSE lessons was consistently high.

English

Teachers shared the content of lessons effectively with pupils. They used ICT and other media to help pupils develop critical thinking skills. Teaching ensured all learners took increasing responsibility for and an active part in learning. Tasks generally matched pupils’ needs, but pupils needed more frequent advice on what they could do to improve their learning at S1/S2. Through their study of well-chosen texts, including Scottish writing, pupils developed confidence in expressing their own views about local and national issues.

Overall, the quality of teaching, learning, meeting needs, and attainment was good. Particular features included the following.

• At S1/S2, the majority of pupils attained appropriate national levels in reading, writing, talking and listening.
• At S3/S4 the proportion of pupils gaining Grades 1-2 at Standard Grade was above the national average.
• At S5/S6 the proportion of pupils gaining Grades A-B at Higher had improved significantly. The majority of pupils entered gained an award at A-C. At Intermediate 2 the proportion of pupils gaining an award at A-B was well below the national average, but at A-C was in line with the national average. Less than half of pupils presented for Intermediate 1 gained an award at A-C, but at Advanced Higher most pupils gained an award at A-C.

Mathematics

Teachers worked hard to make lessons relevant to pupils and used homework well. They gave helpful explanations to individual pupils. Teachers effectively explained more basic concepts and how to do routine calculations. In some classes, ICT was used to enhance the quality of teaching and learning. Pupils worked well in class, but did not have sufficient opportunities to think for themselves or work together. Teachers did not always explain to pupils what they were expected to learn and did not consistently use questioning effectively. In several lessons the pace of learning was too slow.

Overall, the quality of teaching and meeting pupils' needs was adequate. The quality of learning was weak. Attainment was adequate. Particular features included the following.

• At S1/S2, the majority of pupils gained appropriate national levels.
• By the end of S4, the proportion of pupils gaining Credit awards had increased and was well above the national average. Pupils in S3/S4 performed less well in mathematics than in their other subjects, although there were signs of recent improvement.
• At S5/S6, results at Intermediate 2 were consistently above national averages. Too many pupils presented at Higher did not gain A-C awards.
• By the end of S6, most pupils presented at Advanced Higher gained A-C awards.

Modern languages

Teachers used praise effectively and interacted well with pupils. Lessons included an appropriate variety of activities and teachers made good use of ICT to motivate pupils and enrich their learning experience. Pupils were well supported in their learning but some French lessons provided insufficient pace and challenge. In German, pupils had begun to develop extended language skills in relevant contexts. Teachers had scope to give all pupils more opportunities to develop these skills through collaborative tasks.

Overall, the quality of teaching, learning and meeting needs was good. Attainment was good. Particular features included the following.

• At S1/S2, pupils coped well with coursework, but pupils had not yet developed extended listening, talking and reading skills.
• At S4, almost all of the pupils presented for Standard Grade French gained an award at Grades 1-4. In German all pupils presented gained Grades 1-2. These proportions were above and well above the national averages respectively. All of the pupils presented for Access 3 French attained an award.
• At S5/6, the proportion of pupils attaining an A-C award was well above the national average in both French and German. Almost all pupils gained an award in German, and all did in French. All pupils presented for Intermediate 2 and Advanced Higher French attained an A-C award.

Gaelic

Staff used a wide range of activities to promote and actively engage pupils in learning. At all stages teachers used effective questions to develop pupils’ understanding. Lesson aims were shared with pupils and reinforced throughout lessons. A positive atmosphere existed in all classes and pupils were motivated to produce their best work. Pupils were given opportunities to work collaboratively in pairs, and in small and large groups. ICT was used very effectively to support learning and stimulate pupils.

Overall, the quality of teaching and learning was very good, and meeting needs was good. Attainment was very good. Particular features included the following.

• A very successful community project for S1 Gàidhlig pupils developed pupils’ ICT skills and, along with their iPod project, increased fluency and developed independent research skills.
• At all stages, Gaelic Learners were developing sound skills in Gaelic language, building on their talking, listening, reading and writing. Pupils in S4 were making very good progress towards Standard Grade. All pupils at Higher attained awards at A-C. At Advanced Higher, skills in literary criticism and independent research were being developed well.
• Standards in Gàidhlig were very high, with pupils at all stages attaining appropriate national levels including at Standard Grade in S4. Pupils at Higher were further developing skills in literary criticism and independent research.

Music

Lessons were well focused. Teaching was supportive, and explanations and instructions were clear. Pupils' needs were very well met from S3 where they made choices and specialised, but the lack of choice of instrument at S1/S2 constrained progress for some in performing. ICT was used very effectively, particularly to support inventing. Most pupils were well motivated and they engaged well in learning, but needed more opportunities for multi-instrumental class and group performance.

Overall, the quality of teaching was very good. The quality of learning and meeting pupils' needs was good. Attainment was good. Particular features included the following.

• At S1/S2, pupils were introduced to an appropriate range of skills but progress in performing was limited by the structure of the course.
• At S3/S4, the proportion of Credit awards at Standard Grade was above the national average, and all pupils entered gained an award at grades 1-4. All pupils entered for individual units attained a pass.
• At S5/S6, presentations at Higher were broadly in line with the national average and all pupils attained awards at A-C.
• At Intermediate 2 and Advanced Higher, all pupils entered had gained an award at A-C.

Attainment

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 Scottish Qualifications Authority (SQA) within the Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework (SCQF)³ for the three year period 2005-2007, are included below.

By the end of S2 attainment was adequate. Particular features included the following.

• In all subjects, pupils made progress in coursework but in most the standards being attained were not sufficiently clear or evaluated effectively. In general, attainment was not raised sufficiently during S1/S2. The school had yet to ensure that learning built effectively on the standards pupils had attained at primary school. The majority of pupils attained appropriate national levels in listening, talking, reading, writing, and mathematics.

By the end of S4 attainment was good. Particular features included the following.

• The proportion of pupils attaining English and mathematics at SCQF level 3 was consistently above the national average. The proportion attaining five or more awards at SCQF level 3 was above the national average. At levels 4 and 5 the proportions were consistently well above the national averages.
• The proportions of pupils who gained a Credit award at Standard Grade were well above the national averages in art and design, biology, chemistry, German and graphic communication. Pupils’ results in art and design, chemistry, and graphic communication were better than in their other subjects.

By the end of S6 attainment was good. Particular features included the following.

• The proportions of pupils attaining five or more awards at SCQF levels 3, 4 or 5 were well above the national averages.
• The proportions of pupils attaining one or more, three or more or five awards at SCQF level 6 were well above the national averages.
• At Higher, the proportions of pupils attaining awards at A-C were well above the national averages in art and design, chemistry, graphic communication, and physics
• At Higher, the proportion of pupils attaining awards at A-C was below the national average in computing. It had been well below the national average in geography but had recently improved significantly. In biology, a significant number of candidates did not gain an award at A-C.

4. How good is the environment for learning?

5. Leading and improving the school

The school successfully raised achievement for all pupils. It ensured that they could gain the qualifications they needed to progress beyond school. Increasingly, the school was providing stimulating opportunities for pupils to develop personal skills and attributes, such as confidence and enterprise. Staff were continuing to take steps to recognise these important aspects of achievement. The school was now well placed to be more ambitious and innovative for its pupils to ensure that their learning skills and vocational experiences equipped them well for the future.

Leadership across the school was good. The headteacher’s strategy to empower staff at all levels to lead in their own areas was beginning to show encouraging results in some areas. Teachers had the scope to develop their own ideas within a context which increasingly expected them to be accountable for improvement. This approach to developing leadership at all levels was sound, and it was stimulating some exciting, innovative practice from a few teachers. For example, leadership of support for learning was exemplary. The impact on learning of faculty principal teachers was more varied. The school’s senior management team now needed to manage this group of leaders more effectively, and to orchestrate innovations in learning in a more coherent way to improve pupils’ experiences across the school. The headteacher provided good leadership. In his two years in post, he had established a climate of professional respect and trust with staff. He was highly regarded by them and more widely by the community served by the school. He had demonstrated sound judgement in fostering the strengths of the school and the way it served its community. The headteacher had a clear vision for increasing the effectiveness of the school. He had focused on meeting the needs of all learners more effectively, through improved choices and better learning and teaching. He had started to implement this vision through a focus on aspects of achievement. He had not yet shared this vision clearly with all staff and the whole school community. As a result, they were not yet fully engaged in his strategy to make the school excellent.

Self-evaluation was adequate. The school’s quality assurance procedures ensured that staff knew how well the school was doing in general terms, for example in its successful pursuit of qualifications for pupils. The school had some effective approaches to find out how parents and pupils felt about the school. Staff reviewed examination results and, occasionally, lessons were visited by members of the senior management team to evaluate the quality of learning in action. Plans for improvement were linked to the findings of these evaluations. These approaches were helpful, but they lacked the rigour to make a significant impact on quality to bring about improvement. In particular, the way middle managers implemented the procedures was too inconsistent. The headteacher had not yet engaged directly enough in the quality assurance process at all levels. He had not shared his expectations clearly to ensure that planned improvements, such as AifL, were implemented effectively. To improve learning and achievement and develop a momentum of continuous improvement, the school now needed to use more systematic approaches to self-evaluation with all staff, learners and their parents. Overall, the school had the capacity to improve.

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.

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

Graham Norris
HM Inspector

15 January 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 promoting learning and achievement for all pupils.

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

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.

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

Percentage of relevant S4 roll attaining by end of S4

Percentage of relevant S4 roll attaining by end of S5

Percentage of relevant S4 roll attaining by end of S6

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, 1^st 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 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 Unit, 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. Pre Appeal