24 June 2003
1. Introduction
2. The school
3. How well are pupils performing?
4. How good is the curriculum?
5. How good is learning and teaching?
6. How well are pupils supported?
7. How well is the school managed?
8. How well does the school perform
overall?
Key strengths
Main points for action
Appendix
Indicators of quality
Quality of lessons observed
How can you contact us?
Mosstowie Primary School was inspected in March 2003 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 how well pupils were performing, the effectiveness of the school and how well the school was managed.
HM Inspectors evaluated learning, teaching and attainment, examined pupils’ work and interviewed staff and pupils. They assessed the school’s processes for self-evaluation and development planning. There was a particular focus on attainment in English language, mathematics, and technology within environmental studies.
Members of the inspection team analysed responses to
questionnaires issued to all parents, and to samples of staff and pupils. Members of the inspection team also met the vice chairperson of the School Board and a group of parents.
The school serves a rural area around Miltonduff, south-west of Elgin. At the time of the inspection the roll was 69.
Parents’ views
Parents who responded to the questionnaire were generally very pleased with the work of the school.
Almost all responded positively, or very positively, to most questions about the quality of the school’s provision. A minority were unclear about the school’s priorities for improving the pupils’ education.
Ethos
The school was very welcoming. Pupils were proud of their school and enjoyed being there. They were friendly and courteous and behaved very well. They related very well to staff and had good opportunities to air their views about the school. Staff morale was high. Pupils were treated fairly and equally, and showed caring attitudes towards others. Teachers used praise effectively to motivate pupils. The school strongly promoted pupils’ achievement and celebrated their successes. Older pupils had responsibilities as house captains, and pupils were awarded house points for effort, sportsmanship and citizenship. Weekly assemblies provided good opportunities for religious observance. Pupils’ attendance at school was above national levels.
School and community
The school had established very good links with parents, the local playgroup and other schools, the local authority and the wider community.
Notable features included:
Accommodation
The overall quality of accommodation was good. The building was very well maintained. Classrooms were bright and attractive and adequate in size. Staff accommodation was good. Storage facilities had been considerably improved, although they were still limited. Outdoor play areas were extensive and attractive.
Staffing and resources
The school was very well staffed. Specialist teachers of home economics and expressive arts visited the school for all or part of the session. Auxiliary and support staff made strong contributions to the work of the school. The provision of resources was good overall, with very good provision of computers. Additional materials were required for practical work in technology. Resources were very well organised and well used to support pupils’ learning. The use of information and communications technology (ICT) had still to be fully developed. Accommodation was used imaginatively. A computer room was being set up for the teaching of skills in ICT. The headteacher managed the school’s devolved budget very well, targeting funds appropriately on improvements to the curriculum.
English language
The overall quality of attainment in English language was good. Recent improvements in attainment were most evident at the early and middle stages. Most pupils performed well in their coursework, although some of it was not sufficiently challenging. Pupils listened well and talked with confidence, and at the upper stages they discussed topical issues objectively. Progress in developing reading skills was good. At the middle and upper stages, most pupils showed good skills in reading for information. Progress in writing was more limited. Although pupils wrote for a variety of purposes, they did not always structure their writing well enough. Almost all pupils at the early stages, and most at the middle and upper stages were attaining appropriate national levels in listening, talking and reading. Most at the early and middle stages, and a majority at the upper stages, were attaining these levels in writing.
Mathematics
The quality of attainment in mathematics was fair. Most pupils performed well in their coursework, although it was not always appropriately matched to their learning needs. Pupils collected information and interpreted graphs well, but lacked skills in using computers to handle data. Standards in mental calculation were good, but pupils at the upper stages often had difficulty with fractions, decimals and measurements. Pupils’ knowledge of shapes, angles and compass directions was too often insecure. Almost all pupils at the early stages, most at the middle stages, and the majority at the upper stages, were achieving appropriate national levels in information handling, number, money and measurement, and shape, position and movement. The proportion of pupils attaining these levels had improved significantly in recent years. In problem solving and enquiry pupils were not yet tackling problems systematically enough.
Technology
The overall quality of attainment in technology was fair. The programme did not enable pupils to make steady progress in their learning. Pupils at the middle stages showed good knowledge about recycling materials and ways of saving energy in the home. In model-making activities, pupils showed some skill in selecting appropriate materials. By the upper stages they could use a limited range of tools well, and solve some practical problems. However, pupils’ awareness of design principles was too limited.
The curriculum was suitably broad and included opportunities for pupils at P5 to P7 to study German. Most aspects had good overall structures, although their detailed content was often less clear. Various aspects of the curriculum were being improved. The overall quality of the curriculum was good.
English language
The programme for English language was good overall. It gave good attention to knowledge about language, including the use of grammar and punctuation, and to developing skills in listening, talking and reading. The use of a new approach to developing writing skills was beginning to improve attainment. More guidance for staff was required to ensure that all pupils made appropriate progress in writing.
Mathematics
The programme for mathematics was good overall. It enabled pupils to develop their skills systematically, although course materials were not always used selectively enough to meet pupils’ varying needs. Mental calculation received good emphasis. A more systematic approach to teaching problem solving skills had recently been introduced. Pupils had too few opportunities to use computers for handling data.
Technology
The programme for technology was fair. While it included some good practical activities, it was too disjointed to enable pupils to build steadily on their prior learning. It gave too little emphasis to the design process and to encouraging creativity.
Environmental studies
The programme for environmental studies was fair overall. Much of the work covered in social subjects and science was of good quality, although some was not sufficiently well matched to pupils’ stage of development. The weakest aspect was technology.
Standards of teaching were good overall, and often very good. Pupils responded very well in their learning, although weaknesses in assessment meant that their individual needs were not always well met.
Features of learning and teaching were as follows.
Care and welfare
Staff looked after pupils very well and were very alert to their physical, social and emotional needs. They were well aware of the school’s procedures for ensuring pupils’ welfare. However, the school’s anti-bullying and child protection policies required review as they did not sufficiently address possible situations that could arise.
Personal and social development
The school made very good provision for pupils’ personal and social development. Pupils participated in a wide range of well-organised extra-curricular activities, including sporting and other competitions. They were encouraged to be good citizens, to take on leadership roles, and to be considerate and tolerant towards others. Older ones had benefited from the teamwork involved in a business enterprise project. All key aspects of health education were covered, with useful input from outside agencies.
Support for learning
The overall quality of support for pupils’ learning was good. Class teachers and auxiliary staff supported pupils very well. The support for learning teacher was absent at the time of the inspection and her duties were being covered temporarily by the headteacher’s relief teacher. Individualised and group educational plans had been prepared for pupils experiencing significant learning difficulties. They included helpful advice for staff and parents and clear short-term targets for the pupils concerned. However, pupils’ success in achieving these targets was not being recorded clearly enough.
The school provided strong support for pupils with Records of Needs. Close liaison took place with external support services to meet pupils’ needs and review their progress. In the absence of specialist occupational therapy, the school staff made good efforts to provide what support they could. Most of the school’s support procedures were very effective. However, individualised educational plans did not indicate long-term targets for the pupils, or show their progress clearly against short-term targets.
Overall management and leadership
The headteacher provided good leadership. She made a very strong personal contribution to the ethos of the school and to pupils’ personal and social development. She had ensured very good management of resources and had initiated improvements to the curriculum. Teamwork was good and staff had been actively involved in self-evaluation. The headteacher now needed to provide better direction on teachers’ planning, and obtain a clearer view of classroom practice.
The school’s aims were appropriate and well used in development planning. Staff were fully involved in school decision-making. The school had a broad range of written policies, but some were dated or did not reflect classroom practice.
Staff review and development
Provision for staff review and development was very good. Staff had benefited from a variety of staff development activities which were carefully matched to their duties in the school and to the school development plan. The authority’s scheme for reviewing the work of staff had been implemented very well.
Planning for improvement
Planning for improvement was fair overall. The audit section of the school development plan covered only a limited range of aspects of the school’s provision. Reasons for the choice of development projects were not clearly explained. While some appropriate priorities had been chosen, others, such as the need to improve assessment, had been given too little attention. The school’s priorities for improvement were not communicated well enough to parents. Action plans were well structured but often lacked detail on implementation strategies and timescales. Although the outcomes of development projects varied in quality, some curricular developments had resulted in clear improvements to pupils’ learning experiences.
Approaches to improving quality
Procedures for self-evaluation were fair overall. Staff used national quality indicators well to help evaluate various aspects of the school’s provision. The headteacher regularly checked teachers’ plans, although these still lacked useful information about pupils’ activities. She taught her colleagues’ classes for one day each session and informally at other times. This gave her useful insight into pupils’ attainment, but only limited information about the quality of learning and teaching. The headteacher carefully recorded pupils’ performance in National Tests in reading, writing and mathematics and set pupils long-term targets for future testing. Some important weaknesses in record-keeping, however, made it difficult for her to monitor pupils’ progress. The school’s own report on standards and quality provided too little evaluation of the school’s strengths and development needs.
Overall the school provided a good standard of education. The school’s ethos was very good and pupils’ were actively encouraged to achieve success in a wide range of pursuits. Very strong links had been established with parents and the community. The overall quality of attainment in English language and mathematics had shown some improvement in recent years. Some pupils, however, were capable of achieving higher standards. Further improvements to the curriculum and assessment were required to ensure that this happens.
The school and education authority should act on the following recommendations.
HM Inspectors have asked the school and education authority 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. In liaison with the education authority, HM Inspectors will monitor progress to ensure improvements in line with the main findings of the report. They will arrange for further progress reports and visits to the school if necessary and will inform parents and carers of the outcomes of these when they occur.
Dr T Straiton
HM Inspector
on behalf of HM Chief Inspector
Northern Division
24 June 2003
See Quality Indicator data below.
Appendix
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
HMI also evaluated the quality of the lessons observed. The overall quality of lessons was very good in 40% of cases and good in 60%. There were no fair or unsatisfactory lessons.
Copies of this report have been sent to the headteacher and school staff, the Director of Educational Services, 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 web site: www.hmie.gov.uk
Should you wish to comment on or make a complaint about any aspect of the inspection or about this report, you should write in the first instance to Bill Maxwell, HMCI at HM Inspectorate of Education, Wellgate House (Level 5), The Wellgate, Dundee, DD1 2DB. A copy of our complaints procedure is available from that office and on our website.
If you are still dissatisfied, you can contact the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman directly or through your member of the Scottish Parliament. The Scottish Public Services Ombudsman is fully independent and has powers to investigate complaints about Government Departments and Agencies. She will not normally consider your complaint before the HMIE complaints procedure has been used. Instead, she will usually ask you to give us the chance to put matters right if we can.
Complaints to the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman must be submitted within 12 months of the date of publication of this report.
The Ombudsman can be contacted at:
Professor Alice Brown
The Scottish Public Services Ombudsman
23 Walker Street
Edinburgh
EH3 7HX
Telephone number: 0870 011 5378
e-mail: enquiries@scottishombudsman.org.uk
More information about the Ombudsman’s office can be obtained from the website: www.ombudsmanscotland.org.uk
Crown Copyright 2003
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.