11 January 2005
1. Background
2. Key strengths
3. What are the views of parents and
carers, pupils and staff?
4. How good are learning, teaching,
attainment and achievement?
5. How well are pupils supported?
6. How good is the environment for
learning?
7. Improving the school
Appendix 1 Indicators of quality
Appendix 2 Summary of questionnaire
responses
Appendix 3 Attainment in Scottish
Qualifications Authority (SQA) National Qualifications
How can you contact us?
Lossiemouth High School was inspected in September 2004. Subjects included in the inspection were English, mathematics, chemistry and S1/S2 science, and geography. The school is a non-denominational secondary school which serves the town of Lossiemouth and the surrounding area, including the smaller communities of Burghead, Duffus and Hopeman. At the time of the inspection the roll was 753. The percentage of pupils entitled to free school meals was well below the national average. Pupils’ attendance was in line with the national average.
The headteacher and a depute headteacher had been absent from work for an extended period of time. The education authority had responded by appointing a headteacher and a depute headteacher from within Moray Council to work jointly and take over the task of leading the school.
HM Inspectors identified the following key strengths.
The majority of parents and carers who completed the questionnaire were pleased overall with the school. Almost all of them felt welcome in the school and found parents’ evenings helpful. Whilst they were happy with the way their children were treated by staff, a considerable number expressed concerns about pupil indiscipline and staff absence. Only around half felt that the school was well led and had a good reputation locally. Pupils were positive about the majority of aspects of the school. Almost all felt they got on well with other pupils, and that teachers expected them to work hard. The majority, however, did not think that pupils’ behaviour was good, and some thought that poorly-behaved pupils were unjustly rewarded. Some were unhappy about the condition of the toilets. Staff were positive about most aspects of the school. Many felt well involved in decision-making and that their training time was well used. However, a large majority felt that pupil indiscipline was not being dealt with consistently or effectively. Many teachers expressed concerns about the effectiveness of teamwork amongst senior managers, and some had concerns about leadership. Some teachers felt that these more negative aspects had recently begun to improve.
Further details about what most pleased parents and carers, pupils and staff, and what they would most like to see improved, can be found in Appendix 2 of this report.
In evaluating the overall quality of learning, teaching, achievement and attainment, HM Inspectors observed aspects of learning and teaching in the inspected departments and more widely across the school. They also reviewed the extent to which the structure of the curriculum addressed pupils’ needs, and analysed pupils’ performance in examinations (see Appendix 3).
The curriculum, learning and teaching
The overall quality of the curriculum was good. The curriculum for S1/S2 was broad and well balanced. The timetabling of some subjects on a rota basis had successfully reduced the number of different teachers that pupils met in the course of a week. This ensured greater continuity in pupils’ learning. At S1, pupils’ skills were systematically developed by a well-planned course in information and communications technology (ICT). Too few subjects developed these skills at later stages. The organisation of classes by ability was helping to improve the pace of learning in mathematics. However, staff overall did not take enough account of pupils’ prior learning in primary school in all areas of the curriculum. At S3/S4, all pupils followed appropriately broad programmes comprising eight Standard Grade courses or equivalent. Alternative courses at Intermediate or Access 3 levels, provided in some subjects, were helping to improve the motivation and attainment of specific groups of pupils. At S5/S6, the curriculum provided a wide choice of courses to meet pupils’ needs and enabled them to progress effectively in their learning from S4. At S5, almost all pupils studied a combination of five subjects at Intermediate or Higher levels. Advanced Higher courses were offered in several subjects at S6. However, there was no provision for core physical education at S5, or for personal and social education at S6.
Standards of teaching and the quality of pupils’ learning were variable, but good overall. In most cases, teachers’ planning and delivery of lessons ensured that pupils were well motivated and appropriately focused on their work. Teachers gave clear instructions and explanations, but did not share systematically enough with pupils the key knowledge and skills they expected them to learn. Their interactions with pupils were generally good, and sometimes of high quality. In the best lessons, teachers used open-ended questions very effectively to check understanding, and set high expectations of pupils’ answers. In some lessons in art and design, drama, music and personal and social education (PSE), pupils responded well to good opportunities to think for themselves and collaborate in groups. In some other subjects, the range of teaching approaches used was too limited to develop pupils’ independent learning skills. Some teachers gave too little homework, especially in S1/S2, and insufficient feedback to pupils about their work. Pupils were well supported during lessons by subject teachers and by well-targeted and positive support from learning support staff. However, there were some important weaknesses in meeting the full range of pupils’ needs at S1 to S4, and particularly at S1/S2. In some lessons, the pace of learning was too slow, especially for high-achieving pupils.
Attainment and achievement
The overall quality of attainment at S1/S2 was fair. The majority of S2 pupils were reaching appropriate national levels of attainment in reading and mathematics, and the proportions doing so had recently improved. Fewer than half of pupils reached these levels in writing, where performance had declined again after a period of improvement. Some departments were taking good account of previous levels of attainment to ensure appropriate challenge. Overall, however, pupils at S1/S2 were making insufficient progress in their learning.
The overall quality of attainment at S3/S4 was fair. The proportions of pupils gaining five or more awards at General level or better had been above national averages but had recently decreased. The proportion of pupils gaining five or more awards at Credit level was below the national average, and pupils’ performance at Credit was notably poorer than in other schools with similar characteristics. The proportion gaining Credit awards had been decreasing, although there had been some improvement in 2004. More than half of the departments in the school were performing below or well below national averages at Credit level.
The overall quality of attainment at S5/S6 was fair. Performance was generally in line with national averages. The proportion of pupils gaining A-C grades at Higher was below national averages at S5, although this improved at S6. Pupils made good progress overall in their classwork in S5/S6, and a third of subjects in 2004 were performing above or well above national averages in terms of A-C grades at Higher. However, pupils’ overall performance at Higher in S5/S6 was notably poorer than in other schools with similar characteristics. At Intermediate 2 and Advanced Higher levels, the majority of pupils gained A-C grades.
Information on the subjects inspected is given later in the report. Significant features of attainment in the subjects not inspected were as follows.
Many pupils participated actively in the wide range of extra-curricular activities on offer. In sports, pupils had won local and national competitions in football, hockey, judo and swimming. They had achieved notable successes in chess, and in music and art festivals and competitions. Many had participated in a bi-annual musical show, and broadened their horizons through trips to various destinations in the UK and abroad. Some pupils were participating successfully in the Duke of Edinburgh Award Scheme. A few pupils with additional support needs had won bronze and silver awards in a nationally-accredited scheme which included the development of their personal and social skills. Senior pupils were very positive about the opportunities provided by the school. Many were developing a sense of responsibility, for example, by supporting younger pupils and through involvement in successful enterprise activities and fundraising for charity. Across the stages, pupils’ skills of decision-making and independence in learning were insufficiently developed.
English language
Learning and teaching
The quality of teaching varied too much between lessons. Interactions between pupils and teachers were generally positive. Teachers explained tasks clearly and pupils mostly worked conscientiously. Too little emphasis was given to direct teaching and searching questioning of pupils. Teachers did not consistently ensure that coursework was appropriately stimulating and challenging. Pupils had too few opportunities to work collaboratively and take responsibility for their learning. Assessment information was not used systematically enough in planning pupils’ learning and monitoring their progress, particularly in writing. At S5/S6, effective arrangements had been introduced to improve feedback to pupils on their progress. Overall, however, teachers provided too little feedback to pupils on how to improve their work. These weaknesses in planning and assessment meant that pupils’ varying needs were not sufficiently well met.
Attainment and achievement
By the end of S2, the majority of pupils achieved the appropriate national levels of attainment in reading. Less than half achieved these levels in writing. There was no reliable information on pupils’ attainment in listening and talking. In Standard Grade at S4, the proportion of pupils achieving Credit awards had declined and was well below the national average. In Higher at S5/S6, the proportion of pupils achieving A-C grades had declined and was well below the national average. In Intermediate 2 at S5, the proportion of pupils achieving A-C grades was consistently well below the national average. At this level, pupils performed notably less well in English than in their other subjects and made less progress than expected from their performance at Standard Grade. The majority of those presented at Intermediate 1 achieved A-C grades. In Advanced Higher, the majority of the small number presented achieved A-C grades. At all stages, there were important weaknesses in pupils’ attainment in writing.
Mathematics
Learning and teaching
Teachers explained ideas and concepts clearly. They supported pupils well and questioned them regularly to check their knowledge. There were some examples of very good interactive teaching which fully engaged pupils in their learning. However, in most lessons, teachers did not check pupils’ understanding well enough or promote independent thinking. Pupils worked well on the tasks set, but these tasks were often not well matched to their abilities and prior knowledge. As a result, pupils’ progress in some lessons was slow and this sometimes reduced their motivation. Teachers set homework and assessed pupils’ progress regularly, but did not give clear feedback to pupils on their strengths and on how they could improve. They did not use ICT often enough to enhance learning and teaching.
Attainment and achievement
Just over half of S2 pupils were reaching appropriate national levels of attainment. At Standard Grade, the proportion of pupils gaining awards at General level or better was below national averages overall. The proportion of pupils gaining awards at Credit level had been below the national average and declining, although attainment had recently improved. The majority of the small number of pupils presented for Intermediate 1 gained A-C grades. Performance at Intermediate 2 was below national averages overall. The proportion of pupils presented for Higher, and their performance, were generally below the national average. Too many pupils were failing to gain A-C grades. Around half of the small number of pupils presented for Advanced Higher in recent years had achieved A-C grades.
Other features of pupils’ attainment and achievement included the following.
Chemistry and S1/S2 science
Learning and teaching
Some chemistry classes were being taken by non-specialist supply teachers due to the absence of the principal teacher. This affected the quality of some pupils’ learning. Specialist teachers generally interacted well with pupils and provided clear instructions and explanations. In some chemistry classes, the quality of teaching was outstanding. In these classes, the teacher’s expectations of pupils’ responses were consistently high, with very effective use of praise and humour to encourage pupils. Pupils’ motivation in other lessons was good. Most pupils were well focused on their work and worked steadily. Pupils cooperated well during practical work, but they had too few opportunities to make decisions and learn independently, particularly at S1/S2. At these stages, teaching approaches were insufficiently varied to take account of pupils’ differing learning needs. Homework was given regularly in chemistry but too infrequently in S1/S2 science. Some teachers provided too little feedback to pupils on their work generally.
Attainment and achievement
In S1/S2 science, most pupils were achieving good standards in their coursework. However, able pupils were not consistently challenged. In recent years pupils had performed notably better in Standard Grade chemistry than in their other subjects. The proportion achieving Credit awards had been above the national average. In Higher chemistry, the proportion of pupils achieving A-C grades was below the national average at S5, but in line with the national average when S6 pupils were included. Most pupils taking Intermediate 2 and Advanced Higher chemistry had achieved A-C grades.
Geography
Learning and teaching
Teachers used a wide variety of approaches very effectively to motivate pupils and ensure their progress. They gave clear explanations and instructions and used questions skilfully. They were increasingly using ICT and fieldwork activities very effectively to improve the quality of pupils’ learning. Most lessons were conducted at a brisk pace. Pupils worked hard and responded well, especially when given responsibility for aspects of their own learning. Homework was well integrated into courses. Teachers used appropriate resources and supported individual pupils well. However, tasks were not sufficiently adjusted to provide appropriate levels of challenge for all pupils, particularly at S1 to S4. The department took too little account of pupils’ prior learning in primary school. At all stages, teachers gave insufficient written feedback to pupils on how to improve their attainment.
Attainment and achievement
At S1/S2, most pupils were making good progress in their coursework, although some were insufficiently challenged. The proportion of pupils studying Standard Grade geography at S3/S4 was above the national average. The proportion achieving Credit awards was in line with the national average but had declined in recent years. At S5/S6, the number of pupils studying Higher geography was well below the national average. However, the proportions of pupils who achieved A-C grades and A or B grades at Higher were generally above the national average. At Intermediate 2 level, almost all candidates had achieved A-C grades.
Other features of pupils’ attainment and achievement included the following.
Arrangements for the pastoral care and welfare of pupils were very good. The school had sound procedures for child protection and placed strong emphasis on ensuring pupils’ personal safety. Appropriate procedures were in place to deal with any instances of bullying. The school actively promoted healthy lifestyles through a planned programme of relevant activities and had started a breakfast club for pupils. It had achieved the Scotland’s Health at Work bronze award for health promotion. Guidance staff knew their pupils well and responded promptly and positively to pupils’ concerns and requests for advice. The team was very well supported by a number of other staff with responsibilities for supporting pupils, including a home-school link worker, and a wide range of external support agencies.
Pupils benefited from the school’s provision for personal and social development. The programme for PSE gave appropriate emphasis to healthy living, positive relationships, substance abuse and careers education. Pupils engaged enthusiastically in discussions in PSE, showing consideration for the views of others. They had good opportunities to discuss important issues related to equality, disability and aspects of mental health. The school made effective use of outside speakers, including workshops on financial management for senior pupils. The PSE programme, despite its strengths, did not yet ensure the steady development of pupils’ skills, and made insufficient provision for pupils at S6. Many pupils benefited from active participation in a wide range of inter-house and extra-curricular activities provided by staff. Enterprise activities and other activities at S5/S6 developed team-building and other skills. Fund-raising for charity involved pupils in active citizenship. Senior pupils benefited from prefect duties and other responsibilities, including working with younger pupils.
The school had a well-planned programme to support pupils transferring from primary schools. At key transition stages pupils and parents were given very helpful advice, information and extensive support on course choices and future pathways. The involvement of the careers service, and productive links with colleges, universities, employers and the armed services, contributed effectively to giving pupils very good vocational guidance. Pupils were encouraged to use the up-to-date careers library and computer-based sources of reference to make informed career decisions. Most pupils at S4 and some at S5 participated in the school’s good work experience programme, with some pupils arranging their own placements. Guidance staff were just beginning to develop a system for monitoring and tracking pupils’ progress, course choices, career plans and individual targets.
Two temporarily-appointed principal teachers shared responsibility for the management of learning support. Learning support staff fulfilled some of their roles effectively. In the learning support base, they provided well-planned support for individuals and groups of pupils experiencing difficulty with their learning. They also worked with teachers in classes to provide well-targeted support for a small number of pupils. There were a few examples of joint work with subject teachers in the development of the curriculum to meet pupils’ needs. The overall aims of learning support were unclear, however, and the quality of impact of learning support had not been sufficiently evaluated. Learning support staff had not worked closely enough with subject departments to build an ethos of teamwork in supporting pupils with additional support needs. Subject teachers were not sufficiently involved in supporting pupils with individualised educational programmes (IEPs), including consultation about their targets. Pupils with Records of Needs received regular reviews of their progress. Most were making good progress towards the English and mathematics targets set for them within their IEPs. Overall, the quality of learning support was fair.
Led by a depute headteacher, staff involved in pupil support had developed some effective links between learning support, guidance and external agencies. Support for pupils with social, emotional and behavioural difficulties was at an early stage of development. The school had not yet developed the role of behaviour support to ensure a coordinated approach to meeting the needs of these pupils.
Quality of accommodation and facilities
The overall quality of accommodation was fair. The building was of sound construction and well maintained. Strengths included a pleasant and well-organised library, a new multi-purpose hall, some very good drama facilities and well-appointed guidance offices. The school had access to very good sports facilities in the adjoining community building. However, there were also a number of important weaknesses. Indoor social areas for pupils were inadequate. The rising school roll meant that some teachers were having to use classrooms unsuited to their subject. The small size of classrooms in a number of subjects restricted pupils’ movement and the use of audiovisual and ICT equipment. Access by subjects to ICT facilities was often difficult, although some improvements were taking place. Some pupil toilets were unhygienic and had been vandalised.
Ethos
The school had a welcoming atmosphere. Staff as a whole showed a strong commitment to the pupils. Most teachers related positively to their pupils, and most pupils responded by behaving well. A small minority of pupils presented challenging behaviour and disrupted learning in some classes. Staff morale had suffered as a result, but had begun to improve following changes introduced by the acting headteachers. Staff had begun to review the school’s policy on promoting positive behaviour. This review needed to ensure more consistent approaches to discipline by staff at all levels. The school was beginning to take greater account of pupils’ views by establishing a pupil council. Most teachers used praise effectively to encourage pupils, but teachers’ expectations of pupils’ work-rate and attainment were too variable. The setting of targets for pupils to improve their attainment was at an early stage of development. The school had still to develop a culture of achievement, including the celebration of pupils’ successes. Equality and inclusion were actively promoted. However, strategies adopted for dealing with a few disruptive pupils had not been effective. The school was improving its arrangements for religious observance in line with national advice.
Partnership with parents and the community
The school had established good links with parents and carers, the School Board and wider community. The very active Lossiemouth High School Association organised fund-raising events and provided very good support to many aspects of the school’s work. A high proportion of parents attended school events and activities involving the pupils. The school provided parents with helpful information about their children’s progress through regular reports and parents’ evenings. Reports at S1/S2, however, included too little information and gave insufficient advice on how pupils could improve their work. Regular newsletters, a comprehensive prospectus and course choice booklets provided further information about the school. However, these publications were not attractively presented, and the school generally did not do enough to publicise the many successes of its pupils. The School Board was not proactive enough in communicating with parents about its own work or the work of the school. The school had a wide range of very effective links with community organisations, employers and external agencies to support pupils, enrich their learning and extend their achievements.
There were some important weaknesses in the quality of education provided by Lossiemouth High School. Many pupils achieved high levels of success in a wide range of extra-curricular activities provided by staff. However, pupils’ overall attainment in schoolwork was fair at all stages and examination results were below those in comparable schools. Some learning and teaching was very good, but considerable variation existed in quality and in teachers’ expectations of pupils. The needs of a small number of pupils with social, emotional and behavioural difficulties had not been effectively addressed. This had become a focus for staff concerns and had diverted their attention away from key issues related to learning and teaching. Staff absences and shortages of accommodation in some departments, coupled with concerns about leadership, had further reduced morale and presented additional difficulties for the school.
The education authority had made suitable interim arrangements until the situation regarding the possible return of the absent headteacher had been resolved. It had responded appropriately by appointing another headteacher and a depute headteacher to take over the task of leading the school. Staff remained uncertain, however, about the longer-term situation regarding leadership. The education authority had engaged with the school during the period leading up to the absence of the headteacher and depute, but had not sufficiently addressed the difficulties in the school. Working together, the two acting headteachers had shown strong leadership in beginning to take the school forward. They had skilfully identified the school’s strengths and development needs, including the need to improve attainment. Consultation of staff and approaches to tackling indiscipline were beginning to be improved. The senior management team (SMT) included two experienced depute headteachers. Each made important contributions to the work of the school, including some aspects of quality assurance. However, they had not provided sufficient strategic direction in some of their areas of responsibility. A third depute, only recently appointed in an acting capacity, had made a good start to fulfilling his remit. Staff found the SMT approachable and generally supportive. Teamwork within the SMT had not been strong but was beginning to improve. Leadership shown by principal teachers was variable. Some had not addressed 5-14 developments and quality assurance with sufficient rigour. The absent headteacher and depute had taken some useful steps towards developing school self-evaluation and improving the school, but these initiatives had not been driven forward effectively. There were insufficient strategies in place at both school and departmental level to monitor the quality of learning and teaching and pupils’ progress. Too little account had been taken of the views of parents, pupils and staff. Overall, leadership had been fair and considerable work lay ahead to improve the school.
The school and education authority, in liaison with HM Inspectors, should take action to ensure improvement in:
What happens next?
The school and the education authority have been asked to prepare an action plan indicating how they will address the main findings of the report, and to share that plan with parents and carers. HM Inspectors will engage with the school and the education authority to monitor progress. They will publish an interim report on progress within one year of publication of this report. Thereafter HM Inspectors will continue to engage with the school and the education authority in monitoring progress, and will undertake a follow-through inspection. This will result in another report to parents and carers, within two years of the publication of this report, on the extent of improvement that had been achieved.
Dr Tom Straiton
HM Inspector
11 January 2005
We judged the following to be very good
We judged the following to be good
We judged the following to be fair
We judged the following to be unsatisfactory
|
What pleased parents and carers most |
What parents and carers would like to see improved |
|
Almost all felt that:
|
Around half felt that improvement was needed in:
|
|
What pleased pupils most |
What pupils would like to see improved |
|
Almost all felt that:
|
Nearly half felt that improvement was needed in:
A large majority felt that improvement was needed in:
|
|
What pleased staff most |
What staff would like to see improved |
|
All, or almost all, teaching and support staff felt that:
|
Almost all teachers, and most support staff, felt that improvement was needed in:
Most teachers, and the majority of support staff felt that:
The majority of teachers, and a minority of support staff, felt that improvement was needed in:
|
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 achieving by end of S4
|
|
2002 |
2003 |
20041 |
|
|
English and Mathematics |
Lossiemouth High |
97 |
89 |
91 |
|
@ Level 3 |
Comparator Schools2 |
96 |
95 |
95 |
|
National |
91 |
91 |
91 |
|
|
5+ @ Level 3 or Better |
Lossiemouth High |
98 |
91 |
91 |
|
Comparator Schools |
94 |
95 |
95 |
|
|
National |
91 |
91 |
91 |
|
|
5+ @ Level 4 or Better |
Lossiemouth High |
94 |
79 |
79 |
|
Comparator Schools |
84 |
84 |
84 |
|
|
National |
77 |
76 |
76 |
|
|
5+ @ Level 5 or Better |
Lossiemouth High |
29 |
24 |
28 |
|
Comparator Schools |
39 |
42 |
41 |
|
|
National |
34 |
34 |
34 |
Percentage of relevant S4 roll achieving by end of S5
|
|
2002 |
2003 |
20041 |
|
|
5+ @ Level 4 or better |
Lossiemouth High |
86 |
94 |
79 |
|
Comparator schools2 |
86 |
87 |
85 |
|
|
National |
78 |
78 |
78 |
|
|
5+ @ Level 5 or better |
Lossiemouth High |
45 |
45 |
34 |
|
Comparator schools |
53 |
50 |
51 |
|
|
National |
45 |
45 |
45 |
|
|
1+ @ Level 6 or better |
Lossiemouth High |
38 |
37 |
26 |
|
Comparator schools |
45 |
42 |
45 |
|
|
National |
39 |
39 |
38 |
|
|
3+ @ Level 6 or better |
Lossiemouth High |
19 |
16 |
14 |
|
Comparator schools |
25 |
27 |
26 |
|
|
National |
23 |
23 |
22 |
|
|
5+ @ Level 6 or better |
Lossiemouth High |
6 |
3 |
3 |
|
Comparator schools |
10 |
10 |
11 |
|
|
National |
9 |
10 |
9 |
Percentage of relevant S4 roll achieving by end of S6
|
|
2002 |
2003 |
20041 |
|
|
5+ @ Level 5 or better |
Lossiemouth High |
46 |
48 |
49 |
|
Comparator schools2 |
54 |
54 |
51 |
|
|
National |
46 |
47 |
47 |
|
|
1+ @ Level 6 or better |
Lossiemouth High |
41 |
43 |
43 |
|
Comparator schools |
52 |
50 |
47 |
|
|
National |
44 |
44 |
43 |
|
|
3+ @ Level 6 or better |
Lossiemouth High |
30 |
30 |
26 |
|
Comparator schools |
39 |
36 |
36 |
|
|
National |
31 |
31 |
30 |
|
|
5+ @ Level 6 or better |
Lossiemouth High |
18 |
19 |
15 |
|
Comparator schools |
24 |
22 |
24 |
|
|
National |
20 |
20 |
19 |
|
|
1+ @ Level 7 or better |
Lossiemouth High |
10 |
12 |
10 |
|
Comparator schools |
16 |
14 |
15 |
|
|
National |
12 |
12 |
12 |
1 Pre Appeal.
2 Comparator schools are the fifteen schools immediately above and the fifteen schools immediately below the school being inspected in terms of the percentage of pupils entitled to free meals (FME).
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 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 website at www.hmie.gov.uk.
If you wish to comment about secondary inspections
Should you wish to comment on any aspect of secondary inspections, you should write in the first instance to Dr Bill Maxwell, HMCI, at HM Inspectorate of Education, Room 14, Stadium House, Alderstone Road, Livingston EH54 7DN.
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, T1 Spur, Saughton House, Broomhouse Drive, Edinburgh EH11 3XD. A copy of our complaints procedure is available from this office or by telephoning 0131 244 8468 or from our website at www.hmie.gov.uk.
If you are not satisfied with the action we have taken at the end of our complaints procedure, you can raise your complaint with the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman. The Scottish Public Services Ombudsman is fully independent and has powers to investigate complaints about Government departments and agencies. You should write to The Scottish Public Services Ombudsman, 4-6 Melville Street, Edinburgh EH3 7NS. You can also telephone 0870 011 5378 or e-mail enquiries@scottishombudsman.org.uk. More information about the Ombudsman’s office can be obtained from the website: www.scottishombudsman.org.uk .
Crown Copyright 2005
HM Inspectorate of Education
This report may be reproduced in whole or in part, except for commercial purposes or in connection with a prospectus or advertisement, provided that the source and date thereof are stated.