Fintry Primary School
Dundee City Council

1 May 2007

Contents

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

1. Background

Fintry Primary School was inspected in January 2007 as part of a national sample of primary education. The inspection covered key aspects of the work of the school at all stages. It evaluated pupils’ achievements, the effectiveness of the school, the environment for learning, the school’s processes for self-evaluation and innovation, and its capacity for improvement. There was a particular focus on attainment in English language and mathematics.

HM Inspectors examined pupils’ work and interviewed groups of pupils, including the pupil council, and staff. Members of the inspection team also met representatives of the parent-teacher association (PTA) and a group of parents¹. There was no School Board.

The school serves the area of Fintry, in the north of Dundee. At the time of the inspection the roll was 363, including 24 pupils in the language unit. The proportion of pupils who were entitled to free school meals was well above the national average. Pupils’ attendance was below the national average.

2. Key strengths

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

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

Parents, pupils and staff were positive about almost all aspects of the school. Parents felt that staff made them feel welcome in the school and that all staff showed genuine concern for their children. They thought that the headteacher provided strong leadership and they were pleased with the recent improvements they had seen in the school. A majority of parents stated that the accommodation was in a poor state of repair and were concerned about the timescale for the proposed move to a new building. Pupils also expressed concern regarding the condition of the school building. They enjoyed being at school but a significant minority felt that pupils were not always dealt with fairly. A few wanted more regular homework and more challenging work in class. All staff enjoyed working in the school and thought that the school was well led by the headteacher and deputes.

4. How good are learning, teaching and achievement?

Pupils’ learning experiences and achievements

The school provided pupils with a broad and balanced curriculum which helped them to develop a range of effective skills. Additional time given to English language and mathematics had been used most recently with the intention of raising pupils’ attainment. Staff were working to improve aspects of the curriculum, particularly in reading, writing and personal and social education, to improve pupils’ knowledge, understanding and development of skills. Staff did not integrate information and communications technology (ICT) sufficiently into the curriculum. The overall quality of teaching was good. Interactions between teachers and pupils were positive. In most classes, teachers questioned pupils effectively to challenge and extend their learning. They listened to pupils’ responses and actively promoted and valued their contributions to class lessons and discussions. They shared the purpose of lessons, explained ideas well and provided clear instructions. However, this good practice was not consistent throughout the school.

Most pupils were well behaved, conscientious and remained on tasks set for them. However, they were too often asked to undertake work which did not require them to think enough about their learning, particularly in the middle stages, where activities were not sufficiently challenging or stimulating. In too many English language and mathematics lessons, pupils were passive learners and did not have enough opportunity for active learning or collaborative work. Across the school the pace of learning was frequently too slow. Pupils spent considerable time completing low level, undemanding tasks and were often unclear about what to do next.

The school took good steps to help pupils develop their wider achievements. Pupils had worked with staff and parents to raise funds for charitable organisations, including a very successful event for the British Heart Foundation. Enterprise activities at each stage were beginning to help pupils develop skills in teamwork. Older pupils helped look after younger pupils and played their part as monitors conscientiously. Pupils in P5 had designed and made stained glass panels with the help of a specialist artist, highlighting school values including trust and caring for others. The school held a successful end of term assembly where each pupil was rewarded for their personal achievement in a range of areas. Staff encouraged pupils to become aware of the need for healthy eating and exercise through an effective programme and related activities. There was a wide range of well-attended out of school activities organised and led by staff.

English language

The overall quality of attainment in English language was weak. Over the last three years, standards of attainment in reading and writing had fluctuated. More recently, there had been a notable improvement. At the early stages, most pupils reached appropriate national levels of attainment in reading and writing earlier than might normally be expected. However, this good early progress was not sustained and by P7 only a majority of pupils achieved expected levels. Pupils listened to and responded well to their peers and to adults but were not sufficiently skilled in group discussion. Most read fluently and talked enthusiastically about books they had read. By P7, the majority of pupils read regularly for their own enjoyment. However, they were unable to comment with confidence on how writers achieved their effects. Pupils’ attainment in writing was weak. In the middle and upper stages, pupils were not given sufficient opportunities to write at length. Standards in spelling, handwriting and presentation of written work were inconsistent.

Mathematics

The overall quality of pupils’ attainment in mathematics was weak. Levels of attainment had shown some improvement from a very low level two years ago. At the early stages, almost all pupils reached appropriate national levels of attainment. At P4 to P7 only a majority were achieving these levels. For too many pupils, including pupils with additional support needs, the pace of progress was slow. Most pupils could interpret bar graphs and charts but pupils needed more regular opportunities to gather and present information graphically and use computers to organise and display information. Most pupils were able to give accurate change in activities involving money. However, at the upper stages, a majority were not yet fully confident in working with fractions, decimals and percentages. Pupils had a basic knowledge of two- and three-dimensional shapes, but a significant minority did not have a firm understanding of the properties of shapes. Throughout the school, a positive start had been made to developing pupils’ problem-solving and enquiry skills. However, pupils needed to develop their skills further in selecting, discussing and applying a range of problem-solving strategies and setting down solutions in a clear and logical fashion.

5. How well are pupils’ learning needs met?

There were a number of important weaknesses in the arrangements for meeting pupils’ learning needs. Staff did not make effective use of assessment information to identify and plan next steps in pupils’ learning. In a number of classes there was an over-reliance on learning materials that were not sufficiently challenging and did not take full account of the range of pupils’ needs. Pupils working with support for learning staff were not making sufficient progress in areas identified as weaknesses. The school had introduced individualised educational programmes (IEPs) for a small number of pupils with additional support needs. The IEPs contained appropriate learning targets and these were shared with parents. The targets were not used sufficiently by class teachers. Learning assistants had good relationships with the pupils and provided valuable support during lessons. The school had effective arrangements to support pupils at points of transfer from the nursery class into P1. Strong links with Braeview Academy included good opportunities for staff from the secondary school to work with P7 pupils. For example, pupils studied the development of books on an extended project working with secondary school staff.

Staff in the language unit provided a high standard of care and support for pupils with autism spectrum disorders and other speech, language or communication difficulties. The caring and committed depute headteacher and staff took full account of the social, emotional, physical and educational needs of the pupils. Pupils were making very good progress and staff ensured that the achievement of all pupils in the unit was recognised and celebrated. They provided pupils with well-judged support in the unit classes and across the school. They ensured that pupils were involved in the wider work of the school including, for example, representation on the school’s pupil council. Staff made effective use of the wider community to further progress pupils’ learning. Support staff and teachers worked well as a team to enable pupils to develop socially and to become more independent.

6. How good is the environment for learning?

7. Leading and improving the school

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

In the two years prior to the inspection, the school had experienced significant staffing difficulties. This had adversely affected relationships within the school, staff morale and the partnership between parents and the school. The headteacher and staff had worked well together to improve the climate within the school and create effective relationships and an appropriate context for learning. As a consequence of this work, the curriculum had been developed and pupils’ attainment had shown signs of recent improvement. The school was well placed to improve but there was a need for staff to address weaknesses in pupils’ learning experiences and in the quality of attainment.

The headteacher provided good leadership. She was highly committed to the school and the local community and had successfully led staff and pupils during a difficult period. She had developed a supportive climate and had given a clear lead in taking forward appropriate priorities for improvement. Her open and consultative management style had gained her the loyalty and respect of staff and parents. She consulted with staff and parents on the school’s priorities, and encouraged staff involvement in curriculum development tasks. The headteacher was supported well by a team of three depute headteachers. They carried out their remits effectively, had made improvements to the curriculum and had led initiatives with considerable professional expertise. The headteacher and staff had developed good procedures for monitoring the work of the school, using national performance indicators. They tracked pupils’ attainment, regularly evaluated and discussed the quality of learning and teaching and consulted with parents and pupils about initiatives. They were beginning to monitor more systematically the rate of pupils’ progress towards learning targets.

What happens next?

The school and the education authority have been asked to prepare an action plan indicating how they will address the main findings of the report, and to share that plan with parents. Within two years of the publication of this report parents will be informed about the progress made by the school.

Peter Carpenter
HM Inspector

1 May 2007

Appendix 1 Indicators of quality

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

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

Appendix 2 Summary of questionnaire responses

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

How can you contact us?

If you would like an additional copy of this report

Copies of this report have been sent to the headteacher and school staff, the Director of Education, 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 www.hmie.gov.uk.

HMIE Feedback and Complaints Procedure

If you wish to comment about primary inspections

Should you wish to comment on any aspect of primary inspections, you should write in the first instance to Chris McIlroy, Acting HMCI, at HM Inspectorate of Education, Denholm House, Almondvale Business Park, Almondvale Way, Livingston EH54 6GA.

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 e-mail 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 SPSO, Freepost EH641, Edinburgh EH3 0BR. You can also telephone 0800 377 7330 (fax 0800 377 7331) or e-mail: ask@spso.org.uk. More information about the Ombudsman’s office can be obtained from the website: www.spso.org.uk.

Crown Copyright 2007

HM Inspectorate of Education

This report may be reproduced in whole or in part, except for commercial purposes or in connection with a prospectus or advertisement, provided that the source and date thereof are stated.

Footnotes

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