Our Lady’s RC 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

Our Lady’s RC 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 a group of parents¹.

The school serves the Hilltown area of Dundee. At the time of the inspection the roll was 121, including 20 children in a resourced location which catered for pupils with a wide range of needs and disabilities. At the time of the inspection a new headteacher had taken up post a few weeks earlier. 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 all parents, P4 to P7 pupils, and to all staff. Information about the responses to the questionnaires appears in Appendix 2.

Less than one fifth of the parents responded to the pre-inspection questionnaire. Parents who responded to the pre-inspection questionnaire were very positive about the work of the school. They felt their children enjoyed being at school and that teachers set high standards for attainment. All who responded to the questionnaire thought that the school was good at consulting them on decisions which affected their children. Almost all pupils enjoyed being at school. They felt that teachers were good at telling them how they were getting on with their work and letting them know how they could improve their learning. Around two thirds felt that the behaviour of other pupils was good. Teaching and auxiliary staff were very positive about almost all aspects of the work of the school.

4. How good are learning, teaching and achievement?

Pupils’ learning experiences and achievements

The quality of the curriculum within the whole school was good overall. It was generally well balanced, although in the resourced location too much time was spent on numeracy and literacy work. The new headteacher had recognised the need to review the programme for English language to ensure that there was continuity and progression in the development of pupils’ skills, knowledge and understanding. Teachers provided good opportunities for pupils from P1 to P4 to learn through play. All staff took good account of enterprise activities and citizenship to develop pupils’ skills in these aspects. Visiting specialist teachers and visitors to the school helped pupils to develop a range of important skills through provision of activities in, for example, drama, fitness and dance. The overall quality of teaching was good. Teachers effectively explained to pupils what they were to learn and gave clear explanations and instructions. Teaching was frequently very interactive with teachers questioning effectively to engage pupils in discussion and to probe their understanding. Almost all staff made good use of praise to encourage pupils and to recognise good work. Homework was clearly linked to classwork and was promptly marked and returned to pupils with suggestions on how they could improve their performance. Information and communications technology (ICT) was used well to enhance teaching in all curricular areas.

Pupils’ learning experiences were good overall. In almost all lessons, pupils concentrated well and enjoyed their learning. They were well behaved and showed respect for their teachers and for each other. Some pupils in the resourced location were capable of more challenging work. At P1 to P3, pupils were developing good early literacy and numeracy skills and worked well together in collaborative play. At P4 pupils showed enthusiasm for their lessons and worked well without direct teacher supervision. P5 pupils interacted well with pupils from the resourced location when considering the dangers arising from smoking. Pupils worked well in group writing activities at P6 and P7. On a few occasions, the pace of lessons was not always sufficiently brisk and follow-up activities were not consistently stimulating or challenging.

The school took good steps to help pupils develop their wider achievements. Almost all pupils were making good progress in developing confidence and self-esteem. Pupils were successfully encouraged to contribute to the wider life of the school. The recently re-established pupil council had already had a positive impact. It had requested mirrors in the toilets and had been involved in selecting new kits for the school football team. Pupils in the mainstream classes were effective in supporting pupils from the resourced location and took responsibility for acting as monitors in the dining hall, playground and around the school. Pupils had developed a good understanding of healthy lifestyles and the school had achieved a Bronze Award as a Health Promoting School. Younger pupils received fresh fruit on a daily basis. Many pupils successfully benefited from taking part in a wide range of sporting activities including football, netball and hockey. At all stages pupils were encouraged to show care and concern for others through raising funds for charities.

English language

The overall quality of attainment in English language was good. Most pupils at P1 to P5 and a majority at P6 and P7 were achieving appropriate national levels of attainment. Pupils who were not attaining national levels were making good progress in their coursework. In recent years, attainment levels in reading had shown some improvement. However, attainment in writing had not markedly improved. The school was unable to provide consistent evidence of pupils’ attainment in listening and talking. At all stages, pupils listened attentively and were confident when reporting back to their class. Pupils at P1 to P4 were developing understanding of a variety of writing styles including letter writing. They had good opportunities to use ICT in language work. P5 pupils had included clear and helpful writing instructions in a technology project. In P6, pupils had successfully developed their creative writing skills through working with a visiting author. Pupils at the early stages read fluently and with expression. P4 to P6 pupils spoke enthusiastically about books they had read. Pupils at P7 were able to read unfamiliar texts well, and talk about their favourite authors and the genre of reading they preferred. Expectations for the standards of handwriting and presentation were not high enough across the school. Pupils in the resource location with individualised education programmes (IEPs) were making appropriate progress.

Mathematics

The overall quality of pupils’ attainment in mathematics was good. Standards of attainment had improved in recent years at the early stages, but had remained fairly constant at the upper stages. Pupils in the resourced location were making appropriate progress. Most pupils at P1 to P5 and a majority at P6 and P7 were achieving appropriate national levels of attainment. Whilst most pupils coped well with their coursework, some were capable of tackling more challenging tasks and working at a brisker pace. Across the school, pupils had sound knowledge of the properties of shape, position and movement. By P7, most pupils could confidently interpret information from a range of graphs and charts. However, a minority were not confident in using databases and spreadsheets on computers. Pupils in P1 to P3 were making a very good start to their early number work and showed enthusiasm for their learning. At the middle stages, most pupils were progressing well through their appropriately challenging coursework. A minority of pupils at the upper stages were not confident when making conversions between fractions, decimals and percentages. Although all pupils tackled straightforward tasks in problem solving and enquiry, a minority lacked a sufficient range of strategies to deal with more complex problems.

5. How well are pupils’ learning needs met?

The school’s approaches to meeting pupils’ needs were good. Teachers took account of prior learning when planning work for groups and individuals. Most pupils performed well in tasks set by teachers. However, there was a lack of challenge for a small number of more able pupils. Learning support teachers, including the English as an additional language (EAL) teacher, interacted very well with pupils but their deployment was not always effective. They assessed pupils’ needs and planned carefully to meet these needs but did not consult sufficiently with class teachers. IEPs did not set out short and long term targets for pupils’ learning clearly or in sufficient detail. There were good arrangements in place for the transition from primary to secondary school. A wide range of agencies including educational psychology, social work and a speech and language therapist worked in partnership with school staff to address pupils’ needs. Staff had insufficient time for consultation and planning with each other or visiting specialists.

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.

The headteacher and staff provided a caring, inclusive and supportive learning environment. Pupils were happy, motivated and very well behaved. They had frequent opportunities to take part in a range of worthwhile activities which broadened and enriched their educational experiences. There was some good and very good teaching in the school. Pupils’ attainment in English language and mathematics was good overall. There was scope to further improve pupils’ attainment by providing them with greater challenge and improving the pace of lessons.

The headteacher had been in post for a short period at the time of the inspection. Since taking up post, she had quickly and accurately evaluated the school’s strengths and development needs. She demonstrated extensive leadership qualities, and had used her very good inter-personal skills to gain the respect of teachers, parents and pupils and to build upon the strong teamwork already in place. The depute headteacher was hard working and strongly committed to the school. She provided the headteacher with very good support. The newly appointed principal teacher in the resourced location required further support to develop his skills and expertise in his new role. He was now working closely with the headteacher to develop the curriculum to meet the needs of all pupils within the resourced location. The senior management team had established a range of formal and informal approaches to monitoring the work of the school. This included visits to classes, monitoring teachers’ plans, sampling pupils’ work and use of questionnaires. However, over recent years areas for improvement, including gaps in the curriculum in the resourced location, deficiencies in the information contained within IEPs and arrangements for the effective integration of pupils into mainstream classes had not been clearly identified.

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.

David M Martin
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 contact our Complaints Manager by telephoning 01506 600258/9 or write to 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 the HMIE Feedback and Complaints Procedure leaflet is available from this office by telephoning the above telephone number 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.