2 October 2007
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?
Duns Primary School and nursery class were inspected in June 2007 as part of a national sample of primary and nursery education. The inspection covered key aspects of the work of the school at all stages. It evaluated nursery children's and 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 the quality of the children's experience in the nursery, pupils' work and interviewed groups of pupils, including the pupil council, and staff. Members of the inspection team also met the chairperson of the School Board, representatives of the parent-teacher association (PTA) and a group of parents1.
The inspection team also evaluated aspects of the school's progress in implementing national recommendations related to improving aspects of school meals provision.
The school serves the town of Duns and the surrounding area. At the time of the inspection the roll was 396, including 60 children in the nursery class. The proportion of pupils who were entitled to free school meals was well below the national average. Pupils' attendance was in line with the national average.
At the time of the inspection, the school’s headteacher was on a period of secondment. One of the two depute headteachers had served as an acting headteacher from January to March 2007. A depute headteacher, seconded from another primary school, had been in post as acting headteacher for six weeks.
HM Inspectors identified the following key strengths.
|
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.
Parents were very positive about most aspects of the school’s work. All thought the school had a good reputation in the community. Almost all reported that their child was treated fairly in school and that staff made them feel welcome. Nursery parents commented on the positive and welcoming atmosphere in the nursery class. About a third of parents in the primary felt that school buildings were not kept in good order. Most pupils were very positive about the school. All thought that the school helped them to keep themselves safe and healthy. They reported they enjoyed being at school and that teachers expected them to work as hard as they could. A few commented positively on opportunities to take part in a wide range of activities. Almost all teachers were very positive in their responses and in discussion. They liked working in the school and felt that pupils were enthusiastic about learning. A few reported that recent changes in management had had an unsettling effect on staff. All support staff noted that they liked working in the school. About half felt that their staff training time was not used effectively. Nursery class staff were proud to work in the school and felt valued as part of the school team.
Pupils’ learning experiences and achievements
The quality of the curriculum was weak, overall. In the nursery class, the curriculum had important strengths, including a wide variety of opportunities for pupils to explore and investigate through a range of play experiences. In the primary, teachers provided a broad curriculum for pupils and had ensured recent improvement in areas such as physical education (PE) and aspects of enterprise education. The school had made good progress in ensuring two hours each week of PE for all pupils. Regular input from visiting teachers of, for example, music and PE helped enhance the range of pupils’ learning experiences. At P1, teachers had begun to ensure that there were suitable opportunities for pupils to be actively involved in their learning. Overall, however, approaches to the development and improvement of the curriculum required clearer strategic direction. Pupils’ learning experiences in English language and mathematics often lacked progression and were too restricted. The programme in writing lacked coherence and did not support teachers and pupils in helping to raise attainment. The school’s use of curriculum flexibility time had not resulted in sustained improvement to pupils’ attainment. The quality of teaching was adequate. Staff in the nursery class interacted well to extend and challenge children in their thinking and learning. In the primary classes, teachers’ explanations were clear and helpful and in almost all classes, the climate for learning was positive. There were examples of high quality, interactive teaching. However, overall, there was too much inconsistency in teaching approaches. In only a minority of classes, teachers shared the purposes of lessons effectively with pupils to help clarify their understanding. Teachers’ use of information and communications technology (ICT) in lessons was too inconsistent and was not used effectively enough to engage pupils in their learning. Homework was regular but did not always offer pupils sufficient stimulation and variety.
In the nursery class, children were making good progress in a range of appropriate areas. They investigated the natural environment regularly and, for example, most had developed a sound knowledge of mini beasts and their habitats. However, nursery staff did not seek the views of children prior to planning learning opportunities. This resulted in a lack of stimulation for some children. In primary classes, most pupils applied themselves well in a range of learning situations, including when working collaboratively. Pupils at both P3 and P6 responded enthusiastically to opportunities to learn actively in areas of mathematics. Pupils’ respect for one another was evident in high standards of cooperation at a number of stages. At P7, most pupils were skilled at using ICT to support and enhance presentations. Across the school, pupils’ understanding of what they needed to do to improve their learning was not yet consistently well developed. The pace of learning was too uneven, and in a minority of lessons was too slow to challenge pupils fully.
The school used an effective variety of approaches to help pupils develop their wider achievements. Pupils were involved regularly in additional drama and sporting activities including participation in an annual pantomime and an after-school athletics club. Pupils at P6 had enhanced their self-confidence while rehearsing and performing a range of skills in a recent concert. Participation in community events further extended pupils’ experiences, including taking part in the Borders’ Dance Festival. Pupils’ interest in enterprise was enhanced through the contribution of visiting speakers, as well as visits to local businesses. Pupils had benefited from involvement in an innovative project which involved them in making a DVD about plans to improve the school grounds. The school had recently improved opportunities for pupils to exercise responsibility with the introduction of a pupil council, and an eco committee. Pupils at P6 had benefited from leading younger pupils in playing playground games.
English language
In the nursery class, children were making good progress in communication and language. Most were becoming increasingly skilled in listening and talking and concentrated well in large group situations. They displayed a keen interest in books and were able to find information with adult support. In the primary, the overall quality of attainment in English language was adequate. Levels of attainment in writing had improved from a low base in recent years. Attainment levels in reading had not risen significantly. Most pupils were achieving appropriate national levels of attainment in reading and writing. A significant minority of pupils were attaining these levels earlier than might normally be expected. Pupils who required additional support, including those with limited knowledge of English, were making good progress in their learning. Most pupils listened well to instructions and spoke confidently with the teacher and other adults. Pupils at P1 were making good progress in developing appropriate skills in listening and talking. At P7, pupils were very skilled in group discussion. Across the school, most pupils read fluently and, by P7, talked confidently about styles of different authors and features of books they had read. However, the quality of pupils’ writing had important weaknesses. The performance of boys in writing was, overall, too low. From P4 to P7 in particular, pupils did not write at sufficient length. In too many cases, pupils’ writing lacked appropriate structure and coherence. Standards of presentation were too low.
Mathematics
In the nursery class, children were making good progress in most aspects of early mathematics, including matching, sorting and making comparisons. They were learning to count and measure items confidently during activities such as baking. In the primary, the overall quality of attainment was adequate. In recent years, the school had made limited progress in raising levels of attainment. Most pupils were achieving appropriate levels of attainment in key aspects of mathematics. A minority of pupils, particularly at the early stages, were achieving these levels earlier than might normally be expected. However, these early gains were not maintained as pupils progressed through the school. Pupils who found aspects of mathematics difficult were making appropriate progress in their learning. Most pupils were able to interpret information from a range of graphs. Across the stages, most pupils carried out written calculations confidently in number, money and measurement. By P6, for example, pupils were confident in dividing numbers, including decimals. Across the school, most pupils could identify and discuss the properties of two- and three-dimensional shapes. Pupils, including children in the nursery, were not consistently confident in using an appropriate range of strategies to solve problems.
There were important weaknesses in how staff met the learning needs of pupils. In the nursery class, staff did not make sufficiently effective use of assessment information to plan for the next steps in individual children’s learning. In the primary classes, significant weaknesses in a number of areas constrained the ability of staff to address pupils’ learning needs fully. This included a lack of progression in pupils’ learning experiences in, for example, writing, and important weaknesses in how pupils’ progress was monitored in a range of areas. Staff did not always offer sufficient challenge to ensure that pupils achieved to their full potential. Overall, teachers required more effective support to assist them in addressing the learning needs of all pupils. The two support for learning teachers provided well planned and useful assistance to groups of pupils in their learning. Support staff provided effective additional help for a range of pupils. Pupils who required additional support were, overall, making good progress towards agreed learning targets. However, involvement of class teachers in the ongoing review and implementation of pupils’ learning targets was not consistently effective. Staff in the primary and nursery had developed effective links with a number of agencies, including speech and language therapy, to help them provide targeted support for pupils.
Aspect |
Comment |
Pastoral care |
The quality of pastoral care was good. Almost all pupils reported that they felt safe and well cared for, in a happy learning environment. In the nursery class, staff made very good use of praise to develop children’s confidence. Across the school, clear policies for child protection and anti-bullying were in place and understood by staff. Staff responded well to any concerns raised by parents and pupils. Staff had recently taken effective steps to develop pupils’ understanding of a healthy lifestyle. This included an innovative and popular daily exercise programme for all pupils and staff. School lunches were of good quality, and pupils enjoyed a positive social experience when having their lunch. Nursery children were learning about healthy eating through experiencing a wide variety of healthy snacks. The acting headteacher had prioritised the need to implement a whole-school approach to health education. The school had established effective links with Berwickshire High School and a range of agencies to support the transition of P7 pupils to S1, including those with specific support needs. |
Quality of accommodation and facilities |
There were a number of important weaknesses in the quality of accommodation. The quality of decoration, fittings and some of the furniture was not consistently of a suitable standard. The condition of the pupils’ toilets was poor. In the open plan area, noise from nearby classrooms at times interrupted teaching and learning in adjacent learning bays. The dining room was cramped though staff made effective use of available space to enhance the social experience for pupils. Arrangements to ensure aspects of security and the reception of visitors required review and improvement. Access for those with restricted mobility was limited in the main building. The acting headteacher had, however, taken immediate and effective measures to improve the appearance of the school. Working with staff, she had improved the learning environment in the library area. In the nursery, recent work had resulted in improvements to the toilets and snack areas. Work was underway to improve the school’s internal courtyard. |
Climate and relationships, expectations and promoting achievement and equality |
Staff, parents and pupils identified strongly with the school. Pupils were very proud of their school. Relationships between staff and pupils were good. Approaches to how support staff were involved in the work of the school required review and further development. Staff, overall, used praise well to motivate and encourage pupils. However, their expectations of pupils’ attainment and achievement were not consistently high. The school held regular assemblies which were used effectively for religious observance and to celebrate success. There was a strong sense of fairness in how staff interacted with pupils and in how pupils treated one another. Pupils who had limited knowledge of English were well supported and encouraged by other pupils. Approaches to promoting an understanding of race equality and diversity through the curriculum were uneven and required further development. |
Partnership with parents and the community |
The school, including the nursery, had developed very effective relationships and a good partnership with parents and the community. Parents were very supportive of the school and contributed positively to the work of the school in a range of ways. A significant number, for example, assisted in the school as regular parent helpers. Regular newsletters, and an open door policy for parents, helped ensure effective communication between school and home. The school consulted parents appropriately on sensitive health issues. The School Board and PTA supported the work of the school well, raising funds and assisting with social activities and events. Recently introduced curriculum overviews had helped to inform parents about aspects of their child’s learning. Overall, however, the school did not yet involve parents directly and consistently to support their child’s learning and progress. A range of local artists had supported the school in a series of activities during eco week. Links with local businesses were good. |
Appendix 1 provides HM Inspectors’ overall evaluation of the work of the school.
The quality of education at Duns Primary School had some strengths. Staff ensured that pupils were well cared for in school. Pupils felt safe and well looked after. Relationships with parents were very positive. However, there was a need for further improvement in several key areas. In particular, there was a need to improve the curriculum and the consistency of learning and teaching. Although children in the nursery class made a sound start to their learning experiences, in the primary there were important weaknesses in how pupils’ learning needs were being met. Levels of attainment were too low, particularly in writing.
There were important weaknesses in the strategic leadership of the school. In her short time in post, the acting headteacher had made a very positive start in identifying the school’s strengths and weaknesses and in preparing a clear strategy for improvement. Individually, members of the senior management team and principal teachers provided effective support to the acting headteacher. One of the two depute headteachers had led the school well on an interim basis prior to the appointment of the acting headteacher. However, overall, the level of support and challenge offered to teachers in their work was too inconsistent and required improvement. There was a lack of coherence and clarity in the allocated remits and responsibilities of senior managers and the principal teachers. This had prevented them from focusing fully on improving the quality of the curriculum and how pupils’ learning needs were addressed. The school’s approaches to self-evaluation were not sufficiently rigorous. Staff use of the school’s monitoring and tracking system was not effective in supporting pupils’ progress. The school now required significant, sustained support from the education authority to help ensure improvement in a range of important areas.
Staff in the nursery class had a good understanding of the Scottish Social Services Council’s Codes of Practice and the implications for the nursery. At the last Care Commission inspection there was one recommendation and seven requirements. The recommendation and three of the requirements had been fully implemented. Four requirements regarding staffing were in progress.
Main points for action The school and education authority should take action to secure 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. HM Inspectors will engage with the school and the education authority to monitor progress, and will undertake a follow-through inspection. This will result in a report to parents, within two years of the publication of this report, on the extent of improvement that has been achieved.
Peter McNaughton
HM Inspector
2 October 2007
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.
How good are learning, teaching and achievement? |
|
Structure of the curriculum |
Weak |
The teaching process |
Adequate |
Pupils’ learning experiences |
Adequate |
Pupils’ attainment in English language |
Adequate |
Pupils’ attainment in mathematics |
Adequate |
How well are pupils’ learning needs met? |
|
Meeting pupils’ needs |
Weak |
How good is the environment for learning? |
|
Pastoral care |
Good |
Accommodation and facilities |
Weak |
Climate and relationships |
Good |
Expectations and promoting achievement |
Adequate |
Equality and fairness |
Good |
Partnership with parents, the School Board, and the community |
Good |
Leading and improving the school |
|
Leadership across the school |
Weak |
Self-evaluation |
Weak |
This report uses the following word scale to make clear judgements made by inspectors:
| excellent | outstanding, sector leading |
| very good | major strengths |
| good | important strengths with some areas for improvement |
| adequate | strengths just outweigh weaknesses |
| weak | important weaknesses |
| unsatisfactory | major weaknesses |
Important features of responses from the various groups which received questionnaires are listed below.
What parents thought the school did well |
What parents think the school could do better |
|
|
What pupils thought the school did well |
What pupils think the school could do better |
|
|
What staff thought the school did well |
What staff think the school could do better |
|
|
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 & Lifelong Learning, 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, Denholm House, Almondvale Business Park, Almondvale Way, Livingston, EH54 6GA or by telephoning 01506 600385. Copies are also available on our website www.hmie.gov.uk.
HMIE Feedback and Complaints Procedure
Should you wish to comment on any aspect of primary inspections, you should write in the first instance to Chris McIlroy, HMCI, at the above address.
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.
1. Throughout this report, the term ‘parents’ should be taken to include foster carers, residential care staff and carers who are relatives or friends.