25 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?
St Mungo’s High School was inspected in October 2004. The inspection covered key aspects of the educational provision of the school at all stages. Subjects included in the inspection were English, mathematics, modern languages, chemistry and S1/S2 science. The school is a Roman Catholic denominational secondary school which serves almost all of the Falkirk Council area. At the time of the inspection the roll was 941. The percentage of pupils entitled to free school meals was in line with the national average. Pupils’ attendance had significantly improved and was now above the national average.
Members of the inspection team analysed responses to questionnaires issued to samples of pupils, parents and carers, and to all staff. They also met the chair of the School Board and representatives of the parent-teacher association (PTA) and the pupil council. They interviewed groups of pupils, parents and staff.
HM Inspectors identified the following key strengths.
Parents and carers were very positive about the work of the school. In particular, they felt that the school had a good reputation in the local community, staff made them feel welcome at school and their child was treated fairly. Around a third of those who responded thought that the school buildings were not in good condition. A fifth thought that the school could consult them more on decisions which affected their child. Pupils thought that behaviour in the school was good and teachers expected them to work to the best of their ability. Pupils spoke positively about the improvements in behaviour in classes and around the school. Teachers enjoyed working at the school. They thought that standards set for pupils’ behaviour were consistently upheld and pupils were enthusiastic about their learning. All thought that relationships between pupils and staff were positive. However, only half of the teachers who responded thought that there was effective communication between senior managers and staff or that senior managers worked effectively as a team. Less than half of teaching and non-teaching staff felt they had good opportunities to be involved in decision-making. Further details about what most pleased parents, carers, staff and pupils 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, attainment and achievement, HM Inspectors observed aspects of learning 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 they analysed pupils’ performance in examinations (see Appendix 3).
The curriculum, learning and teaching
The overall quality of the curriculum was good. At S1/S2, the curriculum was broad and balanced. The school had reduced the number of teachers with whom pupils had contact by introducing rotas of subjects. However, difficulties with the timetable this session had resulted in many classes being shared between teachers, with the result that pupils’ learning was being adversely affected by the lack of continuity in teaching. Senior managers had begun to monitor the development of pupils’ skills in information and communications technology (ICT) across a range of subjects. This provision was not yet sufficiently developed to ensure coherent learning experiences in ICT for all pupils. At S1 to S4, the physical education department offered pupils a well balanced experience which included an element of choice and actively promoted health and fitness for all pupils. At S3/S4, almost all pupils followed eight Standard Grade courses or their equivalent. The school had introduced National Qualifications (NQs) in a range of subject areas to improve pupils’ progression to S5/S6 or to meet the needs of lower attaining pupils. While these NQ courses met the needs of most pupils, a significant number were not achieving A-C grades by the end of S4. In collaboration with Falkirk College, the school had introduced vocational courses for a small group of pupils with the aim of better meeting their needs. At the time of the inspection, the school could not provide information on the qualifications these pupils had achieved. At S5/S6, the curriculum provided good progression from S4. It offered a broad range of courses at Intermediate, Higher and Advanced Higher, some of which were offered through a well-planned programme with neighbouring schools and the local college.
In most classrooms, there was a positive learning environment, with pupils working on task. Teachers and pupils enjoyed good relationships. Teachers planned lessons well, provided clear explanations and made good use of homework. There were some very good examples of direct teaching and effective use of questioning. In most lessons, pupils were clear about the purpose of the lesson and could link the lesson to earlier learning. Overall, teaching approaches lacked variety. Pupils did not have sufficient opportunities to develop independent approaches to their learning and thinking. In a few classes, teachers made effective use of ICT, but the use of ICT to support pupils’ learning was not yet widespread. Almost all pupils were well behaved and attentive. They worked well in class and almost all were keen to succeed. However, at times their learning was too passive, especially in classes at S5/S6. In some lessons, the pace of learning was not sufficiently brisk and teachers’ expectations of what could be achieved were not high enough. Teachers knew their pupils well and some met individual pupils’ needs effectively through organising them into groups by prior attainment or by the use of materials at different levels. However, tasks and activities were not always at an appropriate level of challenge especially for high attaining pupils. Teachers had started to set targets for pupils, but did not involve them sufficiently in the process of identifying these. One of the depute headteachers had introduced a target-setting initiative which involved teachers working with a group of identified pupils at S4. The school had plans to extend this initiative to other groups of pupils.
Attainment and achievement
The overall quality of attainment at S1/S2 was good. The proportion of pupils achieving appropriate national levels of attainment in reading was above the national average. Overall, in writing, the proportion was in line with the national average but had decreased over the last three years. In mathematics, the proportion was above the national average. Although it had decreased in 2003, recent results showed a marked improvement.
The following comments are based on Scottish Qualifications Authority (SQA) data for the three year period 2002 to 2004.
The overall quality of attainment at S3/S4 was good. The proportion of pupils achieving five or more Standard Grade awards at grades 1-4 and grades 1-2 or their equivalent was in line with the national averages. In 2004, the proportion had increased to above the national average. Over the last three years the proportion of boys achieving five or more grades 1-2 at Standard Grade or its equivalent had increased from below the national average to above it. The school’s performance at Standard Grade was in line with schools with similar characteristics.
The overall quality of attainment at S5/S6 was fair. By the end of S5, the proportion of pupils achieving three and five or more A-C grades at Higher was in line with the national average, but below that of schools with similar characteristics. The proportion achieving one or more A-C grades at Higher was deteriorating and in 2004, it had decreased to below the national average. In 2004, the performance of girls had decreased from being in line with the national average to below the national average. By the end of S6, the proportion of pupils achieving one, three and five or more A-C grades at Higher or better was in line with the national average. The proportion of pupils achieving one or more A-C grade at Advanced Higher was below the national average. For this measure, the school performed less well than similar schools. At Higher, overall, the school performed in line with similar schools, but its position relative to these schools was declining.
Information on the subjects inspected is given later in the report. Significant features of attainment in the subjects not inspected were as follows.
The school provided a wide range of opportunities to develop and promote pupils’ wider achievements. The school’s sports co-ordinator had extended the range of sporting extra curricular activities on offer. Increasing numbers of pupils were participating in clubs and sports. The school had introduced a range of approaches to promoting positive behaviour as a result pupils’ attendance had improved and the number of pupils being excluded had significantly reduced. Pupils and staff regularly raised funds for charity. Senior pupils had good opportunities to take responsibilities. For example, they supported younger pupils in classes and had set up a school radio show. Each year, two senior pupils accompanied pupils with physical disabilities on a trip to Lourdes. The school had started a major project which aimed to involve pupils in developing their citizenship skills through supporting an international charity. In addition, pupils, parents and staff provided aid to identified groups in the local community. It had also recently received two national awards for developing pupils’ skills in work and enterprise.
English language
Learning and teaching
Teachers generally explained new work clearly and interacted well with their pupils. They used a good range of teaching approaches, including group work. However, teachers did not always use homework consistently. Pupils concentrated closely on their lessons and co-operated well with each other and with their teachers. They did not always have enough opportunities to take responsibility for their learning, including using ICT to locate information. Teachers organised classes by prior attainment and effectively met pupils’ needs, particularly at S3/S4. Recent and current instability in staffing had adversely affected pupils’ progress in some classes and on some courses. Pupils were not sufficiently challenged at S1/S2 in particular in writing.
Attainment and achievement
By the end of S2, the proportion of pupils achieving appropriate national levels of attainment in reading was above the national average. In writing, the proportion was in line with the national average. There was a deteriorating trend in writing. The school did not provide information on pupils’ attainment in listening and talking. At Standard Grade, the proportion of S4 pupils achieving grades 1-2 was above national averages and the proportion achieving grades 1-4 was in line with national averages and improving. At S5/S6, the proportion of pupils at achieving A-C grades Higher and Intermediate 1 was in line with national averages. At Intermediate 2, the proportion was well below the national average. Most pupils presented at Advanced Higher achieved A-C grades.
Other features of pupils’ attainment and achievement included the following.
Mathematics
Learning and teaching
Teachers provided clear explanations and all made effective use of homework. They made good use of questioning to check pupils’ understanding. However, they did not always clearly share the purpose of the lesson with pupils and not all lessons were well-structured. Teachers were not making effective use of ICT to develop further pupils’ mathematical skills. Pupils were motivated and worked hard in class. The opportunities for pupils to work together to solve problems were not consistent across classes and stages. Teachers generally chose tasks and activities well to meet pupils’ needs. The department needed to continue to review the courses and programmes it was offering to ensure that the needs of all pupils were being met.
Attainment and achievement
By the end of S2, the proportion of pupils achieving appropriate national levels of attainment was above the national average. By the end of S4, the proportion of pupils achieving a Credit award at Standard Grade or an A-C grade at Intermediate 2 was above the national average. However, in 2004 around a fifth of those presented at Intermediate 1 or 2 did not achieve A-C grades. At S5, the majority of those presented for Intermediate 1 achieved A-C grades. At Intermediate 2 and Higher, the proportion achieving A-C grades was below the national average. The majority of those presented for Advanced Higher mathematics and Advanced Higher applied mathematics achieved A-C grades.
Other features of pupils’ attainment and achievement included the following.
Modern Languages
Learning and teaching
There was a positive learning environment within the department. Teachers planned lessons well. They made sound use of direct teaching approaches, effective use of questioning and engaged in good quality dialogue with pupils. Staff were beginning to use ICT effectively to motivate pupils and enrich their learning experience. In most classes, there was variety and balance of activity. However, teachers did not work sufficiently closely with groups of pupils to improve speaking. Pupils worked well in lessons and effectively carried out the tasks asked of them. However, while there were some lessons where the pace of learning was brisk, overall, pupils were not sufficiently involved in their learning and the pace and expectation in lessons were not always appropriate. Teachers matched classwork and homework effectively to meet the needs of most pupils. However, in some lessons, the needs of all pupils, including higher achievers, were not always met through classroom activities.
Attainment and achievement
At S1/S2, most pupils were performing well in their coursework. Pupils’ speaking skills were not consistently well developed across the stages. The proportion of pupils who achieved a Credit award at Standard Grade in French and German was below national averages, although there had been a recent improvement. All pupils presented at Access 3 in French and German had been successful. At Higher, most pupils presented in French and German, and all in Spanish and Russian achieved A-C grades. At Intermediate 2, most of those presented in French and all in German achieved A-C grades. Most pupils presented for Advanced Higher in a modern language achieved A-C grades.
Other features of pupils’ attainment and achievement included the following.
Chemistry and S1/S2 science
Learning and teaching
In most S1/S2 science and chemistry lessons, teachers interacted well with pupils and gave clear instructions and explanations. Overall, they supported pupils effectively and were careful to relate science to everyday life. In the best lessons, pupils were informed clearly about what they were expected to learn. Sometimes however, teachers’ questioning was not challenging enough, or pupils were not involved actively enough in the lesson. Homework was given regularly in chemistry but too infrequently in S1/S2 science. Feedback to pupils on the quality of their classwork was also too infrequent in S1/S2. In almost all lessons, pupils were well motivated and responsive. In S1/S2 science and Standard Grade chemistry, teaching approaches gave too little attention to meeting the range of pupils’ needs.
Attainment and achievement
In S1/S2 science, the majority of pupils were achieving good standards in their coursework. However, too many were under-achieving because tasks were not sufficiently well matched to their individual abilities. In Standard Grade chemistry, the proportion of pupils achieving General and Credit awards had improved. The proportion achieving Credit awards was in line with the national average. Only a few of those presented had achieved success in Intermediate 1 chemistry by the end of S4. At S5/S6, pupils performed less well in Higher chemistry than would be expected from their results at Standard Grade. In S5/S6, the proportion achieving A-C grades at Higher had been well below the national average, but improved in 2004. The proportions of pupils achieving A-C grades in Intermediate 2 and Advanced Higher chemistry were below the national average.
Other features of pupils’ attainment and achievement included the following.
Pastoral care, including the care, welfare and protection of pupils was good. The school had well-developed plans to take an integrated approach to pupil support. It had reorganised into ‘house’ groupings which had made a positive impact on the arrangements for supporting pupils. Pastoral heads, heads of faculty and form teachers shared the responsibility for pastoral care. One of the pastoral heads had responsibility for the management of the integrated support team. The school had recently introduced an extended form period at the start of the day at the request of form teachers to enable them to carry out their pastoral duties. At the time of the inspection, most staff were committed to this initiative. However, some were not which led to inconsistencies in pupils’ experiences. Staff followed clear procedures for child protection and an effective anti-bullying policy was in place. All staff were aware of their responsibilities for ensuring the well-being of pupils. Staff in the behaviour support base provided a very effective range of measures to meet the social and emotional needs of pupils. These included early liaison with primary schools, support for pupils’ learning, tailoring the curriculum to better meet individual needs and a breakfast club. A family care worker effectively supported vulnerable youngsters as did a mentoring scheme by S6 pupils.
Personal and social education (PSE) was well planned with a significant number of staff trained to deliver aspects of the programme such as sexual health and drug awareness. The school had consulted parents, the education authority and the Catholic Church on the content and delivery of the PSE programme. PSE was delivered by a number of staff, partly through learning and teaching in specific subject areas S5 and S6 pupils had a weekly period taught by their own pastoral head. However, the delivery was not consistent across classes. The school needed to continue to monitor the effectiveness of the delivery of PSE through subject areas. There was a wide range of opportunities for pupils at all stages to take part in and develop active citizenship, for example, by supporting charities both locally and globally. The school encouraged pupils to take part in a number of extra-curricular activities and enterprise initiatives. It organised conferences to prepare pupils for S6 with key note speakers. There was a pupil council for all stages as well as all S6 pupils taking on extra responsibilities as prefects, mentors or supporting younger pupils in classes and clubs.
The school’s arrangements for curricular and vocational guidance were very good. Pupils were well prepared for course choices from S2 to S3 and S4 to S5. The careers service gave very good support to pupils. All pupils took part in a well-organised work experience programme in S4. Staff provided strong support to pupils applying for university as well as those seeking employment. One of the faculty heads had responsibility for developing a whole school system for tracking pupils’ progress across the school. At the time of the inspection, this process had only just begun. The school needed to continue to support this development and link it with their plans to set targets for pupils’ attainment.
The school’s provision for supporting pupils with additional support needs was fair. The school had introduced individualised educational programmes (IEPs) for pupils with additional support needs, some of whom also had a Record of Needs. Future Needs Assessments had been held for pupils with Records of Needs. There was no evidence of IEPs being reviewed. Targets contained within the IEPs were not sufficiently specific to allow pupils’ progress to be measured effectively. The school and the education authority were not effectively managing pupils’ Records of Needs. Staff provided good support to pupils in classes and pupils with a range of additional support needs received good assistance from visiting specialists and support assistants. Key workers from the behaviour support base were effectively helping pupils who were particularly vulnerable, such as those who were looked after by carers. Support for learning staff did not consult sufficiently with departments to develop appropriate coursework to meet pupils’ needs.
The depute headteacher with responsibility for pupil support had provided a strong lead in the development of the integrated approach to pupil support. However, he had not been sufficiently involved in providing direction and advice to support for learning. He needed to continue to participate fully in the co-ordination and management of the new system to ensure the highly committed pastoral heads, faculty heads and teachers of learning and behaviour support are supported in effecting these new arrangements.
Quality of accommodation and facilities
The quality of the accommodation and facilities was fair. Strengths included the behaviour support base and the refurbished science laboratories and home economics rooms. The school library was bright and attractive and was used effectively by a wide range of subject areas and classes. A number of departments were making very effective use of display to enhance the learning environment. Janitors and cleaning staff worked hard to maintain the building. Despite the school’s efforts to improve the toilets, some of them were still in poor condition. There were some social areas for pupils and the majority of pupils had lockers. Many parts of the school were in a poor state of repair and required upgrading. The education authority had plans to rebuild the school in two years.
Ethos
Pupils, teaching and non-teaching staff identified strongly with the school. All were proud of its achievements. Almost all pupils were well behaved in classes and almost all staff enjoyed working at the school. Staff and pupils enjoyed very positive relationships. Changes in the management structure of the school had impacted on staff morale. In addition, the difficulties in the implementation of the school timetable had adversely affected relationships between staff and senior managers. Most staff felt valued for their contributions to the life of the school, but some did not. Senior managers and pastoral and faculty heads were very effectively promoting a positive ethos and Catholic values through assemblies, religious observance and the opportunities for pupils to worship together. While most staff were consistently upholding the school’s aims of promoting Christian values, some were not.
Staff had appropriately high expectations for pupils’ attendance and behaviour. However, they did not have sufficiently high expectations for pupils’ achievements. Most staff made effective use of praise to motivate and encourage pupils.
The religious and moral education and modern studies departments made very effective contributions to the development of pupils’ awareness of ethical, religious and cultural issues. Pupils felt they were treated fairly. The school had plans to promote pupils’ awareness of racial equality.
Partnership with parents and the community
The school had developed very effective partnerships with parents. It enjoyed a very good reputation in the community. The school communicated regularly with parents through e-mail, newsletters, pupil reports and an informative and well-presented handbook. Parents were made to feel welcome by all staff. They supported school events such as award ceremonies, information evenings and parents’ evenings. The recent target-setting initiative for S4 pupils had involved parents in supporting their child’s learning. The School Board strongly supported the work of the school and the PTA worked hard to raise funds. The school had developed very good links with local businesses, the parish community and educational support agencies.
Teachers at St Mungo’s RC High School were committed to improving pupils’ education, and most actively promoted the identity of the school as a Christian community. Through the staff’s commitment to the promotion of positive behaviour the number of pupils being excluded had significantly reduced and overall attendance had improved. Teaching approaches lacked variety and not enough use was made of ICT to enhance learning. In 2004, attainment in national examinations at S4 had improved, but attainment at S5/S6 continued to decline.
Overall, the leadership of the school was good. The headteacher was highly committed to the school. He had a clear vision for the school which focused on improving the quality of learning and teaching. Parents were very positive about the leadership of the school. However, not all teachers shared the headteacher’s vision for the school. In the last year, the school, in consultation with the education authority, had introduced a number of significant changes to the management structure of the school. The management of the process of change had not been wholly successful, and relationships between teachers and senior managers were not altogether positive. The new management structure had a core and extended management team. The core team consisted of the headteacher, three depute headteachers and the integrated learning community resource manager. Senior managers were highly committed and worked well together. The extended team included senior managers, six heads of faculty, three pastoral heads and the librarian. The relationship between the core and extended management team was not yet fully understood by staff. All heads of faculty had very significant remits which included curricular, pastoral and whole-school responsibilities. Staff had been consulted and involved in decision-making. However, a majority of teachers felt that the changes had been made too quickly and not enough discussion had taken place as to how the new management structure would take the school forward. Heads of faculty and pastoral heads were highly committed to improvement, but had concerns about their ability to deliver all aspects of their remits. The school needed to continue to regularly review the remits of senior managers, faculty heads and pastoral heads to ensure that they were meeting the needs of the school.
Senior managers had introduced a range of processes to evaluate the effectiveness of the work of the school. A depute headteacher rigorously analysed pupils’ performance in SQA examinations. Departmental attainment had been discussed throughout the year with principal teachers. Senior managers had undertaken classroom visits to monitor pupils’ learning experiences. The views of pupils, parents and teachers had been sought. However, less than half of the teachers had responded to questionnaires. Many staff regarded self-evaluation as the responsibility of senior managers and not all staff were involved in evaluating learning and teaching. The school’s standards and quality report was not sufficiently evaluative. Overall, the quality of self-evaluation was fair.
The school had the capacity for improvement if all staff worked together with a shared sense of purpose and direction. To achieve this, senior managers and heads of faculty needed to work with teachers with a clear focus on improving the quality of pupils’ learning experiences. In taking the school forward, the school and the education authority should take account of the need to:
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 continue to engage with the school and the education authority in monitoring progress, and will undertake a follow-through inspection. This will result in a report to parents and carers, within two years of the publication of this report, on the extent of improvement that has been achieved.
Maureen McKenna
HM Inspector
25 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 thought:
|
Some thought:
|
|
What pleased pupils most |
What pupils would like to see improved |
|
Almost all thought:
|
Some thought:
|
|
What pleased staff most |
What staff would like to see improved |
|
Almost all thought:
|
Around a third thought:
|
|
Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework (SCQF) levels: |
Percentage of relevant S4 roll achieving by end of S4
|
2002 |
2003 |
20041 |
||
|
English and Mathematics @ Level 3 |
St Mungo’s RC High |
92 |
94 |
76 |
|
Comparator Schools2 |
92 |
91 |
93 |
|
|
National |
91 |
91 |
91 |
|
|
5+ @ Level 3 or Better |
St Mungo’s RC High |
92 |
94 |
94 |
|
Comparator Schools |
91 |
91 |
92 |
|
|
National |
91 |
91 |
91 |
|
|
5+ @ Level 4 or Better |
St Mungo’s RC High |
76 |
81 |
85 |
|
Comparator Schools |
77 |
77 |
78 |
|
|
National |
77 |
76 |
76 |
|
|
5+ @ Level 5 or Better |
St Mungo’s RC High |
33 |
35 |
44 |
|
Comparator Schools |
34 |
36 |
35 |
|
|
National |
34 |
34 |
34 |
|
Percentage of relevant S4 roll achieving by end of S5
|
2002 |
2003 |
20041 |
||
|
5+ @ Level 4 or better |
St Mungo’s RC High |
87 |
77 |
82 |
|
Comparator schools2 |
80 |
79 |
79 |
|
|
National |
78 |
78 |
78 |
|
|
5+ @ Level 5 or better |
St Mungo’s RC High |
49 |
45 |
45 |
|
Comparator schools |
47 |
45 |
45 |
|
|
National |
45 |
45 |
45 |
|
|
1+ @ Level 6 or better |
St Mungo’s RC High |
43 |
36 |
32 |
|
Comparator schools |
43 |
40 |
40 |
|
|
National |
39 |
39 |
38 |
|
|
3+ @ Level 6 or better |
St Mungo’s RC High |
19 |
21 |
19 |
|
Comparator schools |
23 |
21 |
22 |
|
|
National |
23 |
23 |
22 |
|
|
5+ @ Level 6 or better |
St Mungo’s RC High |
8 |
10 |
8 |
|
Comparator schools |
8 |
9 |
8 |
|
|
National |
9 |
10 |
9 |
|
Percentage of relevant S4 roll achieving by end of S6
|
2002 |
2003 |
20041 |
||
|
5+ @ Level 5 or better |
St Mungo’s RC High |
50 |
56 |
47 |
|
Comparator schools2 |
50 |
51 |
48 |
|
|
National |
46 |
47 |
47 |
|
|
1+ @ Level 6 or better |
St Mungo’s RC High |
44 |
48 |
40 |
|
Comparator schools |
46 |
47 |
45 |
|
|
National |
44 |
44 |
43 |
|
|
3+ @ Level 6 or better |
St Mungo’s RC High |
36 |
24 |
30 |
|
Comparator schools |
33 |
32 |
30 |
|
|
National |
31 |
31 |
30 |
|
|
5+ @ Level 6 or better |
St Mungo’s RC High |
25 |
17 |
17 |
|
Comparator schools |
20 |
19 |
18 |
|
|
National |
20 |
20 |
19 |
|
|
1+ @ Level 7 or better |
St Mungo’s RC High |
10 |
7 |
8 |
|
Comparator schools |
11 |
11 |
10 |
|
|
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 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, Saughton House, Broomhouse Drive, Edinburgh EH11 3XD or by telephoning 0131 244 8473. 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, Denholm House, Almondvale Business Park, Almondvale Way, Livingston, EH54 6GA.
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, Denholm House, Almondvale Business Park, Almondvale Way, Livingston, EH54 6GA. A copy of our complaints procedure is available from this office or by telephoning 0131 244 8437 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.