Bo’ness Academy
Falkirk Council

1 May 2007

Contents

1. Background
2. Key strengths
3. How well does the school raise achievement for all?
4. How good is the environment for learning?
5. Leading and 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?

1. Background

Bo’ness Academy was inspected in January 2007 as part of a national sample of secondary education. The inspection covered key aspects of the school’s work at all stages. HM Inspectors evaluated how well the school was raising achievement for all pupils, taking into account the extent to which pupils’ learning needs were met by the curriculum and teaching. They also analysed pupils’ attainment in national examinations (see Appendix 3), the school’s processes for self-evaluation and innovation, and its overall effectiveness and capacity for improvement. HM Inspectors focused particularly on English, mathematics, biology and S1/S2 science, and geography.

The inspection team also evaluated aspects of the school’s progress in implementing national recommendations related to improving aspects of school meals provision.

HM Inspectors observed teaching, learning and achievement in lessons and other contexts and examined pupils’ work. They analysed responses to questionnaires¹ issued to a sample of parents² and pupils and to all staff. They interviewed groups of pupils and staff. Members of the inspection team also met the chairperson of the School Board and a group of parents.

Bo’ness Academy is a non-denominational school serving the town of Bo’ness. At the time of the inspection, the roll was 794. The percentage of pupils entitled to free school meals was in line with the national average. Pupils’ attendance was below the national average.

2. Key strengths

HM Inspectors identified the following key strengths.

• Partnerships with a wide range of organisations and agencies.
• The school’s success in providing opportunities for pupils to develop creativity through music and the arts and to access wider curricular activities.
• The capacity for improvement in meeting pupils’ needs provided by the extended pupil support team.
• Leadership of the headteacher and senior managers.
• The commitment of staff to school improvement.

3. How well does the school raise achievement for all?

To evaluate how well the school was raising achievement for all, HM Inspectors considered the extent to which the learning needs of all pupils were met through the curriculum and teaching. They evaluated the effectiveness of the school in promoting the learning and personal development of all pupils in lessons and in other, broader contexts. They also considered the standards attained in specific aspects of learning.

Curriculum

The quality of the curriculum was good. The broad range of courses based on a clear rationale and appropriate consultation enabled most pupils to progress well. Particular features of the curriculum included the following.

• Additional time had been made available at S1/S2 to improve attainment in numeracy and literacy.
• Arrangements for some pupils to begin certificated courses in English, mathematics and art and design at S2 were impacting positively on the pace of learning and attainment.
• A selection of school-based courses and experiences as college vocational programmes had been introduced at S3/S4 for some pupils for whom a full Standard Grade or equivalent programme was considered inappropriate. A few were pursuing particular vocational interests through attendance at Forth Valley College. The school now needed to broaden access to programmes of this sort for more pupils.
• Almost all S5/S6 pupils were able to follow their chosen programmes. Choice was extended through attendance at the local college and through links with neighbouring schools.
• Pupils experienced a well-planned programme of personal, social and health education (PSHE) and effective curricular and vocational guidance, particularly at S2 and S4. They had good opportunities for enterprise education and to prepare for the world of work.
• The school was working towards achieving the Health Promoting School award. Although still at the early stages of the Hungry for Success initiative, there were well-established working groups which were promoting aspects of health, including provision of food in school.
• Time for physical education approximated to national guidance but too little time was allocated to religious and moral education (RME).

Teaching and meeting pupils’ needs

The overall quality of teaching was good. Teachers provided an outline of the work to be covered at the beginning of lessons and the majority reviewed progress with pupils at the end. Most teachers had positive relationships with pupils and gave clear explanations, instructions and directions. Teachers were developing further their approaches to feedback based on a few good examples of supportive verbal and written feedback. Teachers used questioning well to check pupils’ knowledge but some needed to allow pupils more time to think and provide extended answers. The majority of teachers used praise effectively to encourage pupils. A few teachers used an appropriate range of teaching approaches which included increasingly effective use of information and communications technology (ICT), but scope remained for further improvement across the school. The quality and frequency of homework varied.

The school met the learning needs of a wide range of pupils well. Most were making good progress. The school’s integrated pastoral, learning support and behaviour management approach ensured that most pupils with additional support needs made good progress. The majority of class teachers formed teaching groups carefully and chose tasks well to take account of pupils’ prior attainments. Effective pastoral features included the arrangements for pupils’ transfer from P7 to the secondary school. The school’s house tutor system had the potential to make a more significant contribution to supporting pupils. Most of the significant number of pupils with additional support needs experienced well-planned, skilful programmes. Some support was delivered through the mainstream curriculum, with very good contributions from support teachers and assistants. Support staff evaluated their impact on pupils’ progress well overall. Support in some subjects such as English and mathematics was well coordinated. In other subjects, time allocated for support was not consistently well used and teachers and support staff had too few opportunities to plan jointly. The wide range of approaches to providing support included individual and small group work in pupil support bases, and services provided by the education authority and an extensive range of support agencies. However, several pupils with a complex range of learning and behavioural difficulties were not provided with a full-time educational provision. Some subjects met abler pupils’ needs well, for example through ‘fast tracking’ appropriate pupils, but the needs of higher attaining pupils were not yet given enough emphasis across the school. Staff prepared helpful individualised educational programmes (IEPs) for those pupils for whom they were appropriate. These provided useful summaries to help class teachers meet pupils’ needs. Some targets did not provide enough detail to enable staff to assess pupils’ progress effectively.

Learning and personal development

The overall quality of pupils’ learning was adequate. In most lessons, the majority of pupils were hardworking, on task and well behaved. A significant group of pupils, notably at S3/S4, were not engaged or interested in their work and caused disruption to other pupils’ learning. However, in a few lessons pupils with potentially challenging behaviour were well motivated and engaged in stimulating and appropriate programmes. In some subjects, pupils responded very well to collaborative learning opportunities. Overall, the pace of learning was variable. The school provided limited opportunities for independent work and for pupils to take responsibility for their learning.

Pupils’ personal and social development was good overall. At all stages, most pupils were considerate of others but a minority showed little respect for their peers or for staff. Their behaviour had an adverse effect on their own progress and that of their classes, and presented an ongoing challenge to the school’s attempts to meet their needs. The programme in PSHE provided pupils with a number of valuable experiences. It had begun to address issues of key importance to the pupils, and to the school’s ethos, such as self-esteem and tolerance. Careful management of the programme ensured that pupils developed relevant knowledge and skills, and reflected on important issues in areas such as health, relationships and citizenship. Parents were appropriately informed about sensitive topics. Many pupils took part in a range of extra-curricular activities including lunchtime clubs, educational visits, musical events and dramatic performances. Pupils were involved in school decision-making through junior and senior student councils, but many wished for greater involvement. The school’s buddy system, in association with Barnardos, exemplified many features of good practice. Pupils in S4 and S5 provided support for those in S1/S2, and were in turn coached by S6. Pupils’ awareness of issues of citizenship and responsibility were further enhanced by fundraising for charity. Some made important contributions through duties such as house captains and school captains, organising events such as the school prom, producing the yearbook and serving on working groups.

English

Teaching was purposeful with an appropriate range of approaches and regular homework. Pupils had motivating opportunities to work with others at a steady pace. Staffing difficulties had slowed pupils’ progress in learning. New initiatives to improve writing, promote regular personal reading, and provide well-chosen challenge and rewards were starting to raise achievement.

Overall, the quality of teaching, learning and meeting needs was good. The overall quality of attainment was adequate. Particular features included the following.

• At S1/S2, the majority of pupils attained appropriate national levels in reading and listening but less than half did so in writing and talking. Signs of rising standards and a greater number of pupils gaining the highest level were encouraging.
• At S3/S4, a significant minority attained SCQF level 5 earlier than expected. By the end of S4, the proportion of level 5 awards was below the national average.
• At S5/S6, performance was below the national average at Higher and Intermediate 2, and above at Intermediate 1. The majority of candidates for Advanced Higher gained an A-C grade.

Mathematics

Most pupils worked at an appropriate pace and made good progress in lessons. Teachers gave clear explanations and used questioning well. They sometimes needed to give pupils more experience of thinking for themselves. Teachers took a well-planned approach to meeting pupils’ needs through provision of a wide range of courses at all levels. Staff successfully accelerated learning at several stages for higher attaining pupils and provided effective additional support for pupils experiencing learning difficulties.

Overall, the quality of teaching was good and of learning was adequate. Pupils’ needs were very well met. The overall quality of attainment was good. Particular features included the following.

• At S1/S2, most pupils made appropriate progress in coursework. A majority of S2 pupils attained the appropriate national level and an increasing proportion attained above this level.
• At S3/S4, pupils’ attainment in mathematics was better than in their other subjects. The proportions attaining Credit or Intermediate 2 awards were in line with national averages.
• At S5/S6, the proportion of pupils taking Higher had been low but performance was above the national average. The majority of candidates for Advanced Higher, Intermediate 2 and Intermediate 1 attained an A-C grade.

Biology and S1/S2 science

Teachers gave clear explanations and instructions and provided a range of practical work. Teachers knew their pupils well and provided effective support to meet their learning needs. Almost all pupils were well behaved and worked well on assigned tasks. Pupils had too few opportunities to discuss in groups and to develop independent learning skills. Pupils at all levels were developing citizenship skills through the ‘Heartstart’ programmes delivered in partnership with the British Heart Foundation.

Overall, the quality of teaching and meeting needs was good, and of learning was adequate. The overall quality of attainment was good. Particular features included the following.

• At S1/S2, the majority of pupils were making good progress in their coursework.
• At S3/S4, the proportions of pupils attaining Credit or General awards were below the national averages but had improved in 2006.
• At S5/S6, the proportion of pupils attaining A-C grades in Higher biology was above the national average. The proportion of pupils attaining A-C grades in Higher human biology had improved steadily and was now well above national averages. The majority of pupils presented for Intermediate 2 biology attained A-C grades. The majority of the small numbers of pupils presented for Advanced Higher gained success.

Geography

Teachers gave clear explanations and made effective use of questioning to check knowledge and understanding. They conducted most lessons at a brisk pace. They used a variety of approaches and made effective use of a range of appropriate resources including ICT. Homework tasks were issued regularly and linked to coursework. Pupils worked effectively together and responded well when given opportunities to take responsibility for their own work. Staff provided pupils with helpful feedback, including appropriate advice on how to improve.

Overall, the quality of teaching, learning and meeting pupils’ needs was good. The overall quality of attainment was good. Particular features included the following.

• At S1/S2, almost all pupils were making good progress in their coursework. They had good recall of previous learning and were developing their enquiry and investigative skills.
• At S3/S4 the proportion of pupils attaining Credit or General awards had improved significantly. The proportion attaining Credit awards was now in line with the national average.
• At S5/S6 the proportion of pupils gaining A-C grades at Higher was well above the national average. Most of the small numbers presented for Advanced Higher had attained A-C grades. Around half of those presented at Intermediate 2 attained A-C grades.

Attainment

Information about the subjects inspected has been given earlier in the report. Across the school, particular features of pupils’ progress, results in examinations and other qualifications, including those awarded by the Scottish Qualifications Authority (SQA) within the Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework (SCQF)³ for the three year period 2004-2006, are included below.

By the end of S2 attainment was adequate. Particular features included the following.

• In English and mathematics, pupils’ performance had improved overall. By the end of S2, the majority of pupils were attaining appropriate national standards in reading, listening and mathematics. Less than half were doing so in writing and talking.
• Across the curriculum, pupils were making good progress in their coursework.

By the end of S4 attainment was weak. Particular features included the following.

• The proportions of pupils gaining five or more SCQF awards at levels 3 and 5 were below the national average. The proportions gaining these awards at level 4 were well below the national average.
• The school performed less well than schools with similar characteristics at levels 3 and 4, and in line with similar schools at level 5.
• The small numbers of pupils following skills-based, practical courses were making good progress towards certification.
• The proportion of pupils gaining Credit awards was well below the national averages in chemistry, graphic communication, home economics and physics. It was below the national averages in business education, drama, German and physical education.
• At Standard Grade, pupils performed less well in chemistry and notably less well in graphic communication in comparison with their other subjects.
• The proportion of no awards at Standard Grade was above the national average in computing studies, German and physics.

By the end of S6 attainment was good. Particular features included the following.

• The proportion of pupils attaining five or more awards at SCQF level 6 was in line with the national average. The proportions of pupils gaining one or more or three or more awards were below the national averages.
• At S5, the proportion of pupils attaining five or more A-C awards at SCQF level 6 was better than that of similar schools. The proportions attaining one or more, or three or more A-C grades were in line with those in similar schools. By S6, the performance in all of these measures was in line with that of similar schools.
• At Advanced Higher, the proportion of pupils gaining one or more A-C grades was in line with the national average. The performance at this level was better than in similar schools.
• At S5/S6 at Higher, the proportions of pupils attaining awards at grades A-C were well above national averages in music and physical education, and above in business management. The proportions gaining these grades were below the national averages in chemistry, and well below in drama and history.
• At Intermediate 2, the proportions of pupils gaining awards at grades A-C were well above the national averages in art and design and woodworking skills.
• The proportion attaining no awards was well above the national average in chemistry. Pupils performed less well in chemistry and physical education than in their other subjects.

4. How good is the environment for learning?

5. Leading and improving the school

Bo’ness Academy provided an improving environment for learning. It was successfully raising the achievement of most pupils. Senior managers and staff had worked well together to address significant challenges in aspects of ethos and pupils’ behaviour. Revised approaches to the behaviour management and rewards system were leading to greater consistency in practice. A major reorganisation of the school’s management structure and the pupil support arrangements had enabled staff to provide good support through a more integrated service. Staff were strongly committed to the school and morale was good. More recently, the school’s focus had shifted to the need to improve attainment across the school, including greater challenges for higher attaining pupils. New approaches to learning and teaching were showing signs of having a positive impact on attainment.

The headteacher provided very good leadership. In his four years in post, he had successfully addressed significant underlying ethos and behaviour issues. He had made a well-judged start to address concerns of low expectations and attainment. He had skilfully promoted strong teamwork among senior and middle managers. He had a clear appreciation of the issues facing the school and appropriate ideas for securing further improvements. The depute headteachers supported the headteacher very well in leading and managing the school. They carried out extensive remits with enthusiasm and commitment. As a team they had successfully taken forward a range of important initiatives. The Integrated Learning Community resource manager now took responsibility for operational aspects allowing other members of the team to focus more closely on educational issues. Principal teachers were still adapting to the school’s new management structure, developing their dual roles as curricular leaders and support managers. The rigour with which they engaged with subject departments varied. All principal teachers demonstrated strong commitment to pupils and had a clear focus on improvement. The extended support principal teachers displayed strong skills and carried out their remits very effectively.

Senior managers and principal teachers were steadily improving the procedures for monitoring and evaluating the work of the school. The school had surveyed staff, parents and pupils and produced evaluative reports on standards and quality. Staff had used the analysis of SQA attainment information very well to produce detailed and effective action plans for improvement. Early developments in monitoring progress and setting targets for attainment were showing positive impact in a few subjects. These developments now needed to be systematically developed across the school. Observations of learning and teaching had led to the sharing of good practice in some subjects. This development was still at an early stage and procedures were not yet being consistently applied. Overall, the school had good capacity for further improvement.

As well as building on the strengths and addressing the issues raised throughout this report, the school and the education authority should address the following main points for action.

Main points for action

To raise attainment and overall achievement the school should:

• continue to improve the curriculum to meet pupils’ needs;
• further raise expectations for behaviour and continue to address challenging behaviour;
• achieve greater consistency in applying revised approaches to improving the quality of pupils’ learning across all departments; and
• improve further the procedures for monitoring and evaluating the work of the school and ensure they have an impact on outcomes for learners.

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. Within two years of the publication of this report parents and carers will be informed about the progress made by the school.

Jim Bruce
HM Inspector

1 May 2007

Appendix 1 Indicators of quality

The following quality indicators have been used in the inspection process to contribute to the evaluation of the overall effectiveness of the school in promoting learning and achievement for all pupils.

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

Appendix 2 Summary of questionnaire responses

The following provides a summary of questionnaire responses. Key issues from the questionnaires have been considered in the inspection and comments are included as appropriate throughout the report.

Appendix 3 Attainment in Scottish Qualifications Authority (SQA) National Qualifications

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 attaining by end of S4

Percentage of relevant S4 roll attaining by end of S5

Percentage of relevant S4 roll attaining by end of S6

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, 1^st Floor, Endeavour House, 1 Greenmarket, Dundee DD1 4QB or by telephoning 01382 576700. Copies are also available on our website at www.hmie.gov.uk.

HMIE Feedback and Complaints Procedure

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 Frank Crawford, HMCI, at HM Inspectorate of Education, Europa Building, 450 Argyle Street, Glasgow G2 8LG.

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 email 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 Scottish Public Services Ombudsman, 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. See Appendix 2
2. Throughout this report, the term ‘parents’ should be taken to include foster carers, residential care staff and carers who are relatives or friends.
3. 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
4. Comparator schools are the 20 schools statistically closest to the school being inspected in terms of the key characteristics of the school population.