Maxwelltown High School
Dumfries and Galloway Council

8 January 2008

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

Maxwelltown High School was inspected in September 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. Inspectors focused particularly on English, mathematics, geography, and technical education. 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, including representatives of pupil councils, and staff. Members of the inspection team also met the chairperson of the Parent Council and a group of parents.

Maxwelltown High School is a non-denominational school serving the Lochside and Lincluden areas of Dumfries and part of the surrounding rural area. At the time of the inspection, the roll was 386. The percentage of pupils entitled to free school meals was well above the national average. Pupils’ attendance was below the national average. The school had a unit, the Learning Centre, which provided additional support for learning for 35 pupils with specific learning needs.

2. Key strengths

HM Inspectors identified the following key strengths.

• A strong culture of fairness, support and care for pupils.
• Innovative approaches to the curriculum, particularly at S3/S4.
• Mentoring and tracking systems which were leading to improvements in pupils’ learning.
• The very good relationships amongst staff and pupils which created a purposeful working environment.
• The positive impact on learning of the headteacher’s and senior managers’ leadership.

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 rationale for curricular innovation was clear. Senior managers had initiated appropriate discussion with pupils, parents and staff. They had implemented very systematic arrangements for evaluation of the curriculum change. Particular features of the curriculum included the following.

• The school had analysed carefully issues arising from its performance in national examinations. In response, it had adopted a distinctive approach to the S3/S4 curriculum. Presentations for Standard Grade examinations were now being phased across S3 and S4 to reduce the demands on pupils in any one year, to increase the pace of learning and to maximise the range of subjects offered. Initial results for those S3 pupils presented for certificate examinations in 2007 were encouraging.
• The S1/2 curriculum had appropriate breadth and balance, although subjects required to build more consistently on pupils’ prior learning experiences in primary schools. A clearer link with S3 courses was also needed to prepare pupils for earlier presentation.
• S3 and S4 pupils followed courses in English and mathematics over two years. In S3, they were presented for three other Standard Grades or National Qualifications. In S4, the same pattern applied, reducing the number of subjects to five per year for individuals.
• The school had established appropriate links with local colleges, to broaden the range of subjects and vocational opportunities available and to provide pupils with additional opportunities for personal development.
• The programme of personal, social and health education (PSHE) had recently been reviewed to improve its coherence and progression. Provision for religious and moral education was appropriate at all stages.
• The curriculum for pupils in the Learning centre was based on national guidelines, offered opportunities for national accreditation and provided good preparation for pupils leaving school, through life skills courses and college links.
• The school’s provision for pupils with social, emotional and behavioural needs did not fully meet pupils’ needs because of weaknesses in liaison between the school, external support agencies and the education authority.
• Staffing constraints had impacted adversely on a number of subjects for several years, including drama, modern languages and history. Limited provision of physical education for pupils beyond S4 as part of their curriculum entitlement was being reviewed.
• Arrangements for curricular and vocational guidance were effective.
• The school was developing very promising links with the education authority’s CREATE team for culture and the arts, including the recent appointment of an artist in residence in the school.

Teaching and meeting pupils’ needs

The overall quality of teaching was good. In most subjects, teaching was well judged and effective. Many lessons were of high quality. However, a minority required more impact, in order to engage pupils fully and to let them see the relevance and significance of what they were learning. Most teachers were making systematic efforts to ensure that pupils were aware of the aims of lessons. However, in some cases this slowed the pace of learning. In a few very good examples, teachers reviewed learning during and at the end of lessons. Overall, teachers gave clear instructions and explanations and made effective use of questioning. They were not yet using a sufficient variety of teaching approaches, however, with limited opportunities for active or collaborative learning. The development of ICT as a medium for teaching and learning was adversely affected by poor classroom facilities.

Overall, the school met pupils’ needs well. Arrangements to support pupils’ learning were effective. Teachers received high quality information and advice from learning support staff to assist them in preparing courses to meet the needs of individuals and groups. Class groupings were carefully planned to ensure an optimum level of support for identified groups of pupils. Staff used a well designed computerised tracking system to monitor pupils’ progress regularly and allow early action to meet individual needs. However, teaching approaches in a small number of classes did not take account of the full range of pupils’ needs. As a consequence, some pupils struggled to cope with class activities whilst a few were not sufficiently challenged. The school had begun to extend the curriculum by developing courses at Access level in some areas to allow more pupils to achieve success in exams. A significant number of pupils had Individualised Educational Programmes (IEPs) which contained appropriate learning targets and were regularly monitored. Support assistants provided high quality assistance to a large number of pupils in class. There was insufficient support to directly address the needs of some pupils with emotional or behavioural needs who required a high level of adult supervision. The library assistant provided very good support for pupils in developing reading skills at S1/S2 and in investigative activities in a number of subjects.

The Learning Centre effectively supported pupils with a wide range of complex additional learning needs. Pupils were provided with well judged support to enable their effective inclusion in the wider life of the school. They attended some mainstream classes and received targeted support in the learning centre. Pupils were enthusiastic about their learning and could share their views with others. Teachers skilfully tailored targets in IEPs to the individual needs and abilities of each pupil. Where appropriate, staff had prepared coordinated support plans for pupils. Others were currently under preparation. Teachers and support assistants had built up very good relationships with pupils through regular feedback on learning targets. However, support assistants lacked sufficient planned time for liaison with other staff. Staff had very good arrangements to support pupils transferring into the Learning Centre and preparing them for moving on to colleges and other centres.

Learning and personal development

Most pupils were well behaved in class and were motivated to learn and develop their skills. When given stimulating and interesting activities they responded enthusiastically and, with prompting, were prepared to accept responsibility for their own learning. In too many classes, however, the pace of learning was slow and pupils were often passive listeners. Overall, pupils had too few opportunities for active learning, through expressing their views in discussion or independent investigation and planning. There was limited evidence of collaborative learning. In a number of subjects, staffing discontinuity had disrupted the flow of learning and had impacted adversely on levels of attainment.

At all stages pupils were making good progress in developing personal and social skills. The high quality planned programme for PSHE placed a strong emphasis on developing curricular and vocational education from S1 to S6. This included participating in enterprise activities, developing interview skills and completing a work experience programme. Pupils extended their skills and applied them in different contexts through links with local colleges. They were tolerant of individual differences and were caring and supportive of others. Many had successfully entered national competitions and had recently been involved in compiling an award-winning documentary on the theme of social responsibility. Many pupils participated enthusiastically in a range of extra curricular activities including badminton, football, rugby, curricular visits and residential trips in the UK and Europe. They took part in visits to the Glasgow Science Centre and the Galloway Arts Festival theatre trips, a Masterchef competition and a story telling day. An artist in residence was working with pupils to develop their awareness of, and participation in, cultural and creative activities. Pupils were developing their awareness of aspects of citizenship through fund-raising for a range of charities. For example, they had worked in partnership with local businesses to organise a highly successful fashion show. Whilst some older pupils acted as helpers to younger pupils, opportunities in this area were not sufficiently developed to enable pupils to take on leadership roles, for example, through buddying younger pupils or assisting in their learning.

English

Teachers shared the aims of lessons consistently and provided clear explanations and instructions. They used effective approaches for developing pupils’ personal reading in S1/S2 and a range of homework activities to reinforce classwork. They provided appropriate opportunities for pupils to work in pairs and groups, and in some classes pupils spoke confidently. At times pupils’ learning was too passive, however, and the quality of discussion and dialogue did not always fully develop their understanding. Classroom activities needed to provide more sustained support and challenge to meet pupils’ learning needs fully.

Overall, the quality of teaching was good, and of learning and meeting pupils’ needs was adequate. Attainment was weak. Particular features included the following.

• At S1/S2, most pupils made good progress from the levels of attainment they had reached by primary 7. Although pupils made good progress in their coursework, less than half attained appropriate national standards in reading. Only a few pupils attained these standards in writing, talking and listening.
• At S3/S4, the proportion of pupils attaining General or Credit awards at Standard Grade was consistently well below the national average.
• At S5/S6, an increasing proportion of pupils had gained an A-C award at Intermediate 2. Around half of the small number presented at Higher attained an A-C award.

Mathematics

Teachers gave clear explanations and used homework well. They were making progress in using interactive whiteboards to enhance the quality of pupils’ learning. They did not provide pupils with enough opportunities to explore or investigate mathematical ideas, however, or to think for themselves when tackling challenging problems. Most pupils were attentive and worked well. Teachers supported pupils effectively on the tasks they were given. In some classes, learning or behaviour support specialists made a helpful additional input to meeting pupils’ learning needs. The department was short of its full complement of teachers, and this shortage was affecting the quality of support for some classes.

Overall, the quality of teaching was good, and of learning and meeting pupils’ needs was adequate. Attainment was weak. Particular features included the following.

• At S1/S2, most pupils made good progress from the levels of attainment they had reached by primary 7. However, less than half attained appropriate national levels by the end of S2, and this proportion had declined.
• At S3/S4, almost all pupils attained an award at Standard Grade. Only a few pupils attained an award at Credit level.
• At S5/S6, around half of all pupils presented at Higher or Intermediate levels attained an A-C award. There were signs of improvement in pass rates at Intermediate levels 1 and 2 over the last three years.

Geography

A wide variety of approaches was used to achieve learning outcomes, with increasingly effective use of ICT to improve the quality of learning. The aims of lessons were shared with pupils and summarised effectively. Questions were used well and pupils were given clear explanations and instructions. Pupils responded well and worked hard, especially when given responsibility for aspects of their own learning. Well planned homework was issued regularly at each stage. A variety of appropriate resources was used well to support pupils in their coursework. Pupils were very well supported by class teachers and additional support staff. Staff needed to take more account of pupils’ prior learning in primary schools.

Overall, the quality of teaching was very good, and of learning and meeting pupils’ needs was good. Attainment was good. Particular features included the following.

• At S1/S2, almost all pupils were making good progress in their coursework. They were developing a good knowledge and understanding of geographical concepts, including map and atlas skills.
• At S3/S4, the proportion of pupils attaining awards at Credit or General levels was well below the national average, but had improved recently. At Intermediate 1 and 2, most candidates had gained an A-C award in recent years.
• At S5/S6, most of the small number of pupils presented at Higher had gained an A-C award. All of the small numbers at Access 3 had gained an award.

Technical education

Teachers gave clear explanations and instructions. In craft classes, questions were used well and practical demonstrations were effective. Teachers were well organised and shared the purposes of lessons with pupils. They were making increasingly effective use of limited ICT resources to enhance the teaching and learning experience for pupils. Pupils enjoyed their craft activities, and worked well in groups or pairs. Teachers and support for learning assistants provided effective support for pupils’ learning, including those with additional support needs. The pace of work was slow in a few classes, leading to some higher attaining pupils not being sufficiently challenged.

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

• At S1/S2, most pupils showed good skills in craftwork. They demonstrated the commitment to produce work of a high standard and some craft pieces were of very good quality.
• At S3/S4, almost all of the large number of pupils presented for Standard Grade craft and design attained an award.
• At S5/S6, the proportion of pupils attaining A-C awards in product design was above the national average at Higher and well above at Intermediate 2. Almost all pupils who had been presented for practical craft skills had gained A-C awards.

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 2005-2007, are included below.

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

• During S1/S2, pupils made considerable progress in English and mathematics from their levels on entry into S1. By the end of S2, around a quarter of pupils were attaining appropriate national levels of attainment in reading and mathematics; fewer were doing so in writing. These levels had declined since 2005.
• At these stages, standards of attainment and progress were variable within the inspected subjects and across the school. Staff were using a computerised monitoring system increasingly effectively to record achievements and track progress.

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

• The school had achieved recent improvements at SCQF levels 3, 4 and 5. In particular, the performance of those candidates sitting the Standard Grade and National Qualifications examinations early at S3 had contributed significantly to the improvements across most subjects.
• Overall, the proportions of pupils gaining five or more SCQF awards at levels 4 and 5 were well below the national average. The school performed notably less well than schools with similar characteristics. The proportion gaining these awards at level 3 was below the national average but in line with similar schools.
• All of those candidates presented at Access level had achieved awards.
• The proportion of pupils gaining Credit awards at Standard Grade was well below the national averages in biology, home economics and physical education. It was below the national averages in chemistry and computing studies.
• Of the large number of pupils with IEPs, the success rate towards targets had improved significantly over the last three years and was now over 90%.
• A significant proportion of pupils had achieved awards in alternative vocational courses provided in nearby colleges.

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

• By the end of S5, and at the end of S6, the proportions of pupils attaining one or more, three or more and five or more awards at SCQF level 6 were well below the national averages. The proportion of pupils attaining these levels was notably poorer than that of similar schools.
• By the end of S6, the proportion of pupils achieving five or more awards at SCQF level 5 was well below the national average. This performance was notably poorer than in other similar schools.
• At S5/6, the proportions of pupils achieving Higher awards at grades A-C were well below the national averages in art and design, and below in information systems.
• At Intermediate 2, the proportion of pupils gaining A-C grades was well above the national averages in hospitality: practical cookery.

4. How good is the environment for learning?

5. Leading and improving the school

Maxwelltown High School provided a caring, inclusive and supportive learning environment for all pupils. Staff knew their pupils very well and had a strong focus on continuous improvement. Some pupils achieved highly, but the school was not yet successful in raising achievement sufficiently for all. The school had recognised the need for a wider variety of approaches and greater challenge for higher attaining pupils. Improved approaches to classroom practice were beginning to have an impact on learning, teaching and attainment, though these were not yet consistently applied across all subjects. Staff now needed to share such good practice more widely. Revised approaches to promoting positive behaviour had improved the environment for learning. Overall, attainment was improving, particularly at S3/S4. The school needed to promote its achievements more effectively within the wider community.

The headteacher provided very good leadership. He had a very clear strategic vision for the school, and was effective in using staff skills to improve the school. He had a thorough knowledge of the school’s strengths and areas for improvement. He maintained a high profile around the school and enjoyed very good relationships with staff, pupils and parents. His leadership, which placed learning firmly at the centre of the school’s agenda, had been a major factor in creating an inclusive school. More widely, leadership across the school was good. The headteacher had delegated responsibilities well to the two depute headteachers. Their individual strengths and skills had been deployed very effectively in key aspects of the work of the school. This had been particularly successful in the development of the school’s monitoring and tracking systems, and in the oversight and leadership of the pupil support system within the revised management structure. The impact of curriculum and pupil support principal teachers on the quality of learning varied. Most had made significant contributions to developments which impacted positively on the overall quality of pupils’ learning and achievement. A few had not yet fully implemented their whole-school responsibilities within the revised management system. The Learning Centre was very well organised and led.

The school had an appropriate range of procedures for evaluating the quality of its work, set out in an annual calendar for quality improvement. These included regular analysis of attainment results, annual reports on standards and quality, and observations of classroom practice with feedback to staff. Staff used information from primary schools, in conjunction with attainment data from tests carried out in S1, to establish the baseline for target-setting for all pupils. This information was processed within the computerised system for monitoring attainment, achievements and progress, which highlighted good progress and identified issues to be addressed. Pupils’ involvement in tracking was being increased by the capacity for them to access and view their own files online. Pupils, parents and staff had been consulted regularly about learning, and improvements had been made as a result. Commendably, the school had adopted regular and detailed approaches to evaluate the implementation of the changes to the S3/S4 curriculum. Effective self-evaluation had led to recent positive changes to learning and behaviour support. The school now needed to share the best practice more widely and focus improvements on teaching approaches which develop pupils’ confidence and self expression. Overall, the school had good capacity to make further improvements.

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

• Continue to improve teaching approaches to improve pupils’ attainment, self-confidence and independence.
• Continue to develop self-evaluation to focus more directly on sharing best practice in engaging pupils more actively in their learning.
• Ensure that new curricular arrangements have a positive impact on attainment.
• Address the accommodation issues identified in this report, particularly those concerned with health and safety.

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

8 January 2008

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 Service Director for Schools Services, 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

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 and Communications Team, 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 2008

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. Pre Appeal
5. Comparator schools are the 20 schools statistically closest to the school being inspected in terms of the key characteristics of the school population.