4 November 2008
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
Appendix 3 Good Practice
How can you contact us?
Cunard School was inspected in June 2008 as part of a national sample of provision for pupils with additional support needs. The inspection covered key aspects of the work of the school at all stages. It evaluated pupils' achievements, the effectiveness of the school, the environment for learning, the school's processes for self-evaluation and innovation, and its capacity for improvement. There was a particular focus on attainment in English language, mathematics and personal and social development.
HM Inspectors examined pupils' work and interviewed groups of pupils, including the pupil council, and staff. Members of the inspection team also met a group of parents1. There was no Parent Council.
The school serves West Dunbartonshire. It provides for primary aged pupils with additional support needs arising from social and emotional factors and family circumstances. At the time of the inspection the roll was 21. No pupils had Coordinated Support Plans. All pupils received free school meals. Six pupils attended the school full-time and the remainder had a placement shared between Cunard and their primary school. The time in mainstream provision varied from one half day to seven half days. A nurture group met in the ‘Rainbow Room’. This group included pupils from outwith the school.
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.
The few parents who responded to the questionnaire were very positive about all aspects of the school. Pupils enjoyed attending the school and all teachers and learning assistants liked working there. Pupils thought that teachers expected them to work hard and they helped when they had difficulties. All teachers felt that they set high standards for pupils’ attainment and celebrated their success regularly. All staff felt that there was mutual respect between staff and pupils. Teachers thought that they applied consistent standards of behaviour. Half of the pupils did not think that behaviour in the school was good. Teachers and ancillary staff did not think that there was effective communication in the school. The majority of staff did not think that the school was well led.
Learners’ experiences
The curriculum was satisfactory. Each class experienced a broad range of topics and an appropriate emphasis was placed upon English language and mathematics. A number of visiting specialists provided enrichment lessons in art and design and drama. Each class was timetabled for approximately two hours of physical activity each week. Teachers used the ‘soft play’ room too often as a reward for pupils after they had completed a minimal amount of work. Personal and social education was taught effectively as a separate component and also permeated the curriculum. A transition teacher supported pupils in their mainstream schools very effectively. Moves of pupils from one class to another, to make way for new enrolments, disrupted learning in some aspects of the curriculum.
The quality of teaching was good. Teachers were skilled at motivating and encouraging pupils. They were adept at using questions to help pupils to think. However, they had not yet made much use of the recently introduced information and communications technology (ICT) and provided a limited range of practical activities to reinforce learning. Writing and aspects of English language and music were taught skilfully to groups. Learning assistants provided very good support to individual pupils. The nurture group experienced a positive climate in the Rainbow Room. In this class, which included pupils from outwith the school, opportunities were made available for pupils to develop social skills through playing together.
Pupils responded well in lessons. For the most part, they were motivated and keen to participate. Some found it difficult to concentrate and were easily distracted. Pupils particularly enjoyed music lessons and singing games. Pupils developed their confidence and self-esteem successfully when talking about their work to the rest of the school at assemblies. Teachers and learning assistants used praise skilfully to enhance pupils’ self esteem. Pupils in the nurture group were developing social skills and learning to collaborate, share toys and play well with each other. Teachers respected and valued pupils and pupils trusted teachers and learning assistants. Pupils felt safe and well cared for in the school.
The school took some steps to help pupils develop their wider achievements. At lunchtime one group was learning to play the recorder. The school had planned an ambitious activities week to enable pupils to take part and achieve in a range of sports and activities, which included horse riding and skiing.
Improvements in performance
Overall, the school was successful at improving the personal and social skills of pupils. It had re-engaged all pupils with education and it had successfully integrated a significant proportion of pupils back into mainstream education.
The overall quality of attainment in English language was good. All pupils, with appropriate support, coped well with their classwork. Staff took account of individual levels of attainment and pupils were making good progress towards their own learning targets. Across all stages, pupils listened well to teachers and to each other. They expressed their opinions clearly during group and class discussions. Pupils displayed confidence in talking to adults and their classmates. At the upper stages, teachers assisted pupils to plan and structure their imaginative writing very effectively. Pupils were making steady progress in developing their spelling skills. In P2-P4, pupils were writing sentences using simple joining words and with suitable attention to punctuation. Pupils in the middle and upper stages made good use of the Internet to find information for their personal research topics. At all stages, pupils were developing their reading skills and read effectively for information.
Overall, pupils’ progress in mathematics was good. A few pupils were achieving appropriate national levels of attainment. At all stages pupils were developing skills in mental and written calculations and presented their work well. At the early stages pupils could recognise coins and count money. They further developed their number and counting skills through structured play activities in the Rainbow Room. In P5, pupils could multiply 2 digit numbers and had a knowledge of weight and measurement. By P7, pupils could measure angles and design symmetrical shapes. Some pupils had opportunities to handle money in a real-life context. For example, they did this when running stalls at the Fun Day in Whitecrook Primary School and when making financial transactions with Cunard Supersavers. However, pupils did not have sufficient opportunities to work together in problem solving, calculating and measuring. Pupils would benefit from greater use of ICT and games to support and extend mathematical skills.
Pupils at all stages were making good progress in developing their personal and social skills. They had developed very good relationships with teachers and learning assistants, particularly those who worked closely with them in the classroom. Most pupils were developing a sense of confidence and self-esteem. They were generally well behaved in class and responded well to classroom routines. Pupils contributed effectively to class discussions. They could share feelings and bring their own experiences to discussions. Pupils socialised well with one another at lunchtime. They understood that healthy food was important to help them grow and keep well. Pupils carried out responsibilities effectively across the school including as Junior Road Safety Officers and as buddies for younger pupils. The school had bought better equipment for the soft play room following suggestions by the pupil council. Staff made effective use of praise to encourage pupils to respond positively to each other.
The school had recognised the need to use more ICT to enrich learning and made this a priority in its improvement plan. It now had computers and an interactive board in each classroom and pupils were beginning to use these valuable resources. Teachers and learning assistants reflected on their work and introduced improvements in their own classrooms. Overall, however, the school improvement planning process had little impact on pupils’ learning experiences and achievements.
Approaches to meeting pupils’ learning needs were satisfactory. A good feature was the adoption of the reading schemes from each pupil’s mainstream school. This approach helped pupils to return to mainstream education. Work in English language and mathematics was well organised. Most pupils worked individually on mathematics exercises, and on phonics, spelling and reading. Some of the tasks and activities promoted the development of learning skills. However, many of these activities were too abstract and not sufficiently relevant to pupils. Teachers were skilled at identifying learning needs. They were regularly assisted in this task by an educational psychologist. All pupils had individualised educational programmes (IEPs) and individual behaviour plans. Both provided suitable medium term goals and were regularly reviewed. Parents and the relevant mainstream school were involved in the reviews of the IEPs. However, behaviour plans did not have sufficient impact. They were not easily understood by pupils. Staff in the Rainbow Room set very effective short-term behaviour targets. The school should build on this good practice and ensure that all pupils have agreed meaningful short-term behaviour targets.
Aspect |
Comment |
Care, welfare and development |
Staff provided good quality care and welfare. The school had suitable approaches for safeguarding pupils and all staff had been trained in child protection. Staff were alert to pupils’ emotional needs and highly skilled at managing their behaviour. Pupils felt safe and well cared for and they were happy coming to school. The school promoted a healthy lifestyle. A few learning assistants had not been trained how to manage challenging behaviour by pupils appropriately. |
Management and use of resources and space for learning |
The management and use of resources was satisfactory. Teachers made classrooms bright, attractive and stimulating. They used displays well in classrooms and corridors to celebrate pupils’ achievements. A small library also served as an extra classroom for one-to-one tuition. The school had effective security arrangements. The curriculum was well resourced. Staff and pupils used the local park and the school garden. There were very good procedures for recording medication. However, the school had no disabled access, and insufficient toilets for both staff and pupils. There were too few dedicated rooms, for example for craft activities, cooking and art and design. The ‘time out’ room was small, unwelcoming and unfurnished. |
Climate and relationships, expectations and promoting achievement and equality and fairness |
Relationships between staff and pupils were very positive, despite some challenging behaviour by pupils towards staff. The weekly assemblies were used well by staff to celebrate the achievements of pupils. Teachers and learning assistants had high expectations of pupils’ behaviour and achievements. Some pupils had low expectations of themselves. Teamwork between teachers and between teachers and learning assistants was very effective. Other relationships among members of staff were not always positive. Staff treated all pupils fairly and provided extra activities for them in their own time. The school carefully adjusted pupils’ time in mainstream schools to enable them to be included in learning activities. However, the school did not always make effective use of resources such as the ‘time out’ room. The curriculum included the study of other world religions and this helped pupils to appreciate different cultures and customs. It did not place enough emphasis upon equality issues. The provision of opportunities for religious observance were weak. |
The school’s success in involving parents, carers and families |
Parents were positive about the school and its impact on their children. The school communicated regularly with parents by telephone, newsletter and pupil reports. In addition, teachers used home-school diaries successfully to inform parents of their children’s behaviour and progress. Staff had formed a parenting group, with assistance from Social Work Services staff, to help parents manage their children’s behaviour using similar approaches to the school’s. Parents worked alongside the headteacher in the school’s fund raising group. |
Appendix 1 provides HM Inspectors’ overall evaluation of the work of the school.
Cunard School made a significant impact on its pupils by improving their personal and social skills and behaviour. This enabled them to re-engage with education. It had also succeeded in helping a significant proportion of pupils to go back into mainstream schools.
There were important weaknesses in the leadership of the school. The school did not have clear strategies focused on improving the quality of education. Communication was poor and staff did not feel that they were fully consulted. Teachers and learning assistants felt that they needed better support and encouragement. The school did have effective working relationships with its partner mainstream primary schools.
The school’s approaches to self-evaluation were weak. Teachers’ plans were monitored by the headteacher and there had been some visits to classrooms to observe learning and teaching. The school prepared an annual standards and quality report in which it recorded events and achievements. It did not include evaluations of its key areas of work and as a consequence did not provide a good basis for planning for improvement. The school’s improvement plan contained three priorities but they did not focus on achieving a positive impact upon pupils. Individual teachers and learning assistants reflected on their own work and made improvements to the learning experiences of pupils. Overall, however, there was not an effective corporate approach to using self-evaluation to bring about continuous improvement.
Main points for action The school and education authority, in liaison with HM Inspectors, should take action to ensure 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 liaise with the education authority to monitor progress with the school’s approach to leadership and school improvement. Within two years of the publication of this report parents will be informed about the progress made by the school.
Terry Carr
HM Inspector
4 November 2008
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? |
|
The curriculum |
satisfactory |
Teaching for effective learning |
good |
Learners’ experiences |
good |
Improvements in performance |
satisfactory |
How well are pupils’ learning needs met? |
|
Meeting learning needs |
satisfactory |
How good is the environment for learning? |
|
Care, welfare and development |
good |
Management and use of resources and space for learning |
satisfactory |
The engagement of staff in the life and work of the school |
good |
Expectations and promoting achievement |
good |
Equality and fairness |
good |
The school’s success in involving parents, carers and families |
good |
Leading and improving the school |
|
Developing people and partnerships |
satisfactory |
Improvement through 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 |
satisfactory |
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 |
|
|
In the course of the inspection, the following aspects of innovative and effective practice were evaluated as being worthy of wider dissemination.
Developing social skills in a nurture group The school had established a nurture group for pupils at the early stages. They met regularly in the Rainbow Room. This was a welcoming, bright and attractive area equipped with soft furnishings, pre-school equipment, books and toys. In this room pupils were encouraged to play together to develop early social skills such as collaborating, sharing resources and taking turns. Through the quiet and skilful intervention of staff, pupils’ positive behaviour was reinforced. On some occasions the group would go to a local park where the same positive behaviours were reinforced in a different setting. As a result of these approaches pupils were developing social skills and getting better at collaborating with their classmates. A particularly good feature was the approach adopted for setting individual behaviour targets. The nursery nurse discussed with each pupil their behaviour and from this discussion a target for the week was agreed. Care was taken to select one which was relevant and meaningful for the pupil. This was written in the pupils’ own words and monitored closely during the following sessions. This approach was helping pupils to improve their behaviour. |
If you would like an additional copy of this report
Copies of this report have been sent to the headteacher and school staff, the Executive Director of Education 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, Ground Floor Suite, Unit 7, Blair Court, 5 North Avenue, Clydebank Business Park, Clydebank, G81 2LA or by telephoning 0141 435 3550. 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 provision for pupils with additional support needs, 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 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 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.