St Flannan’s Primary School
Kirkintilloch
East Dunbartonshire Council

4 September 2007

Contents

1. Background
2. Key strengths
3. What are the views of parents, pupils and staff?
4. How good are learning, teaching and achievement?
5. How well are pupils’ learning needs met?
6. How good is the environment for learning?
7. Leading and improving the school
Appendix 1 Indicators of quality
Appendix 2 Summary of questionnaire responses
How can you contact us?

1. Background

St Flannan’s Primary School was inspected in April 2007 as part of a national sample of primary education. 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 and mathematics.

HM Inspectors examined pupils’ work and interviewed groups of pupils, including the pupil council, and staff. Members of the inspection team also met representatives of the School Board, parent-teacher association (PTA) and a group of parents¹.

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

St Flannan’s Primary School is a denominational school serving the Rosebank, Harestanes and Hillhead areas of Kirkintilloch. At the time of the inspection the roll was 234. The proportion of pupils who were entitled to free school meals was above the national average. Pupils’ attendance was in line with the national average.

2. Key strengths

3. What are the views of parents, pupils and staff?

HM Inspectors analysed responses to questionnaires issued to a sample of parents, P4 to P7 pupils, and to all staff. Information about the responses to the questionnaires appears in Appendix 2.

Parents were very positive about most aspects of the school’s work. They agreed that the school had a good reputation in the community and treated their children fairly. They found parents’ evenings to be informative and helpful. They felt welcome in the school. A few believed that the school did not deal effectively with poor behaviour. Pupils stated that teachers expected them to work hard, explained things clearly and helped them with any difficulties in their classwork. They enjoyed school and felt that they had a say in how to make their school better. Staff liked working in the school and were very positive about all aspects of their work. They felt that there was a strong sense of community and teamwork.

4. How good are learning, teaching and achievement?

Pupils’ learning experiences and achievements

The quality of the school’s curriculum was good overall. Staff provided pupils with a broad and balanced variety of learning activities. These included effective attention to aspects such as health education, enterprise education and information and communications technology (ICT). Most pupils had good opportunities to develop an appropriate range of knowledge, understanding and skills as they progressed through the school. The curriculum was not sufficiently well structured in a few areas, including environmental studies. Pupils at P1 to P3 did not have enough opportunities to learn through play, exercise choice and take responsibility for aspects of their own learning. Overall, the quality of teaching was good. Some interactive teaching, particularly at the upper stages, was very effective. At the early and middle stages, teachers did not use a sufficiently broad range of teaching approaches with groups and individuals. Teachers were well organised, gave clear explanations and used discussion effectively to develop pupils’ understanding. In all classes, teachers started lessons by providing pupils with clear explanations of what they were expected to learn. ICT was used well to enhance teaching in all curricular areas. Teachers set regular homework and were improving the range of homework activities at each stage.

All pupils were well motivated and worked well at the tasks set for them, without direct supervision. At the upper stages, they were learning to cooperate by working together on a range of activities such as working in teams to design posters on a health theme, and discussing a religious topic in groups. However, during the inspection, at the early and middle stages, teachers did not consistently ensure that the pace and challenge of pupils’ work was appropriate. Too often, tasks were based on the completion of text book pages or worksheets. These tasks did not challenge pupils consistently or require them to think for themselves.

Across the school, pupils demonstrated achievement in a wide range of contexts. They were making very good progress in developing their confidence, self esteem and skills as active citizens. Pupils were very aware of local and global issues. The school had received a green Eco School flag in recognition of its environmental work. Pupils were actively involved in recycling waste materials and spoke knowledgeably about the opportunities they had within school to learn about healthy lifestyles. They showed effective skills in enterprise education, including, for example, making fridge magnets and running a stationary shop. The pupils were given regular opportunities to contribute to the decision-making processes in school. They had chosen equipment and resources for the school, following consultation with other pupils. All pupils benefited from an extensive range of out-of-school clubs led by staff and members of the community.

English language

The overall quality of pupils’ attainment in English language was good. Most pupils achieved appropriate national levels of attainment in reading and writing. A significant number of pupils had attained these levels earlier than might normally be expected. Those who required further support in aspects of English language were making appropriate progress in their class work. Pupils were developing good skills in listening and talking. They listened well to instructions and directions from teachers. They spoke confidently about personal experiences and answered questions clearly. Pupils were less skilled in group discussion. Across the school, most pupils read with accuracy and fluency. They could discuss key features of books and identify their favourite author. However, their skills in analysing texts were less well developed. At all stages, pupils wrote for a range of personal, imaginative and functional purposes. Most pupils demonstrated a good knowledge about language. The quality of pupils’ handwriting and presentation of their work were not always of a sufficiently high standard.

Mathematics

The overall quality of pupils’ attainment in mathematics was good. Over the last three years, attainment levels had been inconsistent. There were encouraging signs of improvement in the current year. Almost all pupils had attained the appropriate national levels. A significant number were achieving national levels earlier than might normally be expected. Across the school, pupils had undertaken their own surveys and could display their findings. However, at P7, pupils were not confident in interpreting information from different graphs. They did not have enough experience of using ICT to organise and present information using databases and spreadsheets. At the early stages, pupils were making good progress in learning numeracy skills. At P7, pupils were quick and accurate in their mental calculations. At P4, pupils did not have a good understanding of number work. They were confident in their knowledge of time. At all stages, pupils demonstrated good understanding of the properties of two- and three-dimensional shapes. Across the school, pupils were developing their skills in problem solving. However, they were not always able to apply these skills effectively in different contexts.

5. How well are pupils’ learning needs met?

Class teachers and support staff gave useful help to individual pupils. They knew their pupils well and were responsive to their social and emotional needs. Teachers did not always take account of pupils’ prior attainment, to ensure that tasks were sufficiently challenging for all. The school used effective approaches to identify pupils with additional support needs. The depute headteacher and network support teacher planned effectively together to address difficulties in pupils’ learning. Helpful individualised educational programmes (IEPs) ensured teachers, pupils and parents were clear about pupils’ specific learning targets. Support assistants gave valuable and well-judged support to pupils. For example, they developed pupils’ reading skills by leading the ‘Rainbow Readers’ group, and delivered an effective programme of work for pupils experiencing difficulties with coordination and memory.

6. How good is the environment for learning?

7. Leading and improving the school

Appendix 1 provides HM Inspectors’ overall evaluation of the work of the school.

St Flannan’s Primary School provided a caring and supportive learning environment in which most pupils were making good progress in their learning. Staff had established a very positive ethos and provided strong pastoral care to help pupils achieve their potential. Overall, the quality of teaching was good. Overall, pupils needed to be given greater responsibility for their own learning, and increased opportunities to be independent and active in their learning. Staff needed to continue to provide more appropriate levels of challenge to pupils and improve the pace of learning.

The headteacher was highly dedicated to the school. She provided good leadership, which included some major strengths. She had a positive influence on the school’s orderly and supportive climate and had given a clear lead in taking forward appropriate priorities for improvement. She consulted with staff and parents on the work of the school and successfully encouraged staff involvement in curriculum development tasks. She led by example and worked hard to promote the school and its achievements. She managed the day-to-day running of the school effectively and also provided clear strategic direction to help secure future improvements. The headteacher was very ably supported by the depute headteacher and principal teacher. Both had extensive remits which they carried out very effectively. Their remits did not show, clearly enough, responsibility for aspects of the curriculum. The headteacher used a wide range of approaches to monitor and evaluate the work of the school. The headteacher and depute headteacher evaluated teachers’ plans, sampled pupils’ work and provided helpful written feedback to staff. They regularly observed learning and teaching and involved staff fully in reviewing and evaluating the work of the school. These initiatives had yet to ensure consistently high levels of challenge to all pupils across the school. The headteacher should now lead the further development of the school’s procedures for monitoring and evaluating the quality of its work, to ensure high quality learning experiences for all pupils. Overall, the school showed good capacity to review and improve its work.

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

Peter Carpenter

HM Inspector

4 September 2007

Appendix 1 Indicators of quality

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.

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

Appendix 2 Summary of questionnaire responses

Important features of responses from the various groups which received questionnaires are listed below.

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 Corporate Director (Community), 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, Europa Building, 450 Argyle Street, Glasgow G2 8LG or by telephoning 0141 242 0100. Copies are also available on our website www.hmie.gov.uk.

HMIE Feedback and Complaints Procedure

Should you wish to comment on any aspect of primary inspections, you should write in the first instance to Chris McIlroy, HMCI, at HM Inspectorate of Education, Denholm House, Almondvale Business Park, Almondvale Way, Livingston EH54 6GA.

If you have a concern about this report, you should write in the first instance to our Complaints Manager, HMIE Business Management Unit, Second Floor, Denholm House, Almondvale Business Park, Almondvale Way, Livingston, EH54 6GA. You can also e-mail HMIEComplaints@hmie.gsi.gov.uk. A copy of our complaints procedure is available from this office, by telephoning 01506 600200 or from our website at www.hmie.gov.uk.

If you are not satisfied with the action we have taken at the end of our complaints procedure, you can raise your complaint with the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman (SPSO). The SPSO is fully independent and has powers to investigate complaints about Government departments and agencies. You should write to the SPSO, Freepost EH641, Edinburgh EH3 0BR. You can also telephone 0800 377 7330 (fax 0800 377 7331) or e-mail: ask@spso.org.uk. More information about the Ombudsman’s office can be obtained from the website: www.spso.org.uk.

Crown Copyright 2007

HM Inspectorate of Education

This report may be reproduced in whole or in part, except for commercial purposes or in connection with a prospectus or advertisement, provided that the source and date thereof are stated.

1. Throughout this report, the term ‘parents’ should be taken to include foster carers, residential care staff and carers who are relatives or friends.