St Patrick’s Primary School
Kilsyth
North Lanarkshire Council

12 June 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 Patrick’s Primary School was inspected in March 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 the chairperson of the School Board, representatives of the parent-teacher association (PTA) and a group of parents¹.

St Patrick’s Primary School is a denominational school serving the communities of Kilsyth, Queenzieburn and Banton. At the time of the inspection the roll was 287. The proportion of pupils who were entitled to free school meals was in line with the national average. Pupils’ attendance was below the national average.

A newly-built school was nearing completion at the time of the inspection.

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.

Overall, parents were satisfied with almost all aspects of the work of the school. All felt that their children were treated fairly and that staff showed concern for their care and welfare. Almost all thought the school had a good reputation in the community. They found parents’ evenings helpful and informative. About a third of parents who responded to the questionnaire were not clear about the school’s priorities for improvement. Pupils were pleased about most aspects of school life. Almost all enjoyed being at the school and thought the school helped them to keep safe and healthy. They thought teachers listened to what they had to say and helped them sort things out when they were upset. Almost all liked the school meals, but were less happy with the lunchtime dining arrangements. Staff liked working in the school and thought they worked hard to promote and maintain good relations with the local community. They thought they set high standards for pupils’ attainment and showed care and concern for their welfare.

4. How good are learning, teaching and achievement?

Pupils’ learning experiences and achievements

The overall quality of the curriculum was good. The school provided pupils with a broad curriculum which was enhanced by a good range of activities in sports and the arts. Teachers had allocated additional time to writing and this had been effective in helping to raise pupils’ attainment. There was good emphasis on pupils’ personal and social development (PSD), including activities related to education for enterprise and citizenship. The headteacher and staff had identified the need to review the programme for mathematics to improve continuity and progression. The school had begun to increase the amount of time given to physical education (PE) but not all pupils yet experienced two hours of PE each week. The quality of teaching was good and several lessons were lively and interesting. Some very well structured approaches in writing and drama provided stimulating learning experiences for pupils. Teachers planned carefully and shared the purpose of lessons with pupils. Teachers had begun the practice of discussing learning targets with pupils and giving them helpful feedback on how to improve. Almost all made good use of praise to raise pupils’ confidence and reward their achievements. Teachers set regular homework but there was scope for more variety in homework tasks.

The quality of pupils’ learning was good. Most pupils were well behaved and attentive and completed tasks competently. They responded well when cooperating with others on a range of practical activities, including writing, research and science activities. A few were not sufficiently challenged by the pace of learning. Pupils were active in their learning, for example through play at P1 and P2 and in drama and PSD. They were developing good skills in information and communications technology (ICT), but they did not yet use computers for a wide enough variety of tasks. Pupils were beginning to evaluate their own and others’ work well, particularly in writing and drama. Throughout the school, pupils could talk fluently about what they had learned. A few were unsure of what they needed to do to improve, particularly in mathematics. Pupils at all stages were developing sound attitudes and developing good skills in enterprise, citizenship, and health education. The Spring Fair activities and productive links with a local business had helped to develop their confidence and understanding of the world of work. Pupils contributed effectively to the school’s decision-making process through the pupil council, Eco committee and health committee. They were enthusiastic about their involvement and successes in a range of lunchtime and out-of-school activities such as chess, football, netball and drama. Pupils were aware of the difficulties faced by others and regularly helped to raise funds for a range of charities, including a local hospice and the Malawi Back Pack appeal. Visits from an author, awards for artist of the month and visits to museums and galleries enhanced pupils’ knowledge of the arts and culture. Pupils at P7 were involved in a residential experience which helped to develop their team-building skills. At all stages, pupils enjoyed opportunities to take on roles of responsibility within the classroom, for example as group leaders and monitors.

English language

The overall quality of pupils’ attainment in English language was good and had improved over the last three years. Most pupils were achieving appropriate national levels of attainment in reading and writing. A significant number across the school were achieving these levels earlier than might normally be expected. Pupils with additional support needs, and those with English as an additional language were making steady progress in their learning. Most pupils listened well to their teachers and talked confidently about personal experiences. By P6 and P7, they participated enthusiastically in small group discussions. Across the school, pupils read fluently and could discuss stories they had read. They were beginning to develop an understanding of how writers created their effects in different texts. Most were applying this knowledge well in their own writing. Pupils wrote regularly and at length and the quality of writing was improving significantly. Pupils did not have sufficient opportunities to read or write poetry and had very limited knowledge of Scots language and literature. Pupils did not make sufficient use of computers to draft and edit their work. Across the school, the presentation of pupils’ written work was good.

Mathematics

The overall quality of pupils’ attainment in mathematics was good and had shown some improvement over the last three years. Most pupils were achieving appropriate national levels of attainment. Almost all pupils in P2 were achieving appropriate national levels earlier than might normally be expected. However, this progress was not sustained as pupils progressed through the middle and upper stages. By P7, most pupils were achieving appropriate national levels. Across the school, a significant number of pupils were capable of achieving more. Pupils at the early stages were making a very good start to the development of their mathematical skills. Across the school, pupils had good information handling skills and were competent in collecting and organising data and interpreting graphs. Most pupils were confident in describing a range of problem-solving strategies. Pupils with additional support needs were making appropriate progress in their learning.

5. How well are pupils’ learning needs met?

Arrangements to meet the needs of all pupils were good. The school had identified the need to review their support for learning policy. In the most effective lessons, teachers provided a good range of activities and tasks. However, across the school, tasks and activities did not always match the needs of all pupils. As a result, some activities were not sufficiently challenging, particularly for higher attaining pupils. In a few classes, the pace of learning in mathematics was too slow. The network support teacher was appropriately deployed and contributed effectively for those pupils with identified support needs. The special educational needs coordinator worked effectively with class teachers to develop individualised educational programmes (IEPs) and advised them appropriately on how to meet the needs of pupils. IEPs were reviewed regularly. Classroom and support assistants provided very effective support for learning. The school’s plans for pupil support had been affected by staffing difficulties.

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 Patrick’s Primary School provided good quality education for its pupils. The headteacher, teachers and support staff provided a caring, supportive and inclusive learning environment in which pupils felt safe, happy and valued. Staff encouraged pupils to achieve in a wide range of areas. Attainment in English language was good and improving. The level of pace and challenge offered to higher achieving pupils in mathematics required improvement. The quality of teaching and pupils’ learning was good overall. The headteacher and staff now needed to identify and share strengths in teaching and learning to ensure high quality experiences for all pupils.

The headteacher was highly dedicated to the school and provided good leadership with major strengths in some aspects. She had earned the respect of pupils, staff and the community. The headteacher had successfully promoted pupils’ broader achievements and led improvements to the curriculum and quality of learning. As a result, the school had been successful in raising attainment, particularly in writing. Teachers were involved in the process of school self-evaluation and were encouraged to be involved in aspects of curriculum development. The depute headteacher fulfilled her pastoral role appropriately. The headteacher needed to develop further the role of the depute headteacher. The headteacher used a range of appropriate methods for self-evaluation, including monitoring teachers’ planning, observing lessons and giving written feedback. However, procedures were not always rigorous enough and did not impact sufficiently on classroom practice or pupils’ attainment. The tracking of pupils’ progress was not sufficiently robust. With a more rigorous approach to self-evaluation focused on the quality of learning and teaching, the school is well placed to continue to improve.

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.

Janet Ure
HM Inspector

12 June 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 Executive Director Learning and Leisure 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, 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 contact our Complaints Manager by telephoning 01506 600258/9 or write to 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 the HMIE Feedback and Complaints Procedure leaflet is available from this office by telephoning the above telephone number 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.

Footnotes

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