St Mark’s Primary School and Nursery Class
Shettleston
Glasgow City Council

23 October 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 Mark’s Primary School and Nursery Class were inspected in June 2007 as part of a national sample of primary and nursery education. The inspection covered key aspects of the work of the school at all stages. It evaluated nursery children's and 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 the quality of the children's experience in the nursery, pupils’ work and interviewed groups of pupils and staff. Members of the inspection team also met a group of parents¹. There was no School Board.

St. Mark’s Primary School is a denominational school serving an area in the north east of Glasgow. The school is part of the St Andrew’s New Learning Community. At the time of the inspection the roll was 249, including 70 children in the nursery class. The proportion of pupils who were entitled to free school meals was well above the national average. Pupils’ attendance was below the national average.

2. Key strengths

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

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.

Parents felt that the school had a good reputation in the local community. They considered that their concerns were dealt with effectively. A significant number would have liked more information about the work of the school. All parents of nursery children felt that their children enjoyed being at nursery. They considered that the nursery had good accommodation and resources to support children’s development. Pupils in primary classes enjoyed school and were confident that teachers would help them if they had problems. They were proud of their work on the eco committee. Staff considered that pupils were enthusiastic about their learning and their successes were celebrated regularly. Teachers identified teamworking developed among staff as a strength. However, staff did not think that there were good opportunities for them to be involved in the decision-making process. Almost all staff considered that there was a lack of strategic leadership in the school and that communication between senior managers was not effective.

4. How good are learning, teaching and achievement?

Pupils’ learning experiences and achievements

Overall the curriculum was weak. In the nursery class there were well-planned opportunities for children to progress in all areas of the curriculum. However, in primary classes teachers were not provided with guidance on the balance of the curriculum. Overall, insufficient attention had been paid to the times allocated by teachers to different curricular areas from P1 to P7. Pupils’ knowledge and skills were not developed systematically from stage to stage due to a lack of continuity and progression in a number of curricular areas. Teachers did not make enough use of information and communications technology (ICT) to support pupils’ learning. The school had plans to increase opportunities for pupils to be active in their learning through play activities at the early stages. Pupils from P3 to P7 regularly received swimming lessons. However, as yet, the school had not considered how they would provide two hours of quality physical education, in line with national advice. There were good opportunities for pupils to develop enterprise skills. These included a range of recycling activities and the introduction of a smoothie bar which was operated by pupils at P7. There were some instances of good direct teaching. Overall, the quality of teaching was adequate. Teachers were organised and planned individual lessons well. Most teachers explained the purposes of lessons and questioned pupils effectively. However, in some lessons too much whole-class teaching limited opportunities for discussion between teachers and pupils, and amongst pupils themselves. Homework tasks lacked variety and challenge.

The quality of learning was weak. Children in the nursery were settled and aware of playroom routines. They were developing good skills in sharing toys, cooperating during play and taking turns. They chose activities well and most were motivated and enthusiastic. They were developing independence in personal tasks and helped tidy the playroom and serve snacks. Children made effective use of a suitably wide range of early technology and many were skilled at using the interactive whiteboard. Props were used well by children to develop imaginary play scenarios. They were developing good skills in climbing, crawling, jumping and balancing when using challenging play equipment and toys but access to energetic activities was too limited. At the primary stages, the majority of pupils had positive attitudes to learning and responded well to teachers’ questioning. However, in a few lessons a minority of pupils became easily distracted. The majority of pupils settled to work quickly and worked well on tasks set for them. However, pupils’ skills in working independently, taking responsibility and working together in small groups were not sufficiently well developed. At P7, pupils worked well collaboratively when exploring issues of trust and ways to resolve conflict. Pupils were not always clear about what they had to do to improve their learning.

The school took some steps to help pupils develop their wider achievements. Pupils took pride in caring for the environment. They took responsibility for monitoring energy use, recycling paper and for maintaining the memorial garden. The school had been awarded an Eco Schools (Scotland) Green Flag. At all stages, pupils worked together in a range of enterprise activities, including making and selling healthy fruit drinks and organising coffee mornings. All pupils were learning how to present to an audience through participation in the annual school concert. At P4 to P7, pupils were developing their sports skills in after-school clubs, including football and basketball. Pupils benefited from participation in an anti-sectarianism initiative with a local primary school and had been successful in a poster competition. Pupils in P6 and P7 developed their self-esteem and confidence through their responsibilities as junior road safety officers and buddies. At all stages, pupils were aware of the needs of others and regularly raised money for a range of charities.

English language

Children in the nursery were making good progress in communication and language. They were developing in confidence when speaking to adults and each other and most listened well to instructions and stories. Children enjoyed investigating early mark-making through writing lists, drawing plans and taking notes when playing imaginatively. A few children used books well to find information when playing. Overall, the quality of pupils’ attainment in English language from P1 to P7 was adequate. In recent years, the school had made some progress in raising levels of attainment. The majority of pupils had achieved appropriate national levels of attainment in reading and writing. A few pupils were attaining these levels earlier than might normally be expected. The school did not systematically maintain assessment information on pupils’ attainment in listening and talking. At P1 to P3, the majority of pupils were making good progress in developing early literacy skills. At almost all stages, the majority of pupils who were experiencing difficulty in their classwork were receiving appropriate support and were making good progress. Across the school, most pupils listened well and responded appropriately to teachers’ explanations, instructions and questions. At P7, pupils were able to read fluently and with expression, and to extract information from texts. However, pupils were not given sufficient opportunities to read a range of books for pleasure. Across the school, pupils had not developed their writing skills for a sufficient range of purposes. Writing tasks concentrated too heavily on imaginative writing. Opportunities for pupils to write reports or to produce extended pieces of writing of an appropriate quality in other curricular areas were limited.

Mathematics

Children in the nursery were making good progress in their understanding of early mathematics. They were developing good skills in counting but some children were less confident in their recognition of numbers. They measured ingredients accurately when baking. Most could recognise basic shapes and were developing skills in sorting and matching objects. They were well supported by staff to solve simple problems when playing with construction toys. In the primary classes, the overall quality of attainment in mathematics was adequate. In recent years, the school had improved the level of pupils’ attainment in mathematics. Most pupils were attaining appropriate national levels and some achieved these levels earlier than might normally be expected. However, there were gaps in pupils’ knowledge and understanding of mathematics. Most pupils were making good progress with their coursework. The majority of pupils who experienced difficulties in mathematics were making good progress. Across the school, pupils collected and displayed appropriately collated information in graphs. However, pupils in P6 and P7 had difficulty extracting information from a range of graphs. They did not have experience of using ICT to organise and present information. At all stages, most pupils were competent using and understanding number and money but in P6 and P7, pupils were not confident in the use of fractions, decimals and percentages. Pupils could identify a range of two- and three-dimensional shapes appropriate to their stage, but were not always able to discuss their properties. At P6, pupils were not secure in their knowledge of angles. At all stages, pupils were able to use strategies to help solve mathematical problems.

5. How well are pupils’ learning needs met?

The school’s approaches to supporting pupils’ learning were weak. In the nursery class, there was an appropriate balance between activities children could choose and those led by adults. Most group activities were suitably challenging. However, from P1 to P7, teachers did not always ensure that tasks and activities provided appropriate pace and challenge for the majority of pupils. In most lessons, opportunities for pupils to work in groups and individually were limited. The headteacher had not developed effective procedures for identifying and supporting potentially vulnerable pupils. The area network support teacher provided a good level of support for individuals and small groups. She provided advice and guidance to classroom assistants to enable them to give valuable support to individual pupils. There were individualised educational programmes (IEPs) in place to help pupils achieve success in their learning. However, these were not well managed and pupils’ progress towards achieving learning targets was not being effectively monitored. IEPs were reviewed regularly. Parents and pupils were not yet sufficiently involved in setting and reviewing learning targets. Appropriate support had been provided for the small number of pupils with English as an additional language and they were making good progress.

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.

The nursery class provided children with a welcoming learning environment. Children were making good progress and had good opportunities to be active in their learning. However, this was not built on effectively at the early stages of the primary school. Staff showed concern for the care and welfare of nursery children and pupils. Overall, at the primary stages, attainment in English language and mathematics was adequate. There was a need for teachers to improve learning and teaching and balance the structure of the curriculum. Pupils responded well to their involvement in decision making through the eco committee. However, across the school, they did not have enough opportunities to be responsible for their own learning. They needed learning experiences that provided them with greater challenge.

There were major weaknesses in the quality of leadership provided by the headteacher. He placed a priority on the care and welfare of pupils. However, he had not provided sufficient leadership for learning. Sustained effort was required to ensure improvements in the curriculum, learning, teaching and meeting pupils’ needs. Staff did not feel well supported by the headteacher. Expectations of pupils’ attainment were not sufficiently high and procedures for identifying those in need of additional support lacked rigour. There was a lack of opportunities for staff to work together collaboratively. The depute headteacher managed the nursery class and early years’ classes effectively. She had supported staff in planning for the development of play in the early years and in revising planning procedures. Nursery staff were aware of the implications of the Scottish Social Services Council Codes of Practice. The post of principal teacher had remained unfilled for the whole session. The school’s approaches for self-evaluation were unsatisfactory. Senior managers monitored teachers’ plans. However, their feedback to staff did not always provide useful guidance to enable teachers to ensure continuity in the curriculum and improve their practice. They had recently started to visit classes to monitor the quality of learning and teaching. However, these visits often lacked focus and did not result in improvements to learning and teaching. Parents and pupils had not been involved in evaluating aspects of the work of the school. Teachers had received insufficient guidance in the use of quality indicators developed nationally. As a result they had not used them effectively to evaluate the work of the school. Procedures for monitoring and tracking pupils’ progress lacked rigour. Without significant support from the education authority, the school had limited capacity for improvement.

At the last Care Commission inspection of the nursery class there was one requirement and one recommendation. The recommendation had been addressed. The requirement, relating to safe recruitment practices, remains in place.

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 engage with the school and the education authority to monitor progress. They will publish an interim report on progress within one year of the publication of this report. Thereafter, HM Inspectors will continue to engage with the school and the education authority in monitoring progress, and will undertake a follow-through inspection. This will result in another report to parents, within two years of the publication of this report, on the extent of improvement that has been achieved.

Jacqueline Horsburgh
HM Inspector

23 October 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 of Education and Social Work 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 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.

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.