St Edward’s Primary School and Nursery Class
Airdrie
North Lanarkshire Council

6 May 2008

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 Edward’s Primary School and Nursery Class were inspected in February 2008 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, including the pupil council, and staff. Members of the inspection team also met a group of parents¹ and the chairperson of the former School Board. The school was in the process of forming a Parent Council.

St Edward’s is a denominational primary school which serves an area of Airdrie. At the time of the inspection the roll was 218, including 69 children in the nursery class. 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.

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. The following is an analysis of the views expressed by staff, parents and pupils.

Parents, staff and pupils were positive about the school and nursery class. Parents felt welcome in the school. They highlighted their appreciation for the care and concern shown by all staff for their children. Those with children in the nursery were happy with the range of opportunities for them to become involved in their children’s learning. A few parents would like more information about the school’s priorities for improvement. Pupils enjoyed school. They liked the way teachers praised them for doing well and helped keep them healthy. Around a quarter of pupils thought that the behaviour of some pupils could be better. Staff were very positive about working in the school. They highlighted the high level of staff teamwork and the school’s very positive ethos. All staff thought that the school was well led.

4. How good are learning, teaching and achievement?

Pupils’ learning experiences and achievements

The nursery offered children a suitably broad curriculum. However, many activities were too closely directed by adults to allow children sufficient opportunities for free play. Staff did not take sufficient account of children’s interests when planning learning activities. The school provided pupils with a broad and relevant curriculum which included very good provision for enterprise education, education for sustainable development and the promotion of healthy eating. Pupils in the early stages of primary school had very good opportunities to learn actively. In particular, staff were beginning to develop pupils’ skills in reading and writing very effectively, engaging pupils actively in their learning. The school was making steady progress towards providing pupils with two hours of physical education each week. Pupils at P5 to P7 were progressing well in Spanish. Pupils were making good progress in building their skills in information and communications technology (ICT) but did not yet use these skills sufficiently to support their learning across the curriculum. There were weaknesses in the school’s arrangements to ensure that pupils’ learning built appropriately on what they had already learned, particularly in English language. This had led to too slow a rate of progress for some pupils. Pupils from P4 onwards had too few opportunities to develop literacy and numeracy skills across a wide enough range of curricular areas. The quality of teaching across the school was good, with a number of examples of very good, inspiring teaching. Most teachers organised lessons well. Several promoted and encouraged pupils’ curiosity and confidence in learning through well-planned group work. Many were skilled in using questions effectively to check pupils’ understanding and sometimes to encourage them to explore their thinking. Most teachers ensured that pupils knew the purposes of lessons and reviewed with them what they had learned. This good practice was not consistent throughout the school. Whilst some lessons were lively and interesting, teachers did not use a wide enough range of teaching approaches, including ICT. Teachers set regular homework tasks, but these occasionally lacked variety.

In the nursery class, staff listened carefully to children and gave them clear instructions and directions. However, the range of activities offered to children was too limited and did not always engage their interest. The quality of pupils’ learning across the school was adequate overall. In the early primary stages of the school, the very good, active learning experiences offered by teachers were beginning to achieve a significant positive impact on pupils’ learning. At these stages, teachers regularly challenged pupils’ thinking and enabled them to develop independence in their learning. As a result, pupils at P1 to P3 were progressing well in their learning. However, pupils at P4 to P7 did not always receive an appropriate level of challenge in their work. The pace of their learning was often too slow. Pupils throughout the school were highly motivated and worked conscientiously. Many were able to learn from each other very effectively, for example when studying rock formation in groups for science at P5. They now needed further opportunities to participate actively in group work, to develop their ability to learn independently and to take increasing responsibility for their own learning.

The school had taken effective steps to encourage pupils’ wider achievements. Pupils were caring and supportive of each other. Nursery children were developing friendships and cooperated well together. Many persevered well at their chosen activities. Children celebrated achievements together. At the primary stages, older pupils looked after younger ones and acted as buddies in the playground. Pupils demonstrated social responsibility towards others and raised funds for a wide range of charities. The wide range of clubs gave the opportunity for pupils to enhance their learning and experience success, for example in music, sport, enterprise, culture and care for the environment. Several senior pupils learned to play string and brass instruments to a high standard and were able to demonstrate their talents at local authority-led concerts and dramatic events. At all stages, pupils had a good understanding of healthy lifestyles. The school had been awarded two successive green flags for Eco School Scotland activities and was working towards a third.

English language

Children in the nursery class were not making sufficient progress in communication and language. They listened well to stories and could recount them in sequence. However, they made insufficient use of books to develop an interest in reading and did not have appropriate opportunities to develop early writing skills in play contexts. The overall quality of attainment in English language in P1 to P7 was adequate. It had declined in recent years. Across the school, only a majority of pupils were attaining appropriate national levels in reading and writing. While a significant number at P1 to P3 achieved these levels earlier than might normally be expected, these early gains were not yet sustained into later stages. A number of pupils at P4 to P7 were capable of achieving higher standards. Pupils experiencing difficulties in their learning were well supported by class teachers and were making good progress. The school did not systematically plan or assess pupils’ progress in listening and talking. Across the school, pupils listened attentively to their teachers and to each other. Several gave articulate accounts of presentations they had made in connection with their topic work. They were less skilled in group discussions. At P4, pupils read aloud fluently. However, by P7, many pupils read a restricted range of books. They had insufficient knowledge about poetry. Pupils from P3 to P7 did not all progress appropriately in writing. Many would benefit from further opportunities to write at length. Standards in spelling, punctuation and presentation of written work were too variable.

Mathematics

Children in the nursery class did not have enough opportunities to learn mathematical skills through play. Many could count confidently but needed more opportunities to solve problems in the course of their play activities. The quality of pupils’ attainment in mathematics in P1 to P7 was good and had improved steadily in recent years. Across the school, most pupils were achieving appropriate national levels of attainment. At most stages, a few were achieving these levels earlier than might normally be expected. However, at several stages, a significant minority of pupils were capable of achieving higher standards. Pupils with additional support needs were making steady progress in their course work. Pupils at P7 had used ICT very well to create a spreadsheet to support their study of the work of young carers. More such opportunities were needed across the school. At P1 to P3, pupils could perform oral and written calculations quickly and accurately. By P6/P7, pupils could add and subtract effectively but were less confident when working with fractions, decimals and percentages. At P5, pupils could describe the properties of two- and three-dimensional shapes. By P7, most had a secure understanding of angles and coordinates. At all stages, pupils had developed effective skills in problem-solving and enquiry and could discuss appropriate strategies with confidence.

5. How well are pupils’ learning needs met?

The school’s approaches to meeting pupils’ learning needs were adequate overall. Staff in the nursery were caring and supportive of children. They did not offer sufficient challenge or make enough use of assessment information and children’s own ideas to plan for their learning. Across the primary classes, whilst tasks and activities in the early stages were appropriate and challenging, this good practice was not sustained through P4 to P7. Tasks and activities set were not always closely enough matched to the learning needs of pupils and pupils occasionally repeated work already covered. Many pupils at P4 to P7 needed further challenge in their learning. Across the school, pupils experiencing difficulties in their learning were identified at an early stage and were very well supported in their learning. Class teachers worked flexibly and skilfully to ensure that pupils with additional support needs were included and supported in class activities. The visiting teacher of support for learning provided additional support to small groups of pupils in English language and mathematics. Support staff made a very good contribution to supporting pupils’ learning, particularly in reading. The school’s partnership with a range of support agencies ensured a high level of assistance for a few pupils experiencing particular challenges.

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 Edward’s Primary School provided its pupils and nursery children with a caring and supportive environment. Most teachers were skilled, hard working and committed to the well-being and personal development of all pupils. Attainment in mathematics was good. Relationships and teamwork were positive. However, pupils’ attainment in English language was not high enough. The pace of learning across the school was too slow. As a result, too many pupils were making insufficient progress in their learning.

The headteacher provided good leadership. Her very effective interpersonal skills had gained the respect of staff, parents and pupils. She was approachable and hard working. In improving leadership for learning throughout the school, she had significantly developed staff teamwork and the school’s partnerships with parents and the local community. She now needed to focus more clearly on improving pupils’ learning. The depute headteacher had successfully led the development of problem-solving in mathematics. Her approaches to supporting the improvement of children’s learning in the nursery needed further development. The principal teacher carried out her remit effectively and had led developments in pupils’ learning in drama. Many staff were developing a leadership role, for example in leading developments in education for sustainable development, active learning and teaching approaches and the expressive arts. Nursery staff were aware of the implications of the Scottish Social Services Council’s Codes of Practice. The school had established systematic procedures for reviewing the quality of its work. Promoted staff scrutinised teachers’ plans, visited classes and reviewed pupils’ work. However, these approaches had not yet proved effective in securing improvement in pupils’ attainment. Teachers, pupils and parents were fully involved in identifying and addressing the school’s priorities for improvement. There was considerable scope to improve the effectiveness of the school’s approaches to tracking pupils’ attainment, to ensure an appropriately high level of challenge to all pupils.

At the last Care Commission inspection of the nursery class there were no recommendations and no requirements.

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. The District Inspector will continue to monitor the work of the school and education authority to improve pupils’ attainment in English language. Within two years of the publication of this report parents will be informed about the progress made by the school.

Anne McGachey
HM Inspector

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.

Complaints Manager, HMIE Business Management and Communications Team, Second If you have a concern about this report, you should write in the first instance to our 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 there of 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.