17 June 2008
1. Background
2. Key strengths
3. How well does the school raise achievement for all?
4. How good is the environment for learning?
5. Leading and improving the school
Appendix 1 Indicators of quality
Appendix 2 Summary of questionnaire responses
Appendix 3 Performance in Scottish Qualifications Authority (SQA) National Qualifications
Appendix 4 Good practice
How can you contact us?
Carluke High School was inspected in March 2008 as part of a national sample of secondary education. The inspection covered key aspects of the school's work at all stages. HM Inspectors evaluated how well the school was raising achievement for all pupils, taking into account the extent to which pupils' learning needs were met by the curriculum and teaching. They analysed pupils' achievement in national examinations (see Appendix 3) and other areas, the school's processes for self evaluation and innovation, and its overall effectiveness and capacity for improvement. Inspectors invited the school to identify examples of good practice and have provided an example of good practice in Appendix 4. HM Inspectors focused particularly on English, mathematics, modern languages, and home economics. The inspection team also evaluated aspects of the school's progress in implementing national recommendations related to improving aspects of school meals provision.
HM Inspectors observed teaching, learning and achievement in lessons and other contexts and examined pupils' work. They analysed responses to questionnaires1 issued to a sample of parents2 and pupils and to all staff. They interviewed groups of pupils, including representatives of pupil councils, and staff. Members of the inspection team also met the chairperson of the Parent Council, a group of parents and representatives of the school's wider community.
Carluke High School is a non denominational school serving the town of Carluke and the surrounding rural area and the villages of Braidwood, Yeildshields, Kilncadzow, Law and Forth. It forms part of the Carluke learning community. At the time of the inspection, the roll was 1186. The percentage of pupils entitled to free school meals was in line with the national average. Pupils' attendance was in line with the national average.
HM Inspectors identified the following key strengths.
To evaluate how well the school was raising achievement for all, HM Inspectors considered the extent to which the learning needs of all pupils were met through the curriculum and teaching. They evaluated the impact of the school on the learning and personal development of all pupils in lessons and in other, broader contexts. They also considered pupils’ achievement in examinations and other areas, and the school’s overall success in sustaining improvements in performance.
Curriculum
The overall quality of the curriculum was good. There was a clearly articulated rationale aimed at improving achievement, offering more choice and meeting pupils’ needs. The school regularly evaluated its curriculum and staff members were encouraged to put forward proposals for innovations. A number of Standard Grade courses had been replaced with National Qualifications that involved the earlier presentation of a small number of pupils for awards resulting in improved motivation and interest in some subject areas. There were also some good examples of cross-curricular work on ‘rich tasks’, more vocational choices and the development of enterprise skills. Particular features of the curriculum included the following.
Teaching and meeting learning needs
The quality of teaching was good overall, but varied across the school. Most lessons were well planned and teachers gave clear instructions. In the best lessons teachers increased pupils’ motivation by sharing the purpose of lessons with them. Most teachers provided a range of appropriate activities to stimulate and maintain the interest of pupils. Teachers used questioning well, and a few used it very well to extend pupils’ learning. The use of information and communications technology (ICT) was inconsistent. In the most effective lessons, it was used to encourage interactive learning. Although there were some good examples where pupils had opportunities to develop independent learning skills, or to work collaboratively, this was inconsistent across the school.
The school’s arrangements for meeting pupils’ needs were adequate overall. Guidance teachers knew their pupils well and had good links with parents and other agencies to support pupils in their learning. Pupils with English as an additional language were making very good progress. Classroom assistants supported pupils very well but this support was not always allocated effectively. At S3/S4 and S5/S6, the curriculum included a good range of courses at varying levels to meet pupils’ needs. The school had begun to monitor and track the performance of pupils. Whilst this initiative was well received by pupils, parents and staff it was not yet being consistently applied across all departments. Support for learning staff had not set sufficiently focused targets for individual educational programmes (IEPs) and had not involved subject teachers or shared the targets with them. Outcomes for pupils receiving additional support were not tracked or monitored and there was no mechanism in place to evaluate the effectiveness of the approaches being used by support for learning staff. Behaviour support staff supported pupils with social, emotional and behavioural needs well. The school had clear behaviour management procedures and strategies for staff which, when implemented effectively had a positive impact on pupils’ behaviour, however some staff were inconsistent in applying these. There were effective pastoral links with the associated primaries. Subject teachers did not always build sufficiently on pupils’ prior attainment to ensure progression in learning. The pace of learning was frequently too slow and tasks were often insufficiently challenging, particularly for pupils in S1/S2. However, higher-attaining pupils in S2 were invited to take part in a ‘Be My Best’ project which had led to one pupil receiving an award from the Royal Geographical Society. The librarian had organised book awards for S1/S2 pupils to encourage them to read more.
Impact on learners
This section provides an evaluation of the extent to which the school was successful in raising achievement for all pupils. It refers to pupils’ learning experiences, personal development and aspects of their achievement in examinations and other areas.
Learners’ experiences and personal development
The quality of pupils’ learning experiences was good overall. Pupils felt that they were safe and were encouraged to play a full part in the life of the school. Although most responded well to class discussions they showed variable levels of motivation across the school. They were not given sufficient opportunities to be actively involved in their learning. As a result, their skills as learners were not well developed and most pupils were not aware of their strengths and development needs. In a few departments, they received helpful feedback on how to improve their performance in class work and written assignments. This practice was not yet consistent across the school. Some departments had begun to give pupils the opportunity to comment on aspects of their learning experience. The school had not yet made this a whole-school initiative. Pupils contributed positively to the ethos of the school and wider community by raising substantial funds for an extensive range of charities. The library provided a bright and stimulating area for study and research, and pupils benefited from very good support from the librarian.
Staff had included experiences to enrich the curriculum, such as the ‘rich task’ initiative undertaken by the English and physical education departments. A number of pupils had developed their skills in working together to achieve targets through enterprise activities. All pupils had the opportunity to extend their learning through an extensive range of well-attended sporting and cultural activities outwith the classroom. This included trips to other countries, such as a ski trip to Italy, to broaden pupils’ experiences. Pupils were also encouraged to contribute to the local community. For example, a group of pupils had worked with the police to dramatise an anti-bullying message and had performed the drama in local primary schools. Pupils were developing skills of citizenship by involvement in the large number of charity events and the Fair Trade initiative. They had the opportunity to develop leadership skills at all stages, including S1 pupils hosting an evening for P7 parents and senior pupils acting as buddies for S1 pupils. Pupils had received a number of awards, both individually or as team members, such as the Eco-Schools Scotland green flag award. All awards were recognised and celebrated by the school to increase pupils’ sense of achievement and pride in the school community. Pupils felt they could make their opinions known through the pupil council or through the prefects linked to their house.
English
The overall quality of teaching and learners’ experiences was good, and of meeting learning needs was adequate. Pupils’ performance was not improving sufficiently.
Teachers shared the objectives of lessons with pupils and explained new work clearly. In most classes teachers motivated pupils well, kept their attention and questioned them skilfully. Most teachers made good use of ICT. Teachers set pupils according to their prior attainment. Small class sizes for pupils with additional support needs helped staff to provide good support. In most classes, the pace of learning was good, however in a few classes pupils were not sufficiently engaged in their learning. Higher-achieving pupils were not always sufficiently challenged. Homework was not used consistently across classes.
Overall, pupils did not make sufficient progress from their prior levels of attainment. By the end of S2, the majority achieved appropriate levels of attainment in reading, listening, talking and writing. Attainment in talking and writing had improved recently. By the end of S4 the proportion of pupils attaining Credit awards was in line with the national average. Pupils performed notably less well in English than they did in their other subjects. By the end of S6 the proportion of pupils entered for National Qualifications was well below the national average at Higher and well above at Intermediate 1 and 2. The proportion of entrants achieving grades A-C was well above the national average at Higher, above it at Intermediate 2 and in line with it at Intermediate 1. Just over half of the small number of pupils entered for Advanced Higher achieved A-C awards.
Mathematics
In mathematics, the quality of teaching, arrangements for meeting pupils’ learning needs and the quality of pupils’ learning experiences was good. Pupils’ performance was improving well.
Teachers had taken positive steps to use a variety of teaching approaches to engage pupils in their learning. In the best lessons, well-planned tasks and activities enabled pupils to work cooperatively and take responsibility for their learning. Pupils were increasingly provided with opportunities to reflect on their learning. In the best lessons teachers provided high-quality feedback to individual pupils on their progress and next steps in learning.
By the end of S2, most pupils were making good progress in their coursework and the majority reached appropriate national levels of attainment. Almost all of the S3 pupils presented at Access 3 achieved success. By the end of S4 the proportion of pupils gaining a Credit award or equivalent was in line with the national average. At S5/S6 the majority of pupils gained an A-C award at Higher. The proportion attaining an A award at Intermediate 2 was above the national average. The majority of pupils entered for Advanced Higher achieved an A-C award.
Modern languages
The overall quality of teaching and learners’ experiences was good. The quality of arrangements for meeting learning needs was adequate. Pupils’ performance was not yet improving sufficiently.
Teachers planned lessons well and provided a variety of activities to motivate pupils. Led by the principal teacher, the department was beginning to include more collaborative tasks. Teachers used ICT well to make lessons more interactive. However, the pace of lessons was not always brisk enough and many tasks did not provide sufficient challenge. Teachers gave pupils helpful feedback but overall, pupils did not know what to do to improve.
S1/S2 pupils did not have sufficient opportunities to work on extended pieces of reading, writing or speaking. By the end of S4, pupils performed notably less well in German than they did in their other subjects. In French, Credit passes were in line with the national average. All pupils presented for Access 3 in modern languages attained an award. By the end of S6 the number of pupils attaining an award at A-C in Higher French and German was below the national average. Of the small number of pupils presented for Intermediate 2 French, all had attained an A or B award. Pupils benefited from a number of opportunities to broaden their achievements, such as when taking part in a French foreign exchange trip.
Home economics
The overall quality of teaching, arrangements for meeting learning needs and learners’ experiences was very good. Performance was improving very well.
Learning and teaching had major strengths. Teachers planned lessons carefully using a wide range of teaching methods to provide stimulating pupil activities. In almost all classes, the pace of work was brisk and there were regular opportunities for pupils to participate in collaborative learning. Teachers set high expectations and made effective use of praise, regular homework and feedback. The range of courses offered at S3 to S6 was well matched to pupils’ needs and interests. Almost all pupils worked enthusiastically, were well motivated and enjoyed their lessons. The achievements of pupils at all stages were enhanced by a number of well-developed links with the local community.
At all stages, pupils were making sound progress. By the end of S2 almost all pupils were making appropriate progress in their coursework. Almost all of the small number of pupils presented for Standard Grade social and vocational skills achieved a Credit or General award. Pupils consistently performed better in home economics than in their other subjects. By the end of S6 almost all of the pupils presented for Intermediate 2 attained A-C awards. All pupils presented for Higher home economics achieved an A-C grade whilst those presented for Higher personal and social education gained A-B awards. All of the small number of pupils presented for Advanced Higher home economics gained an A-C award. Pupils in S1 and S2 enthusiastically participated in enterprise competitions. Senior pupils organised events involving pupils from a local school for pupils with additional support needs as part of their personal and social education classes.
Achievement in national assessments, examinations and other areas
Information about the subjects inspected has been given earlier in the report. Across the school, particular features of pupils’ progress, results in examinations and other qualifications, including those awarded by the Scottish Qualifications Authority (SQA) within the Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework (SCQF) 3 for the three-year period 2005-2007, are included below.
Particular features of achievement in national assessments and other areas by the end of S2 included the following.
Particular features of achievement in examinations and other areas by the end of S4 included the following.
Particular features of achievement in examinations and other areas by the end of S6 included the following.
Overall the school was beginning to raise pupils’ achievement but still had to improve the levels of attainment for pupils moving into S5/S6. By the end of S2 and S4 the majority of pupils had made good progress from their prior levels of achievement. By the end of S6 the quality of improvement in pupils’ performance had improved and was now good. Pupils were beginning to have higher expectations of themselves and how to benefit more from their education. The incidence of unauthorised absences had reduced significantly although the numbers arriving late for lessons was still too high. The number of S4 pupils returning to S5 and into S6 was well above the national average. More girls than boys were staying on at S5/S6. The proportion of pupils progressing to higher education had increased and was above the national and local authority levels whilst the numbers progressing to further education was well below the national level. The proportion of pupils entering into employment was above the local authority level and in line with the national average.
Aspect |
Comment |
Care, welfare and development |
The school had very good arrangements for the care, welfare and development of pupils. There were clear and appropriate policies for the care and welfare of pupils. Most staff knew pupils well and were alert to their emotional, physical and social needs. Staff monitored looked-after and accommodated children and pupils at risk of missing out sensitively through well-established approaches. Staff were clear about their responsibilities regarding child protection and anti-bullying. They had access to a range of policies and guidance on issues relating to equality, diversity and safeguarding. The school had an integrated support team, which facilitated suitable planning with other agencies. Particular success had been achieved by staff working with the Multi Family Group to provide support to vulnerable pupils and their families. Whilst the school had a good climate of respect and mutual trust overall, on a small number of occasions, teachers and pupils did not always show appropriate respect for each other. Arrangements for the issue of free school meals were inappropriate and required to be reviewed. The school promoted a healthy lifestyle through the PSHE programme. The PSHE programme covered key aspects of drug and alcohol education, careers, safety on the Internet, citizenship and relationships. Almost all S4 pupils benefited from a very well-planned work experience. Pupils were aware of how to make a complaint. Guidance staff were readily accessible and had formal meetings with all pupils at least once a year. They were sensitive to pupils’ individual circumstances and provided effective support, particularly for those who needed additional help. Pupils appreciated the quality of support they received from their guidance teachers. Senior pupils provided effective peer support to younger pupils and played an important role as leaders and role models. Pupils were able to put forward their views through regular pupil house councils. The school had a very comprehensive liaison programme to support the transition from primary schools and into the world of work and further and higher education. |
Management and use of resources and space for learning |
The school moved into very high quality new build accommodation in October 2007. Pupils had settled very well into their new school and were clearly benefitting from the modern environment for learning. The school buildings were very well maintained by staff. In a number of classes and around the school, well-chosen and informative displays of pupils’ work enhanced the learning environment and celebrated pupils’ learning and achievement. The well-resourced and well-organised library provided very effective service to the school. The building was secure and there was appropriate disabled access to all areas of the school. Dedicated interview rooms ensured year heads and guidance staff were able to meet with parents and pupils to discuss confidential or sensitive issues. However, social areas for pupils, classroom storage space and outdoor sports areas were limited. |
Equalities, expectations and engagement |
Almost all staff had positive relationships with pupils and a few were skilled at engaging all pupils in the learning process. Some teachers used overly familiar language and were inconsistent in their behaviour management approaches. Most staff had appropriate expectations of pupils although some did not actively promote high expectations of learning, behaviour or attendance. A few staff had not yet embraced shared responsibility for the learning of all pupils. In some classes personal achievement was well celebrated through the effective use of praise and attractive displays of pupils’ work, but this was not consistent across the school. Pupils’ successes were also effectively celebrated through a reward scheme linked to house activities. The school successfully promoted equality and fairness through a range of PSHE and religious and moral education (RME) courses on racial equality, anti-bullying, anti-sectarianism and understanding diversity. Regular assemblies provided appropriate opportunities for religious observance. Teachers provided many opportunities for pupils to participate in a wide range of sporting, musical, charity and social activities at lunchtimes and after school. These pursuits were open to all pupils and the music department imaginatively promoted activities which included non-musical aspects in order to involve a wider range of pupils. The drama department successfully engaged almost all members of the school community in a yearly charities show which was well supported by the local community and businesses. Pupils and staff had successfully organised fundraising events and raised awareness of global diversity through a ‘Fair Trade’ focus. There was a strong sense of community amongst staff with a high proportion keen to get involved in school activities beyond their contractual obligations. The school had also established well-planned social and curricular links with a nearby school for pupils with additional support needs. This resulted in both sets of pupils gaining immensely from these experiences. Some staff had been involved in well-organised whole-school quality improvement groups on a range of issues but these groups had recently lost focus and had not yet impacted on teaching and learning. |
The school’s success in involving parents |
The school had successfully developed links with parents, carers and families. Almost all parents said they felt welcome in the school and were satisfied with the overall quality of education which their children received. The school offered a range of opportunities for parental involvement but some parents felt that parents’ night was not a helpful way to gain quality information about their children and many did not feel fully involved in their children’s education. Parents were not yet fully involved in setting targets within IEPs for their children. Some parents had attended a parenting class and others linked closely with pupil support staff and external agencies to engage pupils more effectively with the school. Parents received communications from the school through an effective texting system and newsletters. Newsletters were extensive but were not always attractively formatted or written in plain English to ensure broad understanding and appeal. Parents attended annual reviews for pupils with additional support needs where current progress and next steps were discussed. A Parent Council had been formed and parents in the council were enthusiastic about their roles. Many parents were highly supportive of the school’s wide range of charity and fundraising activities and became particularly involved in the high-profile end of year Charities Show. Senior managers were proactive in meeting with parents to discuss individual issues of concern but had not yet fully engaged parents on late-coming. |
Carluke High School was, encouragingly, now improving the quality of provision but was not yet raising achievement sufficiently for all pupils. It had effective approaches to meeting the needs of its most vulnerable pupils within a caring and supportive atmosphere. Strengths included the achievements of pupils in a wide range of sporting, extra-curricular, charity fundraising and enterprise activities. Teachers were highly committed to the school and almost all had a very good relationship with pupils. Although the quality of learning and teaching was good overall, there was a need to for staff to re-focus their efforts on meeting needs and raising attainment for all pupils which was adequate at S1 to S4 and good at S5/S6. Staff now needed to share the good practice that existed within the school to improve the quality of provision across all areas of the curriculum and to raise attainment further. Whilst pupils enjoyed being at school, there was a need for all teachers to ensure that pupils attended classes promptly and were actively involved in their own learning and that both higher and lower-attaining pupils were given work that set them appropriate challenge.
The overall leadership in the school was good. The headteacher had been in post for three years and had shared his vision and ambitions for the school with staff, parents, pupils and the wider community. He had won their trust, was highly regarded by the teaching staff and had actively encouraged many of them to develop their leadership abilities by taking responsibility for policy-making groups and other productive initiatives. He had significantly changed the remits of the senior management team two years ago and these were now becoming firmly embedded. The depute headteachers were highly committed to the school and supported staff. However, their role in leading learning required further development as their impact through links with departments and in evaluating learning and teaching was too variable. Most principal teachers carried out their roles well. Their leadership for improvement, however, was too inconsistent. Staff had responded positively to the opportunity to select and share elements of good practice with their colleagues. Pupils had developing opportunities to influence the life of the school.
The school’s approaches to self-evaluation were adequate. However, there were sound systems which should provide a useful basis for further development. The headteacher had established effective methods to gain information from staff, parents and pupils and had used these successfully to take forward specific improvements. He had assessed many of the school’s strengths and identified areas where improvements were required. Helpful annual reviews of the curriculum carried out by the headteacher, a depute headteacher and principal teachers allowed for discussion of course changes and timetabling to meet the future needs of learners. These meetings also provided the headteacher with an opportunity to share his vision with principal teachers whilst allowing them the opportunity to suggest improvements. In addition, annual meetings involving the headteacher and relevant deputes with department heads allowed for an in-depth review of examination results. Two deputes had responsibility for whole-school quality assurance. They engaged departments in discussions about their performance. Overall, however, the school had not embedded the system of self-evaluation effectively at either departmental or classroom level to ensure that teachers readily reflected on their practice with a view to making improvements. The good approaches that existed were insufficiently developed and were not systematically and rigorously applied by most promoted staff to identify areas for improvement in attainment, learning and teaching. Whilst professional development courses were evaluated there was limited evidence of the evaluation of how these courses impacted on classroom practice. However, the evident commitment of the headteacher, deputes and most promoted staff to further developing self-evaluation as a priority indicates that the school has a strengthening capacity for improvement.
As well as building on the strengths and addressing the issues raised throughout this report, the school and the education authority should address the following main points for action.
Main points for action
Improve achievement by:
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.
David M Martin
HM Inspector
17 June 2008
The following quality indicators have been used in the inspection process to contribute to the evaluation of the overall effectiveness of the school in raising achievement for all pupils.
Section 3. How well does the school raise achievement for all? |
||
The curriculum |
good |
|
Teaching for effective learning |
good |
|
Meeting learning needs |
adequate |
|
Learners’ experiences |
good |
|
Improvements in performance: S1/S2 |
adequate |
|
Improvements in performance: S3/S4 |
adequate |
|
Improvements in performance: S5/S6 |
good |
|
Section 4. How good is the environment for learning? |
||
Care, welfare and development |
very good |
|
Management and use of resources and space for learning |
very good |
|
The engagement of staff in the life and work of the school |
very good |
|
Expectations and promoting achievement |
good |
|
Equality and fairness |
good |
|
The school’s success in involving parents, carers and families |
good |
|
Section 5. Leading and improving the school |
||
Developing people and partnerships |
good |
|
Leadership of improvement and change (of the headteacher) |
good |
|
Leadership of improvement and change (across the school) |
good |
|
Improvement through self-evaluation |
adequate |
|
This report uses the following word scale to make clear the judgements made by inspectors:
excellent |
outstanding, sector leading |
very good |
major strengths |
good |
important strengths with areas for improvement |
adequate |
strengths just outweigh weaknesses |
weak |
important weaknesses |
unsatisfactory |
major weaknesses |
The following provides a summary of questionnaire responses. Key issues from the questionnaires have been considered in the inspection and comments are included as appropriate throughout the report.
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 |
|
A minority of the staff thought that:
|
This data is used alongside evaluations of teaching for effective learning, meeting learning needs, expectations and promoting achievement, and the overall quality of learners’ achievement, to inform the overall evaluation of improvements in performance.
Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework (SCQF) levels:
7: Advanced Higher at A-C/CSYS at A-C
6: Higher at A-C
5: Intermediate 2 at A-C; Standard Grade at 1-2
4: Intermediate 1 at A-C; Standard Grade at 3-4
3: Access 3 Cluster; Standard Grade at 5-6
Percentage of relevant S4 roll gaining awards by end of S4
2005 |
2006 |
2007 |
||
English and Mathematics @ Level 3 |
Carluke High School |
91 |
85 |
88 |
Comparator schools4 |
91 |
93 |
93 |
|
National |
90 |
91 |
92 |
|
5+ @ Level 3 or better |
Carluke High School |
90 |
82 |
83 |
Comparator schools |
91 |
91 |
91 |
|
National |
90 |
91 |
91 |
|
5+ @ Level 4 or better |
Carluke High School |
73 |
70 |
67 |
Comparator schools |
79 |
78 |
76 |
|
National |
76 |
77 |
76 |
|
5+ @ Level 5 or better |
Carluke High School |
33 |
31 |
28 |
Comparator schools |
34 |
32 |
32 |
|
National |
34 |
35 |
33 |
Percentage of relevant S4 roll gaining awards by end of S5
2005 |
2006 |
2007 |
||
5+ @ Level 4 or better |
Carluke High School |
73 |
74 |
72 |
Comparator schools4 |
77 |
80 |
80 |
|
National |
78 |
78 |
79 |
|
5+ @ Level 5 or better |
Carluke High School |
41 |
46 |
42 |
Comparator schools |
45 |
44 |
42 |
|
National |
45 |
45 |
46 |
|
1+ @ Level 6 or better |
Carluke High School |
36 |
43 |
33 |
Comparator schools |
41 |
36 |
37 |
|
National |
39 |
38 |
39 |
|
3+ @ Level 6 or better |
Carluke High School |
17 |
20 |
16 |
Comparator schools |
21 |
19 |
19 |
|
National |
23 |
22 |
22 |
|
5+ @ Level 6 or better |
Carluke High School |
7 |
8 |
6 |
Comparator schools |
8 |
9 |
7 |
|
National |
10 |
10 |
10 |
Percentage of relevant S4 roll gaining awards by end of S6
2005 |
2006 |
2007 |
||
5+ @ Level 5 or better |
Carluke High School |
48 |
43 |
47 |
Comparator schools4 |
46 |
47 |
47 |
|
National |
47 |
48 |
47 |
|
1+ @ Level 6 or better |
Carluke High School |
44 |
41 |
47 |
Comparator schools |
41 |
44 |
42 |
|
National |
43 |
43 |
42 |
|
3+ @ Level 6 or better |
Carluke High School |
29 |
25 |
31 |
Comparator schools |
27 |
28 |
28 |
|
National |
30 |
30 |
29 |
|
5+ @ Level 6 or better |
Carluke High School |
18 |
16 |
15 |
Comparator schools |
16 |
17 |
18 |
|
National |
19 |
20 |
19 |
|
1+ @ Level 7 or better |
Carluke High School |
11 |
7 |
10 |
Comparator schools |
12 |
12 |
13 |
|
National |
12 |
13 |
12 |
In the course of the inspection, the following aspects of innovative and effective practice were evaluated as being worthy of wider dissemination.
Areas of good practice within the home economics department
In addition to the aspects of strong performance described earlier in this report, the home economics department demonstrated a number of aspects of good practice, as follows.
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 (Education Resources), 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, 1st Floor, Endeavour House, 1 Greenmarket, Dundee DD1 4QB or by telephoning 01382 576700. Copies are also available on our website at www.hmie.gov.uk.
HMIE Feedback and Complaints Procedure
Should you wish to comment on any aspect of secondary inspections, 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 email 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 Scottish Public Services Ombudsman, 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.