12 April 2005
1. Background
2. Key strengths
3. What are the views of parents and carers, pupils
and staff?
4. How good are learning, teaching, attainment and
achievement?
5. How well are pupils supported?
6. How good is the environment for learning?
7. Improving the school
Appendix 1 Indicators of quality
Appendix 2 Summary of questionnaire responses
Appendix 3 Attainment in Scottish Qualifications
Authority (SQA) National Qualifications
How can you contact us?
Grange Academy was inspected in December 2004. Subjects included in the inspection were English, mathematics, biology and S1/S2 science, and computing. The school is a non-denominational secondary school which serves the south-east area of Kilmarnock. The school also houses a base for the peripatetic Visual Impairment Team, a Hearing Impairment Unit and a Gaelic Unit. At the time of the inspection the roll was 1188. 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. As part of East Ayrshire’s Public Private Partnership (PPP) programme, the council planned to build a new school to replace the existing buildings. Work on this project was scheduled to be finished by August 2007.
Members of the inspection team analysed responses to questionnaires issued to samples of pupils, parents and carers, and to all staff. They also met the chairperson of the School Board, some members of the local community and a group of parents. They interviewed groups of pupils and staff.
HM Inspectors identified the following key strengths.
Just over a quarter of the sample of parents surveyed responded to the questionnaire. Almost all thought that the school was well led and that staff made them feel welcome in the school. Around one third of those who responded wanted more information about the school’s priorities for improving pupils’ education. Almost all pupils felt that teachers expected them to work to the best of their ability and that they were well supported. The majority of pupils felt they had a say in deciding how to improve the school and that staff were good at dealing with bullying. However, more than a half of those who responded felt that the behaviour of pupils was not good. Almost all staff enjoyed working in the school. They also felt that the school was well led, but about one quarter felt that pupil success was not regularly celebrated. Further details about what most pleased parents and carers, staff and pupils, and what they would most like to see improved, can be found in Appendix 2 of this report.
In evaluating the overall quality of learning, teaching, attainment and achievement, HM Inspectors observed aspects of learning in the inspected departments and more widely across the school. They also reviewed the extent to which the structure of the curriculum addressed pupils’ needs, and they analysed pupils’ performance in examinations (see Appendix 3).
The curriculum, learning and teaching
The overall quality of the curriculum was good. At S1/S2, pupils studied a broad and balanced range of subjects. They were able to select additional topics, such as technology, music and drama, to widen their experiences. The school had reduced the number of teachers with whom pupils had contact by introducing rotas of certain subjects. At S3/S4, most pupils followed programmes which consisted of eight Standard Grades or their equivalent. The school had introduced a variety of alternative programmes which were well planned to meet the needs of individual pupils experiencing difficulties with their learning. These programmes allowed certain pupils to gain experience of working in local businesses and following college courses in combination with school-based courses. Parents and pupils had been fully consulted on these alternative programmes. At S5/S6, pupils could choose from a range of courses at Intermediate, Higher and Advanced Higher levels. The school did not monitor sufficiently closely pupils’ programmes at these stages to ensure an appropriate level of challenge.
In most lessons, teachers planned their lessons well, and gave clear explanations and demonstrations. Most teachers helpfully shared the aims of the lessons with pupils and used questioning well to find out what pupils had remembered from the previous lesson. However, they did not consistently consolidate the main points at the end of the lesson. In most classes, teachers used a range of teaching approaches to make lessons stimulating, and set homework regularly. However, they did not always provide sufficient opportunities for pupils to work independently or to cooperate with each other, think for themselves and take responsibility for their own learning. Most pupils were well behaved, stayed on task and worked at a good pace. There were a few examples of teachers making very good use of praise to motivate pupils. Most tasks and activities in lessons matched the needs of individual pupils. However, to raise attainment, teachers needed to take more account of pupils’ prior learning, provide pupils with information on how they could improve their performance and encourage them to set their own targets.
Attainment and achievement
The overall quality of attainment at S1/S2 was good. The proportion of pupils achieving appropriate national levels of attainment in mathematics by the end of S2 was above the national average and was increasing. The proportion achieving these standards in reading and writing was in line with national averages. In some subjects courses and programmes at S1/S2 did not take sufficient account of pupils’ prior learning experiences.
The overall quality of attainment at S3/S4 was good. The proportion of pupils achieving five or more Standard Grade awards at General and Credit level or their equivalent by the end of S4 was in line with the national average. The proportion achieving five or more Credit awards or their equivalent was variable but had improved to above the national average in 2004. At Standard Grade, the school performed less well than schools with similar characteristics.
The overall quality of attainment at S5/S6 was good. The proportion of pupils achieving three or more and five or more A-C grades at Higher by the end of S5 and the end of S6 was in line with the national averages, but below those in schools with similar characteristics. The proportion of pupils achieving one or more A-C grades at Advanced Higher by the end of S6 was in line with the national averages and with performance in similar schools.
Information on the subjects inspected is given later in the report. Significant features of attainment in the subjects not inspected were as follows.
The school promoted pupils’ wider achievements and positive values through a good variety of extra-curricular activities and by providing opportunities for pupils to take responsibilities. Pupils participated in activities such as ‘Enterprising Maths’, ‘Mini-Trials’ and public speaking which helped to promote achievement and self-confidence. Many pupils took part in the very successful annual school show organised by the music and drama departments. From S1 to S6, all pupils participated in a variety of enterprise education activities, ranging from setting-up a company and taking part in Industrial Awareness Days to work experience in France or Germany. These activities helped pupils to develop additional skills and knowledge. The school had won first prize in a citizenship award through Barclay’s Bank for organising and running British Sign Language (BSL) classes in the school for the community, including staff and pupils. The whole project was set up and organised by a small committee of hearing impaired and hearing pupils. The school also had a signing choir which provided pupils and parents with an awareness of BSL and the need for signing. These activities helped pupils to develop self-confidence, citizenship, equality, enterprise and lifelong learning as well as raising awareness of the deaf culture in the school. The school was involved in a Comenius project with Norway and Portugal which added to their already established international links with a wide range of countries. A number of pupils had also been successful in a wide range of sporting activities including rugby, football, athletics and cross-country running.
English language
Learning and teaching
Teachers shared the aims of lessons with pupils and questioned them well to check for understanding and to develop their thinking. They created impressive displays of pupils’ work to motivate pupils and celebrate their success. Sometimes they provided too much direction and they did not consistently consolidate pupils’ learning at the end of lessons. Pupils worked diligently and responded well to a brisk pace in learning. Most demonstrated good team work when collaborating on tasks. While some pupils accepted responsibility for their own progress in class work and homework, others were not sufficiently independent. Teachers provided helpful verbal and written feedback on pupils’ work. They used a sound range of strategies to support pupils’ differing learning needs.
Attainment and achievement
By the end of S2, the majority of pupils achieved appropriate national levels of attainment in reading, writing, talking and listening. Pupils had made good progress from previous levels of attainment in reading but not in writing. At Standard Grade, the proportion of pupils attaining Credit awards had improved to slightly above the national average. At Intermediate and at Higher, the proportions attaining A-C grades were in line with national averages overall. Almost all of the pupils presented for Advanced Higher were successful.
Other features of pupils’ attainment and achievement included the following.
Mathematics
Learning and teaching
Teachers made effective use of questioning and provided homework regularly to most classes. There were some examples of very effective lessons, where teachers shared the purpose of the lesson and took account of pupils’ earlier learning. Some teachers made effective use of praise to encourage and motivate pupils. Teachers did not make use of information and communications technology (ICT) to enhance pupils’ learning. Most pupils worked well in class but did not have sufficient opportunities to work together to solve problems. The grouping of pupils by prior attainment helped teachers to meet pupils’ needs well. Teachers had increased the level of challenge at S1/S2. The department had started to review courses at S3/S4 to ensure that the increased level of challenge was maintained to improve attainment at S5/S6.
Attainment and achievement
The proportion of pupils attaining appropriate national levels of attainment by the end of S2 was above the national average. Increasing numbers of pupils were exceeding these levels. The proportion of pupils achieving Credit awards by the end of S4 was above the national average. Pupils performed notably better in mathematics than in their other subjects. The proportion of pupils achieving A-C grades at Intermediate 1 or 2 by the end of S5 was below the national average. At Intermediate 2, it showed a declining trend. At Higher, the proportion achieving A-C grades was below the national average. At Advanced Higher, around half of those presented had achieved A-C grades.
Other features of pupils’ attainment and achievement included the following.
Biology and S1/S2 science
Learning and teaching
Most teachers gave clear explanations and used questioning effectively to confirm pupils’ understanding and ensure involvement in the lesson. Teachers interacted well with pupils both when carrying out written tasks and during experiments. Homework was well organised and given regularly. The pace in the majority of lessons was appropriate and pupils were given opportunities to work individually and in groups. Most pupils were enthusiastic, worked well on tasks and were well behaved. However, the poor behaviour of a few S3 pupils interrupted the learning of others. Pupils had insufficient opportunities to contribute to answers in classes and to take responsibility for their learning. Teachers did not consistently provide pupils with appropriate challenge and clear advice to help them improve their overall performance. The approaches used had not met the needs of all pupils. The use of praise was inconsistent across the department. Some teachers made good use of ICT.
Attainment and achievement
At S1/S2, most pupils were performing well in their course work. At S3/S4, pupils performed less well in biology than in other subjects. The proportion of pupils achieving Credit or General awards was below the national average. At S5/S6, the proportions of pupils who achieved A-C grades in Higher biology and Higher human biology were below national averages. The proportion of pupils achieving A-C grades in Intermediate 2 biology was in line with the national averages.
Other features of pupils’ attainment and achievement included the following.
Computing
Learning and teaching
Teachers organised lessons well and made good use of ICT in providing pupils with clear instructions and explanations. They shared the objectives of lessons with pupils, assessed their progress regularly and provided feedback and praise. Teachers used questioning to engage pupils in learning, but did not use it sufficiently to probe understanding or develop pupils’ thinking. They did not make enough use of homework or target-setting to improve attainment. Pupils were well behaved and remained on task. They generally showed competence in their practical computing work and made effective use of ICT to access information. However, there were insufficient opportunities for them to take responsibility for their own learning. Teacher interventions were well judged and appropriate, but they had not adapted their materials or teaching approaches for differing pupil abilities and aptitudes.
Attainment and achievement
The department was unable to provide evidence of pupils’ attainment in ICT by the end of S2. The proportion of pupils studying computing at Standard Grade was in line with the national average, but at Higher and Intermediate 2, it was below the national average. In Standard Grade computing studies, the proportion of pupils achieving a Credit or General award was in line with the national average. At S5/S6, the proportion of pupils achieving A-C grades in Higher computing was below the national average, and performance in Intermediate 2 computing was in line with the national average.
Other features of pupils’ attainment and achievement included the following.
Overall, arrangements for the pastoral care and welfare of pupils were good. The school had sound procedures for child protection, including bullying. It was developing a range of approaches to promote a healthy lifestyle. The school had established a new pupil support team which was beginning to work well as a team and responded effectively to situations as they arose. They did not meet frequently enough as a group. They had not implemented consistently their programme of one-to-one interviews with their pupils. The recording of pupil information was not sufficiently focused or detailed.
The school made good provision for pupils’ personal and social development (PSD) through a wide range of extra-curricular activities. The personal and social education (PSE) programme from S1 to S4 included key aspects of relationships, health education, decision-making, careers education, preparation for the world of work, and citizenship. Staff were currently reviewing the programme to make it more relevant to pupils’ experiences. The quality of delivery of PSE was too inconsistent across classes. Currently S5/S6 pupils did not have access to an appropriate PSE programme.
The school provided good curricular guidance for pupils. At key transition stages, pupils and their parents received comprehensive information on course choices. The school also prepared pupils well for making careers choices. However, pupils had limited opportunities to use ICT to find out such information. Pupils were provided with a very good range of education for work and enterprise opportunities, including work experience. The school also prepared them well for the world of work. The school had not established a systematic approach to monitoring, tracking and supporting pupils’ progress.
The overall quality of support for learning was good, with some clear strengths. Teachers in the additional support needs department, auxiliaries and classroom assistants all made a significant contribution to supporting pupils with learning and other difficulties. The additional support needs department worked well with a large number of S1 to S4 pupils in extracted groups, to improve their literacy and numeracy. They further supported a range of individuals in class. The department made commendable efforts to create individual timetables for pupils experiencing difficulties. These included after-school classes, work placements and college courses. The department monitored the progress of particular pupils through individualised educational programmes (IEPs). Long-term learning targets were well focused, but short-term targets required much clearer definition. Overall, the school needed to further develop a whole-school approach to addressing pupil needs, which would enable the additional support needs department to support pupils in a more flexible way.
Within the school, the unit for pupils who were deaf or hearing-impaired made provision for seven pupils from across the authority and from neighbouring authorities. The unit staff supported pupils very well in classes across a range of curricular areas. Pupils were in mainstream classes for all the subjects they studied. Staff gave pupils valuable tutorial time within the unit,which was used very effectively to teach and reinforce new concepts and vocabulary related to the curriculum. Pupils were making good progress in their coursework. However, teachers did not make enough use of assessment evidence, or monitor progress sufficiently to ensure that pupils were achieving to the best of their ability. Unit staff did involve pupils in identifying their support needs, planning their support programme, and identifying targets within the curriculum. The unit worked effectively in partnership with parents. It had very effectively raised awareness of deaf issues across the school and in the community, through the signing choir and the provision of signing classes.
The two depute headteachers with responsibility for pupil support made a very sound contribution to managing this area of the school’s work. The guidance and additional support needs departments were beginning to work in an integrated fashion with a wide range of agencies, including a home-school link teacher, to support jointly the needs of all pupils. They should include the staff of the hearing-impaired unit.
Quality of accommodation and facilities
The overall quality of the accommodation was fair. The main building was in sound condition with a well-stocked library, assembly hall and a unit for additional support needs. The school had undertaken some work to ensure that there was suitable wheel chair access to the ground floor. Although the school had closed circuit television, there was no secure entry system. The school made good use of display to highlight pupils’ work and achievements and ancillary staff worked hard to maintain the building and to keep it clean. However, there were a number of areas around the school which required maintenance, such as the pupils’ toilets which were generally in poor condition. There was a lack of access to appropriate ICT equipment to support pupils’ learning. In some areas of the school, the type of flooring and furniture caused excessive noise. This affected the access to the curriculum for the hearing impaired pupils who were using hearing aids.
Ethos
The school provided a welcoming and friendly atmosphere and pupils and staff identified strongly with the school. The school’s ethos and discipline group had made a good start to improving the ethos of the school and communication amongst staff. Relationships between staff and pupils were good. Most pupils were well behaved in classes and around the school. Whilst a few pupils displayed inappropriate behaviour, the school had some effective support systems in place to reduce the disruption to other pupils’ learning. Staff had generally high expectations for pupils’ behaviour, attendance and achievement. However, some did not have high enough expectations of what pupils could attain within their own learning. The majority of staff made effective use of praise to motivate and encourage pupils’ learning. Staff provided a wide range of extra-curricular activities and there was a high level of pupil participation. Across the school, support assistants were very effective in helping pupils in their learning. The school had introduced effective approaches which ensured that pupils with behavioural, emotional and additional support needs participated in the life of the school. The school had taken some effective steps to promote citizenship and anti-sectarianism. The school had made appropriate arrangements for religious observance.
Partnership with parents and the community
Partnerships with parents and the community were very good. The school communicated with parents through informative newsletters, helpful pupils’ progress reports and the school handbook. Staff had consulted parents on school issues and on the format of parents’ evenings. The school had very good working arrangements with the School Board who had organised work placements for S4 pupils through links with local businesses. It also had good links with its associated primaries, the local newspaper, the police, external support agencies and the local special school. Parents supported the school well through a variety of events such as fund-raising for charity and the annual school show which was sponsored by local businesses. Local businesses acted as befrienders to a group of S3/S4 pupils as well as providing expertise and resources for school activities.
Grange Academy provided pupils with a good quality of education within a caring and supportive environment. The quality of pupils’ learning experiences was enhanced by a wide range of extra-curricular activities and opportunities for pupils to take on responsibilities. There were many examples of effective teaching from S1 to S6. However, there were weaknesses in how the school met the needs of all pupils. There was a need to raise attainment further at all stages. Staff needed to ensure that pupils were actively involved in their own learning and that all pupils were given work that set them appropriate challenges.
The headteacher provided the school with good leadership. Under his leadership, the school had made a start to improvement in a number of areas, for example, impact on staff morale. He was consultative, supportive and had established very good relationships with staff, parents, pupils and the wider community. He was highly committed to the improvement of the school, inclusion, raising attainment and pupils’ wider achievement. He had developed effective teamwork, established working groups and encouraged the development of leadership potential of staff through involving a number of them in the Scottish Qualification for Headship (SQH). He had addressed issues related to inappropriate behaviour and meeting the needs of pupils. However, there were weaknesses in self-evaluation including the monitoring of pupils’ progress, and in the process of planning for improvement, but needed to ensure that further improvement included all staff working together in a more focused and rigorous manner. Senior managers were committed and hardworking, and provided good support for the headteacher, staff and pupils. Their remits were appropriate, but there was insufficient emphasis on monitoring curriculum developments. Whilst they had a general overview of the work of their link departments, they had not systematically evaluated the learning and teaching in departments in relation to raising attainment and informing pupils on how to improve their performance. The senior management team had been using quality indicators to evaluate aspects of the school’s provision. However, this practice was not yet widespread in departments. The headteacher and the formal depute headteacher had undertaken some classroom visits to monitor learning and teaching. Senior managers needed to develop these approaches further to improve the quality of pupils’learning experiences and share best practice. The modern languages department had established systematic approaches to evaluating the quality of its work. However, this was not the case in other departments. The school needed to develop rigorous tracking and target-setting procedures which would provide information on how to improve the quality of pupils’ experiences and standards of attainment.
Main points for action
While the school had made a good start to the process of improvement, there remained a number of important areas where progress needed to be made. In taking the school forward, the school and education authority should take account of the need to:
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 and carers. Within two years of the publication of this report parents and carers will be informed about the progress made by the school. HM Inspectors will continue to engage with the school and the education authority in monitoring progress.
Hakim Din
HM Inspector
12 April 2005
We judged the following to be very good
We judged the following to be good
We judged the following to be fair
We judged the following to be unsatisfactory
|
What pleased parents and carers most |
What parents and carers would like to see improved |
|
Almost all thought that:
Most thought that:
|
Only a majority thought that:
Less than half thought that:
|
|
What pleased pupils most |
What pupils would like to see improved |
|
Almost all thought that:
Most thought that:
|
Only a majority thought that:
Less than half thought that:
|
|
What pleased staff most |
What staff would like to see improved |
|
Almost all thought that:
Most thought that:
|
Less than half thought that:
Around a quarter thought that:
|
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 achieving by end of S4
|
2002 |
2003 |
20041 |
||
|
English and Mathematics @ Level 3 |
Grange Academy |
86 |
89 |
88 |
|
Comparator Schools2 |
94 |
93 |
94 |
|
|
National |
91 |
91 |
91 |
|
|
5+ @ Level 3 or Better |
Grange Academy |
83 |
91 |
89 |
|
Comparator Schools |
93 |
92 |
93 |
|
|
National |
91 |
91 |
91 |
|
|
5+ @ Level 4 or Better |
Grange Academy |
70 |
78 |
78 |
|
Comparator Schools |
81 |
81 |
82 |
|
|
National |
77 |
76 |
76 |
|
|
5+ @ Level 5 or Better |
Grange Academy |
35 |
29 |
39 |
|
Comparator Schools |
38 |
40 |
40 |
|
|
National |
34 |
34 |
34 |
Percentage of relevant S4 roll achieving by end of S5
|
2002 |
2003 |
20041 |
||
|
5+ @ Level 4 or better |
Grange Academy |
78 |
73 |
80 |
|
Comparator schools2 |
83 |
82 |
83 |
|
|
National |
78 |
78 |
78 |
|
|
5+ @ Level 5 or better |
Grange Academy |
41 |
45 |
41 |
|
Comparator schools |
51 |
49 |
51 |
|
|
National |
45 |
45 |
45 |
|
|
1+ @ Level 6 or better |
Grange Academy |
34 |
42 |
39 |
|
Comparator schools |
46 |
45 |
45 |
|
|
National |
39 |
39 |
38 |
|
|
3+ @ Level 6 or better |
Grange Academy |
19 |
25 |
21 |
|
Comparator schools |
27 |
25 |
25 |
|
|
National |
23 |
23 |
22 |
|
|
5+ @ Level 6 or better |
Grange Academy |
7 |
14 |
7 |
|
Comparator schools |
10 |
10 |
10 |
|
|
National |
9 |
10 |
9 |
Percentage of relevant S4 roll achieving by end of S6
|
2002 |
2003 |
2004 |
||
|
5+ @ Level 5 or better |
Grange Academy |
45 |
42 |
45 |
|
Comparator schools |
52 |
54 |
53 |
|
|
National |
46 |
47 |
47 |
|
|
1+ @ Level 6 or better |
Grange Academy |
45 |
42 |
47 |
|
Comparator schools |
51 |
51 |
49 |
|
|
National |
44 |
44 |
43 |
|
|
3+ @ Level 6 or better |
Grange Academy |
30 |
25 |
30 |
|
Comparator schools |
36 |
35 |
35 |
|
|
National |
31 |
31 |
30 |
|
|
5+ @ Level 6 or better |
Grange Academy |
19 |
18 |
19 |
|
Comparator schools |
23 |
21 |
23 |
|
|
National |
20 |
20 |
19 |
|
|
1+ @ Level 7 or better |
Grange Academy |
11 |
10 |
14 |
|
Comparator schools |
13 |
14 |
14 |
|
|
National |
12 |
12 |
12 |
If you would like an additional copy of this report
Copies of this report have been sent to the headteacher and school staff, the Director of Educational and Social 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 at www.hmie.gov.uk.
If you wish to comment about secondary inspections
Should you wish to comment on any aspect of secondary inspections, you should write in the first instance to Dr Bill Maxwell, HMCI, at HM Inspectorate of Education, Denholm House, Almondvale Business Park, Almondvale Way, Livingston EH54 6GA.
Our complaints procedure
If you have a concern about this report, you should write in the first instance to Hazel Dewart, Business Management Unit, HM Inspectorate of Education, Denholm House, Almondvale Business Park, Almondvale Way, Livingston EH54 6GA. A copy of our complaints procedure is available from this office or by telephoning 01506 600258 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. The Scottish Public Services Ombudsman is fully independent and has powers to investigate complaints about Government departments and agencies. You should write to The Scottish Public Services Ombudsman, 4-6 Melville Street, Edinburgh EH3 7NS. You can also telephone 0870 011 5378 or e-mail enquiries@scottishombudsman.org.uk. More information about the Ombudsman’s office can be obtained from the website: www.scottishombudsman.org.uk .
Crown Copyright 2005
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.