27 April 2004
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?
Grantown Grammar School was inspected in February 2004. Subjects included in the inspection were English, mathematics, chemistry and S1/2 science, and modern foreign languages. The school is a non-denominational secondary school which serves the town of Grantown-on-Spey and the surrounding rural area. At the time of the inspection the roll was 342. The percentage of pupils entitled to free school meals was slightly below the national average. Pupils’ attendance was generally in line with the national average.
Members of the inspection team analysed responses to questionnaires issued to samples of pupils, parents and carers, and to all staff. They also met a group of parents which included a representative of the School Board and the chair of the school association. They interviewed groups of pupils and staff.
HM Inspectors identified the following key strengths.
More than half of the parents and carers surveyed returned questionnaires. Their views of the school were mixed. Many were very positive about the support given to their children and the quality of education provided by the school. However, some were critical of aspects of teaching. Pupils were also critical of some of the teaching they received, and felt that they had no way of complaining effectively about this. They were very positive about sports and other extra-curricular activities, particularly the Duke of Edinburgh Award Scheme. They valued the small size of the school and the fact that teachers knew them well. They commented on overcrowded canteen facilities and the lack of healthy choices there. Many pupils noted that they were not sufficiently involved in making decisions about the school, although two senior pupils represented the school on Highland Council’s Youth Voice consultative group. Staff were very positive about the school, and of the behaviour and attitude of almost all pupils.
Further details about what most pleased parents and carers, pupils and staff, 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
Against a background of a small roll and many single-teacher departments, the school offered a good curriculum. In S1/S2, the range of subjects studied was very wide and included two modern languages. Rota arrangements were effective in reducing the number of teachers that pupils saw in any one week. Effective arrangements for course choice and timetabling ensured that pupils studied a generally broad and balanced range of subjects from S3 through to S6. Almost all pupils in S3/S4 studied eight Standard Grade subjects. Appropriately, some pupils studied fewer, and this arrangement allowed the school to give them more support and to undertake vocational courses at Further Education (FE) college. However, the school had not done enough to justify the benefits of studying a modern foreign language and fewer than half of S3/S4 pupils were studying one. There was no provision for religious and moral education beyond S2. S5/S6 pupils generally studied five courses. At Higher, there were very good opportunities for pupils to make progress from their studies at Standard Grade. Choice was more restricted at Intermediate 1 and 2 levels. Some courses linked well to local needs such as hospitality and tourism. Open learning (OL) and other courses available from FE colleges widened opportunities for many pupils. However, pupils required in-school tutorial support when studying OL courses.
While the quality of teaching and learning was good overall, it varied widely and needed to be improved in some subjects. All teachers organised lessons effectively and explained their purposes well, although few summarised the key points and progress made at the end of a lesson. In most cases their expectations of pupils’ work and behaviour were appropriately high. Homework was well used in many subjects to support pupils’ learning. Most teachers interacted well with pupils, and in some classes this interaction was of very high quality. However, in some lessons teachers did not question pupils well to check their understanding or to challenge them, and relied too much on pupils asking for help. The quality of learning was very good in those classes where teachers were actively developing pupils’ learning skills. Most pupils were well motivated and focused on their work, but in a minority of classes some were not well behaved and this affected the learning of others. The pace of work was good or very good in most classes. However, in some subjects pupils needed more opportunities to work independently and to collaborate with others. The use of information and communications technology (ICT) to enhance pupils’ learning varied between subjects.
Teachers knew their pupils very well as individuals. They gave good support to pupils in class and mostly met their needs effectively. Support for learning staff gave valuable assistance in classes. Arrangements for early closure on Friday afternoons allowed for extra-curricular activities to take place, pupil attendance at FE college or extra tuition in subjects. In some classes, especially in S1/S2, tasks needed to be more challenging to take account of pupils’ prior achievement and aptitudes. In a few lessons, materials were out-of-date and needed to be made more relevant to pupils’ experiences.
Attainment and achievement
The quality of attainment in S1/S2 was good. The majority of pupils were achieving appropriate national levels of attainment in reading, writing and mathematics by the end of S2. Almost all had made very good progress since the start of S1 in these subjects. They were making good progress in other areas of the curriculum, but in some subjects teachers did not take enough account of pupils’ previous learning and levels of attainment.
The following comments are based on SQA data for the three-year period from 2001-2003.
The quality of attainment in S3/S4 was good. The school’s overall performance was above national averages, and was well above in the proportion achieving five or more Standard Grade awards or better. It performed better than schools with similar characteristics. However, in some subjects there was scope for improving the performance of the most able pupils through greater pace and challenge in classes.
The quality of attainment in S5/S6 was good. The school’s performance was above the national average on all measures. It was above that of schools with similar characteristics except for the proportion achieving five or more Higher awards or better by the end of S6. Almost all pupils with the appropriate Standard Grade qualifications studied five Highers. Attainment was poorer for the few pupils who were studying a subject at too challenging a level, and for the most able who were insufficiently challenged in mixed ability classes.
Information on the subjects inspected is given later in the report. Significant features of attainment in the subjects not inspected were as follows.
Other aspects of achievement included the wide participation of pupils in sports, concerts and other extra-curricular activities, including the Duke of Edinburgh Award Scheme. Pupils’ citizenship skills were being developed through the involvement of the school with the Cairngorms National Park, including setting up its youth website. Creativity in the school was being enhanced through activities for many pupils in art, poetry, music and in the production of the school calendar. Some departments including art and design, technology, and home economics entered pupils for prestigious external competitions and many gained success in those. As part of its programme in personal and social education (PSE), the school taught lifesaving skills to all pupils.
English language
Learning and teaching
The quality of teaching was consistently good at all stages. In some examples of very good practice, teaching approaches were varied and well chosen. Teachers successfully promoted pupils’ positive attitudes to learning and helped build their confidence. In all lessons, pupils were well behaved and hardworking. In some stimulating and challenging lessons, pupils actively took responsibility for their own learning. In almost all classes, teachers matched coursework to pupils’ needs very well and enabled pupils to make very good progress in their learning.
Attainment and achievement
By the end of S2, around two-thirds of pupils were achieving the appropriate national levels of attainment in reading and writing, and around a quarter were exceeding these levels in reading. Attainment in writing was generally well above the national average. All pupils made good progress from their previous levels of attainment. Pupils’ attainment in listening and talking was not recorded by the department. At Standard Grade, the proportion of pupils achieving Credit awards was consistently in line with or above the national average. Over the last three years, almost all pupils had achieved a General award or above. At Higher and Intermediate 2, the proportion of pupils achieving A-C grades was consistently well above the national average. At Higher, pupils generally performed better in English than in their other subjects, and made better progress than expected from their performance at Standard Grade. At S6, all those presented had achieved an A-C grade in the Certificate of Sixth Year Studies.
Other features of pupils’ attainment and achievement included the following.
Mathematics
Learning and teaching
Teachers generally explained topics well to pupils, and set appropriate tasks in class. They needed to use a wider range of strategies to clarify and reinforce key concepts. Lessons were well paced, and pupils worked hard and behaved very well. However, they were often too passive in class, and many were not enthusiastic about mathematics lessons. The wide range of courses offered, and arrangements for setting classes, helped teachers to meet pupils’ needs well. Staff generally gave good support to groups and individuals within classes, but they needed to improve arrangements to help pupils prepare for assessments. They also needed to make more effective use of the information gained from assessments. While ICT was used to enhance learning and teaching in mathematics, its use was limited through lack of modern hardware and difficulties with the school’s computer network.
Attainment and achievement
The majority of pupils were reaching appropriate national levels of attainment by the end of S2, and some were exceeding them. Almost all pupils had made good progress in their attainment from the beginning of S1. Almost all S4 pupils achieved an award in Standard Grade mathematics. The proportion of pupils achieving a Standard Grade Credit award was around the national average, and the proportion achieving grades 1-6 was well above it. Of the very small number of pupils attempting Intermediate 1 mathematics, almost all achieved an A-C grade. The proportion of entries at Intermediate 2, and the performance of those pupils, were well above the national average. In recent years, performance at Higher had been above the national average, with the proportion achieving A grades well above. All of the Advanced Higher candidates achieved an A-C grade.
Other features of pupils’ attainment and achievement included the following.
Chemistry and S1/S2 science
Learning and teaching
Teachers planned lessons well. In the majority of classes there was a positive environment for learning, and teachers supported pupils effectively. Homework was generally well used to support pupils’ learning. In some classes at S1 to S4 teachers did not focus and motivate pupils well enough, and a minority of pupils were allowed to disrupt the learning of others. As a result, pupils in these classes were not achieving their potential. In several classes, ICT was well used to improve pupils’ learning. Teaching in chemistry required to be supported by a greater variety of visual aids to stimulate pupils’ interest and improve their understanding. In chemistry at S5/S6, the provision of courses met a wide range of pupils’ needs. In S1/S2 science and in Standard Grade chemistry the tasks set for pupils required to be more closely matched to their individual needs and prior achievement.
Attainment and achievement
The majority of pupils were making good progress in their coursework in S1/S2 science. In S3/S4, the numbers of pupils taking Standard Grade chemistry, and the proportions gaining awards at Credit or General levels, were generally below national averages. In S5, the number of pupils taking Higher chemistry was below the national average, but the proportion gaining A-C grades was well above the national average. Small numbers of pupils had taken Intermediate 2 chemistry, with half of them gaining A-C grades. A few pupils had been presented for Advanced Higher chemistry in 2002, and all gained a B or C grade.
Other features of pupils’ attainment and achievement included the following.
Modern languages
Learning and teaching
The quality of teaching was consistently very good. The foreign language was appropriately used and pupils were clear about lesson objectives. There were many good examples of direct teaching. This included skilful questioning to encourage independent thinking and an enthusiasm for language. However, teachers sometimes relied too much on whole-class teaching. They emphasised the importance of accuracy in spoken and written language, and had high expectations of what pupils could achieve. Pupils had a very positive learning experience through the use of appropriate resources, including ICT, but needed to be given more responsibility for their own learning. The learning and support needs of most pupils were well met through teaching approaches which took good account of prior learning and different learning styles. However, some tasks did not fully challenge the most able, especially at S1/S2.
Attainment and achievement
At all stages, pupils were performing well in their coursework in reading, and very well in writing. Listening skills were well developed. However, pupils were performing less well in speaking and needed more opportunities to develop oral skills through discussion with others.
In Standard Grade French, the proportion of pupils achieving a Credit award was in line with the national average, although the proportion achieving a grade 1 was above it. The proportions of pupils gaining grades 1-4 and grades 1-6 were well above national averages. In Standard Grade German, the performance of pupils was consistently well above the national average. The proportions of pupils gaining A-C grades in Higher French and German were consistently well above national averages.
Other features of pupils’ attainment and achievement included the following.
The school had good arrangements for ensuring the care and welfare of pupils. Effective procedures were in place to deal with situations in which pupils might be at risk. Almost all pupils felt safe and secure. Staff actively discouraged bullying and dealt effectively with any incidents which did occur. Staff worked hard to support pupils’ personal and social development through a wide range of activities. However, there was no complaints system for pupils and the school had not established ways of involving them in decision making. The school’s procedures for recognising pupils’ achievements were used inconsistently by teachers. Too few staff had been trained in child protection.
Overall, the quality of pupils’ personal and social development was good. The programme in PSE covered an appropriate range of topics and placed good emphasis on developing pupils’ study skills. Teachers used a good variety of approaches and methods to stimulate and retain pupils’ interest. Some pupils had undertaken a number of enterprise activities, but opportunities for work experience were limited to only a few pupils.
Pupils received very good advice about course choices and potential careers. They made very good use of computer programs to identify interests and possible occupations. Effective arrangements were in place to prepare pupils for interviews and to allow them to attend events relating to
post-school education and training. Subject departments regularly reviewed pupils’ progress and reported any concerns to guidance staff. Guidance staff effectively supported pupils who were experiencing problems. However, the school did not have a systematic approach to setting agreed targets for the attainment of individual pupils and to sharing attainment information across all staff. Information on pupils’ progress in S1/S2 was reported in different ways by departments, which was confusing for parents and carers.
Staff in the support for learning department gave very good support to pupils who had difficulty in learning across a range of subjects. Pupils’ additional support needs were very well met. These pupils participated well in classes and other activities. Their very good progress was well supported and monitored through individual education plans. Support for learning staff took very good care to ensure that pupils with additional support needs developed good levels of self-esteem and self-confidence, for example through special programmes in swimming and movement.
The principal teachers of guidance and learning support managed their respective departments very well. They were highly respected by pupils, parents and other staff. They ensured that the various contributions of outside agencies, including the multi-agency support group, were effectively co-ordinated for the benefit of all pupils. Responsibility for support for learning and for guidance was divided between two members of the senior management team. The school needed to review this arrangement to ensure that support for pupils at all levels was co-ordinated efficiently.
Quality of accommodation and facilities
The school was attractively set in extensive grounds. Attention had been paid to improving parts of the building through redecoration, displays of artwork, and refurbishment of some departments. Hutted accommodation for music, modern languages and the library was bright and attractive. The school had excellent outdoor sports facilities and a swimming pool. Plans were in place to build major new indoor community sports facilities to improve the current limited provision. However, there were a number of weaknesses in the quality of accommodation. There were insufficient toilets and showers in the school, and many of them were in very poor condition. Parts of the playground and many classrooms were also in poor condition, including some older huts. Computer rooms had inadequate ventilation. There were too few social areas for pupils. The dining hall and assembly hall were too small. There was restricted access to upper floors in the main building for disabled persons. While there was a large number of computers in the school, many were old and the education authority did not now support their maintenance. Internet access was slow. Potential risks to pupils’ health and safety were posed by poor storage of materials and equipment and the lack of separation of cars and pupils in the playground. In addition, guards and power supply cut off switches were inadequate on older machines in the technical education department. The school had no secure entry arrangements.
Ethos
The ethos of the school was good. There was a welcoming atmosphere with an approachable headteacher and senior management team. Pupils were proud of their school, and almost all wore school uniform. Their behaviour around the school was very good, though in a few classes a minority were allowed to disrupt the learning of others. Staff morale was very good, and staff were supportive of one another. Pupils’ morale was more mixed, and depended on their relationships with the teachers they had. They felt that some teachers did not treat them fairly. Some staff did not use praise sufficiently in class. They were sometimes not effective in translating their high expectations of what pupils could achieve into high attainment and good behaviour. Pupils were confident, polite and articulate, but they were not involved in decision making in the school. Overall, they had too few opportunities to take responsibility. There were no policies and procedures in place to guide the school in ensuring equality and fairness. Some pupils and parents did not feel valued, and many staff did not feel they were consulted on the work of the school. There were too few opportunities for religious observance.
Partnership with parents and the community
There were a number of strengths in the school’s procedures for communicating with parents. These included a useful website. There was an active School Board and school association. Parents were well involved in the process of course choices. Information on learning support, including the progress made by pupils, was very good. The school was developing strong curricular links with primary schools through work in science, music and modern languages. There were strong links with the community through sports clubs, the local enterprise company, and the development of the Cairngorms National Park. However, many parents felt that they were not well informed about the work of the school, including its priorities for improvement. The school needed to ensure that parents fully understood all the information it was issuing, and that they had clear ways in which they could express their views on the work of the school.
Pupils at Grantown Grammar School were reaching good standards of attainment overall. They had very good opportunities for involvement in a wide range of extra-curricular activities, including sports and the arts, which promoted wider achievement and creativity. While many lessons were stimulating, variability in the quality of learning and teaching led to inconsistencies in the quality of pupils’ experiences. Staff expressed their appreciation of the behaviour and hard work of their pupils, but some pupils were not always encouraged to demonstrate these in lessons. Pupils with additional support needs were very well supported by specialist staff, but class teachers sometimes did not meet the full range of pupils’ needs. Some pupils were involved in consultations and decision making in the wider community, but they had very few opportunities to influence decision making within the school.
The headteacher had shown considerable commitment to the school over a number of years, and had helped to foster its key role in the community. He was caring and supportive of the staff and pupils, and they appreciated this. However, there were some important weaknesses in his leadership. He did not have a sufficiently clear vision for how the school could improve. He had not successfully ensured that senior managers focused on identifying and addressing weaknesses in the school’s provision. The depute headteacher with responsibility for the curriculum worked very hard. He was seen by staff as a key person in moving the school forward through widening opportunities for pupils. His work with his linked departments was generally effective. He had carried out a survey of pupil views and of the working of the school’s praise and referral systems. However, these surveys had not led to any clear actions. He worked well with the principal teacher of computing to develop the ICT provision in the school, and to train and support staff. The effectiveness of their work was limited by the time they spent on day-to-day maintenance of the school’s ICT infrastructure. The other depute headteacher worked well to improve the ethos of the school, but he had too few strategic duties in his remit. Many principal teachers led their departments well and made positive contributions to the wider life of the school and community. Some had analysed pupils’ attainment in their subjects well. However, the school was not well placed to improve its performance. Staff as a whole had very little awareness of how to evaluate their work and how to plan to ensure a consistently high quality of learning, teaching and attainment. There were no established procedures for senior managers to monitor and evaluate the work of the school. The national agreement giving teachers an entitlement to continuous professional development, which would support them in ensuring that their materials and methodology were up-to-date, had not been implemented. Senior managers needed to take a strong lead in the systematic evaluation of the school’s work and in planning for improvement at school and departmental level.
The school and the education authority, in liaison with HM Inspectors, should take action to ensure improvement in:
What happens next?
The school and the education authority, in association with HMIE, have been asked to prepare an action plan indicating how they will address the main findings of this report, and to share that plan with parents and carers. HM Inspectors will engage with the school and the education authority to monitor progress, and will undertake a follow-through inspection. This will result in another report to parents and carers, within two years of the publication of this report, on the extent of improvement that has been achieved.
Brian Stewart
HM Inspector
27 April 2004
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:
|
Some parents and carers thought that:
|
|
What pleased pupils most |
What pupils would like to see improved |
|
Almost all thought that:
|
Many thought that:
Some thought that:
|
|
What pleased staff most |
What staff would like to see improved |
|
All staff thought that:
|
Many staff thought that:
Some thought that:
|
|
Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework (SCQF) levels: 7: Advanced Higher at A-C/CSYS at A-C |
Percentage of relevant S4 roll achieving by end of S4
|
2001 |
2002 |
20031 |
2001-3 |
||
|
English and Maths @ Level 3 |
Grantown Grammar School |
100.0 |
97.3 |
92.9 |
96.9 |
|
Comparator Schools2 |
95.5 |
95.6 |
94.6 |
95.6 |
|
|
National |
92.0 |
91.1 |
91.0 |
91.4 |
|
|
5+ @ Level 3 or Better |
Grantown Grammar School |
98.5 |
98.7 |
87.5 |
95.4 |
|
Comparator Schools |
95.0 |
94.6 |
95.5 |
95.2 |
|
|
National |
90.7 |
90.8 |
90.6 |
90.7 |
|
|
5+ @ Level 4 or Better |
Grantown Grammar School |
87.7 |
93.3 |
75.0 |
86.2 |
|
Comparator Schools |
82.8 |
87.1 |
83.8 |
84.4 |
|
|
National |
76.8 |
76.7 |
76.0 |
76.5 |
|
|
5+ @ Level 5 or Better |
Grantown Grammar School |
43.1 |
52.0 |
30.4 |
42.9 |
|
Comparator Schools |
43.1 |
40.6 |
40.1 |
41.0 |
|
|
National |
33.8 |
33.9 |
33.4 |
33.7 |
Percentage of relevant S4 roll achieving by end of S5
|
2001 |
2002 |
20031 |
2001-3 |
||
|
5+ @ Level 4 or better |
Grantown Grammar School |
90.6 |
87.7 |
93.3 |
90.7 |
|
Comparator Schools2 |
86.0 |
85.5 |
88.6 |
85.5 |
|
|
National |
78.2 |
78.5 |
78.5 |
78.4 |
|
|
5+ @ Level 5 or better |
Grantown Grammar School |
56.3 |
49.2 |
64.0 |
56.9 |
|
Comparator schools |
49.6 |
53.2 |
54.9 |
53.8 |
|
|
National |
44.1 |
45.5 |
45.3 |
44.9 |
|
|
1+ @ Level 6 or better |
Grantown Grammar School |
48.4 |
44.6 |
54.7 |
49.5 |
|
Comparator schools |
43.4 |
45.6 |
46.1 |
46.3 |
|
|
National |
39.6 |
39.5 |
38.8 |
39.3 |
|
|
3+ @ Level 6 or better |
Grantown Grammar School |
25.0 |
33.8 |
28.0 |
28.9 |
|
Comparator schools |
25.1 |
27.4 |
25.8 |
26.0 |
|
|
National |
23.0 |
22.8 |
21.8 |
22.5 |
|
|
5+ @ Level 6 or better |
Grantown Grammar School |
10.9 |
7.7 |
9.3 |
9.3 |
|
Comparator schools |
10.5 |
10.1 |
9.3 |
9.3 |
|
|
National |
9.3 |
9.2 |
9.0 |
9.2 |
Percentage of relevant S4 roll achieving by end of S6
|
2001 |
2002 |
20031 |
2001-3 |
||
|
5+ @ Level 5 or better |
Grantown Grammar School |
52.6 |
56.3 |
50.8 |
53.2 |
|
Comparator schools2 |
48.6 |
52.8 |
55.6 |
52.7 |
|
|
National |
44.5 |
46.7 |
47.7 |
46.3 |
|
|
1+ @ Level 6 or better |
Grantown Grammar School |
50.9 |
54.7 |
46.2 |
50.5 |
|
Comparator schools |
50.9 |
48.7 |
51.0 |
50.5 |
|
|
National |
45.7 |
44.1 |
43.8 |
44.5 |
|
|
3+ @ Level 6 or better |
Grantown Grammar School |
33.3 |
39.1 |
40.0 |
37.6 |
|
Comparator schools |
33.3 |
34.9 |
37.9 |
34.9 |
|
|
National |
31.7 |
31.0 |
30.4 |
31.0 |
|
|
5+ @ Level 6 or better |
Grantown Grammar School |
22.8 |
21.9 |
18.5 |
21.0 |
|
Comparator schools |
21.3 |
22.1 |
22.8 |
21.7 |
|
|
National |
19.9 |
19.8 |
19.3 |
19.7 |
|
|
1+ @ Level 7 or better |
Grantown Grammar School |
12.3 |
23.4 |
4.6 |
13.4 |
|
Comparator schools |
12.8 |
14.5 |
12.1 |
12.8 |
|
|
National |
11.2 |
11.6 |
11.6 |
11.5 |
Copies of this report have been sent to the headteacher and school staff, the Director of Education, Culture and Sport, 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, Longman House, 28 Longman Road, Inverness, IV1 1SF or by telephoning 01463 253115. Copies are also available on our website: (www.hmie.gov.uk).
Should you wish to comment on or make a complaint about any aspect of the inspection or about this report, you should write in the first instance to Bill Maxwell, HMCI at
HM Inspectorate of Education, H Spur, Room H1-11, Saughton House, Broomhouse Drive, Edinburgh EH11 3XD. A copy of our complaints procedure is available from that office and on our website.
If you are still dissatisfied, you can contact the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman directly or through your member of the Scottish Parliament. The Scottish Public Services Ombudsman is fully independent and has powers to investigate complaints about Government Departments and Agencies. She will not normally consider your complaint before the HMIE complaints procedure has been used. Instead, she will usually ask you to give us the chance to put matters right if we can.
Complaints to the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman must be submitted within 12 months of the date of publication of this report.
The Ombudsman can be contacted at:
Professor Alice Brown
The Scottish Public Services Ombudsman
23 Walker Street
Edinburgh
EH3 7HX
Telephone number: 0870 011 5378
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 2004
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.
1 Pre-appeal.
2 Comparator schools are the ten schools immediately above and the
ten schools immediately below the school being inspected in terms of the percentage
of pupils entitled to free meals (FME).