20 December 2005
1. Background
2. Key strengths
3. What are the views of parents, pupils and staff?
4. How good are learning, teaching and achievement?
5. How well are pupils 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?
Hillpark Secondary School was inspected in September 2005 as part of a national sample of secondary education. The inspection covered key aspects of the school’s work at all stages. It evaluated the structure of the curriculum, analysed pupils’ performance in examinations (see Appendix 3) and assessed the quality of pupils’ broader achievement. It also evaluated the quality of learning and teaching and pupil support, the environment for learning, the school’s processes for self-evaluation, and its overall effectiveness and capacity for improvement. There was a particular focus on the work of the English, mathematics, home economics and physical education departments.
HM Inspectors observed learning and teaching and examined pupils’ work. They analysed responses to questionnaires issued to a sample of parents1 and pupils and to all staff. They interviewed groups of pupils, including the pupil council, and staff. Members of the inspection team also met representatives of the School Board and a group of parents.
Hillpark Secondary School is a non-denominational school serving parts of greater Pollock, Newlands and the Mansewood area of Glasgow. At the time of the inspection the roll was 1195. The percentage of pupils entitled to free school meals was well above the national average. Pupils’ attendance was below the national average. There was a Communication Disorder Unit (CDU) within the school.
The headteacher of the school was also principal of the Hillpark Learning Community which comprised local nursery and primary schools and the Glasgow Gaelic primary school. The formal depute headteacher acted as head of school for Hillpark Secondary School and worked with the headteacher in the management of the school.
HM Inspectors identified the following key strengths.
Almost all parents who responded through the questionnaire and in interviews were very positive about the school. They considered that the school was well led. They felt welcome in the school and particularly appreciated the concern shown by staff for their children’s care and welfare. They were pleased with the helpful information about their children’s progress provided by staff. About one fifth of parents would have liked to have had more information about how they could help with homework and about the school’s priorities for improvement. All pupils thought that teachers expected them to work to the best of their ability and almost all felt well supported. Most enjoyed being at school and felt that they got on well with other pupils. However, one quarter of pupils felt that instances of bullying were not dealt with well. Almost half felt that the behaviour of pupils was not good. Overall, staff responses were very positive. All felt that staff showed concern for the care and welfare of pupils. They thought that there were very good links with parents and the community. Almost all thought that senior managers worked well as a team and that the school was well led. While almost all teachers felt that they were appropriately involved in the decision making process in the school, around one third of the support staff did not.
Further details about what most pleased parents, staff and pupils, and what they would most like to see improved, can be found in Appendix 2 of this report.
The curriculum, learning and teaching
At all stages the school provided a broad, balanced and well structured curriculum. The school had begun to develop more flexible approaches to the curriculum to provide more pupils at all stages with courses to meet their individual needs and aspirations. It made appropriate provision for religious and moral education at S1 to S4 but not in S5/S6. Effective links with primary schools had helped some departments to develop courses which built effectively on pupils’ prior attainment. Fluent Gaelic speakers were able to build on their primary school learning in that language through Gaelic medium teaching in history, geography and personal and social education (PSE). At S1/S2 almost all pupils continued to study the modern language that they studied at primary. Overall, however, some departments did not take sufficient account of pupils’ learning experiences in primary school to ensure continuity in their learning. Information and communications technology (ICT) skills were being well developed across the curriculum. Almost all pupils at S3/S4 studied eight Standard Grade courses or their equivalent. Following appropriate consultation with parents and pupils, a small number of pupils had taken up the option of a pre-vocational course. The school had monitored pupils’ progress on this course. Most pupils in S4 participated in work experience. At S5/S6 the school provided pupils with a wide range of courses which allowed almost all to progress appropriately from their earlier learning. Some of these courses were provided through well-developed links with neighbouring schools and a local college. Pupils were able to choose additional study opportunities in physical education, art and design, drama, ICT and music. Effective arrangements were in place to enable senior pupils to develop personal, social and study skills and to contribute to the school and wider community.
Teaching had a number of important strengths. Teachers gave clear explanations and, in almost all lessons, shared the aims of learning effectively with pupils. They made use of a number of sound approaches to teaching, including the effective use of ICT and skilful questioning to help pupils to develop their thinking. Almost all teachers were appropriately responsive to pupils’ ideas. However, they did not always reinforce main points of learning during or at the end of lessons, and at times, there was too much reliance on whole class teaching with insufficient interaction. Almost all pupils co-operated with teachers, worked confidently and diligently, and showed a positive attitude to learning. They responded well to the brisk pace of learning in most lessons. They presented classwork neatly and completed homework on time. Pupils had insufficient opportunities for collaborating with each other and for independent work. Teachers, support staff and the librarian worked productively with pupils to meet a range of learning needs. Generally, coursework was well matched to pupils’ prior learning and took good account of assessment information. Teachers provided pupils with well judged support to improve attainment. In some curricular areas, pupils benefited from setting their own learning targets, but the overall quality of feedback to pupils about next steps in learning was variable across departments.
Achievement
The overall quality of attainment at S1/S2 was good. Most pupils had made good progress in their coursework and performed well. By the end of S2 almost all pupils had improved their previous levels of attainment. The school had not, however, made effective use of national assessments to monitor accurately pupils’ progress. By the end of S2, the majority of pupils were achieving appropriate national levels of attainment in reading. Less than half of the pupils were achieving appropriate national levels in writing and mathematics. Over the last three years pupils’ attainment had improved steadily in mathematics.
The following comments are based on Scottish Qualifications Authority (SQA) data, using the Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework (SCQF)2 for the three year period (2003-2005) and also draw on the overall evaluations of the quality of learning, teaching and meeting pupils’ needs.
The overall quality of attainment at S3/S4 was good. At S4, pupils performed much better than in schools with similar characteristics, although levels of attainment had declined over the last three years. The proportion of pupils achieving five or more awards at SCQF level 3 or above was better than the national average. At SCQF level 4 or above, the proportion of pupils achieving five or more awards was broadly in line with the national average. The proportion of pupils achieving five or more awards at SCQF level 5 or above was below the national average.
The overall quality of attainment at S5/S6 was good. By the end of S5 and S6, pupils performed much better than in schools with similar characteristics. However, levels of attainment had declined over the last three years. The proportion of pupils achieving one or more and three or more A-C grades at SCQF level 6 by the end of S5 was broadly in line with national averages. The proportion of pupils achieving five or more A-C grades at SCQF level 6 by the end of S5 was below the national average. By S6, the proportion of pupils achieving one or more A-C grades at SCQF level 7 was below the national average.
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 actively promoted and celebrated pupils’ wider achievements, for example through daily announcements, assemblies and newsletters. Many pupils gained success and enjoyment through their commitment and participation in a wide range of activities. In recognition of extensive sporting achievements, the school had won the Glasgow Sport School of the Year award in 2004. In football and gymnastics, in particular, pupils had been successful at local and national level. Activities such as the skiing, cheerleading club, the annual school show and talent competition had developed pupils’ confidence and strong team-working skills. The school pipe band and choirs performed regularly for the school and the wider community. Pupils in the CDU and in the school’s film making club were developing new skills in animation and in using digital cameras. Several S4 to S6 pupils had won prestigious national design competitions. Pupils in the poster club designed a variety of striking and attractive displays for corridors and the dining hall. S6 pupils displayed good citizenship skills by collaborating effectively with pupils from across the city to raise funds and manage community projects. They also supported younger pupils very effectively through buddying schemes. At all stages pupils demonstrated their understanding of the needs of others through successful fund-raising initiatives.
English
Learning and teaching
Teachers used direct interactive teaching and ICT effectively. They questioned pupils skilfully to develop their thinking. They shared the purposes of lessons clearly with pupils. However, they did not always review and consolidate learning at the end of lessons. Almost all pupils co-operated with their teachers and worked conscientiously, but they had insufficient opportunities to collaborate on tasks. Teachers used a range of sound approaches to support pupils’ learning needs. Pupils were not sufficiently involved in checking their own work.
Achievement
At S1/S2, pupils were making appropriate progress in their classwork. By the end of S2, the majority of pupils achieved appropriate national attainment levels in listening, talking and reading. Less than half of pupils attained appropriate levels in writing. At S4, the proportion of pupils who attained grades 1-4 at Standard Grade was well below the national average. These pupils performed notably less well in English than in their other subjects. The proportion of pupils attaining A-C grades at Higher by the end of S6 and at Intermediate 1 was above the national average. At Intermediate 2, attainment had declined and was below the national average. Most pupils presented at Advanced Higher were successful.
Other features of pupils’ achievement included the following.
Mathematics
Learning and teaching
Teachers gave clear explanations and made effective use of questions to check pupils’ knowledge. They used homework well to monitor pupils’ progress with coursework. Although lessons were well planned, teachers did not always share clearly the purposes of lessons with pupils. Almost all pupils worked purposefully, behaved well and co-operated with their teachers. However, the pace of learning was generally too slow. Teachers provided pupils with helpful advice for assessments, including supported study after school. Arrangements for setting classes by prior attainment helped to provide appropriate support for pupils. However, especially at S1/S2, there was scope to match tasks more closely to pupils’ needs.
Achievement
At S1/S2, pupils were making appropriate progress with their classwork. Over the last three years, less than half of pupils in S2 had reached the appropriate national level of attainment. This proportion was below the national average but was improving. The proportion of S4 pupils attaining grades 1-4 at Standard Grade was below the national average. The proportion of pupils in S5/S6 achieving A-C grades at Higher was above the national average. At Higher, pupils performed better at mathematics than in their other subjects and frequently better than would be expected from their Standard Grade performance. At Intermediate 2, the proportion of pupils in S5/S6 achieving A-C grades was generally above the national average, although this had decreased in 2005. The proportion of pupils attaining A-C grades at Intermediate 1 was in line with the national average. At Advanced Higher, just under half of pupils were successful.
Other features of pupils’ achievement included the following.
Gaelic
Learning and teaching
Teachers gave very clear explanations and instructions and made very effective use of Gaelic as a teaching medium. Teachers organised lessons very well and made good use of a range of texts. Highly effective direct interactive teaching to classes and groups ensured an appropriately quick pace of learning. Teachers shared and reinforced the aims of lessons with pupils. Teachers questioned effectively to ensure pupils’ understanding. They set high expectations for pupils. Pupils were appropriately challenged by the choice of texts for homework. Pupils worked well in small groups and interacted positively. Almost all pupils were keen to learn and benefited from the opportunities to work independently. Teachers used a variety of approaches to meet the needs of different pupils. Pupils found the detailed written and oral feedback on how they could improve their work helpful.
Achievement
Almost all pupils from S1 to S6 performed very well in their coursework. All pupils presented for Standard Grade since 2003 had attained grades 1-4. At S5/S6 almost all pupils attained A-C grades at Higher. At Advanced Higher all pupils attained A-B grades. Pupils performed consistently well at all levels and frequently better at Higher than would be expected from their Standard Grade results.
Other features of pupils’ achievement included the following.
Home economics
Learning and teaching
Learning and teaching had many strengths. In all lessons, teachers shared with pupils the intended outcomes of their learning and gave very clear explanations and instructions. They used a wide range of teaching approaches and made very effective use of ICT at all stages to enhance pupils’ learning. In most lessons, teachers used questioning skilfully to check understanding and encourage pupils to work independently on practical tasks. Homework was well planned and used very effectively to support pupils’ learning. Teachers gave detailed written and oral feedback to pupils, which included helpful suggestions for improvement. Almost all pupils were motivated to work conscientiously and responded positively to the high expectations set by teachers. The brisk pace of lessons enabled them to make sound progress in their coursework. Coursework was generally well matched to pupils’ learning needs. However, at S1, teachers needed to take more account of pupils’ learning experiences from primary school.
Achievement
At all stages, almost all pupils were performing well in their coursework. At Standard Grade, the proportion of pupils achieving Grade 1 awards had improved steadily and was well above the national average. At S5/S6, all pupils presented for Intermediate 1 achieved A-B grades. Most pupils presented for Intermediate 2 achieved A-C grades.
Other features of pupils’ achievement included the following.
Physical education
Learning and teaching
In almost all lessons teachers interacted well with pupils and made appropriate use of praise. They shared the content and aims of lessons with pupils and their instructions and explanations were clear. They used whole class direct interactive teaching effectively. However, the range of teaching approaches was limited. In the best lessons, there was an appropriately brisk pace. In these lessons, pupils collaborated well with each other and there were suitably high expectations of performance. In a number of class based lessons, ICT was used well to enrich learning. Pupils were generally well motivated, enthusiastic and on task. However, there were limited opportunities for them to take responsibility for their own learning. The range of course activities was well matched to pupils’ learning and teachers generally provided good support to pupils. They did not always share clearly with pupils what they needed to do to improve their individual performance.
Achievement
Almost all pupils performed well in their coursework. At S1/S2, pupils were making appropriate progress. At S3/S4 the proportion attaining grades 1-2 at Standard Grade was above the national average and pupils performed notably better in physical education than in their other subjects. Presentations were consistently above the national average. At S5/S6 at Intermediate 2 almost all of the small number of pupils presented attained A or B grades. At Higher, the proportion attaining A-C grades was broadly in line with the national average.
Other features of pupils’ achievement included the following.
Overall arrangements for the pastoral care and welfare of pupils were very good. The school had sound procedures for child protection, including anti-bullying. It had an effective programme delivered through assemblies and PSE lessons, for example, to ensure that pupils had confidence in the way the school would respond to their concerns. The school promoted a healthy lifestyle through the PSE programme. The committed pastoral care staff knew their pupils very well through their involvement in the PSE programme and other appropriate contacts. The school was in the early stages of implementing a tutor scheme for pupils in S1 to enhance the involvement of all staff in pastoral care. The school had established very productive links with a range of external agencies in the support of young people.
The PSE programme included key aspects of relationships, health education, sexual health, decision-making, careers education, preparation for the world of work and citizenship. There was good involvement of outside speakers. However, teachers needed to work more effectively with pupils to help them achieve greater involvement in their learning.
The school provided very good curricular guidance for pupils. At key transition stages, pupils and their parents received comprehensive information on course choices. The school prepared pupils well for making careers choices by encouraging them to evaluate their own strengths and interests. It also prepared pupils well for employment through enterprise activities and work experience. Pastoral care teachers made a significant contribution to tracking the progress of all pupils and supporting them in setting appropriate targets. They discussed progress and targets with each pupil and provided individual pastoral care reports. These reports allowed parents and carers to be well informed and provided a helpful source of support for pupils.
The overall quality of support for learning was good, with some clear strengths. Staff in the support for learning department made a significant contribution to helping pupils with a range of difficulties, and they had a positive influence on the ethos of the school. They worked well with individuals and groups of pupils to help improve their literacy and numeracy. They managed alternative examination arrangements well for pupils who needed them. For pupils who had individualised educational programmes (IEPs), long- and short-term learning targets were generally well focused. However, the targets were not always sufficiently detailed to enable all teachers to contribute effectively to their achievement. Behaviour support staff provided appropriately targeted help for pupils in the pupil support centre, but there was insufficient support as pupils re-entered mainstream classes. This contributed to the lack of consistency in the effectiveness of some class teachers in addressing the full range of pupils’ needs.
The Communication Disorder Unit (CDU) provided very effective support in the development of communication, social and organisational skills for pupils with autism spectrum disorders. Pupils benefited from the very structured teaching approaches used within the unit and all staff worked hard to ensure that pupils felt valued. There was a very strong sense of teamwork, including with subject teachers. All pupils had IEPs that contained appropriate targets which focused on raising their self-esteem and confidence. Pupils knew their targets well and were working hard to achieve them. However, these targets had not been shared sufficiently with subject staff. Pupils were well integrated into mainstream classes and all were making good progress towards attaining National Qualifications in a number of subjects. Effective strategies were in place to support pupils when they attended subject departments. Staff in the CDU now needed to be systematic in their approach to monitoring learning and teaching and the impact on pupils’ progress. Young people from the unit had benefited from a programme to help them make friends, including participation in social activities. The unit was well supported by parents and a range of professionals. It was seen as an integral part of the school and all staff and pupils valued the comprehensive advice and support they received from CDU teachers.
The depute headteacher with responsibility for pupil support worked effectively with the team. He was developing a clear overview of the pupil support area. He needed to ensure that the school maintained a strong focus on integrating all strands of pupil support to meet the range of pupils’ needs consistently throughout the school.
Aspect |
Comment |
Quality of accommodation and facilities |
The school had recently been re-furbished and was secure, very clean and well maintained. There were many features which contributed to the positive learning environment, including:
|
Climate and relationships, expectations and promoting achievement and equality |
The school had a very friendly and welcoming atmosphere. Staff and pupils were proud to belong to the school and their morale was high. Ethos was a strength of the school. Positive aspects included:
However the school did not provide sufficient opportunities for religious observance. |
Partnership with parents and the community |
The school’s partnership with parents, the local community and external agencies was very strong. In particular:
|
Overall, the school provided an effective education for its pupils, founded on the commitment of the headteacher and staff. The school had developed very positive relationships with pupils and parents. Attendance had improved and was generally in line with the national average. Staff were committed to raising achievement and many pupils participated enthusiastically and successfully in a wide range of extra-curricular activities. All staff now needed to be involved in implementing a whole school approach to improve further the effectiveness with which pupils’ specific learning and behavioural needs are met.
The school was led very effectively. The headteacher was well respected by staff, pupils and parents and had secured their commitment to improving all aspects of its work through strong and effective teamwork. This had helped the school to promote an inclusive ethos and high expectations of pupils’ achievement. The depute headteachers fulfilled their remits effectively. They made a positive contribution to school priorities including pastoral care and broader support for pupils at transition times. The formal depute headteacher provided high quality support to the headteacher in leading and managing the school. Commendably, the depute headteacher with responsibility for staff professional development helped teachers to share effective practice with each other. In a few departments principal teachers were particularly influential in leading improvements in learning, teaching and achievement. However, their individual effectiveness varied across the school. Recently appointed faculty heads had made a good start to fulfilling their remits.
The school had established a range of methods for reviewing the quality of its work. These included consulting staff, parents and pupils through questionnaires. Many staff also contributed to school improvement through their involvement in working groups. An annual departmental review, led by the headteacher and a senior manager with each principal teacher, included an analysis of examination results and monitoring progress of development projects. The headteacher had produced a well-judged and evaluative report on standards and quality in the school. However, to achieve greater impact on performance, the school had recently introduced a revised system of quality assurance. There were some early indications that this new approach was having a positive impact. Visits to classes by senior managers, for example, had identified how the quality of the pupils’ learning experiences might be improved in S1/S2. However, some principal teachers and faculty heads were not yet fully involved in implementing the revised system. With a view to continuing to improve learning and teaching and to ensure consistent impact across the school, senior managers should continue to develop more regular and purposeful contact with principal teachers and departments, in addition to the annual review meetings.
Main points for action
Hillpark Secondary School had a clear sense of purpose and direction and was moving forward confidently. It had the capacity to continue to improve the quality of its educational provision and to address the recent decline in examination performance. In taking forward its planned improvements, the school and the 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.
Eleanor Harkness
HM Inspector
20 December 2005
The sections in the table below follow the order of this report. You can find the main comments made about each of the quality indicators in those sections. However, aspects of some quality indicators are relevant to other sections of the report and may also be mentioned in those other sections.
How good are learning, teaching and achievement? |
||
Structure of the curriculum |
Good |
|
The teaching process |
Good |
|
Pupils’ learning experiences |
Good |
|
Meeting pupils’ needs |
Good |
|
Overall quality of attainment: S1/S2 |
Good |
|
Overall quality of attainment: S3/S4 |
Good |
|
Overall quality of attainment: S5/S6 |
Good |
|
How well are pupils supported? |
||
Pastoral care |
Very good |
|
Personal and social development |
Very good |
|
Curricular and vocational guidance |
Very good |
|
Learning support |
Good |
|
How good is the environment for learning? |
||
Accommodation and facilities |
Good |
|
Climate and relationships |
Very good |
|
Expectations and promoting achievement |
Very good |
|
Equality and fairness |
Very good |
|
Partnership with parents, the School Board and the community |
Very good |
|
Improving the school |
||
Leadership |
Very good |
|
Effectiveness and deployment of staff with additional responsibilities |
Good |
|
Self-evaluation |
Adequate |
|
This report uses the following word scale to make clear the judgements made by inspectors:
excellent excellent
very good major strengths
good important strengths with areas for improvement
adequate strengths just outweigh weaknesses
weak important weaknesses
unsatisfactory major weaknesses
What parents thought the school did well |
What parents think the school could do better |
Almost all thought that:
|
Some thought that
|
What pupils thought the school did well |
What pupils think the school could do better |
All thought that:
Almost all felt that:
|
Some thought that:
A significant number thought that:
|
What staff thought the school did well |
What staff think the school could do better |
All thought that:
Almost all thought that:
|
Some 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
2003 |
2004 |
20053 |
||
English and Mathematics |
Hillpark Secondary School |
91 |
94 |
88 |
@ Level 3 |
Comparator Schools4 |
81 |
80 |
76 |
National |
91 |
91 |
90 |
|
5+ @ Level 3 or Better |
Hillpark Secondary School |
95 |
94 |
94 |
Comparator Schools |
80 |
81 |
78 |
|
National |
91 |
91 |
90 |
|
5+ @ Level 4 or Better |
Hillpark Secondary School |
78 |
77 |
66 |
Comparator Schools |
54 |
53 |
50 |
|
National |
76 |
77 |
76 |
|
5+ @ Level 5 or Better |
Hillpark Secondary School |
26 |
26 |
20 |
Comparator Schools |
12 |
11 |
9 |
|
National |
34 |
35 |
34 |
Percentage of relevant S4 roll achieving by end of S5
2003 |
2004 |
20053 |
||
5+ @ Level 4 or better |
Hillpark Secondary School |
83 |
80 |
81 |
Comparator schools4 |
55 |
58 |
57 |
|
National |
78 |
78 |
78 |
|
5+ @ Level 5 or better |
Hillpark Secondary School |
45 |
38 |
39 |
Comparator schools |
18 |
20 |
18 |
|
National |
45 |
45 |
45 |
|
1+ @ Level 6 or better |
Hillpark Secondary School |
44 |
33 |
36 |
Comparator schools |
16 |
15 |
14 |
|
National |
39 |
39 |
38 |
|
3+ @ Level 6 or better |
Hillpark Secondary School |
24 |
19 |
22 |
Comparator schools |
4 |
4 |
5 |
|
National |
23 |
23 |
22 |
|
5+ @ Level 6 or better |
Hillpark Secondary School |
8 |
7 |
6 |
Comparator schools |
1 |
1 |
1 |
|
National |
10 |
9 |
9 |
Percentage of relevant S4 roll achieving by end of S6
2003 |
2004 |
2005 |
||
5+ @ Level 5 or better |
Hillpark Secondary School |
44 |
46 |
39 |
Comparator schools |
21 |
22 |
21 |
|
National |
47 |
47 |
47 |
|
1+ @ Level 6 or better |
Hillpark Secondary School |
40 |
46 |
36 |
Comparator schools |
19 |
21 |
20 |
|
National |
44 |
44 |
43 |
|
3+ @ Level 6 or better |
Hillpark Secondary School |
25 |
30 |
24 |
Comparator schools |
10 |
8 |
8 |
|
National |
31 |
31 |
30 |
|
5+ @ Level 6 or better |
Hillpark Secondary School |
16 |
17 |
15 |
Comparator schools |
4 |
2 |
3 |
|
National |
20 |
20 |
19 |
|
1+ @ Level 7 or better |
Hillpark Secondary School |
7 |
8 |
4 |
Comparator schools |
1 |
1 |
1 |
|
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 Education, 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, 3rd Floor, Argyll House, Marketgait, Dundee DD1 1QP or by telephoning 01382 349999. 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 Frank Crawford, HMCI, at HM Inspectorate of Education, Europa Building, 450 Argyle Street, Glasgow G2 8LG.
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.
1 Throughout this report, the term ‘parents’ should be taken to include foster carers, residential care staff and carers who are relatives or friends.
2 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
3 Pre Appeal
4 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).