Holy Cross RC Primary School
City of Edinburgh Council

8 February 2005

Contents

1. Background
2. Key strengths
3. Views of parents and carers, 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
How can you contact us?

1. Background

Holy Cross RC Primary School was inspected in October 2004 as part of a national sample of primary education. The inspection covered key aspects of the work of the school at all stages. It evaluated pupils’ achievements, the effectiveness of the school and the environment for learning. There was a particular focus on attainment in English language and mathematics.

HM Inspectors examined pupils’ work and interviewed staff and pupils. They assessed the school’s processes for self-evaluation. They analysed responses to questionnaires issued to a sample of parents and P4 to P7 pupils, and to all staff. Information about the responses to the questionnaires appears in Appendix 2. Members of the inspection team also met the chairperson of the School Board, the chair of the parent-teacher association (PTA), members of the pupil council and the school chaplain.

Holy Cross RC Primary School is a denominational school which serves a wide area in the north east of the City of Edinburgh including Inverleith, Granton, Pilton, Trinity and part of Leith. At the time of the inspection the roll was 285, including 57 in the nursery class. The proportion of pupils who were entitled to free school meals was below the national average. Pupils’ attendance was above the national average.

An integrated inspection of pre-school provision was carried out at the same time by HMIE and the Care Commission and is the subject of a separate report, which will be published at approximately the same time as the primary report.

At the time of the inspection the headteacher was absent on long term sick leave. Immediately prior to the inspection major building work had been carried out. This included the installation CCTV cameras, a new boundary fence, the replacement of windows in several classrooms, a new roof on the infant wing and the painting of a number of classrooms. This had caused considerable disruption to the school and, during the inspection, some classrooms had not been returned to normal use.

2. Key strengths

3. Views of parents and carers, pupils and staff

Parents and carers were satisfied with most aspects of the work of the school. They appreciated the care and concern shown to pupils by staff. They felt welcome and thought that the school had a good reputation in the community. They wanted more information about their child’s strengths and weaknesses. Almost a third of those who responded expressed concerns about the poor condition of the building. Pupils were very positive about their school experience. They enjoyed being at school, felt secure and had made many friends. A number commented enthusiastically about the improved range of games available to them in the playground. In discussion, they commented about the wide variation in the amount of homework they received. Staff were positive about almost all aspects of school life.

4. How good are learning, teaching and achievement?

Pupils’ learning experiences and achievements

The school provided a broad curriculum. The time allocated to enable greater curriculum flexibility had not been agreed for the whole school. In English language and mathematics, teachers relied heavily on commercial resources. More selective use needed to be made of textbook exercises. Visiting specialists in music, art and design, and physical education made a significant and very positive contribution to the expressive arts programme. Staff had begun to address the place of enterprise education and citizenship in the curriculum. There was a wide range of resources for information and communications technology (ICT) but these were not exploited fully across the school. Staff gave very good attention to developing pupils’ personal and social skills and encouraged pupils at all stages to show a care and concern for others. Teaching was good overall and in some aspects very good. Teachers organised their classrooms well and used praise appropriately to encourage and motivate pupils. Most taught lessons to the whole class and engaged pupils in group or individual follow-up activities. Their instructions, explanations and directions were usually clear. They did not always however, explain the purpose of lessons well nor summarise the main points of the lesson at the end. While teachers monitored pupils’ attainment informally they did not make sufficiently good use of national assessments to confirm their own judgement of pupils’ progress. Planning did not take enough account of assessment information. Homework was given out and marked regularly, but there was scope to extend further the range of tasks set.

Pupils were very well behaved, motivated and interacted politely with teachers and their fellow pupils. They were attentive during lessons but not sufficiently active in their learning. Pupils worked steadily on individual tasks and had some responsibility for following daily programmes of work. Examples of more practical approaches to learning included lessons in science where in one, pupils used drama to help them understand the properties of different elements and in another they made use of the computer to present and reinforce what they had learned from their science topic. Pupils at the early stages were physically active when learning about letters and sounds. In music, pupils sang together tunefully, played tuned and untuned percussion well and were learning to sustain a rhythm. Overall, however, opportunities for pupils to work together in small groups to solve problems, carry out investigations or discuss texts were too limited. Some more able pupils were not being sufficiently challenged by their classroom experiences and needed a faster pace of learning. Pupils at all stages received feedback about their work, and at the later stages teachers shared with them the broad targets they were to achieve.

Pupils had good opportunities to develop their personal and social skills. They supported a number of charities very generously. Circle time provided an opportunity to express their feelings, listen to the views of others and discuss appropriate issues, including the action they might take to improve their progress. Pupils were encouraged to be aware of their personal safety and to develop a healthy lifestyle. The pupil council was active in identifying ways of improving the school and action was taken on their suggestions. Classes took turns to prepare and lead religious celebrations. They chose hymns, wrote and read prayers and assisted the chaplain in the celebration of Mass. An annual residential visit to Benmore Outdoor Centre for P7 pupils fostered their independence, responsibility and social skills. After-school clubs included boys’ and girls’ football teams, a Scottish country dance club and instrumental groups which took part in school celebrations. Senior pupils assisted conscientiously in the care of younger pupils in the playground and school.

English language

Overall, the quality of pupils’ attainment in English language was good. There was an improving trend in attainment. Pupils for whom English was not their first language were making steady progress. Pupils from P1 to P3 were supported well in developing their literacy skills. A few pupils at these stages were attaining beyond the levels expected for their age. In listening, talking and reading most pupils from P4 to P7 were attaining in line with national expectations and the majority were attaining these levels in writing. Pupils spoke well and with confidence about a range of topics. In the main, they listened quietly to one another but needed to develop better skills in group discussion. Most were familiar with a range of authors and talked animatedly about the books they had read and enjoyed. They read aloud with fluency and expression, but were not sufficiently confident when exploring texts and discussing authors’ use of structure and language. Pupils’ skills in finding and using information from a range of sources were not developed progressively. At the early stages, some pupils wrote very well and at a good length. However, at the middle and later stages they needed to improve their understanding of how to craft a story and use language more effectively to create meaning and effects. There were examples of very neat written work but overall the standard of pupils’ spelling and handwriting was too variable.

Mathematics

Overall, the quality of pupils’ attainment in mathematics was good. At all stages, levels of attainment had risen over recent years. Across the stages most pupils were attaining appropriate standards in key aspects of mathematics. A few at the early stages were attaining beyond these levels. Lower attaining pupils were making steady progress. Most pupils were confident when performing mental and written calculations. However, some were capable of undertaking more challenging activities and of achieving higher standards. By P6, pupils showed good understanding and knowledge of the appropriate properties of two- and three-dimensional shapes. Pupils in P7 could use computers well to organise and display information. However, across the school pupils’ skills in handling information and in tackling problems were not sufficiently well developed.

5. How well are pupils supported?

Staff gave very good attention to pupils’ care and welfare. They knew pupils well and were sensitive to their emotional, personal and social needs. They were aware of the education authority’s guidance on child protection and had been trained in its use. Pupils reported no instances of bullying. They felt safe and able to discuss any concerns with staff. The school addressed education about drugs, health and personal relationships appropriately. The school was open and inclusive. Staff and pupils welcomed children from a very wide range of religious and cultural backgrounds and supported them and their families very well. All pupils were valued as individuals and mutual respect was fostered carefully.

The school addressed the varying needs of pupils appropriately. All staff made appropriate use of attainment groups in English language and mathematics to help manage the range of ability within their classrooms. A teacher of English as an additional language provided effective support for pupils entering the school from other countries. These pupils were well integrated into the appropriate class for their stage and the wider school community, and were making steady progress in learning English. There was an appropriately broad range of provision for pupils with additional support needs. The support for learning teacher gave very effective and well-focused assistance to these pupils and to staff. Pupils with additional support needs were making good progress. In collaboration with class teachers, parents, visiting specialists and support agencies the support for learning teacher prepared relevant individualised educational programmes (IEPs) which had clear long- and short-term learning targets. IEPs were reviewed regularly to monitor pupils’ progress. Records of Needs were managed very well. In addition, the support for learning teacher was beginning to help class teachers to address the needs of the most able pupils. Learning assistants were deployed well and provided very good assistance to the pupils with whom they worked. Liaison with the school’s nursery class and the associated secondary schools was appropriate and well organised.

6. How good is the environment for learning?

7. Improving the school

Holy Cross Primary School provided a good quality of education for its pupils. They benefited from the inclusive environment, and were developing sound personal and social skills. They related well to one another. Most pupils were making steady progress but expectations of attainment and achievement were not consistently high.

In the absence of the headteacher, the depute headteacher held the post of acting headteacher during the inspection. The headteacher was held in the highest regard by staff and parents. They welcomed his open, approachable manner and appreciated his enormous commitment to the pupils, and to the school. He had established a close and supportive staff team. Prior to the headteacher’s absence the acting headteacher had a teaching commitment, organised resources for English language across the school and was responsible for the nursery and P1 to P3. She was hard working and respected by staff for her commitment and the support she gave to them and to pupils. She and the headteacher had worked together closely. There was a continuing need to clarify and extend her roles and responsibilities within the school. The principal teacher was responsible for teaching Spanish and had been promoted to acting depute headteacher. Her remit, as acting depute headteacher had yet to be agreed. Overall, there were important weaknesses in the management of aspects of the work of the school and of the curriculum. The school’s arrangements for monitoring and evaluating the quality of provision had major weaknesses. The information available from a wide range of sources within the school was not used effectively to plan for improvements. The school, with the assistance of the education authority, should develop robust systems to track and predict pupils’ progress, evaluate their classroom experiences and set an appropriate pace and challenge in learning for all pupils.

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. HM Inspectors will engage with the school and the education authority to monitor progress. They will publish an interim report on progress within one year of the publication of this report. Thereafter, HM Inspectors will continue to engage with the school and the education authority in monitoring 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.

Christine Roebuck
HM Inspector

8 February 2005

Appendix 1 Indicators of quality

We judged the following to be very good

• Pastoral care
• Climate and relationships

We judged the following to be good

• Structure of the curriculum
• The teaching process
• Pupils’ learning experiences
• Pupils’ attainment in English language
• Pupils’ attainment in mathematics
• Meeting pupils’ needs
• Expectations and promoting achievement
• Equality and fairness
• Partnership with parents, the School Board and the community

We judged the following to be fair

• Accommodation and facilities, with some aspects unsatisfactory
• Effectiveness and deployment of staff with additional responsibilities
• Leadership

We judged the following to be unsatisfactory

• Self-evaluation

Appendix 2 Summary of questionnaire responses

Important features of responses from the various groups which received questionnaires are listed below.

How can you contact us?

If you would like an additional copy of this report

Copies of this report have been sent to the headteacher and school staff, the 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, G1 Saughton House, Broomhouse Drive, Edinburgh EH11 3XD or by telephoning 0131 244 8178. Copies are also available on our website: www.hmie.gov.uk .

If you wish to comment about primary inspections

Should you wish to comment on any aspect of primary 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, 2^nd Floor, 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 600265 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.