14 March 2006
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?
Menzieshill High School was inspected in November 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 quality 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 English, mathematics, modern languages, and physics and S1/S2 science 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 the chairperson of the School Board and a group of parents.
Menzieshill High School is a non-denominational school situated to the west of Dundee. At the time of the inspection, the roll was 815. The percentage of pupils entitled to free school meals was above the national average. Pupils’ attendance was below the national average. Some pupils with additional support needs attended a unit within the school and joined mainstream classes where appropriate.
HM Inspectors identified the following key strengths.
|
Parents had positive views about the school. They felt that it was well led and that its reputation had improved over the last few years. Almost all parents who responded to the pre-inspection questionnaire thought that their children enjoyed school and were treated fairly. They were happy about parents’ evenings and reports on their child’s progress. Around a quarter would have liked more information about some aspects, including the school’s priorities for improvement. Pupils also viewed the school positively. They felt that staff were good at taking action over anything they were worried about. Most pupils felt that staff were good at dealing with bullies. Only a majority thought that all pupils were treated fairly. Staff liked working in the school. Most teachers, but only a majority of auxiliary staff, felt that they had good opportunities to be involved in decision making. Around a quarter of staff felt that there was insufficient mutual respect between teachers and pupils. These concerns about mutual respect were shared by a number of parents and pupils.
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
The quality of the curriculum was very good. At S1/S2, pupils followed broad and well balanced programmes of study. The number of teachers seen by S1 pupils each week had been reduced to improve conditions for effective learning and teaching. Effective arrangements for pupils to continue from P6/P7 with the study of French or German in S1/S2 had been agreed with all associated primary schools. Pupils at this stage had good opportunities to make progress through a course in information and communications technology (ICT). At S3/S4 almost all pupils studied a broad programme of eight courses at Standard Grade or equivalent level. Some pupils benefited from studying a reduced number of Standard Grades and undertook alternative courses which met their individual needs more effectively. These courses included vocational programmes in partnership with the local further education college or Prince’s Trust activities which helped their social development. The school offered qualifications at Access 3 or Intermediate 1 level in some subjects to help pupils make more progress in courses suited to their needs. All pupils in S1 to S4 undertook weekly activities in religious education, physical education and personal and social education (PSE). The S5/S6 curriculum allowed pupils to make good progress in a broad range of National Qualifications courses at Advanced Higher, Higher and Intermediate levels. A range of useful additional opportunities to extend pupils’ skills was available. These opportunities included computing, study links with Abertay University, work experience, and other college courses. S5/S6 pupils had some PSE and had opportunities to undertake physical education as part of their additional activities.
Strengths outweighed weaknesses in teaching. Most teachers used a variety of teaching methods and provided clear explanations. Very good practice existed, for example in some physical education and music lessons. Some teachers were skilled at using questioning to assess pupils’ understanding, improve their reasoning skills, and develop helpful dialogue between teachers and pupils. Well-judged homework was used in some departments to reinforce and extend classwork. Strengths just outweighed weaknesses in the quality of learning and the extent to which pupils’ learning needs were met. Most pupils responded well to the tasks set. When pupils were given the opportunity to take responsibility for their own learning they usually responded positively. The pace of learning was appropriate in several departments but was not brisk enough in others, particularly in S1/S2 classes. Some teachers were using ICT to enhance the quality of pupils’ learning. In a significant minority of lessons at S1 to S4 teachers accepted too much inattentiveness or low level disruption in classes. Teachers generally matched tasks and activities to the learning needs of classes, but at times they did not provide sufficient support or challenge for individual pupils. They were increasingly giving helpful advice to pupils on how to improve their work. This and other good practice in learning and teaching was inconsistent within and across departments.
Achievement
The overall quality of attainment at S1/S2 was weak. The time allocated to English and mathematics in S1/S2 had been increased with the aim of raising attainment, but there were no signs of steady improvement as yet. Only around half of all pupils attained appropriate national levels in reading and mathematics by the end of S2. The proportion attaining these levels in writing by the end of S2 had declined. Only around a third of all pupils had achieved appropriate national levels in writing in the last two years. Overall, while pupils were making some progress in their coursework, departments did not build sufficiently well on pupils’ prior learning to raise their attainment.
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 weak. The proportion of pupils achieving five or more awards at SCQF level 5 was consistently well below the national average, and notably less than for schools with similar characteristics. The proportion of pupils achieving five or more awards at SCQF level 3 or better was below or well below national averages, and less than for schools with similar characteristics. The proportion achieving five or more awards at SCQF level 4 or better had improved over the last three years and was in line with the average for similar schools in 2005. There had been no other trend of improvement. In comparison to the national averages for boys and girls, boys’ attainment was often better than girls’ attainment at this stage.
The overall quality of attainment at S5/S6 was weak. By the end of S5 and S6, the proportions of pupils achieving five or more SCQF awards at levels 3, 4 and 5 were on the whole well below national averages and less than for schools with similar characteristics. The proportions of pupils achieving three or more, and five or more, awards at SCQF level 6 were also generally well below national averages and less than for schools with similar characteristics. There was no overall trend of improvement.
Information on the subjects inspected is given later in the report. Significant features of attainment in the subjects not inspected were as follows.
Many pupils benefited from taking part in a wide range of additional activities which broadened their achievement. They developed their confidence through giving musical performances at Christmas concerts and choral presentations at a local hospital. The school’s wind band and string ensemble achieved high standards in local performances, and a number of pupils took part in the Tayside Symphony Orchestra’s charity concert. Pupils also achieved very highly in sporting activities including football, cross-country running, hockey, badminton, volleyball, water polo, skating and indoor bowls. One pupil had achieved the Dundee Sportswoman of the Year Award. Many pupils developed citizenship skills through playing an active and influential role in the pupil representative council at both school and authority level, and as members of the Scottish Youth Parliament. Pupils showed responsibility and initiative in their enterprise activities and in fundraising for a number of charities. Trips abroad developed pupils’ confidence and knowledge of the wider world, and many had achieved high awards in the Duke of Edinburgh Award Scheme. Senior pupils showed high levels of responsibility in their peer support activities in local primary schools, in carrying out their prefect duties, delivering part of the PSE programme to S1 classes and helping S1 pupils with their reading.
English
Learning and teaching
At the time of the inspection, staff absences and difficulties with recruiting suitably qualified teachers meant that over half of the classes were supervised by non-specialist teachers. As a result it was not possible to evaluate the overall quality of learning and teaching in the department. There were major weaknesses in these aspects in the lessons seen, as many pupils were not receiving specialist teaching. The subject specialist teachers were hard working and committed. In lessons taught by them, interactions between teachers and pupils were positive. They gave clear explanations and instructions and made good use of questions. On the whole, pupils worked well. In some lessons, coursework was not always appropriately challenging or well paced, and pupils did not always make sufficient progress.
Achievement
By the end of S2, around half of all pupils achieved appropriate national attainment levels in reading. Around a third achieved these levels in writing. The department did not systematically monitor pupils’ overall progress and attainment in listening and talking. The proportion of S4 pupils presented for Standard Grade who achieved a Credit award and the proportion of S5/S6 pupils presented at Higher level who achieved A-C grades were usually well below national averages. Pupils consistently performed less well in English at Higher level than in their other subjects. At Intermediate 1 and 2 levels, the proportion of pupils achieving A-C grades was generally above or well above the national average. The majority of those presented at Advanced Higher level achieved A-C grades.
No other significant features of pupils’ achievements in English were noted.
Mathematics
Learning and teaching
Teachers gave clear explanations to classes and individual pupils. They did not always use questioning effectively to assess pupils’ understanding or to help pupils develop reasoning skills. Most pupils were well motivated, although there were high levels of inattentiveness in some classes. The quality of pupils’ learning was not often enhanced by use of ICT or challenging and motivating problems. Teachers matched tasks well to their classes. They did not always give individual pupils detailed feedback on what they needed to do to improve in classwork or homework.
Achievement
Around half of pupils in S1/S2 reached or exceeded appropriate national levels of attainment by the end of S2. In S3/S4 the proportion of pupils presented for Standard Grade who gained Credit awards was well below the national average over the last two years. Almost all pupils presented in S3/S4 for National Qualifications at Access 3 level gained full success. At this stage pupils performed better in mathematics than in their other subjects. In S5/S6 the proportion of pupils presented at Higher or Intermediate levels who gained A-C grades was well below the national average. Around a third of pupils presented at Advanced Higher level achieved A-C grades. At S5/S6, pupils tended to do less well in mathematics than in their other subjects.
Other features of pupils’ achievement included the following.
Modern languages
Learning and teaching
In almost all lessons, there were examples of good, direct teaching, and a variety of pupil activities. However, in many lessons, the tasks set were not sufficiently motivating or well paced, and as a result pupils did not sustain an appropriate rate of work throughout. Pupils were not always challenged or supported enough, particularly in S1/S2. In S5/S6, the level of work set was more appropriate to the needs of pupils, who responded positively. At all stages there were not enough opportunities for pupils to work together on activities to extend their skills in reading or speaking. In general, speaking was not given sufficient attention, although there were signs of improvement in this aspect at S3.
Achievement
In S1/S2, pupils were able to write short texts but did not demonstrate extended speaking and reading skills. In S3/S4, almost all pupils presented for Access 3 French or German achieved success. At Standard Grade, pupils generally achieved less well in modern languages than in their other subjects. The proportion of pupils presented who achieved Credit awards was below the national average in French and well below in German. In S5/S6, the numbers of pupils presented for French or German at Higher level were well below the national average. All presented at this level achieved an A-C grade. Of the very small numbers presented for French at Intermediate 2 level, all achieved an A-C grade.
Other features of pupils’ achievement included the following.
Physics and S1/S2 science
Learning and teaching
Teachers gave clear explanations and generally made good use of questioning to extend pupils’ learning. They had made a good start to using ICT to motivate pupils. They interacted well with pupils but did not always ensure that pupils were focused on their learning. The pace of learning was brisk overall, but was too slow in some S1/S2 science classes. Homework was generally well used but could be better matched to individual needs. Pupils responded well when given challenging tasks.
Achievement
In S1/S2, pupils’ progress in coursework varied, and a number were insufficiently challenged to give of their best. At S3/S4, overall, the proportion of pupils gaining a Credit award in Standard Grade physics was below the national average. The proportion of pupils gaining A-C grades at Intermediate 1 was in line with the national average and the proportion gaining an A grade was above the national average. At S5, the proportion of pupils achieving A-C grades at Higher varied from well above to well below the national average but showed an improving trend overall. Pupils generally did better in Higher physics than in their other subjects and better than would be expected from their Standard Grade results. Almost all of those presented for Advanced Higher physics achieved A-C grades.
Other features of pupils’ achievement included the following.
The school provided very good pastoral care for pupils. Staff dealt with care and welfare issues effectively and responded well to pupils’ emotional and social needs. Procedures for identifying and responding to child protection issues were well established and well known by staff. The school effectively promoted a healthy lifestyle through good canteen menus, out-of-class activities and the personal and social education (PSE) programme. Members of the pastoral support team were readily accessible to pupils, who appreciated the levels of care and support they received.
The overall quality of personal and social development was good. The PSE programme covered an appropriate range of topics including healthy lifestyles, substance abuse, personal relationships and citizenship. However, the intended learning outcomes for pupils were not clearly identified and there was no effective system to measure pupils’ progress and attainment in PSE. Staff needed to improve the balance of time spent on topics. Out-of-class activities, work experience, the buddying system and paired learning activities provided very good opportunities for pupils to develop further personal skills and active citizenship. Pastoral support staff reported to parents on pupils’ overall school performance but not on work covered or attainment within PSE.
The quality of curricular and vocational guidance was very good. At key transition stages, including enrolment and leaving, the school gave pupils and their parents helpful information on courses and prepared pupils well for the next stages in their learning. Pupils had very good access to careers information and advice, including interviews with the careers adviser, and texts and online materials in the school library. Almost all S4 pupils participated in a well supported work experience programme and gained awards at Intermediate 1 level. Pupils’ academic progress was monitored through annual interviews with guidance staff and regular reports from departments. The school was beginning to develop more systematic approaches to tracking pupils’ attainment and setting targets with them.
Effective in-class support was provided by learning support specialists and auxiliaries for pupils who experienced difficulties in their learning. Some pupils with additional learning needs were taught very skilfully in small groups out of class by learning support teachers. Support for learning staff were not always deployed to support the pupils most in need of help. Whilst the department had reviewed the format of individualised educational programmes (IEPs) for pupils with identified needs, these IEPs were not always updated regularly enough to reflect the progress being made by individuals. Overall, the quality of support for learning was good.
Pupils with hearing problems received a high quality of pastoral care and learning support. Their learning needs were systematically reviewed with parents and support agencies. Pupils for whom English was an additional language felt safe and secure. They were well supported in the school and were making good progress in developing their English language skills at an appropriate level. Youth workers contributed to high-quality support to vulnerable pupils who were experiencing social, emotional and behavioural difficulties and were disaffected with school. In carrying out their work specialist teachers and support staff made a strong contribution to the school’s ethos of inclusion.
The depute headteacher with responsibility for pupil support led the team well. In a number of aspects of their work, including pastoral care and behaviour and learning support, staff generally co-operated well with each other and with a wide range of outside support agencies. Together they provided an appropriate range of support for individuals and groups of pupils.
They did not always focus their planning and monitoring clearly and in an integrated way on setting appropriate targets for individual pupils and helping them to achieve these.
Aspect |
Comment |
Quality of accommodation and facilities |
The school had a sufficient number of general and specialist teaching rooms, most of which were well appointed. Some practical areas were cramped and in need of refurbishment. Positive features included an assembly hall, swimming pool, library and computer suites. All classrooms had at least one computer, and there was a small number of electronic whiteboards in the school. Some aspects of security needed attention. |
Climate and relationships, expectations and promoting achievement and equality |
Staff morale was good. Teachers were mutually supportive, and they made good use of a wide range of opportunities to be involved in team activities to improve the school. The librarian interacted well with teachers and pupils and made a strong contribution, as did other clerical, auxiliary and staff. Some of these staff felt that they could be more involved in aspects of the school’s work. Pupils were happy in the school. Relationships between teachers and pupils, though generally positive, were not always purposeful enough to create a sound environment for learning. Teachers worked hard to help pupils achieve well and promote their personal and social development. They did not always set appropriately high expectations for pupils’ attentiveness, work-rate or attainment. Staff worked hard and with much success to treat all pupils fairly and to include all in the school community. Racial incidents, which occurred rarely, were dealt with well but were not always recorded properly. The school was about to implement the education authority’s policy on race equality and improve the active promotion of this important aspect. |
Partnership with parents and the community |
Under the headteacher’s leadership the school had improved and developed to a high standard its partnerships with parents and links with the community. Parents appreciated opportunities to meet staff, for example at parents’ evenings or through the headteacher’s ‘surgery’ meetings at which they could raise concerns with him. They also had opportunities to attend workshops on aspects of the curriculum, and fully supported school concerts. The school employed a wide range of useful methods for communicating with parents and was improving its website. The School Board and parents’ association, ‘Friends of Menzieshill’ were active and supportive. The headteacher and other staff were widely involved in community and local business links. Liaison with associated primary schools had been effective in ensuring continuity in many aspects of pupils’ learning. Links with the chaplain, who contributed to assemblies and religious observance at appropriate times, were strong. |
Menzieshill High School was effective in providing for the care and welfare of its pupils. It was very successful in promoting and developing their sporting, artistic and cultural achievements. Staff were working hard to improve aspects of learning and teaching, and there were a few signs of success, but they had not yet been successful in raising the attainment of all pupils.
The headteacher’s leadership had been very effective in improving several key aspects of the school’s work. He had strengthened links with the community and had improved the ways in which the school’s work was monitored and improved. The headteacher had an appropriate strategic vision of what the school could achieve. Under his direction staff were now more fully involved in activities for improving the school. He had been instrumental in ensuring that it achieved various awards, including Investors in People and Scotland’s Health at Work. He was ably assisted by five depute headteachers, all of whom had achieved or were near to achieving the national Standard for Headship. Each had made a positive impact on their areas of responsibility. The school was forward-looking in many ways. For example staff were starting to take a strategic look at how the curriculum might be further developed to produce excellence for all pupils, and the range of effective staff development activities was being broadened. Principal teachers managed their departments well on the whole. Some were experiencing difficulties as a result of staff absences. The quality of departmental leadership to improve learning was variable. The overall quality of leadership was good.
The school’s wide range of procedures for self-evaluation included surveys of the views of parents and staff, and analysis of attainment data. All aspects of the school’s work were monitored and evaluated systematically, and the education authority had recently carried out a comprehensive and helpful review of the school’s performance. Senior staff, heads of department and teachers carried out a large number of direct observations of the quality of lessons. These observations sometimes included innovative use of audio-visual technology. Despite this comprehensive approach, weaknesses in some lessons, including acceptance of inattentiveness or low level disruption from some pupils, or lack of pace and challenge in teaching, had not yet been remedied.
Main points for action 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. Through District Inspector contacts with the education authority, HM Inspectors will monitor aspects of learning, teaching and attainment, including staffing levels in departments.
Douglas Cairns
HM Inspector
14 March 2006
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 | Very good |
|
| The teaching process | Good |
|
| Pupils’ learning experiences | Adequate |
|
| Meeting pupils’ needs | Adequate |
|
| Overall quality of attainment: S1/S2 | Weak |
|
| Overall quality of attainment: S3/S4 | Weak |
|
| Overall quality of attainment: S5/S6 | Weak |
|
| How well are pupils supported? | ||
Pastoral care |
Very good |
|
Personal and social development |
Good |
|
Curricular and vocational guidance |
Very good |
|
Learning support |
Good |
|
How good is the environment for learning? |
||
Accommodation and facilities |
Good |
|
Climate and relationships |
Good |
|
Expectations and promoting achievement |
Adequate |
|
Equality and fairness |
Good |
|
Partnership with parents, the School Board and the community |
Very good |
|
Improving the school |
||
Leadership |
Good |
|
Effectiveness and deployment of staff with additional responsibilities |
Good |
|
Self-evaluation |
Good |
|
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:
|
Around a quarter felt that:
|
What pupils thought the school did well |
What pupils think the school could do better |
Almost all thought that:
|
Around a third felt that:
|
What staff thought the school did well |
What staff think the school could do better |
Almost all teachers and support staff thought that:
|
A significant minority of teachers and support staff felt that:
A significant minority of support staff felt that:
|
Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework (SCQF) levels: |
Percentage of relevant S4 roll attaining by end of S4
2003 |
2004 |
2005 |
||
English and Mathematics @ Level 3 |
Menzieshill High School |
85 |
91 |
86 |
Comparator Schools3 |
89 |
90 |
88 |
|
National |
91 |
91 |
90 |
|
5+ @ Level 3 or Better |
Menzieshill High School |
86 |
89 |
84 |
Comparator Schools |
89 |
90 |
87 |
|
National |
91 |
91 |
90 |
|
5+ @ Level 4 or Better |
Menzieshill High School |
65 |
68 |
69 |
Comparator Schools |
69 |
71 |
70 |
|
National |
76 |
77 |
76 |
|
5+ @ Level 5 or Better |
Menzieshill High School |
19 |
14 |
19 |
Comparator Schools |
27 |
30 |
26 |
|
National |
34 |
35 |
34 |
|
Percentage of relevant S4 roll attaining by end of S5
2003 |
2004 |
2005 |
||
5+ @ Level 4 or better |
Menzieshill High School |
65 |
69 |
70 |
Comparator schools3 |
75 |
72 |
73 |
|
National |
78 |
78 |
78 |
|
5+ @ Level 5 or better |
Menzieshill High School |
27 |
31 |
28 |
Comparator schools |
37 |
37 |
39 |
|
National |
45 |
45 |
45 |
|
1+ @ Level 6 or better |
Menzieshill High School |
24 |
27 |
22 |
Comparator schools |
34 |
31 |
33 |
|
National |
39 |
39 |
39 |
|
3+ @ Level 6 or better |
Menzieshill High School |
8 |
14 |
8 |
Comparator schools |
16 |
16 |
18 |
|
National |
23 |
23 |
23 |
|
5+ @ Level 6 or better |
Menzieshill High School |
3 |
6 |
1 |
Comparator schools |
6 |
6 |
5 |
|
National |
10 |
9 |
10 |
|
Percentage of relevant S4 roll attaining by end of S6
2003 |
2004 |
2005 |
||
5+ @ Level 5 or better |
Menzieshill High School |
30 |
29 |
34 |
Comparator schools3 |
40 |
40 |
39 |
|
National |
47 |
47 |
47 |
|
1+ @ Level 6 or better |
Menzieshill High School |
30 |
28 |
33 |
Comparator schools |
36 |
38 |
36 |
|
National |
44 |
44 |
43 |
|
3+ @ Level 6 or better |
Menzieshill High School |
14 |
13 |
19 |
Comparator schools |
24 |
24 |
23 |
|
National |
31 |
31 |
30 |
|
5+ @ Level 6 or better |
Menzieshill High School |
8 |
6 |
11 |
Comparator schools |
14 |
14 |
14 |
|
National |
20 |
20 |
19 |
|
1+ @ Level 7 or better |
Menzieshill High School |
4 |
4 |
8 |
Comparator schools |
7 |
8 |
8 |
|
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 2006
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. 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).