13 May 2003
1. Introduction
2. The school
3. How well are pupils performing?
4. How well are the inspected
departments performing?
5. How good is the curriculum?
6. How good is learning and teaching?
7. How well are pupils supported?
8. How well is the school managed?
9. How well does the school perform
overall?
Key Strengths
Main points for action
Appendix
Indicators of quality
Quality of lessons observed
How can you contact us?
Park Mains High School was inspected in January and February 2003 as part of a national sample of secondary education.
The inspection covered key aspects of the work of the school at all stages. HM Inspectors evaluated learning, teaching and attainment, examined pupils’ work and interviewed staff and pupils. The subjects included in the inspection were English, mathematics, chemistry and S1/S2 science, computing and music. HM Inspectors also evaluated the quality of support for pupils, including arrangements for the care and welfare of pupils and child protection, and aspects of guidance and support for learning. In evaluating how well the school and departments were managed, HM Inspectors assessed the school’s processes for self-evaluation and development planning.
Members of the inspection team analysed responses to questionnaires issued to a sample of parents and to samples of staff and pupils. They met the Chairperson of the School Board and a group of parents.
Park Mains High School is a non-denominational secondary school which serves the town of Erskine and the villages of Bishopton, Inchinnan and Langbank. At the time of the inspection the roll was 1449. The school accommodated a support base for pupils who experienced specific language difficulties.
Parents’ views
Parents who responded to the questionnaire were very positive about most aspects of the school.
Almost all felt that:
Ethos
The school provided a positive climate in which staff and pupils worked well together. Most staff had established high expectations of pupils’ achievement, behaviour, attendance and punctuality. The school had taken very good steps to promote equality and fairness. Many staff used praise well to encourage pupils, but there was some inconsistency in the use of praise in the classroom. Many pupils had opportunity to improve their learning through supported study. Non-teaching staff contributed well to the overall ethos of the school. Some approaches to promoting pupils’ sense of identity with the school had been successful, for example through the establishment of a dress code for pupils. The majority of staff felt that indiscipline was dealt with consistently and effectively. Representative committees provided pupils with some opportunity to express their views, but a few pupils felt that these were not listened to and that they were not treated fairly. Pupils behaved well in classes and corridors. Attendance was well above the national average.
School and community
The school had very good links with parents and the local community. Strengths included:
The school actively sought parents’ support in promoting pupils’ learning and attendance. It now needed to develop further its information to parents to make it more helpful to them in supporting their learning.
Accommodation
Overall, the accommodation was fair. The education authority and the school were taking steps to improve security arrangements in and around the school. The accommodation needed maintenance in places, including toilets and showers for pupils. Corridors were narrow, and careful vigilance was provided by staff to ensure the safe passage of pupils between classrooms. Work-bases for staff provided space for preparation and correction activities. Social and leisure facilities for pupils included a spacious school theatre. There was some locker space available for pupils. Accommodation for support for learning was limited. There was a modern block for information and communications technology (ICT).
Staffing and resources
Overall, the school was very well staffed with mainly experienced teachers. Technicians and classroom assistants provided a valuable service to a number of departments, but some were experiencing delays in the repair and maintenance of audio-visual equipment. Overall, ancillary staff made positive contributions to the work of the school.
The school was well resourced overall. Facilities for ICT had been recently upgraded by the installation of a school network and the purchase of additional computers. All departments had sufficient, good quality resources and most had access to a good level of ICT provision. The acting principal teacher of cross-curricular ICT had greatly assisted staff and pupils to access a range of useful resources through the development of the school intranet. The library provided a good level of support for pupils and staff.
The headteacher, with the effective support of the Administrative and Finance Assistant, had established very good procedures for allocating funding to departments, which took appropriate account of development priorities.
Overall quality of attainment
The overall quality of attainment was good at all stages. At S1/S2, pupils’ performance in reading, writing and mathematics was above national averages and showed an increasing trend. Pupils’ achievements in national examinations were above, and sometimes well above, national averages. The percentage of pupils attaining five or more Credit awards at Standard Grade or their equivalent was in line with similar schools. The proportion gaining three or more Higher awards was also in line with similar schools, while the proportion gaining five or more Highers was better than in similar schools.
Scottish Qualifications Authority (SQA) Awards
The following comments are based on SQA awards for the period 2000 to 2002.
Information on attainment in those subjects inspected is given later in the report. Significant features of attainment in the subjects not inspected were as follows.
English
Attainment
The overall quality of attainment was good at S1/S2 and S5/S6. It was very good at S3/S4. Pupils’ progress in coursework was good overall. The department had been successful in raising attainment at S1/S2. Levels of attainment in reading and writing were well above national averages. Most pupils were attaining appropriate national levels in reading. The majority were doing so in listening, talking and writing. At Standard Grade, the proportion of pupils achieving a Credit award over the last three years was above national averages. At Higher, the proportion of pupils gaining A-C grades at S5/S6 had decreased over the past three years to below the national average. The proportion of pupils gaining A-C grades at Intermediate 2 was below national averages. The corresponding figures for Intermediate 1 showed significant improvement to well above the national average. All pupils presented for CSYS or Advanced Higher had been successful.
Courses
Courses at all stages were very good. The principal teacher needed to develop some aspects of advice and guidance for staff.
Learning and teaching
Learning and teaching had a number of strengths. Teachers provided a good balance of whole class, group and individual activities. There was purposeful direct teaching, but teachers were not consistent in discussing with pupils books they were reading. Overall, pupils applied themselves in a positive learning environment. However, the pace of learning varied too widely at S5/S6, with a considerable number of pupils finding difficulty in working independently of teachers. Within the Higher course, teachers needed to provide pupils with more opportunities to explore their own ideas through group discussion. Teachers provided good levels of individual support to pupils, particularly at S3/S4. At other stages there was a need for more consistency across the department in establishing clear learning objectives during lessons and reviewing with pupils how well they had met these objectives.
Management and quality assurance
The principal teacher showed some very good qualities as a leader of the department. She had delegated appropriate responsibilities to her assistant principal teachers. The assistant principal teacher with responsibility for S1/S2 brought clear strengths to her role. The principal teacher had gained the confidence of staff and had been successful in generating a team spirit among them. She should now build upon the good start to quality assurance by widening the scope of evaluations. She should continue to develop aspects of learning and to raise attainment, particularly in Higher classes at S5/S6.
Priorities for action
The department should increase the pace of learning at S5/S6 and promote more independent learning among pupils. The department should improve pupils’ performance in Higher examinations. The principal teacher should extend the range of departmental self-evaluation.
Mathematics
Attainment
The overall quality of attainment was good at S1 to S4 and fair at S5/S6. Most pupils were making good progress in their coursework. By the end of S2, the majority of pupils were achieving appropriate national levels of attainment. At Standard Grade, the proportion of pupils achieving a Credit award was above national averages. At Intermediate 1 and 2, the proportion of pupils achieving A-C grades was above national averages. At Higher, the proportion of pupils achieving A-C grades was below national averages. Less than half of those presented for CSYS or Advanced Higher achieved A-C grades.
Courses
The quality of courses was good at S1 to S4 and very good at S5/S6. The department needed to develop courses further at S1 to S4 to improve pupils’ progression.
Learning and teaching
Teachers gave clear explanations, questioned pupils effectively and set homework regularly. They made use of computers to develop some pupils’ skills in basic numeracy. However, too few lessons made effective use of ICT to enhance pupils’ learning. Pupils worked purposefully, but teachers did not give them enough opportunity to think for themselves in tackling mathematical problems. Teachers chose tasks well to meet pupils’ needs, although at times they were too reliant on textbooks to determine the tasks and the teaching approaches rather than responding to pupils’ prior learning. The arrangements for assessment were good at S3 to S6. Assessment at S1/S2 needed to be reviewed.
Management and quality assurance
The principal teacher provided very effective leadership. She was highly committed to improving the quality of learning and teaching in the department. The assistant principal teachers provided her with good support. The department worked well together. The principal teacher rigorously monitored pupils’ attainment and had good arrangements in place for ensuring the quality of work within the department.
Priorities for action
With a view to improving pupils’ progression and so raising their attainment at S5/S6, the department should improve courses at S1 to S4. Teachers should make more effective use of ICT. They should improve the quality of pupils’ learning by providing more opportunities for pupils to think for themselves in tackling mathematical problems.
Chemistry and S1/S2 science
Attainment
The overall quality of attainment was good in science at S1/S2 and fair in chemistry. Most pupils at S1/S2 and the majority studying chemistry at S3 to S6 were progressing well in their classwork. In science at S1/S2, and in chemistry at S3/S4, attainment was limited for some pupils. In chemistry, the proportion of pupils gaining Credit awards at Standard Grade and A-C grades at Higher had declined to below national averages. At S5/S6, the majority of pupils presented for Intermediate 2, CSYS and Advanced Higher chemistry had gained A-C grades.
Courses
The science course at S1 and the biology, chemistry and physics courses at S2 were good. They built well on science work covered in primary school and gave very good emphasis to developing investigative skills. However, some planned work was too demanding for lower achieving pupils. Chemistry courses were good at S3/S4 and very good at S5/S6.
Learning and teaching
Learning and teaching had a number of strengths. In S1/S2 science, teachers’ interactions with pupils were often of high quality, but teaching approaches were not varied enough to provide for the range in pupils’ needs. Pupils were well involved in the learning process and often showed high levels of motivation. In chemistry, most pupils were responsive and well motivated. Teachers needed to use visual aids more to support pupils’ understanding. In Standard Grade chemistry, too many pupils were expected to cover Credit work which was too difficult for them. In Higher chemistry, teachers’ expectations of pupils were too low at times and pupils needed to be more actively involved in learning. Procedures for assessment had some important weaknesses at S1 to S4. Teachers corrected homework thoroughly but gave too little attention to correcting classwork. They did not use assessment information sufficiently to set appropriate targets for pupils. Assessment was very well organised in chemistry at S5/S6.
Management and quality assurance
The principal teachers of biology, chemistry and physics provided good leadership in organising and improving S1/S2 science courses. Leadership in chemistry was fair. The principal teacher had given good attention to developing courses but had not addressed some important weaknesses in learning and teaching approaches. Departmental self-evaluation required strengthening through more consistent monitoring of classroom practice by the principal teachers.
Priorities for action
In courses at S1 to S4, teachers should use the results of assessments more effectively to ensure that coursework and pace are better matched to pupils’ needs. All of the principal teachers should systematically monitor the quality of classroom practice.
Computing
Attainment
The overall quality of attainment was good at S1/S2 and S5/S6, and very good at S3/S4. Most pupils were progressing well in their coursework. At S2, most pupils were able to use the school’s computers well to create and edit a document and enter data into a spreadsheet. At S3/S4, the proportion of Standard Grade Credit awards was consistently above national averages. At S5/S6, pupils performed better in Higher computing than in their other subjects. All those entered for Advanced Higher gained A-C grades.
Courses
The good course at S2 included the use of general purpose software and aspects of the internet. Courses at S3/S4 and S5/S6 were very good. They were based on high quality learning materials which had been very well prepared by staff.
Learning and teaching
Learning and teaching had many strengths. Teachers used a suitable range of methods and explained work clearly. Pupils responded positively and worked conscientiously. Teachers provided homework for each class, but some did this more regularly than others. Teachers should question pupils to challenge their thinking more rigorously. Staff adopted a number of approaches to meeting pupils’ needs at each stage. They were most effective at S5/S6. At each stage, teachers used an appropriate range of assessment methods. However, they did not make full use of assessment data to help them to improve pupils’ performance.
Management and quality assurance
The principal teacher provided good leadership. He had very positive relationships with staff and pupils. Staff worked very well together as a team. The department evaluated its own performance in a variety of ways, which included analyses of examination results, discussions on the progress of each class and sampling senior pupils’ views on each unit of work. These approaches highlighted the need to improve homework but had not identified the need to improve the rigour of teaching. Staff had improved performance in Higher Grade by re-designing the course and learning materials.
Priorities for action
Staff should improve the consistency of homework at each stage. They should question pupils in a more challenging way. The principal teacher should adopt a more rigorous approach to self-evaluation.
Music
Attainment
The overall quality of attainment was good from S1 to S4 and very good at S5/S6. Pupils coped well with coursework. They could identify key musical ideas in music they heard and many played and sang to very high standards in class and extra-curricular activities. From S1 to S4, pupils were capable of achieving higher standards in inventing. Presentations at Standard Grade were above national levels. The proportion of pupils gaining Credit awards was in line with those averages. At Higher, in recent years, almost all pupils had attained A or B grades and high proportions achieved A.
Courses
Courses at S1 to S4 were good. Pupils needed more opportunities to use their understanding of key musical ideas to help improve progression in their inventing skills. Courses at S5/S6 were very good.
Learning and teaching
Teachers made effective use of direct teaching to classes, groups and individuals. Their careful use of praise encouraged pupils to approach most aspects of their work confidently and to work well together and independently. Teachers selected tasks to match pupils’ needs and interests, particularly at S5/S6. They had high expectations of pupils but needed to be more consistent in maintaining the brisk pace set at the start of lessons. Pupils received regular feedback on their work, although, from S3 to S6, teachers needed to share assessment information more fully with them when discussing progress. Assessment at S1/S2 required review.
Management and quality assurance
The principal teacher provided good leadership. He was highly committed to the department and all aspects of its work. His positive relationships with teachers, visiting instructors and pupils successfully promoted strong teamwork. He had established good quality assurance procedures and was beginning to focus more on evaluating the quality of pupils’ attainment and experiences.
Priorities for action
The department should improve inventing courses and assessment. Teachers should ensure that the pace of pupils’ learning is always suitably brisk. They should continue to improve self-evaluation.
Overall, the quality of the curriculum was very good.
At S1/S2, pupils followed broad and balanced programmes. Several departments had established very good links with local primary schools to implement coherent programmes of study and to improve pupils’ progression from P7 to S1. Some departments had still to complete their review of S1/S2 courses to take fuller account of pupils’ prior learning and ensure appropriate challenge for all pupils.
At S3/S4, almost all pupils followed programmes of eight Standard Grades or equivalent courses leading to National Qualifications (NQ). The school had recently replaced Standard Grade courses in the sciences and home economics with Intermediate level courses. Senior managers and staff should continue to monitor carefully the effectiveness of these revised arrangements in meeting pupils’ needs and raising attainment. All pupils followed courses in personal and social education (PSE), physical education and religious and moral education (RME).
At S5/S6, the school offered pupils a wide range of NQ courses at Intermediate, Higher and Advanced Higher levels. These provided them with appropriate progression routes from their prior attainments in S4 and opportunities to increase breadth and interest. Arrangements with Reid Kerr College enabled a few pupils to follow modular vocational courses and the input of a college lecturer extended the options available to S6 pupils by offering a course in Higher psychology. Pupils in S5 followed core programmes in physical education and personal and social development. Almost all S6 pupils undertook community service, in addition to opportunities to participate in a programme of educational events, presentations and enterprise activities.
Learning and teaching had a number of strengths, including very good interactive teaching and the attentiveness and application of most pupils. On occasion, teachers did not take sufficient account of the learning needs of pupils in selecting classroom activities.
The quality of teaching was good overall, with some very good practice, particularly at S1 to S4. Teachers planned lessons well and provided a good balance of whole class, group and individual activities. They questioned pupils well but sometimes did not explain things clearly enough. Some teachers used ICT effectively in their lessons, but there was a need to increase the use of computers in learning and teaching in some areas of the curriculum.
The quality of pupils’ learning experience was good. Teachers provided a good range of purposeful and stimulating activities and supported pupils well in their learning. They did not always provide sufficient opportunities for pupils to take responsibility to work independently and to interact with one another. Many lessons were well paced, but this aspect varied too widely across classes.
Arrangements for assessing and reporting on pupils’ progress were good. Teachers knew how well pupils were progressing in their work and employed a good range of assessment approaches. They commented to pupils regularly about their classwork, but sometimes they did not make lesson objectives clear enough. The school provided clear and helpful reports to parents and encouraged them to respond. Some aspects of advice and guidance to parents on the next steps their children should take in their learning needed to be more specific.
The school made very good provision for pupils’ care and welfare. Procedures for managing child protection issues were effective. The school had plans to develop a behaviour support base for pupils. Staff were sensitive to the needs of individual pupils. The school had a clear policy for anti-bullying. However, a small number of pupils lacked confidence in the school’s arrangements for combating bullying.
Positive features of guidance and pastoral care included:
A caring and committed team of guidance staff provided good support for their pupils. They conducted regular individual interviews and knew their pupils well. Pupils were very well prepared for decision-making on progression from school and had ample opportunity to explore the world of work. Guidance staff should extend the range of methods for gathering pupils’ views.
The guidance team played an effective role in monitoring pupils’ progress. They compiled detailed profiles to help them to advise and support pupils. There was a need to extend these procedures to set targets for and support all pupils.
The PSE programme was good overall, with some very good elements, such as the peer support arrangement, with S6 pupils working with S1 pupils. The programme had been carefully planned to include health education and study skills, as well as issues of respect and tolerance. The school made good use of visiting speakers. Many pupils derived great benefit from the school’s wide range of extra-curricular and musical activities. They were very proud of their achievements, including those within the school’s extensive Duke of Edinburgh’s Award Scheme, the wide range of musical events and performances and an annual activities week. The school needed to extend the range of measures to evaluate the delivery of the PSE programme.
The guidance team was very well led by the depute headteacher, who had recently taken on this area of responsibility. Principal teachers led their guidance teams well and fostered good working relationships within their teams and with other staff. The annual departmental review process should identify clearer targets for development.
Support for learning
The quality of support for learning in the school was very good.
Strong features of support for learning included:
Staff worked well together to provide high quality support for pupils. They had produced a wide range of teaching resources to provide additional support for teachers and pupils. Support for Learning staff should have formal opportunities to meet subject teachers to plan and discuss pupils’ work. Classroom assistants provided good support for a significant number of pupils.
The depute headteacher had recently taken on the responsibility for the management of support for learning. She provided very good support to the department. The principal teacher provided very good leadership. He was well organised and provided an extensive range of advice to subject teachers. He had set up procedures to monitor and evaluate the work of the department.
Priorities for action
The annual departmental review process should identify clearer targets for the development of guidance.
Guidance staff should extend their procedures for monitoring pupils’ progress to set targets for and support all pupils. The school should introduce additional methods for evaluating the effectiveness of guidance and PSE provision. It should also extend the range of methods for gathering pupils’ views. Learning support staff should have formal opportunities to meet subject teachers to plan and discuss pupils’ work.
Overall management and leadership
The headteacher provided very good leadership. He had developed clear approaches to improving the effectiveness of the school. He had a vision for the school’s future, which he had communicated clearly to staff. In turn, they were aware of his expectations of them. The headteacher had succeeded in motivating staff and had developed very good relationships with them and with parents. He had successfully developed teamwork and involved staff in policy-making and in promoting school achievement in its widest sense. He now needed to ensure that his clear desire for inclusive education was not only consistently communicated to all pupils but was also evaluated more rigorously.
The headteacher received very good support from the depute headteacher and was also well supported by other members of the senior management team. The remits of this team had been recently readjusted and all were settling well into new and developing roles. Together they formed a co-operative and effective team. They all showed individual strengths and management skills in their work. They now needed to build upon their links with departments to ensure greater consistency in self-evaluation and planning for improvement.
Most heads of department provided very good or good leadership. Assistant principal teachers and senior teachers had clear remits. Together they contributed well to the work of the school. Some had a very high impact on their respective areas of responsibility.
The school had a very clear set of aims, which included an appropriate focus on the curriculum, learning and teaching and developing pupils’ full potential. These were closely linked to national priorities and provided a very good basis for development and evaluation. The school had made a very good effort to communicate its aims to parents and pupils, and to take their views into account in the process of developing its work. It now needed to build upon this solid basis by ensuring that all pupils and parents felt assured that their views were equally valued.
Staff review and development
Most staff had taken part in the education authority’s scheme for professional review. Staff had good opportunities for staff development, including ICT. The planning of the staff development programme took some account of the needs of the whole school, departments and individuals, but the level of training and development did not always match the identified needs and levels of expertise of staff. The school made good use of in-service training to develop important aspects of its work. Induction and support arrangements for probationer teachers were very effective.
Planning for improvement
Overall, the school’s arrangements for development planning were good. It had recently been awarded the Charter Mark in recognition of the quality of its continuous improvement in public service.
Priorities in the school plan were clearly linked to the school’s aims and reflected national and education authority priorities, with a clear focus on raising achievement. They also took account of areas for improvement identified through an audit of the schools’ work. The plan included a clear timescale for addressing each of the main priorities over a three-year timescale and strategies for measuring their impact. The school had prepared a concise summary of the plan to explain to parents its priorities for improvement. The school had achieved good progress in implementing successfully most of the priorities in the previous plan. These had had a positive impact on the quality of courses and aspects of learning and teaching. Through their regular links with departments and a systematic review process, senior managers supported the process of departmental planning. However, they needed to continue to work with departments to ensure a more consistent quality of departmental planning.
Approaches to improving quality
The school’s approaches to improving the quality of education were good. The headteacher had encouraged staff to be reflective and they had made a good start to the process of self-evaluation. The school had sought the views of staff, parents and pupils in auditing aspects of its work, including management. The headteacher had a very clear understanding of issues relating to the analysis of attainment. He was developing this further to measure the degree of pupil improvement in individual subjects. The process of departmental review was firmly established. The headteacher held an annual meeting with individual heads of department to discuss this review and conduct an analysis of SQA results. The school now needed to build upon this good climate of self-evaluation and link it more securely to planning for improvement and reporting on standards and quality. Teachers should become more systematic and more rigorous in applying quality indicators to specific aspects of the school’s work, including learning and teaching. In their links with departments, senior managers should be more involved in this process
Park Mains High School provided many opportunities for pupils to demonstrate high levels of achievement in extra-curricular activities as well as in the subjects they were studying. The school’s many positive links with community agencies, organisations and businesses benefited both the school and its partners. Inclusive education was at the heart of the school’s aims. The commitment of the headteacher, senior managers and all staff in achieving this over-arching aim would serve the school well in extending the quality of its work.
In addition to addressing the priorities for action identified in this report, the school and education authority should act on the following recommendations.
HM Inspectors have asked the school and education authority 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. In liaison with the education authority, HM Inspectors will monitor progress to ensure improvements in line with the main findings of the report. They will arrange for further progress reports and visits to the school if necessary and will inform parents and carers of the outcomes of these when they occur.
Bill Stevenson
HM Inspector
on behalf of HM Chief Inspector
Western Division
13 May 2003
See Quality Indicator data below.
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
HMI also evaluated the quality of the lessons observed. The overall quality of lessons was very good in 32% of cases, good in 59%, fair in 7% and unsatisfactory in 2%.
Copies of this report have been sent to the headteacher and school staff, the Director of Education and Leisure, local councillors and appropriate Members of the Scottish Parliament. Subject to availability, further copies may be obtained free of charge from HM Inspectorate of Education, Europa Building, 450 Argyle Street, Glasgow G2 8LG or by telephoning 0141 242 0100. Copies are also available on our web site: 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 Frank Crawford, HMCI at the above address. 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.ombudsmanscotland.org.uk
Crown Copyright 2003
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.