St David’s Primary School
Johnstone
Renfrewshire Council

16 January 2007

Contents

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’ learning needs met?
6. How good is the environment for learning?
7. Leading and improving the school
Appendix 1 Indicators of quality
Appendix 2 Summary of questionnaire responses
How can you contact us?

1. Background

St David’s Primary School was inspected in October 2006 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, the environment for learning, the school’s processes for self-evaluation and capacity for improvement. There was a particular focus on attainment in English language and mathematics.

HM Inspectors examined pupils' work and interviewed groups of pupils, including the pupil council and staff. Members of the inspection team also met the chair of the School Board, representatives of the parent teacher association (PTA), and a group of parents¹.

St David's Primary School is a denominational school serving West Johnstone. At the time of the inspection the roll was 115. The proportion of pupils who were entitled to free school meals was well above the national average. Pupils' attendance was below the national average.

2. Key strengths

3. What are the views of parents, pupils and staff?

HM Inspectors analysed responses to questionnaires issued to parents, P4 to P7 pupils, and to all staff. Information about the responses to the questionnaires appears in Appendix 2.

Parents were very positive about all aspects of the school. All thought the school had a good reputation in the community, made them feel welcome and was well led. All believed staff showed concern for their children’s welfare and treated them fairly. Pupils were very positive about their school and were proud of it. All thought teachers explained things clearly. They thought that teachers expected them to work hard, helped them when they were stuck and told them when they had done something well. A third did not believe that pupils behaved well. Teaching staff were highly satisfied with all aspects of the school. They thought there was effective communication with senior managers and among staff, including regular discussion about priorities. They believed senior managers operated effectively as a team and that teachers set high standards and celebrated pupils’ success. Support staff liked working in the school and were positive about all aspects of the school, including approaches to tackling any incidents of bullying and to promoting good relationships with the community.

4. How good are learning, teaching and achievement?

Pupils’ learning experiences and achievements

The overall quality of the curriculum was very good. The school provided pupils with a broad curriculum which was enhanced by the contribution of visits and visitors and the emphasis placed on promoting wider achievement. Effective use of the available teaching time had led to improvements in pupils’ attainment, notably in mathematics. The headteacher recognised the need to continue to review programmes of study to ensure continuity and progression in the development of pupils’ knowledge and understanding. The quality of teaching varied, but was good overall. Teachers were beginning to share with pupils what was to be learned. In several lessons, teachers discussed with pupils at the end of the lesson whether they had achieved the intended learning. The school was working to extend this good practice. Teachers gave clear instructions and directions. Most used a variety of teaching approaches in lessons to involve pupils and help meet their learning needs. Questions were used to check pupils’ knowledge and understanding, but in some lessons more needed to be done to encourage fuller responses from pupils. Praise was well used to motivate pupils. Teachers made use of information and communications technology (ICT) to enhance learning and teaching, but overall this remained an area for further development. Homework was used regularly in most classes, but too often lacked variety.

Pupils were well behaved and worked well on the tasks set by their teachers. Pupils at all stages responded enthusiastically when working together in group activities or when given opportunities to take responsibility for aspects of their learning. However, in some lessons, tasks set by teachers did not provide sufficient challenge for all pupils. At P1/2, pupils required more opportunities to learn through play. The pace of lessons was variable across the school and, overall, pupils would benefit from more opportunities to develop their skills as independent learners. In the best lessons pupils responded positively to the lively pace and to opportunities to discuss, question and carry out independent research.

Pupils benefited from a wide range of additional activities provided by school staff, a range of other staff employed by the council and from outside agencies and companies. These activities were broadening pupils’ experience, developing confidence and self-esteem and promoting awareness of the environment and healthy lifestyles. Many provided very useful opportunities for pupils to work together and develop a sense of teamwork. A strong feature was the school’s commitment to bringing in people with expertise in areas such as sport or the arts and encouraging pupils to participate in local and national events. Pupils at P4/5 worked enthusiastically with a touring drama group to produce and perform for parents a short play about healthy lifestyles. Others were enthusiastically taking part in ‘street dance’ classes. Pupils were involved in a range of enterprise in education and citizenship activities and pupils from P4 to P6 were beginning work on items for a Christmas fair as part of an enterprise project. At P7, pupils were learning how to prepare and cook healthy meals.

English language

The overall quality of pupils' attainment in English language was good. Most pupils were achieving appropriate national levels of attainment in reading, and the majority in writing. An increasing number at P2 were achieving such levels earlier than might normally be expected. However, some pupils at each stage were capable of even higher levels of attainment. Pupils who were not achieving in line with national expectations were well supported and were mostly making appropriate progress. Listening and talking skills were not consistently or systematically developed across the school and this hindered pupils’ progress. Most listened attentively in class but their skills in discussion were not well developed. Pupils at all stages read fluently and were able to understand what they had read. Older pupils read aloud with good expression and enjoyed taking parts in reading parts from short plays. A significant number of pupils did not read regularly for pleasure and were unfamiliar with authors and books. There were some examples of good quality writing displayed throughout the school, notably in accounts of events in pupils’ lives or when conveying pupils’ feelings and emotions.

Mathematics

The overall quality of attainment in mathematics was very good. Staff had maintained high levels of attainment over recent years. Overall, most pupils were attaining appropriate levels of attainment in national assessments. Almost half of pupils were attaining such levels earlier than might normally be expected. Pupils not achieving such levels were supported to make good progress in their classwork, but a few were capable of attaining more. Across the school, pupils could collate information and display this in graph form. Pupils at the early stages were developing good numeracy skills. By P7, most pupils had a confident grasp of most key areas of number, money and measurement. Pupils’ skills and speed in mental calculation were too variable and their ability to use ICT in mathematics limited. Pupils could identify an appropriate range of shapes and their properties. They were confident in problem solving and most had a good understanding of a range of strategies they could use in different situations.

5. How well are pupils’ learning needs met?

Overall, staff met pupils' learning needs effectively. In classes, teachers chose a good range of activities appropriate to most pupils’ needs. They worked very well with classroom assistants to support pupils to make good progress across the curriculum. The visiting network support teacher and senior managers gave useful additional support to pupils’ development in English language. However, staff were not sufficiently well focussed when identifying individual pupils' specific learning needs and when monitoring their progress. They did not, for example, make consistently effective use of individualised educational programmes to underpin the work they did with pupils.

6. How good is the environment for learning?

7. Leading and improving the school

Appendix 1 provides HM Inspectors’ overall evaluation of the work of the school.

St David’s Primary School provided high quality education for its pupils. Pupils were happy at school and parents were very pleased with the education their children received. Staff were very caring and highly committed to the school. Morale was high and all staff worked very well as a team. They provided a very high quality of pastoral care and had established excellent relationships with parents and the community. Standards of attainment in reading and writing were good and in mathematics very good, but there remained room for some further improvement. There was scope for improvements in the quality of pupils’ learning experiences by providing more consistently stimulating activities, increased pace and active involvement in learning. The school’s commitment to promoting pupils’ wider achievements in areas such as sports, the arts and citizenship was a major strength.

The headteacher was highly committed to the school and its community. She enjoyed the confidence and support of parents and staff. She had successfully led improvements in a number of key areas of the school’s work and had established a clear vision for the school and its future development which put pupils’ interests and achievements firmly at the centre. The depute headteacher provided strong support. Together they formed a highly effective team. The school’s approach to self-evaluation was good. Staff knew pupils well and with the support of senior managers regularly discussed progress. Senior managers monitored learning and teaching and staff were committed to discussing and improving key aspects of their work. Nonetheless, there was variation in the quality of learning and teaching and in the extent to which pupils’ learning needs were consistently met. The school should continue to develop its approaches to monitoring and evaluating its work to provide a firm basis for further improvement.

What happens next?

As a result of the high performance, the strong record of improvement and the very effective leadership of this school, HM Inspectors will make no further reports in connection with this inspection. 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. Within two years of the publication of this report the education authority, working with the school, will provide a progress report to parents.

Nick Pepin
HM Inspector

16 January 2007

Appendix 1 Indicators of quality

The sections in the table below follow the order in 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.

This report uses the following word scale to make clear judgements made by inspectors:

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 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 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 Chris McIlroy, Acting HMCI, at HM Inspectorate of Education, Denholm House, Almondvale Business Park, Almondvale Way, Livingston EH54 6GA.

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, Second 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 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 2007

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.

Footnote

1. Throughout this report, the term ‘parents’ should be taken to include foster carers, residential care staff and carers who are relatives or friends.