31 October 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
How can you contact us?
St Marie’s RC Primary School was inspected in June 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 chairperson of the School Board, and a group of parents1.
This denominational school serves Kirkcaldy, Kinghorn, Burntisland, and the surrounding area. The school had won an Investor in People award. At the time of the inspection the roll was 274. A significant number of non-Catholic parents opted to send their children to the school. The proportion of pupils who were entitled to free school meals was above the national average. Pupils’ attendance was below the national average. At the time of the inspection, the headteacher had very recently returned after an 18 month secondment during which the school had been led by the acting headteacher and acting depute headteacher.
HM Inspectors identified the following key strengths.
|
HM Inspectors analysed responses to questionnaires issued to a sample of parents, P4 to P7 pupils, and to all staff. Information about the responses to the questionnaires appears in Appendix 2.
Parents, pupils and staff were very positive about all aspects of the school. Parents said they were welcomed and their children were well cared for. They thought that the school had a very good reputation in the community. Pupils said that they liked their school, teachers and the many after-school activities. They were proud of their part in making the school a healthier place and of the DVD they had produced of their work to celebrate diversity. Staff felt that the responsive pupils and supportive parents were major strengths of the school. They considered that their work on areas like diversity and health promotion had further improved the school.
Pupils’ learning experiences and achievements
Overall, the school provided pupils with a good curriculum. It gave appropriate additional time to developing pupils’ understanding of citizenship and their skills in using information and communication technology (ICT). Visiting teachers of art and design, drama and physical education made a useful contribution to extending pupils’ experience. Teachers gave pupils productive opportunities to apply learning across the curriculum for example through ICT and enterprise projects. The school had recently improved programmes for environmental studies, including science, for religious and moral education, and for health to ensure pupils had a broad and balanced experience. However, weaknesses in timetabling for example in mathematics sometimes restricted pupils’ progress. The quality of teaching was good. Teachers shared learning intentions with their pupils and provided them with regular appropriate homework. Most explanations and questions to classes and individuals were clear and purposeful. A few teachers, the most effective, made skilled use of approaches such as open questions to extend learning. They skilfully used precise praise and demonstrations, and gave summaries at the end of lessons in order to deepen pupils’ understanding. On occasion, teachers set pupils to work through relevant tasks but did not do enough teaching for pupils to make good progress.
Pupils were well motivated and keen to contribute. Special projects gave all pupils some stimulating opportunities to take responsibility for their learning, work with others and reflect on issues. For example, all classes had taken part in a study of diversity involving research, discussion and public performance. At all stages, pupils were learning to plan their writing and work with a partner to edit it. In a few classes, pupils were developing their skills in group discussion across the curriculum but this good practice was not well developed across the school. The school had started to use personal learning planning to set learning targets for pupils but was at an early stage in involving pupils in assessing their own learning. Overall, the pace of learning was too slow for pupils to make good progress. Sometimes lessons, for example in mathematics and environmental studies, went on too long and with insufficient variety for pupils to concentrate. The overall quality of pupils’ learning was adequate.
Across the school, pupils were developing confidence and good social skills. They showed respect for others and the school environment. They were working towards an Eco School award and P6 had won an award for creating a wildlife garden. Senior pupils worked responsibly as playground mediators, as readers with younger pupils, and as organisers of playground games. Pupils across the stages had won a Scottish Enterprise award for their school enterprises. Their recent celebration of diversity had developed their confidence and ability to perform successfully in front of an invited public audience. They responded very well to opportunities to be creative. For example, pupils in P1 and P4 produced well-observed, detailed drawings after studying plants, fruit and vegetables. Pupils in P5 had formed a ceilidh band after successfully learning to play traditional musical instruments. Pupils were keen to share what they had learned about eating healthily and keeping fit. They used pedometers to measure their activity levels and ran a health promoting tuck shop at morning break. A significant number took part in after-school clubs, for example on dance, sports and chess, which helped them extend their interests and friendship groups.
English language
Overall the quality of attainment was good. Pupils at P1 and P1/P2 made good progress in learning to read and write as did pupils who had entered school without any English. At P2, a significant minority achieved appropriate national levels in reading and writing earlier than expected for their age and stage. The majority from P3 to P7 consistently attained appropriate national levels or above in reading and writing. The school did not yet systematically assess and monitor pupils’ progress in talking and listening. Across the school, pupils were attentive and talked confidently about their interests. However, they lacked skill in group discussions and talking about texts. Pupils could read accurately for information, for example about their projects. They had still to develop an appropriate level of skill for analysing how writers created their effects in different types of texts. Pupils were able to produce attractively presented writing at length for a range of purposes. A minority had difficulty with punctuation and spelling but their skills in planning and checking their work were improving.
Mathematics
In mathematics, the overall quality of attainment was good. The majority of pupils had consistently attained appropriate national attainment levels in mathematics. Pupils in P1 and P2 had made a very strong start to their development of mathematical skills and most had achieved appropriate national attainment levels earlier than expected. At all stages pupils performed very well in ICT work. For example, P4 to P7 pupils had made good use of spreadsheets to organise and display information. They had confidently designed questionnaires to collect information and were using databases well to analyse results. Pupils were not yet confident enough in calculating number, money and measurement. Pupils were able to describe the properties of two- and three-dimensional shapes. However, pupils had still to develop an appropriate level of problem solving and enquiry skills.
The school provided a very good level of care and welfare for pupils. Staff knew pupils and their families very well and were sensitive to their needs. The school had appropriate and well-understood procedures in place for action against bullying, child protection, administration of medication and first aid, and safe use of the Internet. The school successfully promoted healthy eating and fitness, through special campaigns and groups such as the School Nutrition Action Group. Staff had introduced a number of well-received strategies to promote pupils’ personal and social wellbeing. Senior pupils had received training to mediate in the playground. Staff used ‘circle’ time in class and the nurse ran occasional ‘drop in’ sessions to help pupils talk through their feelings. There were appropriate arrangements in place for pupils transferring from pre-school to P1 and P7 to S1.
The school’s arrangements for meeting pupils’ learning needs were adequate. Across the school, there were significant weaknesses in using assessment to confirm teachers’ professional judgement and to adapt tasks and groupings sufficiently to meet pupils’ needs. The use of ‘soft start and finish’ sessions open to parents provided useful opportunities for pupils in P1 and P1/P2 to learn through play but did not always give older pupils sufficient challenge. Despite these weaknesses, there were major strengths in arrangements to meet the needs of pupils with additional support needs. Teachers, support staff and support agencies worked effectively together to identify needs, plan and adapt provision, and monitor progress in appropriate partnership with parents. Teachers were knowledgeable about their pupils and often provided them with tasks chosen to build on their interests, for example in ICT. Learning support teachers, support staff, and visiting teachers of English as an additional language and behaviour support, worked alongside teachers in the classroom to provide well-targeted additional support for groups and individuals.
Aspect |
Comment |
Quality of accommodation and facilities |
The quality of the accommodation was good. The school provided pupils with a safe environment. Classrooms were bright and spacious. In addition, the school also had a good range of facilities to support learning such as a computer suite, rooms for drama and music and a large hall. The extensive grounds included a wild life garden and sports fields as well as playgrounds. The janitors and cleaners took a pride in keeping the school in good order. However, furnishings and windows were due for appropriate up-grading. |
Climate and relationships, expectations and promoting achievement and equality |
Staff and pupils identified strongly with their school and were very proud of their achievements such as their work on understanding and celebrating diversity. Overall, relationships between staff and pupils were very positive. Pupils responded very well to staff’s high expectations of behaviour and attendance. A few pupils needed and received appropriate support for working towards these high standards. The school actively celebrated pupils’ successes but expectations of attainment and learning were not always consistently high enough. There was a strong sense of equality and fairness in the school in which everyone felt valued. The school actively promoted cultural, ethnic, linguistic and religious diversity. Pupils and their families who were speakers of other languages at home had met with senior promoted staff to identify their needs and plan next steps. The school followed the diocesan religious education programme and provided pupils with regular opportunities for religious observance. At the same time it took sensitive account of the beliefs of other faith groups. |
Partnership with parents and the community |
The school had very productive partnerships with parents, other schools and support agencies. It encouraged parents to support their children’s learning and the work of the school. Parents contributed to school improvements, for example by giving their views on the new homework policy and being part of working groups such as on healthy eating. Regular newsletters, leaflets on school policies, briefings and open sessions kept them well informed. Parents found meetings to discuss their children’s progress and reports to be helpful. The School Board took an active interest in the school and had successfully campaigned for a safer traffic management system for the school. The Friends of St Marie’s association had recently re-activated itself with a successful social event for pupils. The school ensured that parents were informed in advance about sensitive aspects of the health education programme. The school nurse and, on occasion, police services worked alongside teachers to help senior pupils learn about relevant health issues. Helpful links with local schools had enabled pupils to enjoy regular sports competitions. Primary and secondary staff had worked together recently to good effect on a common approach to citizenship and religious education. |
Appendix 1 provides HM Inspectors’ overall evaluation of the work of the school.
Overall St Marie’s RC Primary School provided a good education for its pupils and very good support for pupils with additional support needs. Staff very effectively worked in partnership with parents to promote pupils’ wellbeing and personal and social development. Attainment in English language and mathematics was good. However, pupils could have achieved more with more effective use of assessment to match pace and challenge to their needs.
During the secondment of the experienced headteacher, the acting headteacher and acting depute headteacher had shown evident leadership qualities. These included the ability to involve staff and parents in productive school improvement groups on issues such as inclusion and health. They had built on the well-established culture of teamwork which had won the school an Investors In People award. They had taken forward a series of appropriate initiatives such as the celebration of diversity and work towards becoming an Eco School. They had regular discussions with staff to review their professional development. However, feedback to staff had not been sufficiently focused on next steps in pupils’ learning. Leadership decisions were not founded enough on knowledge of classroom practice and pupils’ needs. Overall, there had been weaknesses in the leadership of continuous improvement of learning, meeting needs and attainment. The school had an extensive range of self-evaluation processes but had not used them to provide staff with enough constructive challenge to improve practice. For example, teachers and the acting senior management team had observed teaching on several occasions but had not identified next steps for improvement. The school’s recent standards and quality reports did not clearly enough evaluate its achievements and identify priorities. Overall the quality of leadership and self-evaluation was adequate.
Main points for action
The school and education authority should take action to improve learning, meeting needs, attainment and use of self evaluation. In doing so they 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. Within two years of the publication of this report parents will be informed about the progress made by the school.
Frances Corcoran
HM Inspector
31 October 2006
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.
How good are learning, teaching and achievement? |
|
Structure of the curriculum |
good |
The teaching process |
good |
Pupils’ learning experiences |
adequate |
Pupils’ attainment in English language |
good |
Pupils’ attainment in mathematics |
good |
How well are pupils supported? |
|
Pastoral care |
very good |
Meeting pupils’ needs |
adequate |
How good is the environment for learning? |
|
Accommodation and facilities |
good |
Climate and relationships |
very good |
Expectations and promoting achievement |
good |
Equality and fairness |
very good |
Partnership with parents, the School Board, and the community |
very good |
Improving the school |
|
Leadership |
adequate |
Self-evaluation |
adequate |
This report uses the following word scale to make clear judgements made by inspectors:
excellent |
excellent |
very good |
major strengths |
good |
important strengths, some areas for improvement |
adequate |
strengths just outweigh weaknesses |
weak |
important weaknesses |
unsatisfactory |
major weaknesses |
Important features of responses from the various groups which received questionnaires are listed below.
What parents thought the school did well |
What parents think the school could do better |
|
|
What pupils thought the school did well |
What pupils think the school could do better |
|
|
What staff thought the school did well |
What staff think the school could do better |
|
If you would like an additional copy of this report
Copies of this report have been sent to the headteacher and school staff, the Head 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, 1st Floor, Endeavour House, 1 Greenmarket, Dundee DD1 4QB or by telephoning 01382 576700. 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 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.