St Mark’s Primary School
Hamilton
South Lanarkshire Council

24 October 2006

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 supported?
6. How good is the environment for learning?
7. Improving the school
Appendix 1 Indicators of quality
Appendix 2 Summary of questionnaire responses
How can you contact us?

1. Background

St Mark’s 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 representatives of the parent-teacher association (PTA), and a group of parents¹. There was no School Board.

St Mark's Primary School is a denominational school serving Little Earnock, Earnock Wood and Torhead Farm areas of Hamilton. At the time of the inspection the roll was 121. The proportion of pupils who were entitled to free school meals was below the national average. Pupils' attendance was above the national average. The school was part of the John Ogilvie High School Learning Community. The long term absence of the headteacher due to ill-health over a period of two years had caused the school disrupted leadership. At the time of the inspection, the school was being led by a headteacher who had been in post for six weeks.

2. Key strengths

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

HM Inspectors analysed responses to questionnaires issued to all 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 almost all aspects of the school. Almost all felt that staff made them feel welcome and showed concern for the care and welfare of their children. Almost all felt that their children enjoyed being at the school which had a good reputation in the community. A few parents did not feel that the school was good at consulting them. About a third did not think the school informed them sufficiently about the priorities for improving the education of their children. Pupils were very positive about their school. Almost all felt safe, well-looked after, and that they got on well with each other. They thought that teachers expected them to work hard, and explained things clearly. Around a fifth did not feel that pupils behaved well. A few felt that the school did not deal with bullying effectively and that they were not treated fairly. Teaching staff were pleased about almost all aspects of the school. They felt there was a welcoming, friendly environment in the school and that they all worked well as part of a team. Support staff were positive on almost all aspects of the school.

4. How good are learning, teaching and achievement?

Pupils’ learning experiences and achievements

The overall quality of the curriculum was adequate. The school provided pupils with a generally broad curriculum which was enhanced by the contribution of visits, excursions and visitors. Effective use of flexibility time had led to improvements in pupils’ attainment in mathematics. Teachers had made good progress in delivering an effective literacy programme at the early stages. However, listening and talking was not systematically developed and assessed across the school. The headteacher recognised the need to review all programmes of study to ensure continuity and progression in the development of pupils’ knowledge and understanding in each curriculum area. The quality of teaching varied across the school. Teachers were beginning to share the purposes of lessons with pupils and, a few revisited these at the end. Generally there were clear instructions and directions. A minority of teachers used a variety of teaching approaches to help meet pupils’ learning needs. Teachers made effective use of questions to check all pupils’ knowledge and understanding. Praise was not used consistently across the school. Occasionally, tasks set by teachers did not engage pupils fully in their learning. Teachers made too little use of information and communications technology (ICT) to enhance learning and teaching. Homework was used regularly in most classes, but it lacked variety and it was not used well to consolidate learning.

The majority of pupils were well behaved and worked well on tasks given by their teachers. Pupils from P1 to P3 had good opportunities to be active in their learning, for example through planned play activities. Pupils in P3 and P4 responded well when working in group activities in mathematics. However, collaborative approaches were not well developed across the curriculum. Pupils generally did not show enthusiasm and were often not ready to learn. A few pupils did not work well on their own and were easily distracted. The pace of lessons was variable across the school and at times, pupils were passive learners. Pupils had too few opportunities to think for themselves or reflect on ideas and experiences. There were limited opportunities for pupils to take responsibility for their own learning.

Pupils from across the school were involved in a wide range of out-of-school activities. Pupils in P4 and in P6/7 had developed their personal and social skills through their participation in pastoral and educational residential trips. Pupils were developing their sports skills at after-school clubs including badminton, netball and football. All pupils developed their self-esteem and confidence through their participation in the annual school show. Across the school, pupils were developing skills through a range of enterprise activities. Funds raised by pupils in P5 and P6 had been used to purchase resources for computers in the school. Pupils were aware of the needs of others and regularly raised sums of money for charities. Participation in Easter school and in the Greater Opportunity of Access and Learning with Schools initiative (GOALS) enhanced P7 pupils’ learning and self confidence.

English language

The overall quality of pupils’ attainment in English language was adequate. It had been variable over the past three years. Across the school, most pupils were achieving appropriate national levels of attainment in reading, and the majority in writing. Many at P2 were achieving these levels earlier than might normally be expected. However, a few pupils at each stage, were capable of even higher levels of attainment. Those pupils who were experiencing difficulty in reading were effectively supported. In almost all classes, pupils did not listen attentively in class and their listening and talking skills were not well developed. Pupils at all stages read fluently and showed good understanding of what they had read. Pupils at the early stages were making good progress in developing reading skills. Across the school, a significant number of boys did not regularly read for pleasure and were unfamiliar with authors and books. Pupils’ writing skills were not sufficiently well developed. At all stages, pupils needed further opportunities to write at greater length. They did not have a sufficiently well developed understanding of writing styles or how to write for different audiences. Standards of handwriting and presentation required significant improvement.

Mathematics

The overall quality of pupils’ attainment in mathematics was good. In recent years, levels of attainment in mathematics had improved steadily. Almost all pupils were achieving appropriate national levels of attainment in mathematics. At P2 and P3 many pupils were achieving these levels earlier than might normally be expected. However, a few pupils at the middle and upper stages were capable of achieving even higher standards by being set more challenging tasks. Almost all pupils were making good progress in their coursework. Pupils with additional support needs were making appropriate progress towards agreed targets. By P7, pupils could confidently interpret information from a range of graphs and charts and were starting to develop appropriate skills in using computers to handle information. Across the school, pupils’ number skills were well developed. A few, however, were not skilled in carrying out mental calculations. Pupils had a good knowledge and understanding of the properties of shapes. At all stages, pupils were able to use a range of strategies to help solve mathematical problems. Their skills in choosing the most effective strategy to solve particular problems were limited.

5. How well are pupils supported?

The school’s arrangements for the care and welfare of pupils were good. Almost all pupils enjoyed being at school and felt safe and secure. All staff had a clear understanding of their role and responsibility in relation to child protection issues. Staff were caring and committed and they knew pupils and their families well. The school had clearly stated policies in place to deal with child protection issues and the administration of medicine. The school provided effective support for vulnerable pupils. Although an anti-bullying policy was in place, the procedures had not been kept up to date in the recent past.

Overall, there were important weaknesses in how well pupils’ learning needs were met. Staff did not make effective use of assessment information to identify and plan next steps in learning. Across the school many tasks and activities were too narrowly based on text book exercises and were not sufficiently challenging. Pupils were not consistently involved in setting targets for their learning. Support staff provided good assistance for teachers. The support for learning teacher worked effectively with pupils to support learning in reading and mathematics. She had prepared appropriate individualised educational programmes (IEPs) and shared these with pupils and parents. Class teachers and the support for learning teacher, now needed to consult about how best to address pupils’ additional learning needs in class. Although the school had appropriate arrangements in place to support pupils as they moved from nursery to P1 and from P7 to secondary school they needed to ensure that effective transition planning was in place for all children with identified additional support needs.

6. How good is the environment for learning?

7. Improving the school

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

St Mark’s Primary School provided an adequate standard of education for its pupils. Staff were caring and committed to the school and morale was high. Staff worked well as a team. Pupils were happy at school. However, whole school attainment levels, while showing improvements in mathematics, remained below national averages in English language. There was scope for improvements in the quality of pupils’ learning experiences and in meeting the needs of all learners. Pupils across the school were capable of achieving higher standards with improved and more consistent pace and challenge in their learning. There was a need to improve the whole school approach to promoting and celebrating achievement.

There had been an unsettled period for staff and pupils in recent years. The school had lacked focus and clear strategic direction. Staff had not received appropriate leadership, guidance and direction on a range of curricular areas, on planning or on learning and teaching. The new headteacher had a clear vision for the school, with a strong focus on learning and teaching and improving the quality of pupils’ experiences. She had a realistic view of the school’s priorites and had prepared a systematic, rigorous approach to moving the school forward. She had shared this vision with staff. They fully supported her and were clear about their role in working as a team in taking the school forward. The headteacher demonstrated a high level of professional competence and was committed to the school and its community. Parents and staff had commented on the postive impact she had already made on the school. The school’s approach to self-evaluation was weak. Tracking of pupils’ performance had been successful in improving attainment in mathematics in recent years. However, the monitoring procedures in place were not rigorous and had resulted in a number of pupils not making sufficient progress. There had not been a culture of self-evaluation in the school. There was a very wide variation in the quality of learning, and this had not been recognised or addressed. Staff, parents and pupils were not sufficiently involved in evaluating the performance of the school. The school required to develop a systematic approach to monitoring and evaluating the quality of learning, teaching and attainment. The new headteacher had already been successful in establishing effective staff teamwork to identify areas for improvement. Teachers had agreed an appropriate range of development activities and demonstrated a willingness to rise to the challenge of improving many aspects of the school.

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. HM Inspectors will continue to engage with the school and the education authority in monitoring progress, and will undertake a follow-through inspection. This will result in another report to parents, within two years of the publication of this report, on the extent of improvement that has been achieved.

Mary Hoey
HM Inspector

24 October 2006

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. Where any one group had five or less respondees then, in order to maintain confidentiality, the analysis is not provided.

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 Executive Director (Education Resources), 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 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.