St Matthew’s Primary School
Wishaw
North Lanarkshire Council

23 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 Matthew’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 innovation, and its 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.

The inspection team also evaluated aspects of the school's progress in implementing national recommendations related to improving aspects of school meals provision.

St Matthew’s Primary School is a denominational school serving the Wishawhill and Craigneuk areas of Wishaw. At the time of the inspection the roll was 149. The proportion of pupils who were entitled to free school meals was well above the national average. Pupils’ attendance was below the national average. The school is part of the St Aidan’s and Our Lady’s learning partnerships.

2. Key strengths

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

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 almost all aspects of the school. Parents thought that the school set high standards for pupils’ attainment. They thought staff showed a high level of concern for their child’s welfare. They felt welcome in the school and found parents’ evenings and pupils’ progress reports helpful. They valued the staff’s identification of pupils’ strengths and weaknesses and the headteacher’s leadership. Pupils said that they enjoyed being at school and got on well together. They thought teachers were good at telling them what they did well and how to improve their work. They felt that staff were good at dealing with the very rare incidents of bullying. A few pupils felt the behaviour of pupils in the playground could be improved. All staff enjoyed working in the school. They valued the high standards set for attainment and the priority given to pupils’ care and welfare. Almost all teachers and most support staff felt that they had good opportunities to be involved in school decision-making. Support staff felt pupils’ behaviour in the playground could be improved. All staff thought that the school was well led and believed the school had achieved significant improvements in pupils’ experience.

4. How good are learning, teaching and achievement?

Pupils’ learning experiences and achievements

The overall quality of the curriculum was good. Teachers provided all pupils with a suitably broad and balanced range of learning experiences. Staff used time effectively to sustain high levels of attainment in English language and mathematics. Additional time was used well for physical education, to increase pupils’ levels of fitness. The principal teacher and visiting music specialist provided good quality experiences for pupils in the expressive arts. There was scope to improve continuity and progression in pupils’ learning in health education and personal and social development. Teachers were developing pupils’ skills in information and communications technology (ICT) and had identified they needed to extend its use across the curriculum. The overall quality of teaching was good, with very good practice evident in English language and mathematics. The quality of teaching was less consistently good in other areas of the curriculum. Teachers created a positive learning climate and used praise effectively. They planned lessons well and gave clear explanations but homework lacked variety. In the best lessons, teachers set appropriately challenging work and used questioning effectively to engage pupils fully in their learning. Teachers must now match this level of challenge in all other areas of the curriculum.

Overall, pupils were well motivated and most were enthusiastic learners. In most lessons, they listened attentively and worked conscientiously on their tasks. Pupils were developing some valuable independent approaches to learning, for example using task boards which set out the sequence of activities for them to follow. However, across the school pupils involvement and independence in their learning could be further developed. In writing tasks, pupils were given clear guidance on what they needed to do to improve, but this was less effective in other areas of the curriculum. When given the opportunity pupils worked confidently and well together in pairs and groups. From P5 to P7, pupils were making good progress in learning French. In a few cases, the pace of work was too slow for some pupils.

The school broadened pupils’ achievements in a wide variety of effective approaches. All pupils worked enthusiastically with a range of visiting organisations, such as a touring theatre company and a science initiative. They participated successfully in school and community events such as the Veteran’s Day and the Golden Jubilee Mass. Most pupils were involved in a range of out-of-school activities including badminton, gymnastics and a residential activity for pupils at P6 and P7. These activities helped pupils to become more confident in working with others and to develop their self esteem. Pupils at P5 to P7 developed their awareness of issues of citizenship, for example by supporting younger pupils in the playground as part of the school’s ‘buddy’ scheme. Most pupils had taken part in a variety of competitions. Pupils from P1 to P5 had won prizes in the local Road Safety Calendar competition. Pupils’ work had resulted in the achievement of Health Promoting School status. The health committee was helping to encourage healthy lifestyles among pupils. These activities also helped pupils develop their organisational and leadership skills. Pupils also raised funds for a range of charities.

English language

The overall quality of pupils’ attainment in English language was very good. In recent years, pupils had achieved and maintained high levels of attainment. Almost all pupils were achieving appropriate national levels of attainment in reading and writing. Following recent improvements in approaches to English language a number of pupils reached national levels earlier than might normally be expected. Pupils with additional support needs were making satisfactory progress towards individual targets. Most pupils at all stages were developing appropriate skills in listening and talking, and the majority could present their ideas to their class clearly and fluently. Across the school, pupils were making very good progress in developing their reading skills. Most read with appropriate fluency and could describe the main ideas in texts they had read. Pupils at P5 to P7 demonstrated their understanding of the author’s style of writing clearly in discussions. At P1 and P2, pupils were making a very good start in developing early writing skills. Most pupils from P3 to P7 wrote appropriately, at length and for a range of purposes. Most pupils demonstrated a very good awareness of correct use of language in their writing. However, the range of writing tasks in other areas of the curriculum was too limited.

Mathematics

The overall quality of pupils’ attainment in mathematics was very good. Over the last three years, pupils’ attainment in mathematics had steadily increased. Almost all pupils achieved appropriate levels of attainment in key aspects of mathematics. All pupils at P3 and P4, and a third of the pupils at P6 achieved these levels earlier than might normally be expected. Almost all were confident in handling data and performing mental and written calculations. At P5/P6, pupils could interpret graphs and charts effectively. At P7, a few pupils’ understanding of fractions and percentages required further reinforcement. At all stages, most pupils showed a good understanding and knowledge of shape and were able to talk about the strategies for solving problems.

5. How well are pupils’ learning needs met?

The school’s approaches to meeting pupils’ learning needs were adequate. Staff used some effective approaches to address pupils’ different learning needs. Too often, the same activity was set for the whole class to complete. The recently created nurture class was beginning to help to meet pupils’ additional support needs at the early stages. Teachers and support staff supported individual pupils well in this class. However, overall, support for learning staff were not deployed in a sufficiently flexible way to address the range of different needs at all stages in the school. A few higher attaining pupils were not receiving appropriate support to help them achieve their potential. Additional staffing provided by the education authority gave good support to small groups of pupils and individuals. The school had recently prepared individualised educational programmes (IEPs) for a few pupils experiencing difficulties in their learning. The targets in these IEPs were appropriate and were shared with pupils, parents and staff. However, teachers were not sufficiently aware of the learning targets for all pupils who needed additional support in their learning. This limited the progress of those pupils. The school had good arrangements for supporting pupils at transition from nursery to P1 and from P7 to secondary school.

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 Matthew’s Primary School provided high quality education for its pupils, in a caring and supportive environment. Pupils’ attainment was very good in English language and mathematics. The school now needs to seek similarly high levels of attainment in all areas of the curriculum. Staff were committed to improving approaches to learning and teaching. Pupils’ wider achievements were regularly celebrated. The range and quality of support for most pupils with additional support needs was of a good standard. Across the school staff did not always provide sufficiently challenging activities to meet the needs of all pupils.

The headteacher provided very good leadership and had a positive influence on the school’s achievements. She was very committed to the school, its staff and pupils and had a sound knowledge of the school community. She had developed effective team working and supported teachers in achieving high quality teaching in English language and mathematics. The principal teacher fulfilled her remit well and had led improvements in the programme for play in the early stages. Teachers were making a good start to leading initiatives across the school in enterprise in education and health. Staff were fully involved in decision making, and shared a positive attitude to change and development. With the support of the principal teacher, the headteacher had established sound processes for evaluating the work of the school and monitoring pupil progress. The headteacher had sought parents’ and pupils’ views, for example relating to the promotion of positive behaviour, and had taken action to introduce improvements. She now needed to focus self-evaluation more closely on improving the consistency of learning and teaching in all areas of the curriculum. With appropriate support from the education authority, the school had a clear capacity for continuous improvement.

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.

Elizabeth C Cole
HM Inspector

23 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, 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, Freepost EH641, Edinburgh EH3 0BR You can also telephone 0800 377 7330 (fax 0800 377 7331) or e-mail ask@spso.org.uk. More information about the Ombudsman’s office can be obtained from the website: www.spso.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.