10 January 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
Appendix 3 Attainment in Scottish Qualifications Authority (SQA) National Qualifications
How can you contact us?
Stranraer Academy was inspected in September 2005 as part of a national sample of secondary education. The inspection covered key aspects of the school’s work at all stages. It evaluated the structure of the curriculum, analysed pupils’ performance in examinations (see Appendix 3) and assessed the quality of pupils’ broader achievement. It also evaluated the quality of learning and teaching and pupil support, the environment for learning, the school’s processes for self-evaluation, and its overall effectiveness and capacity for improvement. There was a particular focus on the work of the English, mathematics, biology and S1/S2 science and computing departments.
HM Inspectors observed learning and teaching and examined pupils’ work. They analysed responses to questionnaires issued to a sample of parents1 and pupils and to all staff. They interviewed groups of pupils and staff. Members of the inspection team also met the chairperson of the School Board and representatives of the parent-teacher association.
Stranraer Academy is a non-denominational school serving an extensive catchment area, including the town of Stranraer and the Rhins of Galloway. At the time of the inspection, the roll was 1117. The percentage of pupils entitled to free school meals was in line with the national average. Pupils’ attendance had improved and was now broadly the same as the national average. The school provided specialist support for pupils with a range of additional support needs. The ‘Aird Unit’ provided for pupils with profound and complex learning difficulties, the ‘Learning Centre’ provided for pupils experiencing difficulties with their learning and the ‘Support Unit’ catered for pupils experiencing social, emotional and behavioural difficulties.
HM Inspectors identified the following key strengths.
Most of the parents who responded to the questionnaire thought that staff made them feel welcome when they visited the school and that parents’ evenings and school reports were helpful in giving them information on their child’s progress. Most thought that the buildings were in poor condition. Almost all pupils said that they got on well with other pupils but they did not think that the behaviour of others was good. The majority also thought that teachers did not listen to what they had to say. Almost all teachers thought that staff showed concern for the care and welfare of the pupils and that they were aware of the school’s child protection procedures. They felt that they set high standards for pupils’ attainment and ensured that pupils received constructive feedback on their work. However, the majority said that pupils were not enthusiastic about their work and there were insufficient opportunities to celebrate pupils’ achievements. They did not think that there was effective communication between senior managers and staff, and they said that they were not properly consulted on changes in policy and procedures. A significant minority did not think that indiscipline was dealt with effectively.
Further details about what most pleased parents, staff and pupils, and what they would most like to see improved, can be found in Appendix 2 of this report.
The curriculum, learning and teaching
Overall, the curriculum from S1 to S6 was weak with some major weaknesses. There was no provision for religious and moral education at any stage. At S1/S2, pupils followed a broad range of courses. Almost all pupils helpfully continued to learn the modern foreign language they had begun at primary school. At S3/S4, pupils could study up to nine Standard Grades or their equivalent. All pupils studied English and mathematics, and those who did not attend college studied social and vocational skills. An increasing number of subjects were available as National Qualification (NQ) courses at Access and Intermediate levels in place of Standard Grade. Some pupils at this stage had made a positive start on vocational courses at the local further education college. A small group of vulnerable pupils was being offered a recently introduced ‘Enhanced Curriculum’ which aimed to develop their literacy, numeracy and social skills. This programme was not yet sufficiently matched to pupils’ individual needs. Nevertheless, it successfully kept pupils in education. It was supported by a number of external agencies. At S5/S6, pupils were offered a broad range of NQ courses at Intermediate, Higher and Advanced Higher. A daily period for all pupils to undertake extended study was not used effectively at all stages.
Overall the quality of teaching was adequate but there were some important weaknesses in learning. A few teachers consistently shared the purposes of lessons with pupils and helped them link their learning effectively. Teachers were beginning to make effective use of ICT to enhance pupils’ learning. Many teachers made good use of questioning. In the best practice, they developed pupils’ understanding and thinking and encouraged them to make extended responses. Teachers’ use of homework was inconsistent and many gave too little. The majority of pupils were motivated in classes. Pupils occasionally took responsibility for their own learning. They generally did what teachers asked them to do but too often they were passive listeners. Teachers did not provide enough opportunities for pupils to think for themselves or reflect on ideas and experiences. Often the pace of learning was too slow. Approaches to learning and teaching did not provide an appropriate level of challenge for all pupils. Too often, pupils undertook tasks which did not require much thought. There were few occasions when pupils could work collaboratively. Across the school, tasks and activities were not sufficiently matched to individual pupils’ strengths and needs. As a result, higher attaining pupils in particular were not sufficiently challenged.
Achievement
The overall quality of attainment at S1/S2 was weak. By the end of S2, the majority of pupils were achieving appropriate national levels of attainment in reading and writing. Attainment in these areas had recently started to show some improvement. Around half were achieving appropriate national levels of attainment in mathematics. Courses and programmes did not take sufficient account of pupils’ prior learning experiences and there were weaknesses in learning and teaching.
The following comments are based on Scottish Qualifications Authority (SQA) data, using the Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework (SCQF)2 for the three year period (2003-2005), and also draw on the overall evaluations of the quality of learning, teaching and meeting pupils’ needs.
Overall the quality of attainment at S3/S4 was weak. By the end of S4, the proportions of pupils gaining five or more awards at SCQF level 3 was well below the national average and the performance of boys at this level had deteriorated over the last three years. At levels 4 and 5 the proportions of pupils gaining five or more awards were below the national average. These results were broadly in line with similar schools. Around one third of those being presented for Access 3 and Intermediate level courses did not achieve success.
The overall quality of attainment at S5/S6 was weak. The proportions of pupils achieving one or more, three or more, or five or more awards at SCQF level 6 by the end of S5 and S6 were in line with or below the national average. These results were broadly in line with similar schools. There was a declining trend in the performance of boys achieving one or more and five or more awards at level 6 in S5 and in S6. At Higher, one fifth of all entries resulted in no award. The majority of pupils entered for Advanced Higher courses gained A-C grades.
Information on the subjects inspected is given later in the report. Significant features of attainment in the subjects not inspected were as follows.
Pupils had a number of opportunities to achieve in a range of areas. Boys and girls had been successful in football and reached national finals and won local leagues. A few individuals had achieved success at national level in football and rugby. A number had also achieved well in golf, curling and swimming. The senior pupils who organised the Snow Ball and year book had improved their organisational and enterprise skills. S6 pupils also provided effective support for S1 pupils through their involvement in a twice weekly paired reading scheme and as buddies in a number of subjects. The school celebrated the success of many pupils in a range of achievements in an annual award ceremony. Pupils from across the school participated enthusiastically in the annual ‘Showcase’. They also organised fund-raising events and collected significant amounts for charity. The Pupil Council had been influential in introducing changes to the uniform and dining arrangements and was planning a series of further improvements during this session.
English
Learning and teaching
Teachers often gave clear instructions and used ICT well to focus pupils’ attention on the aims of lessons. They set activities which motivated most pupils but some tasks were not always relevant. Pupils usually worked well in class but the pace of learning was often too slow to hold their attention. Individual teachers organised work carefully but there was significant variation in the quality of approaches across the department. As a result, the quality of pupils’ learning experiences varied notably from class to class. To help them achieve more highly, pupils needed a more consistent level of challenge which made more effective use of their prior learning.
Achievement
By the end of S2 the majority of pupils had achieved appropriate national levels of attainment in reading and writing. The school was not able to provide evidence of attainment in listening and talking. At Standard Grade, the proportion of awards at Credit level were broadly in line with the national average, but at other levels proportions were below national averages. At S5/S6, pupils performed notably less well in Higher English than in their other subjects. Overall, the proportion of pupils achieving A-C grades was below the national average with around a quarter failing to gain any award. At Intermediate 2, the proportion achieving A-C grades was in line with the national average. Fewer than half of those presented at Intermediate 1 achieved A-C grades. The majority of pupils presented at Advanced Higher achieved A-C grades.
Other features of pupils’ achievement included the following.
Mathematics
Learning and teaching
A few teachers provided pupils with clear explanations and well-structured lessons. However, overall, teaching approaches lacked variety. While some teachers made effective use of questioning, they did not always develop pupils’ understanding well. Teachers’ expectations of the amount and quality of work which pupils were asked to produce were too low. The presentation of many pupils’ work was poor. Teachers were beginning to make some use of ICT to enhance pupils’ learning. Many pupils lacked motivation and did not always stay on task. The pace of learning was not sufficiently brisk to allow pupils to make appropriate progress. The tasks and activities which teachers selected did not always build effectively on pupils’ prior attainment or provide an appropriate level of challenge.
Achievement
By the end of S2, around half of the pupils had achieved appropriate national levels of attainment, and performance had recently decreased. At Standard Grade, the proportion of pupils achieving Credit awards was broadly in line with the national average. Pupils performed notably less well in mathematics than in their other subjects. By the end of S4, most of those presented for Access 3 achieved success. At Higher, the proportion of pupils achieving A-C grades was below the national average. At Intermediate 2, pupils performed less well in mathematics than in their other subjects. At Intermediate 1, less than half of those presented achieved A-C grades. At Advanced Higher, the majority of those presented for the Mathematics paper and less than half of those presented for the Applied Mathematics paper achieved A-C grades. .
Biology and S1/S2 science
Learning and teaching
Teachers shared lesson aims with pupils and reviewed these at the end of lessons. They made regular use of ICT to enhance their presentations and made effective use of praise to encourage pupils. Overall, approaches to learning and teaching were too limited and pupils had too few opportunities to develop independent learning skills. Although teachers questioned pupils to check their understanding, they missed opportunities to challenge pupils at an appropriate level. Homework was given regularly but lacked variety. The pace of lessons was generally too slow and pupils were not sufficiently involved in their own learning. Teachers did not adapt their approaches appropriately to challenge and extend the understanding of higher attaining pupils.
Achievement
At S1/S2, the majority of pupils were performing well in their coursework although too little account was taken of pupils’ prior experiences and achievements. The proportion of S4 pupils gaining Credit or General awards at Standard Grade biology had risen steadily over recent years and was now in line with the national average. However, pupils still performed less well in biology in comparison with their other Standard Grade subjects. At Intermediate 1, the majority of those presented achieved A-C grades. All those presented for Access 3 achieved success. At S5/S6, the proportion of pupils gaining A-C grades in Higher biology was below the national average. Less than half the pupils taking Intermediate 2 biology achieved an A-C grade. Too many pupils at Higher and Intermediate level did not achieve an award. At S6, the majority of pupils gained A-C grades in Advanced Higher biology.
Other features of pupils’ achievement included the following.
Computing
Learning and teaching
Teachers organised lessons well and explained new work clearly, sometimes using digital projectors effectively to enliven lessons. However, on some occasions they spent too much time talking and not enough time interacting effectively with pupils. They did not ask sufficiently probing questions and pupils generally answered questions in a limited way. Teachers did not use homework consistently to consolidate learning. When given the opportunity, pupils collaborated effectively on tasks. In most lessons, pupils were well behaved and worked conscientiously. Some classroom tasks were not well designed and did not lead to effective learning. The pace of lessons was generally too slow. At S1/S2 especially, teachers did not meet the wide range of pupils’ learning needs. Often higher attaining pupils were not sufficiently challenged.
Achievement
Pupils in S1/S2 could enter data into a spreadsheet and embed graphics within a document produced by a word processor. At S4, pupils performed notably less well in computing than in their other Standard Grade subjects. The proportion of pupils presented who gained Credit awards was consistently well below the national average. The majority of S5/S6 pupils presented for Higher information systems gained A-C grades. Approximately one third did not achieve any award. The majority of those presented for Advanced Higher gained A-C grades.
Other features of pupils’ achievement included the following.
The school provided good pastoral care for pupils. An integrated support system had recently been introduced. The nine principal teachers of pupil support worked closely with a range of visiting specialists to target support to individual pupils. Pupils understood how to make concerns known to staff and appreciated the levels of support they received. The school had appropriate arrangements to deal with care and welfare issues, including child protection and sound anti-bullying procedures. The school had effective procedures for monitoring pupils’ attendance, which included contacting parents promptly.
The overall quality of personal and social development was good. The school worked effectively with a range of health professionals who contributed to the personal and social education (PSE) programme, helped train senior pupils in peer counselling and offered drop-in clinics. The school made a considerable commitment to pupils’ personal and social development by running residential experiences for all S1 and S2 pupils. The S1/S2 PSE lessons gave pupils opportunities for discussion, reflection and the development of life skills. Coverage of topics in S3-S6 did not ensure the progressive development of knowledge and skills. Pupils were also able to develop their personal and social skills through the Pupil Council, which provided opportunities for all pupils to participate in elections. In addition, members were able to exercise responsibility and engage in other aspects of active citizenship. The senior pupils who provided peer support had good opportunities to take on responsibility and develop social skills. Overall, the majority of pupils were making sound progress towards developing self-esteem, cooperating with others and behaving appropriately in different situations.
The quality of curricular and vocational guidance was good. A range of targeted approaches and work in PSE lessons prepared pupils well for curriculum choice at key stages. Almost all pupils participated in a work experience programme and placement. Teachers provided opportunities for pupils to access careers information and learn about the world of work and further and higher education. A careers convention was open to all pupils at transition stages and included access to local employers. Good links had been established with the careers adviser. The careers library was well-stocked and provided convenient access to computer based reference sources. Staff provided an effective programme for pupils applying for university.
The overall quality of learning support was adequate. The school had established a variety of additional programmes to meet a wide range of pupils’ learning needs. Some aspects of this provision were effectively meeting the needs of groups of pupils. The librarian promoted the development of literacy very effectively. However, a coherent framework was not yet in place to identify, plan for and meet the needs of all pupils. Additional support for pupils other than in English and mathematics was largely delivered by a team of classroom assistants. Overall, they provided effective support by helping pupils to meet their learning objectives. However, teachers and assistants were not always clear as to their respective roles when working together and they did not always access and make use of information on individual pupil’s strengths, needs and support strategies. The ‘Support Unit’ provided a small class setting for vulnerable pupils and for those who were temporarily excluded from classes as a result of their behaviour. The room used by the unit was not sufficiently stimulating and the teaching approaches adopted were limited and lacked variety. Pupils generally behaved well in this unit and were given targets to help them to rejoin their classes. For groups of pupils experiencing difficulties with their behaviour a ‘Behaviour Matters’ programme was available. This offered time out from classes for three days in each week to allow pupils to focus on improving their behaviour. The programme succeeded in improving aspects of behaviour whilst pupils maintained contact with the mainstream curriculum. The ‘Learning Centre’ provided focused work on the development of literacy and numeracy skills for a small group of pupils. Staff did not make sufficient use of the assessment information provided by primary schools and they did not clearly state learning targets in individualised educational programmes. The ‘Aird Unit’ had been established to meet the learning needs of pupils with profound and complex needs. Pupils received good care within the unit but there were weaknesses in the education programmes. These programmes did not meet the diverse range of pupils’ needs and were not sufficiently specific or individualised. Pupils’ progress and achievements were not being effectively assessed and recorded.
The new support for pupil system had already developed a greater degree of integrated working among staff involved in supporting pupils with emotional, social, behavioural and learning difficulties. However, staff lacked a shared understanding of each element of these complex arrangements and how together they were expected to meet the needs of all pupils. Senior managers and principal teachers had not effectively evaluated the impact of all these initiatives, and had not communicated effectively to all staff the arrangements for supporting pupils. Senior managers needed to take a more strategic approach to the management of pupil support.
Aspect |
Comment |
Quality of accommodation and facilities |
Overall, the quality of the accommodation was weak with some unsatisfactory aspects. The widespread school campus had four separate buildings. The new building was bright and stimulating with good fixtures and fittings and very good ICT and physical education facilities. One dilapidated building has since been demolished. The other buildings had a number of major weaknesses. They were not water or weather tight and had poor windows, décor, fixtures and fittings and standards of cleaning. Shortcomings in security and health and safety were drawn to the attention of senior managers. |
Climate and relationships, expectations and promoting achievement and equality |
Many pupils did not display a sense of pride in the school. Some behaviour was poor around the school and in some classes. Staff did not manage behaviour consistently. The morale of a significant number of staff was low. They felt that senior managers did not communicate with them sufficiently on the large number of initiatives which they had to implement. However, relationships between staff and pupils were generally good and a significant number of highly committed teachers were willing to provide extra support for pupils. Most teachers used praise well in lessons but a number did not have high enough expectations of pupils’ attainment or of the presentation of pupils’ work. Only senior pupils and those elected members of the Pupil Council had good opportunities to exercise responsibility. The school did not always celebrate pupils’ achievements well. It did not provide opportunities for religious observance. Timetabling arrangements for English and mathematics at S5/S6 were not uniform and resulted in pupils receiving different amounts of teaching time. Some steps were being taken to promote racial equality. Part of the school’s approach included a project at S1/S2 on Africa. |
Partnership with parents and the community |
The school had developed good links with a range of agencies and a number participated in health promotion activities and in supporting vulnerable pupils. Local businesses provided work experience opportunities. Links with the local college were developing. Attendance reports were sent regularly to parents. However, there was too great a variation in the quality of reports from departments on pupils’ progress. Parents and pupils had not been appropriately consulted on the many changes which had recently been made to the curriculum. The School Board was supportive and challenging, and there was regular contact between the headteacher and the chairperson. The parent-teacher association had recently been re-established. Communication with parents was assisted by the handbook, a good newsletter and regular reports in the local press. |
The school had many hard working teachers, but needed to improve to become a successful learning community. Attainment was generally in line with similar schools, but had not shown any sign of improvement. Learning and teaching were not consistent and initiatives aimed at improving pupils’ learning experiences were not always implemented effectively. The school had been successful at reducing the numbers of pupils who had been excluded from school. Progress had been made with improving the behaviour of the most challenging pupils. However, the school’s ethos was weak and it was not meeting the learning needs of many of its pupils.
The headteacher was committed to the pupils, especially to the most vulnerable, and had friendly relationships with staff and pupils. He had been successful in implementing a dress code, improving attendance and reducing the number of exclusions. However, he did not provide a sufficiently clear strategic direction for the school. He did not consult and communicate sufficiently with staff and parents. As a result, the many changes which were introduced to the curriculum and organisation of the school were not wholly successful. In addition, the frequent changes impeded the growth of a coherent whole school approach to improving the school’s ethos, quality of learning and teaching, and attainment. There were four depute headteachers. They had limited impact on the strategic management of the school and did not work coherently as a team. One had been successful in developing teamwork among the newly appointed principal teachers of curriculum. These principal teachers showed good potential and some were already beginning to have a positive effect in their departments. A number of other staff were developing their roles in their new posts after the school had been restructured.
The school had a number of approaches to self-evaluation. Senior managers visited classrooms to monitor and evaluate learning and teaching in the departments with which they linked. Some of these visits had prompted useful discussion on learning and teaching. However, limited action had been taken as a result of these visits and they did not help to spread the good practice which was present in the school. Senior managers also regularly visited classes in the year group they were associated with, to monitor aspects of behaviour. The headteacher and senior managers discussed SQA results annually with principal teachers. These meetings helped to focus departments on examination results but they were not always followed by clear action plans. Senior managers carried out reviews on other aspects of the school’s work. Some of these reviews had been analysed effectively, but they were not always followed up by a clear, coherent strategy which focused on improvement. Overall, approaches to quality assurance had a limited impact upon improving the school.
Senior managers and teachers recognised that there were weaknesses in ethos, learning and teaching and attainment. Many staff did not understand the complex pupil support arrangements. Some were frustrated by the frequent changes in policy and procedures, but they wanted to do the best for the pupils. In order to take forward the necessary improvements, additional support was required from the education authority to provide better leadership to direct the energy and skills of staff and secure the full support and collaboration of parents and carers.
Main points for action
The school and education authority, in liaison with HM Inspectors, should take action to ensure improvement in:
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 and carers. HM Inspectors will engage with the school and the education authority to monitor progress. They will publish an interim report on progress within one year of the publication of this report. Thereafter, 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 and carers, within two years of the publication of this report, on the extent of improvement that has been achieved.
Terry Carr
HM Inspector
10 January 2006
The sections in the table below follow the order of 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 |
Weak |
The teaching process |
Adequate |
Pupils’ learning experiences |
Weak |
Meeting pupils’ needs |
Weak |
Overall quality of attainment: S1/S2 |
Weak |
Overall quality of attainment: S3/S4 |
Weak |
| Overall quality of attainment: S5/S6 | Weak |
| How well are pupils supported? | |
| Pastoral care | Good |
| Personal and social development | Good |
| Curricular and vocational guidance | Good |
| Learning support | Adequate |
| How good is the environment for learning? | |
| Accommodation and facilities | Weak |
| Climate and relationships | Weak |
| Expectations and promoting achievement | Weak |
| Equality and fairness | Weak |
| Partnership with parents, the School Board and the community | Adequate |
| Improving the school | |
| Leadership | Weak |
| Effectiveness and deployment of staff with additional responsibilities | Weak |
Self-evaluation |
Weak |
This report uses the following word scale to make clear the judgements made by inspectors:
excellent |
excellent |
very good |
major strengths |
good |
important strengths with areas for improvement |
adequate |
strengths just outweigh weaknesses |
weak |
important weaknesses |
unsatisfactory |
major weaknesses |
What parents thought the school did well |
What parents think the school could do better |
Most parents and carers said:
|
Most parents said the school buildings were not kept in good order. A significant minority said they did not know the school’s priorities for improving the education of pupils. |
What pupils thought the school did well |
What pupils think the school could do better |
Almost all pupils said they got on well with other pupils. Most pupils said:
|
The majority of pupils said they would like to see the behaviour of other pupils improve. A significant minority said:
|
What staff thought the school did well |
What staff think the school could do better |
Almost all teachers said:
|
The majority of teachers said:
A significant minority of teachers said:
|
Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework (SCQF) levels: |
Percentage of relevant S4 roll achieving by end of S4
2003 |
2004 |
20053 |
||
English and Mathematics @ Level 3 |
Stranraer Academy |
86 |
88 |
90 |
Comparator Schools4 |
93 |
91 |
89 |
|
National |
91 |
91 |
90 |
|
5+ @ Level 3 or Better |
Stranraer Academy |
88 |
85 |
83 |
Comparator Schools |
92 |
91 |
90 |
|
National |
91 |
91 |
90 |
|
5+ @ Level 4 or Better |
Stranraer Academy |
71 |
73 |
72 |
Comparator Schools |
74 |
71 |
72 |
|
National |
76 |
77 |
76 |
|
5+ @ Level 5 or Better |
Stranraer Academy |
29 |
28 |
27 |
Comparator Schools |
27 |
31 |
26 |
|
National |
34 |
35 |
34 |
|
Percentage of relevant S4 roll achieving by end of S5
2003 |
2004 |
20053 |
||
5+ @ Level 4 or better |
Stranraer Academy |
74 |
75 |
75 |
Comparator schools4 |
76 |
77 |
74 |
|
National |
78 |
78 |
78 |
|
5+ @ Level 5 or better |
Stranraer Academy |
40 |
35 |
38 |
Comparator schools |
39 |
38 |
41 |
|
National |
45 |
45 |
45 |
|
1+ @ Level 6 or better |
Stranraer Academy |
36 |
31 |
31 |
Comparator schools |
33 |
33 |
34 |
|
National |
39 |
39 |
38 |
|
3+ @ Level 6 or better |
Stranraer Academy |
18 |
17 |
13 |
Comparator schools |
16 |
17 |
17 |
|
National |
23 |
23 |
22 |
|
5+ @ Level 6 or better |
Stranraer Academy |
6 |
6 |
4 |
Comparator schools |
6 |
6 |
5 |
|
National |
10 |
9 |
9 |
|
Percentage of relevant S4 roll achieving by end of S6
2003 |
2004 |
20053 |
||
5+ @ Level 5 or better |
Stranraer Academy |
43 |
43 |
37 |
Comparator schools4 |
42 |
41 |
41 |
|
National |
47 |
47 |
47 |
|
1+ @ Level 6 or better |
Stranraer Academy |
42 |
40 |
34 |
Comparator schools |
38 |
37 |
37 |
|
National |
44 |
44 |
43 |
|
3+ @ Level 6 or better |
Stranraer Academy |
27 |
29 |
24 |
Comparator schools |
25 |
23 |
23 |
|
National |
31 |
31 |
30 |
|
5+ @ Level 6 or better |
Stranraer Academy |
19 |
18 |
17 |
Comparator schools |
15 |
13 |
14 |
|
National |
20 |
20 |
19 |
|
1+ @ Level 7 or better |
Stranraer Academy |
9 |
10 |
7 |
Comparator schools |
6 |
8 |
7 |
|
National |
12 |
12 |
12 |
|
If you would like an additional copy of this report
Copies of this report have been sent to the headteacher and school staff, the Corporate Director of Education & Community Services, 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, 3rd Floor, Argyll House, Marketgait, Dundee, DD1 1QP or by telephoning 01382 349999. Copies are also available on our website at www.hmie.gov.uk.
If you wish to comment about secondary inspections
Should you wish to comment on any aspect of secondary inspections, you should write in the first instance to Frank Crawford, HMCI, at HM Inspectorate of Education, Europa Building, 450 Argyle Street, Glasgow G2 8LG.
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, 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.
2Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework (SCQF) levels:
7: Advanced Higher at A-C/CSYS at A-C
6: Higher at A-C
5: Intermediate 2 at A-C; Standard Grade at 1-2
4: Intermediate 1 at A-C; Standard Grade at 3-4
3: Access 3 cluster; Standard Grade at 5-6
3Pre Appeal
4Comparator schools are the ten schools immediately above and the ten schools immediately below the school being inspected in terms of the percentage of pupils entitled to free meals (FME).