Shaftesbury Junior School Ofsted Report

The school has the following strengths

• Staff ensure that the rich curriculum promotes pupils’ personal, social, moral, spiritual and cultural development well. Pupils are well prepared for life in modern Britain.
• Pupils behave and conduct themselves around the school well at all times of the school day. Pupils are polite and courteous.
• Relationships are positive. The school has a positive and caring ethos of mutual respect that is shared by all.

• Pupils who join the school during the academic year and speak English as an additional language receive effective additional support.
• Pupils are proud of their school and their teachers. Pupils’ handwriting and presentation of their work are usually of a high standard.
• There is evidence of the impact of leaders’ and other staff’s work to improve standards, particularly in reading and mathematics.

Full report

What does the school need to do to improve further?

• Leaders and those responsible for governance need to drive more rapid improvements by ensuring that:
  • assessments of pupils’ learning are accurate and used effectively to identify sharp and focused targets to help all groups of pupils make consistently strong progress
  • they check their actions to improve standards are consistently applied by all teachers and they more rigorously hold staff to account for the progress pupils make
  • they further develop the roles of middle leaders so that they are more effective in raising standards in their areas of responsibility
  • the governing body is more effective in holding leaders to account for the progress pupils make and the impact of additional funding, including the pupil premium and funding provided to support pupils who have SEN and/or disabilities.
• Improve the quality of teaching, learning and assessment to accelerate pupils’ progress and raise their attainment by ensuring that all teachers:
  • quickly tackle pupils’ errors and misconceptions
  • use assessment information effectively to identify next steps in learning and match work accurately to pupils’ abilities, including for the most able
  • ensure that all pupils, especially those who speak English as an additional language, are secure in their phonics and early reading skills and know how to apply these in their writing
  • effectively promote all pupils’ understanding of vocabulary and inference and deduction skills in reading
  • teach pupils to use accurate spelling, grammar and punctuation appropriate to their ability to improve the quality of their writing
  • consistently teach pupils how to more effectively edit and improve their writing
  • more effectively deploy teaching assistants so that they have the maximum impact on pupils’ progress. An external review of the school’s use of the pupil premium funding should be undertaken in order to assess how this aspect of leadership and management may be improved.

Inspection judgements

Effectiveness of leadership and management Requires improvement

• Leaders’ self-evaluation of the school’s performance is accurate. The headteacher has a clear understanding of the school’s strengths and areas for improvement. The school improvement plan, including the plan written with the support of the local authority, accurately identifies the key priorities for improvement. However, plans for improvement do not identify specific and ambitious targets for different groups of pupils, including those who are disadvantaged, the most able and those who speak English as an additional language. The pace of improvements, particularly in reading and writing, has been too slow.
• Leaders have not ensured that the quality of teaching and learning and assessment are consistently good. As a result, the quality of pupils’ work and the progress they make is too variable in different classes and subjects. Too many pupils do not make the progress or attain as highly as they should in reading, writing and mathematics.
• Leaders have introduced a range of initiatives and provided training to improve the quality of teaching. Some of these have only been recently introduced. Leaders’ recent reviews of writing led to the identification of ‘non-negotiables’. However, leaders have not been rigorous enough in checking that these and other initiatives, such as work to promote pupils’ problem-solving and reasoning skills in mathematics, have been applied equally effectively by all staff.
• Leaders provide opportunities for staff to work alongside each other, as well as teachers in other schools, to develop further their expertise in assessing pupils’ learning, particularly in reading and writing. However, leaders have not ensured that assessment is accurate. As a result, leaders’ and governors’ understanding of the progress and attainment of different groups of pupils in different classes and subjects is not as accurate as it could be.
• Subject leaders are enthusiastic and the headteacher has ensured that they have received some training to develop their roles. They have led developments of the curriculum in different subjects. There is evidence of the positive impact of their work to improve standards in mathematics and reading. However, their plans and initiatives are also not linked well enough to pupils’ progress to help drive more rapid improvements.
• Leaders regularly meet with staff to review carefully the progress of pupils in each class. They agree actions and provide extra support for pupils where this is required. However, leaders do not identify sharp, measurable targets for pupils’ progress to more effectively hold staff to account. The management of teachers’ performance is not sufficiently rigorous. Last year, for example, all staff met the targets set by leaders, yet standards in writing are too low in the majority of classes.
• Leaders have used the pupil premium funding largely to provide additional teaching to support pupils’ learning. Most disadvantaged pupils make progress in line with, and sometimes better than, other pupils in the school. However, their attainment is well below that of pupils nationally, particularly for reading and writing. The new leader for the pupil premium is enthusiastic and forward looking. However, the current pupil premium plan and previous reviews are too general. They do not identify clear, measurable targets for improvement. Leaders and governors are not as effective as they could be in stringently checking that the funding has the maximum impact in accelerating pupils’ progress.
• Leaders and governors do not check carefully enough the progress made by pupils who have SEN and/or disabilities. Their understanding of the impact of teaching and support for these pupils is limited. Consequently, they cannot be sure that additional funding to support these pupils is being used effectively.
• The additional funds provided through the primary physical education and sport premium are used to provide sports coaching and increase the range of sporting activities on offer. However, the impact of the funding is also not measured sharply enough. Leaders cannot be sure the funding is having the maximum impact on, for example, increasing participation rates of pupils throughout the school or improving the quality of teaching.
• Leaders work with a local partnership of schools to review standards and develop leadership roles. The local authority has been supporting the school for a number of years. Recently, they have supported projects to improve the quality of teaching of reading and writing and provide consultant support to develop improvements in the quality of teaching, learning and assessment. Staff and leaders are positive about this support. However, leaders and the local authority have not been effective in ensuring that this work has sufficiently strong impact on pupils’ outcomes.
• The headteacher is passionate about the school’s work to meet the needs of pupils who speak English as an additional language. The knowledgeable higher-level teaching assistants who lead and support this work ensure that the language needs of pupils who join the school are analysed carefully, and they provide personalised support focusing on developing pupils’ reading skills. While this work is effective, leaders have not ensured that the gains pupils make are built upon in their lessons.
• Leaders have ensured that the school’s broad and balanced curriculum, enrichment activities and wide range of extra-curricular cubs ensure that pupils’ social, moral, spiritual and cultural development is promoted well. Subject leaders have strengthened the curriculum to better promote pupils’ understanding of British values, develop the expertise of staff in teaching art, and provided resources to support the teaching of French. Leaders and other staff prepare pupils well for their life in modern Britain.
• Parents and carers who spoke with inspectors were positive about the school. Many commented on the friendly, well-organised and welcoming ethos of the school. They say their children are happy and enjoy school.

Governance of the school

• The governing body is clear on its dual roles to both support and challenge the school. It has a secure general overview of the school’s strengths and areas in which it needs to improve. The governing body is knowledgeable about the school’s actions and initiatives to improve standards. Governors regularly visit the school to meet with leaders and staff to deepen their understanding of the school’s work. However, they do not use their findings effectively enough to better hold leaders to account.
• The minutes of the meetings of the governing body show that governors ask challenging questions about different aspects of the school’s performance. They are not, however, as effective as they could be in holding leaders to account for the progress of different groups of pupils. They have not ensured that improvement plans and the management of teachers’ performance set measurable and ambitious targets for the progress and attainment of different groups of pupils.
• The governing body is not as effective as it could be in holding leaders to account for the impact of their use of additional funding. They cannot be sure that the pupil premium, funding for pupils who have SEN and/or disabilities and funding for physical education and sport have the maximum impact on pupils’ learning and progress.

Safeguarding

• The arrangements for safeguarding are effective. There is a strong culture of safeguarding. The school’s caring ethos is evident in pupils’ positive interactions with teachers and with each other. Pupils are taught how to keep safe, including when they are online. Pupils say bullying is very rare and are confident that adults will rapidly resolve any concerns they have. Pupils say they feel safe and all parents who spoke with inspectors said their children are safe.
• Leaders ensure that the record of recruitment checks on staff, governors and visitors is thorough. Governors check that arrangements to safeguard pupils are in place.
• The designated leaders for safeguarding ensure that all members of staff are kept up to date with the latest guidance on keeping pupils safe in education.
• Leaders ensure that staff are clear on the procedures for reporting any concerns about pupils’ welfare. Leaders record these carefully, including the actions taken. They are tenacious in involving external agencies where this is required.

Quality of teaching, learning and assessment Requires improvement

• The quality of teaching, learning and assessment is inconsistent. Teachers’ assessment of pupils’ learning is not consistently accurate. Teachers’ use of information about pupils’ learning is not as effective as it should be. They do not tackle pupils’ errors and misconceptions quickly enough. Sometimes, work is not well matched to pupils’ needs. As a result, too many pupils, including the most able, do not make the rapid progress they should to attain more highly.
• Staff promote positive attitudes to reading. The impact of school initiatives, such as the teaching of English through class novels, the ‘reading miles’ strategy and the well-structured approach to guided reading, is helping to improve standards. However, teachers do not ensure that pupils, including those who speak English as an additional language, are sufficiently secure in their phonics and early reading skills. Teachers do not focus clearly enough on promoting pupils’ understanding of important vocabulary and improving their inference and deduction skills. As a result, some pupils’ attainment and progress in reading and writing is not as strong as it should be.
• In writing, pupils often write at length and in different subjects. However, their progress is not as rapid as it could be because teachers do not consistently challenge them to use accurate spelling, grammar and punctuation appropriate to their ability. Expectations are sometimes not high enough. Teachers do not consistently teach pupils how to edit and improve their work.
• In mathematics, there is evidence of teachers’ work to develop pupils’ problem-solving and reasoning skills by providing ‘challenge’ questions. In some classes, pupils are given opportunities to develop their problem-solving and reasoning skills. However, this is not consistent. In some classes, there is little of this work. Sometimes, teachers ask pupils to complete too many examples of work at the same level of difficulty rather than moving them on to more challenging work.
• In some lessons, teaching assistants provide effective support, particularly when working with individual pupils, or supporting pupils who speak English as an additional language. However, the effectiveness of teaching assistants is inconsistent. Too often, teachers do not deploy teaching assistants carefully enough to ensure that they can have the maximum impact on pupils’ learning and progress.
• Teachers are enthusiastic and relationships are positive. Teachers ensure that classrooms are calm and purposeful places to learn. Routines are in place and learning is well organised. Teachers provide useful class displays and resources to help support pupils’ learning. However, pupils sometimes lose focus when they are not sure what to do next or work is not challenging enough.
• Teachers set homework, in line with the school’s policy and as appropriate for the age and learning stage of pupils. This consolidates learning and prepares pupils well for work to come.

Personal development, behaviour and welfare Good

Personal development and welfare

• Leaders’ and other staff’s work to promote pupils’ personal development and welfare is good. Pupils’ personal development is enhanced by the roles and responsibilities the school offers them, such as the school council or ‘eco-warriors’. Members of the ‘reporting club’ told inspectors of how they had interviewed David Attenborough for a school newsletter. A Year 3 pupil said he liked the club because ‘you get to write about things you are interested in’. Pupils speak very positively about the wide range of clubs the school provides, such as the homework, cheerleading or steel drum clubs.
• Pupils are very reflective and understand the importance of respecting others. Staff ensure that pupils understand British values and pupils can relate them to their own lives and learning. One pupil, for example, explained to inspectors how the suffragette movement won the right for women to vote and was able to relate this to ideas of personal liberty. The school’s ‘language of the month’ celebrates diversity and promotes pupils’ understanding of respecting different cultures and beliefs.
• Teachers teach pupils to understand the importance of healthy eating. The school gardening club and hall display show the school’s work to help pupils to understand where food comes from and the importance of a balanced diet.
• Pupils are taught how to keep safe, including when online. They understand different types of bullying. Pupils say bullying sometimes happens, but the large majority are confident that staff will quickly resolve any concerns they may have.
• Pupils have generally positive attitudes to their learning. In lessons, pupils pay attention, concentrate and try hard to complete all that is asked of them. They sometimes lose focus, however, when work is not matched well to their ability or needs.

Behaviour

• The behaviour of pupils is good. Pupils are polite and courteous. Their conduct in classrooms, corridors or on the playground is good. They have a good understanding of school systems to support their behaviour. Parents who spoke with inspectors were almost unanimous in their view that pupils are well behaved.
• Pupils are proud of their school. They take pride in the presentation of their work. Pupils are polite, respectful and confident. The school has a strong ethos of mutual respect and pupils clearly like their teachers and other adults in the school. Staff ensure that lunchtime is a positive, sociable time.
• Overall attendance was below the national average in 2017. The attendance of boys, disadvantaged pupils and pupils who have SEN and/or disabilities was low. Current information shows a similar picture. Leaders take a range of robust actions to promote the importance of attendance to parents. They, in collaboration with the education welfare officer, check attendance carefully and work with the families of pupils who have persistent absence. There are compelling contextual factors to support leaders’ view that their improvements were affected in the current year. Leaders and the governing body recognise that improving attendance is an ongoing area of focus.

Outcomes for pupils Requires improvement

• The progress that pupils make is inconsistent. Too many pupils are not making the progress they should in mathematics, reading and particularly writing. While there is evidence of some improvement, this is not rapid enough or sufficiently secure. Pupils, including those who are disadvantaged, the most able, those who speak English as an additional language and those who have SEN and/or disabilities, are capable of more.
• At the end of 2017, the school did not meet the government’s floor standards. Pupils’ progress, including that of disadvantaged pupils, in reading, writing and mathematics declined compared to the previous year. Pupils’ attainment in reading and writing have been below the national averages for the last two years. The proportion of pupils achieving the expected standard in mathematics, including for disadvantaged pupils, was above the national average. Progress was broadly average in mathematics, though lower than the previous year.
• Pupils’ work and current school information show that the proportions of pupils on track to achieve the standards expected for their age are too variable. Too many pupils, in mathematics, reading and particularly writing, are not making the progress they should. Some pupils, including those who are disadvantaged, the most able, and those who speak English as an additional language, are underachieving.
• In writing, teachers ensure that pupils’ work is usually well presented. However, the quality of their writing is often let down by poor grammar, punctuation and spelling. Teachers do not consistently guide and teach pupils how to edit and improve their work. This slows the progress they make. The quality of pupils’ writing in other subjects is often not as high as it is their English books.
• Pupils in all key groups are not making the progress of which they are capable. Leaders and staff quickly identify pupils who need to catch up. Pupils who join the school within the school year and who speak English as an additional language often receive effective additional support to develop their reading and writing skills. However, these gains are sometimes not capitalised on in their wider learning in lessons.
• The progress and attainment of disadvantaged pupils are often close to and sometimes above those of other pupils. However, the attainment and progress of both these groups of pupils in reading and mathematics are below those of pupils nationally.
• Standards of handwriting and presentation are generally strong throughout the school.

School details

Unique reference number Local authority Inspection number 120026 Leicester 10047607 This inspection of the school was carried out under section 5 of the Education Act 2005. Type of school Junior School category Age range of pupils Gender of pupils Community 7 to 11 Mixed Number of pupils on the school roll 238 Appropriate authority The governing body Chair Headteacher Telephone number Website Email address Nick Cox Karl Stewart 01162 549203 www.shaftesbury.leicester.sch.uk office@shaftesbury.leicester.sch.uk Date of previous inspection 12–13 June 2014

Information about this school

• In 2017, the school did not meet the government’s current floor standards, which are the minimum expectations for pupils’ progress and attainment in reading, writing and mathematics by the end of Year 6.
• Since the previous inspection, there have been no significant changes in staffing or leadership.
• Shaftesbury Junior School is smaller than an average-sized primary school.
• The proportions of pupils from minority ethnic backgrounds, and of pupils who speak English as an additional language, are above those seen nationally.
• The proportion of disadvantaged pupils is above the national average.
• The proportion of pupils who have SEN and/or disabilities is similar to the national average.
• The school has a breakfast and after-school club which are run by the governing body.

Information about this inspection

• Inspectors held meetings with the headteacher, deputy headteacher, members of the senior leadership team, the coordinator for the provision for pupils who have SEN and/or disabilities and subject leaders. They met with members of the governing body and a representative from the local authority. Discussions explored a wide range of subjects, including safeguarding arrangements.
• Inspectors observed learning in all classes. Twenty lessons were observed, many jointly with the headteacher or deputy headteacher. Inspectors looked at pupils’ work with subject leaders, spoke with pupils to evaluate the quality of their learning and listened to pupils read. They scrutinised a variety of documents relating to safeguarding, behaviour, attendance, the quality of teaching, learning and assessment, pupils’ attainment and progress, and staff performance. Inspectors looked at plans for improvement as well as leaders’ evaluation of the school’s performance. Inspectors also considered the range and quality of information provided on the school’s website.
• Inspectors spoke with parents informally at the start of the school day. They took account of the responses to the staff questionnaire and the small number of free-text responses from parents. There were seven responses to Parent View during the course of the inspection. There were no responses to the pupil questionnaire.

Inspection team

John Lawson, lead inspector Helen Atkins Her Majesty’s Inspector Ofsted Inspector