Hinckley Academy and John Cleveland Sixth Form Centre Ofsted Report

Full report

In accordance with section 44(1) of the Education Act 2005, Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector is of the opinion that this school requires special measures because it is failing to give its pupils an acceptable standard of education and the persons responsible for leading, managing or governing the school are not demonstrating the capacity to secure the necessary improvement in the school.

What does the school need to do to improve further?

• Make safeguarding effective through ensuring that there is an appropriate system for

monitoring pupils’ attendance which includes rigorous, timely checks on absences.

• Increase the impact of leadership and management on raising pupils’ achievement, by:
  • ensuring that governors have the skills to hold school leaders to account with more rigour
  • creating an effective strategy for the use and evaluation of the additional funding the school receives to improve the attendance and outcomes of disadvantaged pupils
  • ensuring the accuracy of progress data so that leaders, governors and teachers are better informed about the next steps in pupils’ learning
  • strengthening the monitoring of pupils’ attendance by including rigorous checks on absence at an earlier stage so that actions can be taken to improve attendance for all pupils
  • implementing the findings of the recently competed review of the curriculum so that it is fit for all pupils, including those who have special educational needs (SEN) and/or disabilities
  • making sure that all members of staff are consistent in their application of school policies, including managing pupil behaviour and feedback to pupils.
• Rapidly improve the quality of teaching, learning and assessment by:
  • ensuring that teachers plan to meet the needs of pupils of all abilities to secure good progress and good behaviour in lessons
  • ensuring that all teachers have high expectations of what pupils can achieve and provide them with work that is appropriately challenging
  • making sure that all teachers use information about pupils’ attainment and progress to provide work that is at the right level
  • ensuring that teachers check pupils’ understanding regularly in lessons so that learning matches their needs and they make good progress
  • providing more bespoke professional development for staff, including the sharing of best practice, so that teachers can increase rates of achievement for all pupils across the curriculum, especially for boys and disadvantaged pupils.
• Make sure that all pupils understand what constitutes bullying, so they are able to recognise it if it occurs and report it appropriately to staff.
• Ensure that pupils develop a good understanding of fundamental British values so that they are well prepared for life in modern Britain. An external review of governance should be undertaken in order to assess how this aspect of leadership and management may be improved. An external review of the school’s use of the pupil premium should be undertaken in order to assess how this aspect of leadership and management may be improved.

Inspection judgements

Effectiveness of leadership and management Inadequate

• Leaders and governors have overseen poor outcomes for pupils since the school came into being in 2015, following the amalgamation of two predecessor schools. They have not demonstrated the capacity to improve these outcomes rapidly enough.
• Leaders are not doing enough to tackle poor teaching. The recently appointed principal has insisted on a much-needed focus on teaching with the introduction of the ‘HAJC6 way’. However, this is yet to lead to pupils making consistently strong progress. Leaders accept that their strategy for improving teaching changes too frequently. They have not allowed sufficient time to embed the improvements required.
• Leaders are not taking effective action to improve the progress of disadvantaged pupils. Leaders do not plan sufficiently well to meet these pupils’ needs using the additional government funding. There is little monitoring of actions or evaluation of their impact. Although the school’s tracking data shows that outcomes are expected to improve, too many disadvantaged pupils are underachieving.
• Leaders do not have robust plans in place for the use of additional funding to support Year 7 pupils who need to catch up in literacy and numeracy. Governors are not given any information about the impact of this funding and, consequently, are unaware of the effectiveness of its use in improving standards.
• Leaders and governors have an overgenerous view of the school and an unrealistic picture of current standards. As a result of this, governors have not focused sufficient attention on the underachievement of groups such as disadvantaged pupils, boys and those who have SEN and/or disabilities. Consequently, these groups continue to achieve less well than their peers.
• Although outcomes remain low for pupils who have SEN and/or disabilities, the relatively new leader is providing a clear framework of support for them. However, teachers are not implementing these strategies sufficiently well in the classroom to secure better progress for these pupils.
• The principal is introducing much-needed new systems and structures to the school. However, it is too soon to see the impact of these on the quality of teaching and outcomes for pupils.
• The school has recently arranged support from a local teaching school alliance to help improve the quality of teaching. Again, it is too early to see the impact of this on raising the effectiveness of teaching.
• Leaders have not done enough to improve the poor attendance of pupils. Too many are absent from school. The attendance of disadvantaged pupils is particularly low and is declining.
• The curriculum is broad and balanced at key stage 3 but does not meet the needs of pupils at key stage 4, including those who have SEN and/or disabilities. Leaders are yet to implement fully their revised curriculum that they have determined will better meet the needs of all pupils. The school has a personal and social education programme (PSE), but this is not well enough planned to allow pupils to develop a good understanding of fundamental British values.
• The school uses displays around the school and events, including assemblies, to raise the awareness of pupils about anti-bullying and careers. However, these approaches are insufficiently embedded in the curriculum to make a consistent, positive impact on pupils’ spiritual, moral, social and cultural development.
• The school makes use of alternative providers for a very small minority of pupils. Checks are frequent and sufficiently timely to ensure that these pupils attend well and make progress.
• It is recommended that newly qualified teachers are not appointed.

Governance of the school

• Since September 2015 when the amalgamation took place, governors have been overwhelmed by financial concerns, largely as a result of the staff redundancies that had to be made. Consequently, governors have not had a focus on the quality of teaching and its impact on the outcomes for pupils, which have been far too low. As a result of this, governance is inadequate.
• Governors are not holding leaders sufficiently to account. Although this has improved recently with the appointment of a new principal, they accept information from leaders without taking sufficient steps to ensure its accuracy. This has led to an overoptimistic view of the strengths and areas that need improving in the school. Until recently, governors have not grasped the urgent need to improve outcomes for pupils.
• Governors have not ensured that the additional pupil premium funding provided to support disadvantaged pupils has been spent effectively to help these pupils make progress in line with other pupils nationally. They have not reviewed the impact of the use of the funding for last year and, consequently, have not published this.
• Governors are ineffective in holding leaders to account for the use of the extra funding received to help Year 7 pupils catch up in literacy and numeracy. They have not reviewed the impact of actions taken last year or planned how best to use the funding this year.

Safeguarding

• The arrangements for safeguarding are not effective.
• The current arrangements to monitor pupils’ attendance are not adequate. Leaders do not follow up the high levels of absence on a daily basis with sufficient rigour. They do not always make the connections between pupils’ attendance and potential safeguarding issues and put in place appropriate support. This places pupils at unnecessary risk.
• The safeguarding policy was not up to date at the start of the inspection and did not take into account latest statutory guidance. For example, advice to staff about reporting female genital mutilation was incorrect and there was no guidance on peer-on-peer bullying or child sexual exploitation. The policy was updated by the end of the inspection.
• Allegations against staff are investigated in a timely and appropriate manner by leaders. However, reporting of the outcomes is not always undertaken with the same level of rigour.
• The school’s record of checks on the suitability of staff to work with young people was not fully compliant at the start of the inspection. For example, references for some staff and checks on senior leaders and governors have not always been followed up rigorously enough. This was fully compliant by the end of the inspection.
• When child protection issues arise, they are dealt with in a timely and appropriate manner. The school liaises closely with external organisations.
• Pupils are taught how to keep safe from the dangers of radicalisation and extremism through the school’s PSE programme and assemblies. However, pupils’ understanding of these issues is too variable and is not presented in a coherent manner. Leaders have a good understanding of what the risks are in the local community and all staff have undergone ‘Prevent’ training. Quality of teaching, learning and assessment Inadequate

• Too much teaching is mundane, poorly planned and ill-matched to pupils’ abilities. It is failing to enthuse pupils, especially boys, about their learning. There is not enough good teaching to accelerate pupils’ achievement.
• Teachers and pupils do not understand assessment information, or where pupils are in their learning, well enough. Teachers do not regularly check on pupils’ understanding in lessons or plan learning that is appropriate to pupils’ needs. Consequently, learning is either too easy or too difficult and does not take into account pupils’ starting points. For example, in a mathematics lesson, Year 7 pupils were finding fractions and percentages of shapes. Many found the task too difficult and some were unable to get started at all because the teacher did not check what pupils knew and adjust the teaching as a result.
• The teaching of English, mathematics and science is not good enough. In too many of these lessons, work is repetitive and at too low a level for pupils to catch up with others nationally.
• Time is not well used to accelerate progress in many lessons. Inspectors saw examples of pupils who had completed work and were having to wait too long for further learning activities. Often, teachers’ expectations of what their pupils can achieve within a given amount of time are too low. There is little evidence of the urgency that is needed for pupils to learn quickly and make the rapid progress needed to catch up with their peers nationally.
• There is a lack of challenging work to help the most able pupils progress at a fast enough rate. For example, in a philosophy and ethics lesson, some able Year 8 pupils successfully used higher-level vocabulary when questioned by the teacher, but none used this to improve their written work.
• Teaching in science is particularly poor overall. In too many lessons, pupils work through activities given to them without the teacher checking their understanding. Consequently, pupils are unclear whether or not they have mastered correctly what they are being asked to learn. For example, in a Year 10 lesson, pupils were considering the differences between nerves and hormones. Their understanding was not checked by the teacher before moving onto the next question and pupils were left uncertain about the correct answers.
• Scrutiny of pupils’ books shows that there are wide variations in the quality of assessment. Frequently, teachers do not provide feedback to pupils in line with school and departmental policies. Pupils say that the feedback they receive is very variable even between teachers in the same department, although they do value this when they receive it.
• When the teaching is stronger, pupils are more motivated and keen to work hard. In many lessons pupils just sit quietly when teaching is less effective. However, inspectors saw examples of some very poor behaviour from a small minority of pupils.
• Most parents say that they get valuable information about their child’s progress from the school. However, pupils say that this is the main way that they learn about how well they are progressing.

Personal development, behaviour and welfare Inadequate

Personal development and welfare

• The school’s work to promote pupils’ personal development and welfare requires improvement.
• Incidents of bullying are few according to school records. Around a third of pupils who responded to the online survey were concerned that bullying is not always dealt with well. Some parents believe that the school does not always deal well with incidents of bullying. However, pupils who met inspectors said that bullying is rare and when it occurs, it is generally dealt with well by teachers. Leaders agree that there is more work to do to help pupils understand what constitutes bullying.
• Pupils say that they feel safe and the majority of their parents agree with this. Through their PSE programme, pupils learn how to keep safe online. Pupils who spoke with inspectors were confident that they knew how to protect themselves online.
• Older pupils say that they are clear about their next steps in education at the end of Year 11. Careers advice is provided and many pupils make the decision to join the sixth form at the school. The school’s information shows that almost all pupils progressed from Year 11 into learning of some kind in 2016 and 2017.

Behaviour

• The behaviour of pupils is inadequate.
• Attendance is consistently too low for all pupils and it is particularly low for disadvantaged pupils. No overall improvement has been seen this year and attendance has declined for disadvantaged pupils from the previous year.
• Rates of persistent absence are very high for all pupils, for disadvantaged pupils and for those who have SEN and/or disabilities. Around a quarter of all Year 11 pupils have been persistently absent during this academic year and the proportions in other year groups are not far behind this.
• Procedures for monitoring attendance are not rigorous enough. They are not applied quickly enough and leaders have failed to change their approach despite limited impact. Systems and approaches are not tight enough, not least given the potential safeguarding concerns that arise from so much absence. Inspectors were not convinced that the school knows enough about the whereabouts of the many pupils who are absent for leaders and governors to be reassured about the safety of these pupils.
• Exclusions are low. Pupils conduct themselves well in many lessons and around the school. Pupils are friendly and polite, opening doors for inspectors. However, in some lessons, pupils’ behaviour is poor, and inspectors saw examples of pupils disrupting learning. When this occurs, it is largely because less-effective teaching means that the needs of pupils are not being met. In these lessons, staff fail to take responsibility for pupils’ behaviour in their classrooms.
• A small number of pupils attend some lessons in other educational settings. Rigorous checks are made by the school to ensure that these pupils attend regularly and make sufficient progress. This is helping these pupils to behave well when they attend lessons in school.

Outcomes for pupils Inadequate

• Outcomes have been very low for all pupils since the school opened. In 2017, outcomes showed no improvement overall from the previous year and pupils underachieved in all the subject areas that had large examination entries.
• From their starting points, progress for all pupils was very low in English, mathematics, science, humanities and modern foreign languages in 2017. It showed no improvement on 2016. This pattern is replicated for the most able, those of average ability, the least able, for boys, disadvantaged pupils and for those pupils who have SEN and/or disabilities.
• Outcomes for disadvantaged pupils have been very low for the past two years, with progress from their starting points in the lowest 10% nationally in 2016 and 2017. Progress was particularly low in English, mathematics, science, humanities and modern foreign languages for these pupils.
• The school’s tracking system shows that outcomes should improve for the current Year 11 pupils in English, mathematics and science, but these are still predicted to be below national averages. The predicted outcomes for modern foreign languages, information and communication technology, art and computer science indicate little, if any, improvement from their low levels in 2017. This is also true for current Year 10 pupils because the teaching is not consistently good enough.
• Although pupils are underachieving in all the main subjects, progress in science is particularly poor. The school’s tracking data indicates that too many pupils are underachieving across key stages 3 and 4.
• Current data provided by the school shows that, overall, boys are making less progress than girls in English, mathematics and science. Progress for disadvantaged pupils is well below that of pupils nationally and these differences are evident across the curriculum.
• Work in pupils’ books supports the picture given by the school’s data. Inspectors did not generally see rapid enough progress in pupils’ books.
• There is some evidence to suggest that pupils in Year 7 are making better progress from their starting points in English and mathematics than in previous years. However, those in Year 8 are not making such strong progress, particularly disadvantaged pupils.
• Pupils who have SEN and/or disabilities achieve less well than other pupils in the school because the additional funding has not been targeted effectively to lead to consistently strong outcomes.
• Although rates of progress were low for the pupils who left Year 11 in 2017, almost all progressed into education or employment with some formal learning.

16 to 19 study programmes Requires improvement

• Over the past two academic years, the students have made below-average progress in their academic subjects. However, progress in work-related subjects improved in 2017 to being above-average and disadvantaged students made broadly average progress overall. Current pupils in Year 13 are making average progress.
• The quality of teaching in the sixth form is too variable across a range of subjects to ensure that students consistently make good progress. Teachers focus their energy on helping students to prepare for examination questions, but planning is not meeting the wider needs of students, particularly in academic subjects.
• Students’ progress has been particularly slow in courses such as biology, English literature and media studies. Leaders are focusing their attention on ensuring that the quality of teaching better meets the students’ needs in these subjects. However, it is too early to see the impact of this.
• Leaders of the sixth form have introduced new systems and undertaken a rigorous analysis of the performance of students. Consequently, the acting leader of the sixth form has an accurate view of the quality of teaching that students receive.
• Students who have not previously achieved passes in GCSE English or mathematics receive close support that enables them to attain these qualifications. Although numbers are small, nearly all of these students, including disadvantaged students, were successful in attaining a GCSE standard pass in the relevant subject.
• Students receive impartial careers advice and guidance that helps them to understand their next steps when they leave the sixth form. Students learn about university courses and work-based training opportunities, including internships. Students on the level 2 pathway receive an entire module dedicated to learning about future career opportunities.
• Students have a range of opportunities to develop their personal, social and employability skills. They undertake work experience and participate in activities outside of their lessons such as Young Enterprise, where they have had considerable success. Such opportunities enable the students to grow in confidence and to develop the knowledge and attitudes that help them to succeed.
• Almost all Year 12 students continue with their studies into Year 13. This is because, prior to joining the sixth form, students receive close support to ensure that they make appropriate subject choices.
• Students learn how to keep safe, including online, and how to live healthy lifestyles through the personal development programme.
• In 2017, almost all students moved on to appropriate places of higher education, employment or training at the end of Year 13.

School details

Unique reference number Local authority Inspection number 141682 Leicestershire 10048186 This inspection of the school was carried out under section 5 of the Education Act 2005. Type of school Secondary School category Age range of pupils Gender of pupils Gender of pupils in 16 to 19 study programmes Academy converter 11 to 19 Mixed Mixed Number of pupils on the school roll 1,258 Of which, number on roll in 16 to 19 study programmes 442 Appropriate authority Board of trustees Chair Principal Telephone number Website Email address Paul Brown Richard Cahill 01455 632183 www.hajc.leics.sch.uk office@hajc.leics.sch.uk Date of previous inspection Not previously inspected

Information about this school

• This is a larger than average-sized secondary school.
• The school started as an academy in September 2015, following the amalgamation of two predecessor schools.
• The school currently uses three alternative providers: Hinckley Partnership, UNeek and Hospital School Leicester.
• The vast majority of pupils are of White British heritage.
• The proportion of disadvantaged pupils is below average.
• The proportion of pupils who have SEN and/or disabilities is well below average.
• The proportion of pupils who have SEN and/or disabilities receiving support through statements of special educational needs or education, health and care plans is below average.
• In 2017 the school did not meet the government’s floor standard, which sets the minimum level for pupils’ progress between Years 7 and 11.

Information about this inspection

• Inspectors visited 47 lessons, 15 of which were seen jointly with senior leaders. Inspectors made short visits to tutor time and an assembly.
• Inspectors observed the behaviour of pupils at break and lunchtime and as pupils moved around the school.
• Inspectors scrutinised, in detail, a range of pupils’ books in a range of subjects.
• Inspectors held a number of meetings with the principal, senior and middle leaders, the chair of the trustees (who is also the chair of the governing body) and other trustees.
• Inspectors spoke with a wide range of pupils from all year groups in meetings, in lessons and around the school at break and lunchtimes.
• The inspection team looked at a wide range of the school’s documentation, including the school’s evaluation of its own performance, the school action plan, data on pupils’ attainment and progress, attendance and behaviour records, safeguarding procedures, evaluations of the quality of teaching and minutes of the governing body meetings.
• Inspectors took account of 84 responses to Ofsted’s online Parent View questionnaire, 77 free-text comments from parents, 51 responses to the online staff questionnaire and 46 responses to the online pupil questionnaire.

Inspection team

Jamie Clarke, lead inspector Jenny Brown Annabel Bolt Jane Burton Ofsted Inspector Ofsted Inspector Ofsted Inspector Ofsted Inspector Deborah Mosley Her Majesty’s Inspector