Lincoln Christ's Hospital School 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?

• Rapidly improve the quality of teaching, learning and assessment by:
  • making sure that teachers use information about pupils’ attainment and progress and have high expectations of what they can achieve in order to provide work that is appropriately challenging
  • developing the quality of teachers’ questioning, so that pupils’ thinking is challenged so that they develop a deeper understanding of the topics that they study.
• Improve the effectiveness of leadership and management by:
  • ensuring that leaders and governors routinely evaluate pupil premium expenditure so that it is spent on activities that improve outcomes for disadvantaged pupils, including the most able
  • developing the skills of middle leaders so that they can improve the quality of teaching in their subjects
  • strengthening the role of governance so that school leaders are effectively supported and held to account
  • strengthening the leadership of post-16 provision and special educational needs and/or disabilities
  • making sure that school leaders closely track and monitor the work that they do to check that their actions are having a positive impact on pupils’ outcomes
  • ensuring that teachers consistently use the school’s assessment policy to give effective feedback to pupils so that they are clear about what they have to do to improve their learning.
• Improve the personal development, behaviour and welfare of pupils by:
  • improving the attendance of disadvantaged pupils and pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities
  • further reducing the number of permanent and fixed-term exclusions to be consistently in line with or below national averages.
• Improve students’ progress in 16 to 19 study programmes so that it is at least good by ensuring that leaders make rigorous checks on the quality of teaching to ensure that it is appropriately challenging. 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 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 Inadequate

• Leaders have not taken the decisive action necessary to secure the improvements identified in the last inspection. As a result, pupils’ progress remains low and GCSE outcomes have not improved sufficiently.
• Leaders have not taken action quickly enough to improve the attainment and progress of pupils. Achievement overall and for groups of pupils, including disadvantaged pupils, has been below national averages in each of the last three years. Leaders are committed to improving the school but their actions have lacked coordination and clarity.
• Leaders have not been quick enough to implement more effective action to improve attendance and reduce the rates of persistent absence, particularly for disadvantaged pupils and pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities. This is also the case for the levels of permanent and fixed-term exclusions which are still too high.
• Weaknesses in teaching are common, including the effectiveness of teachers’ questioning, challenge for the most able pupils and the development of pupils’ writing skills. Leaders have not done enough since the last inspection to improve teaching. The systems to manage the performance of teachers are in place and the range of programmes to support and improve teaching has increased.
• The school has encountered difficulties in recruiting suitably qualified mathematics teachers. This has caused instability in the mathematics department. Pupils and parents have expressed concerns about the number of substitute teachers which has affected pupils’ progress.
• School leaders do not provide sufficient strategic direction for the school. Self-evaluation does not provide a sharp assessment of the school’s strengths and weaknesses. It is too generous in its view of the school’s effectiveness.
• Assessment systems are new and not fully effective. More aspirational targets have been set for pupils but the system to track how well they are progressing towards these targets is not widely or well understood by staff or by pupils themselves.
• Additional funding to accelerate the progress of disadvantaged pupils has not been used effectively. Leaders do not know in sufficient detail the profile and needs of disadvantaged pupils in each year group. Leaders have focused on Year 11 at the expense of pupils in other year groups. There has been little impact.
• Leaders do not ensure that pupils who arrive in Year 7 with standards below national expectations in English and mathematics receive the precise support required to help them catch up, and that additional funding is used effectively. Leaders have not rigorously evaluated the impact of strategies to raise the attainment of these pupils.
• Despite the school’s stated commitment to academic excellence for all pupils, those who have special educational needs and/or disabilities do not achieve well enough. The additional funding for these pupils is not used effectively.
• Feedback to pupils from their teachers is not consistent with the school’s assessment policy.
• Leaders have put in place a curriculum to promote British values and pupils’ spiritual, moral, social and cultural development through personal, social and health education (PHSE) lessons and in assemblies. The school has done much work to develop pupils’ understanding of democracy and the rule of law, including specific timetabled classes in Year 7. Pupils are able to talk about how they would avoid risks, such as those posed by the use of social media. The website’s ‘purple cow’ that has been developed by the pupils to help support each other to stay safe is very positively received.
• The design of the current curriculum provides pupils with breadth and balance and they have the opportunity to participate in a number of extra-curricular activities including language exchanges abroad, choir, learning Mandarin and various sporting opportunities.
• The impact of the external support procured by leaders has had limited effect in terms of school improvement.

Governance

• Governors have been far too slow to challenge the school’s senior leaders to bring about the changes identified at the last inspection. They have not held school leaders to account sufficiently for their actions.
• Governors do not ensure that leaders target additional funding precisely for the most significant priorities or that these result in sustainable improvements. For example, although additional pupil premium funding has been directed at strategies to improve the attendance and reduce exclusions of disadvantaged pupils, rates for both are still above published figures for all pupils nationally.
• Governors are aware that they have aspects to improve and are now more focused on facing the challenges ahead.

Safeguarding

• The arrangements for safeguarding are effective.
• Pupils report that they feel safe at school and that bullying is rare. Pupils learn about a range of strategies to keep themselves safe, both inside and out of school. Parental replies to Ofsted’s online questionnaire, Parent View, for parents, typically agree that their child is happy and safe at school.
• All statutory safeguarding checks meet requirements.
• Staff have up-to-date safeguarding training. The school has clear systems in place to check that pupils are safe, and staff work closely and effectively with a range of outside agencies.

Quality of teaching, learning and assessment Inadequate

• Teaching does not enable all pupils and groups of pupils to make enough progress across a range of subjects.
• Teachers do not use all the information they have about the pupils and the progress pupils make to plan learning that supports and challenges them effectively. When teaching is not pitched accurately, some pupils become bored. Consequently, they lose concentration and their learning slows. Over time, teaching has not been challenging enough.
• Disadvantaged pupils do not make enough progress because teaching does not provide a consistent diet of well-targeted support and challenge that responds to these pupils’ particular needs. At times, teachers set tasks that are too easy. At other times, they do not give pupils enough time to complete the tasks that are set.
• Teachers are not well informed about the particular needs of pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities. The variation in the quality of teaching means that the progress made by this group is too slow.
• Some teachers’ expectations of what pupils can achieve and how they should present their work are too low. As a result, some pupils have very little pride in their work.
• Many pupils are confused about the new assessment system which has recently been introduced. While some pupils can explain how it works, few are able to talk confidently about the target they are aiming for in each subject and how they can improve their work to achieve it.
• When learning is best developed, it is because planning engages and challenges pupils and meets their needs over time. This was evident in geography, history and physical education.
• Teaching is currently better in the sixth form, although not consistently good enough to ensure strong academic outcomes.

Personal development, behaviour and welfare Requires improvement

Personal development and welfare

• The school’s work to promote pupils’ personal development and welfare is good.
• Most pupils feel safe in school and know whom to talk to if they have any concerns.
• Pupils are, in the main, cooperative with one another and their teachers.
• The school has an effective approach to bullying and incidents are rare. Pupils told inspectors that, when it does happen, it is dealt with seriously and swiftly by staff.
• In their day-to-day interactions, pupils show respect and tolerance towards one another. This reflects the school’s work to promote equality and diversity, and fundamental British values.
• Pupils say that they are aware of the rules of safe internet use and are taught to keep themselves safe online through assemblies.
• Pupils are well cared for. Leaders ensure that the school is inclusive and that staff are approachable. This is a strength of the school.
• Pupils attending alternative provision are well catered for and as a consequence are making adequate progress.
• Most pupils wear their uniform with pride. They arrive punctually to lessons and are ready to learn.

Behaviour

• The behaviour of pupils requires improvement.
• The attendance of disadvantaged pupils and those who have special educational needs and/or disabilities is below the national average for all pupils and their levels of absence have been in the highest 10% nationally since 2012. Leaders have not taken decisive action quickly enough and have not placed sufficiently high expectations on these pupils to attend school regularly. Poor attendance affects their outcomes.
• While rates of fixed-term and repeat exclusions have reduced this year, they are still higher than the most recently published national averages. The proportion excluded from vulnerable groups, who are predominantly those who underachieve at the school, is still too high.
• Pupils, and most commonly boys, do not routinely have a positive attitude towards the presentation of their work. The quality of work can vary.
• A small number of pupils attend a local alternative provider of education. Leaders maintain regular contact with this provision to ensure that pupils make progress, behave well and attend regularly.
• Overall attendance is improving according to the school’s own information and is now in line with the national average for all pupils.
• Pupils’ behaviour in lessons is generally good, although there are incidents of minor misconduct where pupils are not given work which interests and motivates them.
• The overwhelming majority of pupils behave sensibly during social times and are polite and courteous to others.

Outcomes for pupils Inadequate

• Outcomes are inadequate. Pupils make weak progress over time.
• In 2015 and again in 2016, outcomes for pupils in a wide range of subjects were significantly below the national average.
• Pupils enter the school with attainment that is just below the national average. When pupils left at the end of 2016, their attainment across a range of subjects was below the national average. As a consequence, too few pupils were prepared well for their next steps in education or training.
• Pupils’ progress overall was low in 2016. It was in the bottom 10% of schools nationally for the disadvantaged, middle- and low-ability pupils. Leaders have not ensured that pupil premium spending has had an impact on the progress disadvantaged pupils make. They do not routinely check the links between funded initiatives and pupils’ outcomes. Consequently, progress over time for this group has been inadequate and continues to be so.
• The most able pupils, including those who are disadvantaged, like their peers, underachieve over time. This is because teachers do not plan to meet their needs. The most able pupils do not achieve the highest grades of which they are capable.
• Progress in English and mathematics was in the bottom 10% of schools nationally.
• The progress of pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities at the end of Year 11 in 2016 was weak and in the bottom 10% of schools nationally, because their needs are not being met.
• Inspectors carried out an extensive review of pupils’ work across year groups and subjects. In addition, a focused scrutiny of work was carried out with school leaders, including with middle leaders. The quality of work seen and teaching observed was variable across and within subjects. Inspectors found that progress made by current pupils was not adequate overall.
• Published information shows that boys, particularly those of middle and low ability, made weak progress in 2016. Boys’ underachievement is also apparent for current pupils. Boys’ work is often poorly presented, with limited evidence of sustained writing, which is critical to securing strong progress in some subjects.
• Pupils are not making the progress they are capable of across the curriculum because teachers’ expectations of them are too low. Pupils’ ability to express their knowledge and understanding varies greatly across the school.
• Pupils’ achievement in religious education is a strength. Teachers have high expectations of what pupils can achieve, and plan lessons effectively to allow all pupils to make good progress.

16 to 19 study programmes Inadequate

• The effectiveness of the sixth form is inadequate because of poor leadership. In too many instances, students’ progress has declined in both A level and AS level in the past three years.
• Attendance in the sixth form is too low.
• Leaders do not have a clear understanding of how students are doing. They are not confident that students are on track to make the progress expected from their starting points.
• Leaders do not monitor the quality of teaching and learning in the sixth form rigorously enough. The quality of teaching and the quality of students’ work across different subject areas is too inconsistent.
• Leaders do not have an accurate view of what impact the school’s various intervention strategies are having on students’ outcomes.
• The progress of middle- and high-ability disadvantaged students is a weakness.
• Students are not well supported to resit examinations at GCSE, in English and mathematics, to improve their grades to C or above in the sixth form.
• There are pockets of stronger teaching in the sixth form but not all teachers provide students with sufficient challenge in lessons or ensure that learning is appropriate to students’ prior attainment. This limits the progress that students make.
• Careers guidance in the sixth form is a strength. Students benefit from impartial careers advice and as a consequence they are better prepared for the next stage of their education.
• Students are positive about the experience they have in the sixth form and the opportunities that it provides, including coaching, listening to pupils read and supporting younger pupils out of lessons.
• Students behave responsibly, say that they feel safe and provide strong role models to younger pupils in the school.
• The sixth form meets the 16 to 19 minimum standards.



School details

Unique reference number Local authority Inspection number 137447 Lincolnshire 10031302 This inspection was carried out under section 8 of the Education Act 2005. The inspection was also deemed a section 5 inspection under the same Act. 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 18 Mixed Mixed Number of pupils on the school roll 1,321 Of which, number on roll in 16 to 19 study programmes 291 Appropriate authority The governing body Chair Headteacher Mrs Kate Wilson Mr Martin McKeown Telephone number 01522 881 144 Website Email address www.christs-hospital.lincs.sch.uk education@christs-hospital.lincs.sch.uk Date of previous inspection 25 26 June 2013

Information about this school

• The school is a larger than average-sized secondary school with a sixth form.
• Lincoln Christ’s Hospital School opened in September 2011 and is a single-academy trust.
• The headteacher has been in post since September 2014.
• The large majority of pupils are White British, with a lower than average proportion from minority ethnic backgrounds. The proportion who speak English as an additional language is below the national average.
• The proportion of pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities is above average.
• The proportion of pupils supported by the pupil premium is above average.
• The school has a very small number of pupils in alternative provision.
• The school meets requirements on the publication of specified information on its website.
• The school complies with the Department for Education guidance on what academies should publish.
• The school does not meet the government’s current floor standards, which are the minimum expectations for pupils’ attainment and progress in English and mathematics by the end of Year 11.



Information about this inspection

• Inspectors observed lessons, some jointly with members of the senior leadership team. Inspectors also undertook learning walks, one of which was with the headteacher, in which part-lessons were observed. Other activities included inspectors observing tutor group periods, visiting assemblies and listening to pupils read.
• Inspectors looked at pupils’ work in lessons and scrutinised a sample of work from a range of subjects.
• Inspectors observed pupils’ behaviour at break and lunchtime, between lessons and around the school site.
• Inspectors held meetings with the headteacher, members of the senior leadership team, middle leaders and newly qualified teachers.
• An inspector interviewed a representative of the local authority by telephone.
• The lead inspector met with representatives of the governing body.
• Meetings were held with groups of pupils including sixth formers to discuss their views of the school. A number of other pupils were spoken to informally around the school.
• There were 136 responses to Parent View, 121 responses to the free-text section within this, 66 responses to the online staff questionnaire and a letter from a parent. These views were all considered. There were no responses to the pupil questionnaire.
• Inspectors reviewed the single central record, safeguarding records, and associated policies and procedures including checks on the suitability of staff.
• Inspectors also considered a range of school documentation including safeguarding information, the self-review and development plan, school pupil tracking data, the school’s analysis of the quality of teaching minutes of governors’ meetings, behaviour and attendance records, and appraisal targets.

Inspection team

Ashfaq Rahman, lead inspector Dick Vasey Tim Croft Lynn Cox Kathryn Hardy Christopher Davies Jayne Ashman

Ofsted Inspector Ofsted Inspector Ofsted Inspector Ofsted Inspector Ofsted Inspector Ofsted Inspector Her Majesty’s Inspector