Skegness Academy 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?

• Improve the quality of leadership by:

ensuring that all leaders have the skills required to play an effective role in accelerating school improvement ensuring that the use of the pupil premium funding is monitored efficiently and that it addresses the barriers to learning experienced by all eligible pupils ensuring that the use of the Year 7 literacy and numeracy catch-up funding is monitored efficiently and that it helps all eligible pupils to catch up with their peers ensuring that the use of the funding to support pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities is monitored efficiently and that it supports the learning needs of these pupils effectively ensuring that the curriculum prepares pupils for their next stage in their education ensuring that those responsible for governance have effective oversight of the impact of external government funding, including the pupil premium ensuring that those responsible for governance have effective oversight and hold leaders to account to ensure that the school improves rapidly ensuring that those responsible for governance continue to secure high-quality, intensive external support for the school and that this support is monitored closely to ensure that it has impact for pupils.

• Improve the quality of teaching, learning and assessment by:

eradicating the inconsistencies in teaching quality ensuring that pupils’ literacy and numeracy needs are met.

• Improve the personal development, behaviour and welfare of the pupils by:

ensuring that an effective behaviour policy is in place, is well understood by all staff and is applied consistently eradicating the incidents of poor behaviour, particularly in lessons reducing the number of pupils excluded from school ensuring that all pupils and groups of pupils attend school at rates similar to national averages, particularly disadvantaged pupils and pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities.

• Improve outcomes for pupils by ensuring that:

pupils’ attainment and progress at key stage 3 and key stage 4 improve dramatically

pupils in the current Year 9 receive intensive support, in order that they have the skills required to study at key stage 4 disadvantaged pupils achieve as well as other pupils with the same starting points pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities make the progress that their starting points indicate they should the high proportion of pupils who enter school with attainment that is significantly below the national average are supported effectively to develop the literacy and numeracy skills needed to catch up the most able pupils, including the most able disadvantaged pupils, make the progress that they should.

• Improve 16 to 19 provision by ensuring that:

the variability in the quality of teaching, learning and assessment is addressed students attend more regularly students are helped to catch up, so that they achieve as well as their starting points would indicate that they should students receive intensive support, in order to develop the skills required for studying at this level. Ofsted recommends that an external review of governance is carried out, in order to improve this aspect of the school. Ofsted recommends that an external review of the school’s use of the pupil premium funding is carried out, in order to improve this aspect of the school.

Inspection judgements

Effectiveness of leadership and management Inadequate

• Standards at the school have declined since the previous inspection. The Greenwood Dale Foundation Trust has overseen this decline.
• The school’s academy sponsorship was due to be re-brokered and to move from the Greenwood Dale Foundation Trust to another sponsor. The re-brokering did not happen. The uncertainty caused by this process caused turbulence for the lead principal, who is new to the post, to manage.
• Since the previous inspection, there have been several senior leadership changes, including at principal level. It is difficult to recruit to this area of the country; however, the many leadership changes have impacted negatively on pupils.
• The recently appointed lead principal has brought much-needed stability. She has put in place strategies to improve the school. The strategies are at an early stage of implementation.
• The management of attendance is inadequate. Far too many pupils are regularly absent from school. The school’s efforts to ensure that effective systems are in place to improve pupils’ attendance have been too recent.
• The management of pupils’ behaviour is inadequate. The behaviour policy is not working because staff do not follow it consistently. Recently, the number of pupils excluded from the school for fixed periods of time has reduced, but leaders still exclude too many pupils.
• The school curriculum does not meet the needs of all pupils. The changes made to the key stage 4 curriculum have been too recent to ensure that pupils in the current Year 11 achieve as they should.
• Pupils at key stage 3 have not accessed a curriculum that prepares them well for the next stage in their education. Many have not had sufficient opportunities to develop their literacy and numeracy skills.
• The management of the pupil premium funding is inadequate. The pupil premium strategy is too vague and does not ensure that the funding is making enough difference for eligible pupils.
• Disadvantaged pupils underachieve. They do not attend school regularly enough. They are more likely than other pupils are to be excluded from the school.
• The external review of pupil premium spending, conducted by the trust, has had limited impact.
• The pupils entitled to Year 7 literacy and numeracy catch-up funding have been let down. The school’s use of the funds has not supported pupils to develop the literacy and numeracy skills that they need to access the next stage in their learning.
• The external funding to support pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities has not had the impact needed. These pupils have, until extremely recently, received inadequate support.
• The quality of teaching, learning and assessment varies extensively and contributes to a legacy of pupils’ underachievement. The leader of teaching and learning is new to post. He has identified the correct issues.
• A full range of activities takes place to provide pupils with opportunities to develop a broad understanding of the world around them, including visits from external speakers and trips outside school. A new leader is now in place to ensure that pupils’ spiritual, moral, social and cultural development is provided for well. Leaders are aware that not enough is done to develop pupils’ understanding of different cultures and faiths.
• The arrangements for managing the performance of staff are fit for purpose. Staff are clear about improvement priorities and their role in achieving these.
• Recently, staff have accessed a range of professional development opportunities that they have appreciated. The opportunities include working with trust consultants to improve the quality and accuracy of assessments and to sharpen their practice at subject level.
• More action is being taken by leaders to begin to improve the quality of teaching at subject level. The leaders carry out regular checks to find out if pupils are on track. Subject leadership within the school is developing. These leaders are keen to take responsibility for the progress that pupils make within their subject.
• The special educational needs coordinator, recently appointed, has already made a big difference. She has correctly identified what is required and has swiftly addressed many of the critical actions needed. She has received good support from the trust consultant.
• The leader of the sixth form has begun to support school improvement.
• Ofsted recommends that the school should not appoint newly qualified teachers.

Governance of the school

• Those responsible for governance have overseen a decline in the standard of education for pupils.
• They have not ensured that external funding to the school effectively addresses the barriers to learning for eligible pupils, particularly disadvantaged pupils and pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities.
• Recently, they have ensured that leaders and teachers receive intensive training and support from trust consultants and staff. Much of this support has had positive impact.

Safeguarding

• The arrangements for safeguarding are effective.
• The designated safeguarding lead, who is very new to the role, knows the pupils well and has shown great commitment to ensure that the support for the most vulnerable pupils is effective. She has received good support from the trust consultant.
• Those staff spoken with had a good understanding of the school safeguarding procedures and policy. Safeguarding training is in place and is effective. Teachers are clear about how to make appropriate referrals and have a good understanding of the ways in which pupils may be at risk.
• Staff records are appropriate and meet the most recent requirements. Recruitment processes are managed well by the trust.
• Pupils learn in lessons and in school assemblies about how to keep safe. Experts come to the school, for example the local police, to inform pupils and ensure that they have good information. Pupils know how to keep safe when using computers and about the dangers of issues such as ‘sexting’ when using their mobile phones. They are less aware of the risks of radicalisation.
• Pupils said that bullying is rare. They said that, if it happens, staff deal with it quickly and effectively.

Quality of teaching, learning and assessment Inadequate

• In many lessons, pupils do not learn because of the highly disruptive behaviour of some in the class. Too often, the classroom teacher has to deal with this disruption at the expense of helping others to make progress in their lessons. Pupils told inspectors, ‘The focus of teachers is on the pupils that are naughty or do not want to learn. We would like the focus to be on those who behave well and want to learn.’
• A high proportion of pupils have poor literacy skills. Many have reading abilities below their chronological age. Inspectors saw little evidence that teachers’ planning took this into consideration. Evidence was seen in a range of subjects, including in English, of pupils who were unable to complete an activity set by their teacher because the language was too difficult for them to understand.
• Too few most-able pupils have their needs met within lessons. They do not have sufficient opportunities to deepen their knowledge and to test their understanding. Too few have opportunities regularly enough to develop their thinking, or to provide a thorough response through extended writing.
• The quality of teaching, learning and assessment is too variable across subject areas and within subject areas. In English, mathematics, humanities, science, and modern foreign languages, too many pupils, including the most able, disadvantaged pupils and pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities, fail to make the progress they should because of weak teaching.
• Teachers do not always expect enough of their pupils. Work in the pupils’ books is often incomplete and pupils produce work without care. Inspectors saw particularly low expectations of disadvantaged pupils in English and in the work of pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities in a range of subjects.
• Pupils are ill-prepared for the next stage in their education. For example, the key stage 3 curriculum is not effective in ensuring that pupils have the literacy and numeracy skills required to access learning at key stage 4.
• Too many pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities have failed to have their needs met within lessons. They have not made the progress that they could. Very recently, appropriate support has begun to improve this provision.
• Pupils within alternative provision receive good support and are often making progress.
• When learning is most effective, teachers pitch learning activities appropriately. To do this, they use good subject knowledge and their understanding of pupils’ starting points. Consequently, pupils achieve and enjoy acquiring knowledge and skills. Inspectors saw more evidence of this in the sixth form than in the main school.
• In the more effective lessons, teachers managed pupils’ behaviour well.
• Additional adults in the classrooms help pupils to make accelerated progress. Inspectors observed a good example of this in an English lesson, when lower-attaining pupils were fully engaged in learning and making good progress because of effective support.

Personal development, behaviour and welfare Inadequate

Personal development and welfare

• The school’s work to promote pupils’ personal development and welfare is inadequate.
• Pupils do not gain sufficient opportunity to become self-confident and successful learners. They said that they felt frustrated not to be able to learn.
• Many of the pupils have complex needs. Numerous staff, including family support workers, behaviour support workers and the school’s education welfare officer, work diligently with pupils and their families to ensure they are safe. Nevertheless, too many pupils are still excluded from school, or fail to attend.
• Pupils are capable of great maturity, consideration and respect. During the one minute’s silence to mark the terrorist attack in Manchester, pupils’ behaviour and conduct was impressive.

Behaviour

• The behaviour of pupils is inadequate. The school’s behaviour policy is ineffective. Staff do not apply the policy in a consistent manner.
• Too often, pupils’ poor behaviour disrupts the learning of others. Pupils said that some of their teachers did not deal effectively with unruly behaviour. Consequently, week after week, lesson after lesson, pupils expect their learning to be hindered.
• Pupils’ behaviour is particularly poor in certain curriculum areas. Inspectors observed repeated occasions of poor, disruptive and defiant behaviour in science and in mathematics.
• The members of staff who responded to the inspection questionnaire indicated that they had little belief that leaders managed pupils’ behaviour effectively.
• The proportion of pupils excluded from school remains high. Too many pupils miss their learning due to their poor conduct. Recently, the proportion of fixed-term pupil exclusions has reduced.
• A disproportionate number of disadvantaged pupils are excluded from school.
• Pupils’ attendance is too low. Far too many pupils regularly miss school. Too many of the disadvantaged pupils and pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities fail to attend school.
• The pupil premium funding allocated to improve the attendance of eligible pupils is having limited impact. Many more disadvantaged pupils than other pupils nationally are regularly absent from school.
• The systems to ensure that pupils attend school are ineffective. The school-based education welfare officer is effective in her work with individual pupils and their families. She is let down by poor leadership and by ineffective management systems.
• Pupils look extremely smart in their uniforms.
• Inspectors observed pupils entering the GCSE examinations in a sensible manner. They followed instructions, entered quietly and clearly took this important event seriously.
• The lead principal’s actions to improve the learning environment and to encourage pupils to take pride in their school are starting to work.

Outcomes for pupils Inadequate

• In 2016, all pupils, including disadvantaged pupils, underachieved significantly and were in the bottom 10% of all schools nationally in English at the end of key stage 4. They underachieved significantly in mathematics.
• Disadvantaged pupils, who make up a large proportion of the pupils, fail to make the progress that they should and do not achieve as well as others do within school and when compared to other pupils nationally.
• The proportion of pupils who attained a good GCSE grade in English and mathematics at the end of key stage 4 in 2016 was well below the national average.
• Also in 2016, too many of the most able pupils failed to achieve the grades at GCSE of which their starting points would indicate they were capable.
• Leaders’ information suggests that pupils within the current Year 11 will underachieve at the end of key stage 4 in too many of the subjects that they study, including in English, mathematics, modern foreign languages and humanities. The school’s predictions suggest that many pupils will fail to make the progress of which they are capable, including the most able pupils, disadvantaged pupils and pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities.
• Pupils in Year 9 are not prepared for the next stage in their education. The progress of some of these pupils is slowed because they do not have the literacy and numeracy skills needed.
• Although pupils are making progress within Year 7 and Year 8, for some pupils, this is not enough. Some lower-attaining pupils do not have their progress increased sufficiently to enable them to catch up with their peers.
• The very recent reading, writing and social engagement support, which is now in place for a number of pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities, is having a positive impact for these pupils.
• Leaders have more confidence in the accuracy of teacher assessment. Teachers have received training, external support and have been involved in moderation activities in order to improve the accuracy of their assessment of pupils’ examination work.
• Leaders have ensured that pupils attend a range of workshops to prepare for their examinations. During the inspection, a well-attended mathematics workshop took place. Pupils appreciated the help that they received from their teachers and also the pizza provided as a treat.

16 to 19 study programmes

Requires improvement

• Too few of the students make accelerated progress to enable them to achieve at the levels of which they are capable. A significant proportion of students enter the sixth form having underachieved at key stage 4. Many students enter the sixth form ill-prepared for studying at the levels demanded of 16 to 19 study programmes. They often lack the scholastic skills required to study at this higher level, for example the skill to evaluate a text effectively.
• The progress of disadvantaged students is less strong in the academic subjects than the progress of other students.
• The quality of teaching, learning and assessment within the sixth form is inconsistent.
• The learning is least effective when teachers do not take sufficient opportunities to deepen students’ knowledge. Subsequently, the students do not achieve the higher grades of which they are capable.
• In 2016, the proportion of students gaining a good GCSE grade after resitting the GCSE examination in English was low and below the national level.
• The students’ attendance within the sixth form remains too low. There are many local issues, including the seasonal nature of local employment, that impact negatively on students’ attendance.
• Retention rates are low in Year 12 but are improving.
• Retention rates are better in Year 13. Where students leave the sixth form, the head of sixth form provides close support to ensure that they move to appropriate places of study, employment or training.
• The leader of the sixth form has an accurate understanding of the quality of the provision. She monitors the achievement of the students and the quality of teaching closely.
• The leader of the sixth form provides appropriate challenge when she identifies classroom practice which does not ensure that students make sufficient progress. As a result, the quality of teaching and students’ achievement across a range of subjects, both academic and work related, are improving, though the quality of both is not currently good.
• Leaders’ information indicates improved attainment in academic subjects. Students are not, however, progressing well enough to suggest that their achievement at the very highest grades remains other than low.
• The 16 to 19 provision meets all aspects of the study programme.
• In 2016, students’ progress within the academic subjects was broadly in line with the national average.
• Progress was significantly above the national average for vocational subjects.
• In 2016, there were no students who were not in employment, education or training once they had left the school. Students take advantage of regular opportunities to receive independent careers advice and guidance. They have access to a wide range of activities to inform them of next steps in further education, employment or training.
• In 2016, a significantly higher than the national proportion of students who resat the GCSE mathematics examination gained a good GCSE pass.
• Where learning is effective, the teacher provides close support to students, clarifying misconceptions and ensuring that they are secure in their understanding. Inspectors observed this in a mathematics lesson.
• Students undertake appropriate work experience placements in Year 12. Leaders ensure that the placements are suited to students’ career aspirations, or planned ‘next steps’. Leaders take action to review the effectiveness of the placements that the students have undertaken and make changes to the programme, where appropriate.
• Students learn how to be safe and how to lead healthy lives through their enrichment lessons. Students told inspectors that they feel safe and that they have a selection of adults whom they could approach if they have anxieties or problems. They said that they are confident that staff will listen to them and that the staff will work determinedly to resolve any of their concerns.
• Students spoke extremely highly of the care and support they received from the head of the sixth form. One student said, ‘She is sensitive of our needs and provides good support.’

School details

Unique reference number Local authority Inspection number 136217 Lincolnshire 10021352 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 Academy sponsor-led Age range of pupils 11 to 19 Gender of pupils Gender of pupils in 16 to 19 study programmes Number of pupils on the school roll Of which, number on roll in 16 to 19 study programmes Mixed Mixed 1134 265 Appropriate authority Academy trust Chair Principal Telephone number Website Email address Mike Hamlin Jo Edwards 01754 879122 www.skegnessacademy.org jedwards@skegnessacademy.org Date of previous inspection April 2012

Information about this school

• The information on the school’s website meets current statutory requirements.
• The school complies with Department for Education guidance on what academies should publish on their websites.
• The school is much larger than the average-sized secondary school.
• The school is an academy, sponsored by the Greenwood Dale Foundation Trust.
• Over half of the pupils who attend the school are supported by the pupil premium. This is well above the national average.
• The proportion of pupils from minority ethnic backgrounds is much lower than that found nationally. The vast majority of pupils are from White British backgrounds.
• The proportion of pupils who speak English as an additional language is well below average.
• The proportion of pupils identified to receive support for their special educational needs and/or disabilities is high.
• The proportion of pupils with a statement of special educational needs or an education, health and care plan is above the national average.
• A small number of pupils attend alternative provision provided by Acorn and Build a Future.
• The school did not meet the government floor standards, which set the minimum expectations for pupils’ achievement, in 2014, 2015 and 2016.
• The school meets the Department for Education’s definition of a coasting school, based on key stage 4 academic performance results in 2014, 2015 and 2016.

Information about this inspection

• Inspectors observed 37 lessons, some jointly with senior school leaders. Lessons in key stage 3, key stage 4, and in the sixth form were seen.
• Inspectors looked at the work in pupils’ books within lessons. Additionally, a sample of mathematics and English work was scrutinised.
• The lead inspector held a range of meetings with the lead principal and other senior leaders. Meetings took place with the chief executive officer of the Greenwood Dale Foundation Trust and other trust representatives.
• Inspectors held meetings with the senior leaders with oversight of the sixth form, attendance, behaviour, pupils’ achievement, the curriculum, and teaching, learning and assessment. Meetings also took place with the special educational needs coordinator, the senior leader with oversight of pupils’ safeguarding, and the representatives of the trust who support their work.
• An inspector conducted a health and safety walk around the school site.
• Inspectors spoke formally with groups of pupils from key stages 3 and 4 and the sixth form.
• An inspector spoke with representatives from Acorn and Build a Future. These organisations provide alternative provision for a small number of pupils.
• Inspectors observed pupils arriving at the school. They observed pupils’ behaviour in lessons, between lessons and during breaktime and lunchtime.
• Inspectors reviewed a range of documentation relating to the school, including the school’s development plan and self-evaluation, performance information for all year groups, and records on behaviour, attendance, exclusions, and pupils’ safety and welfare. Documentation relating to pupil premium and Year 7 catch-up spending, and the provision for these pupils was scrutinised, as was information regarding pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities.
• Inspectors reviewed information about teachers’ performance. The academy performance information, which is shared at the trust standards committee and then with the trust board, was seen.
• An inspector conducted a thorough review of the curriculum for key stage 3 and key stage 4 pupils.
• Inspectors considered the 22 responses to the Ofsted online questionnaire, Parent View. They also considered the 23 responses from members of the school staff to the inspection questionnaire.
• Inspectors observed the work of leaders and teachers to promote the spiritual, moral, social and cultural development of pupils within the school.

Inspection team

Jayne Ashman, lead inspector Simon Hollingsworth Tim Croft Phil Drabble Jo Ward Jason Howard Her Majesty’s Inspector Her Majesty’s Inspector Ofsted Inspector Ofsted Inspector Ofsted Inspector Ofsted Inspector