The Peele Community College 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?

• Ensure that strong senior leadership is in place and that leaders have the required skills, knowledge and expertise to improve the school effectively and at the pace that is needed and that pupils deserve.
• Ensure that the use of the funding intended for those pupils who are disadvantaged or pupils with SEND has a positive impact on the attendance and achievement of these pupils.
• Improve the quality of teaching and thereby pupils’ outcomes, particularly those of boys, disadvantaged pupils, pupils with SEND and the most able, by ensuring that all teachers:
  • appropriately plan learning to meet pupils’ needs effectively
  • consistently follow the agreed marking and feedback policy
  • ensure that the gaps in pupils’ knowledge, understanding and skills are identified and then promptly addressed
  • ensure that pupils receive appropriate challenge and make the progress of which they are capable.
• Improve pupils’ personal development, behaviour and welfare, by ensuring that:
  • an effective behaviour policy is in place and followed consistently by all staff
  • in-school ‘remove’ is used wisely and does not lead to a loss of learning time for pupils
  • pupils’ absence, persistent absence and temporary exclusions, particularly of disadvantaged pupils, boys and pupils with SEND, are reduced.

Inspection judgements

Effectiveness of leadership and management Inadequate

• Senior leaders have failed to improve the school. Pupils’ outcomes, attendance and exclusions have worsened under their leadership.
• Leaders have an accurate view of aspects of the provision. They recognise that the quality of teaching, learning and assessment and pupils’ outcomes are inadequate. However, their plans for improvement lack the necessary urgency, focus and precision. Actions to improve the school have been implemented too recently or have had limited impact.
• Leaders have failed to ensure that external funding to support disadvantaged pupils and pupils with SEND helps them to succeed at school. These groups of pupils make significantly poor progress in all year groups. They fail to attend school regularly. They are too often excluded from school.
• The curriculum does not prepare pupils for the next stage in their learning. By the end of key stage 3 in Year 8, they do not reach the standards needed to be well prepared for study at key stage 4. Some key stage 4 pupils, including the most able, do not study an appropriate range of subjects, at the appropriate depth, to ensure that they achieve their potential.
• Leaders have successfully appointed subject specialists to the school, including subject leaders. These leaders, particularly the leaders for special educational needs, English and teaching and learning, have great enthusiasm for the school and an ambition to improve pupils’ achievement. However, these developing leaders do not receive the strategic, senior line management or the support they require or deserve.
• Leaders have ensured more regular professional development opportunities for all staff. Teachers share good practice in school and with teachers in partner schools. These opportunities are welcomed, but too little is done to make sure that this training has a positive impact on improving the quality of teaching overall. Although there are pockets of stronger practice, the quality of teaching, learning and assessment is inadequate.
• Leaders are beginning to use additional catch-up funding more effectively to support pupils who have previously fallen behind with their literacy and numeracy skills.
• The new leader for spiritual, moral, social and cultural education is successfully ensuring an appropriate programme. Pupils benefit from a wide variety of opportunities to develop their awareness, understanding and appreciation of life in modern Britain. Inspectors observed an inspiring assembly on the theme of ‘child soldiers’. Pupils said that this helped them appreciate how lucky they are to live in a democracy and to have the right to an education.
• Following a period of turbulence and extreme staffing difficulty, the headteacher has now ensured a stable and skilled staff. However, this process took too much energy and time away from the school’s overall improvement.
• Senior leaders, particularly the headteacher, have received poor support and challenge from the local authority. This has improved markedly very recently.
• The process to convert the school to an academy has been protracted. This has had a negative impact on the school’s improvement.
• It is recommended that the school should not appoint newly qualified teachers (NQTs).

Governance of the school

• Governors have not provided sufficient challenge to ensure that leaders plan strategically to bring about rapid and sustained school improvement.

• Governors have not held leaders rigorously to account to ensure that the additional funding for disadvantaged pupils and pupils with SEND has a positive impact on these pupils.

• An external review of governance has been commissioned. Governors are rightly acting on the findings of this process.

• Governance, under the leadership of the new chair of governors, is improving. A core group of members of the governing body are skilled, know the school well and are determined to ensure improvement. The chair of governors recognises that not all members of the current governing body show the same commitment or skill. He is keen to address this.

• The chair of the governing body, relatively new to the role, provides strong strategic support to the school. Under difficult circumstances, his actions have aided the school’s future, including changes to the membership of the governing body, an improved staffing structure and competent financial planning.

Safeguarding

• The arrangements for safeguarding are effective.
• Leaders ensure that appropriate action is taken when any concerns arise. They maintain appropriate records of their concerns and involve external agencies when required.
• Leaders make sure that staff are trained so that they can identify risks to pupils, including risks from child sexual exploitation, issues related to the ‘Prevent’ duty and peer-on-peer abuse. Teachers were able to describe to inspectors the actions they would take if they were worried that a pupil was at risk or if a pupil disclosed an issue to them. Referral processes are well understood.
• Leaders have secure pupil safeguarding records. However, there are occasions when recruitment records are not comprehensive.

Quality of teaching, learning and assessment Inadequate

• Teachers’ expectations of what pupils can achieve are too low. Teachers do not routinely plan learning that effectively meets pupils’ learning needs. Learning is too easy for some and far too challenging for others. This often leads to pupils’ off-task and distracted behaviour, particularly pupils with SEND and the most able.

• Pupils have experienced a legacy of poor teaching, leaving significant gaps in their learning. Plans to support those who have fallen behind are not sharply enough focused, implemented or monitored. Too many pupils are not catching up and are not making sufficient progress.
• Teachers fail to apply the school’s marking and feedback policies. Pupils are not receiving the guidance from teachers that they could. They continue with misconceptions or repeated errors, including in spelling and punctuation.
• Careless work is unchallenged by some teachers. Some pupils do not have suitable notes from which to learn or revise. Often, pupils’ work is disorganised and inaccurate. Too regularly, worksheets are loose and badly stored. Work remains unfinished.
• The quality of teaching, learning and assessment across different subjects is inconsistent at best, and often poor. Pupils do not make progress as they should across a range of subjects, including English, mathematics and science.
• There are some pockets of stronger practice in the school. When this is the case, teachers have good subject knowledge and use this well to plan pupils’ progress. They provide clear explanations and have high expectations of pupils’ capabilities. They demand high-quality work and motivate and enthuse pupils, who thrive in these lessons. Inspectors observed middle leaders exhibiting strong practice in science and English. Unfortunately, this level of practice is too infrequent.

Personal development, behaviour and welfare Inadequate

Personal development and welfare

• The school’s work to promote pupils’ personal development and welfare is inadequate.
• Many pupils do not have confidence or self-belief that they can achieve or be successful learners.
• Leaders provide pupils with a detailed and comprehensive programme of independent careers advice and guidance. Pupils participate in meaningful work experience and associated activities. However, pupils’ options when they leave Year 11 are restricted because they underachieve at key stage 4.
• Pupils, staff, and parents and carers agree that incidents of bullying are rare and if they do occur, they are dealt with promptly and effectively.
• Pupils take pride in their appearance. They are smart and, in this regard, are a credit to their school.

Behaviour

• The behaviour of pupils is inadequate.
• The whole-school behaviour policy is ineffective. It is inconsistently applied by teachers. Some teachers’ expectations of pupils’ behaviour and conduct in lessons are far too low. At times, pupils fail to fully engage in their learning. They are often off task, achieve very little and can be defiant.
• Pupils’ attendance has been below national averages for too long. Leaders’ information indicates that pupils’ attendance is still not improving. The attendance of disadvantaged pupils and pupils with SEND is particularly poor.
• The proportion of pupils who are routinely absent is above national averages. The most vulnerable pupils, including disadvantaged pupils and pupils with SEND, are more likely than others to be persistently absent.
• Published information for 2016 and 2017 indicates that the percentage of pupils who are excluded from school for a fixed period or for more than one fixed period is much higher than the national average. The proportion of pupils who are excluded is too high and is rising.
• The internal exclusion room is over used. The reasons teachers select to exclude or ‘remove’ pupils from lessons to be placed in this facility are too inconsistent. Many pupils are regularly ‘removed’. Too much learning time is lost.
• Many pupils are polite, well mannered, friendly and approachable young people. When learning is appropriately pitched, their behaviour is well managed and when they are treated with respect, they thrive.

Outcomes for pupils Inadequate

• For far too long, disadvantaged pupils and pupils with SEND have made inadequate progress across a wide range of subjects, including English and mathematics. This was particularly so in 2017 and 2018. Boys and the most able pupils underachieve considerably.
• Pupils’ progress is not improving. All pupils, but particularly disadvantaged pupils, pupils with SEND, boys and the most able, continue to underachieve significantly in all year groups. Considerable underachievement is evident across different subjects, including in English, science and mathematics.
• In 2018, pupils’ outcomes were worse than in previous years. Pupils’ attainment across the eight subjects studied was significantly lower than the average and in the bottom 10% of all schools nationally.
• In 2018, all pupils’ progress was significantly lower than the national average. Pupils made significantly poor progress in a range of subjects including English, science and humanities.
• Scrutiny of Year 8 pupils’ work, observations of learning and a review of assessments indicate that pupils at the end of key stage 3 are not prepared well for GCSE study in Year 9.
• The vast majority of Year 11 pupils who left school in 2018 secured education, employment or training. However, some pupils will not have accessed courses at the levels at which they should, because they underachieved at the end of key stage 4.

School details

Unique reference number Local authority Inspection number 120645 Lincolnshire 10057660 This inspection of the school was carried out under section 5 of the Education Act 2005. Type of school Secondary comprehensive School category Age range of pupils Gender of pupils Maintained 11 to 16 Mixed Number of pupils on the school roll 624 Appropriate authority The governing body Chair Headteacher Telephone number Website Email address Andrew Everard Jane Moody 01406 362120 www.peele.lincs.sch.uk enquires@peele.lincs.sch.uk Date of previous inspection 11 July 2017

Information about this school

• The school is a smaller than the average-sized secondary comprehensive school.
• The proportion of disadvantaged pupils is higher than the national average.
• Most pupils are of White British heritage.
• The proportion of pupils with SEND is higher than the national average.
• The school does not use alternative providers.

Information about this inspection

• Inspectors observed learning in 25 lessons, across a range of subjects in key stages 3 and 4. Several lessons were observed jointly with leaders. Additionally, series of lessons were jointly observed with the teaching and learning lead. Inspectors attended an assembly.
• Inspectors looked at pupils’ work in lessons and samples of the work in the books of pupils in Years 8, 10 and 11.
• Inspectors held a range of meetings, including with the headteacher, senior and middle leaders, the inclusion manager, special educational needs coordinator, head of house, lead for careers information and guidance, and other staff within the school. The lead inspector spoke with governors, including the chair of the governing body.
• The lead inspector spoke with a representative of the local authority and the principal of a local secondary school that is currently providing informal school-to-school support.
• Inspectors observed pupils’ behaviour during lessons, before school and during breaktimes and lunchtimes.
• Inspectors spoke formally with pupils in key stages 3 and 4. Inspectors also spoke with pupils more informally in lessons and at breaktime.
• Inspectors scrutinised a wide range of documents, including the school’s self-evaluation, its improvement plans, information about the attainment and progress of pupils, records relating to behaviour, attendance and safeguarding, and information on the school’s website. They evaluated the effectiveness of external funds to the school, including the pupil premium. An inspector checked the school’s single central register and the school’s system for recruiting staff, including staff files.
• Inspectors considered the 85 responses to Parent View, Ofsted’s online survey. There were 23 responses to the staff survey. There were no responses to the pupil survey.

Inspection team

Jayne Ashman, lead inspector Jackie Thornalley Alastair Ogle Matthew Sammy

Her Majesty’s Inspector Ofsted Inspector Ofsted Inspector Ofsted Inspector