The Spalding Parish Church of England Day 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?

• Improve the effectiveness of leadership and management, including governance, by ensuring that:
  • leaders accurately identify weaknesses in teaching, support underperforming staff and take swift action to improve the quality of teaching, learning and assessment
  • effective systems are in place to monitor and evaluate the work of the school accurately
  • the school’s development plans contain clear success criteria that enable leaders to improve pupils’ outcomes and sustain these improvements
  • governors are trained to understand the information they receive and hold leaders to account for the quality of provision and pupils’ achievements
  • pupil premium funding is used effectively to overcome barriers to learning for disadvantaged pupils
  • leaders and governors fulfil their responsibilities in making sure that additional funding is used appropriately to support pupils with SEND.
• Urgently improve teaching so that all pupils make accelerated progress, by ensuring that:
  • teachers and adults have high expectations of what pupils can achieve
  • assessment information is accurate and is used to plan learning that challenges pupils of varying abilities
  • all teachers implement the revised curriculum effectively and plan learning that increases pupils’ knowledge, deepens their understanding and develops their skills, especially in reading and mathematics
  • pupils benefit from consistent, effective feedback in line with the school’s assessment policy.
• Improve pupils’ personal development, behaviour and welfare by:
  • improving attendance, especially of disadvantaged pupils who are persistently absent, so that pupils get the maximum benefit from being in school
  • raising expectations of what pupils can achieve and challenging pupils with learning that engages them and keeps them on task
  • eliminating unruly behaviour by providing pupils with resources and activities that engage them at lunchtime. An external review of the school’s use of pupil premium should be undertaken in order to ascertain how this aspect of leadership and management may improve. An external review of governance 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

• Governors have not acted quickly enough to secure permanent leadership of the school. Changes in senior leadership over recent times have resulted in instability and uncertainty, and have meant that leaders, including governors, have not acted with sufficient urgency to tackle the school’s weaknesses.
• Leaders have not addressed the poor attainment and progress of pupils swiftly enough. Improvements implemented from September 2018 are not sufficiently embedded to have had a positive impact on the quality of teaching and pupils’ learning and progress.
• Leaders’ self-evaluation is not accurate. It is too generous and does not reflect the weaknesses in teaching and pupils’ progress. The school improvement plan focuses on short-term measures and does not enable leaders to bring about sustained improvements.
• The school is supported by a locality lead from the local authority. The locality lead has recently identified priorities for improvement and has provided useful support to school leaders. However, given the poor outcomes in 2016 and 2017, the local authority support has been too little, too late.
• Leaders have an over-generous view of current pupils’ standards. A new assessment system has been established since September 2018. However, teachers do not use the outcomes of these assessments to plan learning that meets pupils’ needs.
• Middle leaders are ambitious and keen to make a positive difference, but the impact of their leadership is limited because changes they have made are recent.
• Leaders have not planned effectively for the allocation of pupil premium funding. They cannot account for its spending or the impact it has had on outcomes for disadvantaged pupils. They have not taken effective measures to eliminate barriers to learning. The progress of disadvantaged pupils is well below that of their peers in the school and other pupils nationally.
• The curriculum has recently been reviewed and redeveloped. Leaders are clear about the intentions of the curriculum but have neither ensured that teachers implement the new curriculum effectively in the classroom, nor evaluated its impact. As a result, they do not know whether the revised curriculum is leading to improvements in pupils’ attainment and progress.
• Leaders and teachers provide a wide range of opportunities for the spiritual, moral, social and cultural development of pupils. This is a strength of the curriculum. Pupils who met with inspectors said that this is an important part of their learning and helps them to understand the importance of respecting others. Pupils know what the school’s values are and do their best to uphold them.
• The primary physical education (PE) and sport premium is well spent. Leaders have been effective in broadening pupils’ experiences and have increased the number of pupils participating in sport on a regular basis. These activities have inspired some pupils to take up such activities outside school.
• Pupils who spoke with inspectors said they appreciate the sporting life of the school and the opportunity to try new and different sports and the range of extra-curricular opportunities offered.

Governance of the school

• Governors are loyal supporters of the school. However, they have not acted with sufficient urgency to stem the school’s decline since its previous inspection.
• Governors have not ensured that self-evaluation is accurate and that improvement plans enable leaders to bring about the rapid improvements needed.
• Governors have not held leaders to account for the inadequate outcomes in 2016, 2017 and 2018. They have not challenged leaders effectively to address the school’s weaknesses and improve provision and outcomes.
• Governors do not have an accurate understanding of how additional funding is used to support disadvantaged pupils and pupils with SEND. They have failed to ensure that additional funds have a positive impact on the educational outcomes of these pupils.
• Governors fulfil their safeguarding responsibilities to ensure that pupils are safe in school.

Safeguarding

• The arrangements for safeguarding are effective.
• There is a strong culture of safeguarding across the school. Leaders ensure that all staff are appropriately trained and understand their safeguarding responsibilities. Staff are vigilant and know how to respond to the needs of vulnerable pupils.
• Senior leaders and governors are thorough in checking the suitability of all adults who work with pupils.
• Designated senior leaders for safeguarding receive regular training and work effectively with external agencies. They ensure that external agencies support vulnerable pupils and their families.
• Leaders make sure that records are thorough and review pupils’ needs regularly. They know pupils and families very well.
• Pupils know how to keep themselves safe and are taught the risks involved in online activity. They are also taught road safety and ‘Bikeability’. Pupils say that they feel safe at school, a view supported by both parents and staff.

Quality of teaching, learning and assessment Inadequate

• The quality of teaching is weak in too many classes. There is not enough effective teaching to help pupils make secure progress, or to reach or exceed the expected standards by the end of Year 6.
• Teachers do not have high enough expectations of pupils. They do not have a clear understanding of what pupils in their classes know and can do. Teachers do not plan suitable tasks that enable pupils to make the progress they need to catch up. In addition, they do not consistently use the school’s feedback policy to help pupils understand what they need to do next to improve their work.
• Teachers often provide work that lacks challenge. As a result, pupils disengage and become off-task. This leads to low-level disruption and, on occasions, some teachers struggle to maintain order. Many pupils, including disadvantaged pupils, pupils with SEND and pupils who speak English as an additional language, have considerable gaps in their learning. Teaching does not consistently help these pupils make the progress needed to catch up with other pupils nationally.
• The teaching of phonics does not develop pupils’ reading well enough. Year 1 and 2 pupils do not make enough progress in developing the use of their reading skills.
• Teachers’ assessment and predictions have not been consistently accurate in the past. The recently introduced standardised assessments mean that teachers and leaders now have a more accurate picture of what pupils know, understand and can do.
• The presentation of pupils’ work is variable. When teachers’ expectations are low, pupils do not demonstrate pride in their work. Teachers do not consistently challenge poor presentation or support pupils to improve.
• The quality of adult support is variable. In some cases, adults question and support pupils effectively in their learning. However, in too many instances adults do the work for pupils and do not address misconceptions and errors.

Personal development, behaviour and welfare Requires improvement

Personal development and welfare

• The school’s work to promote pupils’ personal development and welfare requires improvement.
• Pupils’ attitudes to learning are inconsistent. Many pupils work hard and are self-motivated. They are keen to do well. However, when teaching fails to meet pupils’ needs, behaviour deteriorates.
• Pupils feel safe at school. Parents have no concerns about pupils’ safety and well-being. The curriculum helps pupils to understand how to keep themselves safe in a range of situations. For example, pupils explained how to use fireworks safely, following a recent visit from the fire service. Pupils know whom they can speak to when they have concerns.
• Pupils understand what bullying is. Pupils who met with inspectors said that incidents of bullying are rare. Pupils are confident that staff would deal with any incidents swiftly and effectively.
• Pupils appreciate the wide range of activities that are available, such as boxercise, gymnastics, cricket and fencing. They show a keen interest in sports and physical fitness.
• Pupils understand diversity. They respect values and beliefs that differ from their own. Pupils learn about different cultures and faiths, for example Hinduism and Islam. They have an age-appropriate understanding of healthy relationships.

Behaviour

• The behaviour of pupils requires improvement.
• Behaviour at social times is not always positive. At lunchtime, inspectors observed unruly behaviour on the playground. Leaders have not ensured that there are sufficient resources in the outdoor areas to promote pupils’ personal development and well-being effectively.
• The majority of pupils conduct themselves well around school and in lessons. They are polite and courteous. For example, pupils hold open the doors for one another. Inspectors observed pupils chatting amiably and sociably in the dining room at lunchtime. Pupils demonstrated positive behaviour and good manners when speaking to each other and with staff.
• Leaders have employed a variety of strategies to support pupils who have more challenging behaviour. For example, they use external agencies to support pupils and to provide training to staff to help them manage pupils’ behaviour. The proportion of fixed-term exclusions has reduced and is now very low.
• Leaders have raised expectations of pupils’ attendance recently. Whole-school attendance has improved and is now similar to the national average. The proportion of pupils who are persistently absent from school has also reduced and is now below the national average.
• The attendance of pupils who speak English as an additional language has improved but remains too low. The proportion of disadvantaged pupils who are persistently absent from school is considerably higher than the national average.

Outcomes for pupils Inadequate

• In recent years, pupils’ weak progress, especially in key stage 2, has not prepared pupils well for the next stage of their education.
• Progress in reading and mathematics is particularly weak, and too few pupils attain the expected standards by the end of Year 6.
• Current assessment information and work in pupils’ workbooks show that pupils are making weak progress. This is because teaching does not close the gaps in pupils’ learning from previous years.
• Pupils with SEND make particularly poor progress. Those who speak English as an additional language make poor progress in reading and mathematics. Consequently, the proportions of these pupils achieving the expected and higher standards remain very low at the end of key stage 2. Provisional information for 2018 indicates that these pupils make even less progress than their peers.
• The progress of disadvantaged pupils is inadequate. The pupil premium funding is having little impact on improving the progress that these pupils make.
• Provisional information for 2018 indicates that in mathematics, the proportions of pupils who attained both the expected standard and greater depth are above the national average. However, attainment in key stage 1 in reading and writing is likely to be below the national average.
• The proportion of pupils achieving the expected standard in the phonics screening check at the end of Year 1 is below the national average, as is the proportion who retake the check at the end of Year 2. Their low attainment in phonics limits pupils’ ability to become confident readers and is reflected in the overall outcomes in reading as pupils move through the school. Pupils’ attainment in writing at the end of Year 2 is also lower than that seen nationally.
• The most able pupils in key stage 2 are not supported to reach sufficiently high standards in reading, writing and mathematics. Teachers’ expectations of what these pupils can achieve are too low.

Early years provision Good

• The leadership of early years is a strength of the school. All adults work as a cohesive team with consistently high expectations. They know the children well and engage positively with parents.
• The curriculum is responsive to the needs of children and encourages the development of effective learning. Teaching is consistently good. Children enjoy their learning and make good progress.
• There is an appropriate blend of adult-led and child-initiated activities to meet the needs of the child. This is coupled with effective continuous provision in well-resourced classrooms and outdoor space.
• Teachers plan exciting activities for children and provide good opportunities for discovering and learning. The outdoor space is imaginatively planned, allowing children to explore and take risks.
• Adults use questioning very effectively to encourage children to think, explain and deepen their learning. Assessment is accurate and enables teachers to plan activities that take children to the next steps in their learning.
• The proportion of children attaining a good level of development is above the national average, with a particular strength in mathematical learning. In 2018, the proportion of children exceeding the expected standard was also above the national average. Children are very well prepared for key stage 1.
• Children enjoy their learning. They are positive and willingly share their thoughts and ideas. Relationships are good, both among children and between children and staff. This creates a harmonious environment, which increases children’s self-confidence and self-esteem.
• Parents praise the way their children develop in Reception. They feel well informed about their children’s learning. Regular contact supports parents in developing their knowledge and in celebrating children’s success.
• Safeguarding is effective and children are well cared for. Parents who spoke with inspectors said their children are happy and safe in the Reception class.

School details

Unique reference number Local authority Inspection number 120612 Lincolnshire 10067183 This inspection of the school was carried out under section 5 of the Education Act 2005. Type of school Primary School category Age range of pupils Gender of pupils Voluntary aided 4 to 11 Mixed Number of pupils on the school roll 486 Appropriate authority The governing body Chair Acting Headteacher Telephone number Website Email address Katherine Wright Diane Mulley 01775 722 333 www.spaldingparish.lincs.sch.uk enquiries@spaldingparish.lincs.sch.uk Date of previous inspection 1-2 October 2014

Information about this school

• The school is larger than the average-sized primary school.
• The proportion of pupils who are eligible for support through pupil premium funding is below the national average.
• The proportion of pupils with SEND is above the national average. The proportion of pupils with a statement or an education, health and care plan is above the national average.
• The proportion of pupils who speak English as an additional language is well above the national figure.
• The deputy headteacher was appointed acting headteacher in September 2017 and an assistant headteacher was promoted to acting deputy headteacher in September 2018.
• The school had its Section 48 Statutory Inspection of Anglican and Methodist Schools in May 2014.

Information about this inspection

• Inspectors observed a range of lessons in early years and key stages 1 and 2. Senior leaders carried out some observations jointly with inspectors. Inspectors scrutinised a range of pupils’ work.
• Inspectors listened to pupils read.
• Inspectors held meetings with the acting headteacher, acting deputy headteacher, senior leaders, leaders of English and mathematics, other leaders and members of staff, and spoke with pupils.
• The lead inspector met three governors, including the chair of the governing body. He also spoke with the locality lead from the local authority.
• Inspectors spoke to parents and pupils around the school. In addition, they evaluated 36 responses to Ofsted’s online questionnaire, Parent View, as well as 19 free-text responses. Inspectors also took account of 46 responses to the staff questionnaire.
• Inspectors observed the school’s work and scrutinised several documents, including the school’s self-evaluation, minutes of meetings of the governing body, improvement plans and information on pupils’ recent attainment and progress.
• Inspectors also considered behaviour and attendance information, and policies and procedures relating to special educational needs, pupil premium funding, PE and sport premium, safeguarding and child protection.

Inspection team

Chris Davies, lead inspector Christine Watkins Deborah Mosley Her Majesty’s Inspector Her Majesty’s Inspector Her Majesty’s Inspector