Weston St Mary Church of England Primary 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 quality of leadership by ensuring that:
  • high-quality senior leaders are in place
  • middle leaders are in place and are supported to develop the skills they need to be effective in their role
  • the school’s use of additional funding, including the pupil premium, is monitored efficiently and addresses well the needs of pupils
  • the curriculum meets the needs of pupils, excites their interests and prepares them well for their next stage in education
  • governors have effective oversight and an accurate view of the strengths and weaknesses of the school
  • governors monitor the impact of external government funding, including the pupil premium, and make sure that eligible pupils benefit
  • external support is closely monitored and that it has the desired impact to improve the school at the accelerated pace that is needed.
• Improve the quality of teaching, learning and assessment and therefore pupils’ outcomes, by:
  • ensuring that teachers plan activities that focus closely on what all pupils need to learn in order that they make good progress
  • rapidly improving the teaching of all subjects and particularly writing across the school, including in the early years.
• Improve pupils’ personal development, behaviour and welfare by:
  • ensuring that an effective behaviour policy is in place and is understood and consistently applied by all staff in order to eradicate incidents of poor behaviour, both within and outside classrooms
  • ensuring that pupils learn how to lead safe and healthy lives and are 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 use of the 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

• The Lincoln Anglican Academy Trust has been unable to broker effective permanent senior leadership for this school. Since the school became an academy in 2014, there have been six different headteachers. This has hindered the school’s improvement.
• Leaders have lost the trust of parents. A number of parents told the inspector that they have little faith that the school is going to improve.
• The trust has seconded a local headteacher to undertake the role of executive headteacher to the school and a senior leader to undertake the head of school role. These leaders have been in school since June 2017. It is too soon to assess the impact of the work of these leaders in improving teaching and accelerating pupils’ progress.
• There is no middle leadership capacity within the school. Individuals have been given roles and responsibilities but have not received effective leadership training or support to enable them to conduct these roles well.
• The curriculum is inadequate. Pupils do not learn the broad range of subjects they should at the correct level for their age. Their experience of learning has been severely limited. They have not gained the knowledge, skills and understanding needed to be successful at the next stage of their education.
• Pupils in key stage 2 have experienced many changes of class teacher, sometimes at short notice. Leaders have not ensured that the planning for pupils’ learning is good enough under these circumstances.
• The leadership of pupils’ behaviour is inadequate. Leaders do not ensure that all staff apply the behaviour policy consistently. Some pupils’ poor behaviour disrupts the learning of their peers. Some pupils purposely misbehave. Although the number of exclusions is reducing, too many pupils are excluded from their lessons or from the school.
• Teachers’ performance has not been well managed. They have not had good enough support and guidance to develop in their role. Leaders have not held them to account to make sure that pupils make the appropriate progress.
• The leadership of pupil premium spending is inadequate. Leaders have not used this fund wisely to address the barriers to learning for eligible pupils. Disadvantaged pupils do not achieve as they should.
• The physical education (PE) and sport premium funding is not spent effectively. Too few pupils have the opportunity to be involved in age-appropriate sporting activities and in competitions. Too few have their skills and abilities appropriately developed.
• Although the trust has brokered external support to improve the quality of teaching, learning and assessment, leaders have not checked that this support is having the required impact. In fact, the impact of the different support has been variable.
• The school does not prepare pupils positively for life in modern Britain; leaders and teachers do not promote pupils’ spiritual, moral, social and cultural development well. Pupils are unclear about the school’s core values and ethos. Opportunities for pupils to explore other cultures and faiths are limited.
• Pupils do not gain the chance to be fully involved in their school and their community. Their reputation in the wider community is poor and this has limited some opportunities for them to make a positive contribution to the local area.
• The seconded executive headteacher is extremely skilled. In a matter of weeks, she has made a positive difference for pupils and for staff. She has an accurate view of the school’s strengths and weaknesses and is taking appropriate steps to address the school’s weaknesses.
• The seconded head of school is skilled. She has shown commitment and a passion to improve pupils’ progress. Since she joined the school, she has provided bespoke support to key stage 2 pupils. Their progress has accelerated as a result.
• Pupils’ attendance has improved as a result of the trust’s support to leaders.
• Ofsted recommends that the school should not appoint newly qualified teachers.

Governance of the school

• Governance is inadequate. The chair of the governing body has recently resigned. One other governor has also resigned. Currently, there is no chair of the governing body in post.
• The chief executive officer of the Lincoln Anglican Academy Trust has removed the delegated powers of the governing body.
• Governors have an inaccurate view of the strengths and the weaknesses of the school. They have failed to ensure that pupils at Weston St Mary receive a good education. They have not ensured that external funding to the school addresses the barriers of eligible pupils or supports pupils’ sporting enthusiasms and skills. They have overseen a decline in the standard of education for all pupils.

Safeguarding

• The arrangements for safeguarding are effective.
• Some issues relating to access to the school site were addressed during the inspection. The issues were resolved and the site was made safe.
• Records of the most vulnerable pupils are now appropriately detailed and stored.
• 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 have undertaken appropriate training and now receive regular updates so that they are aware of the most current legislation and ways of working.
• Staff have a good understanding of the school’s safeguarding procedures and policy.
• The school’s single central record of all staff meets requirements. Staff recruitment files are in order.

Quality of teaching, learning and assessment Inadequate

• Teaching, learning and assessment are inadequate. Too often, teachers’ planning for pupils’ learning is poor. Teachers do not pay enough attention to what they wish pupils to learn when setting tasks. Some of the tasks they set fail to help pupils, particularly most-able pupils and pupils identified by the school as requiring special educational needs support, to achieve as they should.
• During the inspection, the inspector observed pupils too often completing tasks that were too easy for them. Some pupils were completing tasks without understanding why.
• Teachers’ expectations of what pupils can achieve are far too low. Pupils spend too much time completing mundane tasks. They do not get opportunities to experiment, investigate, predict and explore. Teachers fail to extend and deepen pupils’ knowledge and understanding. They do not encourage or promote pupils’ love of their learning.
• These pupils have been failed. They have not been prepared well for their secondary school education.
• The curriculum is too narrow. Pupils, particularly in key stage 2, do not have the opportunity to learn a foreign language. Their science education is limited. Too little is done to develop their reading, writing and mathematical skills. Not enough happens to encourage their creative and sporting skills, talents and abilities.
• Pupils told the inspector that ‘different teachers had different ways of doing things’ and this was confusing. For example, in mathematics, they had received mixed messages about how to address a mathematical problem. This has dramatically slowed these pupils’ progress.
• Teachers, particularly in key stage 2, have not ensured that pupils take pride in their work. Their workbooks are often incomplete. Graphs and charts are inaccurately drawn. Spelling and grammatical errors go unchecked.
• Too few of the most able pupils have their needs met within lessons. They do not have sufficient opportunity to deepen their knowledge and test their understanding. Too few have enough opportunity to develop their thinking or provide a thorough response through extended writing.
• The teaching of writing is particularly weak. Pupils fail to meet the standards they should in the early years, in key stage 1 and in key stage 2.
• The learning needs of many pupils identified by the school to require special educational needs support are unmet. Planning to accelerate their progress is weak. The support they receive is too general and they do not catch up in the way that they should.
• Pupils with an education, health and care plan benefit from skilled support that helps them achieve independently.
• The trust has brokered external support to improve teachers’ assessment of pupils’ work. Teachers’ assessments of Year 2 and Year 6 pupils’ work are now accurate.

Personal development, behaviour and welfare Inadequate

Personal development and welfare

• The school’s work to promote pupils’ personal development is inadequate.
• Pupils do not learn how to lead safe and healthy lives. They do not have a good enough appreciation of the risks to their safety and well-being of radicalisation, sexting and exploitation. They have not received a thorough enough education about relationships and sexual health.
• Pupils do not have an appreciation of how it feels to be a successful learner. Many have not been afforded the opportunity to experience learning that enriches their life, broadens their interests or prepares them for life outside of school.
• Pupils in key stage 2 said that, although bullying was rare, it did happen and it was more likely to happen to younger pupils within the school. They cited particular areas that they felt were less safe than other areas in the school. All said that their teachers would deal swiftly with any issues of bullying.
• It is to the credit of pupils, particularly in Year 6, that they have not totally ‘switched off’ from their learning. They still want to achieve.

Behaviour

• The behaviour of pupils is inadequate.
• The school behaviour policy is ineffective. Teachers and teaching assistants do not apply the behaviour policy consistently. Pupils are aware of this inconsistency and know well the staff that allow them to get away with poor behaviour. Consequently, they behave badly for these members of staff.
• Pupils told the inspector that poor behaviour regularly disrupts their learning. This was an issue in key stage 1 and key stage 2.
• Pupils’ overall attendance has improved slightly and is now closer to the national average. The proportion of pupils that are persistently absent has reduced.
• Recently, the numbers of permanent and fixed-term pupil exclusions have reduced.
• The outdoor space is impressive and is well resourced. Most pupils play together safely. Older pupils were seen, by the inspector, taking care of younger pupils and involving them in their games.
• The pupils that spoke to the inspector, in lessons and more formally, were polite and articulate. They were an absolute pleasure to meet.

Outcomes for pupils Inadequate

• Pupils’ achievement is inadequate. In 2016 and in 2017, no pupil in Year 6 made sufficient progress in reading, writing or mathematics.
• Leaders’ information indicates that, at the end of key stage 1 in 2017, pupils’ achievement in writing was inadequate. Too few pupils met the expected standard.
• No pupil achieved at a greater depth in writing or in mathematics at the end of key stage 1 in 2016 and in 2017.
• Pupils’ achievement in science is inadequate. No pupil achieved the expected standard in this subject at the end of key stage 2 in 2016 or 2017.
• Year 6 pupils are ill-prepared for the next stage in their education. They are leaving their primary education without the knowledge and skills they require to access learning at key stage 3. Not enough has been made of their talents and interests.
• Equally, key stage 1 pupils are poorly prepared for key stage 2. The majority do not have the skills they need, particularly in writing, to make the progress that they should.
• The most able pupils do not achieve well. They do not receive the opportunities they deserve to extend their learning. Consequently, they do not attain the high standards that their starting points indicate they should.
• Pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities make varying rates of progress. Those who receive support but do not have an education, health and care plan underachieve, because their needs are not met.
• The proportion of pupils achieving the expected standard in the phonics screening check has improved. In 2017, pupils in Year 1 achieved above the national average.

Early years provision Inadequate

• The leader of the early years has not been supported to conduct this role effectively. This leader has an overwhelming range of responsibilities, including Years 1, 2 and 3 and the leadership of science. She has received external support and has accepted advice. However, these actions have not sufficiently improved the quality of teaching.
• Children do not make the progress that they should, particularly in writing. In 2016 and in 2017, the proportion of pupils achieving a good level of development fell well below the national average.
• Teachers’ planning for children’s learning is inadequate. Children are involved in a range of child-initiated activities. However, teachers and teaching assistants pay too little attention to their learning needs across all the areas of learning. Too often, pupils repeat what they have already learned and fail to develop further knowledge and skills, particularly in the more formal aspects of learning such as writing.
• Teachers’ questioning skills are poor. This is not helping children, particularly those who speak English as an additional language, to develop their speech and language skills.
• Parents value the opportunity to check on their child’s progress using the online assessment system. Information about the progress of children is regularly recorded but it is not used with precision to plan children’s learning.
• Teachers and other adults provide an environment where children feel safe and are happy and keen to learn. Children behave well in the early years. Suitable risk assessments are in place and statutory welfare requirements met.

School details

Unique reference number Local authority Inspection number 140988 Lincolnshire 10031124 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 Academy 4 to 11 Mixed Number of pupils on the school roll 46 Appropriate authority Academy trust Chair Headteacher Telephone number Website Email address No chair of the governing body in post at the time of the inspection Nicholas Newitt 01406 370333 www.weston-st-mary.co.uk admin@weston-st-mary.lincs.sch.uk Date of previous inspection Not previously inspected

Information about this school

• The school does not meet requirements on the publication of information about the curriculum, the behaviour policy, PE and sport funding or governor information.
• The school does not comply with Department for Education guidance on what academies should publish about the curriculum, the behaviour policy, PE and sport funding and governor information.
• The school is part of the Lincoln Anglican Academy Trust.
• This is the first section 5 inspection for the school since it became an academy in September 2014.
• The substantive headteacher has resigned his post and will leave the school in August 2017. He has not been in school since May 2017.
• This is much smaller than the average-sized primary school. The number of disadvantaged pupils and pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities is too low to report on in specific terms, as there is a risk of identifying individuals.
• Pupils learn within two classes. In the Acorn class, early years pupils and pupils in Years 1, 2 and 3 learn together. In the Oak class, pupils in Years 3, 4, 5 and 6 learn together.

Information about this inspection

• The inspector observed learning within the early years, key stage 1 and key stage 2, some jointly with the seconded executive headteacher and seconded head of school.
• The work of Year 6 pupils across a range of subjects was reviewed and all Year 6 pupils spoken with. A sample of key stage 1 work was also scrutinised.
• Meetings were held with the chief executive officer of the Lincoln Anglican Academy Trust, the trust school effectiveness adviser, the seconded executive headteacher and the seconded head of school.
• The inspector held meetings with the business manager with oversight of the vetting of school staff and conducted two health and safety walks of the school site accompanied by the seconded executive headteacher, seconded head of school and the business manager.
• The inspector reviewed a range of documentation relating to the school, including the school’s development planning and self-evaluation, performance information for all year groups, and information on pupils’ behaviour, attendance, exclusions, and pupils’ safety and welfare. Documentation relating to pupil premium funding and the provision for these pupils was scrutinised, as was information regarding pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities. The inspector reviewed anonymised information about teachers’ performance.
• The views of the three parents who responded to the Ofsted online questionnaire were considered and the inspector spoke with six parents on day one of the inspection.
• Additionally, four responses from members of the school staff and 18 pupil responses to the Ofsted online inspection questionnaires were taken into account.

Inspection team

Jayne Ashman, lead inspector Her Majesty’s Inspector