Bewick Bridge Community Primary School Ofsted Report

Full report

What does the school need to do to improve further?

• Raise the quality of teaching so that it is good throughout the school, so that all pupils make good progress, by:
  • sharing the good practice that already exists in the school
  • ensuring that teaching captures and maintains pupils’ interests so that they develop excellent attitudes to learning
  • matching the work that pupils are given to do to their ability and prior knowledge.
• Improve behaviour so that disruption is very rare in all classes and no pupil’s learning is disrupted by the actions of others.
• Improve the quality of leadership and management by ensuring that:
  • actions are taken to develop the use of assessment in subjects other than English and mathematics
  • leaders and governors track pupils’ progress regularly in English, mathematics and a wide range of other subjects to ensure that pupils make good progress across the curriculum. 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 Requires improvement

• Leaders and governors did not ensure that the quality of teaching remained high, and that good outcomes were maintained, after the previous inspection. Outcomes at the end of key stage 2, both in terms of pupils’ progress and their attainment, declined in 2014 and have yet to recover.
• Leaders do not track the progress that pupils make in subjects other than English and mathematics. Assessment in these subjects is underdeveloped, and leaders are unable to evidence that pupils make good progress in a wide range of subjects across the curriculum.
• Leaders have not ensured that behaviour is consistently good throughout the school. The behaviour of a small number of pupils has been allowed to have a detrimental effect on the learning of others.
• Some parents express concerns about the school and a fifth would not recommend it to others. A small number of parents said that their children do not feel safe at school and that their learning is being affected by the behaviour of other pupils.
• Spending of the pupil premium grant is not fully effective. Although the funding is used in appropriate ways to improve outcomes for disadvantaged pupils, it is not yet having a clear enough impact on the progress that they make. A review of pupil premium spending has already been carried out, and leaders have started to act on its recommendations.
• The sport premium is spent in a number of appropriate ways. The additional funding is spent effectively, but leaders are only able to provide superficial evidence of this because the impact of spending is not tracked fully. Leaders do not have a clear enough understanding of whether pupils’ attainment and progress in physical education and sport are improving as a result of the actions taken.
• The headteacher and deputy headteacher have had a clear impact on improving overall effectiveness in the relatively short time that they have been at the school. They have rightly focused on improving the quality of teaching as their first priority. Leaders have tackled weak teaching where necessary and have not shied away from having difficult conversations with staff. As a result, much of the teaching in the school is now good over time and outcomes for pupils are starting to rise as a result.
• The leadership of other leaders is developing well. For example, leadership of provision for pupils who have special educational needs (SEN) and/or disabilities is now much stronger than it was. Other leaders have increasingly good knowledge and understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of their subjects. Leaders’ work is starting to have an impact on improving pupils’ outcomes.
• The school’s curriculum is appropriately broad and balanced, covering all the subjects in the national curriculum. The school follows a commercially produced scheme, and leaders have found that this meets the school’s needs well. Pupils said that they enjoy learning about the range of topics included in the curriculum.

Governance

• Governors did not ensure that a good standard of education was maintained after the previous inspection. They permitted standards to fall, and these have yet to recover.

• Governors are not fully effective in holding leaders to account. Governors ask questions of leaders, but these are not sufficiently challenging. As a result, governors do not have sufficient impact on ensuring that standards rise.
• Governors are dedicated to the school and keen to be fully effective in their roles. They visit frequently and know the staff and pupils well. They are very supportive of the school’s leaders and are fully aware of the need to balance challenge with support.

Safeguarding

• The arrangements for safeguarding are effective.

• The headteacher, as the school’s designated safeguarding lead, has an excellent understanding of her role. She is absolutely committed to ensuring that the pupils in her care are kept safe. She follows up concerns tenaciously when they are reported to her by staff. She is persistent in championing pupils to ensure that they are adequately protected.
• Until recently, the school’s records of child protection concerns did not match the same high standard as the headteacher’s response to them. Paperwork was not complete and did not show clearly the actions taken by the school in response to concerns raised. This has now been rectified.

Quality of teaching, learning and assessment Requires improvement

• The significant fall in published outcomes for pupils and the school’s own records shows clearly that the quality of teaching became poorer after the previous inspection. Some weaker teaching remains. Where this is the case, pupils make less progress than they should.
• In some classes, teachers do not plan and deliver learning that captures pupils’ interests well enough. The content and delivery fails to connect with pupils. As a result, some pupils ‘opt out’ of lessons, daydreaming and paying little attention instead.
• Where teaching is weaker, teachers do not use assessment information well enough when planning the work for pupils. This means that some pupils are given work that is too difficult and others are given work that does not provide sufficient challenge.
• The quality of teaching over time is improving and some is now good. Where teaching is good, teachers plan lessons, and series of lessons, well to meet the differing needs and abilities of pupils in their class. Where this is the case, pupils are making better progress and, in some cases, rapid progress. This strong practice is not yet used as a tool for helping to raise the quality of the weaker teaching in the school.
• Where teaching is better, questioning is a strength. Teachers ask carefully chosen questions both to check whether pupils have understood what they have been taught and to encourage them to think more deeply. This helps teachers to have a better understanding of pupils’ needs in order to plan their teaching accordingly.
• Some teachers’ good knowledge of the subjects they teach helps pupils to learn well. Teachers’ deep understanding of the subjects in the curriculum means that they are able to answer pupils’ questions confidently and clearly. It also means that teachers are able to identify and deal with pupils’ misconceptions at an early stage.
• Throughout the school, teachers focus well on the objectives of the lessons they teach. That is, they are clear about what they want pupils to learn during lessons and ensure that they make these intentions clear to pupils. As a result, pupils are usually clear about the purpose of lessons and what they are supposed to do.
• Some teachers use the curriculum well to develop pupils’ writing. Where teaching is better, teachers look for opportunities for pupils to practise their writing skills in subjects other than English.

Personal development, behaviour and welfare Requires improvement

Personal development and welfare

• The school’s work to promote pupils’ personal development and welfare requires improvement.
• Most pupils feel safe at school. The vast majority said that bullying rarely happens and that staff deal with it quickly when it does. However, a small number of pupils told inspectors that bullying is more common and that it is not sorted out quickly.
• Some pupils do not show consistently good attitudes to learning and this has an impact on the progress they make. This is usually connected with weaknesses in the quality of teaching. Although these pupils do not interrupt the learning of others, their lack of active engagement with and interest in their work means that they do not do as well as they should.
• Pupils are polite, friendly and welcoming. They have good manners and show respect to each other and to the adults that work with them. Pupils were keen to talk to inspectors about their school and their work.

Behaviour

• The behaviour of pupils requires improvement.

• The challenging behaviour of a very small number of pupils is having a detrimental impact on the learning of others. In these classrooms, lessons are disrupted by pupils’ behaviour and too much of the teachers’ time is taken up with managing pupils’ behaviour. The number of fixed-term exclusions during the last academic year was very high. There were no permanent exclusions.
• Pupils’ overall rate of attendance for the last academic year remained below the national average. The attendance of some groups of pupils, particularly those who have SEN and/or disabilities and disadvantaged pupils, was much lower than that of others and well below the national average.
• Attendance is now improving. Leaders’ recent increased focus on improving pupils’ attendance is working well. So far this academic year, attendance overall, and for all groups of pupils, compares very well with the national average.
• Most pupils behave very well both in their classrooms and during less structured parts of the day. They move about the school in an orderly fashion. Even when teaching does not capture pupils’ interest, they remain quiet and do not distract other people.
• Leaders have recently introduced a new electronic behaviour-management system. It is too soon to see what the impact of this will be. However, leaders are already able to analyse pupils’ behaviour, and look for patterns of behaviour, much more easily and systematically than they could before.

Outcomes for pupils Requires improvement

• Pupils do not make enough progress and do not attain well enough by the time they leave the school. Results of the key stage 2 national tests show that pupils’ progress has been very low in reading, writing and mathematics, for the last three years.
• The progress and attainment of disadvantaged pupils are variable. Published data shows that, similarly to pupils in the school overall, the progress that disadvantaged pupils make in reading, writing and mathematics has been very low for the last three years.
• Outcomes for pupils who have SEN and/or disabilities are similarly varied. Some pupils are making good progress as a result of the good support that they receive. Other pupils’ progress is much weaker because their needs are not met as well.
• Recently, leaders have ensured that staff focus more closely on outcomes for disadvantaged pupils. The school’s assessment information shows that disadvantaged pupils are making better progress in some year groups than those in others. This is because the quality of teaching is not consistently good throughout the school.
• Published assessment information shows stronger outcomes in key stage 1 than key stage 2. In 2017, the proportion of pupils who reached the expected standard at the end of key stage 1 was similar to the national average in reading and mathematics, and just below it in writing.
• Phonics is taught increasingly well. Results of the Year 1 phonics screening check have improved over the last three years so that they were similar to the national average in 2017. Pupils in the current Year 1 are making similarly good progress in phonics.
• Inspection evidence shows clearly that, in some classes, pupils are now making good progress overall and, in a few cases, quite rapid progress. Variations in the quality of teaching in different classes mean that outcomes are not yet consistently good throughout the school.

Early years provision Requires improvement

• The quality of teaching in the early years is not yet consistently good, although there have been improvements recently. As in the rest of the school, staff do not plan learning for children that matches their abilities or interests well enough. Where this is the case, children do not make the rapid progress that they should.
• The quality of leadership of the early years has improved recently. The current early years leader took up her post in April 2017. She has developed a good understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of the provision and is in the process of writing a development plan to improve early years.
• Children often enter the Reception Year with skills and abilities below those typical of their age. The proportion of children who reach a good level of development by the end of the Reception Year has been below average for some years. The proportion rose in 2017 and was much closer to the national average. More children are now making good progress and children are being prepared better to start Year 1.
• Children behave well in the early years. They follow the school’s rules and respond well to adults’ instructions. Children are developing good attitudes to learning. They are increasingly able to persevere with activities, particularly when they are interesting and meet children’s needs.
• Relationships between parents and staff are developing well. The school has recently introduced an electronic system for recording information about children’s learning. Leaders have found that many parents are finding this useful and some are using the system as a way to increase their involvement in their children’s learning.

School details

Unique reference number 110746 Local authority Cambridgeshire Inspection number 10041532 This inspection of the school was carried out under section 5 of the Education Act 2005. Type of school Primary School category Community Age range of pupils 4 to 11 Gender of pupils Mixed Number of pupils on the school roll 270 Appropriate authority The governing body Chair Judith Lowndes Headteacher Rebecca Simister Telephone number 01223 508772 Website www.bewickbridge.com Email address office@bewickbridge.com Date of previous inspection 13–14 June 2013

Information about this school

• The school does not meet requirements on the publication of information about the curriculum, pupil premium, sport premium and governors on its website. The website does not include the required link to the Department for Education’s performance tables.
• The previous headteacher left the school in December 2015 after a period of ill health. The current headteacher joined the school in January 2016, initially in an acting capacity before becoming substantive headteacher in April 2016.
• The school did not meet floor standards in 2016. These are the minimum standards, set by the government, for pupils’ progress and attainment.
• The school meets the Department for Education’s definition of a coasting school, based on key stage 2 academic performance results in 2014, 2015 and 2016.

Information about this inspection

• Inspectors gathered a range of evidence to judge the quality of teaching and learning over time. Inspectors observed parts of 24 lessons, some jointly with the headteacher.
• Inspectors looked closely at the work in pupils’ exercise books. They listened to pupils read and talked to them about their work. Inspectors looked at a range of the school’s documents including assessment information.
• Inspectors checked the school’s single central record of pre-employment checks and other documentation concerned with the safer recruitment of staff and volunteers.
• Meetings were held with leaders, governors, a representative of the local authority and a group of pupils. Inspectors spoke with pupils throughout the inspection and with parents as they brought their children to school.
• Inspectors considered 74 responses to Parent View, Ofsted’s online questionnaire and 65 additional free-text comments. Inspectors also took note of 15 responses to Ofsted’s staff survey.

Inspection team

Wendy Varney, lead inspector Her Majesty’s Inspector Paul Hughes Ofsted Inspector Jane Dooley Ofsted Inspector