Nightingale 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 effectiveness of leadership and management, including governance, by:
  • ensuring that staff record pupils’ absence correctly and follow up any truancy from lessons
  • notifying the local authority of all children missing education
  • ensuring that pupils fully understand safeguarding risks and how to avoid them
  • ensuring that senior leaders, including leaders in the sixth form, develop an accurate view of the quality of education in the school
  • ensuring that the curriculum provides equality of opportunity, matches pupils’ needs and abilities, and engages and motivates them
  • ensuring that teachers’ assessment of pupils’ and students’ learning and progress are accurate and reliable
  • holding staff to account for the progress and learning of pupils and students they teach
  • ensuring that additional funds are spent effectively to improve the progress of pupils with SEND, pupils who start the school with low attainment in reading, writing and mathematics, and disadvantaged pupils.
• Improve teaching, assessment, and pupils’ learning by:
  • ensuring that teachers receive appropriate training to improve the quality of pupils’ and students’ learning, including those who speak English as an additional language
  • improving the teaching of reading, writing and mathematical skills and knowledge across the curriculum
  • supporting all staff to follow the school’s behaviour policy and promote a consistently positive learning atmosphere, so that pupils are actively engaged in their own learning and make good progress.
• Improving pupils’ personal development and behaviour by:
  • improving their attendance and reducing truancy from lessons
  • providing effective guidance for pupils when they make subject choices for GCSE and A level
  • ensuring that pupils understand how to keep healthy and safe. An external review of the school’s use of the pupil premium funding should be undertaken to assess how this aspect of leadership and governance may be improved.

Inspection judgements

Effectiveness of leadership and management Inadequate

• Senior leaders are not ambitious for their pupils. They set targets for pupils’ learning and progress which are too low. Most pupils fail to achieve these targets because middle leaders and teachers also have low expectations of their pupils.
• Senior leaders have an overgenerous view of the quality of teaching. Leaders recently introduced regular weekly training for teachers to improve the quality of teaching. However, the training does not focus on weaknesses in teaching and consequently is not improving pupils’ learning.
• Leaders are not rigorous in checking pupils’ learning, attendance or behaviour. They do not ensure that staff are working effectively. The standards that pupils achieve are well below national averages because of this lack of robust management.
• Pupils’ attendance is below national averages. Many pupils have poor attitudes to their learning. They achieve weak outcomes in public examinations and are badly prepared for life in modern Britain and the next stage of their education and training.
• There is little focus on pupils’ spiritual, moral, social, and cultural development, although pupils do learn about respect for others in assemblies.
• Leaders do not use additional funding effectively or evaluate its impact carefully. There is no coherent strategy for the use of pupil premium funding, Year 7 literacy and numeracy catch-up funding or special educational needs funding. Disadvantaged pupils, pupils with SEND and Year 7 pupils who need additional support with literacy and numeracy, all make weak progress.
• The curriculum in key stages 3 and 4 is broad but does not enable pupils to achieve well in GCSE examinations. Over three-quarters of pupils speak English as an additional language, with many at an early stage of learning English. Most of these pupils are unable to access the curriculum because teaching does not take account of their learning needs.
• Extra-curricular activities include after-school study clubs, games clubs and sports clubs. However, pupils said that there are insufficient opportunities for trips to broaden their experience and develop their interests.
• Newly qualified teachers (NQTs) value the training they receive in school. Middle leaders said that they find training and coaching provided by the trust very helpful. However, training for teachers has failed to have a positive impact on pupils’ outcomes.
• It is recommended that the school should not appoint NQTs because pupils’ behaviour is inadequate.

Governance of the school

• The trust appointed a new governing body in September 2018. Previously, governors did not challenge school leaders about low standards.
• The new governors understand their role. They carry out checks on the quality of education in the school, using experienced consultants, headteachers from within the trust and senior trust officers. Governors and trust officers now meet with pupils to collect their views. Recent minutes of governing board meetings show that governors and the trust now hold senior leaders to account for the quality of education in the school.
• Governors have an accurate understanding of strengths and weaknesses in the school. They disagree with senior leaders’ self-evaluation of the quality of education. They shared with inspectors their perception of the low standards found in the school, and the actions they are taking to improve pupils’ outcomes. For example, they bring in experienced teachers from the trust to coach teachers to improve the quality of teaching and learning. These changes to governance are very recent.

Safeguarding

• The arrangements for safeguarding are not effective.
• Pupils frequently truant from lessons. Teachers do not understand the importance of keeping an accurate class register, nor do they take responsibility for pupils missing from their lesson. Pupils told inspectors that they leave the school site, hide around the school, or join lessons that they are not assigned to. The local area has a high level of knife crime. Leaders and staff have not considered the potential safeguarding concerns for those pupils frequently missing from school or from lessons. Staff are not vigilant in ensuring that they know the whereabouts of pupils.
• Over 70 pupils across all year groups were taken off roll last year and leaders have not always done enough to identify any potential safeguarding risks. School leaders did not follow the local authority’s guidance and notify them, for example, of a large number of Bulgarian pupils who had been taken off roll. Although leaders attempted to locate these pupils, their whereabouts and potential new schools remain unknown.
• There are records of appropriate recruitment checks on staff. Staff are trained in safeguarding but do not always follow the guidance they receive either from the local authority or from the external company employed by the school to support them. For example, they do not follow the guidance they are given on completing class registers.
• Support for pupils with medical needs is appropriate. Checks and risk assessments for school trips are thorough.

Quality of teaching, learning and assessment Inadequate

• There are key weaknesses in teaching across all subjects and key stages. Teaching does not meet pupils’ ability, and teachers rarely check pupils’ understanding and learning in lessons. The most able pupils are not challenged. The least able pupils are not well supported. Pupils often finish their work and wait for other pupils to catch up. Many lessons finish early because teachers do not plan enough work for the time allocated.
• Teachers do not give pupils enough guidance about how to improve their work. Where constructive advice is provided, pupils rarely respond.
• Pupils said that too often some are unable to learn because they do not understand the content or what they need to do. Teachers organise their classes so that pupils with the same community languages sit together. These pupils communicate in their home language in class. Often, pupils trying to explain the work to their peers, do not themselves understand the content of the topic, and so are unable to support the learning of others. Some pupils copy from their peers but have no understanding of what they have written. Many have significant gaps in their learning and make little or no progress as a result.
• Assessment information on pupils’ progress is inconsistent. Teachers’ judgements of pupils’ standards are overgenerous. Leaders have introduced a new assessment system, but this is not established in practice and is not having an impact on pupils’ learning and progress.
• Some teachers plan lessons well and demonstrate strong subject knowledge. They use questioning effectively to deepen pupils’ understanding.
• Some pupils are keen to learn and succeed. They tolerate some very weak teaching. Too often, however, pupils respond to poor teaching by idly dreaming or chatting.

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 understand how to learn effectively. Many pupils lack self-confidence.
• There is no overall strategy to support pupils’ personal development and welfare. There are activities that take place, such as assemblies, but they are not evaluated to assess their impact on pupils. For example, some pupils and older students do not understand fundamental British values.
• There is no clear programme of careers guidance, and careers advice and guidance is not provided for Year 7 pupils. Pupils’ outcomes in GCSE examinations indicate that the guidance pupils receive on subject choices is not effective.
• Pupils are given advice on healthy lifestyles, but they do not show that they have understood and applied this advice in their daily lives. For example, some Year 11 pupils do not understand the importance of regular physical activity.
• Pupils are taught some elements of how to keep safe such as when using the internet. Most pupils said that they feel safe in school. However, many pupils are unaware of local risks such as knife crime and gangs and how to avoid them.
• The school uses one alternative provider. Pupils in this provision have improved their attendance. However, their personal development and welfare provision is not secure because some have not settled well and are in conflict with other pupils.

Behaviour

• The behaviour of pupils is inadequate.
• Many pupils do not participate in lessons or are inattentive. Often pupils sit in lessons with their coats on, their bags on tables, and chewing gum. Some pupils are rude to their teachers and to visitors. A few pupils disrupt the learning of others.
• Pupils’ attendance has shown improvement over time but remains well below national averages. Truancy from lessons is very high and staff do not check the whereabouts of these pupils.
• Pupils’ behaviour on the corridors and around the school is much better than their behaviour in lessons. Older pupils act as supervisors on the corridors and at dinner queues.
• Pupils are well informed about the different forms that bullying can take and know where to go for support. There are very few incidents of bullying reported.

Outcomes for pupils Inadequate

• Pupils’ progress is consistently below the national average. Pupils’ outcomes in GCSE examinations are declining and have been so for the last three years. Current pupils are also making poor progress from their starting points.
• Leaders’ and teachers’ expectations of pupils are too low. The quality of teaching is too inconsistent. Pupils’ ability and progress is not tracked effectively. Pupils are often absent from lessons. Teachers do not take responsibility for pupils’ learning and progress. All these factors lead to poor outcomes for pupils.
• Pupils of all abilities and in all year groups make very weak progress across all subjects, including English and mathematics. Year 10 pupils make particularly poor progress.
• Disadvantaged pupils make weak progress. Their current progress lags well behind other pupils in school with similar ability. Pupils’ books indicate that some pupils have made little or no progress since September.
• The school’s support strategies are not improving the progress of these groups of pupils with SEND and those who speak English as an additional language. They make inadequate progress.
• Although inspectors met some pupils who were able readers, in lessons pupils generally read with little confidence.
• Pupils are not well prepared for their next stages in education because they do not develop strong reading, writing or mathematical skills.

16 to 19 study programmes Inadequate

• Leaders in the sixth form do not have high expectations for their students. The curriculum offer is very narrow and limits students’ choices and future pathways. Students said that frequent clashes in their timetable disrupt their study.
• Students’ outcomes in public examinations are well below national averages. The progress and attainment of current students are well below what should be expected of them. Students’ progress in vocational subjects is slightly better than in academic subjects. Overall, both vocational and academic examination outcomes for students are inadequate.
• The quality of teaching in the sixth form is inconsistent. Teachers try to plan their lessons to develop students’ learning. In some subjects, however, students are unable to cope with the demands of A levels because they had not reached sufficiently high standards in GCSE examinations. Many students struggle with their learning, and retention of students between Year 12 and Year 13 is low.
• Those students who join the sixth form to acquire GCSE qualifications in English and mathematics do not make the progress they need to catch up and achieve success. There is a lack of support for these students. They make less progress than others with similar starting points nationally.
• Students said that they value the careers advice and guidance they receive. All sixth-form students have the opportunity for work experience. However, the narrow range of courses on offer and poor outcomes limit their choices about destinations. Around half of the students go on to higher education and one third take up apprenticeships and employment. Last year the school reported that all their students were in education or employment.
• Students in the sixth form do not attend regularly and their punctuality to school and lessons is poor.
• Support for students’ personal development and welfare is inconsistent. Students said that the information the school provides on sexual health is very useful. However, it is not comprehensive as, for example, students did not recognise possible safeguarding risks, including, for example, the risks of female genital mutilation.

School details

Unique reference number Local authority Inspection number 136157 Enfield 10047223 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 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 Academy sponsor-led 11 to 19 Mixed Mixed 673 80 Appropriate authority Board of trustees Chair Principal John King Ann Palmer Telephone number 020 8443 8500 Website Email address www.nightingaleacademy.org apalmer@nightingaleacademy.org Date of previous inspection 4–5 May 2016

Information about this school

• Nightingale Academy is part of a multi-academy trust, the London Academies Enterprise Trust, which is a subsidiary of the Academies Enterprise Trust (AET). Previously the governing body was a local governing body. AET appointed a new governing board in September 2018 which includes AET senior officers, school improvement consultants and headteachers from other AET schools. AET delegates all governance responsibilities to this new governing body. Between 2017 and 2018 the academy was in the process of changing its trust sponsor. The withdrawal of the proposed new sponsor gave the school a period of uncertainty until the current arrangement was confirmed.
• AET provides support to coach senior and middle leaders. This support has increased markedly since September 2018, following the withdrawal of the proposed new sponsor, and now includes support for teaching and learning, and pupils’ behaviour.
• The school uses one alternative provider, Enfield College.
• Over three quarters of pupils speak English as an additional language.

Information about this inspection

• Inspectors visited lessons and part-lessons in key stages 3 and 4 and in the sixth form and across subject areas. They also visited one assembly. They carried out checks on pupils’ books and talked to pupils about their work.
• They met with pupils, teachers, middle and senior leaders, governors and representatives from the trust. They spoke with representatives of the local authority by phone. Inspectors reviewed a range of school documents relating to pupils’ behaviour, safety, teaching and learning, and pupils’ progress and attainment.
• There were three responses from parents, no responses from pupils and 17 responses from staff to the Ofsted online questionnaires. Three teachers responded to the Ofsted online questionnaire. Inspectors also reviewed the school’s questionnaires to parents. They were not able to consider Parent View responses as there was an insufficient number.

Inspection team

Joan McVittie, lead inspector Joanne Hamill David Bromfield Kanwaljit Singh

Ofsted Inspector Ofsted Inspector Ofsted Inspector Ofsted Inspector