London Design and Engineering UTC Ofsted Report

Full report

What does the school need to do to improve further?

• Improve the effectiveness of leadership and management by ensuring that:
  • teachers have the knowledge and skills to plan their day-to-day subject curriculum in ways that meet their pupils’ needs and deepen their knowledge and understanding
  • assessment information and observations of learning are used by leaders at all levels to accurately evaluate pupils’ progress and to sharpen their improvement planning
  • the use of pupil premium funding is evaluated rigorously and leaders account for the impact of their decisions
  • pupils’ literacy and numeracy knowledge and skills are successfully developed across the curriculum
  • all staff consistently follow school policies, including those relating to assessment and for pupils who have SEN and/or disabilities
  • outcomes for students on A-level courses and the proportion who successfully complete their work-related courses improve.
• Improve the quality of teaching, learning and assessment, including in the sixth form, by:
  • raising teachers’ expectations of the quality and presentation of pupils’ work
  • challenging pupils more in their learning so that they make the progress of which they are capable.
• Continue to improve attendance, particularly of students in the sixth form. An external review of the school’s use of pupil premium funding is recommended.

Inspection judgements

Effectiveness of leadership and management

Requires improvement

• Some aspects of leaders’ self-evaluation of the school are not as rigorous as they should be. For example, while analysing pupils’ overall progress, leaders do not check that teaching and the curriculum are ensuring that pupils make sufficient progress from their different starting points. As a result, improvement planning is not as sharp as it should be.
• Leaders do not evaluate their use of pupil premium funding for disadvantaged pupils with enough rigour. They do not consider whether strategies in place are ensuring that this group of pupils achieve as well as others in the school. Overall, they do not have a sufficient understanding of whether their chosen strategies are having the intended impact.
• Leaders know that some decisions they have made did not have the intended consequences. For example, some sixth-form students were not provided with courses that suited their needs. The curriculum offer has now been improved, both in key stage 4 and in the sixth form, and better meets pupils’ needs.
• Insufficient emphasis has been given to developing pupils’ literacy and numeracy skills. This work is still at early stage of development and there are inconsistencies in how well skills are taught.
• Leaders have faced significant challenges since the school opened, particularly dealing with delays with the school building. They have had to make some tough decisions along the way. However, they have been successful in creating a popular and inclusive school. Parents and carers are positive about the school and the quality of education and care provided for their children.
• Leaders have managed the substantial year-on-year growth of the school well in some respects. Staff, one third of whom started at the school this year, are positive about working at the school. Teachers new to the profession feel well supported. However, leaders have not secured consistency in the quality of teaching across the school, nor ensured that staff consistently follow the assessment policy. There are plans in place to improve the teaching skills of staff.
• Leaders have worked effectively to give pupils opportunities that link with the school’s design and engineering specialism, including employer engagement strategies. One parent who replied to Parent View, Ofsted’s questionnaire for parents, commented: ‘My son wants to be an engineer and is extremely grateful for the opportunities this specialist school has given him.’ This was echoed by some of the views of other parents and pupils.
• Leaders have also been effective in promoting their vision and ambition of being an inclusive school. Pupils’ ‘learning for life assemblies’, the work of the chaplaincy team and the use of personal coaches all combine to promote pupils’ SMSC development and, more broadly, their personal development.
• Despite their overgenerous evaluation of the school’s effectiveness, leaders have demonstrated that they have the capacity to improve the school. They have also ensured that pupils’ personal development, behaviour and welfare are good.

Governance of the school

• The board of directors oversees the governance of the school. Directors have a wide range of knowledge and skills to carry out their roles. They are ambitious leaders and have a secure understanding of the school’s strengths and weaknesses.
• Directors receive a wide range of information from school leaders. On occasion, this has been used well to challenge leaders and to probe for detail on the issues being discussed. However, directors have not ensured that all of the information is sharply focused and so are not in a position to evaluate the impact of some actions effectively. This is the case, for example, for how well additional funding, such as the pupil premium, is used.
• The board of directors recently commissioned an external review of governance to help evaluate their effectiveness. They have already ensured that an appropriate action plan is put in place to address the few areas for improvement that were identified.

Safeguarding

• The arrangements for safeguarding are effective.
• Leaders have a deep understanding of Newham and the surrounding area. They know that there are risks locally that could be affecting the lives of pupils who attend the school, including domestic violence, ‘county lines’ and gang affiliation. Leaders ensure that staff are well trained on these issues and have a secure knowledge of what to do should any concerns arise.
• Leaders carry out the appropriate checks as to whether there are any child protection concerns for new pupils as they join the school. They follow up any concerns quickly and effectively. Their record-keeping is fit for purpose. Leaders ensure that the required checks on whether adults are suitable to work in the school meet statutory requirements.
• Most parents who replied to Parent View stated that their children are safe and well cared for. Pupils also told inspectors that they feel safe in school.

Quality of teaching, learning and assessment Requires improvement

• The quality of teaching is inconsistent, both within and between different subjects.
• Some teachers do not use assessment information about what pupils already know and can do as effectively as they should. Leaders are developing teachers’ use of baseline information to check pupils’ needs and abilities when they start at the school, and their assessment of pupils’ progress over time. At present, however, the school’s approach to assessment is continuing to develop.
• Some teachers’ expectations are not high enough, particularly in relation to the quality of work that their pupils should be producing. As a consequence, teaching is not routinely challenging. Pupils are not having to think deeply enough about their learning.
• Some teaching does not actively support pupils in developing their literacy skills. This includes pupils using subject-specific words confidently in their written work as well as being accurate in their spelling, grammar and punctuation.
• The support given to pupils who have SEN and/or disabilities varies in its effectiveness, mainly because some teaching does not meet their needs.
• Where teaching is stronger, teachers use questions to probe pupils’ understanding and to make them think. They follow this up by guiding pupils to complete more challenging work and checking on whether pupils understand why they are completing certain tasks.
• Teachers have a positive working relationship with their pupils. Pupils say that teachers are approachable and friendly. Leaders also work with teachers to organise appropriate intervention to help pupils to catch up when they have fallen behind.

Personal development, behaviour and welfare Good

Personal development and welfare

• The school’s work to promote pupils’ personal development and welfare is good.
• The school is a welcoming and friendly environment. Pupils of all ages, including those who recently started at the school, feel safe and secure at school.
• The curriculum provides age-appropriate advice on staying safe. Leaders reflect on pupils’ needs and so, for example, have recently improved the content of the sex and relationships education programme.
• The chaplaincy work of the school is a significant strength. A high number of pupils engage with the chaplaincy team. One pupil’s views chimed with others when talking about the emotional support received: ‘It [chaplaincy] has been a unique experience that has helped me through the best and the worst of times.’ The team also offers a wide range of highly effective ways for pupils to learn about different faiths and to engage in active citizenship work in the local community.
• Pupils benefit from a range of effective careers advice and guidance. This includes their work with local employers and sponsors. The school has an appropriate careers plan in place that meets the latest statutory guidance from the Department for Education (DfE).
• The comment from a pupil that ‘no-one judges you here’ is typical of the inclusive nature of the school. Pupils from different backgrounds and beliefs mix very well together. Bullying is very rare, as confirmed by the views of pupils, parents and staff, and by school records.
• Some pupils have not yet learned to take responsibility for their own learning and the quality of their work.

Behaviour

• The behaviour of pupils is good.
• Pupils are polite, friendly and courteous. They typically behave well. This includes in lessons and at breaktimes or lunchtimes. Pupils move around the school safely and sensibly. Most pupils take pride in their work.
• Fixed-term exclusions have decreased sharply since the school opened and any removal of pupils from lessons is rare. Pupils’ behaviour has improved as leaders have put in place appropriate support to help them to manage their behaviour.
• Attendance at key stage 4 has improved sharply, including that of pupils whose attendance at their previous school was low.
• Occasional lapses in pupils’ behaviour are linked directly to teachers’ insufficiently high expectations and the lack of challenge in the work given to pupils.

Outcomes for pupils Requires improvement

• The school received its first set of key stage 4 public examination results in 2018. A review of the provisional outcomes shows a mixed picture. Results suggest stronger overall progress in some subjects, including English, mathematics, sciences, construction and built environment. Progress was much weaker in iMedia, engineering, art and humanities.
• The progress of pupils currently in the school is also mixed, including in mathematics. Pupils, including those who have SEN and/or disabilities, are not making consistently good progress over time.
• Overall, the day-to-day curriculum in some subjects is not ensuring that pupils are deepening their knowledge and understanding. They are not becoming consistently confident subject specialists, for example as mathematicians or engineers. Pupils’ literacy and numeracy skills are not being as effectively developed as they should be.
• Although some pupils are not making the progress of which they are capable, those who completed key stage 4 in 2018 were all successful in moving on to education, training and/or employment. The current proportion of pupils who move into the school’s sixth form is 40%.
• Some pupils start the school having struggled to engage with their education previously. A review of case studies shows that the school has been successful in re-engaging pupils with learning and improving their behaviour, attendance and confidence.

16 to 19 study programmes Requires improvement

• The variation in the quality of teaching is also evident in the sixth form.
• Provisional examination results for 2018 show that A-level outcomes are not good. The main reason for this was leaders’ decisions to allow students to follow courses that did not meet their needs. As a result, there were too many ‘U’ grades in subjects, including mathematics and sciences. Some of the current students also have significant gaps in their knowledge arising from weaker teaching previously.
• The 2018 outcomes for students on technical courses were stronger, particularly in the proportion of students achieving the higher grades. However, the number of students who started a course but did not go on to complete it such as in engineering, requires improvement.
• There is a marked difference between the attendance of students in Years 12 and 13. Over time, Year 12 attendance has improved significantly, whereas in Year 13 it has remained low.
• The resources available to students, for example the range of hardware and software in digital media courses, are of a high standard. Leaders and teachers have effective strategies to work with and engage employers in delivering and developing subject content. Students also complete an extended project, many of which are employer-led. The resources available to students and employer engagement combine to help them to apply and deepen their specialist knowledge and understanding. Students are developing strong employability skills.
• Students who are following GCSE English and/or mathematics achieve well.
• Students speak positively about the sixth form, particularly about careers guidance and/or the personal support that they receive from their coaches. Leaders’ analysis of students’ destinations shows that just over half of students moved on to university, in the main to study STEM-related subjects. The others were all successful in securing apprenticeship or employment routes, including with employers that work closely with the school.

School details

Unique reference number Local authority Inspection number 142903 Newham 10058830 This inspection of the school was carried out under section 5 of the Education Act 2005. Type of school Secondary technical 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 University technical college 14 to 19 Mixed Mixed 408 233 Appropriate authority Board of trustees Chair Principal Telephone number Website Email address Jeremy Galpin Geoffrey Fowler 0203 019 7333 www.ldeutc.co.uk admin@ldeutc.co.uk Date of previous inspection Not previously inspected

Information about this school

• The school opened in September 2016. Although smaller in size than the national average, it has grown quickly since it opened. It is currently oversubscribed.
• The school’s specialist (technical) subjects are engineering, art and design and construction and the built environment. Its main sponsors are the University of East London, Thames Water, Costain, Skanska and Chelmsford Diocese Education Trust.
• The school currently has pupils in Years 10 to 13. Approximately 75% of current pupils are boys.
• Almost 25% of pupils are from disadvantaged backgrounds. The proportion of pupils who have SEN and/or disabilities is broadly in line with the national average.
• Students come from a wide range of ethnic backgrounds. Many pupils at key stage 4 begin their life at the school so that they can make a ‘fresh start’ in re-engaging with their education.
• The school does not currently use any alternative provision.

Information about this inspection

• Inspectors observed a range of subjects and reviewed a range of pupils’ work from across the school. They carried out several observations jointly with members of the school’s leadership team.
• Inspectors had discussions with directors, senior leaders, middle leaders and staff. The lead inspector also held a telephone conversation with a representative from the DfE.
• Inspectors had formal discussions with groups of pupils and sixth-form students. They also talked with other pupils informally.
• Inspectors observed pupils’ behaviour in and around the school, including at breaktimes and lunchtimes.
• The inspection team looked at a range of documentation, including the school’s evaluation of its own performance, minutes of directors’ meetings, assessment information relating to current pupils’ achievement, information relating to safeguarding and various other documents.
• Parents’ views were considered via email correspondence received and the 41 responses to Parent View. Inspectors reviewed 39 responses to the staff survey. Due to a technical issue with school systems, there were no responses to the pupil survey that was issued electronically.

Inspection team

Sam Hainey, lead inspector Bruce Goddard Catherine Davies

Her Majesty’s Inspector Ofsted Inspector Ofsted Inspector