William Torbitt Primary School Ofsted Report

Full report

In accordance with section 44(2) of the Education Act 2005, Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector is of the opinion that this school requires significant improvement, because it is performing significantly less well than it might in all the circumstances reasonably be expected to perform.

What does the school need to do to improve further?

• Improve leadership and management by ensuring that:
  • arrangements for safeguarding pupils are effective
  • a strong culture of safeguarding underpins all aspects of the school’s work
  • governors hold leaders to account effectively for safeguarding pupils
  • incidents of bullying are always taken seriously, recorded appropriately and dealt with swiftly.
• Improve teaching and outcomes by:
  • sharing the good practice that has already been developed by leaders in some classes, to ensure consistently high quality of teaching across all classes and all year groups
  • ensuring that teachers set tasks which more accurately meet the needs of all learners
  • ensuring that time is used productively in lessons
  • ensuring that teachers routinely keep a check on pupils’ work and their engagement during lessons in order to prompt and guide them to achieve well.
• Improve rates of attendance and reduce the number of pupils who are persistently absent from school, or late for school. An external review of governance is recommended in order to assess how this aspect of leadership and management may be improved.

Inspection judgements

Effectiveness of leadership and management Inadequate

• Leaders and governors have not secured a strong culture of safeguarding in the school. Safeguarding is not effective.
• Leaders and governors do not have an accurate view of the effectiveness of the school.
• Not all incidents of bullying are taken seriously by leaders or recorded appropriately. Bullying logs do not reflect the incidents reported to inspectors by parents and pupils. A number of pupils and parents expressed concern to inspectors about the lack of action taken by leaders to address incidents of bullying.
• Leaders have not maintained a good standard of education since the previous inspection. Achievement is variable across classes and year groups and this is reflected in the inconsistent quality of teaching.
• Leaders have not taken effective action to improve attendance over time. Attendance has remained below the national average for the last three years. The proportion of pupils who are persistently absent from school is well above the national average and has been for three years.
• Pupil premium spending has improved the achievement of disadvantaged pupils. Leaders evaluate the impact of the funding effectively. Differences between disadvantaged pupils and other pupils nationally are diminishing. However, in some classes and in some subjects, the differences remain.
• There is still some way to go to ensure that all teaching is effective. Since the recent restructuring of the leadership team, assistant headteachers are having a positive impact on the quality of teaching and on pupils’ outcomes. They have a thorough understanding of what the school needs to do to improve teaching further, and an accurate view of teaching across the school. They have been successful in ensuring some improvements to the teaching of reading, writing and mathematics.
• Assistant headteachers have ensured that staff have received high-quality professional development and support to improve their skills. Newly qualified teachers and those who are relatively new to teaching are given effective support to improve their skills. This work is having a positive effect, but is not consistent across the school.
• Assistant headteachers are developing assessment systems to help teachers to pinpoint next steps in learning for their pupils. Leaders recognise that this is not yet fully established in all classes and is ‘a work in progress’.
• Provision for pupils who have SEN and/or disabilities is well led and managed. As a result, individual pupils receive appropriate support and, by the end of their time at the school, make strong progress.
• Leaders have recently reviewed and improved the curriculum. Pupils benefit from learning a wide range of subjects. There is a sharp emphasis on reading, writing, mathematics and science. However, pupils also achieve well in other subjects, such as art. The sport premium funding has raised the profile of physical education across the school and has helped to improve teachers’ skills in this area. It has also ensured that more pupils have been given the opportunity to engage in competitive sports.
• The headteacher and governors sought advice from the local authority following the first part of this inspection. A comprehensive safeguarding action plan was drawn up with an external consultant to ensure that the necessary actions to secure improvements are identified. Roles and responsibilities were reviewed and a re-structuring is taking place.
• Many parents and pupils who gave their views to inspectors had an entirely positive view of the school.

Governance of the school

• Governors do not provide adequate challenge to leaders to ensure that their work is effective. As a result, governors have not ensured that the school meets its statutory duty regarding safeguarding.
• Governors support the work of the school but are not incisive in their understanding of its strengths and weaknesses. They have too readily accepted what they have been told by senior leaders.
• Governors undertake regular performance management of the headteacher and secure advice from the local authority with this process.
• Governors are committed to securing further safeguarding training and there is a link governor who holds responsibility for working with leaders on this aspect of the school’s work.

Safeguarding

• The arrangements for safeguarding are not effective.
• Prior to the inspection, leaders had not taken all child protection issues seriously. Not all incidents or disclosures, even very serious ones, were referred to appropriate agencies. Some referrals were made but sometimes several weeks or months after child protection issues had been identified. Therefore, pupils have been left vulnerable and at risk by leaders’ failure to act swiftly.
• Roles and responsibilities regarding safeguarding were unclear at the time of the inspection. Leaders gave conflicting and confusing information about systems, structures and record-keeping. There were many gaps in records relating to safeguarding.
• Governors have not held leaders to account for keeping children safe beyond basic compliance. They keep a check on safer recruitment but expressed shock regarding the issues raised about safeguarding during this inspection.
• Leaders have not been rigorous in keeping a close check on all the pupils who leave the school to ensure that they are safe in their new schools.
• Leaders have not ensured that all staff are vigilant regarding site safety. For example, during the inspection, a cupboard containing chemical cleaning substances was left open in the early years provision.
• At the start of the inspection, not all staff had received appropriate training in all aspects of safeguarding. Leaders did not have an accurate record of training that the staff had received or the training that they required.
• The school benefited from a thorough safeguarding audit in 2016 which identified many of the areas for improvement evident during this inspection. Leaders and governors failed to take effective action in response to this audit.
• When referrals are made appropriately and swiftly by leaders to safeguard pupils, the inclusion team works tirelessly and effectively to secure support for children in need. Inclusion team members challenge external support and services to ensure that they get the right support for pupils.

Quality of teaching, learning and assessment Requires improvement

• The quality of teaching requires improvement because, although there have been improvements in teaching, there are still inconsistencies which lead to variability in the progress that pupils make.
• In some lessons, time is wasted because pupils either lose focus or sit unoccupied for sustained periods when they have completed work. Teachers do not routinely pick up on this to refocus or redirect pupils.
• The quality of catch-up or intervention sessions varies. For example, an intervention session designed to help pupils develop their sentence writing skills was pitched well below the level of writing seen in the targeted pupils’ books. Another intervention designed to develop early language skills was inspirational and helped pupils immediately grow in confidence, follow instructions and speak in simple sentences.
• Teachers have implemented a new mathematics scheme which is helping them to ensure that a higher proportion of pupils achieve expected levels in this subject. However, not all teachers are providing adequate challenge for the most able pupils. Occasionally, work for the least able is too difficult; teachers fail to recognise this and address their misconceptions or difficulties.
• Teachers are working hard to embed the school’s assessment system, to ensure that they plan effectively to meet the needs of all learners. However, the quality of teachers’ assessment and of their ongoing feedback is inconsistent. As a result, teaching does not help some pupils to achieve the best that they can. This is particularly true of boys, who make less progress than girls, especially in reading and writing.
• Some teaching leads to good or better progress. Where leaders have had an impact, the strongest teaching in the school is exemplified by incisive questioning to stretch and challenge learners, purposeful talk between adults and pupils, and opportunities for pupils to talk together about their learning and challenge each other’s thinking.
• Some of the teaching in subjects across the curriculum helps pupils to achieve high-quality work over time. For example, in Year 6, pupils were inspired by a teacher to create high-quality portraits.
• When teaching is at its strongest, pupils are engaged and highly motivated to achieve the best that they can. This was particularly evident in a key stage 2 mathematics lesson where pupils were talking and challenging each other about their work on translation. They were self-motivated to tackle a series of additional challenges.
• Teachers are committed to improving their skills. They respond positively and effectively to professional development and they value and learn from the support and guidance of the phase leaders. As a result, the teaching of reading has improved. Pupils talk enthusiastically about the books they read in class or independently. Teachers are confident in teaching phonics, and this is reflected in pupils’ developing early reading and writing skills.
• High-quality literature is used well by teachers to stimulate writing tasks. This, alongside the school’s commitment to having a sharper focus on talk, has led to improvements in pupils’ writing. High-quality examples of writing can be seen on display around the school.
• Pupils who have SEN and/or disabilities are supported well by teachers and teaching assistants; teaching meets their needs and they make strong progress.

Personal development, behaviour and welfare Inadequate

Personal development and welfare

• The school’s work to promote pupils’ personal development and welfare is inadequate.
• Safeguarding is not effective and pupils’ welfare has not been effectively promoted over time. Pupils have not always been listened to and leaders have not ensured that vulnerable pupils have swiftly received the support that they need.
• Some pupils have suffered from sustained bullying or from bullying incidents which have made them feel unsafe and unheard in school. As one pupil stated: ‘You tell, then you tell again, then you just tell your parents.’
• When referrals are made in a timely fashion, the inclusion team provides excellent pastoral care for individual pupils which helps to improve the quality of the pupils’ lives.
• Pupils show a general awareness of how to keep themselves safe on the internet and have a good knowledge of road safety. However, older pupils show no understanding of the risks related to terrorism, radicalisation and extremism, or of the local risks related to gang culture or knife crime.
• Pupils are confident, friendly and welcoming. When teaching meets their needs, they have a positive attitude to learning. They show respect for those who have different cultures and beliefs to their own.

Behaviour

• Pupils’ behaviour requires improvement.
• Pupils’ attendance has not improved significantly over time. The school’s information about current attendance shows that it is broadly in line with last year’s national average. However, the proportion of pupils who are persistently absent remains above the national average.
• Pupils and parents say that bullying exists in the school. Incidents are not always dealt with effectively. Pupils say that behaviour at playtimes is better than lunchtime because teachers monitor playtimes, but midday supervisors at lunchtime ‘shout’. Some staff views also confirm that playground monitoring lacks consistency.
• During the inspection, playground behaviour was good. Pupils were keen to talk to the inspectors. They played well together with the range of equipment which was available to them.
• Pupils’ conduct in lessons and around the building is good.

Outcomes for pupils Requires improvement

• Outcomes for pupils require improvement because the progress pupils make across different year groups and classes is inconsistent, in line with the quality of teaching.
• Boys make less progress than girls, particularly in reading and writing in key stage 2.
• The proportion of disadvantaged pupils achieving expected standards in reading, writing and mathematics in 2017 was above the average for all pupils nationally. The school’s own assessment information shows that differences between the achievement of disadvantaged pupils and that of others are diminishing, but this is not the case in every class and year group.
• Progress at the end of key stage 2 was strong in mathematics and writing at the end of Year 6 in 2017. Progress in reading was below that seen nationally. Nevertheless, pupils left the school with standards that were slightly above the national averages. This means that they were prepared well for the next stage of their education.
• In Year 1, the proportion of pupils achieving the expected standard in the phonics screening check has been in line with the national average for the past three years.
• Pupils who have SEN and/or disabilities are currently making good progress in key stage 2. This is less strong in key stage 1, but all such pupils have made progress from their various and often complex starting points.

Early years provision Inadequate

• The early years provision is inadequate because safeguarding is not effective.
• Staff are not routinely or consistently vigilant across the early years provision. During the inspection, a cupboard with dangerous substances was left open in an area which children could access.
• During an observed session, an inspector had to ask staff to intervene when children were playing dangerously with sticks. Occasionally, staff position themselves with their backs to children who are on climbing equipment. This prevents them from ensuring that children are safe at all times.
• While most staff in the early years provide a positive, caring climate for learning, this is not consistent. Some interactions with children are inappropriately harsh.
• The impact that adults have on children’s learning is inconsistent. Not all staff support children to think deeply about their learning. Adults sometimes issue a list of instructions but fail to ask questions to check whether children understand. Similarly, adults do not consistently build on children’s learning by noticing what they have achieved and stretching them further.
• All areas of learning are well resourced across the early years. There are a wide variety of stimulating and interesting activities planned and set up for children. Nevertheless, too many children can be found wandering aimlessly throughout the provision without any real focus or motivation.
• Leadership of the early years is in the earliest stages of development. The leader with overall line management for the early years was absent for the final two days of the inspection. As a result, inspectors were not able to test out the school’s own evaluation of the progress that children make in the early years.
• The proportion of pupils who achieve a good level of development by the end of the Reception Year has been broadly in line with the national average in recent years and inspection evidence suggests that this trend is likely to continue this year.
• Inspection evidence showed that children are making strong progress in early writing and mark-making. Their language and communication skills are developing well.
• Some teaching in the early years is highly effective. For example, a group of children were discussing a favourite picture book with an adult, who was guiding them to sketch some drawings. Pupils were engaged, learning and happy.
• Children were very confident to talk to inspectors and tell them about their learning. They sang beautifully in their singing assembly and were proud to explain the theme of the song about caterpillars.
• Children’s conduct when moving around the building to return to the early years is impeccable.

School details

Unique reference number Local authority Inspection number 102820 Redbridge 10048533 This inspection was carried out under section 8 of the Education Act 2005. The inspection was also deemed a section 5 inspection under the same Act. Type of school Primary School category Age range of pupils Gender of pupils Community 3 to 11 Mixed Number of pupils on the school roll 744 Appropriate authority The governing body Chair Headteacher Mr Stuart Phillips Mrs Patricia Hinds Telephone number 02085 991209 Website Email address www.williamtorbitt.org.uk/ admin.williamtorbitt@redbridge.gov.uk Date of previous inspection 1–2 October 2013

Information about this school

• William Torbitt Primary School is larger than the average-sized primary school. The school has expanded to four forms of entry since the time of the previous inspection. The early years consists of two part-time Nursery classes and four Reception classes.
• The proportion of disadvantaged pupils who are eligible for pupil premium funding is smaller than average.
• Altogether, 60% of pupils speak English as an additional language.
• The proportion of pupils who have SEN and/or disabilities is well below the national average.
• The school meets the current floor standards in relation to pupils’ achievement at the end of key stage 2.

Information about this inspection

• A section 8, short inspection took place on 5 June. This converted to a full section 5 inspection on 12–13 June because of serious safeguarding concerns highlighted during the inspection. There were different inspection teams for each part of the inspection.
• Inspectors observed learning in all year groups. Observations were undertaken with the headteacher, the three assistant headteachers/phase leaders and the special educational needs coordinator.
• Inspectors met with the chair of the governing body during both parts of the inspection.
• Inspectors met with representatives of the local authority during both parts of the inspection.
• Meetings were held with groups of pupils to discuss their learning and their views on the school.
• Inspectors met with groups of teachers to discuss their work and their experience at the school.
• Inspectors met with leaders to discuss their roles and the impact of their work.
• Inspectors heard pupils read and talked to pupils in the lunch hall, as they moved around the building and in the playground.
• Inspectors examined a range of school documents, including information on pupils’ progress across the school, improvement plans, curriculum plans and checks on the quality of teaching. They examined school records relating to safeguarding and behaviour.
• Inspectors scrutinised a large sample of books to see what progress pupils make across a range of subjects.
• Inspectors took account of the 44 responses to the Ofsted’s online questionnaire, Parent View, and of information gathered from discussions with parents during the inspection. Inspectors also took account of the 54 responses to the staff questionnaire and to the 62 responses to the pupil survey.

Inspection team

Ruth Dollner, lead inspector Chris Birtles Ann Debono Nick Turvey, lead inspector Dawn Titus

Her Majesty’s Inspector Ofsted Inspector Ofsted Inspector Ofsted Inspector Ofsted Inspector