Stanley Park High 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?

• Ensure that planned changes to the key stage 3 curriculum are implemented quickly and effectively so that pupils develop the subject-specific knowledge, understanding and skills they need in readiness for key stage 4.
• Strengthen the quality of teaching, learning and assessment, and improve outcomes across the school by:
  • ensuring that teachers are held to account for the quality of teaching and the impact of their work on pupils’ achievement
  • ensuring that teachers receive the support they need to teach well
  • making effective use of the strongest practice in the school to improve teaching where it is weak
  • ensuring that teaching is challenging for all pupils, particularly the most able
  • ensuring that the curriculum in each subject is coherent and well planned, supporting high-quality teaching and strong progress for pupils
  • strengthening the use of assessment to provide a secure understanding of how well pupils achieve
  • ensuring that teachers use this information to plan learning which deepens and extends pupils’ knowledge, skills and understanding
  • equipping all staff with the expertise they need to meet the needs of pupils with SEND, including those who are taught in the specialist resource provisions
  • monitoring the impact of recent leadership changes in the sixth form on the quality of teaching across the 16 to 19 study programmes.
• Improve pupils’ personal development and outcomes by:
  • ensuring that they receive appropriate guidance when choosing courses to study in the next stage of their education
  • providing sixth-form students with an appropriate programme of personal, social, health and economic (PSHE) education.
• Improve communication with parents and carers, including by providing reliable information about how well pupils and students achieve in all year groups. An external review of the school’s 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

• Staff, including middle leaders, have not been held to account for the quality of teaching or for pupils’ poor achievement.
• Performance management arrangements have been very weak. Teachers have been left to identify their own development needs, with no oversight from leaders. Training has not been informed by any analysis of the strongest and weakest teaching across the school.
• Provision for pupils with SEND has been poorly led. Staff have not been trained to provide adequately for pupils with SEND, including those who receive some of their education in the specialist resource provisions.
• The curriculum is inadequate. The school’s curriculum does not equip pupils in Years 7 and 8 with the subject knowledge they need to succeed in key stage 4. Pupils have not been prepared well enough for the increased demands of revised GCSEs and vocational qualifications.
• Curriculum coverage in key stage 3 is poor in history, geography, art and computing. This weakens pupils’ spiritual, moral, social and cultural development. It has not been adapted to cater for the increased proportion of pupils joining the school with high attainment on entry.
• Too much time is lost in Year 9. Pupils choose a series of ‘electives’ before deciding on their subject choices for key stage 4, rather than deepening their subject knowledge during Year 9. This approach limits pupils’ learning because there are long periods of time where pupils do not study the courses they will later pursue.
• Curriculum planning within subjects is inconsistent. In some subjects – for example science – learning is not sequenced consistently well. This prevents pupils making strong progress and gaining secure understanding.
• Funding to support pupils eligible for the pupil premium has not been used effectively. As a result, disadvantaged pupils achieve considerably less well than other pupils nationally. A new leader has been appointed to tackle this. She has drawn up appropriate plans to ensure that attention is given to these pupils’ achievement. Inspectors recommend an external review of this spending to help ensure that this funding is used effectively.
• Communication with parents has been poor. Parents have received scant information about their child’s progress. Over half of the 146 parents who completed the Ofsted questionnaire, Parent View, expressed dissatisfaction with the quality of information they receive. Reporting systems are not fit for purpose. Previous leaders prohibited subject teachers from contacting parents to discuss their child’s learning.
• Since his appointment in September 2018, the new headteacher has developed an accurate understanding of the school’s weaknesses. He has made it clear that things need to change and, with calm authority, has begun to raise staff and pupil expectations. This has resulted in an improvement in behaviour.
• Performance management arrangements have been reintroduced for all senior and middle leaders to ensure that they are properly held accountable and supported. The senior leadership team has been extended. All senior and middle leaders have targets which are linked tightly to the school’s well-crafted improvement plan.
• A programme of classroom lesson observations has been implemented, including scrutiny of pupils’ work. This is beginning to inform teachers’ professional development. Agreement has been reached with teachers’ professional associations to implement the new appraisal system in full from September 2019.
• The curriculum has been reviewed. From September 2019, pupils in Years 7 and 8 will receive more teaching of individual subjects. The system of electives in Year 9 is also being revised. The school’s setting arrangements are under review to ensure that the most able pupils are suitably challenged.
• New leadership has been appointed for SEND provision. In a short space of time, the head of Horizon school has remedied some of the key weaknesses which have previously inhibited the progress of pupils with autism spectrum disorder.
• Leaders are implementing a range of well-planned actions to support current Year 11 pupils. This includes, for the first time, informing parents how well their children are attaining. Additional teaching is planned more systematically to remedy gaps in learning and support pupils’ revision.
• It is too early for changes made by current leaders to have had significant impact on improving outcomes for pupils. Nevertheless, the capacity of the school’s leaders to bring about necessary further improvements is clear.

Governance of the school

• Until recently, governors and trustees had not held leaders to account robustly enough for pupils’ poor achievement. They recognise these failings and have taken effective action to ensure that they are not repeated.
• Changes have been made to the leadership of the trust. Some senior staff are no longer in post. Trustees and governors have taken the decision to overhaul the school’s approach to the curriculum.
• Membership of the local governing body has been strengthened. This is resulting in much better oversight of the quality of education provided. Minutes of local governing body meetings show good support provided to the new headteacher. The minutes also show that governors are more effective in asking questions about the impact of leaders’ actions.
• Trustees have commissioned external reviews of the trust and local governance to identify where further improvements can be made.

Safeguarding

• The arrangements for safeguarding are effective.
• Clear and effective procedures are in place to ensure that pupils at risk of harm are identified, helped and protected.
• Leaders work well with outside agencies, such as the multi-agency safeguarding hub, to ensure that vulnerable pupils are kept safe. Weekly meetings ensure that the well-being of pupils known to be at risk of harm is monitored closely.
• Leaders work well with external agencies to ensure that pupils most vulnerable to risk receive the support they need, including, where appropriate, through access to therapy.
• All the required checks on adults’ suitability to work with pupils are completed and recorded.

Quality of teaching, learning and assessment Inadequate

• While there is some strong teaching in the school, the quality of teaching overall is too variable to remedy pupils’ underachievement.
• Assessment practice across the school is also too variable. The school’s information about pupils’ progress and attainment is unreliable. Across a range of subjects, pupils achieved far less well in public examinations than their teachers expected.
• In some subjects, particularly at key stage 3, the school’s assessment information is of little value. It does not indicate how well pupils are attaining in subjects such as history, geography and computing. As a result, teachers’ effectiveness in planning learning to meets pupils’ needs is variable across and within subjects.
• Weaker teaching is characterised by teachers’ low expectations of what pupils can achieve. Inspectors observed learning that was restricted to copying information, answering very simple comprehension questions or repeating work that had been done earlier in the same lesson.
• Some teaching in the specialist resource provisions is provided by unqualified staff who have not had the training or support to enable them to teach effectively.
• The teaching of mathematics and science remains too inconsistent. The school has been unable to recruit permanent science teachers. Pupils who are taught by temporary staff underachieve considerably.
• Support for pupils in Year 7 who join the school with low standards of literacy and/or numeracy has stalled due to recent changes to staffing arrangements.
• There are pockets of strong teaching in the school. Where teaching is more effective, it is characterised by high expectations of what pupils can achieve and a secure understanding of what they already know and can do. In these lessons, teachers engage pupils. Skilful use of questioning ensures that all are involved and participating. Work in pupils’ books reflects these teachers’ careful sequencing of learning. Consequently, pupils make good progress in deepening and extending their knowledge and understanding. Similarly, in these lessons, teaching assistants are deployed effectively and support pupils with SEND well.

Personal development, behaviour and welfare Requires improvement

Personal development and welfare

• The school’s work to promote pupils’ personal development and welfare requires improvement.
• Pupils have not been supported well enough when choosing courses to reflect their aptitude and ability. In a few cases, pupils’ choices for post-16 education have been restricted. This undermines the effectiveness of the school’s careers education, information and guidance programme. Pupils learn about different occupations through visits to the school by external speakers.
• Pupils reported that they feel safe in school. Pupils in key stages 3 and 4 understand how to keep themselves safe from risks, including, for example, those associated with social networking.
• Pupils with SEND taught in the specialist resource bases told inspectors they are well cared for and that they feel safe, supported and included.
• Pupils are respectful of differences and talk knowledgeably about the importance of respecting others, including those who have protected characteristics. Leaders are quick to adapt the curriculum in response to rare incidents of prejudicial behaviour.
• The school’s programme of assemblies promotes pupils’ good understanding of British values.
• A few parents raised concerns about bullying. Inspectors’ discussions with a wide range of pupils (including those with SEND) and scrutiny of the school’s records showed that bullying is rare. When incidents do occur, leaders manage them appropriately.

Behaviour

• The behaviour of pupils is good.
• Pupils arrive punctually to school and to lessons. They routinely bring the equipment they need. They follow routines well. For example, at the end of the school day, key stage 3 pupils line up quietly and queue patiently to hand in the tablet computers they have used in lessons. Pupils in the specialist resource provisions behave well.
• The school environment is calm and orderly. Pupils are respectful to each other and to visitors. In the large majority of lessons, they behave well. This includes where teaching is less effective.
• The headteacher’s raised expectations have brought about improvements, including consistency in managing behaviour across the four mini-schools.
• These raised expectations have led to a slight increase in the proportion of pupils subject to fixed-term exclusion this year. In contrast to previous years, no pupils have been permanently excluded since September 2018.
• Actions to improve attendance, introduced this year, are proving effective. As a result, attendance has improved to be in line with the national average. The proportion of pupils who are persistently absent has reduced to be below average.
• The attendance of pupils with education, health and care (EHC) plans is high.
• Leaders closely monitor the behaviour, attendance and welfare of pupils who receive some of their education through alternative provision. Their records show that these pupils are generally well served by the curriculum they receive elsewhere, although the attendance of a small minority is too low.

Outcomes for pupils Inadequate

• Year 11 pupils’ progress and attainment in their best eight subjects have been too low for the last two years. Poor curriculum decisions meant that too few achieved well across the full range of subjects.
• Take-up in the humanities subjects and modern foreign languages in key stage 4 is too low. This hinders the preparation of pupils – especially the most able – for the next stage of their education.
• Despite some improvements last year, pupils’ progress in English, mathematics and science by the end of key stage 4 remained significantly below average.
• Disadvantaged pupils achieve poorly across the curriculum and in all the core subjects.
• The most able Year 11 pupils also underachieved considerably in 2018.
• Current pupils underachieve across all key stages because of weaknesses in the curriculum, together with inconsistencies in the quality of teaching, learning and assessment. This can be seen through work in their books, including in science.
• Pupils with SEND, including those who attend the specialist resource provisions, achieve poorly. Teaching in the specialist resource provisions and in the main school does not meet these pupils’ needs sufficiently.
• There are pockets of better achievement within and across subjects. Those pupils who take physical education, modern foreign languages and creative media qualifications do well.
• Strategies to improve GCSE results are beginning to prove effective. Improved systems of assessment, together with a systematic approach to improving outcomes in English, mathematics and science, indicate that current Year 11 pupils are achieving better than in the past.

16 to 19 study programmes Inadequate

• As in the main school, students do not achieve well enough. Published performance information reflects a decline in the effectiveness of the sixth form over the last two years.
• Outcomes were particularly poor last year. Achievement at A level and in vocational subjects was in the bottom 10% of all post-16 providers nationally. Students with high and average prior attainment underachieved particularly.
• Last year, achievement was poor in a range of subjects, including mathematics, geography, chemistry, photography, biology, business studies and fine art.
• Despite prospective students receiving guidance in selecting their subjects, a small minority of students pursue courses which are not well matched to their needs or abilities.
• Inspectors found variation between subjects through looking at students’ work in their books and folders. Similarly, students’ understanding of what they need to do to achieve the grades they need for future success was too variable. While there is some effective teaching, the quality of teaching over time in the sixth form has not been consistent enough. Until recently, little monitoring of sixth-form teaching quality has taken place.
• As in the main school, assessment in the sixth form is weak. Previous leaders did not foresee the decline in standards evident last year.
• Students who receive some of their education in the specialist resource provisions have not been supported well enough.
• Sixth-form students receive independent advice and guidance about the next steps in their education, training or employment. This is supplemented by work experience in Year 12, which is generally well matched to students’ programmes of study. Provision for other aspects of their personal development is weak. For example, there is currently no programme of PSHE education.
• Provision for students who retake GCSEs in English and mathematics is good. Last year, a much-higher proportion of students improved their grade in English than was the case nationally. Progress in GCSE mathematics was above average.
• Provision for sports-related studies is strong and well organised, particularly through the football academy which is run in partnership with Carshalton FC. The school has developed links with Crystal Palace FC to extend and strengthen this aspect of provision.
• In a short space of time, new leadership in the sixth form has raised expectations regarding students’ attendance, punctuality and attitudes to learning. Students are now monitored much more carefully than before. Attendance in the sixth form is beginning to improve because those with previously low attendance are receiving appropriate support.
• Leaders have begun to monitor the quality of teaching, learning and assessment in the sixth form. They are working with subject leaders to ensure that students receive the support they need as they prepare for public examinations.

School details

Unique reference number Local authority Inspection number 143002 Sutton 10058938 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 Academy converter 11 to 18 Mixed Mixed Number of pupils on the school roll 1,244 Of which, number on roll in 16 to 19 study programmes 191 Appropriate authority Board of trustees Chair Headteacher Jane Pascoe Amit Amin Telephone number 020 8647 5842 Website Email address www.stanleyparkhigh.org.uk/ office@stanleyparkhigh.org.uk Date of previous inspection Not previously inspected

Information about this school

• The school converted to academy status in December 2016. It is the only school in the Academies of Inspiration multi-academy trust. Since September 2018, the chair of the board of trustees also served as the chair of the local governing body. The trust delegates responsibility for oversight of the school to the local governing body but remains the responsible body.
• The school is organised into four mini-schools within the main building.
• One of these mini-schools, Horizon, includes specialist provision for pupils with autism spectrum disorder, including students in the sixth form. Currently, 70 pupils receive some of their education in this provision. The Aqua base is for pupils with mild autism and the Ignis base is for those with moderate autism. The proportion of pupils with an EHC plan is well above average. The proportion of pupils entitled to SEND support is also above average.
• Higher proportions of pupils than average are eligible for the pupil premium.
• Since the last inspection of the predecessor school, the proportion of pupils joining the school with higher-than-average prior attainment has increased.
• A small number of pupils receive some of their education at alternative provision. The providers used are Study Box, Skills and Integrated Learning Centre, Sporting Chances and Sutton Tuition and Reintegration Service.

Information about this inspection

• Inspectors observed teaching and learning and scrutinised pupils’ work across a range of subjects and in all key stages. Many of these observations were carried out jointly with senior staff from the school.
• Inspectors met with a wide range of pupils, including pupils who receive some of their education in the specialist resource provisions.
• Inspectors also held meetings with a wide range of staff, including senior and middle leaders and other teachers.
• Inspectors met with a representative of the trust and members of the local governing body.
• Inspectors scrutinised a range of school policies and documents, including the school’s self-evaluation and improvement plan and records regarding pupils’ behaviour, safeguarding, attendance and safety.
• Inspectors considered the views of parents through the 146 responses to the Ofsted survey, Parent View, and the 139 comments made using free text. They considered the 75 responses to Ofsted’s questionnaire for staff and the 31 responses to the pupil survey.

Inspection team

Daniel Burton, lead inspector Philippa Nunn Jason Hughes Martin O’Sullivan Sophie Cavanagh

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