Ernest Bevin College Ofsted Report

Full report

What does the school need to do to improve further?

• Strengthen leadership by ensuring that:
  • leaders routinely and effectively review the impact of their actions, to improve outcomes for all groups of pupils
  • governors support and challenge school leaders to bring about the improvements needed
  • leaders and governors have a more stringent monitoring and evaluation of funding for disadvantaged pupils and those who have SEND so that progress for these pupils improves
  • a curriculum review is undertaken to ensure equity of opportunity for all pupils over the subjects they are able to study.
• Improve the quality of teaching, learning and assessment, by:
  • ensuring that teachers have consistently high expectations of what pupils are capable of achieving across the curriculum
  • reviewing and refining assessment practices, so that pupil information is accurate and used to plan learning that challenges pupils of different abilities to learn well over time
  • ensuring that teachers’ questioning skills are developed, so that pupils are given opportunities to extend their ideas and think deeply
  • providing opportunities for teachers to improve their practice by learning from one another and sharing good practice among wider partnerships.
• Improve the quality of 16 to 19 study programmes by:
  • strengthening leadership so that leaders’ plans and actions have a demonstrable impact on improving the quality of the education that students receive
  • ensuring that students benefit from consistently effective teaching on A-level courses, so that all groups of students, especially those with high starting points, attain the grades of which they are capable
  • reducing student absence. An external review of governance should be undertaken in order to assess how this aspect of leadership and management may be improved. 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 may be improved.

Inspection judgements

Effectiveness of leadership and management Requires improvement

• The standard of education provided at the school has declined since the previous inspection. Too many pupils do not make good progress, because of weaknesses in leadership and teaching.
• Governors have not held leaders to account stringently over a significant period of time. As a result, standards slipped. Governors have failed to monitor the school’s use of additional funding effectively. Consequently, progress for disadvantaged pupils and those who have SEND is below the national average.
• Over time, analysis of progress has been ineffectual for particular groups, such as disadvantaged pupils or pupils who have SEND, and pupils of varying ability levels. As a result, leaders have been unaware of the poor progress made by groups of pupils. A new assessment system to monitor the progress of pupils has recently been put in place. It is too early to judge the impact of this system.
• Leaders’ evaluation of the effectiveness of the pupil premium funding lacks precision and detail. Leaders are not always able to identify which strategies are having a positive impact on disadvantaged pupils’ achievement and which are not.
• Leaders have not ensured that their use of the funding for pupils who have SEND is helping these pupils to make progress that is similar to their peers in the school and nationally. Leaders have not ensured that teachers receive the training and support that they require to ensure that their teaching meets the needs of these pupils. As a result, these pupils, particularly those with low starting points, are not routinely taught well. There is too much variability in the quality of teaching of these pupils, and their progress is inconsistent.
• Leaders’ use of Year 7 literacy and numeracy catch-up funding is effective. Pupils are assessed accurately and support is focused and timely. Consequently, the reading and numeracy skills of pupils who had not reached the expected standards by the end of primary school have improved.
• Leaders have recently revised the training that teachers receive. As a result, those teachers who spoke with inspectors were typically positive about the training that they now receive. They say that they can see the difference it is making to the effectiveness of their teaching.
• The range of subjects delivered at key stage 4 is broad. However, current curriculum design restricts pupils’ choice of subjects that they can study. As a result, the curriculum does not consistently meet the needs and aspirations of all pupils.
• Senior leaders take positive steps to ensure pupils’ participation in the wide range of cultural, creative and sporting activities that take place beyond lessons. This is recognised by pupils as a positive aspect of the school’s curriculum.
• Pupils enjoy the curriculum for spiritual, moral, social and cultural understanding and can articulate their opinions on diversity, religion and equalities well. British values underpin teaching. Pupils are ready for life in the 21st century.
• Leaders have ensured a culture of mutual respect for staff and pupils. The school is calm and orderly.
• The careers guidance programme is effective. Pupils receive information which meets their requirements. As a result, a large majority of pupils, including disadvantaged pupils and those who have SEND move on to further education or training.

Governance of the school

• Governors do not have a secure enough understanding of the school’s strengths and weaknesses. Consequently, governors have not been effective in holding leaders to account for school outcomes.
• Governors do not fully understand the published performance information for their school. They rely too heavily on school leaders to analyse and present information for them. As a result, their monitoring of the school’s work and additional funding has been lax, and standards have declined.
• Governors are committed to the school. They visit regularly as link governors, understand many day-to-day issues and are aware of local risks to pupils.

Safeguarding

• The arrangements for safeguarding are effective.
• Leaders have systematic procedures for checking the backgrounds of staff when they are appointed. At the start of the inspection, the single central register of pre-employment checks did not meet statutory requirements. This was rectified during the course of the inspection.
• The designated safeguarding lead works well with other staff and with a wide range of external agencies. This helps to ensure that pupils at risk of harm have access to the support they need.
• Staff are suitably trained to identify pupils at risk of harm. Staff receive regular safeguarding training, including on the ‘Prevent’ duty, to spot those pupils at risk of radicalisation and extremism.
• All incidents are recorded appropriately and securely so that leaders can monitor actions and follow up on incidents or issues where necessary. The designated safeguarding lead and other leaders check and follow up on concerns, so that pupils are safe.
• Pupils informed inspectors, both in meetings and through informal discussions, that they feel safe at the school. Pupils could explain how they are taught to be, and keep, safe, both when at the school and when outside the school. They spoke about how to stay safe online, and how the curriculum supports their understanding of how to be responsible citizens.

Quality of teaching, learning and assessment Requires improvement

• The quality of teaching requires improvement because it is too variable across the school and inconsistent within subject areas. Consequently, teaching is not ensuring that pupils across a range of subjects and year groups are making good progress over time.
• The most common weakness, seen both in pupils’ books and in lessons, is a lack of high expectations for pupils. This includes a lack of challenge for the most able. Pupils do not get enough opportunities to extend their learning, think creatively or solve complex problems.
• The quality of assessment across the school and within departments is inconsistent. As a result, teachers are not planning activities that challenge pupils sufficiently or meet their needs, based on their starting points or prior learning. This is leading to variability in the rates of progress made by different groups of pupils, because pupils are set work that is either too hard or too easy.
• Teachers’ questioning is variable. When questioning is most effective, teachers use it to develop and extend pupils’ knowledge and understanding. However, when it is not used well, teachers accept superficial responses from pupils and they do not require pupils to think deeply about a concept or idea.
• Disadvantaged pupils are not receiving appropriate support for their needs consistently. It is a similar picture for pupils who have SEND. As a result, these pupils do not make good progress.
• In classes where strong relationships are evident between teachers and pupils, they lead to effective learning and good progress. Pupils in these lessons display a positive learning ethos and good attitude towards their studies. They take pride in their work and engage actively in their learning. This was particularly evident in Year 11 mathematics and English lessons.
• Teachers have a wealth of strong subject knowledge. When it is used skilfully, teachers adapt to tackle misconceptions and address pupils’ needs quickly.

Personal development, behaviour and welfare Good

Personal development and welfare

• The school’s work to promote pupils’ personal development and welfare is good.
• Pupils are thoughtful and show respect for each other, staff and visitors. Relationships between adults and pupils are highly positive.
• Most pupils take pride in their work and continually give their best effort in lessons. On occasion, pupils do not take enough care over their work, and so their work is incomplete and less well presented.
• Pupils feel safe at this school. They have confidence that their teachers will look after them and deal with any concerns they have. From the moment pupils cross the threshold of the school in the morning, they are met by positive, enthusiastic staff who model respectful relationships well.
• Pupils report that incidents of bullying are rare and that they know there is an adult in school they can speak with if they have any concerns. Checks of bullying records made by inspectors showed that incidents of bullying are followed up and resolved effectively.
• The pupils with whom inspectors spoke confirmed that staff are approachable and considerate of pupils’ mental and physical well-being. Leaders take necessary steps to ensure that these aspects are promoted effectively through pupils’ learning and the school’s support services.
• Pupils’ spiritual, moral, social and cultural development is good. Leaders ensure that pupils learn about fundamental British values and other faiths and cultures effectively. The pupils with whom inspectors spoke recognise and value differences, and they respect views different from their own.
• Leaders ensure that arrangements are in place to check on the personal development and welfare of those pupils who attend alternative provision.

Behaviour

• The behaviour of pupils is good.
• Pupils typically behave well in lessons. Cases of pupils’ poor conduct disrupting lessons are few and far between. On the rare occasions where pupils lose concentration or there is low-level disruption, it is generally because teachers have not set work at an appropriate level or are not supporting pupils’ needs effectively.
• Pupils’ conduct around the school is good. At breaktime, lunchtime and at the change of lessons, pupils move around the school in an orderly manner. They arrive punctually at lessons. Pupils treat the school environment with respect and do not leave litter lying around.
• There are several pupils who arrive mid-year for a range of reasons, such as permanent exclusions from other schools or being on the brink of them. The majority of these pupils settle swiftly into their new school life, because of the established and effective behaviour routines.
• Leaders manage the few occasions of poor behaviour well. As a result, fixed-term and permanent exclusions have reduced.
• Pupils’ overall attendance is broadly in line with the national average. Disadvantaged pupils and those who have SEND have the poorest attendance, because their funding is not used well to combat this.

Outcomes for pupils Requires improvement

• Both historically and currently, pupils do not make consistently strong progress across a range of subjects and year groups. Consequently, outcomes require improvement.
• Overall, progress measures in 2017 were broadly in line with the national average. Disadvantaged pupils, the most able pupils and those who have SEND did not make the progress of which they are capable, including in English and mathematics.
• The provisional examination results for 2018 indicate that, despite a dip in overall progress, outcomes in mathematics for disadvantaged and most-able pupils have improved and are now broadly in line with the national average. In English, provisional information shows that outcomes for the most able pupils have improved. This is not the case for middle-ability and disadvantaged pupils.
• Currently, the progress pupils make across a range of subjects is too variable. This is because the quality of teaching is mixed, both across and within subjects. The exception to this is mathematics, where in-school assessment records show that progress is consistent across year groups and for pupils of different abilities.
• Inspection evidence and the school’s in-year assessment information show that, in many year groups, disadvantaged pupils and those who have SEND are not making good progress. This is because the teaching in many subjects is not well matched to their needs.
• Leaders are aware of the reasons why outcomes have not improved sufficiently over time. For example, weak teaching has been identified. They are resolute to drive standards up through closer monitoring of teaching. Leaders acknowledge the need to check the reliability of pupil assessment information, so that targeted intervention can take place. This is so that gaps in pupils’ knowledge and understanding are addressed swiftly. Nevertheless, leaders’ actions are in their infancy and the impact so far is limited.
• Pupils receive effective careers guidance through a wide range of opportunities. As a result, almost all pupils move on to further education or training at the end of key stage 4.

16 to 19 study programmes Requires improvement

• The 16 to 19 study programmes require improvement because students, including disadvantaged and most-able students, do not make consistently good progress on academic and vocational courses.
• The quality of teaching is variable, particularly for the most able students. Teachers’ expectations of what these students can achieve are not consistently high enough, and they are not routinely set work that challenges them to attain the highest grades.
• Leadership of the sixth form requires improvement. Leaders do not consistently assess, monitor and evaluate students’ learning effectively. Where students make slower progress than they should, notably on A-level courses, leaders do not act decisively to secure improvements to teaching and the curriculum.
• Leaders have been slow to address the low rates of attendance in the sixth form. Too many students do not attend as regularly as they should and could.
• Students who resit GCSE English and/or mathematics do not make progress in line with others nationally in improving their grades.
• Students benefit from the range of good-quality activities which leaders provide to broaden their study programmes. Leaders ensure that opportunities for students’ personal development and work-related learning form an integral part of their curriculum experience. These aspects of the curriculum meet the requirements of the 16 to 19 study programmes and make a strong contribution to students’ wider development. For example, students participate in Combined Cadet Force and Duke of Edinburgh Award courses, work experience, mentoring of younger pupils and charity work.
• High-quality careers education enables students to make informed choices about their futures. Almost all students who completed their courses in 2017/18 moved into higher education, employment, training or apprenticeship.

School details

Unique reference number Local authority Inspection number Type of school 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 101053 Wandsworth 10082246 Secondary comprehensive Community 11 to 18 Boys Mixed 1262 381 Appropriate authority The governing body Chair Principal Telephone number Website Email address Richard Glasson Rukhsana Sheikh 02086728582 http://www.ernestbevin.london mail@ernestbevin.london Date of previous inspection 5-6 October 2011

Information about this school

• This inspection is a section 8 deemed section 5 inspection.
• The school is larger than the average-sized secondary school.
• The proportion of disadvantaged pupils is above the national average.
• The proportion of pupils who have SEND is in line with the national average. The proportion of pupils who have an education, health and care plan is below the national average.
• The majority of pupils are from minority ethnic backgrounds, which is higher than the national average.
• Almost half of the pupils speak English as an additional language.
• The school uses alternative provision at The Francis Barber pupil referral unit, Wandsworth.

Information about this inspection

• Inspectors observed teaching and learning across a wide range of subjects and year groups, both in the main school and in the sixth form. Observations were completed jointly with members of the school’s leadership team. Inspectors also observed an assembly and pupils’ conduct at breaktime, lunchtime and the end of the school day.
• The inspectors scrutinised pupils’ books in classrooms and they also completed a discrete review of pupils’ books.
• The inspectors held various discussions with senior leaders, other leaders and class teachers. The lead inspector met with a group of governors and two representatives from the local authority.
• Inspectors also met with groups of pupils, ranging from Years 7 to 13. Inspectors spoke with a number of pupils informally and in lessons.
• Inspectors scrutinised a range of documents, including leaders’ self-evaluation. Inspectors considered a selection of school policies, leaders’ assessment information, pupil attendance information, including that relating to groups of pupils, and documents relating to safeguarding.
• There were no responses to Ofsted’s survey Parent View.

Inspection team

Carolyn Dickinson, lead inspector Jeffery Quaye James Whiting Philippa Nunn Dr Okolo-Angus Her Majesty’s Inspector Ofsted Inspector Ofsted Inspector Ofsted Inspector Ofsted Inspector