Hensingham Community Primary School 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 teaching, learning and assessment throughout the school so that all pupils, particularly those who are disadvantaged and/or most able and those with SEND, make the progress of which they are capable by ensuring that teachers:
  • have high expectations of all pupils and a clear understanding of what they can achieve
  • assess pupils’ learning accurately and use this information effectively to provide learning that matches pupils’ abilities, provides sufficient challenge for all pupils and deepens their knowledge and understanding
  • focus on developing pupils’ basic skills in reading, writing and mathematics across a wide range of subjects.
• Urgently improve leadership and management at all levels, including governance, by ensuring that:
  • leaders provide governors with exact information about the quality of teaching and pupils’ progress so that governors have an accurate view of the school’s effectiveness
  • governors hold leaders to account for their actions to improve the quality of teaching and pupils’ outcomes
  • leaders identify how teaching needs to improve and give staff the support required to bring about positive change leaders and governors make effective use of the pupil premium funding to improve outcomes and attendance for disadvantaged pupils leaders identify pupils with SEND accurately and make certain that they receive the support that they need to make good progress from their starting points leaders develop the curriculum to deepen pupils’ knowledge and skills across the full range of subjects.
• Improve pupils’ behaviour by ensuring that:
  • teachers consistently manage pupils’ behaviour and support pupils to manage their feelings and actions so that disruption to learning reduces
  • pupils’ attendance, especially for disadvantaged pupils, improves to at least match the national average.
• Improve teaching and children’s progress in the early years by ensuring that:
  • staff provide children with a range of activities that are challenging and capture their interests
  • leaders provide training for staff to ensure that they have a secure understanding of how young children learn and they can assess children’s skills accurately on entry to the Nursery and Reception classes. An external review of the school’s use of pupil premium funding should be undertaken in order to assess how this aspect of leadership and management may be improved. An external review of governance 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

• Leaders have not acted with sufficient urgency to resolve prolonged weaknesses in pupils’ outcomes and in teaching. Published data, as well as the school’s own information, shows that pupils’ outcomes have declined significantly since the last inspection. Leaders’ actions to tackle these weaknesses over time are ineffective. Consequently, teaching is weak, and pupils continue to underachieve. Too many pupils have poor attendance, which holds back their learning.
• Leaders have not ensured that teachers have the skills, knowledge and understanding necessary to perform their roles well. Training has not been effective in resolving weaker aspects of teaching, especially in challenging pupils’ learning. Leaders do not provide teachers with enough advice and support on how to improve their practice. As a result, the quality of teaching, learning and assessment is inadequate.
• Leaders do not make certain that staff identify pupils’ needs accurately. They do not check thoroughly the impact that teachers have on pupils’ learning. Leaders do not know which groups of pupils are underachieving or in which subjects.
• Leaders’ self-evaluation is too generous because it is not based on rigorous monitoring of the school’s performance. This means that a culture of low expectations has developed. Pupils’ outcomes have deteriorated over time. Leaders now recognise this issue but have not acted with the necessary urgency to ensure that pupils currently in the school are making the progress that they should.
• The leadership of provision for pupils with SEND is poor. Procedures to identify pupils with SEND are weak. As a result, staff do not support these pupils’ needs as soon as necessary and they fall behind in their learning.
• Leaders do not ensure that disadvantaged pupils make the progress that they should. These pupils are not reaching the standards they need to in reading, writing and mathematics before they move on to secondary education. Leaders have failed to make sure that actions funded through the pupil premium strengthen pupils’ progress and improve their low attainment.
• By contrast, leaders use the sport premium funding well to increase pupils’ participation in a wide range of sports and physical activities. Older pupils particularly appreciate the opportunity to train as play leaders. They enjoy helping to organise games and activities for younger pupils at breaks and lunchtimes.
• Middle leaders’ actions to resolve weaknesses in pupils’ writing and in the teaching of mathematics are not making enough difference to pupils’ work. The standard of pupils’ writing is still poor and pupils lack sufficient fluency in using their mathematics skills in other subjects.
• Leaders have not sufficiently dealt with teachers’ weak subject knowledge or their poor planning for classroom activities. As a result, the curriculum that pupils experience does not help them to learn well. For example, in geography older pupils do not learn how to describe key aspects of mountains when given work about mountains. They do not develop accurate knowledge of trade routes when learning about the importation of cocoa beans.
• Pupils benefit from making visits to the local area, including to museums and to participate in science projects. They gain from residential visits, for example visiting London to see places of historic and cultural interest.
• Leaders ensure that pupils’ spiritual, moral, social and cultural development is effective. Pupils are developing an understanding of British values, for example they are tolerant and respectful towards one another. During a recent visit to the magistrates’ court they learned about the rule of law and how the justice system works. They have a developing awareness of the diversity of people who live in Britain.
• Leaders’ effective support for parents and carers, for example through providing sessions on phonics and reading, is helping pupils’ learning at home. Parents appreciate the increased amount of information that they receive about their children’s learning.
• The school may not appoint newly qualified teachers.

Governance of the school

• Governors have overseen a decline in the quality of education at the school since the previous inspection.
• Leaders do not give governors clear information about the work of the school, particularly in relation to the progress of disadvantaged pupils. The information that they receive is too reliant on conversations and assumptions, rather than on secure evidence. This means that governors do not hold leaders to account for pupils’ progress.
• Governors have recognised the need to improve their ability to hold school leaders to account. They have recently undertaken training and development with the support of the local authority. Records of governing body meetings show that governors are becoming more informed about what is happening in the school.
• Governors have an adequate understanding of their duty to promote equality among pupils.

Safeguarding

• The arrangements for safeguarding are effective.
• All systems for safeguarding are fit for purpose. Vetting checks on the suitability of staff are complete. Staff and governors receive regular information on the most up-to-date safeguarding practice to help to keep pupils safe.
• Leaders respond to concerns about pupils’ safety effectively. They take their responsibilities for safeguarding very seriously. Leaders have created a culture of promoting pupils’ safety and welfare. Pupils say that they feel safe at school. They know how to be healthy and stay safe.

Quality of teaching, learning and assessment Inadequate

• The quality of teaching has declined since the previous inspection. Leaders have failed to support teachers so that all have a secure understanding of how to improve their skills.
• Teachers’ expectations of pupils are too low and their assessment of pupils’ abilities is weak. Furthermore, teachers’ understanding of the essential skills and knowledge which pupils need to acquire in each year group is insecure. As a result, work is not well-matched to pupils’ abilities. Some work is too easy, other work is too hard. As a result, few pupils make the progress that they should. They are not well-prepared for the next stage of their education.
• Staff do not give the most able pupils the challenge that they need to extend their thinking and deepen their understanding. Equally, teachers and teaching assistants do not provide lower-ability pupils, including those with SEND, with the support that they need. Sometimes teachers expect pupils to work unsupervised on computer learning programs, often pitched at a very low level, which are unrelated to the learning undertaken by other pupils in their class. Several pupils told inspectors that they are struggling in their studies and would like more support from staff. Consequently, these pupils fall even further behind.
• Teachers are beginning to help pupils develop their fluency in mathematics. However, pupils’ skills in mental arithmetic, including multiplication tables, are generally weak. Teachers do not provide enough opportunities for pupils to apply their skills to solving problems. Therefore, very few pupils reach the higher standard in this subject by the end of key stage 2.
• The teaching of reading is ineffective and pupils’ progress in reading is weak. Teachers do not ensure that pupils read from appropriately challenging texts. Pupils’ phonics knowledge and skills are too variable. Pupils are expected to read books that are too easy for them.
• Recent initiatives to support pupils in improving their writing are beginning to show an impact in improving pupils’ progress in this subject. However, standards in writing are still too low.
• Teaching across other subjects is ineffective and pupils’ progress is poor. Too much work covers topics superficially. Teaching fails to allow pupils to work at a greater depth. Pupils have limited opportunities to practise their reading, writing and mathematical skills for a range of purposes in different subject areas. The quality of pupils’ learning in history and geography is especially poor.

Personal development, behaviour and welfare Inadequate

Personal development and welfare

• The school’s work to promote pupils’ personal development and welfare requires improvement.
• Staff provide supportive pastoral help for pupils who experience stress or feel angry or upset. However, this support does not improve their academic progress. Indeed, when pupils attend additional support sessions they sometimes miss out on other lessons and find it hard to catch up on their learning.
• Staff are caring and pupils are mostly comfortable in approaching them for help. However, several pupils told an inspector that staff treat some pupils more favourably than others.
• Pupils learn how to keep themselves safe from harm. For example, they are aware of the dangers of online bullying and how to stay safe on the internet. They understand the difference between right and wrong and learn to take responsibility for their actions.

Behaviour

• The behaviour of pupils is inadequate.
• Pupils’ attendance is below average and not improving. Disadvantaged pupils’ attendance is lower than that of other pupils nationally and around one third of this group of pupils are persistently absent from school. This has an adverse effect on their progress.
• Most pupils enjoy school and are keen to learn, but teachers do not fully harness their eagerness to study. Teachers do not consistently expect pupils to do their best and take pride in their work. Consequently, the work in pupils’ books is often messy and their handwriting is poor.
• Pupils’ behaviour as they move around the school is sensible. In lessons, however, pupils are not consistently well behaved, particularly when the teaching does not help them as much as it should. There is some inappropriate shouting out and slow responses to teachers’ instructions. Some teachers do not manage pupils’ behaviour well enough to ensure that weaker behaviour does not disrupt pupils’ learning.

Outcomes for pupils Inadequate

• Pupils’ progress and attainment is weak because of poor teaching over time. Those pupils leaving Year 6 have not been well prepared for secondary education. In 2018, the attainment of more than half of the Year 6 pupils leaving the school was below average at the expected standard in reading, writing and mathematics combined. This was also the case for pupils leaving the school in 2016 and 2017.
• Current evidence in pupils’ books and leaders’ records of pupils’ progress shows little improvement. Pupils lack the basic skills that they need to read and write fluently. They are not able to use their reading and writing skills in other subjects. Pupils do not have the confidence to apply their skills to solve problems in mathematics.
• Evidence from teachers’ assessments for pupils at the end of Year 2 give a similar picture of low attainment in reading, writing and mathematics. In relation to their starting points, pupils’ progress is weak.
• Outcomes for disadvantaged pupils are exceptionally weak. They have not improved over time. Pupils with SEND do not achieve well. Additionally, very few of the most able pupils reach the higher standards at the end of Year 2 and Year 6.
• Across other subjects, there is scant evidence that pupils are developing their knowledge, skills and understanding. Pupils’ work in topic books is frequently of a very low standard. Activities do not promote their curiosity and motivate them to want to learn more. Tasks are generally ‘one-off’ activities and there is very little evidence that teachers are building on pupils’ previous learning. Pupils underachieve in relation to their ability.
• Pupils’ attainment of the expected standard in the phonics screening check was average in 2018. Not enough current pupils in Year 1 can use phonics to read unfamiliar words.

Early years provision Inadequate

• Children do not make the progress that they should in early years.
• Children generally enter the school with skills that are lower than those typically expected for their age. However, teachers’ exceptionally low assessments of children’s skills are inaccurate. Leaders fail to challenge the resulting culture of low expectations that continues as children move through the school. Children’s progress is weak. Too few children achieve the good level of development that they need in readiness for Year 1.
• The quality of teaching is inadequate. This is because teachers have a poor understanding of how to help young children to learn. The activities that they provide often fail to challenge or interest children.
• The teaching of phonics in the early years is not strong enough to give children a firm foundation on which to build good reading skills. Teaching lacks challenge and children do not make as much progress as they should.
• Staff do not make the best use of routines, such as at snack time, to support children’s personal and social development and their independence as learners.
• Leadership of the early years is not effective. Leaders do not guide teachers on how to deal with those aspects of early years teaching that need to improve. Therefore, leaders’ actions entrench weaknesses in teaching rather than resolve issues urgently.
• Overall, children behave well and leaders make certain that children are safe. Safeguarding procedures are thorough.

School details

Unique reference number Local authority Inspection number 133726 Cumbria 10082088 This inspection of the school was carried out under section 5 of the Education Act 2005. 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 170 Appropriate authority The governing body Chair Headteacher Paul Smith Nick Hepburn-Fish Telephone number 01946 690021 Website Email address http://www.hensingham.cumbria.sch.uk nickhepburnfish@hensingham.cumbria.sch.uk Date of previous inspection 3–4 December 2014

Information about this school

• Hensingham is smaller than the average-sized primary school.
• The majority of pupils are White British. There is a small minority of pupils who speak English as an additional language.
• The proportion of pupils supported by the pupil premium is above average.
• The proportion of pupils with SEND is below average.
• The proportion of pupils with an education, health and care plan is above average.

Information about this inspection

• Inspectors observed teaching and learning in all year groups.
• Inspectors met with pupils and heard some pupils read.
• Inspectors met with the headteacher, the deputy headteacher and leaders with subject responsibilities.
• The lead inspector met with members of the governing body.
• The lead inspector held a telephone conversation with, and then met with, a representative from the local authority.
• Inspectors scrutinised a sample of pupils’ books from all year groups across a range of subjects.
• Inspectors considered several documents, including a summary of the school’s self-evaluation, governing body minutes and notes of governors’ visits to the school, external reviews by the local authority and the school improvement plan.
• Inspectors scrutinised information about pupils’ progress, the use of additional funding, behaviour, attendance and safety.
• Inspectors took account of 34 responses on the Ofsted online questionnaire, Parent View, and spoke to parents at the start of the school day.
• Inspectors considered the comments made by parents in eight free-text responses.
• Inspectors reviewed the 21 responses to Ofsted’s online staff questionnaire and 38 responses to Ofsted’s online pupil questionnaire.

Inspection team

Jan Corlett, lead inspector Mavis Smith

Ofsted Inspector Ofsted Inspector