Siddal Moor Sports College Ofsted Report

Full report

What does the school need to do to improve further?

• Improve the quality of teaching and learning, so that pupils’ outcomes across the school, particularly in mathematics, are good by making sure that:
  • in all subjects, teachers have consistently high expectations of what pupils can achieve
  • teachers questioning effectively probes pupils’ understanding, challenges misconceptions and deepens their thinking
  • pupils are provided with regular opportunities to develop the skills required to write at length.
• Improve the effectiveness of leadership and management by making sure that:
  • school leaders make better use of the pupil premium funding to improve the academic achievement and attendance of disadvantaged pupils
  • leaders use the catch-up premium and special educational needs funding in a focused way to bring about improvements to pupils’ outcomes
  • all leaders are precise when evaluating the impact of their actions on improving outcomes for different groups of pupils
  • governors are better placed to hold leaders to account for the difference that additional funding makes to pupils’ outcomes.
• Improve pupils’ personal development, behaviour and welfare by making sure that:
  • pupils improve their attitudes to learning in lessons where behaviour is less than good
  • leaders continue with the strategies needed to improve pupils’ attendance and reduce the levels of persistent absence. An external review of the school’s use of the pupil premium should be undertaken in order to assess how this aspect of leadership and management may be improved.

Inspection judgements

Effectiveness of leadership and management Requires improvement

• Many of the actions taken by current leaders have not had the desired effect on improving the quality of teaching. As a result, teaching across the school is not yet consistently good and is not leading to strong outcomes for pupils.
• The headteacher was appointed in January 2014. Since his appointment, he has had to make a number of changes aimed at improving the school. This is due to historically low aspirations, a curriculum that did not sufficiently meet the needs of pupils, inaccurate assessment information and pupils’ inconsistent attitudes to learning. Despite an overgenerous self-evaluation, the headteacher is acutely aware of the strengths and weaknesses of the school.
• In the past, leaders’ plans for improvement lacked sharply focused measures of success. As a result, leaders were unable to evaluate the effectiveness of their actions. Following advice and guidance from external partners, whole-school improvement planning has improved. Nevertheless, further work is still required to ensure that leaders evaluate the effectiveness of their actions with sufficient rigour.
• Leaders, including the governing body, have not evaluated incisively enough how the school uses the pupil premium funding and its effect on disadvantaged pupils’ progress. Leaders do not clearly explain the reasons behind some elements of expenditure. The approaches taken have not resulted in sufficient improvement in the progress made by some disadvantaged pupils.
• The same is true for how the school has used the Year 7 literacy and numeracy catch-up premium. The impact of the actions taken by leaders is not clear. Added to this, leaders have not measured the effect of the additional money that they receive for pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities. As a result, the progress of some pupils in receipt of this additional funding lags behind that of their peers.
• Historically, standards across the school have been too low. As a result, leaders now place a high priority on improving accountability systems and structures to promote stronger learning and progress. Leaders at all levels have been provided with training to help develop their skills in holding staff to account for the quality of teaching and learning and pupil outcomes. However, this training has not yet secured consistently good teaching or securely good outcomes for pupils.
• There remains some variation in the quality of teaching within subjects and across the school. Leaders have introduced strong policies to address the quality of teaching and introduced many helpful techniques and ideas to support teachers with their practice. However, not all teachers use these policies consistently well.
• A national leader of education and the local authority have provided sustained support and guidance to the school over a period of time. Their support has included a focus on securing more robust accountability systems and improving leadership at all levels. Some improvements are clearly evident. However, there is still more to do.
• Senior leaders work well with external partners to seek validation of their work. For example, leaders have brokered the use of specialist leaders of education to check that their assessments of pupils’ progress and achievement are valid. As a result, the accuracy of assessment across most subject areas has improved.
• The curriculum is broad and balanced. Leaders continuously review and adjust the curriculum in response to the new GCSE qualifications and they take into account pupils’ needs. Leaders have provided pupils with a range of qualifications to motivate them and meet their future career aspirations. Pupils value highly the very good advice and guidance that they receive about their future education, employment or training.
• The programme to develop pupils’ awareness and understanding of the challenges and opportunities facing them in modern Britain is particularly strong. For example, leaders ensure that pupils receive effective guidance in health and relationships education. As a result, pupils are well prepared and knowledgeable. They understand what it is to be a good citizen through the Siddal Moor ‘Model Citizen’ initiative.
• Leaders enrich the curriculum through a wide range of activities, for example, sports competitions, public speaking and visits to art galleries.
• Leaders plan opportunities to develop pupils’ spiritual, moral, social and cultural development and their understanding of British values carefully through a well-constructed curriculum programme. Leaders use assemblies, form-time activities and ‘drop down days’ to raise pupils’ awareness of topics such as racism and the importance of accepting people of different faiths.
• Leaders’ system to assess teachers’ performance is robust. Teachers’ objectives align closely to the school improvement plan and to improving outcomes for pupils. The headteacher ensures that leaders provide appropriate training for staff to ensure that objectives are consistently rigorous. The headteacher and governors have been prepared to take a tough stance on teachers not meeting the required standards.
• In the past, leaders have rightly identified that pupils’ attendance at school was not high enough. Consequently, they took decisive action to improve that aspect of their work. Leaders have raised awareness of the importance of attendance with all staff and pupils. They have successfully prioritised key issues such as reducing temporary exclusions and permanent exclusions from school. However, leaders recognise that there is still a lot of work to do.

Governance of the school

• Governors have not delved deeply enough into how leaders have allocated the additional funding provided for disadvantaged pupils and those eligible for the Year 7 catch-up premium. This is because school leaders have not provided governors with precise enough information. They have not held leaders stringently enough to account. As a result, governors are unable to account for the impact of these additional funds on pupils’ outcomes.
• Governors have made significant adjustments to the way that they work. They have grasped the opportunity, since the previous inspection, to restructure the governing body. As a result, they are more aware of the challenges facing the school and the key priorities for improvement.
• Governors are committed to their role and they regularly commission and undertake additional training. They are now able to question leaders robustly and take more rapid actions to secure better outcomes for pupils.
• Governors exercise appropriate oversight of the school’s systems to reward pay linked to performance. They rightly challenge the awarding of additional pay when pupils’ outcomes do not warrant this.

Safeguarding

• The arrangements for safeguarding are effective. There are comprehensive systems and records in place to ensure that pupils are safe and well cared for. Leaders, including governors, ensure that regular external audits are conducted to review the culture of safeguarding in the school. As a result, safeguarding practices continually improve.
• All staff in the school receive appropriate training in safeguarding procedures and those with additional responsibilities receive enhanced training. As a result, staff know how to take the appropriate action when circumstances demand it.
• Leaders ensure that there are appropriate filtering systems in place to keep pupils safe online. They provide pupils with strong guidance in lessons and through assemblies. Leaders regularly survey pupils to determine their awareness of online safety issues and take appropriate actions as required.
• Pupils feel safe and report being confident in knowing whom to approach in the school if they have a concern. They are confident that staff will take the appropriate action.

Quality of teaching, learning and assessment Requires improvement

• Teaching is too variable. While there are pockets of stronger practice in English, science and physical education, practice is not consistent across different classes, year groups and subjects. As a result, some pupils do not make sustained and strong progress.
• The teaching of disadvantaged pupils and pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities is not consistently good. As a result, these pupils make less favourable progress than other groups of pupils. Leaders do not use the pupil premium funding well enough to ensure consistently good progress for disadvantaged pupils.
• Pupils make slower progress when teachers do not effectively address misbehaviour and inattentiveness. Some teachers allow a minority of pupils to dominate learning.
• Pupils do not have sufficient opportunities to develop their extended writing skills across the curriculum. Some pupils’ written work demonstrates an inability to express their ideas effectively in writing. Teachers do not routinely focus on developing pupils’ spelling, punctuation and grammar. Consequently, it is common to find pupils repeatedly making the same technical mistakes.
• Teaching in mathematics is weaker than the teaching in other subjects. Teachers place insufficient emphasis on developing pupils’ problem-solving skills, fluency and mathematical reasoning. Pupils lack pride in their work. Diagrams are sometimes poorly constructed and work is left unfinished. As a result, pupils do not make the progress of which they are capable.
• Teachers do not consistently set work that provides pupils with sufficient challenge, particularly low- and middle-ability pupils. As a result, some teachers do not provide pupils with the depth of technical knowledge that will extend their learning.
• Teachers’ questioning is not used routinely well across subjects to deepen learning. In the most effective examples found by inspectors, such as in physical education, skilful questioning provoked thoughtful and incisive responses from pupils. This ensured that they made more-rapid progress.
• Teaching in English and science is improving and leaders are working to secure increased consistency. Most teachers plan lessons to challenge pupils in these subjects and there is a clear focus on preparing pupils for the increased demands of the revised curriculum.
• The quality of teaching is stronger for the most able pupils. For these pupils, teachers are aware of their needs and they use their strong subject knowledge to plan learning that is appropriately matched to meet that need. Pupils respond with sustained participation and engagement in their learning.
• Teachers generally demonstrate good subject knowledge and are enthusiastic about their subject. This supports pupils’ progress. Relationships between staff and pupils are in the main positive.

Personal development, behaviour and welfare Requires improvement

Personal development and welfare

• The school’s work to promote pupils’ personal development and welfare is good.
• Pupils have many opportunities to develop their leadership skills. This focus is ‘designed to make pupils the most employable around’. For example, pupils can become a sports prefect and act as reading mentors to provide one-to-one support for younger pupils.
• Leaders provide pupils with exceptionally good-quality careers guidance to promote high aspirations for pupils. The school organises careers fairs, work experience and one-to-one interviews for all pupils. Pupils say that they appreciate this valuable advice.
• The school’s work on pupils’ well-being is effective. For example, leaders ensure that pupils are familiar with mental health issues and how to cope with these issues should they arise. Leaders support pupils with their mental health with a specialist ‘in school’ team.
• Pupils are knowledgeable about how to keep themselves safe online through assemblies and the curriculum. Leaders support parents with useful information on the school’s website.
• Leaders raise awareness of bullying through the ‘speak out at Siddal Moor’ initiative. As a result, pupils say that bullying in the school is rare. This includes racist and homophobic bullying. Pupils are confident that when bullying does occur, they know whom to speak to and it is dealt with quickly and effectively.

Behaviour

• The behaviour of pupils requires improvement.
• There are instances of low-level disruption in some lessons, where pupils, particularly some boys, demonstrate a poor attitude to learning. Inspectors saw examples of pupils talking when the teacher was trying to teach, shouting out and not paying attention. These incidents occurred in lessons that did not engage pupils’ interest sufficiently well or when teachers’ expectations were too low.
• The number of pupils who receive fixed-term exclusions is high, especially for boys and disadvantaged pupils. Permanent exclusions remain too high but have declined recently compared to previous years.
• Overall attendance in 2016 was slightly below the national average, but particularly low for disadvantaged pupils and those who have special educational needs and/or disabilities. However, overall attendance is rising each year and is now broadly average.
• The proportion of pupils who persistently miss school is above the national average, particularly for disadvantaged pupils and those who have special educational needs and/or disabilities. Although persistent absence is reducing, leaders are aware that it is not reducing rapidly enough.
• Most pupils are well behaved around school and at break and lunchtime. As a result, there is a calm and orderly environment. Pupils are polite and the majority talked proudly about their school.
• Leaders understand the need to reduce temporary exclusions from school further. As a result, they have restructured the use of ‘the bridge’, an on-site inclusion unit to provide pupils at risk of exclusion with early intervention.
• Leaders liaise effectively with staff at alternative providers to make sure that pupils are safe, display high standards of behaviour, attend regularly and make good progress.

Outcomes for pupils Requires improvement

• Outcomes in 2016 fell below the national average, especially for disadvantaged pupils and high-ability girls. Only a very small minority of pupils gained the EBacc qualification (a good GCSE in English, mathematics, science, a humanity and a modern foreign language). Despite improvements, notably in English, there are too many subjects where pupils do not attain highly enough from their starting points.
• Provisional results for 2017 show that the percentage of pupils achieving a good GCSE pass in both English and mathematics was low. Pupils’ progress overall is too slow. Pupils made insufficient progress from their starting points and attained lower results than their peers nationally in a range of subjects.
• The assessment information presented to inspectors for pupils currently at the school shows that progress varies across subjects and is not consistently good. Pupils’ progress in mathematics still lags behind pupils’ progress in English. The work seen in pupils’ exercise books and the progress seen in lessons confirm this view.
• Boys and those pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities make slower progress than their peers. This is because teaching does not always meet their needs. Leaders, however, are taking effective action to address this issue.
• Outcomes for disadvantaged pupils have been low. Disadvantaged pupils’ learning has not been rapid enough to secure good progress. Leaders’ current data suggests that the performance of disadvantaged pupils is now improving.
• The most able pupils currently in the school are on track to achieve better outcomes in most subjects. They are challenged in higher-ability sets. Occasionally in mixed-ability groups they do not make progress in line with their capabilities. Leaders are working to ensure that all teachers ‘teach to the top’ instead of allowing teachers to be satisfied with just achieving a pass at GCSE.
• Leaders have recently reviewed their assessment system to monitor pupils’ progress across the curriculum. Leaders have invested heavily in external consultants to validate the suitability of assessments for different subjects. As a result, leaders are confident about the assessment data that teachers provide and the overview of attainment and progress that this gives.
• Leaders make thorough use of English and mathematics data received from primary school and internal assessments taken when pupils enter Year 7 to determine their strengths and weaknesses. Leaders now use this information to plan learning sequences and to set ‘expectations’ for pupils to ‘fly high’.
• In 2016, the proportion of pupils who left school and moved into education, training or employment was not good enough. This was because too few pupils left school with a good pass in either GCSE English, mathematics or both. Leaders’ current data indicates an increase in the number of pupils moving on to further education or training.

School details

Unique reference number 105834 Local authority Rochdale Inspection number 10036776 This inspection of the school was carried out under section 5 of the Education Act 2005. Type of school Secondary comprehensive School category Maintained Age range of pupils 11 to 16 Gender of pupils Mixed Number of pupils on the school roll 854 Appropriate authority The governing body Chair Karen McCarthy Headteacher Ray Baker Telephone number 01706 369436 Website www.siddalmoor.uk Email address office@siddalmoor.uk Date of previous inspection 24–25 March 2015

Information about this school

• The school meets requirements on the publication of specified information on its website.
• Siddal Moor Sports College is a slightly smaller than average-sized secondary school.
• The proportion of pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities is lower than the national average.
• The proportion of disadvantaged students supported by pupil premium funding is much higher than the national average.
• Most students are of White British heritage. The proportion of pupils who speak English as an additional language is much smaller than the national average.
• The proportion of pupils who require an education, health and care plan or a statement of special educational needs is above the national average.
• The school has less than five pupils who access alternative provision. Pupils attend Ace Construction.
• The school meets requirements on the publication of specified information on its website.
• In 2016, the school met the government’s floor standards, which set the minimum expectations for pupils’ attainment and progress by the end of Year 11.
• The school is a coasting school because it meets the Department for Education’s definition of a coasting school based on key stage 4 academic performance results in 2014, 2015 and 2016.
• The school works with a national leader of education to ensure that standards improve rapidly.

Information about this inspection

• Inspectors visited a range of lessons and observed teaching and learning across a number of different subjects and different ability groups. Some observations were conducted jointly with senior leaders.
• Inspectors observed registration periods and an assembly. They also listened to younger pupils read.
• Inspectors spoke to pupils informally at break, lunchtime and during lessons. Discussions were held formally with a range of pupils from across all year groups.
• Observations of pupils’ behaviour were undertaken in lessons, between lessons, during assembly, at breaktime, at lunchtime and on arrival to the school.
• Discussions were held with the headteacher, senior and middle leaders, teaching and support staff, and newly and recently qualified teachers.
• Inspectors met with the chair and vice-chair of the governing body. They also met with a representative from the local authority.
• An inspector spoke with a national leader of education who works in partnership with the headteacher of Siddal Moor Sports College.
• Inspectors undertook an in-depth analysis of pupils’ work across a range of subjects, some jointly with leaders. In addition, inspectors looked at pupils’ work in lessons.
• A range of documentation was scrutinised, including: the school’s self-evaluation document; school improvement planning documents; external reports; and the school’s evaluation of the quality of teaching and learning. Inspectors analysed attendance, behaviour and exclusion records. In addition, they scrutinised minutes from the meetings of the governing body. Inspectors also considered the school’s own information about the performance of its current pupils. Safeguarding policies and procedures were also examined.
• A phone call was held with a representative from the alternative provision provider.
• The lead inspector took account of 43 responses to Parent View, Ofsted’s online questionnaire, including one free-text response and 50 responses to the Ofsted’s staff questionnaire.

Inspection team

Alyson Middlemass, lead inspector Ofsted Inspector Annette Patterson Ofsted Inspector Timothy Gartside Ofsted Inspector Jamie Jardine Ofsted Inspector