Savio Salesian College 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?

• Leaders must improve the attendance of pupils, by:
  • focusing on strategies that will bring the attendance of disadvantaged pupils to the same level as others nationally
  • rapidly reducing the number of pupils who are persistently absent
  • ensuring that the whereabouts of absent pupils are known in order that these pupils can be kept safe.
• Leaders must improve the outcomes in mathematics, by:
  • setting aspirational targets that can be used to plan teaching that raises standards for pupils who have a range of starting points
  • increasing the amount of challenge for pupils, while allowing them time to practise and improve skills.
• Leaders at all levels in the school must drive improvement at a faster pace, by:
  • raising expectations and aspirations, particularly for disadvantaged pupils
  • reviewing the impact of school improvement strategies and planning for future improvement on the basis of this evaluation
  • meeting their statutory duty to deliver careers education, information, advice and guidance and ensure that those pupils who have currently missed out have additional opportunities to acquire this support
  • ensuring that governors challenge the school more effectively to reach ambitious targets
  • ensuring that pupil premium funding is spent effectively and improves outcomes for disadvantaged pupils. 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 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 do not have high enough expectations of the outcomes pupils can achieve. Some targets for improvement, such as those for the attendance of disadvantaged pupils and for achievement in Year 9, lack challenge.
• The school’s self-evaluation of strengths and weaknesses and the effectiveness of actions is not sufficiently robust to bring about improvement. The school’s leaders do not have the information they need to identify which actions are bringing about positive changes. This in turn means that leaders cannot plan further improvements to ensure that standards rise quickly.
• The school does not meet its statutory duty to deliver careers education, information, advice and guidance to pupils in key stage 3. Changes were introduced during the last academic year but there are some pupils who have missed the new planned provision, including those in Years 8, 9 and 10. This means that pupils do not have the necessary information about career pathways to choose appropriate subjects or begin to explore post-16 choices. Pupils in Years 9 and 10 said they had had no careers education at all.
• Although the curriculum provides opportunities for pupils to learn about British values, not all pupils engage with this provision. Consequently, pupils in both key stages 3 and 4 have particularly weak knowledge of the British system of democracy and how parliament works.
• Leaders’ actions to secure improvements in teaching were not monitored sufficiently in 2015/16. The school’s view of the quality of teaching is overgenerous and does not correlate with the outcomes for pupils in subjects. Strategies are now in place that will lead to more robust and reliable quality assurance. Leaders understand the need to check the quality of teaching they observe with other evidence such as pupils’ test results and work over time in their books. This more rigorous process has not yet had an impact on pupils’ achievement.
• Teachers value the change in culture which means they can now participate in training that occurs beyond the school. Many consultants have been into school to deliver training. Staff speak highly of the impact of local authority training days for subject specialists and the opportunity for networking. The links with Notre Dame Catholic College are providing teachers with support in many areas and staff value this. Sharing good practice within the school is a recent development. It is too early to see the impact of the new approach to professional development. Leaders are starting to develop a system where their monitoring of teachers’ work is followed up by appropriate training and support.
• Teachers do not use information about pupils’ prior attainment to inform their planning of teaching. The school reported that there had been a detailed analysis of key stage 2 information in mathematics; however, there was no evidence that teachers took this into account in lessons.
• Leaders in the school do not monitor and evaluate the impact of strategies funded by pupil premium in a consistent way. This means that they are planning for some strategies that were ineffective last year to be used again this year. Other strategies were not evaluated at all. The use of catch-up funding for Year 7 pupils was much more effective in English than it was in mathematics. There is no evidence of how mathematics provision will be improved in the future for those pupils who enter the school having failed to meet the expected standard at the end of key stage 2.
• The progress of pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities is not tracked effectively. Little evidence was seen of planning to meet the specific needs of these pupils.
• Leaders at all levels and governors are passionate about the framework of values that underpins a Salesian education. Respectful, supportive relationships are evident between the adults and pupils within the school.
• The curriculum is broad and balanced. Pupils have a choice of subjects to study as options in Year 10. The school has modified the curriculum to ensure that more pupils can access the English Baccalaureate subjects and this has resulted in an increased number of pupils being successful according to this measure.
• There are some strong middle leaders who know what needs to happen to improve outcomes in their areas of responsibility. Standards in their subjects are rising faster than in other areas of the school. All middle leaders spoke highly of the improvements in accountability and the involvement of the governors in the school’s monitoring processes.
• The school offers a wide choice of extra-curricular activities for pupils as well as opportunities for enrichment experiences in school time. Around 30 pupils run their own masses at the school. Pupils enjoy opportunities for overseas visits, participation in an award-winning debating team and the Duke of Edinburgh’s Award scheme to name but a few.
• Newly qualified teachers may be appointed in subjects other than mathematics.

Governance of the school

• Governors do not provide sufficient challenge to leaders in the school.
• Governors have not set the bar high enough for pupils at this school. They are complacent about very low levels of attendance and high levels of persistent absenteeism as they justify small improvements over three years as successes rather than comparing the school’s performance with national measures.
• Minutes of meetings show that the governors have challenged the school about the quality of teaching in mathematics but there is little evidence that they have subsequently checked whether the situation has improved.
• The governing body has a monitoring group comprising the school improvement partner, governors and the headteacher; they hold meetings with heads of subject on a rolling programme. The group collates detailed information about actions taken but does not evaluate the impact of the actions and does not ask for plans for further improvement. Consequently, there is insufficient impetus for improvement.
• Governors are unable to account effectively for the spending of pupil premium funding. There is no monitoring of the impact of actions taken using the funding. Standards for disadvantaged pupils remain very low, although there are some signs of improvement. Governors explained the low outcomes for disadvantaged pupils as being due their poor levels of attendance. They do not set high aspirations for these pupils.

Safeguarding

• The arrangements for safeguarding are not effective.
• Too many pupils are absent from school and absences are not always followed up quickly enough.
• There is insufficient communication between staff to ensure that every absence is accounted for in a timely way.
• The school has taken effective action to secure the site and improve safety.
• The school has a robust system of referral when concerns are raised about the safety of pupils.
• The school has appropriate procedures to ensure that staff are checked before appointment. All staff are trained regularly in safeguarding and are familiar with recent guidance.

Quality of teaching, learning and assessment Inadequate

• Teachers’ assessment of pupils’ work is failing to meet the needs of the pupils. The school’s assessment policy is not followed consistently and there are too many instances of pupils not learning from their mistakes.
• Teachers’ planning at key stage 3 does not take into account how teachers will sufficiently develop pupils’ knowledge, skills and understanding.
• Pupils are not given enough opportunities to apply their learning in ways that challenge their thinking or allow them to practise their skills and embed the learning.
• The school is not using information from primary schools to allow teachers to plan adequately to meet pupils’ needs from the outset. This results in the duplication of work and stalling of progress, particularly in mathematics.
• Work across all year groups and sets is not demanding enough. Teachers do not have high enough expectations of what pupils can achieve, including most-able and disadvantaged pupils.
• Pupils and teachers do not know what targets they are aiming for at key stage 3. Consequently, teachers’ feedback is not focused on the next steps that pupils should take to achieve at a higher level. As a result of this, many pupils are unable to explain how their learning is developing and improving.
• Spelling is a weakness for too many pupils. Teachers do not challenge incorrect spelling consistently and pupils lack the skills to improve their own spelling.
• Where teachers’ expectations are high and learning is well-paced, pupils make more rapid progress. In religious education, pupils learn effectively together and support each other to use correct terminology in developing their answers to examination questions.
• The range of work provided by teachers is often too narrow to engage both the most and least able. This means that the most able are not being stretched and complete the work quickly, and for the least able the teacher moves on before they have completed the tasks.
• There are inconsistencies in the quality and presentation of work produced by pupils.
• The teaching of mathematics is weak and has been since the last inspection of the school. As a consequence, pupils throughout the school have poor numerical and mathematical skills and some struggle with the simplest of calculations. The most able pupils are not being stretched which leads to a slow pace of learning and off-task behaviour. Too many pupils cannot fully master the work they are doing as they do not understand the concepts fully. Pupils can perform mathematical operations but have little understanding of why they are completing them or how they could be used in the real world. Too much work that pupils have already mastered in primary school is repeated.
• Homework is not set consistently to extend pupils’ knowledge and skills.
• Extended writing opportunities are offered on a regular basis in English. Well-constructed discussion tasks provide pupils with plenty of material to write about. Pupils are able to gather their thoughts and organise them into written pieces of work. They are able to explain their work with confidence and enjoy their learning.
• Pupils’ speaking skills are developed well. In geography, for example, pupils are encouraged to provide extended explanations drawing upon their previous learning.

Personal development, behaviour and welfare Inadequate

Personal development and welfare

• The school’s work to promote pupils’ personal development and welfare is inadequate.
• The new personal, social, health and economic (PSHE) education programme has not yet been evaluated. Pupils are not fully engaging with the programme and it is not developing their abilities to reflect and understand issues.
• The school does not deliver the statutory careers education, information, advice and guidance programme to all pupils. This means that pupils are not well prepared for the transition to GCSE options or to their next phase of education.
• Pupils take pride in their uniform and their school.
• Pupils report that bullying is rare at the school and the very detailed school logs support this.
• Pupils are aware about the dangers of using social media and keeping safe on the internet, through assemblies, information technology lessons and PSHE.
• Pupils have a very good understanding of respect and tolerance for those who are different to themselves and gave examples of peers intervening to support others on the rare occasions that pupils used inappropriate language. There is an intolerance to racism throughout the school and any incidents are dealt with firmly and swiftly.
• Pupils feel looked after and cared for in the school. They have a range of adults who offer them advice and they value this. The support for vulnerable pupils is proactive and thorough. There are strong systems to provide early help to those who need it.
• The chaplaincy work in school is making a significant contribution to the pupils’ spiritual, moral and cultural education.
• Pupils at the three off-site provision centres are entered for examinations and are successful. There is regular contact between the school and the providers in order that these pupils are safe. The outcomes, behaviour and attendance of these pupils are monitored regularly.

Behaviour

• The behaviour of pupils requires improvement.
• Attendance rates at the school are very low and persistent absence rates are high. There are marked improvements in attendance for some of those who have low attendance but this is not yet reducing the whole-school figures.
• Disadvantaged pupils and pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities have very low rates of attendance. Persistent absence in these groups of pupils remains very high, despite a reduction during the last academic year.
• Pupils’ attitudes to learning are not consistently positive. Off-task behaviour is evident in many lessons and this reflects pupils’ own views of the behaviour in class.
• The school’s code of conduct for behaviour is not used consistently by staff. This has led to a culture of low-level, off-task chatter and distraction in many lessons.
• The school is an orderly environment. Pupils conduct themselves well along corridors and there is no evidence of graffiti and just a small amount of litter is left after break and lunchtime. Most pupils behave in a friendly manner towards each other.
• No fixed-term exclusions have taken place this term. This is a substantial fall from the very high numbers in previous years. The provision offered by the school’s ‘Bosco centre’ is having a positive impact on the poor behaviour of those pupils who are referred to it as an alternative to exclusion from school.

Outcomes for pupils Inadequate

• Results in 2015 fell across most measures including the number of pupils who achieved five good grades at GCSE including English and mathematics, and the achievement of boys and disadvantaged pupils. Provisional 2016 exam results indicate that low ability, middle ability and disadvantaged pupils made much less progress than others nationally. The difference in attainment and progress for disadvantaged pupils when compared to other pupils nationally is closing in some subjects but continues to be large.
• Outcomes in mathematics, although improving, continue to be very low. Pupils in both key stages make insufficient progress over time and are suffering from the impact of a legacy of weak teaching over several years.
• Outcomes in English have been improving and in 2016 were particularly strong. Pupils make good progress over time in some groups but this is not consistent. Pupils’ progress in key stage 3 is better than in key stage 4 in this subject.
• Outcomes in 2016 were strong in additional science, art, food technology and Spanish. Outcomes were weak in geography, core science, religious education and history.
• Most-able disadvantaged pupils are now making better progress than in recent years according to the school’s own data. However, the reliability of the assessment data from mathematics is not secure.
• Outcomes for pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities are improving but not rapidly enough to be in line with others from the same starting points.
• The most able do not make sufficient progress to catch up with their peers nationally as work is rarely challenging enough. The least able do not make good enough progress as the teacher often moves through tasks and explanations too quickly.
• The school’s predictions for pupils’ outcomes in 2016 were not accurate in over half the subjects. The school has taken action to improve the quality of predictions using expertise at the associate school, Notre Dame Catholic College, and throughout the Liverpool group of local authorities.
• The school’s support programme in mathematics is not having sufficient impact on achievement overall in this subject.
• The school has improved its collation of data on pupils’ attainment and progress at regular times throughout the year. However, the school compares the outcomes for disadvantaged pupils with other pupils in school not with other pupils nationally. Consequently, expectations for these pupils are too low.
• Pupils are making improved progress in many subjects in Years 7 to 11 according to the school’s data.
• The number of pupils achieving the highest grades at GCSE increased three-fold in 2016.
• Pupils are making rapid gains in progress in Year 7 in English, as a result of the effective use of the catch-up funding. Pupils who read to inspectors were fluent. Pupils are less successful in catching up in mathematics.

School details

Unique reference number Local authority Inspection number 104959 Sefton 10019789 This inspection of the school was carried out under section 5 of the Education Act 2005. Type of school Secondary School category Age range of pupils Gender of pupils Number of pupils on the school roll Foundation 11 to 16 Mixed 504 Appropriate authority The governing body Chair Headteacher John Toye Mrs Frances Harrison Telephone number 0151 5213088 Website Email address www.saviosalesiancollege.com admin@saviosalesiancollege.com Date of previous inspection 15–16 October 2014

Information about this school

• The school meets requirements on the publication of specified information on its website.
• This is a small school which is in a foundation trust with Notre Dame Catholic College. It is part of the Salesian group of schools. The executive headteacher and associate headteacher are seconded from Notre Dame Catholic College.
• A high proportion of pupils attending the school are disadvantaged.
• A smaller-than-average proportion of pupils are from minority ethnic groups. Most pupils speak English as their first language.
• The proportion of pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities is above average. No pupil has a statement of special educational needs or an education, health and care plan.
• A small number of pupils are educated full time at Everton Free School and the Impact Centre, Sefton. Some pupils are educated on a part-time basis at Hugh Baird College and Alt Valley, part of North Liverpool Community College.

Information about this inspection

• Meetings were held with the executive headteacher; senior leaders; governors, including the chair; the local authority support officer and middle leaders. Inspectors also spoke to the alternative providers.
• Inspectors observed 25 lessons and carried out three learning walks.
• Inspectors listened to five pupils read.
• Inspectors met a range of pupils of all ages and spoke with pupils on corridors at break and lunchtime.
• The school’s internal inclusion unit, the Bosco Centre, was visited.
• The team looked at pupils’ books, scrutinised documents and minutes of meetings.
• During the inspection, the responses of 15 parents from Parent View, 74 pupil responses and 44 staff responses to surveys were considered.

Inspection team

Elizabeth Haddock, lead inspector Deborah Bailey Vicky Atherton

Ofsted Inspector Ofsted Inspector Ofsted Inspector