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?

• Ensure that leaders provide effective leadership and urgently improve the quality of education in the school by:
  • developing systematic quality assurance systems
  • routinely evaluating the impact of their actions
  • designing a curriculum that enables all pupils to develop their knowledge, skills and understanding and make the best possible progress.
• Improve the quality of teaching and learning by making sure that all teachers:
  • have high expectations of what their pupils can achieve
  • provide the right level of challenge for their pupils, particularly the most able
  • sequence learning in a way that enables pupils to make links with and build on what they already know
  • use questioning effectively to enhance pupils’ learning.
• Urgently improve outcomes by ensuring that pupils, particularly those who are disadvantaged and the most able, make good progress in all subjects, especially English, mathematics and science.
• Reduce the number of fixed-term exclusions, particularly for disadvantaged pupils and those with SEND.
• Build on the improvements already made to increase the attendance rate of disadvantaged pupils.

Inspection judgements

Effectiveness of leadership and management Inadequate

• Since the last inspection in October 2016, those responsible for the leadership and management of the school have not acted with the required urgency. They have not accepted the level of change that is necessary for this school to no longer require special measures. Consequently, for the last two and half years, pupils have been, and continue to be, failed.
• The appointment of a new headteacher in September 2017 on a two-year secondment brought more focused leadership to the school. His genuine commitment to the school and its wider community has raised the morale of staff, pupils, parents and carers. The headteacher’s moral purpose and desire to do the best for the pupils have been a shining example to staff. However, the weaknesses at this school require far more than these qualities to bring about the much-needed improvements.
• Leaders have not demonstrated the capacity to drive improvement at the required rate. Their strategic planning is weak. Systematic quality assurance systems do not exist. Leaders do not routinely monitor and evaluate the impact of their actions on pupils’ progress.
• Using a range of external support, senior leaders have introduced several new initiatives. What has been lacking is a coherent rationale for the changes that have been made. Leaders have changed various systems and protocols, for example in relation to planning lessons and giving feedback, but they have not addressed fundamental weaknesses in the quality of pupils’ education.
• Senior and middle leaders have not thought clearly about what they want their pupils to learn and how to implement that effectively. Consequently, the curriculum from Years 7 to 11 does not enable pupils to develop their knowledge, understanding and skills in an effective way. This is one reason why pupils do not make good progress during their time in the school.
• The local authority and archdiocese have provided the school with a range of support. However, this support has not had any significant impact on improving the quality of teaching and leadership at the school. Consequently, pupils’ progress has not improved. This school requires more than just piecemeal support. The local authority and archdiocese have not worked together constructively to find a more long-term, radical solution to the worrying situation at the school.
• Staff enjoy working at the school and feel supported by leaders. Nearly all the staff who responded to the online questionnaire said that they felt proud to be a member of staff at the school. However, it is of great concern that all the respondents also believe that pupils are challenged to make good progress. This is clearly not the case and shows that staff do not have high enough expectations of what their pupils can achieve.
• There have been two external reviews of the school’s use of the pupil premium funding since the last inspection. Leaders have acted on some of the recommendations following these reviews. However, their actions are not improving outcomes for disadvantaged pupils.
• Leadership of CEAIG is very strong. The school meets all the nationally recognised benchmarks for high-quality careers provision. All pupils in Years 7 to 11 benefit from a very effective CEAIG programme that comprises a range of events, speakers and visits, as well as help and guidance for individual pupils. This has contributed to a significant increase in the proportion of pupils who progress to further education, training or employment. This figure is now above the national average.
• The senior leader who leads on teaching and learning is dedicated and resolute. However, his efforts alone are not enough to raise the standard of teaching across the school. A range of strategies have been employed to address weaknesses in teaching but there is little evidence of impact. There are not enough strong practitioners in the school to model to others what good teaching looks like. Subject leaders do not have the necessary skills to improve the quality of teaching in their departments.
• Pupils have the opportunity to be involved in a wide range of extra-curricular activities. These enrichment opportunities make a significant contribution to their spiritual, moral, social and cultural development. They benefit from a comprehensive, high-quality personal, social, health and economic (PSHE) education programme. This is an inclusive school that values diversity. In this environment, pupils are encouraged to be respectful and reflective. They are prepared well to become responsible citizens in modern Britain.
• The school may appoint newly qualified teachers so long as leaders ensure that they are able to provide sufficient support and mentoring for these teachers.

Governance of the school

• A new chair of governors, who has experience in governing schools in challenging circumstances, has been in place since November 2017. Under his leadership, governance of the school has improved. Over the last year, governors have been asking the right questions of leaders about the quality of education in the school. However, it is concerning that it has been left to governors to raise important issues, such as the quality of the curriculum.
• Members of the standards committee challenge leaders, particularly about the impact of their actions. Governors have an accurate assessment of the weak position of the school but are not able to resolve the situation themselves.

Safeguarding

• The arrangements for safeguarding are effective.
• Leadership of this aspect of the school’s work is impressive. Leaders ensure that all staff have a good understanding of their responsibilities in relation to safeguarding. The high-quality training that staff receive means that they are well placed to spot any signs of pupils being at risk. Leaders have created a strong culture in which pupils feel safe, valued and happy.
• All protocols, systems and practices are fit for purpose. Staff keep detailed records of safeguarding concerns.
• Staff take swift steps to follow up safeguarding concerns and refer them to outside agencies as appropriate. They tenaciously explore every avenue to support the welfare of pupils. The way that school staff work with external agencies is a strength. Partnerships are well established, which helps to keep pupils safe. Staff have a strong awareness of the local issues that may pose a safeguarding risk to their pupils.

Quality of teaching, learning and assessment Inadequate

• Only a very small proportion of pupils benefit from routinely good teaching. Senior leaders’ attempts to improve the quality of teaching have been hampered by the school’s difficult financial situation. Most significantly, this means that too many pupils are being taught by non-specialist subject teachers.
• Most teachers do not have high enough expectations of what their pupils can achieve. This means that they do not provide them with the right level of challenge. Consequently, this prevents pupils, particularly those who are disadvantaged and the most able, from making good progress.
• Pupils being insufficiently challenged is a particular concern in key stage 3, where teachers do not have a strong enough grasp of pupils’ prior learning or starting points. This prevents pupils from continuing any good progress that they have made in primary school. Some key stage 3 pupils told an inspector that, in mathematics, they find the work too easy.
• Programmes of study do not help pupils to develop their knowledge and skills. Poor sequencing of learning does not support the deepening of pupils’ conceptual understanding. Most teachers do not use assessment information effectively to plan future learning for pupils.
• Most teachers do not use questioning well enough to encourage pupils to think and explain their answers. Too often, questioning remains at a basic level and is not used to probe and develop pupils’ understanding. In addition, it is not used well to tease out any misconceptions before moving on to new learning.
• Many teachers do not understand how to develop pupils’ literacy skills in a meaningful way that will enhance their learning. Strategies for developing literacy are superficial and not underpinned by the need to develop pupils’ deep understanding, for example of key vocabulary.
• Positive relationships exist between teachers and pupils. Pupils speak highly of the help and support that they receive from their teachers. Year 11 pupils appreciate the time that their teachers give to help them with their revision. Unfortunately, most teachers do not combine this support and care of their pupils with high academic expectations.
• A very small proportion of pupils are benefiting from high-quality teaching. In these classrooms, teachers routinely use their expertise in their subjects to build pupils’ confidence in their learning. They understand the importance of how learning is sequenced and do this well so that pupils develop their understanding securely.

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 who attend Savio Salesian College are very well cared for. Leaders have created a safe and nurturing environment in which pupils’ welfare is a high priority. Vulnerable pupils are particularly well supported.
• This high-quality care for individual pupils is underpinned by a strong programme of PSHE education. Within this programme, pupils learn how to look after their emotional and physical well-being, including how to stay safe in a wide range of situations.
• The culture of the school is one that values individuals. Leaders have created an environment in which pupils feel safe and comfortable. This gives them confidence, for example, to be open about their sexual orientation and gender identity.
• Pupils who spoke with inspectors said that bullying is rare. Pupils agree that, when it does happen, it is dealt with effectively by staff.
• Leaders ensure that the personal development and welfare of pupils who attend alternative provision are a high priority. Effective communication exists between school staff and the providers. Thorough procedures are in place to check on these pupils’ attendance.

Behaviour

• The behaviour of pupils requires improvement.
• The actions that staff have taken to improve pupils’ attendance have had some impact. Since the last inspection, there has been a steady improvement in the overall attendance rate but this is still below the national average for secondary schools. Staff have had significant success in reducing the number of pupils who are regularly absent from school. The overall persistent absence rate is now lower than the national average for secondary schools. There has also been some improvement in the attendance of disadvantaged pupils. However, the attendance rate of this group remains below that of their peers in the school and significantly below that of other secondary pupils nationally.
• Some pupils’ difficult circumstances have a negative impact on their behaviour. Staff work hard to manage these pupils’ behaviour so that they can learn more effectively. In some cases, this is very successful. However, this is not always the case and fixed-term exclusion rates are high, particularly for disadvantaged pupils and those with SEND. There is a strong emphasis on meeting the needs of individuals. However, a lack of analysis of patterns and trends limits the strategic insight of leaders in relation to exclusions.
• Most pupils, particularly in key stage 4, demonstrate very positive attitudes to learning. They value the strong working relationships that they have with their teachers. On occasions, particularly in key stage 3, some pupils become disengaged and cause low-level disruption. This is usually related to weaknesses in the quality of teaching and the lack of appropriate challenge.
• Pupils behave well around the school. During break and lunchtime, their behaviour is calm and mature. They socialise well and show respect for each other and the staff on duty. They are polite and friendly to visitors. They are also very loyal to their school.

Outcomes for pupils Inadequate

• The provisional data for 2018 shows that pupils underachieved considerably across a range of subjects by the end of Year 11. Their progress was inadequate in nearly all subjects. This represented a significant decline from the previous two years, when pupils’ progress was also below average.
• The lack of progress of disadvantaged pupils is particularly concerning. Substantial differences exist between the achievement of disadvantaged pupils and that of other pupils nationally. These differences are not diminishing.
• The progress of the most able pupils also gives great cause for concern. They make poor progress throughout their time in the school because they are not challenged enough. Consequently, they do not attain the high grades of which they are capable.
• Current pupils are only faring marginally better than their peers in recent years. This is particularly the case in the English Baccalaureate (EBacc) subjects. The curriculum, quality of teaching and leadership are not strong enough to enable pupils to make good progress in these subjects.
• A very effective CEAIG programme has improved the proportion of Year 11 pupils who progress to further education, training or employment. In 2018, this figure was above the national average. However, poor outcomes for pupils, particularly in EBacc subjects, limit their choices for post-16 and post-18 study.
• Oversight of the provision for children looked after is strong. The person responsible for this small group of pupils has a firm grasp of the social and academic progress that they make. The strategic leadership of provision for pupils with SEND is not strong. While individual pupils are well looked after, there is no oversight of the impact of provision on these pupils’ academic progress.
• Many pupils have weak literacy skills. This has a negative impact on their achievement across the curriculum. Various strategies have been introduced to improve their literacy but with little impact. This is because the initiatives are piecemeal and superficial. Leaders do not have a strategic plan for how they are going to improve pupils’ basic literacy and enhance their ability to use a wide vocabulary in an effective way.
• Developing pupils’ reading skills, including reading for pleasure, is not a high enough priority for leaders. There is very little opportunity for pupils to read whole texts. Access to books is limited. Leaders have not ensured that the library is an environment that encourages a love of reading.

School details

Unique reference number Local authority Inspection number 104959 Sefton 10056733 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 Voluntary aided 11 to 16 Mixed Number of pupils on the school roll 442 Appropriate authority The governing body Chair Headteacher Telephone number Website Email address John Thornhill Anthony Costello 0151 521 3088 www.saviosalesiancollege.com/ admin@saviosalesiancollege.com Date of previous inspection 4–5 October 2016

Information about this school

• This school is smaller than the average-sized Catholic secondary school. It is part of the Salesian group of schools. The most recent section 48 inspection took place in February 2017.
• The proportion of disadvantaged pupils is nearly twice the national average.
• Most pupils speak English as their first language.
• The proportion of pupils with SEND is above average. The proportion of pupils with an education, health and care plan is below average.
• A small number of pupils are educated off-site at the local authority’s Impact Centre.

Information about this inspection

• Inspectors observed teaching and learning in lessons across a range of subjects, including joint observations with leaders. They looked at pupils’ work during their observations. They also carried out a work scrutiny with senior leaders.
• Inspectors met with three groups of pupils. They also talked with others informally during breaks and lunchtimes. Discussions were held with staff, including senior and middle leaders and class teachers. The lead inspector met with a representative of the Archdiocese of Liverpool, the chair of the governing body and a representative of the local authority.
• Inspectors took account of the 39 responses to Ofsted’s online Parent View survey and the 22 free-text responses.
• Inspectors took account of the 18 responses to the online staff questionnaire and the 25 responses to the pupils’ online questionnaire.
• Inspectors scrutinised a range of documents. These included the school’s self-evaluation and improvement plan and information about the school’s performance.

Inspection team

Anne Seneviratne, lead inspector Shane Ierston Linda Griffiths

Her Majesty’s Inspector Ofsted Inspector Ofsted Inspector