Ivingswood Academy 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 that 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?

• Prioritise the work to address weaknesses in safeguarding procedures and strongly promote pupils’ welfare, including in the early years, by ensuring that:
  • all safeguarding procedures follow the current guidance issued by the Secretary of State and meet statutory requirements
  • staff’s understanding of their responsibilities to keep pupils safe is updated regularly
  • risk assessments are completed appropriately, kept up to date and implemented effectively.
• Improve the quality of leadership and governance, including in the early years, by ensuring that:
  • all systems for monitoring the work of the school are robust and leaders and managers are held to account for the progress of all groups of pupils
  • the progress of all groups of pupils is assessed accurately by school leaders
  • middle leaders’ skills are developed effectively to enable them to have a greater impact on improvements in teaching, learning and assessment
  • the school’s curriculum is thoroughly reviewed to engage and excite pupils in a wide range of learning across all subjects
  • all policies and procedures are regularly reviewed and thoroughly checked
  • the school’s website meets statutory requirements
  • governors take a full and effective role in challenging leaders to bring about rapid improvement.
• Actively promote the personal development, behaviour and welfare of pupils by:
  • keeping consistent and accurate logs of all behaviour and bullying incidents
  • analysing patterns of behaviour in order to enable effective action to be taken to improve it
  • urgently tackle pupils’ absence and lateness, particularly for those who are persistently late or absent.
• Enhance provision and the quality of learning for children in the early years by:
  • providing a range of experiences that challenge and extend children’s learning
  • making sure all adults actively promote children’s language development.
• Ensure that the quality of teaching, learning and assessment is consistently effective, in order to raise standards and enable all groups of pupils to make at least good progress by:
  • raising expectations of what pupils can do and the progress they can make
  • providing effective support for all groups of pupils to enable them to make at least good progress from their starting points
  • challenging the most able pupils to enable them to make rapid progress, gain a deeper level of understanding and reach high standards
  • making sure teachers’ assessments of pupils’ learning are accurate
  • using assessment information to adjust plans and learning in lessons to provide sufficient challenge to all groups of pupils. An external review of governance should be undertaken to assess how this aspect of leadership and management may be improved. An external review of the use of pupil premium funding should be undertaken to assess how this aspect of leadership and management may be improved.

Inspection judgements

Effectiveness of leadership and management Inadequate

• The governing body and the trust have failed to ensure that the school meets its statutory responsibilities for safeguarding. School leaders have not established an effective safeguarding culture.
• Over time, since the school became an academy, leadership has been ineffective in securing and sustaining improved outcomes for pupils. The school is failing to provide an acceptable standard of education for its pupils.
• Significant staff changes, including at senior leadership level, and problems with recruiting high-quality teachers in the past have contributed to pupils making inadequate progress over time. Pupils’ progress in reading, writing and mathematics has been below the national average for three years, and, in some years, well below average. The progress of current pupils continues to be inadequate. The capacity to bring about whole-school improvement is weak.
• The curriculum is too focused on a narrow range of subjects. It is not broad and balanced and does not enthuse and engage pupils to learn. There is a limited range of additional activities, and few trips or visitors to the school to enliven learning and provide interesting and exciting opportunities for pupils. Policies are not in place to ensure that teachers understand what is expected. Currently, there is no clear guidance for teachers on the teaching of reading, writing, spelling or mathematics.
• Pupils are not prepared well enough for life in modern Britain. Insufficient attention has been given to foster pupils’ spiritual, moral, social and cultural development.
• School leaders have not monitored the work of the school with sufficient rigour. As a result, any actions that have been taken to bring about improvement have not been followed up. For example, records of behaviour and bullying incidents have been kept, but not enough has been done to check whether the actions have led to a reduction in occurrences of inappropriate behaviour.
• In the recent past, concerns about the accuracy of teachers’ assessments of pupils’ learning impeded the ability of leaders to hold teachers to account for the progress of different groups of pupils. School leaders recently introduced a new system for recording pupils’ attainment, but it is too soon to determine the impact of this.
• Leadership of provision for pupils who have SEN and/or disabilities is not good enough. There is weak mapping of provision and no effective review of the impact of the provision for these pupils to enable them to receive the additional support that they require. As a result, the progress of pupils who have SEN and/or disabilities is significantly slower than that of other pupils.
• School leaders have failed to plan well enough to ensure that disadvantaged pupils make the progress of which they are capable. They have not monitored the provision for disadvantaged pupils with sufficient rigour.
• The new headteacher has a clear understanding of the improvements required to ensure that pupils receive a good standard of education. A new behaviour policy has been devised and plans are in place to involve parents and pupils in agreeing the policy.
• For a short period of time at the end of the summer term, an interim acting headteacher led the school. The self-evaluation of the school is accurate. A suitably detailed and helpful improvement plan was devised to support the school to improve. Plans are in place for the newly-appointed headteacher and governors to use this document to support their monitoring activities.
• The leadership of phonics has had a positive impact on an improving trend in the standards Years 1 and 2 pupils reach in the phonics screening check. There is a consistent approach to the teaching of early reading skills.
• It is recommended that newly qualified teachers are not appointed.

Governance of the school

• The governing body and the trust have not ensured that safeguarding procedures are given the highest priority. They have failed in their duty to keep pupils safe.
• The governing body has not ensured that the school maintains a website that is compliant with statutory requirements.
• Governors have not acted with sufficient urgency to raise standards and improve outcomes for all groups of pupils. As a result, too many pupils are not prepared well enough for the next stage of their education.
• The governing body and the trust have not evaluated the impact of pupil premium funding on improving outcomes for disadvantaged pupils. As a result, it is unclear whether this additional funding has resulted in improved outcomes for this group.
• The governing body and the trust have not ensured that sport premium funding is used effectively, because they failed to evaluate the impact of the funding on improving the health and well-being of pupils.

Safeguarding

• The arrangements for safeguarding are not effective.
• Leaders and those responsible for governance have not ensured that pupils’ personal development, behaviour and welfare are supported well. Procedures for keeping pupils safe at school are not robust. A safeguarding audit carried out in March 2018 identified a number of high priorities for action. However, not all recommendations have been fully addressed.
• Risk assessments for activities within and outside of school are not robust. This poses a potential risk of harm to pupils.
• The school’s own pupil survey, carried out in April 2018, shows that less than two-thirds of pupils feel safe all the time in school.
• Procedures to keep all staff up to date with safeguarding information have not been routine.
• Records of incidents that could affect the welfare and safety of pupils have not been rigorously recorded, monitored and followed up.
• Attendance, persistent absence and lateness have not been analysed or followed up rigorously enough. The attendance of some pupils who have SEN and/or disabilities, of disadvantaged pupils and of those whose first language is not English is much lower than that of other pupils.
• Induction procedures for newly appointed staff have recently been improved to make sure all staff are fully aware of their responsibilities to safeguard the welfare of pupils.

Quality of teaching, learning and assessment Inadequate

• In recent years, teachers have not had high enough expectations of what pupils can achieve. Work seen in pupils’ books shows that expectations of presentation, handwriting and spelling are inconsistent. Progress over time has been too slow.
• The quality of teaching has been severely affected by frequent changes in staff. In some classes, pupils have been taught by a number of different teachers during the year. This has exacerbated the inconsistent approach to teaching and the lack of accuracy in the assessment of pupils’ learning.
• The learning experiences for pupils who have SEN and/or disabilities are inconsistent and have not been monitored well enough. Reviewing of pupils’ progress has not been routine. As a result, pupils who have SEN and/or disabilities make slower progress than other pupils.
• Outcomes for disadvantaged pupils are lower than those of other pupils. The difference is widening in reading, writing and mathematics. This is because funding set aside to support these pupils is not being used well enough. School leaders and teachers do not ensure that the specific support, required to enable this group of pupils to make better progress and catch up, is routinely provided. The impact on improving the progress of these pupils is not being analysed with sufficient precision.
• The most able pupils have not been provided with sufficient challenge to enable them to make strong progress. Too few opportunities have been provided for pupils to explain their thinking and solve problems in mathematics.
• At the end of last academic year, school leaders were aware that assessment information was not accurate. The interim headteacher worked effectively with teachers to eradicate inaccuracies in assessment information and to secure correct starting points information for pupils at the start of this academic year.
• Since the start of this academic year, there has been a renewed sense of purpose and a clarity of expectations. Pupils are generally positive about their learning experiences so far this year. However, this improvement is at an early stage and the impact is not yet fully evident.

Personal development, behaviour and welfare Inadequate

Personal development and welfare

• The school’s work to promote pupils’ personal development and welfare is inadequate. Leaders have not implemented safeguarding guidance rigorously enough. Staff have not been given up-to-date information regularly enough to ensure that they are clear about their responsibilities to safeguard the welfare of pupils and protect them from harm.
• Over time, the weak management of behaviour and bullying incidents, and the lack of analysis of the causes and repetition of issues, limit pupils’ personal development and well-being.
• Pupils have a limited understanding of how to keep themselves safe. They are not confident when they raise concerns, for example about bullying, that action will be taken to resolve it. The school’s own survey of pupils, carried out in April 2018, shows that many pupils raised concerns about bullying and fighting during the school day. There is not a high enough priority given to ensure that pupils’ emotional and physical well-being is secured.
• Supervision during breaktimes and lunchtimes is not vigilant enough. During the inspection, not enough adults were supervising a large play space. Adults do not intervene quickly enough or encourage pupils to use equipment safely. Behaviour incident records show high levels of physical assaults, fighting and bullying.
• The curriculum has not provided sufficient opportunities for pupils to learn purposefully and make good progress. As a result, pupils are not prepared well enough for the next stage of their education.
• During the inspection, at this early stage in the term, pupils were beginning to develop positive relationships with their teachers and other staff. Pupils’ attitudes to learning were generally positive.

Behaviour

• The behaviour of pupils is inadequate.
• Pupils’ attendance is well below the national average for primary schools. Too many pupils are persistently absent from school and a high proportion of pupils do not arrive in school on time. This has a negative impact on their learning and progress.
• In the past, record keeping of behaviour and bullying incidents has been inconsistent. A significant number of incidents occur during lunchtime, but because inappropriate behaviour has not been followed up rigorously enough, the number of incidents has not been reduced.
• At the time of the inspection, during breaktimes and lunchtimes, pupils generally played well together. However, pupils are not provided with sufficient opportunities to understand how to use equipment appropriately. As a result, some equipment is not used in the correct manner. Adults and older pupils are not effective role models.
• Pupils are quite positive about behaviour in school since the introduction of the new behaviour policy this term. They say that they respect their new teachers and are keen to learn.

Outcomes for pupils Inadequate

• Pupils’ attainment has been below and, in some years, well below the national average in reading, writing and mathematics. Although attainment in reading, writing and mathematics at the end of Year 6 has risen for the last three years, it has remained well below the national average. Pupils are not prepared well enough for learning when they begin secondary school.
• The attainment and progress of the most able pupils are not good enough. Too few of the most able pupils achieve the higher standard in reading, writing and mathematics by the end of Year 6. Work in pupils’ books, over time, shows that teachers do not provide higher-ability pupils with sufficient challenge to enable them to reach a greater depth of understanding.
• Outcomes for pupils at the end of Year 2 are below the national average in reading, writing and mathematics. There is an improving trend over time, but the proportion of pupils achieving the expected standard and a greater depth of understanding remains lower than the national average.
• Evidence from the school’s own assessment information shows that, in all year groups, too few pupils are on track to achieve the expectations for their age in reading, writing and mathematics by the end of the year. For example, very few of the current Year 6 pupils are on track to achieve the expected standard in reading, writing and mathematics.
• Standards in reading have been well below the national average at the end of Year 6. Older pupils do not have sufficient opportunities to read aloud to adults to enable their comprehension of language to be checked. As a result, their grasp of more complex texts is underdeveloped.
• Pupils’ phonics skills have improved. There was a significant improvement from 2016 to 2017 and this improvement has been maintained. In 2018, outcomes were the highest for three years. Younger pupils use their phonics knowledge well to tackle unfamiliar words.

Early years provision Inadequate

• Outcomes for children in the early years have been below the national average for three years. There was a slight improvement in 2017. However, school information shows that only just over half of children achieved a good level of development by the end of the Reception year in 2018. Many children are not prepared well enough for learning in Year 1.
• Lack of clear leadership and turbulence in staffing have had a negative impact on children’s learning and progress.
• Parents are provided with opportunities to contribute to the assessments of their child’s progress. Nursery staff have developed a range of resources to support parents, for example equipment to support children to develop their fine motor skills at home. Parents are generally happy with the support provided for them and their children. A few expressed concerns about the quality and timeliness of communication.
• Children in the early years are provided with a range of opportunities to learn and make progress. However, not all adults routinely provide a rich range of opportunities for children to develop their language skills to express themselves confidently.
• Opportunities to motivate children and stimulate their thinking do not take place routinely. Some adults do not consistently and effectively interact with children to extend their learning. As a result, some children do not sustain their concentration on an activity, and their learning is not developed well enough.
• The outdoor area is not used well. Children are not provided with sufficient guidance during independent activities to enable them to make better progress. Some children do not use the equipment on offer appropriately, or they run around the area and do not sustain their concentration on tasks. Support and direction by adults do not sufficiently help children to make the most of what is on offer. As a result, adults do not foster children’s personal and social skills well enough.
• Early years staff ensure that all the welfare arrangements are met. Children have access to water and snacks, and their medical needs are managed well. Daily checks are made of equipment to ensure their suitability for use. However, the weaknesses in safeguarding, including governance, which affect the wider school, are relevant to the early years provision.

School details

Unique reference number 141990 Local authority Buckinghamshire Inspection number 10053420 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 Academy sponsor-led 2 to 11 Mixed Number of pupils on the school roll 207 Appropriate authority The governing body Chair Headteacher Sue Walton Julie-Ann Swaysland Telephone number 01494 783 070 Website Email address www.ivingswoodacademy.co.uk office@ivingswoodacademy.org Date of previous inspection Not previously inspected

Information about this school

• Ivingswood Academy opened in September 2015. It has provision for two-year-old children in the Nursery class. It is sponsored by the White Hills Schools Trust. The executive headteacher is the headteacher of Chesham Grammar School. There is a local governing body.
• White Hills Schools Trust is made up of three schools. The founding school, Chesham Grammar School, Ivingswood Academy and Waterside Primary Academy. The trust board has up to five trustees appointed by the members. Other trustees are appointed by the trust board. Altogether, there are eight trustees, who are responsible for the strategic direction, the board policy framework and the oversight of the trust and all schools within it.
• The school receives professional support from a school improvement partner and a primary school improvement consultant brokered by the trust. The trust has also brokered support from other schools to improve teaching.
• The school is smaller than an average-sized primary school.
• The proportion of pupils known to be eligible for the pupil premium grant is above the national average.
• The proportion of pupils who have SEN and/or disabilities is above the national average.
• The proportion of pupils from minority ethnic groups is above the national average.
• The proportion of pupils who speak English as an additional language is well above the national average.
• The headteacher and four teachers took up post in September 2018.

Information about this inspection

• This inspection was conducted under section 5 of the Education Act 2005. It is the first inspection since the school became an academy in September 2015. The predecessor school was judged to be inadequate at the time of its last inspection in November 2014.
• Inspectors observed learning in all year groups. Four observations were undertaken jointly with the headteacher.
• Inspectors held meetings with: the headteacher; the two assistant headteachers, who are also the English and the mathematics subject leaders; the designated safeguarding lead; the Nursery leader and Reception teacher; the school administrator; other staff; and pupils.
• Meetings were held with: the special educational needs coordinator and the human resources manager from White Hill Schools Trust; four members of the governing body, including the chair of governors; the executive headteacher and the chair of the multi-academy trust; and the school improvement partner and the primary school improvement consultant.
• Inspectors listened to pupils talk about their work and listened to pupils read in Year 2 and Year 6.
• Informal discussions were held with pupils during the lunchtime and breaktimes. Inspectors spoke with parents at the start of the school day.
• Inspectors observed the school’s work and looked at a range of documents, including pupils’ work in books, achievement and progress information, documents relating to safeguarding and the school’s policies and procedures.
• Inspectors scrutinised the school’s own self-evaluation, the school improvement plan and external reports on the school.
• Inspectors also considered: nine responses, including six free-text responses, to the online questionnaire, Parent View, and 18 responses from staff gathered through the staff’s survey. There were no responses from the pupil survey.

Inspection team

Ann Henderson, lead inspector Hilary Goddard

Her Majesty’s Inspector Ofsted Inspector