Botley School Ofsted Report

Full report

What does the school need to do to improve further?

• Improve pupils’ achievement in key stages 1 and 2 and diminish the difference between disadvantaged pupils’ achievement and others nationally by:
  • making sure that leaders and teachers have sufficiently high expectations of what all pupils, especially disadvantaged pupils, can achieve
  • ensuring that better teaching leads to improved outcomes in writing, especially – but not solely – in key stage 1, and also improving outcomes in the key stage 2 grammar, punctuation and spelling test
  • using in-school tests and assessments more diagnostically, so that the progress made by the key groups of boys, low attainers and those who have special educational needs and/or disabilities improves, especially in key stage 2
  • strengthening pupils’ progress from Reception to Year 2 so that their outcomes in key stage 1 tests are better, especially the percentage reaching greater depth
  • ensuring that most-able disadvantaged pupils make the rapid progress of which they are capable, so that a greater proportion reach above expected standards in key stage 1 and key stage 2 tests and assessments
  • increasing the proportion of pupils reaching the expected standard in the Year 1 phonics check.
• Improve the impact of leaders and governors on teaching and pupils’ outcomes by ensuring that:
  • governors focus on gaining a more accurate view of the school’s strengths and weaknesses, including through scrutiny of published performance data, and use this to hold leaders to account more rigorously
  • school leaders, including subject leaders, are given the training they need to make a greater contribution to improvements
  • leaders’ checks focus more sharply on the impact of teaching on pupils’ outcomes
  • leaders analyse information on pupils’ progress in detail so that they gain a deep, accurate and comprehensive insight into how well pupils learn and achieve
  • leaders analyse the information they gather on new approaches more systematically and use their analysis to evaluate how well these approaches have worked
  • better teaching across all subjects, including foundation subjects, enables pupils to gain a deep understanding of the subject matter and apply their skills in a sophisticated way. 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

Requires improvement

• Leaders and governors, despite being committed to nurturing and developing pupils, have not done enough to ensure that pupils make strong progress from their starting points. To an extent, this is because improvement has been hampered by funding restrictions and difficulty recruiting teachers and assistants. However, it is also because leaders’ expectations of what pupils can achieve are too low and the skills of some leaders are underdeveloped.
• To enable the school’s development, the headteacher and governors have rightly appointed new senior, middle and subject leaders. Some of these leaders have not yet been sufficiently trained so, despite having made some positive changes, their contribution to improving the school is not strong enough. In addition, subject leaders’ checks on teaching have not been regular enough, nor have they focused enough on whether new approaches introduced are improving pupils’ learning and progress.
• Leaders and governors have been overgenerous in some of their evaluations of the school’s strengths and weaknesses. They have evaluated some aspects of the school as better than they are. However, leaders and governors rightly recognise the strength in the support the school provides for pupils and their families.
• In all areas of the school, data – especially, but not solely, assessment information – is not used effectively. In some cases, it is not well enough collated so leaders do not have a clear overview of how different groups of pupils achieve and behave. In addition, sometimes, when assessment information is collated, leaders are not insightful enough in the conclusions they draw from it. Not enough focus has been placed on the progress of different groups.
• Leaders are not clear enough about which of the initiatives financed by additional pupil premium funding have had the most impact on this group’s learning and well-being. Although the school knows the funding has had a notably positive impact on some individual pupils and their families, leaders do not have a clear enough picture of the funding’s impact on outcomes for the group as a whole.
• Pupils generally behave well; however, leaders are not routinely analysing the rich sources of information they have on pupils’ behaviour to find out whether there are improvements that could be made. There is not enough clarity about which approaches to behaviour are working and about any patterns in pupils’ behaviour.
• The local authority’s support for leaders, which commenced in September 2014, began well but has not had an effective impact overall because it was withdrawn after one year (following some improvements in key stage 2 results). The local authority plans to restore support due to weaknesses in 2016 results; however, this has not yet started. Support provided in the early years has been more effective as it has been continuous over two years and has successfully developed leadership in the early years.
• The school’s new approach for assessing pupils’ work successfully enables teachers to identify pupils whose progress is slower than their peers. However, it does not place enough emphasis on ensuring that pupils make the progress needed to meet the expected standard and above. The school has put in place a number of steps to mark pupils’ progress, most of which are below the expected standard. As a result, pupils can appear to have made rapid progress through these steps; nevertheless, some fail to meet the expected standard.
• The school has developed its curriculum, in line with recent guidance, with a mixed degree of success. Foundation subjects (including science, occasionally) are linked together in cross-curricular topics, for example ‘water’. Within each topic, work set focuses on developing the key literacy skills pupils need. However, there is not always a sharp enough focus on pupils obtaining the subject-specific knowledge, skills and understanding they will need to succeed in non-core subjects at secondary school.
• The special educational needs coordinator joined the school just over a year ago and has made a number of changes that are positive, for example developing the provision for this group and working closely with teachers. However, more needs to be done to track the small steps in progress that pupils who have disabilities and/or special educational needs make. The coordinator has strong plans in place to achieve this.
• Sports premium funding has been effectively deployed because it is overseen by physical education subject experts. It has been well used to develop pupils’ fitness, a raft of school teams and staff expertise. As a result, pupils’ confidence and skills are rapidly developing.
• Spiritual, moral, social and cultural (SMSC) education is a strength of the school. Pupils are very aware of the need to treat all pupils equally. The headteacher has forged strong and effective links with other schools, including local independent schools. These links enable pupils to access additional experiences that feed their minds, including through participating in celebrations from a range of traditions and cultures.
• Fundamental British values are effectively promoted. They are successfully taught through well-planned learning in class, linked well with SMSC education. Pupils are clear about the individual ideas and beliefs that are included in the term because assemblies have successfully focused on unpicking what it means in the context of the school and wider community.
• The work the school does in partnership with stakeholders is effective. One parent commented, ‘I think Botley is a great school that is diverse and inclusive and serves its local community well’. Most parents were generally very positive about the school, although a small number expressed concerns about some aspects of pupils’ learning.

Governance of the school

• Despite governors’ endeavours, they have not been able to mitigate the impact of funding shortfalls. These have hampered the school from implementing some, but not all, developments. In addition, governors have not held leaders to account with sufficient rigour.
• Governors have not placed enough emphasis on comparing pupils’ outcomes with national averages. This has meant that they have not challenged the school about some weaker outcomes.
• Governors oversee the school’s approach to managing teachers’ performance well and have rightly supported the school in implementing robust decisions based on agreed policies for managing performance. However, governors are not clear enough about the impact of different contextual factors on pupils’ learning and progress, and therefore sometimes underestimate what some groups of pupils can achieve.
• Governors have not challenged the school’s leaders to provide a sharp analysis of the impact of additional pupil premium funding on academic outcomes, some of which are weak for this group. They have wisely supported leaders in funding a raft of initiatives designed to help individuals surmount the social barriers that stand in the way of success. However, leaders have not ascertained which of these approaches has been most successful. Governors, therefore, cannot use this information when deciding about the deployment of funding in the future.

Safeguarding

• The arrangements for safeguarding are effective. This is a strong aspect of the school’s provision because the headteacher insists that all staff complete additional online safeguarding training, including ‘Prevent’ duty. New staff are required to complete this training before they join the school. This means that all staff, including those who run the breakfast and after-school clubs, are equally confident in identifying potential risks.
• Senior leaders have a very clear understanding of the risks that pupils face in the locality and how best to protect them. In particular, the school successfully supports parents in managing the behaviour of their children appropriately. Parents trained in appropriate approaches have felt confident enough to share them within their communities. This contributes to keeping children safe.
• The school works effectively with the local authority to protect children and closely tracks those it refers to the authority’s social services. The headteacher vigilantly checks that pupils are given the level of support they need by the authority and on occasion has challenged the authority to provide greater support.

Quality of teaching, learning and assessment Requires improvement

• The quality of teaching is too variable across the school to be good. Teaching does not always enable pupils to gain the depth of skills, understanding and knowledge that is required to achieve highly in national tests and assessments.
• Mathematics teaching is too variable. Tasks set for the most able are not demanding enough. This is because some teachers overestimate how demanding the work is. Their miscalculations mean that pupils do not apply their mathematical reasoning skills enough through the extension work they set.
• The teaching and assessment of writing is not effective. This is because not enough attention is paid to ensuring that pupils’ spelling, punctuation and grammar is accurate. Pupils do not confidently employ the grammatical features that define different genres of writing, such as the use of nouns coupled with well-chosen adjectives for descriptive writing. Their lack of knowledge impedes their ability to write in an engaging and lively manner.
• The new leader has improved science teaching and it is now taught more systematically. There are detailed plans to develop the subject further. However, not enough focus is currently placed on applying key scientific skills, for example enquiry, investigation and analysis. As a result, pupils are not able to speculate on possible explanations for the scientific phenomena they read about when completing comprehension tasks on scientific texts.
• Teaching in non-core subjects is variable. Pupils learn well in physical education because they are taught by subject experts. However, in some non-core subjects (including, on occasion, in science), the emphasis placed on developing pupils’ cross-curricular skills has meant that pupils’ subject-specific knowledge and skills are not always well developed.
• Teaching in phonics is variable. Some practice is strong because teachers and assistants are clear about what pupils must understand by the end of the session and make sure that everyone gets there. They do this by making good use, for example, of repetition and practice. On occasion, teachers do not ensure that all pupils achieve the minimum learning necessary to enable them to reach national expectations in phonics in Year 1.
• Key stage 2 teaching is generally stronger than in key stage 1. In particular, the teaching of reading is more effective than writing. This is as a result of new approaches introduced last year, including a strong focus on reading for pleasure. However, teachers in key stage 2 do not always use information on pupils’ progress well enough when providing feedback and setting tasks.
• Teachers use day-to-day assessment of pupils’ work well to build a general picture of their strengths and weaknesses and some ask targeted questions to check the depth of pupils’ understanding. However, teachers do not use information from more formal tests diagnostically enough, so although pupils receive additional help, it does not always have the anticipated impact on their learning and outcomes.

Personal development, behaviour and welfare Good

Personal development and welfare

• The school’s work to promote pupils’ personal development and welfare is good. Pupils are eager to learn and recognise the importance of working hard. Consequently, they relish the opportunity to choose more challenging tasks in class.
• The school successfully ensures that all pupils participate in evaluating their learning. Older pupils effectively support younger pupils in this process. This helps pupils to be more involved in learning well. However, in a small number of classes, pupils’ concentration slips and they go off-task because they complete the work teachers set too easily.
• A higher than average proportion of pupils join the school after Reception, some mid-year. These pupils are supported effectively and settle in well so that they quickly feel part of the school community. One pupil described the school as being ‘like a big family’.
• The school successfully promotes pupils’ leadership. There are a variety of roles available for pupils, such as peer mediators and bullying ambassadors. Pupils value these opportunities. They enable pupils to develop important skills, while making a positive contribution to the school community.
• The school works very well with its partner schools to support parents in the locality in their efforts to keep their youngsters safe. For example, the school hosted an online safety evening for all local schools and used its extensive facilities to accommodate a crèche. This approach supported better parental involvement in the event.
• Parents are particularly pleased with the way the school nurtures its youngsters. To meet the growing demand for emotional support, the school has employed a dedicated member of staff who works well with pupils and their families, developing well-being and self-esteem. The comments parents made on the free text facility in Parent View and via email were very positive about this aspect of the school’s work.
• Pupils told inspectors that they felt safe. The well-planned personal development programme, successfully enhanced through additional sessions focused on specific risks, effectively supports pupils in understanding how best to stay safe.

Behaviour

• The behaviour of pupils is generally good, especially in lessons. Pupils are polite and respectful to each other and their teachers. They play harmoniously and participate well in additional activities.
• Incidents of bullying are rare and when they do occur they are dealt with well, including using specially trained pupils to mediate. Leaders have not collated the information they have, to see if some forms of bullying are more prevalent, but have strong plans in place to do so.
• In the last academic year, pupils’ attendance was slightly below average, but attendance since the start of September 2016 has been better. Over the past two years, the school has effectively focused on improving the attendance and punctuality of individual pupils for whom this has been an issue. This has had a positive impact, most notably in 2014/15.

Outcomes for pupils Requires improvement

• Leaders’ and teachers’ actions to improve outcomes have not been effective enough. In 2014 and 2015 national tests, pupils’ achievement in key stage 1 was significantly below average. Pupils’ achievement in 2016 national tests and assessments was weak, particularly, but not solely, in key stage 1 in writing. In key stage 2 in 2016, some groups of pupils had progress scores that were significantly lower than other pupils nationally.
• In key stage 2, the overall picture is a bit more positive than in key stage 1. In 2015, pupils’ achievement was above average in key stage 2 tests and assessments, except in mathematics. In 2016, pupils attained broadly in line with national averages in reading and writing, and slightly above in mathematics. However, the progress of some groups in mathematics and writing was much lower than average, especially boys and pupils with lower starting points.
• Not enough has been done to improve pupils’ writing. In 2016, in key stage 1 national tests and assessments, pupils’ progress from their starting points in writing was not strong enough. Progress in writing in key stage 2 was weaker than in mathematics and reading. In addition, pupils attained below average in the 2016 key stage 2 grammar, spelling and punctuation test. It is noteworthy that pupils’ spelling scores were below average. Inspectors found weaknesses in spelling and grammar when they scrutinised work in books.
• Pupils in key stage 2 read fluently and show an enthusiasm for reading. However, in key stage 1, the proportion of pupils reaching the expected standard in the 2016 phonics check was significantly below average and had declined from 2015, when it was also below average. Disadvantaged pupils at the school scored significantly below other pupils nationally.
• Although leaders have focused on supporting disadvantaged pupils, this group do not yet achieve well enough. The progress made by disadvantaged pupils from some starting points was below others nationally in key stage 1 tests and assessments. In addition, a much lower proportion of disadvantaged pupils than others nationally were working at greater depth in key stage 1 or at the higher standard in key stage 2 tests and assessments. In key stage 2, low expectations meant that some disadvantaged pupils did not make the rapid progress of which they were capable.
• Most-able pupils do not achieve well enough at the school. In particular, most-able pupils’ progress from the end of Reception to the end of key stage 1 is not strong enough. As a result, the proportion of pupils who reached greater depth in their key stage 1 assessments and tests in 2016 was much lower than average. In key stage 2, it was also much lower than average in writing.
• Following support provided by the school, in 2016 key stage 2 tests, pupils who speak English as an additional language made progress that was broadly in line with pupils for whom English is their first language, except in mathematics, where their progress was stronger.
• Leaders ensure that all pupils are equally valued. However, they have not focused enough on analysing the progress of different ethnic groups, especially those that are most represented. In most of the key groups, pupils achieve broadly in line with national averages.
• In key stage 2 tests in 2016, pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities made significantly less progress than others nationally in writing. In other subjects, their progress was broadly in line with others.
• The school’s own information indicates that pupils who speak English as an additional language generally make stronger progress than pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities. However, the current work of the SENCo is improving this. Leaders and teachers sometimes underestimate what pupils who speak English as an additional language can achieve and this slows their progress.
• The school’s own assessment information shows that, in key stage 2, pupils’ progress is broadly stronger than in key stage 1, with the exception of Year 5 where progress is weaker. Across the school, there is variation between the progress different groups make; for example, in key stage 2, girls make less progress than boys. These variations have not been tackled well enough by the school’s leaders.
• The school’s own data also shows that too few disadvantaged pupils have been set targets for accelerated progress so that they can reach higher than expected standards in national tests. This is impeding the progress that some disadvantaged pupils are currently making. The work teachers set does not always enable these pupils to gain the depth of understanding they need to achieve highly in the new, more challenging key stage 2 tests.

Early years provision Good

• Over the previous academic year, the senior leader with responsibility for the early years, working in close partnership with the two-year-olds provision leader, has made many changes that have enhanced the provision. The newly appointed early years leader has built upon these gains effectively. As a result of these strong improvements, the setting is now good, even though other aspects of the school require improvement.
• Leaders, including the headteacher, have ensured that the merger with the nursery and with the adjoining children’s centre has been successful. The setting now offers effective, continuous provision, including for two-year-olds. Of note has been the impact of leaders’ work to ensure that there is coherence across the provision. A good example is the way all staff across the setting train together to enable strong practice to be shared.
• A strong aspect of the provision is the effective way parents are guided in supporting their children in their learning and development. Leaders plan well-thought-out opportunities for parents to learn how best to help their youngsters, including working alongside the setting’s staff. Parents are, therefore, more confident about adopting the same successful approaches that are employed at school when at home.
• Activities are well planned and include a range of different approaches. Adults provide effective opportunities for children to develop language and enhance their vocabulary through, for instance, questioning children as they play and modelling language use. This has led to improvements in the proportion of children reaching a good level of development. In 2016, 66% reached a good level of development, which was in line with national averages and showed good progress from starting points.
• Adults closely track the progress children make in their learning, using the same online system throughout the provision to provide a continuous record of children’s development. As a result, when children move up to the next year group within the setting, staff know precisely in which areas children need additional support and can rapidly deploy that support. This helps to accelerate progress.
• Baseline tests are accurate and rigorously overseen by leaders. They are well used to identify children who will need additional support to meet their end-of-year targets. Typically, children enter the Nursery with levels of development that are below those that might be expected for children of this age and make strong progress from their starting points.
• Current information, predicated on these baseline assessments, indicates that in 2017 the proportion of children reaching a good level of development will increase. Leaders have promptly identified that a number of boys and disadvantaged children will need additional support to reach a good level of development in 2017. Additional funding is being used adeptly to do this.
• Children are calm and considerate to each other and to adults. They cope well with moving from structured learning, for example in phonics, to learning through play. They adhere well to routines because of the consistent approach to behaviour adopted by staff in all areas of the setting. These approaches dovetail well with those used by staff in key stage 1 and, therefore, support children in making a good start in Year 1.
• Safety procedures are strong and children are closely monitored when they play inside and outside.

School details

Unique reference number Local authority Inspection number 123067 Oxfordshire 10000719 This inspection was carried out under section 8 of the Education Act 2005. The inspection was also deemed a section 5 inspection under the same Act. Type of school Primary School category Age range of pupils Gender of pupils Community 2 to 11 Mixed Number of pupils on the school roll 404 Appropriate authority Chair Headteacher Telephone number Website Email address Local authority Lorraine Desai Alison Marsh 01865 248573 www.botleyschool.org.uk office.2569@botley.oxon.sch.uk Date of previous inspection 16–17 November 2011

Information about this school

• Botley School has expanded since the previous inspection. It merged with an adjoining nursery in 2011 and more recently with a children’s centre which is scheduled for closure. It is now larger than an average-sized primary school.
• The school takes pupils from across the city of Oxford. Although the majority speak English as their first language, approximately one third do not. Just over half the pupil body hails from a variety of ethnic groups, the rest is White British.
• The proportion of pupils who are known to be eligible for the pupil premium (additional money provided by the government) is below average.
• The proportion of pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities is above average. A lower than average proportion have statements of special educational needs or education, health and care plans.
• Since the last inspection, a new chair of the governing body has been appointed.
• The early years consists of a part-time provision for two-year-olds, three Nursery classes, which children attend on a part-time basis, and two full-time Reception classes.
• The school runs a breakfast club and after-school club.
• The school meets requirements on the publication of specified information on its website.
• The school meets the government’s floor standards for 2015, which are the minimum expectations for progress and attainment.

Information about this inspection

• The inspection started as a short section 8 inspection and then converted to a section 5 full inspection.
• Inspectors made visits to observe learning in all classes, including in the early years and in the two-year-old provision.
• Samples of pupils’ work were scrutinised by inspectors.
• Inspectors met with three different groups of pupils, and heard a group of pupils read.
• The inspectors met with the headteacher on several occasions, and separately with English, mathematics, computing and science subject leaders. Inspectors also held separate meetings with newly appointed year group leaders, the SENCo, newly qualified teachers and the physical education coordinators. Inspectors also met with senior leaders on two occasions and held three different meetings with governors, each of which included the chair and vice-chair of the governing body.
• Inspectors reviewed 76 responses made by parents to the online parent survey, Parent View. Inspectors also reviewed 24 comments made by parents using the free text facility within the online parent survey and an email from a parent. Inspectors spoke with a group of parents informally, in the early years setting.
• Documentation and policies, which included the school’s own evaluation and development plans, were reviewed. Inspectors scrutinised the school’s safeguarding records, including safety checks made when teachers are appointed.

Inspection team

Sarah Hubbard, lead inspector Clare Haines Robert Howell Barbara Carr Jo Yates

Her Majesty’s Inspector Ofsted Inspector Ofsted Inspector Ofsted Inspector Ofsted Inspector