Wheatley Church of England Primary School 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?

• Take urgent action to remedy weaknesses in safeguarding procedures and actively 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
  • the safeguarding policy is kept up to date and shared with staff and parents
  • risk assessments are completed appropriately, kept up to date and implemented effectively.
• Improve the quality of leadership, including governance, and 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
  • school self-evaluation is accurate and informs school improvement planning more effectively
  • school improvement planning is sharply focused on the impact leaders’ actions have on improving outcomes for pupils
  • the progress of all groups of pupils is measured 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 further developed 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.
• Improving the personal development and welfare of pupils, by:
  • keeping accurate logs of all behaviour and bullying incidents
  • analysing patterns of behaviour in order to enable effective action to be taken to improve it.
• Improve provision and the quality of learning for children in the early years foundation stage, by:
  • providing a range of experiences that challenge and extend children’s learning, including for the most able
  • making sure that all adults extend children’s learning and develop their understanding.
• Improve the quality of teaching, learning and assessment, in order to raise standards and ensure that all groups of pupils 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
  • increasing teachers’ understanding of assessment and the progression of knowledge and skills in each subject
  • making sure that 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

• School leaders have failed in their duty to keep pupils safe. They have not ensured that policies and procedures are in place to mitigate risks.
• School self-evaluation is weak. School leaders do not analyse information on pupils’ attainment and progress well enough to plan improvements.
• The school improvement plan includes a wide range of targets and actions. However, they are too vague. They are not linked closely enough to the impact that actions are expected to have on improving outcomes for pupils. The plan does not include benchmarks to enable school leaders and governors to know whether the plan is successful.
• Senior leaders are not checking on the quality of learning in lessons, and over time, well enough. They are not providing detailed feedback to teachers to help them to know what they need to do to improve their teaching.
• Senior and middle leaders are not checking pupils’ work in books thoroughly enough. For example, the English and mathematics subject leaders have not yet scrutinised pupils’ learning in their work this academic year. As a result, they do not know whether teachers are covering curriculum requirements or developing and deepening pupils’ understanding.
• Middle leaders’ skills are underdeveloped. They are not monitoring their areas of responsibility thoroughly enough. As a result, they are not contributing to the required improvements in teaching, learning and assessment.
• The trust introduced a new system for recording the assessment of pupils’ learning. Although the updated assessment procedures provide opportunities for teachers to systematically record pupils’ achievements, this is not being checked well enough by senior leaders to make sure that teachers’ judgements are accurate.
• School leaders have information on the progress of different groups of pupils, but the outcomes for these groups are not being analysed to identify strengths, trends and areas for improvement. As a result, strategies to address underachievement and bring about whole-school improvement are not implemented.
• The school provides a broad curriculum, but it is not sufficiently engaging and exciting to enthuse pupils and capture their interest. Some extra-curricular activities enhance pupils’ learning.
• The school planned appropriate approaches for use of the pupil premium funding to support disadvantaged pupils. For example, a summer school was set up for the most able disadvantaged pupils. However, the impact of spending on improving outcomes for disadvantaged pupils is variable.
• The school has used the primary physical education and sports funding to enable pupils to take part in a number of competitions and tournaments and to provide additional activities such as a street dance club and an ice hockey club. However, school leaders have not evaluated the impact of this additional funding on improving pupils’ health and well-being.
• The headteacher has worked well with the local community to develop positive and effective working relationships. The school is benefiting from these positive relationships with local groups who support the school in reciprocal arrangements, such as the local amateur dramatic society who use the school’s stage and provide lights for the school to use for their productions.
• The multi-academy trust has provided effective support to the local governing body during the appointment of the new headteacher. However, the shortcomings in the fulfilment of governors’ statutory duties, including required information to parents via the school’s website, have not been pursued rigorously enough by the trust. The trust’s oversight of the work of the local governing body has not ensured that the school provides an acceptable standard of education for pupils.
• It is recommended that newly qualified teachers are not appointed by the school.

Governance of the school

• Governors do not adequately monitor the work of the school. They do not have an accurate understanding of the most important aspects that need to improve. Governors have not:
  • taken effective action to ensure that pupils make consistently good progress
  • checked systems and procedures well enough
  • ensured that the school’s website meets requirements or complies with the Department for Education’s guidance; a number of policies on the website are not up to date
  • challenged school leaders or held school leaders to account effectively enough
  • evaluated the impact of the physical education and sports premium funding; their evaluation of the pupil premium funding is not precise enough.
• Governors are committed to supporting the school. They meet as a full governing body regularly and check on the school’s work through their committees. However, they are not incisive enough in their questioning. For example, they were unaware of the inaccuracies of teachers’ assessments of pupils’ learning last academic year. As a result, the significant dip in attainment at the end of 2016 for Year 2 pupils and Year 6 pupils in writing was a shock.
• Governors are keen to improve their skills and have undertaken training to develop their understanding of the school’s assessment system. Their visits to the school, to gain a better understanding of specific aspects of the school’s work, are developing their understanding.

Safeguarding

• The arrangements for safeguarding are not effective.
• School leaders and governors have not established an effective culture for keeping pupils safe. Although pupils say they feel safe and almost all parents say the school keeps their child safe, there are aspects of the school’s procedures that do not ensure pupils’ safety. For example, the large site which the school occupies has been designed for multiple use. Access to different areas of the site is essential for different users. School leaders and governors have not maintained effective risk assessments to ensure swift and effective action is taken to ensure pupils’ safety.
• Most of the required checks to determine the suitability of staff to work with children are carried out, but governors have not ensured the required checks are made on staff who may have lived and worked abroad. They are not vigilant enough.
• On day one of the inspection, the school’s safeguarding and child protection policy, on the school’s website, was out of date. It did not meet the requirements set out by the Secretary of State. The policy was updated appropriately before the end of the inspection and posted, as required, on the school’s website. This will now require sharing with staff and parents.
• Staff, including senior staff and governors, have received the required training, at the correct level, to keep pupils safe from harm. School leaders have ensured that all staff have read and understand ‘Keeping children safe in education’, 2016, and are fully aware of their individual responsibilities to keep pupils safe.

Quality of teaching, learning and assessment Requires improvement

• The quality of teaching varies across classes and year groups. Pupils sometimes do not make the progress they are capable of making because planned activities are not matched well enough to their learning needs. In some lessons teachers do not adjust the learning tasks well enough to enable pupils to increase their productivity. In these circumstances, pupils with low prior attainment struggle and those who are most-able find the work too easy. This limits their progress.
• Teacher’s use of assessment in lessons is variable. Some teachers do not pick up on pupils’ misconceptions quickly enough. When this happens, pupils make mistakes that are left uncorrected. As a result, their progress is not as rapid as it could be. Inspectors did observe some more effective learning, where teachers immediately responded to pupils who were struggling to understand, for example in telling the time. Pupils made better progress as a result.
• Some teachers do not expect high enough standards. Some teachers do not remind pupils of their expectations. Errors in spelling, punctuation and number formation are not picked up and corrected. Pupils are therefore not developing good habits of presentation.
• Teachers do not manage behaviour consistently and effectively. In a few lessons observed by inspectors, pupils’ low-level and persistent poor behaviour prevented them and their peers from learning. In these lessons, progress was limited. It also prevented pupils from enjoying their learning. Where teaching is more engaging and relationships are strong, pupils are absorbed in their learning and make much better progress.
• Teachers are beginning to develop their understanding of the updated assessment system and how to assess pupils’ learning. They are making better use of assessment statements in writing and mathematics. However, inspectors also found that teachers are sometimes not using sufficient evidence of pupils’ learning over time to make secure and accurate judgements about pupils’ achievements.
• There are variations in the support provided by teaching assistants. In many lessons, teaching assistants work well to support the learning of individuals and groups. However, in some lessons teaching assistants’ subject knowledge limits their ability to support pupils’ learning, particularly in mathematics.
• Teachers generally provide supportive and effective feedback to pupils to help them to know what they need to do to improve their work. However, some teachers are not checking pupils’ responses well enough so mistakes and errors are not addressed.
• The teaching of phonics is effective. Pupils engage well in interesting and engaging tasks and use their phonic knowledge effectively to blend sounds together to build words. They read with interest and enjoyment.

Personal development, behaviour and welfare Inadequate

Personal development and welfare

• The school’s work to promote pupils’ personal development and welfare is inadequate. School leaders have not carried out enough checks on risks that may compromise pupils’ safety. Logs of behaviour, bullying and racist incidents are not recorded and followed up well enough.
• Pupils know how to keep themselves safe when using the internet. They know they should not share their passwords, personal information or photographs with people they do not know. They also know how to block another internet user who contacts them, if they are concerned. Older pupils have received training in first aid and cardiopulmonary resuscitation.
• Most pupils are confident, self-assured, learners, keen to listen and engage in learning activities. Some pupils have not yet developed good learning habits. As a result, they are less successful in their learning and interrupt the focus of others.
• Pupils say bullying does happen, but most say that adults deal with it quickly. A few pupils who completed the online questionnaire say that adults are not good at resolving it.
• The school’s work to support hard-to-reach families is effective. The family support worker deals well with other agencies to support vulnerable families. Records show that appropriate action is taken to meet the needs of these pupils. This work is successful.

Behaviour

• The behaviour of pupils requires improvement.
• Some pupils do not regulate their own behaviour well enough, particularly when moving around the school. They are overly boisterous and lack self-control. This is compounded when adults do not intervene to remind pupils of the standards of behaviour expected of them. A few staff who completed the online questionnaire agree that adults do not consistently manage behaviour well.
• Where teaching is weaker, some pupils’ behaviour interrupts learning. In these lessons, teachers do not have high enough expectations and do not implement the behaviour policy effectively. Pupils are off-task and show a lack of respect for adults and their peers. However, some pupils are much more mature in their behaviour. They ignore low-level disruption, get on with their learning and display strong self-discipline and self-control.
• Attendance has improved slightly this year. It has improved for some groups of pupils, including boys, disadvantaged pupils and those who have special educational needs and/or disabilities. Rates of persistent absence have decreased.

Outcomes for pupils Requires improvement

• Outcomes for Year 6 pupils at the end of 2016 were much lower than the national average and lower than the school had predicted. Just over a fifth of pupils achieved the expected standard in reading, writing and mathematics combined. Pupils’ outcomes in reading and mathematics were broadly in line with national figures; however, no pupils achieved the high standard in writing.
• Outcomes for pupils at the end of Year 2 in 2016 showed a similar picture. The percentage of pupils achieving the expected standard in reading was broadly in line with the national average. However, only one fifth of all Year 2 pupils and no disadvantaged pupils reached the expected standard in writing. Two fifths reached the expected standard in mathematics. No pupils achieved a greater depth of understanding in reading, writing or mathematics.
• Outcomes for pupils in the Year 1 phonics screening check were more positive. The school slightly improved on the above-average proportion of pupils who achieved the expected standard by the end of Year 1 the previous year. Almost all pupils, including the disadvantaged, achieved the expected standard by the end of Year 2. This was evident when inspectors heard pupils read. They are able to decode unfamiliar words and use their phonic knowledge well to tackle new reading materials.
• Current pupils’ progress is variable. Most pupils are making steady progress and some pupils are making strong progress. However, pupils’ progress is variable in different classes and year groups.
• Pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities are making similar progress to other pupils because the support they receive helps them to access their learning.
• Disadvantaged pupils, including the most able disadvantaged, are not making as much progress as other pupils, in some classes. However, for current Year 3 pupils, given their underachievement in 2016, gaps are diminishing and disadvantaged pupils are beginning to catch up.

Early years provision Inadequate

• Children enter the Reception class with skills and abilities that are typical for their age. They make steady progress from their starting points. However, the most able children are not provided with sufficient challenge to extend their learning and accelerate their progress. Children are adequately prepared for learning in Year 1.
• The newly appointed early years leader is getting to grips with her role. She is being provided with support from an early years consultant to improve provision for children both inside and in the outdoor learning area. This work is at an early stage of development, particularly outdoors.
• Systems and procedures for the induction of children at the start of the year are underdeveloped. There are few opportunities for parents to discuss their child’s strengths and interests with adults prior to their child’s start in school. This limits the ability of staff to plan activities which are interesting and relevant to children as they begin school.
• The early years leader ensures that children have ready access to drinking water and snacks. Their medical needs are managed well. However, the weaknesses in safeguarding, including governance, which affect the wider school are relevant to the early years provision.
• Children behave well in the early years area. They engage enthusiastically in self-directed activities and take turns, share and interact with each other well. In one self-initiated activity a group of boys were making interesting shapes with cubes. They were excited to show how they transformed the cubes into another shape. Children enjoyed role play in the ‘Chinese restaurant’, exclaiming, ‘I’m having noodles!’
• Some adults do not consistently and effectively interact with children to extend their learning. Opportunities to motivate and stimulate children’s thinking do not take place routinely. As a result, some children do not sustain their concentration on an activity and their learning is not developed well enough.

School details

Unique reference number Local authority Inspection number 140344 Oxfordshire 10026739 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 4 to 11 Mixed Number of pupils on the school roll 348 Appropriate authority The governing body Chair Headteacher Telephone number Website Email address David Bendor-Samuel Karen MacKenzie 01865 872366 www.wheatley.oxon.sch.uk office.3165@wheatley.oxon.sch.uk Date of previous inspection Not previously inspected

Information about this school

• The school does not meet requirements on the publication of information on: exclusions; the approach to teaching the curriculum and the content of the curriculum in all subjects for each year group; the phonics and reading schemes being used in key stage 1; key stage 2 assessment results and a link to the Department for Education performance tables; evaluation of the impact of the primary physical education and sports premium funding; the school’s accessibility plan and up-to-date special educational needs information.
• The school does not comply with Department for Education guidance on what academies should publish about: their annual accounts; what the school spent its pupil premium allocation on in the 2015/2016 academic year or the academy’s annual reports.
• Wheatley Church of England Primary School is larger than the average-sized primary school.
• The vast majority of pupils are of White British heritage.
• The proportion of pupils who are disadvantaged and supported by the pupil premium is below the national average.
• The proportion of pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities is below the national average.
• The school does not meet the government’s current floor standards which set the minimum expectations for pupils’ attainment and progress.
• The headteacher took up her post in April 2016. The early years leader took over this role in September 2016. The special educational needs coordinator started in January 2017.

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 March 2014. The predecessor school was judged to be good at the time of its last inspection in February 2014.
• Inspectors observed learning in all year groups. One observation was undertaken jointly with the headteacher.
• Inspectors held meetings with the headteacher; the deputy headteacher, who is also the curriculum leader and the mathematics subject leader; the early years leader, who is also the English subject leader; a group of middle leaders and the physical education subject leader. Meetings were held with the special educational needs coordinator and the family support worker; four members of the governing body, including the chair of governors; representatives from the diocese and the multi-academy trust; the school business manager; staff and pupils.
• 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 breaktime. 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: 45 responses, including 29 free-text responses, to the online questionnaire, Parent View; 16 responses from staff gathered through the staff’s survey and 45 responses from the pupil survey.

Inspection team

Ann Henderson, lead inspector Sue Cox Nigel Cook

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