Christ The King Catholic Primary School Ofsted Report

Full report

What does the school need to do to improve further?

• Improve the quality of teaching, learning and assessment by sharing the good practice that is evident in some classrooms more widely, so all pupils make better progress in reading, writing and mathematics.
• Increase teachers’ expectations for the most able so these pupils are challenged to make stronger progress.
• Increase the focus on the school’s provision for disadvantaged pupils, so that this vulnerable group’s outcomes improve rapidly to match those of other pupils.
• Review the way pupils’ progress and attainment information is shared with middle leaders, so that they are better equipped to identify and influence the improvements required in the quality of teaching and learning in their own fields of responsibility.
• Sharpen school development planning so that:
  • it more closely reflects leaders’ self-evaluation of strengths and weaknesses
  • staff are more keenly aware of their role in achieving the main priorities for improvement
  • leaders at all levels can accurately measure their progress in addressing the main priorities for improvement
  • governors can better hold leaders to account for improving the school.

Inspection judgements

Effectiveness of leadership and management Requires improvement

• Leaders do not have an accurate view of the quality of teaching and learning or its impact on pupils’ outcomes. Their self-evaluation is overly generous. This means that there is not enough focus on improving the key issues that need to be addressed for the school to be judged good.
• Development planning does not focus acutely enough on the specific areas that need to be improved. Plans do not show how leaders will monitor progress towards success or how governors will know that leaders are on course to achieve the long-term targets.
• Middle leaders are not able to closely monitor pupils’ progress to identify how to bring about rapid improvement. They are talented and enthusiastic but are not having enough impact on improving the quality of teaching and learning in their areas of responsibility. This is partly because the headteacher has not allowed middle leaders to take ownership of pupils’ assessment information.
• Leaders have not focused sharply enough on improving the outcomes of disadvantaged pupils. Despite a useful strategy document that is part of the school development plan, pupils in this vulnerable group do not make good enough progress and, therefore, are not catching up quickly enough with other pupils nationally.
• The school’s curriculum is rich, varied and a strength. It meets the needs of pupils well. Pupils’ spiritual, moral, social and cultural development is supported effectively within the day-to-day and wider curriculum. Pupils understand and celebrate diversity.
• The school’s very inclusive ethos ensures that pupils respect and value the faiths and cultures of others. Special events such as ‘international day’ help pupils learn about the values and heritage of the many different ethnic groups represented within the school’s community. Assemblies start with a spoken welcome in one of the many languages spoken by pupils across the school.
• The extra-curricular offer is strong and supports pupils’ participation in a wide range of experiences they might not otherwise access. These include residential trips, visits to London’s theatres, performing on stage, horse riding and visits to historical sites connected with their topic work.
• The headteacher has ensured that the school benefits from a close partnership with other local schools. This enables the school to access additional funding and resources to enrich the curriculum. Other partnerships, such as that with the University of Reading, help develop provision for the arts. Music and sport are enjoyed by all pupils, including those who have SEN and/or disabilities.
• Parents are extremely supportive of the school. Many bring their children from outside the local community because they value the school’s caring, inclusive culture. All parents who responded to Ofsted’s parent survey would recommend the school.

Governance of the school

• The governing body is supportive of leaders but does not have a clear enough understanding of the school’s strengths and weaknesses. The information that governors receive, particularly about pupils’ outcomes, does not enable them to monitor progress against the school’s key priorities for improvement well enough. This means that they are not well placed to challenge leaders about the rapid improvements required in pupils’ attainment and progress.
• The chair of governors has ensured that governors come from varied backgrounds outside of education. As a result, many bring knowledge and experience in finance or health and safety, for instance.
• Governors have attended a range of appropriate training facilitated by the local authority. Training specifically targeted at helping governors monitor the quality of provision for disadvantaged pupils was about to be undertaken at the time of the inspection. This training is timely and will help governors sharpen their focus on provision for this vulnerable group of pupils.

Safeguarding

• The arrangements for safeguarding are effective. The school’s caring and nurturing culture ensures that the welfare and safety of pupils is the school’s number one priority. Staff are trained at an appropriate level according to their individual responsibilities. They are vigilant and know what to do if they have concerns. Leaders are not afraid to challenge when they feel that the responses of other agencies are not as keenly focused as they might be.
• Policies and systems to keep pupils safe are robust. The site is maintained well. Routines at the start of the school day are sound. All parents who spoke to inspectors during the inspection said that they believe that their children are safe at school. All parents who responded to the online parent survey feel that their children are happy and safe at school.

Quality of teaching, learning and assessment Requires improvement

• The quality of teaching and learning is not consistently good across the school. Collectively, it does not yet have enough impact on improving outcomes for pupils.
• While some classroom visits showed purposeful and well-focused teaching and learning, others were marked by pupils who did not know what they were learning or why. When this is the case, pupils are not able to make clear connections with their prior learning and opportunities to consolidate and develop their knowledge are lost.
• Classroom visits and the scrutiny of pupils’ work showed that levels of challenge are sometimes not high enough. This is particularly the case for the most able pupils, when they are given work that is too easy or left waiting for work, having completed the tasks asked of them. As a result, time is not used productively, and their learning slows.
• Some classroom visits showed off-task behaviours such as pupils talking excessively and distracting others from their work. This was particularly the case when pupils were not clear about what they were learning.
• The quality of questioning is strong in some classrooms, enabling staff to confirm pupils’ understanding and extend their learning. This was evident in upper key stage 2, where expectations are high, and pupils apply themselves well to their learning.
• Teachers have good subject knowledge and the professional development of staff has contributed well to improvements in the provision for phonics (letters and the sounds they represent), for example. As a result of the very inclusive attitudes of all staff, pupils enjoy being in classrooms and generally show positive attitudes to learning.
• Pupils who have SEN and/or disabilities are served well by this school. Additional staff are used effectively to support learning, including for pupils who integrate into mainstream classes from the specially resourced provision. Prompts and reminders from support staff are unobtrusive and seamless. As a result, this group of pupils are well motivated and make good progress.

Personal development, behaviour and welfare Good

Personal development and welfare

• The school’s work to promote pupils’ personal development and welfare is good. Pupils enjoy coming to school because they feel cared for and well supported. Pupils and parents talk of the strong sense of family and belonging, and the kind, welcoming feel that the school has.
• Pupils’ attitudes to school and learning are positive. When talking to an inspector during breaktime, a group of pupils described coming to school as ‘awesome’. Another group of pupils told an inspector that they appreciate that staff are willing to share a sense of humour with them.
• Pupils’ physical and emotional well-being is served well by the school’s curriculum. Pupils learn about staying safe in many situations, including when using the internet. Water safety, cycle training and building resilience and confidence through outdoor adventurous activities are all part of the school’s wider curriculum offer.
• Pupils who have SEN and/or disabilities develop well at this school. The nurturing culture builds their self-esteem and encourages them to become confident learners. As a result, many pupils from this vulnerable group are now accessing learning in mainstream classes. For many, experience at their previous school had been less than successful.

Behaviour

• The behaviour of pupils is good. Pupils conduct themselves well around the school. They are welcoming to visitors and show respect for the views of others.
• Leaders monitor the attendance of pupils well and intervene when required. As a result, levels of absence are falling, and attendance is close to national averages, including the attendance of vulnerable groups. Leaders’ focus on reducing lateness was successful last year, although this remains a focus for improvement.
• Classroom visits showed the school to be an orderly environment. Although off-task behaviour which distracts is not rare in some classrooms, inspectors did not witness any behaviour that was concerning during the inspection.

Outcomes for pupils Requires improvement

• Outcomes for pupils require improvement to be good.
• Classroom visits and scrutiny of pupils’ work showed that current most-able pupils are not challenged enough in some classrooms. This means they are not making the progress they are capable of.
• Although the recent improvement in attainment in unvalidated key stage 2 results for 2018 is to be welcomed, the progress measures of this cohort were not strong enough in reading and mathematics.
• Pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds do not make the progress they need to. Nor is their progress improving rapidly enough for them to catch up with other pupils in the school and nationally. Unvalidated outcomes at the end of key stage 2 in 2018 show that the progress measures for disadvantaged pupils did not improve as much as other for pupils and remained low in reading. Although progress in writing did improve, the progress measure in mathematics declined even further from the weak outcomes seen in 2017.
• Attainment at the end of Year 2 in 2018 was low compared to other schools nationally. However, this cohort’s starting points on entry to early years were very low, indicating good progress. Nevertheless, the attainment of pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds was not as strong as other pupils in the school and well below that of other pupils nationally. This means that this group of disadvantaged pupils will need to make accelerated progress as they move through key stage 2, if they are to catch up with other pupils in the school and nationally.
• The school’s recent work to improve pupils’ phonics knowledge and skills has been successful. Classroom visits showed current pupils benefiting from strong phonics provision. As a result, outcomes in the Year 1 phonics screening checks are improving year on year.
• Pupils who have SEN and/or disabilities make good progress because the quality of provision for these pupils is good. This includes the pupils who attend the specially resourced provision, most of whom spend most or all of their time integrated in mainstream classrooms. Parents are particularly happy with this aspect of the school’s provision.

Early years provision Requires improvement

• The early years has some strengths but, when evaluating the overall quality, it mirrors many aspects of the provision in key stages 1 and 2. Central to this is early years self-evaluation and development planning. There is a lack of focus on specific actions to improve the outcomes of children currently in early years. The early years leader’s role in monitoring the progress of children, including that of groups of children, is also less well developed.
• Outcomes over time have been low in early years and well below those seen nationally. This is due, in part, to the low starting points when they join the school of a significant proportion of children.
• The proportion of children achieving a good level of development dipped in 2018 and fell to its lowest point in four years. As a result, only half of the children who moved into Year 1 did so having achieved a good level of development. The headteacher and chair of governors expressed disappointment at this, indicating that turbulence in staffing and its impact on teaching and learning contributed significantly to this outcome. However, leaders have addressed this situation. Evidence collected during the inspection indicates that the early years is improving rapidly, but it is too early to judge the quality of provision to be good.
• Outcomes for boys are not as good as girls’ outcomes in early years. Too few boys achieve a good level of development compared to girls. Recent improvements in the outdoor learning environment will help, as will the impact of good-quality phonics provision now evident in classrooms.
• Classroom visits showed an improving picture in the early years, particularly in Nursery, where effective structures are in place and adults are caring and supportive of children’s development. Care and support for children in Reception are also strong, reflecting the good quality of personal development, behaviour and welfare seen elsewhere in the school.
• All aspects of safeguarding are effective in the early years. Parents talk positively about how well staff care for their children. They were also positive about transitions into school and the level of communication from staff. Parents also said that leaders listen and respond well when they have small concerns.

School details

Unique reference number 110005 Local authority Reading Inspection number 10046699 This inspection of the school was carried out under section 5 of the Education Act 2005. Type of school Primary School category Voluntary aided Age range of pupils 3 to 11 Gender of pupils Mixed Number of pupils on the school roll 364 Appropriate authority The governing body Chair Miss Victoria Hummell Headteacher Mr John Cosgrove Telephone number 01189 375434 Website www.christthekingreading.co.uk Email address admin@christtheking.reading.sch.uk Date of previous inspection 19–20 September 2013

Information about this school

• Christ The King Catholic Primary School is larger than the average-sized primary school.
• The school hosts a local authority specially resourced provision for up to 21 pupils who have autism spectrum disorder.
• A large proportion of pupils who attend the school are from minority ethnic groups.
• The proportion of pupils attending the school who have SEN and/or disabilities is very high compared to other schools.
• The school is an active member of a partnership of local schools.

Information about this inspection

• Inspectors carried out eight extended learning walks during the inspection, visiting every year group and class, most more than once. During classroom visits, inspectors observed teaching and learning, assessed the quality of pupils’ work and talked to them about their progress. Some classroom visits were accompanied by the headteacher.
• Inspectors observed pupils’ behaviour in classrooms and as they moved around the school, including during breaktime and at the start of the school day.
• An inspector heard pupils read.
• Meetings were held with the headteacher, middle leaders, non-teaching support staff, the chair of governors and a representative group of pupils.
• Telephone conversations were held with representatives of the local authority and diocesan board.
• Inspectors met with parents at the start of both days of the inspection. Inspectors considered 54 replies to the online questionnaire, Parent View, as well as the accompanying free-text comments. Inspectors received two letters from parents. Inspectors also took into account 21 responses to the staff survey.
• A wide range of documents and policies were scrutinised, including those regarding the safety of pupils. As well as looking at pupils’ work in classrooms, a separate scrutiny of books was carried out with the leaders for English and mathematics.
• The school’s own self-evaluation, development planning and information about pupils’ outcomes were considered. Documented evidence of the work of the governing body and the notes of visits to the school made by the local authority were also considered.

Inspection team

Clive Close, lead inspector Her Majesty’s Inspector Lynn Martin Ofsted Inspector Debra Anderson Ofsted Inspector