Warnham CofE Primary School Ofsted Report

Full report

What does the school need to do to improve further?

• Leaders need to secure and sustain school improvement by:
  • using performance information effectively and being clear about what success will look like in improvement plans and in the management of staff performance looking more closely at learning and progress when monitoring what is happening in the school improving the quality of teaching and learning, particularly in key stage 1.
• Ensure that outcomes for pupils are at least good by:
  • increasing the proportion of disadvantaged pupils who make good or better progress from their starting points, particularly in key stage 2 increasing the proportion of pupils who reach the expected standard in the Year 1 phonic screening check increasing the proportion of key stage 1 pupils who make good progress from their early years starting points.
• Secure effective governance that can challenge leaders and drive rapid school improvement. An external review of governance should be taken 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 have not responded effectively to national changes to the curriculum and assessment. Leaders acknowledge this. They are not using published information effectively to plan for school improvement. Consequently, there is not a sharp enough focus on the progress that groups of pupils will make from their starting points, including the most able.
• Leaders do not have a strong understanding of the progress that groups of current pupils are making from their starting points. Leaders did take decisive action to change the tools they were using to track pupils’ progress. However, the new system will not be fully functional until January 2017.
• The management of staff performance is not robust. The impact teachers are expected to have on pupils’ progress is not clear. The most able pupils are a current focus for the school but do not feature in the targets that staff are working towards.
• Leaders are not rigorous in their evaluation of the strengths and weaknesses in teaching and learning. Leaders do spend time looking at pupils’ work and observing in classrooms. However, there is not enough focus on the progress that groups of pupils are making.
• The additional funding the school receives to support pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities is not used as effectively as it could be. New leaders know that individual plans for pupils are not clear enough about what success will look like and how progress will be tracked.
• Leaders’ use of pupil premium funding requires improvement. Plans for this academic year are still in draft. However, they largely repeat last year’s key activity. Leaders acknowledge that progress for disadvantaged pupils is inconsistent. Evaluation by the school of last year’s spending states that all disadvantaged pupils made expected progress. This is not accurate.
• The curriculum is broad and balanced. Specialist teachers make a positive contribution to the quality of the curriculum. Additional physical education (PE) and sport funding is used effectively to provide a range of clubs and activities that increase older pupils’ participation in team sports.
• Pupils are well prepared for life in modern Britain. The school’s values are known and understood. Pupils play an active role in developing their school and have many opportunities to vote and make decisions. Older pupils have developed an effective understanding of democracy through their written submissions to local politicians regarding airport expansion.
• Pupils’ spiritual, moral, social and cultural development is effective. Leaders actively provide pupils with time and space to reflect. The curriculum is well planned to give pupils a strong sense of their immediate locality, but also the wider world around them.

Governance of the school

• Governance is not effective. Governors do not know enough about published information to challenge leaders effectively. Governors rely heavily on what the headteacher tells them. When questions are asked, these are too superficial because governors do not have the knowledge to probe or challenge what is being said. The committee responsible for looking closely at pupils’ progress and teaching and learning is not rigorous.
• Governors are over-reliant on the local authority, including for some crucial policies. Governors have not read important statutory documents. Consequently, they cannot spot clear examples when out-of-date legislation is being referenced. The school’s website is missing a significant amount of statutory information, including that relating to the use of pupil premium funding. Governors do not have sufficient oversight of their school to challenge leaders.

Safeguarding

• The arrangements for safeguarding are effective. Leaders know and understand their statutory responsibilities. The induction of new staff is comprehensive and staff know and understand the school’s policies. There is a strong culture of information-sharing in the school that focuses closely on pupils’ well-being. Referrals to other agencies are detailed and logged effectively. During this inspection, leaders responded with swift and decisive action to a temporary technical issue that had the potential to impact on pupils’ online safety. Leaders are diligent and conscientious.

Quality of teaching, learning and assessment

• Teaching, learning and assessment are inconsistent.

Requires improvement

• Planned learning does not consistently take account of pupils’ starting points, particularly for the most able and those pupils who need to catch up. Pupils make less progress than they should when the work is too easy or too difficult, particularly in key stage 1.
• Teachers do not consistently use their assessments of what pupils know and can do effectively. As a result, lessons can be teaching something pupils know they can do, and have done many times before.
• Teachers in key stage 1 do not always have high enough expectations of what the most able pupils should achieve, particularly in reading and writing.
• Teachers’ use of feedback to pupils is variable. When misconceptions are identified swiftly and teachers clarify teaching points, pupils make good progress.
• Time is not always used well in lessons. Sometimes activities are given to fill time that have little or no impact on pupils’ learning. Where learning is most effective, adults are clear about what is expected and pupils get on with tasks quickly.
• The impact that other adults have on pupils’ learning is inconsistent, including those working with pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities. Less effective planning for pupils’ specific next steps affects their progress. New leaders know this.
• Specialist teachers have good subject knowledge. Pupils make good progress because they develop technical vocabulary and key skills over time.

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 confident and articulate. Pupils present their work well and are confident to talk about their learning. Older pupils value the opportunities they get to think more broadly. For example, when meeting inspectors, pupils began a discussion about ‘which came first, the chicken or the egg?’. Rich and stimulating discussion followed.
• Pupils understand what bullying is and are clear that it hardly ever happens. Pupils feel safe in school and trust that adults will help them if required.
• Pupils are taught how to stay safe, including online. Consequently, pupils are able to explain instantly what one should and should not do when using the internet.
• Parents and staff are clear that they feel that pupils are happy and safe in school.

Behaviour

• The behaviour of pupils is good.
• Warnham is a calm and orderly place to learn. Pupils move around the school with a sense of purpose, including when they are not directly supervised.
• Pupils have a very clear understanding of the school’s policies regarding rewards and sanctions. Pupils feel that adults are fair.
• The attendance levels of pupils are good. Leaders’ actions have brought about a clear improvement in the attendance of disadvantaged pupils.
• Behaviour in lessons is good. Pupils listen carefully to what is expected of them and work well in groups and individually. However, pupils can become disengaged when the work is too easy or too difficult. Pupils do not disrupt the learning of others, but they do lose focus on their own work.

Outcomes for pupils Requires improvement

• Standards in phonics are too low. The proportion of pupils reaching the expected standard in the Year 1 phonics check has been well below national averages for the last three years. This does not represent good progress from pupils’ starting points.
• Current Year 3 pupils have not made consistently good progress from their starting points, including those who met the expected standard when they were in Reception Year. Consequently, less than half the pupils left key stage 1 with the expected mathematical and writing skills.
• The school’s performance information shows that the progress of disadvantaged pupils in reading, writing and mathematics is inconsistent across the school, particularly in key stage 2. As a result, differences are not diminishing quickly enough between disadvantaged pupils and others. In 2016, none of the small number of disadvantaged pupils made expected progress in writing or mathematics from their key stage 1 starting points.
• The progress of the most able pupils is inconsistent. Leaders’ analysis of their performance information highlights this. The progress of the most able readers in key stage 2 is accelerated because pupils are reading books that provide the right level of challenge. However, the most able pupils in key stage 1 read and enjoy more challenging texts at home than they do at school. In 2016, the proportion of pupils reading at greater depth at the end of key stage 2 was more than double the national average. The most able readers in key stage 2 make good progress.
• Older pupils make good progress in French and music because specialist teaching is effective. Pupils acquire knowledge and skills that will equip them well for secondary school.

Early years provision Good

• Children achieve well in the early years. Children make good progress, particularly those who do not have the same literacy and language skills as their peers on entry. Adults develop children’s speech and language well. The proportion of children reaching a good level of development by the end of Reception Year is consistently higher than that found nationally. Consequently, children are well prepared for Year 1.
• Children develop good personal and social skills. Children work well together and independently. Children respond swiftly to adults’ instructions and routines are clear. Adults have high expectations and children respond well to these.
• Teaching in the early years is good. Children develop their knowledge about the sounds that letters represent quickly. Children are given a wide range of opportunities to develop themselves as writers and as a result make good progress.
• Leaders work well with other local early years providers. Leaders visit providers before children start school in order to find out important information about the children who will be joining Warnham. As a result, children settle well.
• Leaders and staff work actively to involve parents in their children’s learning. Parents are given opportunities to contribute to assessments. Parents are also given helpful information about the teaching of phonics in the early years so that they can continue to support children at home.
• Leaders are ambitious for all children, including the most able. Leaders’ focus is to increase the proportion of children who leave the early years exceeding the early learning goals. It is too soon to see the impact of this.

School details

Unique reference number Local authority Inspection number 125998 West Sussex 10002774 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 Voluntary controlled 4 to 11 Mixed Number of pupils on the school roll 201 Appropriate authority The governing body Chair Headteacher Telephone number Website Email address Hilary Farquhar Jill Costello 01403 265230 www.warnhamschool.org.uk office@warnhamprimary.co.uk Date of previous inspection 27–28 June 2012

Information about this school

• The school does not meet requirements on the publication of information about exam and assessment results, the pupil premium, PE and sport premium or the information report regarding pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities on its website.
• The school met the 2015 floor standards, which are the minimum expectations for pupils’ attainment and progress in reading, writing and mathematics by the end of Year 6.
• There is an interim leadership structure in place following the resignation of the deputy headteacher. Some leaders are either new to post or new to the school.
• The school has expanded since the last inspection and there is now a class for each year group. Warnham is still smaller than the average-sized primary school.
• Only small numbers of pupils attract pupil premium funding. The proportion is significantly lower than the national average.
• The proportion of pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities is higher than that found nationally.

Information about this inspection

• Inspectors observed learning throughout the school. Inspectors looked at pupils’ work during lessons and spoke to pupils about their learning. Inspectors heard key stage 1 and key stage 2 pupils read.
• Meetings were held with senior leaders. Meetings were held with local authority representatives and with governors.
• Parents’ views were considered through the 54 responses to Ofsted’s online survey, Parent View, and in conversations with parents at the beginning of the school day. The views of staff were considered through the 30 responses to Ofsted’s staff survey and through meetings.
• Pupils’ views were heard through meetings, by talking to pupils around the school and through 24 responses to the pupil questionnaire.
• Inspectors considered a wide range of documents, including leaders’ evaluations of the school’s effectiveness, improvement plans, records of local authority visits, and leaders’ analysis of the quality of teaching, pupils’ progress, behaviour and attendance.
• Inspectors reviewed safeguarding records, the central record of recruitment checks on staff and the school’s internet filters.

Inspection team

Mark Cole, lead inspector Cassie Buchanan Elizabeth Morrison

Her Majesty’s Inspector Ofsted Inspector Ofsted Inspector