Pilton Community College Ofsted Report

Full report

What does the school need to do to improve further?

• Ensure that the trust board, through the local governing body, fully holds school leaders to account in improving the:
  • quality of teaching to raise pupils’ achievement where required
  • monitoring of the quality of provision for pupils educated partly or wholly off-site. level of precision in safeguarding records
• Insist that teachers have higher expectations of the level and quality of pupils’ work based on a more robust understanding of what pupils already can do, know and understand to raise their achievement.
• Improve the quality of teaching to raise pupils’ achievement in mathematics.
• Ensure that disadvantaged pupils, including those who are among the most able, make more rapid progress to rapidly reduce the difference between their achievement and that of pupils who are not disadvantaged nationally.
• Improve the quality of teaching for pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities, including those from the specialist resource base, to match the high-quality support they receive for their welfare and well-being. An external review of the school’s use of the pupil premium funding 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

• School leaders and governors have successfully established a positive culture that well supports pupils’ all-round personal development, particularly their physical and emotional well-being. They have been less effective in making sure that all pupils achieve as well as they should in all subjects.
• Weaknesses in teaching in some subjects and in the achievement of disadvantaged pupils have not been tackled effectively. School leaders’ evaluation that the majority of teaching is at least good has limited the actions taken to improve its quality where necessary.
• The ability of subject leaders to raise achievement in their subjects by improving the quality of teaching is variable. Some of the subjects with weaker teaching have weak subject leadership. These subject leaders’ scrutiny of pupils’ work is focused more on checking teachers’ marking than checking the quality and level of the work. These weaknesses in subject leadership have not been tackled firmly by senior leaders.
• The analysis of pupils’ progress and achievement is not always sharp enough, for example in identifying accurately whether the strategies used to support disadvantaged pupils and those who have special educational needs and/or disabilities have worked.
• Many parents are very positive about the culture and ethos of the school and praise the support for their children’s welfare and all-round development. However, those that feel less positive often cite weaknesses in teaching in certain subjects, their children’s lack of progress, repetition of work already covered in earlier years or poor communication with subject teachers when they want to discuss their child’s progress.
• The curriculum for all year groups is broad and balanced. The pathways followed by pupils in Years 9 to 11 are carefully planned to meet their needs well.
• A significant proportion of pupils follow a pathway that includes vocational and other qualifications. There is a good progression from these courses on to suitable post-16 courses, training or an apprenticeship. Leaders recognise that the choice of qualifications, while entirely suitable for these pupils, means that some score poorly in the government’s school performance measures. They are rightly more concerned with providing an appropriate curriculum to ensure good progression when pupils leave the school at the end of Year 11.
• The majority of the most able pupils are well prepared for A level and other level 3 courses at a range of providers. Those that want to progress to A levels are able to do so despite, in some cases, not achieving the highest grades they should in some GCSE subjects.
• The school provides a very wide range of well-attended enrichment and other extra-curricular activities. Pupils, and parents, are extremely enthusiastic about these, including the sporting, artistic, cultural, musical and dramatic performances, and many other events and clubs. These activities make a significant contribution to the personal development of many pupils and to their good social, moral, spiritual and cultural development.
• The school’s languages specialism is used well to develop pupils’ broader cultural and linguistic understanding as well as a much heightened awareness of international and global issues. This means that pupils can compare a range of other countries’ and cultures’ ways of life and values with their good understanding of life in modern Britain and of fundamental British values.
• Teachers are provided with a wide range of opportunities for their further professional development. However, these have not yet effectively addressed weaknesses in teaching. This has not been helped by school leaders’ overgenerous evaluation of the quality of teaching.
• The arrangements for managing the performance of teachers have not been wholly successful in improving the quality of teaching where required.
• Newly and recently qualified teachers feel well supported. However, their professional development is dependent on the quality of teaching in their subject areas, which is variable.
• Many parents involve themselves wholeheartedly in the life of the school. They attend events, including parents’ evenings, and are very supportive. School leaders and other staff make strenuous and often highly successful efforts to engage those parents who are more reluctant to become involved. This is a strength of the school.
• The large majority of parents feel that communications with school leaders are effective and relationships good, but some say that they find it difficult to make contact with subject teachers.

Governance of the school

• The arrangements for the governance of the school changed when the school joined a multi-academy trust on 1 August 2016. A local governing body, comprising previous members of the academy board of directors, has direct responsibility for holding the school leaders to account. At this early stage, the effectiveness with which they do this requires improvement.
• Historical weaknesses in teaching and in pupils’ achievement, such as in mathematics and by disadvantaged pupils, had not previously been challenged robustly. This means that governors could not ensure that additional funds, through the pupil premium, Year 7 catch-up premium and special educational needs funding, were used effectively.
• A recent audit has identified the need for a greater breadth of expertise, particularly educational experience for governors to, for example, make links between achievement information and the effectiveness of the curriculum. This is currently being addressed so that governors can ask school leaders challenging questions, probe their responses and evaluate thoroughly the impact of the actions they take.
• As a result of the oversight of the trust and mostly well-targeted training, the local governing body is now much better placed to provide the essential balance of support and challenge to the school leaders. The chair of the local governing body fully recognises the additional value that being held to account by the trust board brings. However, further training is required for the trust to be confident that governors monitor the effectiveness of the school’s safeguarding arrangements rigorously.
• Financial accountability now rests with the board of trustees and it is too early to evaluate how effectively this is being undertaken.

Safeguarding

• The arrangements for safeguarding are effective.
• There is a strong culture of safeguarding in the school. Pupils feel safe and are kept safe. Pupils, teachers and parents all feel, correctly, that the leaders and governors do everything they need to do to keep pupils safe, well looked after and cared for. All staff receive training that is regularly updated; they understand their responsibilities.
• Under the new governance arrangements, the designated safeguarding governor has set up frequent meetings with the school’s designated safeguarding lead. These are intended to check that procedures are reviewed regularly and any incidents analysed and evaluated to improve practice. However, for this to be fully effective the governor leading on safeguarding requires urgent additional training.
• The school’s designated safeguarding lead has an impressive depth of knowledge and understanding of individual pupils’ needs and situations. However, she recognises that greater precision and tightening of record-keeping arrangements are required so that follow-up can be tracked and evaluated more carefully. Too much responsibility has been passed to other members of the safeguarding team, whose work has not been checked thoroughly or their training needs identified sharply enough. This situation has not been challenged by governors.

Quality of teaching, learning and assessment Requires improvement

• The quality of teaching, learning and assessment is highly variable between and within subjects. The inspection findings do not agree with the leaders’ and governors’ self-evaluation that ‘the majority of teaching and learning is good or outstanding’. While some teaching is highly effective, too much is not.
• Where teaching is weaker, teachers’ planning does not lead to effective learning. While planning shows teachers thinking about pupils’ different starting points and current progress, this is not transferred to lessons.
• All teachers have seating plans that identify pupils’ targets and include assessment information. The plans also show if pupils are, for example, disadvantaged, have special educational needs and/or disabilities or both. However, it is not clear how this information is used to ensure that these pupils are being challenged, supported and given feedback to help them do as well as they can and make rapid progress.
• The targets set for disadvantaged pupils and those who have special educational needs and/or disabilities – and many pupils are in both categories – show little understanding of the need for these pupils to make accelerated progress to catch up.
• Teachers’ expectations of what pupils can achieve are often too low. They do not have a good understanding of what pupils already can do, know and understand. This leads to unnecessary repetition of prior learning, particularly, but not only, in the lower year groups.
• In mathematics and science there is too little development of pupils’ deeper thinking and reasoning skills. This inhibits the progress that pupils make in these subjects.
• In English, variations in the quality of teaching are often due to lack of precision in what pupils are expected to learn and in the level of challenge. In classes where the pupils are unclear about their current level of achievement and what is expected of them, their progress is limited.
• There is inconsistency in how well teaching assistants are deployed. When they provide high-quality support to pupils, including some of those who have special educational needs and/or disabilities, these pupils make strong progress. Other teaching assistants lack the necessary subject knowledge or are poorly directed, which limits the impact they have in supporting pupils’ progress.
• Marking is mostly completed following the school’s policy. The quality of feedback to pupils on their work varies significantly within subjects. The best makes sure that pupils know exactly what they need to do to correct their work, to deepen their understanding or to take on a higher level of challenge. This is not widespread.
• The school’s policy on marking to improve pupils’ literacy is not followed consistently. The opportunities for pupils to develop their extended writing skills are not used well in some subjects and, when they do write at length, the feedback they receive is not always helpful.
• The impact of strong teaching, where it exists, can be seen in pupils’ enthusiasm and in their progress in subjects such as the performing arts subjects (dance, drama and music), art and design, history, ‘beliefs, values and traditions’ (religious education), physical education and in some languages classes. As one perceptive Year 7 pupil put it: ‘You enjoy it most when the teacher is enjoying it.’ If used well, this good practice would provide a secure basis for improving teaching, learning and assessment elsewhere in the school.
• All classrooms are good learning environments with clear routines. Pupils know what is acceptable and what is not and almost all stick to and respect these boundaries well. Pupils say that teachers do not tolerate the use of derogatory or abusive language or behaviour, although they struggle to give examples of when this has happened. Mutual respect and tolerance are promoted well.
• Pupils sent to spend time during the day in the school’s inclusion room are set the work that they would have done in class. They are supported and mostly make some, although often little, progress. The staff there are generally effective in getting the pupils ready to go back into lessons as quickly as possible.

Personal development, behaviour and welfare Good

Personal development and welfare

• The school’s work to promote pupils’ personal development and welfare is good.
• A well-planned personal development programme, supported by assemblies, covers all aspects of pupils’ well-being. They have a good understanding of, for example, the risks of using the internet and social networking sites, the dangers of extremism and radicalisation, and how to avoid sexual exploitation.
• Pupils are confident, articulate and highly supportive of the school. They are extremely positive about the very wide range of enrichment activities the school provides and they participate in large numbers and with great enthusiasm.
• Pupils, and their parents, report that the school takes good care of them, ensures that they are safe and pays good attention to their personal development. They have a good awareness of potential risks and how to avoid or deal with them.
• The personal development programme, linked with work in ‘beliefs, values and traditions’ and the school’s languages specialism and topics in other subjects, leads to pupils’ good social, moral, spiritual and cultural development. Pupils can discuss, for example, controversial issues about genetics, the apparent rise in racist incidents following the European Union referendum and concerns about the impact of globalisation on jobs.
• Pupils receive good careers guidance through a comprehensive programme and a wide range of events from Year 7 to 11. This prepares them well for their next steps. In 2015, 98% of Year 11 pupils progressed to a suitable post-16 course, employment with training or to an apprenticeship, with almost 90% moving to one of a number of further education colleges. These destinations show good progression from their curriculum pathways in key stage 4.
• Leaders are aware that in previous years too many pupils progressed to level 1 post-16 courses, so they are working with the further education colleges to ensure that more pupils are able to progress to level 2. They are also aware that too many pupils who move on to a level 3 course, including A levels, change course or provider at the end of Year 12. They have begun work with current Year 11 pupils to make them more ‘college ready’ and to help them cope with the often large step up from GCSE to level 3 work.

Behaviour

• The behaviour of pupils is good.
• During break and lunchtimes and at the start and end of the day the school site is a well-ordered and safe environment because pupils behave sensibly, and they are polite and respectful towards each other and adults. This is particularly noteworthy given the large number of pupils in the school. Year 7 pupils say that they feel safe and well looked after.
• At lesson changeovers and at the end of break and lunchtime pupils move promptly to lessons and arrive ready to learn. There are many narrow doors, corridors and stairs and pupils show good self-discipline so that movement in these areas is smooth and safe.
• Pupils respond enthusiastically and obviously enjoy learning where teaching is effective. This was seen, for example, in performing arts and physical education. When teaching is less effective, pupils still behave well, but without taking any obvious pleasure in their learning.
• There is very little disruption to learning as a result of poor behaviour. Pupils say that ‘sometimes other pupils talk and this does stop us learning’, but they felt that this was usually ‘as bad as it got’, and was dealt with quickly so that little time was lost.
• Pupils and parents say that bullying is rare. When it occurs it is almost always name-calling. Pupils say that they know who to report this to, that they do so and feel it is dealt with swiftly and effectively.
• Pupils’ attendance has improved overall and for all groups. Overall attendance is above the most recent national average figure. The attendance of disadvantaged pupils and those who have special educational needs and/or disabilities improved last year and came much closer to the overall national average.
• The use of the internal inclusion room has resulted in a marked reduction in the number of pupils excluded from the school for fixed periods of time and the number of incidents. Additionally, the use of the room itself has reduced significantly.
• The personal development, behaviour and welfare of pupils educated partly or wholly in off-site provision are not monitored frequently or robustly enough.

Outcomes for pupils Require improvement

• Pupils’ progress is not consistently strong across all year groups, for all groups of pupils and in a wide range of subjects. Current pupils’ attainment when they entered the school was significantly above average. Too many do not make strong enough progress in some subjects from these high starting points.
• Pupils’ achievement in mathematics is below average for pupils with all different starting points, including the most able and disadvantaged pupils. The difference between the achievement of disadvantaged pupils in the school, including those who are among the most able, and that of other pupils nationally has not been reduced significantly. Underachievement in mathematics does limit some pupils’ chances of progressing to level 2 or 3 courses when they leave the school at the end of Year 11.
• The work in mathematics of pupils currently in the school includes too much that does not challenge them to achieve as well as they can. Work in Years 7 and 8 repeats mathematics that pupils have shown that they can already do without deepening or developing their understanding further. Pupils would welcome work that enables them to show what they can really do.
• Pupils’ overall achievement in English, including those who are disadvantaged, is in line with the national average, as expected given their high starting points. However, for current pupils there is significant variation in the quality of their work between classes in the same year groups.
• The achievement in English of disadvantaged pupils, including the most able among them, had improved to be in line with that of non-disadvantaged pupils nationally, although the difference was greater again in 2016. The quality of the work of disadvantaged pupils currently in the school, from all starting points, matches the excessive variation between classes for other pupils.
• Many of the most able pupils in the school follow separate GCSE courses in biology, chemistry and physics. They do well and achieve high grades. The rest of the most able pupils follow courses in core and additional science; they do not do so well. The achievement of all groups of pupils in additional science is weak.
• The work of many current pupils in all year groups in science shows a lack of depth of understanding. While pupils can fulfil the tasks that they are set, they do not link this with their prior understanding of key scientific concepts and are not encouraged to develop their scientific reasoning skills. This limits their achievement.
• The work of current pupils in Year 7 shows repetition of science they had completed in primary school, but at a lower level for most pupils, including pupils from the resource base, and particularly for the most able.
• A significant proportion of pupil premium funding has been used to provide additional staffing in English and mathematics. While the impact of this can be seen in English, where differences in achievement have reduced, it cannot yet be seen in mathematics. Differences in achievement have not yet been addressed successfully.
• The impact of sharing successful strategies for overcoming the barriers to learning that disadvantaged pupils may face varies widely. It depends on whether the strategies are consistently used in all subjects and by all teachers.
• Pupils’ work in some other subjects, such as geography and in design and technology, is not at the level and quality expected given their starting points. Work in design and technology shows poor development of skills. Some pupils’ work in geography shows very limited progress since the start of the year.
• There is a good range of subjects where pupils’ enthusiasm and enjoyment of their learning are reflected in the high quality of their work. Achievement in, for example, the performing arts subjects, art and design, history and in ‘beliefs, values and traditions’ is high.
• Pupils are enthusiastic participants in physical education and they achieve well. In lessons many act, highly effectively, as ‘peer coaches’ and support the good learning of others. Pupils have well-developed skills in self- and peer-evaluation that support their further learning.
• Many pupils enjoy learning a wide range of languages, although they are not encouraged to write extended sentences or their own paragraphs quickly enough. Some classes are not prepared well for GCSE courses in Year 9.
• The progress of those pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities is highly dependent on the classes they are in. When teaching is less effective, the pace and quality of their learning drops, as does that of other pupils in the class.
• Overall, the achievement of those pupils receiving special educational needs support has improved. Specialist staff are very good at building pupils’ self-confidence and resilience and they are integrated well into classes.
• Pupils in the resource base learn well when they are in the base. When they are in lessons outside of the base, while their personal needs are cared for well, they are not always encouraged or supported well to deepen their learning. The depth of their learning depends on the variable quality of the teaching.
• The progress made by boys is sometimes inhibited by the poor presentation of their work, not catching up with missed work, or loose handouts that get lost. However, when the teacher’s expectations are high, they respond very well.
• Pupils on the hair and beauty course, who spend part of their week in a hairdressers’ for work experience and practical skills development, do well and many progress to post-16 courses, although too many of these are at level 1. The progress of other pupils educated partly or wholly in off-site provision is not monitored frequently or robustly enough.
• Pupils currently in Year 8 who had additional support in developing their literacy and numeracy skills through the Year 7 catch-up funding made very good progress. All significantly improved their reading age and their mathematical skills; they are now on track to significantly increase their rate of progress from their low starting points.
• Pupils of all ages and within all groups, including pupils of all abilities from the most to the least able, disadvantaged pupils and those who have special educational needs and/or disabilities, read fluently and with good comprehension. Pupils in the classes visited read from textbooks, information provided by the teacher or their own writing with good levels of understanding. It is clear that many of the pupils also read widely and for pleasure.

School details

Unique reference number Local authority Inspection number 136867 Devon 10000462 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 Secondary comprehensive School category Age range of pupils Gender of pupils Number of pupils on the school roll Academy converter 11 to 16 Mixed 1,298 Appropriate authority Trust board Chair Principal Hugh Whittaker Louise Miller-Marshall Telephone number 01271 374 381 Website Email address www.piltoncollege.org.uk admin@piltoncollege.org.uk Date of previous inspection 21–22 June 2012

Information about this school

• The school meets requirements on the publication of specified information on its website.
• The school complies with DfE guidance on what academies should publish.
• Pilton Community College, a converter academy, became part of The Primary Academies Trust, a multi-academy trust, on 1 August 2016. At this time a local governing body was established responsible to the board of trustees. Many members of the local governing body, including the chair, were formerly members of the academy board of directors.
• The school is larger than the average-sized 11–16 secondary school.
• The school hosts the North Devon Communications and Interaction Resource Base catering for eight pupils with autism.
• The school makes use of three alternative providers. Currently a few pupils, who are dual registered, spend all of their time at the Skills Company North Devon Academy (a pupil referral unit); a small number attend part-time at Wings Youth (a youth charity); and a larger number of pupils spend part of their time at Charley’s Hairdresser to develop practical skills for their hair and beauty course.
• The proportion of pupils in the school eligible for free school meals is below average. The proportion identified as having special educational needs and/or disabilities and those with a statement of special educational needs or an education, health and care plan are both almost twice the national average. A sizeable group of pupils are eligible for both the pupil premium and funding for special educational needs and/or disabilities.
• A very small proportion of pupils are from other than White British backgrounds and few speak English as an additional language.
• The school meets the current government floor standards.

Information about this inspection

• There were two inspectors on the first day of the inspection and an additional five inspectors on the second day of the inspection.
• Inspectors held meetings with the school’s senior leaders, a wide range of staff, the chief executive officer of the trust and the chair of governors, and separate meetings with a group of governors and the governor responsible for safeguarding.
• Four formal meetings were held with different groups of pupils. In addition, informal conversations were held with a large number of pupils around the site at break and lunchtimes as well as at the start and end of the school day.
• Inspectors visited classrooms, often with school leaders, in all year groups and across a wide range of subjects. They observed tutor time at the start of the day. In lessons, inspectors looked at pupils’ work and discussed it with them. Inspectors also looked at a wider sample of pupils’ work.
• Inspectors listened to a large number of pupils read, mainly in lessons or during tutor time. These pupils represented the full ability range and included disadvantaged pupils, some most able disadvantaged pupils, and a few pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities in the main school and the specialist resource base. Pupils read from their own work, materials provided by the teacher, sections from a textbook or from their current reading book. One inspector talked and listened to some pupils in Year 8 who had additional support in developing their literacy and numeracy skills when they were in Year 7.
• Inspectors met with the school’s designated safeguarding lead and looked at a wide range of documents and records about safeguarding, as well as checking that arrangements such as the maintenance of the single central record met all statutory requirements.
• Inspectors took account of the school leaders’ and governors’ self-evaluation and used this with senior leaders to establish inspection lines of enquiry on the first day of the inspection. They also looked at a wide range of other documents and information supplied by the school about analysis of pupils’ achievement.
• Inspectors took account of the 91 responses to Parent View, Ofsted’s online survey, including 88 with additional comments. They also took account of the school leaders’ own work with parents.

Inspection team

James Sage, lead inspector Iain Freeland Malcolm Davison Marie Hunter Gary Lewis Paul Winterton Deborah Wring

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