Beaufort Co-operative Academy 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?

• Improve the quality of teaching, learning and assessment and so raise standards, by:
  • ensuring that teachers have high expectations of pupils, whatever their starting points
  • ensuring that teachers set work that meets pupils’ needs
  • making sure teachers address pupils’ misconceptions quickly and pupils understand clearly how to improve their work
  • supporting disadvantaged pupils so that they can make much better progress.
• Improve pupils’ personal development, behaviour and welfare, by: continuing to improve attendance and reducing the number of pupils who are persistently absent ensuring that staff take a robust approach to tackling behaviour and managing low-level disruption, so learning can proceed smoothly ensuring that pupils take a greater pride in the quality of work they produce, including the way it is presented.
• Improve leadership and management, by: ensuring that governors hold leaders to account effectively strengthening school improvement processes so that leaders focus on key issues and regularly review the effectiveness of any strategies they introduce

improving communication between leaders so that their intentions can be implemented effectively urgently reviewing the curriculum provision for all pupils developing middle leaders having capacity to improve teaching, learning, assessment and outcomes in their subject areas. 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 Inadequate

• Leaders, governors and the trust have not been effective in tackling the school’s weaknesses. Pupils’ education has suffered as a result. Senior leaders have not communicated their vision for the school well enough to staff, which significantly limits its impact in the classroom.
• Pupils have made inadequate progress over recent years in a wide range of subjects. Standards have remained low over an extended period because too many strategies are implemented without rigorous review to check that they are working as intended. For example, additional funding, such as the pupil premium and the Year 7 literacy and numeracy catch-up premium, is not used or evaluated effectively. The result is that plans roll over from one year to the next, with little impact on pupils’ progress.
• The leadership of teaching is not improving the quality of teaching, learning and assessment quickly enough. Leaders struggle to balance their roles and identify their priorities. Consequently, the basics of teaching and high expectations are not in place. For example, leaders have failed to raise teachers’ expectations of the most able pupils. Teachers do not consider the needs of these pupils well enough, which limits the progress these pupils make.
• The curriculum is not meeting the needs of the pupils and they are making poor progress as a result. The curriculum for Years 7 to 11 is based around a two-year key stage 3, followed by a three-year key stage 4. Leaders have identified that the curriculum is not the right fit for too many of the pupils and plan to adapt this for the next academic year.
• Until recently, leaders focused most of their efforts to improve standards on Year 11. They have now begun to attempt to address underachievement in other year groups too, but this is not yet having any significant impact on the progress they make.
• Leaders have not done enough to tackle disruptive behaviour. This has meant that teachers are focusing on containing behaviour and not promoting pupils’ progress. A new behaviour policy has been implemented but it is not securely embedded, and staff are not confident in following it.
• Subject leaders do not have the capacity to monitor the quality of teaching in their subject areas. Consequently, they are unable to improve teaching or pupils’ outcomes in their areas of responsibility. There are significant inconsistencies both between and within subject areas. Senior leaders expect subject leaders to develop their own policies in key areas of the school’s work. This exacerbates the differences in practice and leads to underachievement in some subject areas, for example science and mathematics.
• Leaders have made efforts to prepare pupils for life in modern Britain. However, pupils reported that activities to promote spiritual, moral, social and cultural development in tutor periods are not well understood or effective. Pupils do not develop a good understanding of other cultures and points of view.
• The school is recommended not to appoint newly qualified teachers.

Governance of the school

• Although committed to the school, governors have not been able to support leaders in making the necessary improvements. Governors ask questions about how weaknesses are being tackled, but they accept too readily leaders’ assertions that improvements are being made. Consequently, the school has not made enough progress in tackling its many weaknesses.
• The trust is aware that it needs to be involved at an earlier stage in helping the school to resolve its problems.

Safeguarding

• The arrangements for safeguarding are effective.
• Governors and leaders ensure that safeguarding arrangements are fit for purpose. Records are detailed and clearly documented. The school has policies to ensure that pupils are well protected. All staff, including governors, undertake safeguarding training. The checks undertaken on staff and visitors and in recruitment are stringent.
• The procedures for monitoring the safety and welfare of pupils who are not currently receiving education on the school site are robust. The school works closely with alternative providers to ensure that safeguarding procedures, including the monitoring of attendance, are secure.
• Staff understand the issues which may lead to pupils being unsafe or at risk of harm. However, pupils’ awareness of the dangers of radicalisation and extremism is limited.

Quality of teaching, learning and assessment Inadequate

• Teachers’ expectations of what pupils can achieve are too low. Too much teaching does not build effectively on what pupils already know, understand and can do.
• The quality of teaching, learning and assessment varies considerably across the school and too often it fails to meet pupils’ needs. Many pupils say that they are either not challenged enough or are left for too long with work they do not understand. Sometimes this leads to frustration and a deterioration in behaviour. As a result, pupils do not make the progress they should.
• Teaching is often not focused sufficiently on meeting pupils’ needs. Consequently, teaching is not ensuring that there is sufficient challenge for the most able or providing effective support to correct misconceptions in learning.
• Leaders have recently reviewed their approach to improving teaching across the school. This has not had any significant impact because middle leaders are not able to monitor and lead improvement in the quality of teaching and learning in their subject areas with sufficient rigour. Consequently, weaknesses in teaching remain unaddressed.
• Teaching does not help pupils develop the habits of successful and resilient learners. Teachers are too willing to accept poor-quality and poorly presented work. In some cases, this results in the quality of pupils’ work deteriorating further over time.
• Teachers are not consistently assessing pupils’ work to help them plan their teaching effectively. A new assessment policy has been developed but it is not yet used well by all teachers. This is because there is considerable variation in how well leaders’ expectations have been understood and implemented. Consequently, pupils do not consistently receive the help they need to improve their work.
• Poor literacy skills are a barrier for many pupils. Leaders are addressing this by raising the profile of literacy in all subjects. However, at present the teaching of literacy is not embedded practice and varies across subject areas.
• Leaders ensure that the information about how pupils with special educational needs and/or disabilities (SEND) should be supported is easily accessible to teachers. However, at times the information is not used well enough in lessons to ensure that these pupils make the progress they should.
• Teaching assistants support pupils effectively in the classroom but report that they require further training to improve their skills. Pupils appreciate the personalised and caring support they receive.

Personal development, behaviour and welfare Inadequate

Personal development and welfare

• The school’s work to promote pupils’ personal development and welfare is inadequate.
• Pupils’ attitudes to learning vary widely depending on the quality of teaching. Many pupils apply themselves well in their lessons and are keen to succeed when teaching is effective. However, there are a number of pupils who give up too easily, especially when teaching is weak, and their resulting behaviour regularly distracts others.
• Some pupils reported that they were concerned about bullying. This is reinforced by a small number of parents who responded to the online survey. These parents lacked confidence that incidents of bullying would be dealt with effectively.
• Pupils understand how to stay safe in both the real and the virtual worlds. Their understanding of online safety was good. They are less well prepared, however, about other aspects of living in the modern world. They do not have a fully developed understanding of British values, radicalisation or extremism, for example.
• The process for monitoring the attendance of pupils receiving education in alternative provision is effective. Procedures are in place to ensure that the school can make a timely response to any absence.
• Leaders have ensured that there is a clear and consistently applied personal, social and health education programme. Some pupils find this time purposeful and useful, but others did not feel that it helped them to develop their personal and social skills.
• Careers information, advice and guidance are good. In the sixth form, for example, students are well prepared for their next pathways into higher education, apprenticeships or the world of work.

Behaviour

• The behaviour of pupils is inadequate.
• Pupils’ learning is regularly disrupted by poor behaviour. Some pupils pay little attention in class, do not listen to the teacher and disrupt their classmates’ learning. Leaders have recently updated the behaviour policy and introduced restorative practice procedures. These are not fully understood, embedded or adhered to by teachers, which is confusing for pupils, and is not having a positive effect on behaviour.
• All groups of pupils describe how poor behaviour affects many of their lessons. They say their experience of lessons depends greatly on which class they are in or which teacher they have. Some staff report that they do not have the training or support to deal with extreme cases of poor behaviour.
• While many pupils act in a mature and sensible manner in the dining hall and around the site, there are some pupils who struggle to behave well. Such pupils are boisterous with each other and some younger pupils feel nervous around them. While there is a high level of supervision by staff they are not successfully challenging behaviour where pupils act inappropriately.
• Pupils use bad language around the school, which is not consistently tackled by staff.
• Rates of absence remain above the national average, particularly for those pupils who are persistently absent. Although attendance is improving, it remains as a focus for the school as improvements are not rapid enough. The past poor attendance of disadvantaged pupils and pupils with SEND is improving.
• The school has numerous in-year admissions of pupils with complex needs. The procedures in place to support these pupils are not effective in ensuring they have the support they need to succeed.

Outcomes for pupils Inadequate

• Pupils make poor progress across key stages 3 and 4. The school’s own assessment information confirms this picture of poor progress. It is improving but is still not good enough, especially in Years 10 and 11.
• Pupils make significantly less progress over time than other pupils nationally with the same starting points. Provisional information for 2018 indicates that pupils’ overall progress is weak, following on from the poor progress made by the 2017 cohort.
• There is significant underachievement across almost all areas of the curriculum. Underachievement is most pronounced for disadvantaged pupils and the most able.
• In recent years, the progress of disadvantaged pupils at key stage 4 has been extremely poor. In 2018, they achieved on average more than a grade below other pupils nationally with the same starting points. Teaching’s failure to meet the needs of disadvantaged pupils is compounded by these pupils’ poor attendance.
• The most able pupils’ progress varies too much across different subjects. Teaching is not challenging enough, and this impedes pupils’ progress. The most able pupils in Years 7 to 9 are developing better attitudes to study and so they are making better progress in some subjects.
• Pupils with SEND make very inconsistent progress from their starting points. They benefit from individualised programmes in key stage 3. However, support for these pupils is not as effective in key stage 4. Many fail to keep pace and the progress they make by the end of Year 11 is poor.
• Pupils are not well equipped with the appropriate qualifications for the next stage of education, training or employment. Many pupils are required to retake English, mathematics or both as part of their 16 to 19 study programmes.

16 to 19 study programmes Good

• The leadership of the sixth form is good and the 16 to 19 study programmes are well organised. Leaders have high ambitions for students’ academic attainment and their personal development.
• Most students make good progress across a range of academic courses. In the most recently available information, progress in most subjects at A level was at least in line with the national figure and improving. Progress in most applied subjects was in line with the national average.
• The sixth-form provision is inclusive and student numbers are rising. A significant number of students are studying courses at level 2, alongside retaking English and mathematics GCSE. This is indicative of the underachievement at the end of Year 11. In their resits, most students improve their English and mathematics GCSE grades.
• Students have a good understanding of the university application process because the school provides an effective programme of tutorials, visits and assemblies on this subject. Students engage in work-related learning, including work experience, in Year 12. All students secure places in higher education, employment or training when they leave. Careers education and work-related learning in the sixth form are strengths of the school.
• Overall, therefore, the requirements of the 16 to 19 study programmes are well met by the school’s sixth-form provision.
• Relationships between students and their teachers are strong. Students hold their teachers in high regard. They recognise the care and commitment of their teachers, and this motivates them to work hard. Teaching in the sixth form is of much more consistent quality than in the main school, and the most able students are challenged more academically.
• Students’ attitudes to study are good. They enjoy their study programmes. Consequently, they behave well and attend regularly. A high proportion of students continue to Year 13 to complete their qualifications and those that do not are helped into suitable pathways.
• Students feel safe and well looked after at school. Through the enrichment programme, sixth-form leaders ensure that students know how to keep themselves safe in a variety of situations. Even so, many students at present are not fully aware of the risks they face from people attempting to spread extremist ideologies.
• Although there is a programme of mental health education in place, students in the sixth form expressed disappointment at the lack of information they receive on mental health issues. They also felt that there was a lack of extra-curricular activities other than in sport.

School details

Unique reference number 140011 Local authority Gloucestershire Inspection number 10058307 This inspection of the school was carried out under section 5 of the Education Act 2005. Type of school Secondary comprehensive School category Age range of pupils Gender of pupils Gender of pupils in 16 to 19 study programmes Academy sponsor-led 11 to 18 Mixed Mixed Number of pupils on the school roll 1,165 Of which, number on roll in 16 to 19 study programmes 154 Appropriate authority Board of trustees Chair Principal Telephone number Website Email address Peter Westall David Bishop 01452 301381 http://www.beaufort.coop office@beaufort.coop Date of previous inspection 11–12 October 2016

Information about this school

• Beaufort Co-operative Academy opened in October 2013. It is part of OUR Academies Trust. There is a local governing body that oversees the work of the school.
• The school is larger than the average-sized 11–18 school. The proportion of disadvantaged pupils is high. Most pupils are of White British heritage. Very few pupils speak English as an additional language. The proportion of pupils with SEND is average.
• A small number of pupils receive alternative provision, with some or all of their education provided by Gloucestershire Alternative Provision.
• The Cotswold School supports the school.

Information about this inspection

• Inspectors observed learning in a range of lessons and other activities. They talked to pupils about their experiences of school, their learning and the impact of pupils’ behaviour. In visits to lessons, inspectors looked at the quality of pupils’ work and the accuracy of the school’s assessment information. A number of lessons were observed jointly with members of the school’s leadership team.
• Discussions took place with the principal, with other leaders and with various members of staff. The lead inspector also met with members of the governing body, including the chair. She also met with the chief executive officer of the trust.
• Inspectors considered the school’s self-evaluation and improvement planning, assessment information, and minutes of meetings of the governing body. Safeguarding records and documentation were also examined.
• Inspectors considered the 61 responses to the online questionnaire, Parent View, a letter from a parent and phone call from a grandparent. The views of 96 staff and 57 pupils who responded to the online surveys were also considered.
• Inspectors met formally with groups of pupils, including sixth-form students, and spoke with others informally.
• Inspectors met formally with staff and spoke with others informally.

Inspection team

Gill Hickling, lead inspector Judith Mee Jonathan Jones Andrew Brown Jen Edwards Paul Williams Ofsted Inspector Ofsted Inspector Ofsted Inspector Ofsted Inspector Ofsted Inspector Her Majesty’s Inspector