Holway Park Community Primary School Ofsted Report

Full report

What does the school need to do to improve further?

• Improve the quality of teaching, learning and assessment so that pupils’ progress is consistently strong across the school by ensuring that teachers:
  • use assessment information effectively to match work to pupils’ different needs and abilities, for some middle-attaining pupils and the most able disadvantaged pupils including in the early years
  • extend and deepen pupils’ writing skills in other subjects.
• Improve the effectiveness of leadership and management on pupils’ academic outcomes by ensuring that:
  • existing plans to strengthen the rigour of governing body challenge are fully actioned so that governors make rigorous checks on the impact of school leadership on pupils’ progress
  • leaders have clear strategies to meet the learning needs of all of the pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities so that the provision for these pupils is effective leadership is effective in checking and improving the impact of teaching, learning and assessment on the progress of all groups of pupils, including disadvantaged pupils.
• Improve the personal development, behaviour and welfare of pupils by:
  • ensuring leaders increase the urgency of their actions to improve pupils’ attendance
  • further developing systems so that pupils’ behaviour is consistently strong across the school. External reviews of the school’s use of the pupil premium and of governance should be undertaken in order to assess how these aspects of leadership and management may be improved.

Inspection judgements

Effectiveness of leadership and management

Requires improvement

• Leadership and management require improvement because leaders have not secured consistently good outcomes for current pupils. Although senior leaders are driving improvement, the quality of teaching, learning and assessment is not consistently good.
• Significant changes in staffing and staff absence have had a negative impact on pupils’ attainment, progress and behaviour in the school. Parents expressed concerns about the high turnover of staff and number of temporary staff in some year groups. School leaders have worked to mitigate the adverse effects of this. However, there is more work to be done.
• While some staff are positive, outcomes from the staff questionnaire are variable. Less than 50% of the staff who responded agree that they are treated fairly and with respect at the school. The response from parents was very mixed. A number of parents of the very young children were very positive about the school. However, approximately one third of the parents who responded to Parent View expressed dissatisfaction with the way the school deals with their concerns.
• Leaders have not been successful in tackling one of the areas for improvement identified in the previous inspection. Although the most able pupils are catching up in some year groups, in others their progress is much slower. Although the most able pupils achieve well in mathematics, particularly at key stage 2, in the early years they make slow progress.
• School strategies to improve outcomes for disadvantaged pupils or those who have special educational needs and/or disabilities lack precision. Information about progress is not analysed carefully enough by leaders and governors to ensure that funding is having the maximum impact to improve pupils’ progress. Leaders place significant focus on pupils at the end of key stages but less on other pupils in different year groups. This strategy is slowing down the rate of progress for some pupils.
• Leaders’ checks overall, while accurate, do not focus closely enough on how well the teaching brings about good progress for different groups. Although leaders collect information regularly, they have not ensured that information about pupils’ progress is consistently reliable. Leaders place too little emphasis on progress compared to attainment.
• Leaders’ actions have not yet ensured that the attendance of pupils is good. Although records are dutifully kept, leaders do not make good use of them to analyse and monitor trends and patterns to plan for improvement. Too many pupils are absent too frequently. As a result, these pupils miss lessons and do not catch up quickly enough.
• The local authority has provided effective support and challenge for leaders in highlighting where there are gaps in the school’s effectiveness, for example in the reporting on pupil premium expenditure. However, not all advice has been followed up swiftly enough to resolve concerns.
• English and mathematics leaders are well respected by staff and have used coaching effectively to improve outcomes for pupils in their subjects. The English leader has accurately identified the need to secure teachers’ understanding of writing assessment to reduce variability across the school. Similarly, the mathematics leader has identified where weaknesses occur in the teaching of mathematics. Leaders’ work is effective in reducing inequalities. However, catch-up for some pupil groups is not quick enough.
• Newly appointed leaders demonstrate clear enthusiasm for their roles but have not had time to influence pupils’ outcomes. For example, a new leader has assessed all pupils who speak English as an additional language (EAL). She ensures that pupils settle quickly and is supporting teachers with resources and planning. She is developing effective systems to monitor pupils’ progress. It is too soon to see the impact of her work on pupils’ outcomes.
• Additional funding for pupils who have special educational needs has a positive impact for some pupils, particularly those with social and emotional needs. Learning needs are not so well catered for. Impact of interventions to support pupils in catching up requires closer checks by leaders. Leaders recognise that the absence, until recently, of a special educational needs coordinator has added an additional strain to the staff team. The new leader of special educational needs and/or disabilities (SEND) has identified strengths in the support for pupils with social and emotional needs. She has also identified a need for more focused support for pupils with specific learning needs. However, she has not been in post long enough to tackle this weakness.
• Leaders do not make careful checks on the effectiveness of expenditure of the additional funding for sports.
• Leaders have a good understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of the school. Staff training has a high priority. Consequently, staff skills have developed. For example, training has been effective in raising standards in phonics. Similarly, training has led to improved subject knowledge in mathematics.
• The curriculum the school provides is broad. Pupils say that they enjoy their topics and that school visits help them to ‘see beyond their own town’. Leaders ensure that staff consistently promote fundamental British values. Leaders ensure that pupils have a range of opportunities to develop their understanding of life in modern Britain, for example through visits and visiting speakers. Leaders promote pupils’ social, moral, spiritual and cultural development well.
• The support for newly qualified teachers is effective.
• The breakfast club provides a healthy and calm start to the day. Safeguarding measures are effective and relationships between staff and pupils positive. Pupils say they enjoy attending and feel safe.

Governance of the school

• Governance has not been effective in holding leaders sufficiently to account. Where governors do challenge leaders they do not follow this up with sufficient rigour. They too readily accept what leaders say. Consequently, some improvements are slow to take place; for example, provision for the most able pupils. Governors have not been vociferous enough in challenging leaders about pupils’ progress and attendance.
• Governors do not make sure that school leaders have a clear strategy to accelerate the progress of disadvantaged pupils. They do not make careful enough evaluations on how well the additional pupil premium funding is being spent. Consequently, the progress of disadvantaged pupils is too variable. Similarly, governors do not make rigorous checks to ensure that expenditure of funding for those who have special educational needs and/or disabilities is supporting good progress. Governors have identified this weakness and have plans in place to put things right.
• Governors’ monitoring is not sufficiently robust to ensure that the school fulfils all of its responsibilities in respect of the school website. The website was non-compliant in reporting the information required in the school’s special educational needs report and the impact of pupil premium and sport funding. Although there was a link to Somerset league tables, the website did not link to the Department for Education schools performance tables.
• Recent minutes of meetings reflect an increasing challenge from the governing body. Governors carry out visits to check on the school’s improvement priorities. Consequently, they are increasingly knowledgeable about where progress has been greatest.
• Governors have taken effective action more recently to tackle the school’s weakness. For example, following concerns expressed by staff, the headteacher and governors reviewed the systems in place to support pupils with social and emotional needs. This has led to a significant reduction of behavioural incidents.

Safeguarding

• The arrangements for safeguarding are effective.
• Safer recruitment information and policies are compliant. Documentation shows that staff are fastidious in engaging the support of other agencies where they suspect a pupil maybe vulnerable.
• Leaders and governors ensure that staff are up to date about keeping children safe. Staff speak knowledgeably about identifying signs that might leave pupils vulnerable to abuse or exploitation. Visitors from groups such as the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (NSPCC) support the school’s work in empowering its pupils to have a voice.
• Where pupils are absent from school, leaders make appropriate checks to ensure pupils are safe. Where they have concerns, they follow up with home visits.
• Leaders ensure that they liaise closely with other providers for pupils in part-time or alternative provision. Consequently, leaders are assured of the pupil’s well-being and gain an understanding of their academic development.
• School leaders work closely with parents and external agencies to create a strong culture of safeguarding in the school.

Quality of teaching, learning and assessment Requires improvement

• The quality of teaching, learning and assessment is not good enough across year groups and between different subjects. Consequently, there is a need for significant catch-up in Year 6.
• Teaching in some classes does not deepen and extend pupils’ learning for them to achieve as well as they can. The work teachers set is not well matched to what some pupils already know, understand and can do. This is particularly the case for the most able pupils.
• Teachers routinely use the school’s approach to assessment to identify what pupils need to learn in lessons. However, this is not sufficiently focused, or varied enough, to promote effective learning, particularly for some middle-attaining and most-able pupils.
• The teaching of writing, although improving, is variable across the school. Strengths lie in Year 6. Teachers promote pupils’ grammar, punctuation and spelling skills well. Work in books shows significant improvements in the way pupils apply their knowledge of grammar, punctuation and spelling. However, in some year groups, teachers do not provide sufficient challenge for pupils to write across the curriculum. When this happens, the quality of pupils’ writing suffers.
• The teaching of mathematics is improving rapidly. Teachers’ subject knowledge has improved so that the use of reasoning and problem solving is consistent across the school and this is leading to better outcomes for pupils. However, in a few classes teachers do not make effective use of what they know pupils can do and understand to plan activities to extend pupils’ learning. Consequently, progress slows. Leaders’ work to resolve this is taking effect but there is more to be done.
• Teachers promote a culture of reading and encourage pupils to read widely and often. When pupils read aloud to inspectors their enjoyment of books shines through.
• The teaching of science develops pupils’ understanding of key scientific knowledge. Work in science books shows pupils’ well-honed investigative skills. In some cases, pupils demonstrated their effective mathematical skills when recording the outcomes of scientific tests.
• Teachers and teaching assistants establish good relationships with pupils. The nurturing support enables pupils who are less confident to ‘have a go’. Staff are effective in providing emotional support for those who need it. However, the effectiveness of support for pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities related to learning difficulties requires improvement. This slows down the progress these pupils make. Strengths lie in the early years in this respect.
• Teaching assistants are well trained and highly skilled. However, on occasions, they express concerns about an absence of support to help them in planning pupils’ next steps as there is a lack of specific plans to support the individual needs of some pupils in some year groups.

Personal development, behaviour and welfare Requires improvement

Personal development and welfare

• The school’s work to promote pupils’ personal development and welfare requires improvement.
• A few parents expressed concerns about the school’s management of bullying. However, pupils say that bullying is rare and that adults deal with unsafe behaviour quickly and effectively. Staff agree. The school’s records show that incidents of bullying are infrequent.
• The presentation of pupils’ work is not always good enough across subjects and year groups. When teachers’ expectations are not sufficiently high, the quality of presentation falters. However, some of the presentation in the older pupils’ topic books reflects pupils’ great sense of pride as pupils make their own decisions about how they wish to present their knowledge of topics in history and geography.
• Pupils say that they know that they can trust staff to listen to them and they are encouraged to speak out when they have any concerns. Pupils told the inspectors how they could keep safe from dangers of the internet.
• Teaching staff are caring and are vigilant in passing on concerns to senior leaders where they notice changes in pupils’ physical or emotional well-being. No stone is left unturned in helping pupils and their families in getting the support they need.
• The majority of pupils show a commitment to the school and its values. The school’s 4s’, ‘Stargaze, Spirit, Strive and Sparkle’, are central to its work. A group of older pupils take huge pride in carrying out their roles of ‘learning detectives’ to support younger pupils in developing good learning habits.
• Leaders work closely with other agencies to ensure that pupils who have social, emotional and mental health issues, and their families, receive the support they need. Parent support advisers and emotional literacy support advisers provide effective support.

Behaviour

• The behaviour of pupils requires improvement.
• Records show that incidents of poor behaviour for a few high-needs pupils have been frequent. Pupils told inspectors that ‘Sometimes teachers don’t understand that we don’t understand what they are teaching us; that’s when behaviour is not so good.’ However, pupils say that ‘this year behaviour is better’. Records confirm this.
• The number of fixed-term exclusions because of poor behaviour is above the national average. Records show that the school is becoming more adept at supporting these pupils. Incidents are reducing. Pupils who attend alternative provision are slowly, and successfully, re-integrating into the school.
• Leaders recognise that there was a short period where incidents of poor behaviour were frequent. However, leaders’ actions have been effective in tackling this. A number of temporary staffing issues have exacerbated problems in behaviour. These have now been resolved. In addition, leaders have engaged the support of external agencies and have put new systems in place to restore calm. Pupils and staff confirm that behaviour in the school has improved. The needs of pupils who experience social and emotional difficulties are now being met.
• Pupils’ attendance is below the national average. Until a major virus in the autumn and spring terms, there were some small signs of improvement. Leaders recognise that poor attendance is affecting pupils’ outcomes. In some cases, when pupils return to school, leaders deploy support staff to ensure pupils catch up on what they have missed. Leaders say they have been constrained by national attendance cases that have slowed down local authority responses to high levels of absence.
• Pupils’ attitudes towards their learning are good when they are appropriately challenged by the work set. Where teaching is effective children enjoy challenge and demonstrate resilience in their learning. Older pupils told the inspector that ‘You learn more when work is a bit difficult; if our work is too easy, our teacher gives us more difficult work which is good. It helps us to learn.’

Outcomes for pupils Requires improvement

• The school’s systems for assessing pupils’ attainment and progress are developing but still inaccurate and unreliable in some year groups. However, assessment information is particularly accurate in the year groups where teachers work closely with other schools to moderate judgements of pupils’ attainment.
• Progress is not consistently good in different classes and subject areas. Teachers’ subject knowledge in mathematics is leading to greater gains for most pupils. Phonics outcomes are good. In 2016, end of key stage 2 outcomes in English, grammar, punctuation and spelling overall were lower than the national average and much lower for disadvantaged pupils. Work in books now reflects a much improved picture.
• Pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities make variable academic progress. This is because, for some, their learning needs go unidentified. Plans are not in place with the precise steps these pupils need to make progress. While pupils who have social and emotional needs get the emotional support they need, their academic support is less evident.
• In 2016, no pupils from low starting points and receiving support for their special educational needs achieved the expected standard.
• The progress of current disadvantaged pupils is not consistently good enough across year groups and subjects. In 2016, outcomes at the end of key stage 1 show that overall, disadvantaged pupils made good progress to achieve the expected standard in line with national averages. However, too few pupils made good progress to achieve the highest standard. Disadvantaged pupils make similar progress to others in the school.
• Similarly, the performance of disadvantaged pupils at the end of key stage 2 in 2016 was strongest in writing and weakest in mathematics, with no pupils achieving the highest standard.
• Pupils’ reading skills are typically strong. They develop word building and fluency well as they progress through the school and can read a variety of texts with increasing understanding and comprehension.
• Standards at the end of key stage 1 in phonics have been above the national average for the last three years. The school’s strong emphasis on these skills is leading to good outcomes.
• Pupils catch up in Year 6. Pupils’ skills in reading, writing and mathematics improve sharply in this year. In 2016, the number of pupils achieving the expected standard in writing and mathematics exceeded that of others nationally. However, fewer middle-achieving pupils made good progress to achieve the highest standard.

Early years provision Requires improvement

• Outcomes are improving at the end of the Reception Year. However, they are still not high enough and too few children are prepared well enough for Year 1. For some children this represents accelerated progress, but for others, their progress is weak.
• Leaders’ assessment systems to track and analyse children’s progress are not sufficiently robust. Leaders do not use assessment information with sufficient precision. Consequently, on occasions, they do not act quickly enough to improve rates of progress for some pupils.
• The activities teachers provide do not ensure a high level of challenge for all groups of children over time. For example, the most able children and some of the middle-attaining pupils do not make sufficient progress. Too few children make good progress to exceed their early learning goals.
• Leaders’ use of additional funding in the early years has not supported good progress for all disadvantaged children. Middle-attaining and most-able disadvantaged children do not make good progress. Conversely, the children who enter the Reception Year with lower starting points make rapid progress to catch up with others in their year group.
• All adults are well trained in the teaching of phonics and follow the school’s policy rigorously. Teachers make effective use of their assessment of the sounds children know. Consequently, activities are well matched to children’s ability to read and recognise sounds. However, underdeveloped handwriting as a result of incorrect pencil grip is a barrier for some pupils in being able to read back the words they have written. When this happens, children’s progress slows.
• Parents who spoke to inspectors report that they are happy with their child’s start to school. They find teachers approachable and value the support that teachers provide. Parents are particularly positive about the workshops the school provides to help them understand their child’s learning. However, beyond a home visit, there is little evidence to suggest that staff make effective use of parents’ views to inform their assessments of the child’s development.
• The learning environment provides a safe and attractive area in which children can choose from the teachers’ ready-prepared activities.
• Staff have high expectations of behaviour. Adults deal with any lapses in behaviour swiftly so that children’s learning is not interrupted. Children are motivated and interested when working with adults. Most listen attentively. However, when they are working independently, some activities do not engage children’s curiosity or interest; this causes lapses in concentration and progress slows.
• Leaders have accurately identified the areas for improvement and changes are beginning to take hold.
• Safeguarding is effective. There are no breaches of statutory welfare. Adults are well trained about the procedures and the expectation that all children must be safe at school. Leaders carry out risk assessments to ensure that the learning environment is safe. For example, children wore protective goggles when investigating water balls.

School details

Unique reference number Local authority Inspection number 123739 Somerset 10033254 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 Maintained 4 to 11 Mixed Number of pupils on the school roll 321 Appropriate authority The governing body Chair Headteacher Telephone number Website Email address Michael Willoughby Susan Brewer 01823 252126 www.holwaypark.somerset.sch.uk/ sjbrewer@educ.somerset.gov.uk Date of previous inspection May 2013

Information about this school

• Holway Park Community Primary School is larger than the average primary school. It has single-aged classes with the exception of Years 4 and 5, where there are three mixed-aged classes.
• The large majority of pupils are from White British backgrounds.
• A very small number speak English as an additional language.
• The proportion of pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities at school support level is above the national average. The proportion of pupils with a statement of special educational needs or education, health and care plan is below the national average.
• A high proportion of pupils are known to be eligible for support from the pupil premium.
• The school meets the government’s current floor standards (the minimum expectations for pupils’ attainment and progress in English and mathematics).
• The school does not meet requirements on the publication of information about ‘the special educational needs report’, ‘pupil premium expenditure’,’ link to the Department for Education Performance Tables’ or ‘sport premium expenditure’ on its website.
• The school makes use of alternative provision off-site for a very small number of pupils.
• The on-site breakfast club, ‘Action Stations’, is managed by the governing body and is included in this report.
• The leader for special educational needs had only joined the school 16 days before the school inspection. Prior to this, the headteacher had been covering this role for two terms because of recruitment issues.

Information about this inspection

• Meetings were held with senior leaders, including the headteacher, two deputies, the early years leader and the leader for English. Other meetings were held with the special educational needs coordinator and representatives of the school’s local governing body.
• The lead inspector also held a telephone conversation with a representative from the local authority.
• The inspectors scrutinised a number of documents including governors’ minutes, school assessment information, the school’s self-evaluation, the school development plan, staff training and performance management records as well as evidence relating to safer recruitment and child protection.
• Inspectors conducted visits to classes across the school. Senior leaders accompanied most of these visits.
• The inspectors undertook an extensive scrutiny of pupils’ books to evaluate the quality of work and to check the accuracy of assessment information held by the school in writing and mathematics. Inspectors also scrutinised pupils’ science and topic books.
• The inspectors spoke to children through various activities during the inspection. In addition, inspectors met separately with a group of pupils from key stage 2.
• Inspectors also listened to pupils in key stage 1 read during the inspection.
• Inspectors observed pupils’ behaviour at playtime and lunch, and their general conduct across the school day.
• The 36 responses to Ofsted’s online survey, Parent View, were taken into account. The inspectors also considered comments provided in other ways, such as through meeting directly and via texts from parents. There were also 36 responses from staff.

Inspection team

Tracy Hannon, lead inspector Abi Staff Adam Matthews Julie Jane

Her Majesty’s Inspector Ofsted Inspector Ofsted Inspector Ofsted Inspector