St Mary and St Peter's Church of England Primary School 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 leadership and management, including governance, by ensuring that:
  • governors hold school leaders fully to account for the school’s performance and the progress of pupils
  • additional funds for disadvantaged pupils and those with SEND are used effectively to improve outcomes
  • middle leaders are provided with appropriate training to develop their skills in monitoring teaching and learning effectively
  • teaching and learning improve rapidly by focusing clearly on promoting pupils’ progress and attainment, including in the early years.
• Improve teaching, learning and assessment by ensuring that:
  • teachers receive the appropriate training, support and monitoring needed to improve the quality of teaching rapidly
  • teachers have high expectations of what pupils can achieve
  • teachers use accurate assessment to plan learning that meets the needs of pupils, so that their outcomes improve, especially for disadvantaged pupils and those with SEND
  • teachers have high expectations of pupils’ attitudes to learning, so that low-level disruption is reduced, enabling all pupils to sustain learning and make progress.
• Improve pupils’ outcomes by ensuring that:
  • teachers provide activities that challenge all pupils to apply their knowledge of spelling, punctuation and grammar in writing across the curriculum
  • the teaching of mathematics enables pupils to apply what they know to problem-solving and reasoning
  • pupils use their phonics skills to develop their fluency of reading, including within the early years.
• Improve pupils’ attendance and reduce the level of persistent absence. 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 and governors have an overly generous evaluation of the school’s performance. School leaders, including governors, are not tackling the weaknesses identified in the last inspection rapidly enough. As a result, the quality of teaching, learning and assessment is weak. Pupils, including children in the Reception class, are not achieving as well as they could.
• Leaders have identified the actions required to raise pupils’ achievement. However, these actions have lacked urgency. The plans for improvement lack sufficient clarity of actions, timelines and success criteria. As a result, governors are not able to check whether these plans are bringing about improvements.
• There has been significant turbulence in staffing since the previous inspection. Leaders have not ensured that the quality of teaching and learning has been monitored effectively to ensure that teachers are providing pupils with learning that matches their needs.
• Leaders have not used professional development of staff effectively to improve the quality of teaching and learning. Systems are not in place to enable teachers to know how to improve teaching, learning and assessment to ensure that pupils achieve well. Leaders have not provided teachers with clear actions and success criteria to improve their performance.
• Middle leaders have had limited impact on improving the quality of teaching, learning and assessment. This is because they have not been provided with the appropriate training to enable them to monitor and improve their subjects effectively. As a result, they are unable to support teachers fully and ensure that pupils are provided with the learning they need to make strong progress.
• Leadership of early years is weak. Plans for improvement have not been implemented well enough. This has resulted in children in Reception making poor progress because their needs are not met.
• The school’s assessment system is not sufficiently robust to provide teachers and leaders with an accurate understanding of pupils’ progress from their starting points. Assessment information is not used effectively to plan teaching that is matched closely to pupils’ needs. As a result, too many pupils have fallen behind the expectations for their age.
• Leadership of pupils with SEND is not effective. The new leader has not had the training or time to develop new systems or adapt those already in place. Actions taken previously identified as required by the leader, who was seconded from another school, have not been taken. As a result, the funding provided for pupils with SEND is not being used effectively. Consequently, pupils with SEND are not making sufficient progress.
• Leaders’ actions to improve the provision for disadvantaged pupils have not been effective over time. There has been little evaluation of the impact of the additional support provided for pupils. The result is that the progress of disadvantaged pupils is below that of other pupils nationally in reading, writing and mathematics, including for children in Reception class.
• Sports premium funding is being used successfully to provide pupils with suitable provision and teaching in physical education and after-school activities. There has been an increase in engagement and participation in sporting events. These opportunities are appreciated by the pupils.
• The school’s wider curriculum is broad and balanced. Pupils learn about historical events and develop their understanding of scientific concepts such as electricity. At times, the work produced in the wider curriculum is better than that produced in English and mathematics.
• Opportunities for pupils’ spiritual, moral, social and cultural development are well established and this is a positive feature of the school’s work. For example, collective worship is regularly led by members of the local community. They provide positive role models for the pupils. However, the pupils’ cultural understanding of our society is underdeveloped because the curriculum does not give sufficient opportunities for them to learn about life in modern Britain.

Governance of the school

• Over time, governors have not held school leaders stringently to account for the school’s performance. There has been too much time lost between seeking advice and actions being taken.
• Although governors ask probing questions, they do not challenge the lack of information and clarity provided by school leaders. Governors visit the school regularly in various capacities but have not had enough accurate information to evaluate the school’s performance fully. As a result, governors have not challenged school leaders effectively to ensure that pupils achieve the standards of which they are capable. There have been several changes of governors over the past year, hampering the governing body’s effectiveness in moving the school forward.
• Governors have not ensured that leaders make effective use of additional funding for disadvantaged pupils and those with SEND. As a result, the progress these pupils make is not good enough.

Safeguarding

• The arrangements for safeguarding are effective.
• The designated leader for safeguarding liaises well with outside agencies effectively to ensure that pupils are safe from harm. The school has robust systems for recording any safeguarding concerns. The staff know that it is their responsibility to follow up actions taken to ensure that pupils remain safe.
• Staff are well aware of their responsibilities. They are secure in their knowledge of procedures in school and are familiar with guidance in areas such as child protection. The school’s systems ensure that staff are recruited safely. However, there has been a lack of training of staff on radicalisation and extremism.
• The school fulfils its statutory requirements for safety within the early years. There are qualified paediatric first aiders and the site is secure.
• Pupils report that they feel safe in school. They understand the school’s own systems to keep safe and they talk confidently about how to keep themselves safe online. They are confident that the adults in school would help them if they were worried or concerned.

Quality of teaching, learning and assessment Inadequate

• Teachers do not have a clear understanding of the standards pupils are achieving. Too often, across the school, pupils revisit learning that they already know and are not sufficiently challenged to reach the higher standards.
• Weak teaching over time has prevented pupils acquiring the knowledge, skills and understanding to enable them to make sufficient progress. Teachers are not using assessments accurately to plan learning matched to pupils’ needs. As a result, there is insufficient challenge.
• Teachers have low expectations of pupils and what they can achieve. Teachers too often provide learning activities where pupils are unclear about the tasks they are required to undertake. Until recently, teachers have not consistently provided pupils with sufficient guidance on how to improve their work. As a result, pupils are not making the progress they are capable of.
• Teachers do not provide pupils with clear guidance on how to do the work they set. As a result, some pupils find it difficult to sustain their concentration. The resulting poor learning behaviour sometimes goes unchallenged by class teachers.
• Leaders’ and teachers’ work on improving the culture of enjoyment in reading has had limited impact. Actions taken by leaders to address this are not improving pupils’ love of books. In addition, pupils are not encouraged to think about the deeper meaning of the books they are reading, especially in key stage 1. The school has revised the way it tracks how well pupils are reading. However, this has had limited impact because monitoring is weak.
• Teachers ensure that there is daily teaching of phonics in key stage 1 and early years. However, pupils are not making the progress they should, in either reading or writing. Pupils are able to decode individual letter sounds but find blending these together difficult, which limits their fluency in reading. Pupils are not able to apply recent teaching of sounds and are unable to recognise these in text presented to them. For example, pupils are not always using this teaching to enable them to make the correct spelling choices in their writing.
• Teachers provide pupils with tasks which focus on grammar, punctuation and spellings. However, pupils are provided with too few opportunities to be able to practise these skills. Consequently, pupils’ writing is not well developed in terms of grammatical structure, nor is it well punctuated.
• In mathematics, pupils’ understanding of calculations is developing well. However, there are few opportunities for pupils to apply their understanding through problem-solving and reasoning activities. Recent developments to improve this aspect are not embedded; teachers rarely plan activities that challenge pupils to develop their fluency and mathematical reasoning. Pupils lack the mathematical language to enable them to explain their use of calculation methods.
• Teaching in the Reception class does not provide children with appropriate tasks and learning opportunities. Leaders’ vision for early years teaching and learning is not being implemented effectively. There are few opportunities for children to be independent learners in early reading, writing and mathematics.
• Pupils with SEND are not typically given tasks that take appropriate account of their starting points. Consequently, pupils’ learning stalls.

Personal development, behaviour and welfare

Personal development and welfare Requires improvement

• The school’s work to promote pupils’ personal development and welfare requires improvement.
• Pupils’ understanding of what it means to be a successful learner is limited. Some pupils’ achievement stalls because they are overly dependent on the support of adults. This is because teachers do not ensure that they and other adults provide the precise level of academic support that some pupils need. Consequently, learning activities are not well matched to their needs. Pupils demonstrate a lack of pride in their work. As a result, they are not producing work which is of sufficient quality, or well enough presented, to improve their learning.
• Pupils say that they feel safe in school. They are aware of how to keep themselves safe in school and in the wider world, including ‘stranger danger’, and have some knowledge of how to keep themselves safe online. Pupils report that there no incidents of bullying, racism or homophobia. They are confident that, should these occur, they would be dealt with effectively by teachers and school leaders.
• Pupils know the importance of being active and living a healthy lifestyle. They have a good understanding of what constitutes for a balanced diet and the need for exercise.
• The school has developed a caring ethos, which is evident in the positive relationships between pupils and adults. Pupils and parents value and appreciate the guidance and support provided for them by the staff.
• The breakfast club provides a safe and friendly environment for pupils to start the day and be ready to learn.

Behaviour

• The behaviour of pupils requires improvement.
• Some pupils’ low-level disruption means they do not make the progress they can, and they distract others in the classroom. This is not always challenged by the class teachers.
• Pupils are friendly, polite and courteous and show respect to each other and adults; they value the school’s caring ethos. Pupils understand the school’s values, rules, rewards and sanctions. Pupils look forward to their ‘golden time’, which is earned when they behave well or produce good work.
• Attendance remains well below the national average. Although school leaders are tackling this, there is still work to do. Persistent absence is above the national average. Work in pupils’ books indicates that poor attendance leads to poor outcomes.

Outcomes for pupils Inadequate

• Pupils are making weak progress because expectations of what they can achieve are too low. As a result, pupils’ attainment is below that expected for their age.
• The proportion of children who achieve a good level of development at the end of the early years is low compared to all children nationally. These pupils, now in Year 1, are not making sufficient progress from their starting points, especially in reading and writing.
• Pupils’ application of phonics knowledge in their reading is inconsistent. As a result, the proportion of children at the expected standard by the end of Year 1 is below that which is expected of all pupils nationally.
• Standards at the end of key stage 1 in 2018 were an improvement on those in 2017. However, these pupils, now in Year 3, have made poor progress from this starting point. As a result, they are now working below the standards that are expected of them for their age.
• Disadvantaged pupils achieve standards that are below those of other pupils nationally. They are not making sufficient progress due to the lack of effective provision and tasks to meet their individual needs.
• Pupils with SEND make inconsistent progress from their starting points. This is because learning activities and additional support are not closely matched to their individual needs, which has limited their progress over time.
• Numbers are small within each year group. This is part of the reason for variations over the past few years in standards at the end of the early years, in the results of the phonics screening check at the end of Year 1, and in outcomes at the end of key stage 1. However, this should not be allowed to obscure the impact of weak teaching over time on pupils’ outcomes.

School details

Unique reference number Local authority Inspection number 123741 Somerset 10053163 This inspection of the school was carried out under section 5 of the Education Act 2005. 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 34 Appropriate authority The governing body Chair Headteacher Telephone number Website Email address Clive Davies Shaun Watson 01460 52574 www.stmarystpeters.somerset.sch.uk office@stmarystpeters.somerset.sch.uk Date of previous inspection 25 January 2018

Information about this school

• The school is smaller than average. Pupils are taught in two key-stage classes. The school sits within a three-tier school system. Most pupils move to a middle school at the end of Year 4.
• The school is in the Diocese of Bath and Wells. The school last received a section 48 diocesan inspection in October 2015, with overall effectiveness judged to be ‘Good’.
• The majority of pupils attending the school are of White British heritage.
• The proportion of pupils who are in receipt of pupil premium funding is above the national average.
• The proportion of pupils with SEND is above the national average. The proportion of those pupils who have education, health and care plans is well below the national average.

Information about this inspection

• The inspector observed pupils’ learning across the school. Most observations were undertaken jointly with the headteacher.
• The inspector looked at pupils’ current work in books across the curriculum and carried out learning walks across the school.
• The inspector heard pupils read in Years 1 to 4 and spoke with them to find out about their attitudes to reading.
• Meetings were held with governors, middle leaders and pupils. The lead inspector had a telephone conversation with an officer from the local authority.
• The inspector took account of 10 responses to Parent View, Ofsted’s online questionnaire, and informal discussions with parents when they brought their children to school. Inspectors took account of nine responses to the staff questionnaire. The inspector talked to pupils at break and lunchtime, as well as during lessons.
• The inspector looked at a wide range of school documents, including the school’s self -evaluation, school improvement plan, school policies, governors’ minutes of meetings, and the school’s own assessment systems and monitoring records.
• The inspector reviewed a wide range of safeguarding evidence, including the school’s single central record and risk assessments and incident logs.

Inspection team

Paul Smith, lead inspector

Ofsted Inspector