Bordesley Green Girls' School & Sixth Form Ofsted Report

Full report

What does the school need to do to improve further?

• Improve leadership by:
  • making sure that the behaviour systems are applied consistently across the school
  • developing the oversight that leaders for SEN and/or disabilities have over pupils’ teaching
  • improving leaders’ tracking of the quality of teaching over time
  • developing leaders’ oversight of teachers’ application of the marking and feedback policy.
• Rapidly improve pupils’ behaviour and personal development by:
  • improving leaders’ analysis of behaviour trends over time
  • raising expectations of pupils’ behaviour so that they are consistent across the school
  • improving pupils’ positivity about their learning and pride in the school.
• Improve progress tracking of pupils who have SEN and/or disabilities so that senior leaders have a more comprehensive overview of these pupils’ progress.
• Improve the consistency of teaching by ensuring that teachers:
  • plan tasks that consistently engage and challenge pupils
  • have high expectations of all pupils’ engagement in class work.
• Improve the information governors receive so that it assists them in holding leaders to account.

Inspection judgements

Effectiveness of leadership and management

Requires improvement

• Over the last two years, leaders and governors have dealt with complex human resources issues and multiple serious safeguarding cases. During this time, pupils’ behaviour has begun to deteriorate. The consistency of the quality of teaching has also suffered. However, the issues are not yet having a negative impact on pupils’ outcomes.
• Leaders understand many aspects of the school well. However, they have an overgenerous view of the current quality of teaching and pupils’ behaviour.
• Leaders have not ensured that pupils consistently behave well. They collate the number of cases of poor behaviour and compare these to the number of rewards given. They identify patterns in individual pupils’ behaviour. However, they do not analyse trends in the number of instances of poor behaviour. As a result, they do not have an accurate view of whether behaviour is getting better or worse.
• Staff use the system for behaviour management inconsistently. In some cases, they do not log low-level disruption because they feel that it will not be acted upon by more senior staff. Some staff have lost confidence in the behaviour management system.
• There have been some very recent changes to the leadership of the SEN and/or disabilities team. As a result, this area of the school’s work is currently more fragile than it has been in the past. Senior leaders do not know enough about the progress that pupils who have SEN and/or disabilities are making across the curriculum. Moreover, the new SEN and/or disabilities team is not involved in discussing pupils’ progress with senior leaders, which limits the extent to which they can suggest strategies to support pupils when they are falling behind.
• New leaders for SEN and/or disabilities have completed a recent audit. They have accurately identified staff development needs, one of which is to be able to identify pupils’ needs more accurately. The acting special educational needs coordinator has also accurately identified the need to refine and expand the range of interventions on hand to improve the progress of pupils who have SEN and/or disabilities.
• Inspectors found wide variations in the quality of pupils’ work that had not been identified by leaders. This is because leaders’ evaluation of the quality of teaching over time are not fully informed.
• Some teachers do not follow the school’s marking policy consistently.
• The newly formed leadership team is a cohesive group who share a common understanding of what the school is trying to achieve.
• Leaders have developed a curriculum which is broad and balanced across the school. At key stage 3, pupils have access to a range of courses which use visual learning, learning through modern foreign languages, mathematics mastery and literacy development. While the first groups of pupils to be taught this curriculum have yet to take GCSE courses, the school’s own assessment information suggests that this approach is having a positive impact on pupils’ progress.
• Leaders actively seek the views of the school community and staff on their work. They analyse these carefully to see trends in stakeholders’ views about the school. These surveys show a high overall positive view of the school’s work. A pupil survey from the academic year 2016/17 showed that pupils’ satisfaction with school was high. More recently, pupils have much more mixed views about school.

Governance of the school

• Governors cannot consistently hold leaders to account because the information that they have is not complete. For example, while leaders tell governors the balance between positive and negative behaviour, they do not report on the prevalence of poor behaviour over time. As a result, governors cannot tell if the number of instances of disruption in lessons is going up or down.
• In other areas, governors lack the level of information they need to be incisive in their challenge to leaders. Information about pupils who have SEN and/or disabilities compares how well these pupils do from one subject to another but does not compare pupils’ starting points to their current attainment.
• Governors take their role in safeguarding very seriously. They have a thorough understanding of the challenges leaders face in keeping pupils safe and they make sure that leaders have the resources they need to tackle safeguarding issues. They support leaders very effectively in this part of their responsibility.
• Governors have ensured that they are highly effective in their deployment of extra funding for disadvantaged pupils. As a result, these pupils’ progress is strong, particularly up to the end of Year 11.

Safeguarding

• The arrangements for safeguarding are effective. The headteacher leads the school’s work on safeguarding effectively. She has developed a culture of high vigilance that has demonstrably halted some very serious risks to pupils’ safety. Records detailing vetting checks on staff, and the systems leaders use to record concerns, are accurate, detailed and fit for purpose.
• Leaders work tirelessly to keep pupils safe. Over the past few years, there have been many complex safeguarding cases external to the school. The headteacher and governors have responded effectively to these issues. They have trained more designated safeguarding leaders so that there are now 10. Leaders have been tenacious in their demands that external agencies support their work.
• Leaders have developed a curriculum that ensures that pupils have a detailed knowledge of risks to them, such as cybercrime, child sexual exploitation, female genital mutilation, drugs, forced marriage and radicalisation and extremism. Assemblies, workshops, enrichment days and posters and displays around the school consistently reiterate safety messages. Leaders plan lessons on these topics very carefully to make sure that pupils learn in a way that gives them the knowledge they need, that challenges prejudice and discrimination and that has a high impact. As a result, pupils are equipped with confidence about these issues and many speak articulately about keeping themselves safe.

Quality of teaching, learning and assessment Requires improvement

• While in some subjects, teaching is consistently effective, in others, the quality of teaching is too variable. Where teaching quality is consistently effective, pupils make excellent progress. Where it is variable, progress suffers.
• Too often, groups of pupils are slow to engage in their work. As a result, they complete too little work or their work does not represent their best efforts. Sometimes, lessons are disrupted by silly behaviour or chattiness. Where teachers deal swiftly with these issues, learning gets better. In too many cases, teachers do not effectively challenge pupils’ behaviour.
• The quality of questioning is variable across the school. Sometimes, teachers do not engage the whole class in thinking while questioning of an individual pupil takes place. At other times, teachers give explanations without checking pupils’ knowledge through questioning. Where this happens, pupils’ learning suffers.
• In some subjects, for example English and mathematics, teachers consistently meet pupils’ needs with challenging tasks. As a result, pupils’ engagement and hard work are consistent and their progress strong. They apply themselves to their work, discuss issues fervently, work well in groups and respond well to their teachers.
• Where teaching is most effective, teachers use a range of well-pitched strategies. These include visual techniques requiring pupils to explain things in detail, articulate their reasoning and complete increasingly challenging tasks.
• Pupils who are hearing-impaired are well supported by specialist staff. This enables them to integrate fully into their lessons. Interventions to support these pupils’ language development are carefully planned. The impact of the interventions is carefully monitored by the teacher in charge of the base, who adapts strategies and support when needed. Until recently, teachers in mainstream lessons were not consistently wearing the radios that the hearing-impaired pupils need in order to hear. This was rightly challenged by the teacher in charge of the resource base. Pupils and staff say that this situation has now improved.

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 significant proportion of pupils feel negative about school. Some show little pride in their school and have weak attitudes to their learning. During the inspection, a significant minority of pupils were rude to inspectors and found it difficult to have sensible conversations.
• Most pupils say that bullying is rare and not an issue in school. Some pupils say that bullying is an issue but are thinking about a handful of incidents in the recent past, not their personal experiences. Inspectors considered a range of evidence and concluded that bullying is not a prevalent issue.
• There is a daily act of reflection for all pupils, broadcast via a loudspeaker system. This involves reflections from pupils and an act of worship. During this, too many pupils do not take the opportunity to reflect, sometimes because their teachers do not place a high enough priority on this activity. Some pupils talk through this time despite their teachers’ requests for them to listen.
• Pupils have a very well-developed knowledge of how to keep themselves safe as a result of leaders’ highly effective work in this area. Most pupils say that they feel safe. While some say that they do not feel safe in school, they could not articulate the reasons why. Inspectors found no wider evidence that pupils are unsafe in school.

Behaviour

• The behaviour of pupils requires improvement.
• Leaders hold the view that, during the inspection, a small group of pupils were encouraging others to behave poorly and say particularly negative things to inspectors. There was some evidence of this during the inspection, particularly on the first day. Inspectors took this untypical behaviour into account when reaching a judgement on pupils’ behaviour.
• In too many lessons, groups of pupils engage in low-level disruption. They talk over their teacher and do not respond when they are asked to listen. In some lessons, groups of pupils do not apply themselves diligently and make weak progress as a result.
• There has been a recent increase in instances of more serious behaviour, such as fights between pupils. Leaders have dealt well with these recent issues, investigated them thoroughly and taken appropriate action. Some staff and pupils hold the view that these fights are an almost daily occurrence. This is inaccurate. They are infrequent. As a result of these incidents, there has been an increase in fixed-term exclusions. In the past, exclusions have been well below national averages.
• During social times, pupils’ behaviour is not consistently orderly. Pupils described this to inspectors as ‘rowdiness’. During the inspection, pupils ran around the site in large groups very noisily and, at times, their exuberance tipped into inappropriateness. Sometimes they ignored staff requests to behave in an orderly way. Many pupils say that this is typical. Staff have mixed views about the prevalence of this rowdy behaviour.
• Pupils’ attendance is around the national average. Few pupils are persistently absent from school.

Outcomes for pupils Good

• Current pupils’ progress has been strong for some time across most subjects and year groups. However, for some groups of pupils, progress has recently slowed as a result of weaker teaching and behaviour. This is recent so it has not yet had a full impact on pupils’ outcomes.
• In 2016 and 2017, pupils’ progress was above the national average. In some subjects and for some groups, progress was in the top 20% of schools nationally.
• Disadvantaged pupils’ progress has been very strong over time and in the top 20% of schools nationally. These pupils’ progress in English and English Baccalaureate subjects was significantly above the national average.
• Pupils’ progress in English was exceptional in 2017 and significantly above the national average. However, pupils’ progress in mathematics slipped. A large group of pupils with middle prior attainment did not make the progress that they were capable of. As a result of this, in 2017, the proportion of pupils gaining both mathematics and English dipped to well below the national average. Pupils’ progress in science has been very strong over time.
• At the end of Year 11, most pupils go into the school’s sixth form. There are also courses for those pupils who are not quite ready for post-GCSE-level study. Around a third of these pupils then enter the sixth form, with the vast majority of the others going to a range of other local providers. The proportion of pupils who are not in education, employment or training after Year 11 is lower than the national average.
• In 2017, the progress of pupils who have SEN and/or disabilities was weaker than other pupils nationally with similar starting points because of the impact of a small proportion of pupils with specific medical needs. Current pupils who have SEN and/or disabilities are making good progress overall.

16 to 19 study programmes Good

• Leaders have ensured that study programmes in the sixth form are appropriate and meet students’ needs. There is a good balance of academic study, pastoral support and enrichment.
• As a result of high-quality careers information, advice and guidance, students go on to a range of exciting destinations. Leaders make sure that students come into contact with a wide range of employers, universities and apprenticeship providers so that they can make informed choices about their future. Many go on to prestigious universities and an increasing proportion gain bursaries to do so. Students say that they value the school’s focus on science, technology and mathematics because it encourages them to see the whole range of opportunities available to them.
• Good-quality teaching in most subjects leads to students making good progress. In some, especially at AS level, their prior knowledge and attainment limit their progress. However, leaders’ policy of allowing students to try AS-level subjects is valued by students. Very few drop out of the sixth form, and most go on to make good overall progress at the end of Year 13.
• Disadvantaged pupils make weaker progress in some subjects. Leaders know this and intervene to improve learning for these pupils. This remains a priority for leaders.
• A small number of students do vocational study programmes. Their progress on these courses is very strong and significantly above the national average.
• The school’s work to keep post-16 students safe is equally as strong as in the lower school. Students say that staff are highly vigilant and always on hand to help and make sure that they have knowledge of the full range of risks. They are especially positive about the school’s work to help look after students’ mental health and well-being.
• Non-qualification activity is varied and exciting. The school has a cosmic ray detector, engineering projects and plenty of ways in which students can become involved in work experience and community service. Pupils gain a range of personal skills from these activities.

School details

Unique reference number Local authority Inspection number 103493 Birmingham 10054248 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 Gender of pupils in 16 to 19 study programmes Maintained 11 to 18 Girls Girls Number of pupils on the school roll 1,002 Of which, number on roll in 16 to 19 study programmes 332 Appropriate authority The governing body Chair Headteacher Telephone number Website Email address Ian Hedley Judith Woodfield 0121 464 1881 www.bordgrng.bham.sch.uk/ enquiry@bordgrng.bham.sch.uk Date of previous inspection 6–7 February 2014

Information about this school

• The school is a medium-sized secondary school with a sixth form.
• The majority of pupils are from minority ethnic backgrounds. The proportion of pupils who speak English as an additional language is much higher than the national average, although very few are in the early stages of acquiring English language skills.
• The proportion of pupils eligible for pupil premium funding is much higher than average.
• The school has a specially resourced base for 14 pupils who have hearing impairments.
• The school meets the government’s current floor standards for progress and attainment at key stage 4.

Information about this inspection

• This inspection was carried out following a number of complaints made to Ofsted which raised serious concerns. Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector decided that an inspection of the school should take place to follow up the whole-school issues that were raised. Inspectors sought to establish whether safeguarding was effective and whether pupils’ behaviour and the effectiveness of leaders and managers were acceptable.
• Inspectors spoke to pupils both informally and formally. They spoke to staff around the site and held panel meetings with groups of staff. They met with governors, members of the local authority and members of the senior leadership team.
• Pupils’ behaviour was evaluated through visits to lessons, observations during social times, discussions with pupils and analysis of the school’s behaviour tracking information.
• The quality of teaching, learning and assessment was evaluated through observations of lessons, some with senior leaders, scrutiny of pupils’ work and analysis of the school’s internal assessment information.
• Inspectors evaluated a range of documentation, including that related to safeguarding and pupils’ attainment, and the school’s own parental, staff and pupil surveys.

Inspection team

Dan Owen, lead inspector Ann Pritchard Catherine Crooks James McNeillie

Susan Morris-King Tim Bassett

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

Her Majesty’s Inspector Ofsted Inspector