King Solomon International Business 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 the quality of teaching in key stage 3 so that, in all classes, pupils are offered the right level of challenge and support. Do this by:
  • making sure teachers plan work more specifically for pupils who have the potential to reach or exceed age-related standards in English, mathematics and science
  • insisting that all teachers use assessment information about pupils’ attainment and progress to plan work that is suitably matched to pupils’ needs and abilities, retains their interest and extends their learning
  • providing more opportunities for pupils to respond fully to questions during class discussions in order to challenge them more effectively
  • building on the good practice that exists in some lessons where teachers and support staff vigilantly support pupils to remain on task when working independently and regularly correct errors and address misunderstandings.
• Improve pupils’ attainment and progress in key stage 3 and sustain improvements to pupils’ achievement in key stage 1 as they transfer into key stage 2. Do this by:
  • making sure that in all classes across key stage 3 pupils make more rapid progress and that pupils in Year 9 are better prepared for key stage 4
  • reducing more rapidly the difference between the standards reached by disadvantaged pupils compared with others who are not disadvantaged
  • improving, with greater urgency, the achievement of key stage 3 pupils in science
  • making sure that those pupils who are capable of reaching or exceeding age-related standards in English and mathematics in key stage 3 do so.
• Make sure that staff apply consistently the school’s procedures for managing pupils’ behaviour during lessons in key stage 3 by:
  • ensuring that pupils develop positive attitudes to their work and thus improve their capacity to learn
  • applying more consistent approaches to modify and improve pupils’ behaviour
  • reducing instances of persistent low-level disruption during lessons
  • continuing to reduce temporary and repeat exclusion rates.
• Improve leadership, management and governance by:
  • consolidating and maintaining stable and secure senior leadership
  • building on the work being done by the strongest senior and middle leaders as the school continues to grow in size
  • making sure that leaders and governors evaluate more accurately the effectiveness of teaching and learning in order to address weaknesses and build on strengths
  • identifying the most important priorities for improvement in the school’s strategic action plans, particularly those focusing on the quality of teaching
  • setting out in the school’s short and long-term action plans clear measures of success, as well as stages and milestones, to help leaders and governors evaluate the impact of actions taken to bring about and sustain improvement
  • implementing more robust performance management and oversight of teaching and learning to eliminate weak teaching in key stage 3
  • ensuring that governors are more vigilant in holding leaders to account and have access to objective and accurate assessments of the school’s work and progress.
• External reviews of governance and of the school’s use of the pupil premium should be undertaken in order to assess how these aspects of leadership and management may be improved.

Inspection judgements

Effectiveness of leadership and management Inadequate

• Since the school opened in September 2015, leaders and governors have not always steered the school on a sustained course of improvement. The issues facing the new principal and his leadership teams are substantial. A significant number of parents are, rightly, concerned about the quality of education and leadership at the school. Inspectors agree with many parents who have written or stated that the school is not fulfilling its stated aims and objectives.
• The founders and trustees, together with its appointed directors (governors), have ambitious plans and a vision that, as the school grows, it will become a high-quality all-through school. However, poor appointments to the role of principal have failed to realise this vision. The exception to this is in the early years and key stage 1, where leaders have good oversight of teaching and learning and pupils are achieving well as a result.
• Many of the actions set out in the school’s strategic plans do not focus sufficiently on improving teaching or pupils’ outcomes. The plans lack measures of success, which makes it difficult to gauge whether actions are having the necessary impact or if leaders are on track to secure the objectives they are aiming for. The timescales are sometimes too vague or long term. The plans lack milestones or stages to enable leaders and governors to periodically and systematically check if the actions taken so far are on track or not.
• The lack of a coordinated approach to strategic planning is symptomatic of weak governance and leadership at principal and senior leadership levels. It is also not clear whether evaluations of teaching are securing enough improvement. For example, the feedback given to some teachers following reviews of their teaching has not improved their practice enough in key stage 3.
• External consultants and advisers have been commissioned to review the school’s work and suggest priorities and actions for improvement. To a large extent, governors and leaders have become too dependent on external advice and do not currently demonstrate the capacity for sustained improvement themselves.
• The current principal designate had only been in post for two weeks at the time of this inspection as the substantive principal was not in post. Both pupils and staff reported that they feel more confident with the new principal designate. With the help of effective and well-established vice principals, the principal designate is starting to implement more robust reviews of the quality of teaching. These new procedures and the use of what leaders term the ‘teachers’ toolkit’ show potential. The staff survey confirms that the majority of staff now feel better supported and trained than previously. However, it is too soon to judge whether the ideas and ambitions brought by the new principal will have a sustained effect on improved teaching and outcomes, particularly in key stage 3.
• Governors, external consultants and vice principals have recently implemented more robust performance management reviews of leadership, teaching and learning. These relatively new procedures have the potential to address shortcomings and weaknesses in teaching in key stage 3. However, since the school opened, the lack of a clear steer from senior leaders and governors has, until now, resulted in too much inconsistent and weak practice in key stage 3.
• Additional funding for pupils eligible for the pupil premium is not being targeted well enough. Assessments show too great a difference between the standards reached by disadvantaged pupils in English, mathematics and science compared with others who are not disadvantaged. These differences are not declining quickly enough in key stage 3. However, the gaps between these groups of pupils are narrowing in key stage 1 phonics outcomes, although there is still scope to close these gaps further.
• Funding for pupils who have special educational needs (SEN) and/or disabilities is used reasonably well. The current leadership of SEN shows good potential to improve provision further. The SEN leadership team has recently established more effective assessment systems to monitor the progress and performance of pupils who have additional learning needs.
• The Year 7 literacy and numeracy catch-up premiums are not being used effectively enough. There are too many pupils underachieving in English and mathematics. Improved assessments and checking systems are starting to provide more precise information about different groups of pupils. However, a great deal still needs to be done to ensure that pupils in Years 7 to 9 do not continue to underachieve.
• Science is a particularly weak area of the school’s curriculum and one where standards are particularly low. There is currently a great need to appoint appropriately qualified and skilled science teachers.
• Although the school’s curriculum is not providing an adequate education for all pupils, the enrichment activities offered out of school hours, including Saturdays, are stimulating, varied and exciting. Staff are very dedicated and contribute a great deal of time to these activities. They plan programmes that include the creative arts, religious education, music and sport, as well as a very good range of outdoor activities and visits.
• Despite the low levels of disruption and poor behaviour of a few pupils during lessons in key stage 3, the school is successful in promoting tolerance and equality. This prepares pupils well for life in modern democratic Britain. As part of careers guidance and an ‘immersion week’, a visit to the Houses of Parliament provided first-hand experience of democracy at work, which Year 9 pupils said they appreciated very much.
• In addition to promoting the school’s Christian ethos and beliefs, there are opportunities for pupils to learn about other faiths, customs and traditions through religious education, the arts, music and themed topics and projects. Pupils have the opportunity to travel abroad for skiing trips. In order to raise aspirations, some pupils have the opportunity to visit prestigious universities, such as Cambridge. The links with the Woodard Schools Group (a Christian education and faith group of schools), and with other schools and universities, encourage pupils to aim for higher and further education or vocational pathways. However, because of the weaknesses in the taught curriculum, for example in science and technology, pupils may have fewer options if they wish to study technical and scientific subjects at higher levels.
• Leaders and governors appoint sports coaches and mentors to promote physical education. The school receives the primary school physical education and sports premium. There are a number of good opportunities for pupils to engage in team games, sports and activities that promote healthy and active lifestyles. A new sports building is still being built on site and has the potential to provide even more opportunities to engage in these activities.
• It is recommended that the school does not appoint newly qualified teachers. If governors and leaders choose to appoint, then it is recommended that newly qualified teachers should only teach in the early years or key stage 1.

Governance of the school

• The governing body receives regular reports from the school’s leaders and external advisers but has had little influence in holding principals, leaders and staff sufficiently to account. Low standards and some poor teaching in key stage 3, as well as the loss of trust among a significant number of parents, are a result of inadequate governance and uncertain strategic leadership.
• Governors carry out systematic monitoring alongside leaders but these reviews do not result in robust or accurate evaluations of teachers’ performance. Governors are not challenging leaders enough to explain how best to address relative weaknesses in teaching or any decline in pupils’ progress and performance.
• Assessment information about pupils’ progress is linked to teachers’ performance, but it is only recently, following external adviser reviews, that governors have started to adopt the right priorities to help them focus on what needs improving most.
• Governors are committed and dedicated to the school and have invested a great deal of time and effort in managing the extensive building programme and ensuring that pupils are taught in safe and stimulating physical surroundings.
• Governors have a range of expertise and skills and are very committed to both the school and wider community. However, the impact of their management of financial and human resources has been mixed. The lines of accountability from the governing body to the founders and directors of the trust are clear in the funding agreement and scheme of delegation. However, a lack of clear improvement planning, unstable senior leadership and inaccurate evaluations of teaching, learning and pupil outcomes have hampered governors’ and leaders’ abilities to pinpoint the right priorities for King Solomon School going forward.

Safeguarding

• The arrangements for safeguarding are effective.
• There is a vigilant culture of safeguarding. Leaders and governors keep up to date with legal requirements and make sure that all safeguarding arrangements and policies are reviewed and are up to date.
• Teachers and support staff, as well as administrators and managers, are well trained and knowledgeable in exercising their responsibilities to ensure that pupils are safe from harm or abuse. The safety and well-being of children in the early years are well managed. The early years welfare requirements are fully met.
• Pupils and the majority of parents responding to surveys believe, rightly, that pupils are safe in school. Pupils in key stage 3 say that the staff and other pupils make them feel safe, valued and secure. Risk assessments of all indoor and outdoor activities are systematic and inform staff about the necessary precautions to take, including supervision and transport arrangements when off-site.
• All staff have been trained to keep children safe and are aware of the school’s arrangements for reporting any concerns they may have about pupils. Staff have undertaken first-aid training, including paediatric first aid for early years children. Leaders, staff and governors are vigilant in protecting pupils from radicalisation, extremism and child exploitation.

Quality of teaching, learning and assessment Inadequate

• There is a very mixed picture to report about the quality of teaching and learning across the school. Lesson observations, pupils’ work in books and assessment information indicate that pupils are achieving well in key stage 1 but older pupils in key stage 3 do not achieve as well as they should. These differences are a consequence of the inconsistencies in the quality of teaching and in teachers’ expectations of what pupils can achieve.
• In key stage 3, pupils do not receive enough good-quality teaching and are not always expected to do their best. Some of the teaching in this key stage does not offer the right level of challenge for pupils with different needs and abilities.
• Some staff in key stage 3 do not consistently apply the school’s code of expectations, called ‘Basic 10’, when implementing the behaviour policy. As a result, in too many lessons, pupils lose interest or go off task. Inspectors saw too many instances of low-level disruptive behaviour during key stage 3 lessons.
• A significant number of parents are concerned about the quality of teaching and learning. They are right to be concerned about this for older pupils in key stage 3. Younger pupils in both the early years and key stage 1 receive mainly good-quality teaching and they behave well as a result.
• Assessment systems are now well established. Cross-moderation with other schools is increasingly providing accurate evaluations of pupils’ progress and performance in relation to age-related standards in the core subjects of English, mathematics and science. However, teachers in key stage 3 are not using these assessments to plan work or adapt tasks that will help move pupils’ learning on enough.
• The teaching of science is particularly weak in key stage 3, although weak practice also exists in English and mathematics. The intended outcomes of some science lessons do not match pupils’ abilities, with some pupils finding the work too hard and some finding it too easy. This confuses pupils and causes them to lose interest and be more inclined to resort to low-level disruptive behaviour.
• During question and answer sessions, teachers are not providing enough opportunities for pupils to answer fully. In some cases, pupils do not have access to enough information or do not have sufficient previously acquired knowledge to be able to answer accurately.
• The best practice seen, which is untypical across key stage 3, involved teachers regularly checking and intervening to make sure pupils were on task and completed their work within a reasonable amount of time. In a geography lesson for Year 7 pupils, for example, the teacher provided a large amount of information and maps about countries across the world and pupils had to work out which continents they were located in. The teacher was at all times vigilant and helpful, making sure pupils fully understood the task and encouraging them to ask questions. These strong features of teaching are not common enough in classroom practice across key stage 3.
• Teachers do not check or assess pupils’ progress and performance often enough to identify when pupils fall behind or when they have already reached their learning targets and should be moving on in their learning. Until recently, reviews of pupils’ progress have been too infrequent or neglected. This accounts for the gaps in achievement that exist between significant groups such as disadvantaged pupils and other pupils, and those in Year 7 who are being taught in small groups as part of the ‘catch-up’ funding programme and their peers.
• In key stage 1, teachers maintain good pace in lessons and expect pupils to work hard. Phonics teaching is consistently good across classes in key stage 1 and builds on the good start made in the early years. The teaching in Year 2 is usually challenging and effective and prepares pupils well for key stage 2. Throughout key stage 1, there are consistently high expectations of pupils’ work and behaviour.
• Teachers and support staff plan work and teach small groups of pupils who have SEN and/or disabilities. These pupils make similar rates of progress to other pupils, although the quality of support varies. The most effective practice involves clear direction from teachers and support staff and regular checks to make sure pupils who have additional learning needs make progress towards their individual learning targets. In some sessions, however, adults do not intervene enough and, like other pupils in the class, the pupils in this group make mistakes that are left uncorrected.
• The progress made by the small number of pupils who are in the early stages of learning English depends on the quality of teaching and support they receive over time. They settle well in the early years and key stage 1, although it is not yet clear what provision will be put in place when they join key stage 2 and move further up into key stage 3.

Personal development, behaviour and welfare Inadequate

Personal development and welfare

• The school’s work to promote pupils’ personal development and welfare requires improvement.
• ‘I like coming to school’ (Year 7), ‘We get to learn new things’ (Year 2), ‘We are pushed to do as well as we can but some pupils spoil it for others, especially in science lessons’ (Year 9) were some of many comments made by pupils. This mixed picture reflects inconsistencies in teachers’ expectations of pupils’ achievement and in their application of codes of conduct across year groups in this relatively new school.
• Pupils have good opportunities to contribute to their school community and to support others. Older pupils in Year 9 believe, and inspectors agree, that the school assemblies provide good opportunities to reflect. One pupil stated, ‘They help us to think about some challenges that people face and how they overcome these.’ The school’s strong commitment to the Christian faith and ethos encourages respect and tolerance, which benefits pupils’ spiritual, moral, social and cultural development.
• Leaders and staff are committed to providing a balance that values pupils’ academic achievement and personal development. However, the school’s curriculum and inconsistencies in teachers’ expectations hinder the realisation of these ambitions, particularly in relation to pupils’ academic achievement in key stage 3.
• Pupils are provided with some good experiences that develop humanities, linguistic, artistic, scientific, spiritual and aspirational attributes. Enrichment activities and out-of-hours clubs include opportunities for pupils to socialise and learn new skills, such as orienteering, sport and team games.
• Staff and pupils reject all forms of discrimination, bigotry and intolerance. Special topics, cultural and religious festivals and celebrations, and the wide range of educational visits and visitors, improve pupils’ knowledge and understanding of the different cultural, religious and ethnic traditions that exist in the United Kingdom and beyond. These studies, activities and visits, both at home and abroad, make a good contribution to pupils’ spiritual, moral, social and cultural development.
• The staff are vigilant and have been trained to prevent pupils being exposed to racist or extremist views. Leaders and staff record any concerns about individual pupils so they can offer help and support. The pastoral staff team is alert and provides expert early help for vulnerable or hard-to-reach families. Any concerns about pupils are followed up by senior staff so that pupils at risk of harm or experiencing emotional difficulties have a responsible adult they can contact and trust.

Behaviour

• The behaviour of pupils is inadequate.
• On too many occasions in key stage 3 lessons, pupils are inattentive, call out unnecessarily or disengage from their studies. The school’s behaviour modification policy is not being applied consistently by staff. As a result, it is not unusual to see pupils in key stage 3 being sent out of lessons, spoken to by senior staff because of disruptive behaviour, or temporarily removed to be taught separately as part of the school’s internal exclusion process.
• The new principal and senior leaders are currently reviewing the school’s behaviour policy. They recognise, rightly, that there is an urgent need in key stage 3 to involve the pastoral staff more, especially those staff who are skilled in mentoring and supporting pupils who have emotional and behavioural difficulties.
• The school adopts what it calls the ‘Grace intervention programme’ in key stage 3. This programme involves supporting those pupils who find it difficult to concentrate or sustain learning in mainstream lessons in small group sessions. Pastoral staff manage these ‘Grace’ sessions well. Pupils follow the same lesson content as their classmates and behave well. However, some pupils spend too much time withdrawn from mainstream lessons. The principal and senior staff are reviewing this and, rightly, are aiming to reduce or minimise the necessity to withdraw pupils from mainstream lessons. Nevertheless, the programme is particularly effective in supporting pupils who have emotional and behavioural difficulties, including those who have SEN and or disabilities.
• Leaders and staff in the early years and key stage 1 promote pupils’ spiritual, moral, social and cultural development well. Pupils in Years 1 and 2 are well behaved and attentive most of the time in lessons and at other times. There are occasions when they stray off-task if the work provided is not challenging enough.
• Leaders are reducing the use of temporary or fixed-term exclusions. This is an indication that some aspects of the school’s ‘Grace’ programme are working. Attendance figures, although below the national average for each key stage, are improving and the school’s figures for persistent absence are also reducing.

Outcomes for pupils Inadequate

• Pupils in Years 7 to 9 underachieve and should be doing much better. Many pupils join the school in Year 7 with skills and abilities that are in line with those typical for their age. However, approximately one in three pupils on entry to this school had not reached age-related standards in reading, writing and mathematics at their previous schools in key stage 2. Current pupils in Year 7 have to make much more progress than they are currently making to catch up and reach age-related standards in English and mathematics.
• The progress made by pupils of all abilities in Years 8 and 9 is not consistent and reflects variations in the quality of teaching across key stage 3. This is particularly the case in science. However, there is evidence from school assessment information that some pupils are catching up on previously lost ground. These relative improvements reflect some of the good teaching delivered by senior staff and some teachers. However, leaders recognise that there is still much more to do to ensure that, in all classes and across all subjects, pupils achieve better. Currently, pupils in Year 9 are not sufficiently prepared for key stage 4 when they transfer into Year 10.
• The most able pupils in all key stages could be doing better. The work provided, including extension tasks and questioning during lessons, does not provide sufficient challenge for this group of pupils.
• Disadvantaged pupils underachieve and make inadequate progress. Differences between the standards they reach in English, mathematics and science compared with other pupils in key stage 3 are too great, and in some classes are not decreasing quickly enough.
• National assessments over the last two years for pupils in Year 1 show consistent improvement. For the last two years, the proportion of pupils reaching the expected national standard in phonics was above the national average. This represents good progress in relation to their starting points. Pupils currently in Year 2 are on course to reach standards that compare well with last year’s national figures for key stage 1 in reading, writing and mathematics.
• Although overall standards in phonics in Year 1 have been at, and are currently above, national figures, disadvantaged pupils do less well compared with other pupils. However, assessments show that these differences are decreasing. Pupils of all abilities in Year 2 are now well prepared for key stage 2 next year.
• Pupils who have SEN and/or disabilities make reasonable progress, although this requires improvement. They usually receive appropriate and timely support in class and when working separately as a group in key stage 1. In key stage 3, year groups are split according to broad ability groups for English and mathematics lessons. In each year group, pupils who have SEN and/or disabilities are provided with individualised interventions. The recently improved management of SEN provision, together with improved assessments, enable teachers and support staff to plan the right interventions for pupils who have SEN and/or disabilities.
• Pupils in the early stages of learning English make good progress in the early years and key stage 1. Like other pupils in key stage 3, the small number of pupils learning English as an additional language should be doing much better.

Early years provision Good

• Most four-year-old children start school with skills and abilities that are below those expected for their age, particularly in language and communication. There is consistently good practice in the early years classes, which enables children to make good progress. There has been a sustained improvement to standards over the last two years. Currently, the large majority of Reception children are on track to reach a good level of development. Ever since the school opened in 2015, there has been good management and oversight of the early years provision.
• Consistent expectations are reflected in the previous two years’ national assessment outcomes. The proportion of children in 2016 and 2017 reaching a good level of development was above the national average. Good teaching and leadership, as well as effective support for children and families in Reception, enable the youngest children to get off to a good start. The children are well prepared for Year 1, particularly in language, communication and mathematics as well as in their personal, social and emotional development.
• Indoor and outdoor resources are of good quality and are accessible to the children. The early years leader and her staff, together with the vice principal responsible for key stage 1, have managed recent building work well to minimise disruption to children’s learning. Indoor areas provide stimulating environments for play and learning. These resources, and the good care offered by staff, provide the children with the right environment to improve their physical and emotional development in safe and secure surroundings. Children are well behaved and attentive. They listen to instructions and are polite to one another and to adults.
• Children are increasingly getting opportunities to improve their writing and letter formation, but there are occasions when adults do not provide enough activities that incorporate opportunities for children to read and write independently. Similarly, there are good opportunities for children to learn to count and form numbers, but adults do not always provide enough challenge for the most capable children.
• Good leadership of early years provision ensures that all welfare requirements, including assessments, fully meet statutory requirements. The monitoring and support provided for staff by the early years leader are effective in helping them to continually improve their practice. The current focus on moderating assessments in Reception in order to achieve continuous or seamless provision into Year 1 is having a positive effect on the start children make in key stage 1.

School details

Unique reference number Local authority Inspection number 141943 Birmingham 10048347 This inspection of the school was carried out under section 5 of the Education Act 2005. Type of school All-through School category Age range of pupils Gender of pupils Academy free school 4 to 19 Mixed Number of pupils on the school roll 393 Appropriate authority Board of trustees Chair Principal designate Telephone number Website Email address Doctor Mark Yeadon Reverend Gilroy Brown 0121 357 1905 www.kingsolomonibs.com admin@kingsolomonibs.com Date of previous inspection Not previously inspected

Information about this school

• This is the school’s first inspection since it opened as an all-through Christian academy free school in September 2015. A charitable trust owns the school and includes founder members. The trust appoints and holds to account a board of directors that makes up the governing body. The school is affiliated to the Woodard Schools Group, which is a family of Christian faith schools.
• The school is smaller than most schools but is growing in numbers. It opened in 2015, admitting Reception children aged four and five, as well as the first cohort of key stage 3 pupils in Year 7. At the time of this inspection the school comprised pupils aged four through to 14 years (Reception, key stage 1 and key stage 3). The trustees and governors aim to establish an all-through school comprising five key stages, including a sixth form, by 2020. In September 2018, pupils currently in Year 2 will start the new key stage 2 in Year 3 and pupils currently in Year 9 will start the new key stage 4 in Year 10.
• There has been significant turbulence in staffing. The current principal designate has been in post for two weeks.
• Trustees and governors are managing significant building and refurbishment programmes, which have been ongoing before and since the school opened. At the time of the inspection substantial building work was taking place. Pupils are now all being taught in the newly refurbished main building, having previously been in temporary accommodation on the school’s site.
• Most pupils are of Black British Caribbean and/or African heritage. Other pupils come from a wide range of backgrounds and heritages. Very few pupils join the school learning English as an additional language.
• The percentage of pupils who have SEN and/or disabilities is in line with that of most schools. A small number of pupils have education, health and care plans. Currently, no pupils attend any alternative off-site provision.
• The percentage of pupils eligible for pupil premium funding is well above average.
• There is nothing to report regarding national floor standards at key stage 2 or key stage 4 because there are no key stage 2 or key stage 4 pupils currently attending the school.
• The school receives a range of external support from other schools, trusts, higher education institutions and school improvement advisers.
• The school accommodates a breakfast club, which is managed by another organisation. This club is registered with Ofsted and will be subject to a separate inspection.

Information about this inspection

• Inspectors visited parts of lessons in all three key stages. Some of these were carried out jointly with the principal and vice principals. Inspectors checked samples of pupils’ work in books. They observed pupils being supported during small group work and intervention sessions and observed a school assembly.
• The inspection considered a range of documentation, including: leaders’ and governors’ own evaluations of the school’s effectiveness; the school’s strategic action plans; information and assessment tracking data about pupils’ achievement, progress and performance; and documents or data relating to governance, teaching, behaviour, attendance and safeguarding.
• Inspectors spoke to pupils during lessons and met with two groups of pupils to hear them read and to discuss their work, behaviour and safety. Inspectors spoke to pupils during break and lunchtimes to ask them for their views about the school. Inspectors observed pupils’ behaviour and safety around the school, including during transition between lessons in key stage 3.
• Inspectors spoke to some parents to seek their views about the school, analysed the 116 responses to the online Ofsted questionnaire, Parent View, and considered the 146 written free-text responses from parents. The 34 responses from staff to the online inspection survey were analysed. Inspectors also talked to some staff during the inspection to gauge their views about the support they receive.
• Inspectors held discussions with the principal and senior leadership team, as well as other senior and middle leaders, and staff with pastoral responsibilities. The lead inspector held a meeting with six governors, including the chair and vice chair. Some of these members of the governing body are also trustees and/or founder members of the trust. The lead inspector met briefly with an external consultant to discuss some aspects of the advisory support provided for the school.

Inspection team

Charalambos Loizou, lead inspector Julie Bourdon-Pierre David Hughes

Her Majesty’s Inspector Ofsted Inspector Ofsted Inspector