Brewood CofE (C) Middle 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 leadership by:
  • ensuring that governors have an accurate view of the safeguarding and attendance of pupils so that improvements in these areas happen quickly and are sustained
  • ensuring that all processes and systems related to safeguarding are coherent, planned and orderly and give leaders at all levels the information they need to make sure that pupils are safe
  • making sure that registers are maintained accurately for all pupils at all times
  • gathering together all the relevant information about pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities or who are eligible for the pupil premium and using this information to give them the support they need to attend school regularly
  • eliminating the use of part-time timetables for anything other than long-term medical reasons, and ensuring that if they are used, proper safeguarding arrangements are made.
• Improve the quality of provision for pupils’ personal development, behaviour and welfare by ensuring that:
  • there is clear communication within school and between the school and other agencies, especially with regard to pupils who are the most vulnerable
  • clear, effective and secure records are kept with reference to pupils who are most at risk. External reviews of governance and the school’s use of the pupil premium should be undertaken to assess how these aspects of leadership and management may be improved.

Inspection judgements

Effectiveness of leadership and management Inadequate

• Leaders have not prioritised safeguarding well enough at this school. They have not developed robust, accurate or secure enough systems for monitoring attendance or managing pupils’ care and well-being. During the inspection, inspectors found inaccurate register entries, insecure documentation about the care of pupils and incomplete, out-of-date and disorganised logs of support for pupils at risk. Leaders could not, therefore, be sure of the safety and well-being of all pupils.
• Governors have not challenged school leaders well or often enough about safeguarding, the accuracy of registers, procedures for pupils on part-time timetables, the extent to which attendance has been addressed and improved, or the systems for monitoring the care plans for pupils about whom a safeguarding concern has been raised.
• The executive headteacher has delegated responsibilities for safeguarding, attendance and multi-agency communication. Neither he, nor the governing body, have properly overseen or supported the systems they have delegated. Some safeguarding referral records are chaotic and therefore ineffective.
• Leaders are unaware of the need to maintain rigorous records of attendance, care plans and multi-agency communication.
• Too many leaders and staff do not know who is responsible for key areas of safeguarding and attendance and therefore communication about safeguarding and attendance matters is confused. Leaders do not have a clear knowledge about whether pupils at risk of harm are also eligible for the pupil premium or have a statement of special educational needs or education, health and care plan. Consequently, it is very difficult for leaders to plan effective provision for these pupils. Different funding streams such as the pupil premium are not therefore used effectively enough to meet pupils’ needs.
• Leaders have not improved the attendance of disadvantaged pupils and those who have special educational needs and/or disabilities. Too many of these pupils do not attend school regularly.
• Parents say that they value the education their children receive. However, a significant minority of parents who responded to the Parent View questionnaire are very unhappy about how their children are cared for at school. Although most staff report that they feel supported by leaders, a significant minority express concerns over the effectiveness of leaders’ management of pupils’ behaviour.
• Leaders have implemented an increasingly effective system to monitor the performance of teachers. Teachers now have clear targets and regular opportunities to discuss their professional development, particularly with respect to the redesigned primary curriculum.
• Leaders have implemented a new behaviour management system. As a consequence, most pupils behave well at social times and in lessons. Pupils told inspectors that the behaviour management system had made a positive difference and had improved the climate in which they learned.
• Leaders have designed a broad and balanced curriculum that promotes positive outcomes for the majority of pupils. They recognised the need to improve standards at key stage 2 and introduced a new primary curriculum for Years 5 and 6. This is being led by highly effective English and mathematics teachers who bring a particular zeal for learning and a passionate commitment to raising standards. Leaders are continuing to develop and review the curriculum to strengthen it further.
• Leaders ensure that all staff have regular opportunities to train and develop their practice. Teachers told inspectors how pleased they are with the training they receive and with the opportunities they have to learn with other colleagues and share their ideas and skills.
• Leaders have provided pupils with a stimulating environment in which to learn. Space is used imaginatively to engage and enthuse pupils. Pupils show respect for their school and told inspectors that they appreciate the staff’s efforts to improve the school environment.
• Leaders and staff provide a wide range of extra-curricular activities to help to broaden pupils’ experiences. Time and attention are given to introduce pupils to a range of sporting and cultural experiences. Pupils spoke enthusiastically to inspectors about the many opportunities to take part in sport and music after school. They spoke highly of the school’s international project and their involvement in this. The curriculum effectively supports pupils’ learning about different faiths, languages and cultures.
• Newly qualified teachers may not be appointed.

Governance of the school

• Governance is inadequate. Governors have an inaccurate view of the school. They have not been effective in holding leaders to account with respect to safeguarding. They have not provided leaders with sufficient challenge regarding the school’s duty of care to maintain accurate and effective attendance registers and to monitor the care of pupils who are at risk.
• Governors have not asked basic questions of leaders about pupils whose provision has been redesigned to meet their specific needs, for example those pupils who are put onto part-time timetables. They have not been effective in holding leaders to account for the impact of the use of the pupil premium funding, especially in terms of the attendance and safeguarding of disadvantaged pupils.

Safeguarding

• The arrangements for safeguarding are not effective.
• The school’s arrangements for safeguarding pupils do not meet statutory requirements. For example, there are multiple errors in the completion of school registers. Inspectors found that marks indicating attendance had been entered when in fact there had been pupil absence for multiple sessions. This means that the school does not know whether pupils are safe because they cannot say with any accuracy where they are. They cannot spot patterns and trends to notice possible warning signs in a pupil’s absence. The school has no effective system for checking the accuracy of school registers and these errors had gone unnoticed.
• The school’s systems for ensuring the welfare of pupils about whom safeguarding referrals have been made are weak. There is incoherent recording of multi-agency and police involvement. This means that leaders cannot effectively track events or communication. During the inspection, the school could not find key documentation relating to the care of pupils. The logs of multi-agency involvement are confused and records are not kept securely.
• Case notes do not allow staff to have an effective overview of the provision for vulnerable pupils. It is difficult for staff to know whether a vulnerable pupil is also eligible for pupil premium funding, has a statement of special educational needs or education, health and care plan, or pastoral support plan. This means that leaders cannot ensure appropriate provision for pupils for whom safeguarding referrals have been made.
• Too many pupils are persistently absent. Most of these pupils are disadvantaged pupils and those who have special educational needs and/or disabilities. This has been the case for the last three years and there are no signs that this is improving.
• Some pupils on part-time timetables go home for the afternoon session and leaders are not certain who looks after them during the afternoon; therefore leaders cannot be sure of their safety during school time. The safety of these pupils is at risk.

Quality of teaching, learning and assessment Good

• Assessment information and pupils’ work in books, as well as records of leaders’ monitoring of teaching, show that there is effective teaching over time, especially in English and mathematics. As a result, pupils make good progress. High- and middle- ability pupils in particular do consistently well.
• Teaching is generally skilled and enthusiastic and therefore many pupils are highly engaged in their learning. Teachers use resources imaginatively and pupils, both in ability sets and mixed-ability classes, say that they enjoy their lessons. For example, one pupil told inspectors: ‘I can’t wait for the next thing. It’s bound to be exciting!’.
• Most pupils are confident in their learning and teachers both nurture this confidence and capitalise on it to help pupils to make good progress. For example, inspectors observed pupils confidently and competently explaining complicated long division sums to the class, showing their understanding and helping others to learn as they did so. Other pupils read aloud from a challenging book and did so with enthusiasm and gusto. In another lesson, pupils were eager to share with each other the differences between formal and informal writing and to improve it, keen to demonstrate accuracy and progress. Teachers have fostered a real sense of enthusiasm for learning and progress.
• Teachers’ planning effectively addresses the learning needs of pupils with different starting points. For example, the most able pupils, including the most able disadvantaged pupils, often have opportunities to develop their skills or extend and deepen their understanding. In a music lesson, for instance, pupils shared their compositions and knew how to help one another to try new and difficult forms of notation.
• Teachers’ use of questioning within lessons is often strong. Teachers take opportunities to probe pupils’ understanding and challenge their thinking, which helps them to make positive progress. In mathematics lessons, for example, teachers help pupils express their misunderstandings and then carefully help them to secure their knowledge through questioning.
• Recently, leaders have improved the data and assessment systems in the school. Subject leaders now have available to them a range of ways to assess pupils’ progress at key stage 2 and at key stage 3. This helps leaders to challenge and support teachers, and helps teachers to plan tasks that suit pupils’ needs.
• Leaders have made sure that teachers apply the school’s marking and feedback policy consistently.
• Inspectors observed pupils enjoying their learning and making good progress across a range of subjects.
• Teachers have implemented an effective strategy to help pupils to develop their reading skills. Pupils receive expert guidance to learn to read and to develop a love of reading.
• Teachers go to great lengths to celebrate pupils’ work and show that they are proud of what pupils can achieve.

Personal development, behaviour and welfare Inadequate

Personal development and welfare

• The school’s work to promote pupils’ personal development and welfare is inadequate.
• Some groups of pupils are not safe. This is because the systems for planning, reviewing and monitoring their provision and care are ineffective.
• Persistent absence is high. The school has been unsuccessful in reducing this. Leaders have plans to address the issue but these have had very little impact.
• When alterations are made to some pupils’ timetables and they spend part of their day not at school, their safety is not monitored effectively. This does not ensure that pupils are safe when not in school.
• There are errors in attendance registers, making the system of checking pupils’ attendance on a daily basis and the school’s evacuation practices ineffective. These errors mean that school leaders do not know with certainty who is in school or off the school site at any one time.
• Many pupils who spoke to inspectors said that they felt safe and enjoyed school. They understood the nature of bullying and knew whom to go to if they felt concerned.
• Pupils know how to stay safe online. For example, those to whom inspectors spoke knew about the Child Exploitation Online Protection Service and how to report problems if they need to. Pupils know the person responsible for safeguarding and whom to go to if this teacher is absent.
• Pupils are respectful of the school environment. Displays and art work are of a very high quality and pupils are proud of what is presented.
• Pupils take part in the school council. They have prefect roles and are eager to help the school develop as a supportive environment and community.

Behaviour

• The behaviour of pupils is good.
• In lessons, almost without exception, pupils are courteous, thoughtful and polite. Their books are often beautifully presented and they clearly take a great pride in what they do.
• Pupils respond to teachers’ instructions quickly. They know the importance of listening and do so thoughtfully. This means that, for example in mathematics and in English, pupils pay rapt attention to the teachers’ clear and engaging explanations. It is a strength of this school that pupils in lessons welcome the challenge offered by their teachers.
• Most pupils listen to one another and to their teacher with thought and care. When they are asked to help their partners with classwork, they do so with courtesy.
• Only occasionally do pupils drift from the focus of the lesson and wander round the classroom or give up an activity halfway through. Those who do are brought back to the focus of the lesson with expert skill and guidance from teachers and teaching assistants.
• The school is orderly. The code of conduct and rewards structure introduced by leaders have had a positive effect. More rewards are given than sanctions so teachers are effective at helping pupils learn how to behave without being asked.
• Pupils move around the school building sensibly. They line up well and respond to teachers’ instructions when asked to quieten or become more organised. The very occasional boisterousness on the playground is quickly checked by the teachers and mid-day supervisors.

Outcomes for pupils

Good

• The proportion of pupils meeting and exceeding age-related expectations in reading, writing and mathematics by the end of key stage 2 in 2016 was broadly in line with national figures.
• Outcomes for current key stage 2 pupils are good. Pupils’ progress in science is particularly strong.
• At key stage 3, pupils make good progress across a range of subjects, including English and mathematics.
• The use of pupil premium and catch-up funding has resulted in an improvement in the outcomes in English and mathematics. An additional teacher has been allocated to Year 5 to develop the primary curriculum. As a result, outcomes in Year 5 improved last year.
• Some disadvantaged pupils and others who have special educational needs and/or disabilities do not achieve as well as they should because their attendance is too low. However, the differences in progress between these pupils and that of other pupils nationally with similar starting points are diminishing. This is because these pupils are taught increasingly effectively.
• Teachers’ expectations of what the most able pupils can achieve, including the most able disadvantaged pupils, are high. Teachers use the school’s assessment information with growing confidence, and it informs their planning so that the most able pupils make good progress and attain well.
• In the past, the progress made by pupils in mathematics has been weaker than in other subjects, especially at key stage 2. Outcomes are now improving because of stronger leadership of the subject area, leading to more effective teaching.
• Teachers share a dynamic and enthusiastic commitment to literacy throughout the school. Pupils’ outcomes in English are rapidly improving at key stage 2 and continue to rise at key stage 3.
• Subject leaders and teachers have received guidance and support to help them to assess pupils’ work accurately. Leaders now have more confidence in the quality of teachers’ assessments because they have worked closely with partners in other schools to moderate and standardise their work.

School details

Unique reference number Local authority Inspection number 124452 Staffordshire 10020030 This inspection of the school was carried out under section 5 of the Education Act 2005. Type of school Middle deemed secondary School category Age range of pupils Gender of pupils Maintained 9 to 13 Mixed Number of pupils on the school roll 419 Appropriate authority The governing body Chair Headteacher Doreen Ellis David Swift Telephone number 01902 850266 Website Email address www.brewood.staffs.sch.uk headteacher@brewood.staffs.sch.uk Date of previous inspection 23 September 2014

Information about this school

• The school meets requirements on the publication of specified information on its website.
• The school is smaller than most secondary schools.
• The school does not use any alternative provision.
• Pupils come from mainly White British backgrounds.
• Very few pupils speak English as an additional language.
• The proportion of pupils for whom the school receives the pupil premium is lower than average.
• The proportion of pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities on the school roll is lower than that found in most schools.
• The school formed a federation with St Mary’s Church of England First School, Wheaton Aston, in April 2011. The two schools share a governing body and the headteacher is executive headteacher of both schools.
• Last year, the school met the government’s floor standards for pupils’ attainment and progress in key stage 2.

Information about this inspection

• Inspectors observed parts of lessons across a range of subjects, some of which were observed jointly with members of the leadership team.
• Inspectors looked at the quality of teaching over time though evaluating the work in pupils’ books across year groups.
• Inspectors held meetings with senior and subject leaders, groups of pupils, the chair and members of the governing body and representatives from the local authority and diocese who support the school’s work.
• Inspectors held meetings with staff responsible for leading on behaviour and achievement and the special educational needs coordinator. They also spoke with the designated safeguarding leader, pastoral leaders, teaching assistants and members of the school’s non-teaching staff.
• Inspectors observed pupils arriving at the school, and pupils’ behaviour in lessons, between lessons and during breaktime and lunchtime.
• Inspectors considered the views of the 49 parents who had responded to Ofsted’s online questionnaire, Parent View, and those who contacted inspectors directly. Inspectors analysed the results of the 15 replies to the staff questionnaire.
• Inspectors looked at the school’s own data on pupils’ progress, lesson plans, minutes of meetings and records relating to behaviour, safety and attendance. They also reviewed the school’s self-evaluation and improvement plans.
• Inspectors looked at documents relating to safeguarding and the arrangements the school has for keeping pupils safe.
• Inspectors looked at risk assessments and plans for the provision of the health and safety of pupils, including those who have special educational needs and/or disabilities.

Inspection team

Graham Tyrer, lead inspector Richard Ellis Christine Bray Ofsted Inspector Ofsted Inspector Ofsted Inspector