Willenhall E-ACT Academy 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?

• Act with urgency to ensure that all pupils are safe at the school by:
  • addressing pupils’ poor behaviour through insisting on their adherence to school expectations and gaining the full support of their parents
  • ensuring all staff implement the school’s behaviour management policy consistently and effectively, and that this policy offers suitable sanctions and appropriate support and rewards to pupils
  • improving the attendance of pupils, including those in alternative provision, through analysing strategies which have been successful previously, intervening early and working more closely with parents
  • ensuring that pupils receive high-quality information in lessons, and through the pastoral system, that enables them to recognise, avoid and deal with potentially dangerous situations.
• Ensure that the extra funding the school receives to support disadvantaged pupils and those who have special educational needs and/or disabilities is used well to raise their achievement rapidly.
• Improve the impact of leadership, including governance, by:
  • becoming more precise in setting and reviewing actions and using this information rigorously for further improvement
  • meeting the statutory duty to deliver careers education, information, advice and guidance, and ensure that those pupils who have currently missed out have additional opportunities to acquire this support
  • check that communication with parents and the publication of information on the website meets statutory requirements
  • ensuring that senior and middle leaders are fully accountable for the necessary and urgent improvements required in safeguarding, behaviour, attendance and achievement.
• Improve the quality of the 16 to 19 study programme by:
  • analysing and improving the assessment system and outcomes for learners following academic courses.
• Improve teaching at key stages 3 and 4 so that outcomes improve rapidly by:
  • embedding a coherent teaching strategy which is applied consistently throughout the school
  • ensuring teaching staff have higher expectations of what pupils can achieve
  • setting pupils learning tasks which they understand, are suitably challenging, and that capture their attention so concentration does not diminish. An external review of the school’s use of the pupil premium funding 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 the sponsor have overseen a decline in standards since the previous inspection in March 2015. They have not provided the safe environment and high-quality teaching which improve outcomes and enhance life chances for young people. Leaders themselves acknowledge that instability of leadership has meant there has not been a clear sense of values and direction across the school.
• Inspectors were told by leaders that this was a very challenging school. The acting principal at the time of the inspection, new leaders and the sponsor are fully aware of the inadequacies across all aspects of the school’s provision. The new leaders offer a frank and accurate view of the school regarding poor behaviour, inconsistent teaching and poor outcomes for disadvantaged pupils. Leaders’ judgements were fully in line with inspectors’ experiences and evidence. While there is an ambition to address inadequacies and to raise aspirations, there is not yet a sustainable track record in the school to suggest capacity for improvement.
• During 2015 and 2016, 70% of teachers left the school. This high turnover of staff has greatly hampered what leaders have been able to accomplish. It has also meant pupils have less confidence in their teachers because of the variability they encounter. Recent staff turnover is still high at 20%, but has reduced. Current leaders who joined recently, and those in the school as part of E-ACT’s support, are fully committed to the long-term improvement of the school.
• Leaders do not meet the statutory duty to deliver careers education, information, advice and guidance to pupils in key stages 3 and 4. This means that pupils do not have the necessary information about career pathways to choose appropriate subjects or begin to explore post-16 choices.
• The leadership of teaching and learning has been poor over time. Teachers do not consistently apply the school’s policies. New leaders have a clear vision for the development of teaching and a realistic understanding of the school’s current position, including the inconsistencies and weaknesses in practices. Processes of monitoring and support, including work with other schools, have not yet been in place long enough to secure sustained improvement.
• Leaders lack strong self-evaluation. There is no analysis of the extra funding the school received in 2015–16 for disadvantaged pupils and those who have special educational needs and/or disabilities. The use of this funding did not support and bring about required improvements. This lack of evaluation hinders leaders from planning effectively for current pupils.
• The current spending plans to support Year 7 pupils with their literacy and numeracy are based on the previous year’s spending, despite outcomes not being strong. This again reflects poorly on leaders’ evaluation of the impact of additional funding.
• Leaders acknowledge that communication with parents is relatively poor. Parents do not receive written annual reports. They therefore do not know how to support pupils in their learning and this contributes to the continued slow progress.
• Middle leaders think recent training, particularly regarding using pupil-level information, is strong. These leaders feel that changes to line management structures and closer working within and between departments will help improve and support the performance management system. The leaders of English and mathematics feel staffing in their teams is now more stable but it is too early to tell whether this will impact enough upon outcomes.
• Extra-curricular activities form part of the school’s provision. While pupils discuss mainly sporting and revision activities, there are music, drama, dance and reading and writing opportunities. The school’s website only mentions sporting and revision activities although, clearly, a range of extra-curricular activities are on offer, including trips. The tradition of musical and drama performances is a strength of the life of the school.
• Newly qualified teachers feel they are well supported at the school. They are mentored well in terms of their teaching and receive regular updates on safeguarding issues. There are, however, challenges around pupils’ poor behaviour and it is recommended that the school does not appoint newly qualified teachers.
• Leaders state that the provision of social, moral, spiritual and cultural education is in transition. Some curriculum coverage is linked to assemblies and tutor times. Information on the school’s website, and displays around the school, are linked to British values. The school celebrated Black History Month and a recent newsletter highlighted successes linked to the local community.
• The school day and the curriculum have been subject to recent change based on leaders undertaking external research. The number of lessons each day has been reduced from six to five and, at key stage 4, more options have been offered, including triple science for the most able. Leaders believe these changes will improve behaviour because there will be opportunities for more extended learning and less need for cover supervisors. These changes have been undertaken very recently and the full impact is yet to be seen.
• Leaders had highlighted concerns about the quality of alternative provision. Systems to monitor provision and pupils are now stronger. The lead inspector spoke to some pupils in alternative provision who said they felt supported and that they were making progress.

Governance of the school

• Governance has been inadequate over time because of the poor performance of the school.
• E-ACT is now taking more robust action. There are changes to the governance structure using an integrated regional system of accountability and support. New leaders have been appointed with responsibility for key aspects of the school’s work. Although these are in their early stages, there have been developments in systems and approaches seen by inspectors and which middle leaders appreciate. A review of governance is, therefore, not necessary.
• Governance has not ensured that pupil premium funding has been used to good effect, nor have governors analysed the reasons for this.
• Governance has not ensured statutory duties have been met. This includes in relation to providing careers guidance and sending an annual written report to parents.
• Governance has not ensured key information is on the website, including details of governors’ financial and business interests, and involvement in other schools.

Safeguarding

• The arrangements for safeguarding are not effective.
• While leaders have ensured that statutory safeguarding requirements are met, pupils do not feel safe in school. This is because of the consistently poor behaviour they experience.
• A third of the staff who responded to the online questionnaire did not feel pupils were safe in the school.
• Pupils are not taught effectively how to make good choices to protect themselves from potential harm. Too few pupils could explain how they learn about issues such as making healthy lifestyle choices, keeping safe in relationships and protecting themselves from extremism.
• Too many pupils, particularly those at alternative provision, are absent from school.
• Persistent absence this year, although falling, is exceptionally high.
• The school has robust systems to support pupils if safeguarding concerns are raised.
• The school’s procedures to check staff before they take up employment at the school are strong.
• All staff are appropriately trained in safeguarding and are familiar with recent guidance.

Quality of teaching, learning and assessment Inadequate

• Teaching is weak. It has not improved fast enough since the previous inspection. Teaching does not support pupils in making good progress across a range of subjects, including English, mathematics and science, and for academic courses in the sixth form.
• Teachers do not have high enough expectations of what pupils can achieve. This is because planning is not focused on pupils’ abilities and potential through the effective use of assessment data. Far too much time is spent by teachers attempting to control pupils’ behaviour.
• Many teachers do not follow the school’s teaching and assessment policies. As a result, pupils complain of inconsistency across the school.
• Work covered in lessons, and over time in books, shows that pupils are not making the sustained and substantial progress needed to reach their potential and make up for the legacy of previous poor teaching. Pupils are not consistently developing the skills required for the new and more challenging GCSE examinations.
• In many lessons, teachers are regularly interrupted by pupils. This prevents them using time well and from putting challenge into their teaching. In too many lessons, very little learning takes place, and those pupils who attempt to work receive little support. In one lesson seen during the inspection, behaviour was so poor that inspectors immediately shared concerns with leaders.
• Leaders acknowledge that the setting of homework is a weakness and teachers are not following the school’s policy. Pupils told inspectors that homework setting was inconsistent, with more apparently set in English and mathematics than in other subjects. Pupils’ planners, particularly at key stage 3, show homework to be sporadic.
• The work of teaching assistants is variable. While some actively engage in good questioning, as was seen in a Year 9 physical education (PE) lesson, too often they have to spend time helping to manage off-task behaviour and low-level disruption.
• A scrutiny of pupils’ work across all year groups, and in a range of subjects, indicates variability in terms of teachers’ application of the school’s marking and assessment expectations. The challenge of work seen in books did not always match the ability of pupils; it was often too easy. Pupils do not take enough pride in their work, as their presentation is often untidy and tasks are left uncompleted.
• Where learning is most effective, such as in some key stage 3 mathematics and art lessons, there is a clear insistence on adherence to the school’s standards of behaviour and following basic routines. This enables an orderly working atmosphere and good relationships. In such circumstances, teachers can use questioning effectively to stimulate discussion.
• Elsewhere, other instances of effective practice exist. A Year 11 music lesson, for example, was characterised by strong planning to meet individual needs. Moreover, pupils were being thoroughly prepared with academic rigour for their GCSE examination.
• The quality of teaching in the sixth form is stronger, although it is not leading to good academic outcomes. Where learning is most effective, such as in English, business studies and geography, teachers display strong subject knowledge and their positive relationships with students allow for good learning.
• The teaching of vocational courses in the sixth form is very strong, leading to high outcomes.

Personal development, behaviour and welfare Inadequate

Personal development and welfare

• The school’s work to promote pupils’ personal development and welfare is inadequate.
• Pupils feel unsafe. This is because, while some pupils are polite and their conduct is good, too many in Years 7 to 11 are rude and routinely defiant. The opportunities for pupils to experience good learning and to enjoy school are greatly limited.
• Over 60% of staff who responded to the online questionnaire did not agree that there was a culture of encouraging calm and orderly conduct and which is aspirational for pupils. Some support staff feel belittled by pupils.
• Too many pupils at key stages 3 and 4 are neither committed to, nor engaged in, their learning. Both low-level disruption and more challenging behaviour by pupils impede teachers’ ability to involve pupils in their learning. Even those who attempt the work set have their learning disrupted too often by their peers.
• Some pupils told inspectors the school is safe but only if they mix with the right people.
• Many pupils, including those who have special educational needs and/or disabilities, say that bullying does occur but teachers are not always successful in dealing with it. Pupils in Years 9 and 10 said that teachers’ responses to concerns about bullying are inconsistent.
• Many pupils across all year groups did not know, or were vague about, how to keep themselves safe and what the school does to keep them safe. Many girls in key stage 4, for example, spoken to informally and during lessons, said they were not aware of issues such as keeping safe online, keeping safe in relationships, the dangers of sexting or how to keep safe from radicalisation and extremism.
• Pupils told inspectors that some safeguarding topics are covered in assemblies but only briefly. Others said they are given information after incidents have occurred, but the quality of follow-up varies and is often rushed. Pupils could not recall many specific examples of topics covered, although a number referred to the dangers of knife crime, which had been discussed recently.
• A small number of pupils, however, feel the school is improving and new systems are having a positive impact.

Behaviour

• The behaviour of pupils is inadequate.
• Pupils in all year groups, the clear majority of parents who responded to the online questionnaire, and those who contacted Ofsted, noted pupils’ poor behaviour. These concerns related to lessons and social times. Over 80% of staff who responded to the online questionnaire feel behaviour in the school is not good.
• In January 2017, parents were sent a letter from the school which noted that ‘Disruptive behaviour by a small but significant minority is hindering the progress of other students.’ Inspection evidence shows that this poor behaviour is deep rooted and widespread.
• Inspectors had food thrown at them in the canteen and in a classroom. A small number of pupils were rude to them. Inspectors were jostled in corridors and witnessed staff being ignored or defied. A senior leader was spoken to disrespectfully by pupils and told inspectors this was the norm.
• Pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities told inspectors they like to find safe places in the school because other pupils fight, push and swear at social times.
• Sixth form students behave very well but feel the behaviour of pupils in Years 7–11 is getting worse. A number of students do not like to leave the sixth form area because of this. Students gave examples of how younger pupils’ misbehaviour, such as knocking doors during lessons, disrupted their learning.
• Pupils do not take a pride in their school. Litter and graffiti were evident both inside and outside the building. Litter was particularly prevalent after lunchtimes but was also noticeable early in the day.
• Information from leaders and teachers and evidence seen during the inspection confirms that the behaviour of pupils in Years 7 and 8 is particularly poor. In two Year 7 registration periods, a few pupils shouted out inappropriate comments.
• Internal truancy is not uncommon during the day. This occurred during the inspection. Pupils who had been sent to a referral room chose instead to congregate on stairwells.
• Leaders’ strategies to deal with poor behaviour are ineffective. This is seen partly in an increase in the number of exclusions. During the current academic year, the number of fixed-term exclusions has increased markedly. The overwhelming majority of these are of disadvantaged pupils and those who have special educational needs and/or disabilities. Leaders admit they are disappointed with these high numbers.
• For lesser behaviour problems, pupils are sent to an ‘isolation room’ in which very little productive learning takes place. Pupils spoken to said they were sent to this room on numerous occasions and completed little, if any, work.
• While attendance had been improving over the past three years and moving closer toward the national average, current attendance is falling. Leaders are disappointed with this. The attendance of disadvantaged pupils and those who have special educational needs and/or disabilities is the worst in the school and is well below the national average.
• Over a third of pupils in Years 7 to 11 are persistently absent. Of these, just under a half are disadvantaged pupils.
• The attendance of pupils who are in alternative provision is very low. It has been less than 70% this academic year. Improved monitoring of this is now evident.
• Leaders feel there is a great need for the establishment of a strong reward system to recognise those pupils who do routinely adhere to the school’s rules.
• Positive work takes place with the local police neighbourhood team, who work with staff in both pre-empting problems and responding to referrals.

Outcomes for pupils Inadequate

• Leaders’ self-evaluation states: ‘Outcomes in 2016 were very weak.’
• Pupils enter the school with attainment that is well below average. All groups of pupils at GCSE, and those on academic courses in the sixth form, made inadequate progress from their starting points in 2015 and 2016.
• While the proportion of pupils who attained a good GCSE in English and mathematics improved in 2016, it is consistently below the national average. Attainment in some other subjects is particularly weak. For example, the proportions of pupils gaining a good grade in English language, English literature, mathematics, geography, PE, biology, chemistry, additional and core science in 2015 and 2016 were well below the national average.
• Current pupils are not being equipped with the skills they require to succeed in the new and more challenging GCSEs and A levels. This is because pupils’ absence is too high, teaching is not planned to meet their needs and teachers spend too much time on classroom behaviour management.
• In 2016, disadvantaged pupils made a grade less progress in GCSEs overall, in English and in mathematics than pupils of similar abilities in other schools. In science, it was almost one and a half grades less. Current predictions are for a marginal improvement on this. These predictions are, however, not reliable. This is because of the lack of any analysis on the reasons disadvantaged pupils performed the way they did last year, poor work seen in books and the inadequate teaching seen across the school.
• Pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities are not making good progress. Their needs are not being met. Leaders told inspectors that pupils in Year 11 have ‘a big leap to make’ to achieve in line with their targets. Current information for Year 9 shows that only a quarter of pupils are on track to reach their targets.
• The most able pupils are not consistently challenged. They become bored and demotivated because they find the work too easy. They sometimes report this to their teachers via their books but no additional challenge is set.
• Weak literacy and numeracy skills are highlighted as being the main barrier to improving outcomes, including for pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities. Work to address these deficiencies is yet to show measureable impact. Over a third of Year 7 pupils did not improve their literacy, and almost a fifth did not improve their numeracy skills, following intervention in 2015–16. The school had no plans to change its interventions for this year despite this lack of success the year before.
• There are now systems in place that allow pupils to engage in the assessment of their work. This is in line with the school’s policy, but many pupils do not understand, or are not aware of, their targets. Many pupils do not know what to do to improve.
• Provision for independent advice and guidance in Years 7 to 10 is inadequate. There has been no development of a programme since May 2016 and pupils are not being supported to make informed choices.
• Careers provision in the sixth form is embedded and successful.
• Vocational outcomes in the sixth form in 2016 were strong, including for disadvantaged students.

16 to 19 study programmes Inadequate

• While the school meets the current minimum standards, academic outcomes have been inadequate over the past three years. Current standards are low. This is because the school has no leadership structure in the sixth form, nor any clear strategy to improve outcomes. Inspectors were told students had been placed on inappropriate courses previously and that the school was moving towards a more vocationally based provision. The current prospectus, however, contains a list of academic courses and does not match this reported change.
• Too many pupils who sat AS qualifications in 2016 failed to make the progress of which they were capable. A large number have had to leave, re-take or change their options. These students were not well served by the school.
• Retention rates between Years 12 and 13 are continually low and too few students complete their study programme. Attendance in the sixth form is consistently low.
• Assessment in the sixth form is inadequate. Students on academic courses told inspectors their target grades were entirely self-generated, depending on what they thought they could achieve. Some could not remember their targets. Information from assessments is not, therefore, based on prior attainment and it is unclear if students are making the progress that they should.
• Teaching on academic courses is not effective as planning does not specifically focus on meeting students’ needs or take account of their prior attainment.
• Outcomes on vocational courses are strong and improving. Students achieve almost half a grade better than predictions based upon their starting points. They are well prepared for the next stage of their learning.
• A full re-sit programme in English and/or mathematics is available. Current Year 13 students are all predicted to gain pass grades. In Year 12, of the 52 students re-sitting mathematics, 50% are on track to achieve a pass grade. Most of the 39 students re-sitting English are predicted to pass.
• Sixth form students are taught how to keep safe. During this inspection, an assembly on the dangers associated with drug use was very effective. Students also receive information about sexual health and e-safety.
• The enrichment programme is wide ranging. This includes study skills, a national citizenship programme, young enterprise and input from universities.
• Students speak very highly of the care and individual attention they receive.
• Careers provision in the sixth form is embedded and successful. The school is proud of pupils’ destinations, including going to universities.

School details

Unique reference number Local authority Inspection number 137706 Walsall 10025190 This inspection of the school was carried out under section 5 of the Education Act 2005. Type of school Secondary School category Academy sponsor-led Age range of pupils 11 to 18 Gender of pupils Gender of pupils in 16 to 19 study programmes Number of pupils on the school roll Of which, number on roll in 16 to 19 study programmes Mixed Mixed 1340 166 Appropriate authority Multi-academy trust Chair Acting Headteacher Telephone number Website Email address Michael Wemms Tony Evans 01902 368221 http://www.willenhalle-actacademy.org.uk/ postbox@willenhalle-actacademy.org.uk Date of previous inspection 3–4 March 2015

Information about this school

• The school became part of the E-ACT academy trust in 2012. There have been recent changes to the structure of governance, including a move toward a more regional system. New leaders have recently been employed by the trust with specific responsibilities related to aspects of school improvement.
• The interim headteacher was appointed in December 2016.
• The school is much larger than the average secondary school.
• The large majority of pupils are from White British backgrounds.
• The proportion of pupils who have special educational needs/or disabilities is below average.
• The proportion of pupils who are supported through pupil premium funding is well above average.
• The school does not meet the government’s current floor standards, which are the minimum expectations for pupils’ attainment and progress by the end of Year 11.
• The school meets the Department for Education’s definition of a coasting school based on key stage 4 academic performance results in 2014, 2015 and 2016.
• A small number of pupils attend alternative provision at NOVA Training, Impact Education, Walsall College and Community Footprint. 

• The school does not meet requirements on the publication of information about the use of pupil premium funding or information about governors.
• The school does not comply with Department for Education guidance on what academies should publish about how it uses pupil premium funding and information about governors.

Information about this inspection

• Learning was observed in a range of lessons, including in the sixth form. Inspectors were joined by senior leaders for some of these observations. Inspectors visited form time and an assembly. They observed pupils’ conduct at break and lunchtime.
• The lead inspector visited alternative provision provided on the school site. Pupils were observed in the school’s referral and isolation rooms.
• Inspectors looked at pupils’ work during lesson observations and learning walks. They also scrutinised a sample of work provided by senior leaders.
• Discussions were held with senior leaders, subject leaders, class teachers, support staff and representatives of the sponsor.
• Inspectors met with four groups of pupils and sixth form students and spoke with many more informally. There were no responses to the online pupil survey.
• The inspection team looked at a wide range of documentation. This included child protection arrangements, the school’s development and self-evaluation plans, an action plan for the spring and summer terms, school policies, records of meetings between the sponsor and school leaders, information on the regional structure of governance and the school prospectus. The lead inspector also scrutinised the school website.
• Inspectors considered the 27 responses to the online parent questionnaire, the 20 text responses from parents and 59 responses to the staff questionnaire.

Inspection team

Nigel Griffiths, lead inspector Caroline Hoddinott Graeme Rudland Adele Mills Marie McMahon Ofsted Inspector Ofsted Inspector Ofsted Inspector Ofsted Inspector Ofsted Inspector