St Joseph's Catholic Primary School (Huddersfield) Ofsted Report

Full report

What does the school need to do to improve further?

• Secure consistency in the quality of teaching, particularly in early years and key stage 1, so that:
  • pupils who need to catch up are targeted and supported to make accelerated progress
  • pupils understand and respond to high expectations of the presentation of their work
  • the teaching of phonics enables pupils to read with increasing confidence and fluency
  • pupils’ mistakes and misconceptions are quickly addressed during lessons
  • assessment information is used to plan learning that is well matched to pupils’ needs and challenges the most able pupils effectively.
• Improve the effectiveness of leadership, management and governance by ensuring that:
  • inconsistencies in teaching and learning are addressed rigorously
  • leaders evaluate the impact of their actions on pupils’ achievement and use this information to secure and sustain further improvement
  • governors receive sufficient information about all aspects of the school’s work so they can effectively hold school leaders to account
  • the curriculum allows pupils to develop skills, knowledge and understanding across the full range of national curriculum subjects
  • systematic procedures for analysing and evaluating behaviour and safety are implemented to provide leaders with better information to inform their actions
  • the performance management process effectively holds staff to account for pupils’ outcomes.
• Improve pupils’ behaviour in key stage 1 lessons by:
  • supporting pupils to develop the confidence, skills and positive learning behaviours they need to learn well
  • making sure that lessons challenge and interest pupils.
• Accelerate the rate of progress in early years and Year 1 so that a greater proportion achieve a good level of development at the end of Reception and meet the expected standard in the Year 1 phonics screening check.
• Improve provision in the outdoor area in early years to support the development of children’s knowledge, skills and understanding.

Inspection judgements

Effectiveness of leadership and management Requires improvement

• Senior leaders have not sustained the quality of teaching from the last inspection. In key stage 1, this is resulting in current pupils not making sufficient progress. A high turnover of staff and difficulty in recruiting teachers have compounded the problem.
• The whole-school improvement plan does not accurately capture the most urgent priorities for the school. The objectives set lack ambition and the absence of precise success criteria and milestones from which to measure success means that the plan is not effective enough in securing improvement.
• Leaders’ action plans in relation to subjects and other areas of responsibility are more effective. Leaders check the impact of their actions in a range of ways and provide feedback to teachers to help them sharpen their practice. Teachers consequently feel well supported and are keen to know how their teaching can have a better impact on pupils’ learning. While there is evidence of improvement in the quality of teaching throughout school, in key stage 1, progress is slower due to recent and ongoing staffing changes.
• Senior leaders with responsibility for performance management do not use the collective wealth of information they hold about teachers’ strengths and areas for development when formulating targets to improve teachers’ performance. Targets are too vague and are not robustly holding teachers to account for the quality and impact of their work.
• There is a lack of rigour in checking that the school’s curriculum matches the requirements of the national curriculum. The long-term plan does not give teachers enough guidance on the specific knowledge, skills and understanding that pupils need to develop in subjects other than English, mathematics and religious education. There are planned opportunities for pupils to learn about British values and a range of cultures and religions. This is not sufficiently developed to make a positive enough impact on pupils’ social, moral, spiritual and cultural understanding. A wide range of visits and after-school clubs, such as chess, computer club and football, provide enrichment and interest to the school’s curriculum.
• School leaders use the primary school physical education (PE) and sports funding to offer a range of after-school sporting opportunities which are not available in the local community. Specialist sports coaches teach alongside teachers. This is supporting teachers’ professional development.
• Leadership of the provision for pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities is generally effective. The leader knows individuals very well and tracks their development through the school’s assessment system. The leader is in the early stages of forming a strategic overview of the progress that pupils make across school. Funding is used to provide appropriate support for individuals. For example, access to a nurture facility is helpful in meeting pupils’ social and emotional needs so they are able to access learning in a classroom setting more independently.
• Pupil premium funding is used successfully to raise teachers’ awareness of these pupils and rigorously track their attainment and progress. Leaders and teachers work together to identify how to minimise barriers to learning and provide targeted support to address specific learning needs. This is having a positive impact on the achievement of this group of pupils.
• Mentors for newly qualified teachers provide precise and regular feedback about areas for development and ensure that appropriate professional development opportunities are available. Teachers and leaders are benefiting from newly developing partnerships with other schools. This is enabling staff to share and learn from best practice across a wider range of schools.

Governance of the school

• Governors are effective in carrying out their statutory duties. They are very committed to the school and have a range of skills and experience with which to provide appropriate support. However, while they often provide challenge to school leaders about school improvement work, this is not always at sufficient depth to accurately identify areas of concern and to hold school leaders to account.
• The governors have made strategic decisions to strengthen the leadership team and distribute responsibilities across a wider group of leaders, for example through the introduction of a post to champion the learning of disadvantaged pupils. This is providing the school with additional leadership capacity.

Safeguarding

• The arrangements for safeguarding are effective. However, some aspects of recording and monitoring are not as rigorous as they could be. Leaders responsible for safeguarding do not systematically analyse behaviour and safety records in order to look for any patterns and to inform their actions. A small but significant minority of parents do not feel that school leaders deal with behaviour and bullying incidents well.
• Staff understand their roles in relation to child protection procedures and keeping pupils safe. They receive training to help them be alert to any signs of risk, and know how, and to whom, they should report concerns.
• The safety and well-being of children in early years is well managed and the early years welfare requirements are fully met.

Quality of teaching, learning and assessment Requires improvement

• Teaching in key stage 1 requires improvement. Current pupils are not making strong enough progress because teachers are not using assessment information to make sure that learning tasks meet pupils’ needs and abilities. Teachers and teaching assistants do not always notice pupils’ errors or pick up on their misconceptions. This limits pupils’ learning potential in lessons.
• The teaching of phonics is not enabling pupils to develop basic skills in reading, handwriting and spelling rapidly enough. Consequently, many pupils lack confidence in the use of phonics strategies to read unfamiliar words. Work in lessons and in books show that some pupils’ poorly developed skills are also a barrier to their achievement across the curriculum.
• Teachers do not always demonstrate consistently high expectations of pupils’ work, particularly in key stage 1. This can result in work of a lower standard than pupils are capable of, sometimes with little care for handwriting and presentation.
• Teachers’ expectations across the curriculum are inconsistent. Consequently, the standard of work and depth of learning in different subjects varies between classes.
• In key stage 2, where teaching is stronger, teachers use questioning to good effect to probe pupils’ understanding and deepen their knowledge. Teachers specifically target disadvantaged pupils with their questioning, which effectively supports these pupils to develop a greater understanding.
• In key stage 2, teachers devise learning tasks which are often challenging, meet pupils’ needs and effectively grab their interest. On occasion, though, teachers do not challenge the most able pupils as quickly as they might. This is especially the case in mathematics, where the most able pupils spend time completing the easiest tasks, despite having fully grasped the learning already.
• Teachers help pupils to develop good learning habits in key stage 2. Self-assessment and peer assessment, along with regular opportunities to edit and improve their written work, contribute well to the strong progress made in writing.
• Teaching assistants make a valuable contribution towards the learning of some pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities. For example, they provide effective, targeted group work for key stage 2 pupils who need to catch up with reading.

Personal development, behaviour and welfare Requires improvement

Personal development and welfare

• The school’s work to promote pupils’ personal development and welfare requires improvement.
• Pupils’ attitudes to learning are not always positive in key stage 1. Expectations from staff are not consistently high and the learning environment does not promote pupils’ independence. In these cases, pupils are not developing as confident, self-assured learners.
• Pupils feel safe and well cared for in school. Pupils have a good understanding about how to stay safe online and know what to do if someone is unkind to them at school. They say that bullying is rare and school records support this view. However, not all parents have confidence that systems to deal with bullying are effective.

Behaviour

• The behaviour of pupils requires improvement. Leaders do not have a strategic overview of the approaches used to improve attendance and behaviour and are therefore unable to evaluate their impact.
• Pupils’ behaviour is mixed. During lessons in key stage 1, when teachers do not closely match tasks to pupils’ needs, the noise level rises and pupils do not settle quickly to work. However, where teaching is strongest, pupils show very positive behaviour as they are interested in their learning and feel challenged by it.
• Around the school at social times, pupils’ behaviour is generally good but can be quite noisy and boisterous, despite appropriate supervision. There are very few incidents of challenging or disruptive behaviour.
• Attendance is above the national average overall and the proportion of pupils who are regularly absent is below the national average. However, attendance is low for disadvantaged pupils and pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities. Evidence shows that strategies to improve attendance have proved successful.
• Relationships between staff and pupils are warm and respectful. This results in pupils usually showing respectful behaviour to staff, visitors and each other.

Outcomes for pupils Requires improvement

• The progress of current pupils is too variable between subjects and key stages.
• Inconsistency in the quality of teaching in key stage 1, where staffing has been less stable, means that current pupils are not making strong enough progress.
• Over the last three years, the proportion of pupils meeting the expected standard in the Year 1 phonics screening check has declined. In 2016, 60% of pupils met the standard, which is well below the national average of 81%. The proportion of current Year 1 pupils expected to meet the standard is nearer to, but still below, the national average.
• Pupils across the school have less opportunity to develop their skills across the wider curriculum than they do in English, mathematics and religious education. Therefore progress is weaker in some subjects and is not preparing pupils effectively for the next stage of their education. Teachers do not have equally high expectations of pupils’ work in every subject. This contributes to the presentation and quality of work in books which is patchy across the curriculum.
• Disadvantaged pupils generally make progress which is similar to that of other pupils nationally with the same starting points. Effective strategies are in place to identify targeted support for disadvantaged pupils and those who have special educational needs and/or disabilities. However, the progress they are making is not consistent due to the difference in the quality of teaching and support they receive.
• Over time, key stage 1 attainment at the expected standard has been consistently above the national average and has been broadly in line with national figures for pupils exceeding the expectations. In 2016, pupils achieved similarly strong outcomes. Attainment of at least the expected standard was above average in reading, writing and mathematics from all starting points.
• Pupils in key stage 2 are making much stronger progress than in key stage 1. Work in books and lessons, and the school’s assessment information, show that an increasing proportion of pupils are on track to meet and exceed expectations by the end of key stage 2 in reading, writing and mathematics.
• Progress across key stage 2 in recent years has been broadly average in reading, writing and mathematics. In 2016, progress was significantly above the national average in writing and was in line with national figures for reading and mathematics.
• Following a dip in reading attainment in 2016 at key stage 2, leaders took immediate action. A new approach to teaching guided reading in key stage 2 has contributed to pupils’ deeper understanding of the texts they read. Additionally, interventions for pupils who need to catch up with reading have resulted in rapid gains in learning for targeted individuals.

Early years provision Requires improvement

• From sometimes low, and often just below typical starting points, too few children make rapid enough progress to catch up with their peers nationally. Over time, the proportion of children reaching a good level of development by the end of Reception has remained consistently just below the national average and very few children exceed the early learning goals. The targets set for 2017 are below the national average and show a lack of ambition by leaders.
• Teaching and learning is too variable between classes. There is a sluggish start to learning in some cases. Staff do not always check that children are fully involved in their learning and expectations are not consistently high enough of, for example, letter formation. Some adults do not spot children’s errors quickly and learning for the most able children is not always demanding enough.
• Phonics teaching is not effective enough and children are often not actively involved with their learning throughout the sessions. Consequently, there are missed opportunities for development of children’s reading, spelling and handwriting skills.
• Teachers do not ensure that children access the outdoor area frequently enough and resources are generally a bit tired and uninspiring. The learning environment does not give children enough opportunity to develop number skills and consequently they are unable to fully flourish with their mathematical development.
• The early years leader has identified the correct priorities for development and has taken a proactive approach in forging links with feeder nurseries. This, combined with home visits for new starters, has given staff a clearer picture of children’s starting points much sooner than usual. As a result, staff are now able to make sure that children get off to a good start as soon as they join the early years setting.
• Actions taken to raise the profile of writing this year have been successful. The team have worked well together to secure improving standards in writing which are evident throughout the classrooms.
• There are positive relationships between children and staff. Children usually behave well and are kind and considerate to each other. They are well cared for by staff who ensure that children’s safety is a high priority.

School details

Unique reference number 107749 Local authority Kirklees Inspection number 10002738 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 Primary School category Voluntary aided Age range of pupils 3 to 11 Gender of pupils Mixed Number of pupils on the school roll 345 Appropriate authority The governing body Chair Mr Michael Kelly Headteacher Mr Dominic Williams Telephone number 01484 531669 Website www.stjosephscps.co.uk Email address office@stjosephscps.co.uk Date of previous inspection 5–6 October 2011

Information about this school

• The school meets requirements on the publication of specified information on its website.
• The headteacher and chair of governors have been in post since the previous inspection and 12 out of the 15 leaders and teachers have joined the school over that time.
• The school is larger than average and has increased its pupil numbers substantially since the last inspection. The majority of pupils are White British, with an increasing proportion from minority ethnic groups. The proportion of pupils who speak English as an additional language is just below the national average.
• The proportion of pupils known to be eligible for pupil premium funding is similar to the national average.
• The proportion of pupils who have additional support to meet their special educational needs and/or disabilities is below the national average. The proportion who have a statement of special educational needs or an education, health and care plan is in line with the national average.
• The school meets the government’s current floor standard, which are the minimum expectations for pupils’ attainment and progress in English and mathematics by the end of Year 6.

Information about this inspection

• The inspectors observed teaching in every class. Some observations were undertaken jointly with senior leaders. Inspectors observed the teaching of early-reading skills and listened to pupils read. They talked to pupils about their school and evaluated the quality of work in a sample of pupils’ books. A group of pupils conducted a tour of the school for an inspector.
• Inspectors held meetings with the headteacher and other senior leaders, a representative from the local authority and four representatives from the governing body. Inspectors also discussed the school’s work with the leader responsible for pupil premium, the early years leader and the leaders of English and mathematics.
• A range of documentation was considered including the school’s self-evaluation; records of the monitoring of teaching and learning; the school improvement plan; the school’s performance data; information on the progress of particular pupil groups; information relating to attendance and behaviour of pupils; safeguarding and child protection records; and minutes from governing body meetings. Documents outlining the arrangements for the use of pupil premium funding and the primary school physical education (PE) and sports funding were also considered.
• Inspectors spoke to parents informally at the start of the school day in order to seek their views about the school. Inspectors took account of the 31 responses to the Ofsted online questionnaire, Parent View.
• Twenty-two responses to the staff questionnaire were also taken into account.

Inspection team

Kirsty Godfrey, lead inspector Her Majesty’s Inspector Lynda Florence Ofsted Inspector Mary Lanovy-Taylor Ofsted Inspector Susan Twaits Ofsted Inspector