Rothwell Haigh Road Infant School Ofsted Report

Full report

In accordance with section 44(2) of the Education Act 2005, Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector is of the opinion that this school requires significant improvement, because it is performing significantly less well than it might in all the circumstances reasonably be expected to perform.

What does the school need to do to improve further?

• Improve safeguarding arrangements with immediate effect by making sure that:
  • a thorough audit of child protection records is completed, then act to ensure that there is a detailed chronology of actions taken and decisions made
  • communication between the designated safeguarding team is improved to enable better quality of supervision of safeguarding cases
  • a review of first aid incidents is completed on a regular basis, to identify any patterns and enable any remedial works to be undertaken in a timely manner.
• Improve the quality of leadership and management, including governance, by ensuring that:
  • senior leaders provide a clear strategy for school improvement
  • middle and senior leaders carry out rigorous checks on the quality of teaching and its effect on pupils’ learning
  • improvement planning is strengthened, so that plans are focused sharply on the desired gains in pupils’ outcomes, and that they reflect the most pressing priorities for improvement
  • curriculum plans provide teachers with detailed guidance on the progression of pupils’ knowledge and skills in a range of subjects
  • teaching assistants receive the training and help needed to ensure that they offer consistently effective support to pupils
  • the quality of leaders’ reports to the governing body provide the detail needed to enable governors to hold school leaders to account effectively
  • governors know the impact that pupil premium funding is having on improving disadvantaged pupils’ outcomes.
• Improve the quality of teaching and learning in key stage 1, so that pupils’ outcomes improve by:
  • ensuring that teachers build pupils’ knowledge and skills progressively, so that all pupils can reach the standards of which they are capable
  • making sure the most able pupils, including the most able disadvantaged, receive work that is suitably challenging so more pupils reach the higher standards
  • ironing out variabilities in the quality of teaching of phonics, so all practice is as good as the best
  • actively seeking ways to reduce the differences between boys’ and girls’ attainment, particularly in reading and writing. An external review of the school’s use of 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 have failed to ensure that the arrangements to safeguard pupils are effective.
• Leaders’ actions to sustain the good quality of teaching and learning and pupils’ outcomes evident at the last inspection have not been effective. As a result, both aspects have declined. Weaknesses in leaders’ monitoring and evaluation of the school’s performance combined with poor identification of improvement priorities have contributed to this decline.
• Leaders’ checks on the quality of teaching and learning are sporadic and offer little by way of improving pupils’ learning. Any areas for improvement that are provided to teachers are not followed up in a timely manner. Despite teachers’ hard work, the overall quality of teaching has declined since the last inspection, specifically in key stage 1.
• Leaders have not thought about the structure of the key stage 1 curriculum in sufficient depth to ensure that pupils make good progress in a range of subjects. While teachers select topics to entice pupils into learning, and pupils visit places of interest to broaden their experiences, the progression of pupils’ knowledge is poorly planned. There is too little focus on how activities will build pupils’ knowledge and skills sequentially. As a result, pupils’ progress across the full range of curriculum subjects is too variable.
• In the past, provision for pupils with SEND was weak. Aspects of the special educational needs code of practice were not adhered to and pupils’ progress declined. The new special educational needs coordinator has quickly got to grips with securing processes and procedures and has secured more effective provision for those pupils who have more complex needs. She recognises there is more to do to improve the identification of the needs of pupils with SEND and to improve the quality of support provided.
• The skills of school leaders beyond the headteacher are underutilised to support wider school improvement. Subject leaders for English and mathematics are relatively new to post and show much promise, but they have not effected any major improvements to the quality of teaching and learning in the school.
• The school’s physical education (PE) and sports grant is used effectively to provide pupils with access to a range of different sports and a range of after-school sports clubs, which are well supported.
• The school’s pupil premium strategy, available on its website, is of poor quality. It fails to identify the barriers faced by disadvantaged pupils and fails to accurately identify leaders’ action to mitigate against such barriers. Leaders’ evaluation of the impact of funding on improving disadvantaged pupils’ outcomes is weak.
• While the differences between the performance of disadvantaged pupils and their peers begins to close in the early years this is not sustained when they enter key stage 1. Over time, a lack of focused overview by leaders means that when disadvantaged pupils leave key stage 1, the differences between their achievements and that of their peers has increased, leaving them further behind.
• A review of teaching and learning at the school was undertaken by the local authority in the autumn term of 2016. This followed disappointing results in the statutory assessments at the end of key stage 1 in the same year. School leaders reorganised their class structure for key stage 1, in response to the review findings. This led to overall improvements in pupils’ outcomes in the subsequent end of key stage 1 statutory assessments for 2017. As a result, there has been limited further local authority involvement in the school. However, the local authority has responded swiftly to this inspection’s findings and have a package of support in place for school leaders. This includes immediately working with leaders and governors to improve safeguarding arrangements.

Governance of the school

• The governing body has failed in its statutory duties to safeguard pupils.
• Governors are committed to the school and actively seek to improve their effectiveness. They have commissioned a review of their work, to identify areas for improvement. The subsequent action plan provides direction for their training needs.
• A review of the records of governing body meetings shows that governors make visits to the school and share their findings to the wider governing body. Records also show governors asking appropriate questions of leaders. However, leaders’ first responses are accepted, and governors do not probe further with their questioning to hold school leaders to account fully.
• Governors do not receive sufficient information about the school’s performance and the outcomes for pupils, including different pupil groups. As a result, they are not well placed to challenge school leaders effectively. For example, they are not sufficiently aware of the increasing differences between the outcomes for boys and girls.
• Governors have not ensured that the school’s website is maintained effectively, in respect of the school’s pupil premium strategy and the school’s curriculum.

Safeguarding

• The arrangements for safeguarding are not effective.
• Leaders’ record-keeping is not systematic. Safeguarding files lack the detailed chronology and accuracy needed to keep a proper check on the most vulnerable pupils. Records of conversations between school staff, parents and professional colleagues, and subsequently agreed actions, lack accuracy. A sample of submitted school reports to review meetings was scrutinised by inspectors and these were seen to be of poor quality.
• Despite there being a large group of trained designated safeguarding officers, their impact is negligible. Communication about who has oversight for cases where there are safeguarding concerns is poor. Consequently, the supervision and monitoring of child protection casework is weak.
• Staff are appropriately trained in first aid and complete their duties with professionalism and diligence. All injuries, no matter how minor, are recorded systematically and all ‘head bumps’ or more serious falls are reported immediately to parents and carers. However, these records are filed and then there is no further review made by leaders to check for patterns of injury or concern, or to consider wider issues arising with the building or learning environments.
• Staff have received appropriate training and are aware of the latest statutory guidance for keeping children safe. Most adults demonstrate that they understand what to do should they have any concerns about a pupil and to whom they should report them. Pupils trust the adults and are confident that they will be listened to.
• A small minority of parents raised their safeguarding concerns to inspectors during the inspection. However, most parents responded positively to Ofsted’s parental questionnaire, Parent View, and felt that their children are safe and well looked after at school.

Quality of teaching, learning and assessment Requires improvement

• Since the last inspection, the quality of teaching, learning and assessment in key stage 1 has declined. Leaders have not done enough to improve those aspects of teaching and learning that were identified as areas for improvement at the last inspection, nor have they ensured that all staff receive training appropriate to their needs.
• The teaching of mathematics secures pupils’ arithmetic fluency and methodology effectively. This is evidenced by the proportion of pupils reaching the expected standard at the end of key stage 1, which is in line with the national average. However, until recently pupils had too few opportunities to develop their knowledge and skills in mathematical reasoning and problem solving. As a result, these are much weaker aspects of pupils’ learning.
• Likewise, teachers offer too little challenge for the most able mathematicians, who do not move onto more demanding tasks quickly enough. The subject leader has already identified this as an area for improvement and is acting to improve matters.
• Teachers provide pupils with opportunities to write in a range of styles. However, while this leads to pupils writing in greater quantity, the quality of pupils’ writing moves at a much slower pace, particularly that of boys. A review of pupils’ work shows that teachers do not build pupils’ knowledge and skills of different styles of writing sequentially. As a result, very few pupils reach the higher standard successfully and boys’ outcomes remain considerably below those of girls.
• A lack of leadership in phonics provision at key stage 1 means that, over time, teachers have developed their own processes and resources. This is leading to some inconsistencies in the delivery of phonics sessions. Although pupils’ outcomes in the Year 1 phonics screening check were above the national average in 2017 and in 2018, not all teachers are sufficiently focused on developing pupils’ fluency, and too many spelling errors go unchecked. Some lower-ability Year 1 pupils struggle to apply their phonics skills to read words that are unfamiliar to them.
• The teaching of reading encourages pupils to have a love of reading. Pupils are urged to read at home and to visit the local library. A range of rewards are used to inspire pupils to want to read. Some of the more advanced readers are beginning to choose their own books and are showing preference in the types of books they enjoy and their favourite authors. Despite investment in ‘boy friendly’ books, there are still marked differences between boys’ and girls’ achievement at the expected and higher standard, with girls continuing to achieve more highly.
• The teaching of subjects beyond English and mathematics is superficial. Teachers plan for subjects such as history and geography through a topic-based approach. This provides a meaningful context for pupils’ learning and is supplemented by a raft of visits and visitors to support them further. For example, during the inspection, Year 2 pupils visited Leeds City Museum and Leeds Library to support their understanding of the topic ‘now and then’. While this engages pupils’ interests, there is insufficient focus on building pupils’ subject-specific knowledge and skills progressively. This leads to inconsistencies in pupils’ outcomes.
• The effect of teaching assistants on pupils’ achievement is variable. This is particularly the case during whole-class carpet sessions when, too often, teaching assistants are not contributing effectively to pupils’ learning. Several teaching assistants talked to the inspectors about their wish for more training opportunities.

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’ welfare is not promoted as effectively as it could be. Although the processes to forward concerns about pupils are firmly in place, such concerns are not followed through rigorously enough. Likewise, trained first-aiders diligently record and report all accidents and ensure that parents are informed of any head bumps. Despite their vigilance, records are not checked for patterns or concerns that would identify where change may be needed.
• Pupils have an age-appropriate understanding of the different forms of bullying and know the importance of telling an adult when they have a concern. They strongly believe that a trusted adult will respond to their concerns quickly and effectively.
• Year 2 internet ambassadors play a full part in helping pupils across the school to understand how to keep themselves safe when using the internet. They have contributed to the school rules for internet safety and have delivered assemblies to help deliver their message.
• School council members are active in school. They campaigned for more playground resources successfully. This helps pupils’ growing awareness of British values, particularly around democracy and the rights and responsibilities of individuals.
• Pupils are developing a growing understanding about keeping healthy and fit. They enjoy a range of after-school sports clubs and adults supporting lunchtime encourage pupils to eat well. As one pupil told an inspector, ‘We eat our vegetables because they help us grow!’
• Pupils’ spiritual, moral, social and cultural development is effective. Pupils access a range of visits and experiences to support their developing awareness of themselves as learners and their wider awareness of others and the world they live in. A regular programme of assemblies contributes to this successfully. A dedicated member of staff has responsibility to monitor provision to ensure that each aspect is covered effectively.

Behaviour

• The behaviour of pupils is good.
• Pupils demonstrate good manners and welcome visitors with wide smiles. Pupils are keen to share their learning and are wholly supportive of each other.
• Playtime is lively and well supported by supervising adults. Pupils run off lots of energy but are quick to respond to the signal for the end of playtime. Movement to the classroom is orderly and smooth, as teachers escort pupils back to their classes.
• Pupils demonstrate good attitudes to their learning. The vast majority of pupils listen attentively to their teachers and are keen to contribute to their lessons by asking questions, supporting each other in group work and tidying their classrooms. When this is not the case, this is due to teachers’ lower expectations or work that is not accurately matched to pupils’ needs.
• Pupils’ attendance is above the national average for primary schools. Leaders have ensured that there are a raft of rewards for pupils and children with good attendance. A regular newsletter keeps parents well informed of the importance of good attendance and punctuality.

Outcomes for pupils Requires improvement

• While the proportion of pupils achieving the expected standard in reading, writing and mathematics in 2017 and 2018 is broadly in line with the national averages, pupils are not achieving as well as they should.
• At the time of the last inspection, leaders were tasked with reducing the difference between boys’ and girls’ attainment. However, girls perform more highly than boys, in reading and writing. Leaders’ poor monitoring, compounded by a lack of meaningful action, has resulted in the difference between boys’ and girls’ achievement increasing as pupils leave the early years and move through key stage 1. This continues to be an issue for school leaders.
• The proportion of pupils achieving the higher standards of learning at the end of key stage 1 remains variable. In 2018, the proportion of pupils achieving highly in reading improved and was above previous national averages. However, this was not replicated in mathematics or writing. This is because in mathematics, too often, the most able pupils spend too much time on work that lacks sufficient challenge. Equally in writing, there is too little focus upon developing pupils’ awareness of using a range of grammatical forms for effect and in developing pupils’ editing and redrafting skills for improvement.
• Although pupils with SEND are not significantly underachieving, neither are they making good progress. Until very recently the provision for pupils with SEND in key stage 1 has been weak and too often the targets set for them have not reflected accurately enough their needs. Too few checks on their progress or an insufficient adjustment of provision has hampered the progress of these pupils over time. Since the appointment of the new special educational needs coordinator there are early signs that, for those pupils who have just transferred from the early years to key stage 1, provision is matched to their needs more effectively.
• Although disadvantaged pupils’ outcomes in reading, writing and mathematics improved in 2018 to be broadly in line with the national averages, over time there is much greater variability. Leaders’ lack of overview of disadvantaged pupils’ achievement has compounded this issue.
• Although current teaching of phonics is variable in quality, in 2017 and 2018 pupils’ outcomes in the Year 1 phonics screening check were above national averages.

Early years provision Inadequate

• Despite the good provision in the early years, the grade awarded by inspectors is inadequate overall because of the impact of the school’s ineffective safeguarding arrangements.
• The early years leader is a skilled practitioner. She has an excellent understanding of the needs of very young children and uses this to good effect, ensuring that activities both inside and outside are imaginative and engaging for children. Such is the quality of imaginative play opportunities that, for the most part, children are curious about the world around them, are immersed in their play and ‘too busy’ to talk to inspectors.
• The quality of teaching and learning overall is good. Teachers use every opportunity to reinforce children’s early literacy and numeracy skills by expertly weaving early mark-making and counting opportunities into activities. For example, children in Reception were stirring their Halloween potions with large sweeping movements, while counting carefully the various additions to the brew.
• Teachers’ interventions are timely, and their questioning is largely probing and seeks to extend children’s thinking. Occasionally, interventions from teaching assistants are less effective, and focus more on safe play, rather than extending children’s knowledge and skills.
• The teaching of early phonics is good and reinforces children’s speaking and listening skills effectively. Teachers use a range of strategies to ensure that sessions move at a pace, while enabling all children to retain their focus and attention. This means children develop their early reading skills successfully.
• Children make good progress and by the time they leave Reception the proportion of children achieving a good level of development is in line with the national average. Leaders are not complacent and seek to ensure that those children who are capable of doing so exceed the good level of development.
• Adults in the early years track children’s progress carefully throughout their time in Nursery and Reception and are quick to intervene when children’s progress slows. There are emerging differences between boys’ and girls’ achievement upon entry to the early years. Teachers develop activities with boys in mind, to try to minimise this and, although still evident at the end of Reception, there are signs of differences reducing compared to boys’ and girls’ starting points.
• Adults are skilled in identifying children with more complex needs. They seek the advice of external agencies whenever possible and use this information to adjust provision and to set appropriate individual targets for children’s learning. As a result, children with SEND make good progress against their specific targets.
• Children behave well and respond to instructions and adults’ directions quickly. They are encouraged to share and turn-take and, for the most part, play harmoniously together. All adults support children to be kind to one another and to use good manners always. As a result, children in the early years are happy and settled in their environment.

School details

Unique reference number Local authority Inspection number 107833 Leeds 10042197 This inspection of the school was carried out under section 5 of the Education Act 2005. Type of school Infant School category Age range of pupils Gender of pupils Maintained 3 to 7 Mixed Number of pupils on the school roll 173 Appropriate authority The governing body Chair Headteacher Telephone number Website Email address Susan Bulmer Sally Boulton 01133 783 070 www.haighroadinfantschool.com info@haighroad.org.uk Date of previous inspection March 2015

Information about this school

• The school is smaller than the average-sized primary school. It comprises an early years unit including Nursery and three key stage 1 classes, which includes one mixed-age Year 1 and Year 2 class.
• The proportion of disadvantaged pupils is slightly higher than the national average. The deprivation indicator is also slightly higher than the national average figure.
• The proportion of pupils with SEND is below the national average. There are currently no pupils with an education, health and care plan.
• The vast majority of pupils are of White British heritage.

Information about this inspection

• Inspectors observed learning in all classes. In some lessons, senior leaders accompanied inspectors. During lesson observations, inspectors talked to some pupils about their learning and reviewed their work in books.
• A review of pupils’ current work in a range of subjects was completed by inspectors alongside middle leaders and the deputy headteacher of the school.
• Meetings were held with members of the governing body, including the chair of the governing body, as well as several representatives from the local authority, including the head of services for education, and the head of safeguarding. Inspectors talked to parents at the start of the inspection and took account of the 32 responses from Ofsted’s parental questionnaire, Parent View, including 21 free-text responses.
• Pupils were observed at playtime and lunchtime. Inspectors talked to groups of pupils about their learning, and about their views of pupils’ behaviour in the school. Inspectors also listened to several pupils read.
• The inspection team reviewed a range of school documentation, including: the school’s evaluation of its own performance, improvement plans, pupils’ assessment information for Year 2 and the early years, safeguarding information, including that related to attendance, and a selection of minutes from the governing body meetings. The headteacher’s evaluations of the quality of teaching and monitoring activities over time were unavailable to the inspection team.
• The headteacher of the school was not present for the second day of the inspection.

Inspection team

Diane Buckle, lead inspector Alison Ashworth

Her Majesty’s Inspector Ofsted Inspector