Cambridge Park 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?

• As a matter of urgency, improve the effectiveness of the school’s safeguarding arrangements by making sure that:
  • all required checks on the suitability of staff are in place and the school’s record of checks is complete and meets Department for Education requirements
  • all staff are well trained and knowledgeable about how to promote all aspects of pupils’ personal development, behaviour, safety and welfare
  • the school’s safeguarding policies and procedures follow current Department for Education guidance and are clear, understood and consistently applied
  • pupils’ behaviour is managed safely and well.
• Rapidly improve the effectiveness of leadership, management and governance by making sure that:
  • leaders and governors have an accurate and comprehensive understanding of all areas of the school’s work, especially the arrangements for safeguarding pupils
  • leaders and governors closely monitor the quality of teaching and the progress all pupils make, including disadvantaged pupils and the most able, and act quickly and decisively where improvement is needed
  • performance management is used to drive improvement in teaching, accelerate pupils’ progress and hold teachers and leaders more rigorously to account
  • pupils’ spiritual, moral, social and cultural development is supported and promoted consistently well.
• Improve the quality of teaching, learning and assessment and increase the progress pupils make, especially disadvantaged pupils and the most able, by ensuring that:
  • assessment information is used effectively by teachers to plan learning activities which are closely matched to pupils’ interests and levels of ability
  • teachers follow the school’s policy for marking and giving feedback to pupils. An external review of governance should be undertaken in order to assess how this aspect of leadership and management may be improved. 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 and governors have not ensured that the school’s safeguarding arrangements are effective. The school’s safeguarding policies and procedures are either unclear, out of date or applied inconsistently. Checks on the suitability of staff to work in the school, for example, were incomplete at the start of the inspection. This places pupils at an unacceptable level of risk.
• Similarly, leaders and governors do not ensure that timely action is always taken to protect pupils who may be vulnerable or at risk of harm. The school’s records, including those for the most vulnerable pupils, show that concerns are not shared or acted on quickly enough. The quality of the school’s records of incidents involving the use of physical restraint is variable and incidents are not consistently followed up in a systematic or rigorous way. This also places pupils at an unacceptable level of risk.
• Leaders have an overgenerous view of the school’s effectiveness. Crucially, leaders judged that the school’s safeguarding arrangements are effective and that staff are well trained and vigilant. This is not the case. Leaders have not checked the effectiveness of these arrangements robustly enough and, as a result, weak practice has been allowed to persist.
• In contrast, leaders have a developing understanding of other important areas of the school’s work. Leaders are checking the quality of teaching and the progress pupils make with greater precision. However, the areas needing further work are not being tackled with the necessary urgency. As a result, the quality of teaching, learning and assessment is too variable and requires improvement.
• Leaders and teachers have not been held to account for improving the quality of teaching and, consequently, ensuring that all pupils learn well and make good progress. The objectives set for leaders and teachers in their performance management plans do not focus sharply enough on improving the quality of teaching and securing better outcomes for pupils.
• The school’s assessment system and the approach to setting targets for pupils and tracking the progress they make are new. Although there is some variation, for example in mathematics, teachers’ assessments are increasingly accurate and many pupils are set appropriate targets for the end of the school year or key stage. Leaders have not, however, checked whether the targets they set for the most able pupils are sufficiently challenging. This means that leaders cannot be sure that this group of pupils is making fast enough progress, for example in English and mathematics in key stages 3 and 4.
• Historically, middle leaders have not had clear enough roles or a strong enough focus on improving the progress pupils make. Currently, middle leaders are inexperienced in their new leadership roles. As a result, it is too early to evaluate their effectiveness or impact.
• Additional funding, including the pupil premium and the PE and sports premium for primary schools, is used to enhance the curriculum and to support pupils’ physical development and increase levels of participation in PE and sport. Leaders do not, however, evaluate the impact of this funding robustly enough. For example, they do not check whether disadvantaged pupils, including the most able disadvantaged pupils, do as well as other pupils who have similar starting points nationally. Nor do they check whether levels of participation and pupils’ attainment in PE and sport are, in fact, increasing.
• The curriculum is increasingly broad and is more closely matched to pupils’ interests and needs. Key stage 4 pupils, for example, are working towards a wider range of qualifications. This helps them to move successfully on to post-16 study either at school or college. Pupils learn about the different faiths and cultures of people living in modern Britain. Equally, their interest in music, sport and the performing arts is promoted through a range of extra-curricular activities. Leaders have not, however, ensured that these aspects of pupils’ development are promoted systematically and well.
• Many of the parents who completed Ofsted’s Parent View survey and had made a written comment said that Cambridge Park Academy is well led and that their children are making good progress and becoming more independent. Similarly, a high proportion of staff who completed the online staff survey told inspectors that they feel proud to work at the school. However, inspection evidence does not support this positive view of the school’s effectiveness.
• Since the last inspection, much has been done to successfully improve outcomes for the youngest pupils and the school’s post-16 students. In addition, pupils attending the ‘Laurus Unit’ and those accessing alternative provision make strong progress and achieve well.
• It is recommended that the school should not appoint newly qualified teachers.

Governance of the school

• The governance of the school is not effective.
• Governors have not discharged their core statutory functions because they have not ensured that safeguarding arrangements, including the record of checks on the suitability of staff to work in the school, meet statutory requirements. Although rectified by the end of the inspection, this failure places pupils at an unacceptable level of risk.
• While governors are deeply committed to the school and want pupils to do as well as they can, they have a weak understanding of important areas of the school’s performance. Governors have not challenged senior leaders and, as a consequence, poor and sometimes complacent practice has continued unchecked.
• Governors have not kept a close enough eye on the school’s use of additional funding, for example the pupil premium and the PE and sports premium for primary schools. Governors do not have a clear enough view of how pupil premium funding has been used or, importantly, how it will be used in the future to improve outcomes for disadvantaged pupils.
• Governors have not ensured that all the school’s policies are up to date or that the school complies with the Department for Education’s guidance on the publication of information.

Safeguarding

Quality of teaching, learning and assessment Requires improvement

• The quality of teaching, learning and assessment is too variable and, as a result, requires improvement in order to be good. Too often, teachers do not set work which builds on pupils’ knowledge and skills, especially for the most able pupils, and helps them take the next step in their learning. As a result, pupils do not make consistently strong progress from their different starting points.
• Sometimes, teachers explain ideas and concepts clearly and question pupils skilfully to challenge them or reinforce their learning. Pupils respond keenly and, as a result, develop their knowledge and understanding. Too often, however, the most able pupils are not challenged to explain what they are thinking or write about what they are learning in greater depth. This limits the progress they make.
• Teachers do not always spot when pupils are finding the work too hard or too easy. Similarly, teachers do not always follow the school’s policy for marking and giving feedback to pupils about how to improve their work. This limits pupils’ ability to learn from the mistakes they make and holds back their learning and progress.
• Teachers are assessing pupils’ knowledge, skills and understanding with greater accuracy. Teachers are starting to use assessment information to identify pupils who are not on track to achieve their targets but they do not always use this information to work out how to help these pupils catch up.
• At times, teaching assistants provide effective support for individual pupils which helps them to achieve their learning targets. However, at other times, teaching assistants are less effective because teachers have not identified a clear role for them in their planning.
• Teachers and teaching assistants use praise effectively to motivate pupils and help them to keep focused and stay on task. Pupils told inspectors that they value the praise they receive for trying their best. Importantly, however, pupils also told inspectors that they were often unsure about how to improve their work.
• Teachers plan learning activities which are closely matched to the complex needs of pupils attending the ‘Laurus Unit’. As a result, pupils enjoy learning, say that they feel safe, and make good progress.

Personal development, behaviour and welfare Inadequate

Personal development and welfare

• The school’s work to promote pupils’ personal development and welfare is inadequate. This is because safeguarding arrangements are ineffective and, as a result, pupils’ safety and welfare are not promoted well enough.
• Pupils’ attitudes to learning are generally positive. When learning activities are challenging and build on pupils’ interests, they work hard and apply themselves well. Pupils respond positively when they are questioned about what they are learning and when they are guided step-by-step through learning activities. Pupils quickly lose concentration and ‘switch off’ when the work set is too hard, too easy or uninteresting. This is especially the case when the most able pupils are given undemanding work.
• Pupils learn about how to stay healthy and the most able pupils understand the importance of a balanced diet and regular exercise. Key stage 4 pupils told inspectors about the things they do to keep safe when using computers, mobile phones and the internet. Although leaders have asked key stage 3 and 4 pupils about their use of these technologies, they have not used this information to improve the guidance and support they provide for pupils or their families.
• Pupils attending alternative provision are well supported and, as a result, develop their confidence and self-esteem, improve their attendance and behaviour and, importantly, make faster progress in English, mathematics and a wide range of other subjects.

Behaviour

• The behaviour of pupils is inadequate. Leaders do not use the information they collect about pupils’ behaviour in a sufficiently rigorous or systematic way and too little attention is given to working out how to help pupils improve their behaviour.
• Generally, pupils conduct themselves well and, in the main, they are polite, respectful and willingly follow direction from teachers and teaching assistants. Occasionally, pupils’ behaviour is less positive and sometimes this disrupts other pupils’ learning.
• The quality of the school’s records about the use of physical restraint is variable and incidents are not followed up consistently well. As a result, leaders and staff do not have a clear enough view of how to better manage pupils’ behaviour or help some pupils to develop the skills and strategies they need to learn and behave consistently well.
• Levels of attendance have improved since the last inspection and are in line with the national averages for primary and secondary schools.

Outcomes for pupils Requires improvement

• In English, mathematics and a wide range of other subjects, pupils do not make consistently strong progress from their different starting points. The progress Year 2, 6 and 11 pupils made in English and mathematics in 2015 and 2016 was too variable. The work in current pupils’ books and folders shows similarly variable progress.
• In 2016, a high proportion of pupils in key stages 1, 2, 3 and 4 achieved the end-of-year targets they were set for reading, writing and mathematics. A higher proportion of pupils achieved their targets in reading than in writing or mathematics. Importantly, however, the targets set for the most able pupils are not sufficiently challenging.
• While senior leaders are confident that teachers’ assessments in reading and writing are accurate, they are less assured about the accuracy of those for mathematics. Neither are leaders confident that pupils’ starting points have always been assessed accurately. This means that senior leaders cannot be sure that pupils make good enough progress in reading, writing and mathematics.
• In 2015, very few of the most able Year 11 pupils, including disadvantaged pupils, made the progress expected in English and mathematics from their different starting points at the end of Year 6. Some Year 11 pupils overcame significant barriers and achieved GCSE and entry level qualifications which prepared them well for the next stage of their education. Overall, however, the most able Year 11 pupils did not make fast enough progress.
• The most able pupils read confidently and fluently using a range of strategies to decode unfamiliar words. They read with expression and have a good understanding of what they are reading. Pupils with lower starting points acquire and develop the skills and knowledge they need to communicate with greater confidence, accuracy and fluency.

Early years provision Inadequate

• The early years provision is inadequate because the school’s safeguarding arrangements are ineffective and, as a result, the early years statutory welfare requirements are not met.
• Leaders have an accurate view of other aspects of the early years provision. Leaders and staff work closely with families and a wide range of other professionals to identify children’s needs and interests. Pupils’ starting points are identified accurately and their learning and development are assessed and tracked carefully and systematically.
• From starting points which are well below those typical for their age, most children make strong progress and achieve well, especially in their physical development and in the development of their receptive and expressive communication skills. This prepares them well for key stage 1.
• Teachers plan learning activities which build on each child’s interests and focus on their next steps in learning. The activities led by adults are well structured and there are good routines which children understand and follow. This helps them to develop the behaviours and skills they need to learn well and make progress. Occasionally, learning activities do not focus sharply enough on the targets teachers have set for individual children which, in turn, impacts on the progress they make.
• Additional funding is used well to enhance the curriculum for children who are disadvantaged. However, leaders do not evaluate the impact of this funding on the progress disadvantaged children make.

16 to 19 study programmes Inadequate

• 16 to 19 study programmes are inadequate because the school’s safeguarding arrangements are ineffective.
• Importantly, however, other aspects of the 16 to 19 study programmes have developed strongly since the school’s last inspection and students are unequivocally positive about the school’s post-16 provision.
• Study programmes include a wide range of entry level qualifications which build on those achieved by students at the end of Year 11. All students work towards higher-level qualifications in English and mathematics and a greater range of vocational and life skills awards and qualifications.
• There is a strong and effective focus on preparing students for the next stage of education, training or employment. Students develop essential work-related skills through vocational courses, including hospitality, hair and beauty and manufacturing, and work experience. Almost all progress to community- or college-based learning programmes at the end of Year 14. Leaders have identified that the range of community-based work experience opportunities needs to be increased.
• All students receive high-quality careers education and guidance and, as a result, have clear and increasingly ambitious plans for the future. Crucially, students are developing the positive ‘can do’ attitudes they need to be independent and resilient learners.
• Students make strong progress because learning activities are carefully matched to their interests and levels of ability and teachers give students clear and helpful feedback which helps them to take the next step in their learning.

School details

Unique reference number 137363 Local authority North East Lincolnshire Inspection number 10003866 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 Special School category Age range of pupils 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 Appropriate authority Chair Principal Telephone number Website Email address Academy special converter 3 to 19 Mixed Mixed 203 25 Academy trust Anthony Collins Mark Eames 01472230110 www.cambridgepark.co.uk mark.eames@cambridgepark.co.uk Date of previous inspection 26–27 February 2013

Information about this school

• The school does not meet requirements on the publication of the steps taken to prevent disabled pupils from being treated less favourably than other pupils, the facilities provided to assist access to the academy by disabled pupils or the plan prepared by the academy trust under paragraph 3 of schedule 10 to the Equality Act 2010, on its website.
• The school does not comply with Department for Education guidance on what academies should publish about assessment and examination results for key stages 2, 4 and 5, pupil premium, PE and sport premium for primary schools and the structure and responsibilities of the governing body and its committees.
• Cambridge Park Academy is a special school for 203 pupils aged 3 to 19 with a wide range of special educational needs. All pupils have a statement of special educational needs or an education, health and care plan.
• Most pupils are from White British backgrounds and very few pupils speak English as an additional language. There are almost three times as many boys as girls.
• The proportion of pupils who are known to be eligible for the pupil premium is much higher than the national average.
• Primary and secondary classes are based on the Cambridge Road Campus, and the school’s post-16 provision and the ‘Laurus Unit’, a nine-place resourced provision for pupils with complex autistic spectrum conditions, are based on the Cromwell Road Campus.
• The school uses one alternative provider, DKM Assessment and Verification Limited.

Information about this inspection

• Inspectors observed teaching and learning in the primary and secondary classes on the Cambridge Road Campus, and in the ‘Laurus Unit’ and post-16 classes on the Cromwell Road Campus. An inspector visited one alternative provision, DKM Assessment and Verification Limited.
• Inspectors spoke to pupils and post-16 students and examined the work in their books and folders.
• Meetings were held with senior and middle leaders, newly qualified teachers and trainees, pupils and two governors, including the chair of the governing body. The lead inspector had a discussion with the school improvement partner.
• Inspectors considered 32 responses recorded on Parent View (Ofsted’s online questionnaire), including 23 written responses, and 80 responses recorded on Ofsted’s online staff survey.
• Inspectors examined documents relating to governance, self-evaluation, school improvement planning, pupils’ progress, attendance, behaviour, the curriculum and safeguarding.

Inspection team

Nick Whittaker, lead inspector Her Majesty’s Inspector Suzette Garland-Grimes Ofsted Inspector