Carleton High School Ofsted Report

Full report

In accordance with section 44(1) of the Education Act 2005, Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector is of the opinion that this school requires special measures because it is failing to give its pupils an acceptable standard of education and the persons responsible for leading, managing or governing the school are not demonstrating the capacity to secure the necessary improvement in the school.

What does the school need to do to improve further?

• Improve the accuracy of leaders’ judgements about the school’s work by:
  • ensuring that the school’s plans set out precise and timely measures of the impact that school development actions are expected to have
  • making sure that senior leaders check the accuracy and consistency of the information they gather on pupils’ attainment and progress
  • ensuring that middle leaders have sufficient opportunities to monitor the work of their teams and to intervene promptly to improve the consistency and impact of teaching.
• Improve governance at the school by ensuring that:
  • governors have a realistic view of how well the school is doing, based on accurate information
  • governors promptly develop their skills and understanding so that they are better able to hold leaders to account for their work
  • the findings of the review of governance recommended by the lead inspector are acted upon promptly and the impact of any recommended actions is measured carefully.
• Rapidly improve the attendance of disadvantaged pupils so that it is similar to that of pupils nationally by:
  • rigorously monitoring the attendance of these pupils and acting promptly to reduce absence
  • further reducing fixed-term exclusions so that these pupils spend as much time as possible in school
  • ensuring that the implementation of the school’s planned initiative to reduce absence through the work of a recently appointed, additional designated member of staff is very carefully and rigorously monitored by senior leaders and governors and that its impact is regularly reviewed.
• Significantly reduce variations in the quality of teaching and learning by ensuring that:
  • all staff have high expectations of all pupils, but especially those who are disadvantaged, so that they make rapid and sustained progress that it is similar to, or exceeds, that of pupils nationally
  • all staff use the school’s detailed information about individual pupils consistently to refine planning and focus their teaching so that disadvantaged pupils in particular make the progress that they should
  • all staff follow the agreed school policy of giving pupils regular indications of what they need to do to improve their learning which are subsequently acted on
  • staff develop their expertise by having more opportunities to share the good practice that exists in the school. 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 the pupil premium 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 do not have a clear and accurate view of how well the school is doing. They gather a wide range of information about the school through a series of systems but they do not analyse and prioritise it rigorously enough. As a result, their view of the school’s performance is overgenerous.
• The previous inspection report in 2015 set out clearly what needed to be done to improve the school. Leaders and governors have been too slow in successfully tackling the weaknesses identified in 2015. For example, despite the development by leaders of detailed plans and checks, there is still too much inconsistency in the quality of teaching.
• Leaders have not done enough to minimise variability in the quality of teaching. This has meant that pupils are not consistently making the progress that they should in their lessons. This is particularly the case for disadvantaged pupils. Leaders are not insisting that all staff follow school-wide, agreed policies and procedures that underpin successful learning so that pupils know how well they are doing and what they need to do next to improve.
• Leaders and governors are not using pupil premium funding effectively to ensure that disadvantaged pupils make the sustained progress that they should. The plans to support these pupils’ progress, through the use of this additional government funding, lack detailed measures of the positive differences that the school’s actions are making.
• Middle leaders are a strength of the school and are working hard. They are aware of and realistic about what needs to be done. They have received support and training from senior leaders and from the trust. However, it is too early to see if this is having a sustained and positive impact on minimising the variability in the quality of teaching and on reducing the high levels of absence of disadvantaged pupils.
• Leaders and governors work hard to promote equality of opportunity. All pupils have full access to the full range of the school’s opportunities. However, consistently poor attendance means that a significant minority of the school’s population, especially those who are disadvantaged, are not doing as well as they should.
• The school’s arrangements for checking staff’s performance are generally appropriate. Leaders identify, support and challenge underperforming staff. As a result, some staff have left the school and there have been improvements in the quality of teaching. Staff who spoke with inspectors supported the school’s aims and said that staff training was effective.
• School information shows that the use of Year 7 ‘catch-up’ funding is effective in helping pupils progress so that they can have fuller access to the school’s curriculum. The ‘Pathways’ curriculum is very well led and the pupils who attend this provision do well.
• Leaders and governors have ensured that pupils have access to a broad and balanced curriculum. This is supplemented by a wide range of extra-curricular activities and trips, both after school and at lunchtime. Pupils are well prepared for life in modern Britain.
• The leadership of the support for those pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities is effective. The leader coordinates and develops her team so that they are able to provide focused support for these learners. She provides staff with detailed advice and training so that teachers improve their skills in this area of the school’s work.
• It is recommended that newly qualified teachers should not be appointed.

Governance of the school

• The governance of this school is weak and lacks rigour.
• Governors do not hold leaders sufficiently to account for their work because they are too reliant on the headteacher and her team for their information about the school.
• The records of full governors’ meetings and of associated committees lack evidence of detailed discussion about how well the school is doing and how effectively leaders are tackling weaknesses and celebrating strengths.
• Governors have not developed their skills in a consistent and effective way so that they can best identify and address the challenges that the school faces. This is because the Pontefract Academies Trust, although it has identified that governance needs significant improvement, has not moved decisively to deal with these shortcomings.
• The Pontefract Academies Trust has recognised some of the issues associated with leadership and governance and has commissioned a review of governance. This review recommends a reshaping of governance across the trust. The governing body at the school will cease to operate in its present form from 31 March 2017. This action has not been timely enough to reduce the weaknesses of the school.

Safeguarding

• The arrangements for safeguarding are effective. Staff at all levels are trained in safer recruitment and ‘Prevent’ duty strategies. Leaders create a culture within the school where staff show a clear understanding of their responsibilities and of the processes in school to keep pupils safe. As a result, staff quickly identify and appropriately support potentially vulnerable pupils in school and through the involvement of a range of suitable outside agencies.
• Procedures for checking visitors to the school and staff recruitment are robust. Leaders check staff’s suitability to work with children appropriately. School leaders quickly identify any pupil at potential risk of harm and engage appropriately with partners and local community agencies as necessary.

Quality of teaching, learning and assessment Requires improvement

• Teaching requires improvement because it is inconsistent in its quality. Teachers do not always have high expectations of what pupils can and should do. Too often pupils are asked to do work that is too easy for them. As a result, the work can lack challenge, especially for the most-able.
• Teachers do not check pupils’ progress consistently and regularly enough. Too often teachers are not following the school-wide, agreed systems and policies. For example, there are wide variations in the neatness and presentation of the work in pupils’ books. This is because not all staff are insisting that the whole-school approach to presentation is followed. Leaders are not checking this.
• Pupils are not clear enough about how well they are doing in lessons and what they need to do next to improve. Too often the tasks that teachers set their pupils do not take sufficient account of what they can already do. They lack detail and, too often, are not challenging enough.
• Pupils were not always punctual to their lessons. A number of times during the inspection pupils were as much as five minutes late to lessons. This had a detrimental impact on getting learning off to a flying start and setting a climate of learning.
• There is variation in the quality of English teaching. Where expectations are high, pupils do well, especially those who are most able. In a Year 11 lower-ability group, for example, pupils engaged very effectively and with enthusiasm with a passage from Dickens. They were encouraged, through deft questioning by the teacher, to reflect on the impact of vocabulary. In a key stage 3 lesson there was less evidence of engagement. Too often too little account is taken of what pupils have already done at primary school.
• There is also variability in the mathematics teaching. While much teaching is effective, the tracking of pupils’ progress is not rigorous enough to prevent pupils doing work that is too easy for them. Also, evidence in pupils’ mathematics books shows a lack of consistency in the pride taken in their neatness. This was particularly the case with disadvantaged pupils, where lower standards of presentation appeared to be accepted by staff.
• Pupils told inspectors that they enjoyed learning and were keen to get on. However, it was noticed that when the pace of learning slowed, pupils lost focus and, sometimes, low-level disruption followed. Pupils reported to inspectors that there are inconsistencies in the ways that teachers apply the whole-school behaviour policy.
• In the effective teaching, teachers display good subject knowledge and pleasure in their subject. Their enthusiasm is infectious and pupils rise to the high expectations that contribute to a positive climate of learning. In a Year 7 history lesson, for example, pupils were very engaged in identifying the appropriate components of a successful mediaeval castle. The task elicited a great deal of conversation, enthusiasm and learning.
• Homework is a developing strength of the school. The online ‘Show my homework’ means that pupils can readily find out what they need to do. It also helps them extend their understanding by enabling them to undertake additional tasks.
• Teachers used questioning effectively in many of the lessons seen to develop pupils’ ideas and check on their understanding. Inspectors saw a number of examples of the deft use of ‘open’ questions that made pupils think. They also saw, however, occasions when opportunities were missed to extend and deepen learning and understanding because questions often dealt with ‘what?’ and ‘when?’ rather than with ‘how?’ and ‘why?’
• Teaching assistants are generally well deployed to support individual and groups of pupils.
• The ‘Pathways’ curriculum and teaching are effective. The teaching of this focused work to support vulnerable pupils, who need either consistent or occasional support, is marked by careful planning, high expectations and humane yet challenging assessment.
• Staff receive regular and effective training to help them engage with and use the increasingly detailed information that the school has on pupils and their progress. This is beginning to have a positive impact on teachers’ planning and pupils’ outcomes, especially those of disadvantaged pupils.
• The comparatively weaker teaching of science had been identified as an issue by leaders at the school and appropriate support has been put in place. Inspection evidence shows that there are clear improvements as a result. The work in pupils’ books shows that the delivery of topics is interesting and engages pupils in their work.

Personal development, behaviour and welfare Requires improvement

Personal development and welfare

• The school’s work to promote pupils’ personal development and welfare is good.
• Pupils are proud of their school. They are, generally, careful of each other and develop a clear sense of their self-worth and respect for others because of the school’s work and care for them. They recognise and welcome the staff’s interest and care for them. They wear their uniform carefully and with pride.
• The school prepares pupils well for life in modern Britain. There are opportunities for pupils to take on roles of responsibility and to engage in a range of activities that encourage the development of confidence and insights into the wider world.
• Pupils reported that bullying is very rare and that they understand the range of forms that bullying can take, including homophobic bullying. Pupils told inspectors that they were confident that, should incidents of bullying occur, they would be dealt with promptly and effectively by staff at the school.
• The programme of sessions and activities to support pupils’ spiritual, moral, social and cultural development is well developed. Key areas such as e-safety, healthy eating, sexual exploitation, respect and tolerance are discussed in tutor time and during dedicated sessions and ‘resilience days’.
• The school has an effectively structured programme of assemblies supported by ‘thoughts for the day’. These help pupils to think about their responsibilities to themselves, the school and the wider community.
• The school is an attractive place to learn in. There are well-maintained displays of pupils’ work and information about clubs and activities offered by the school. These combine with subject-specific displays which support learning.
• The range of after-school and lunchtime clubs give pupils opportunities to learn and develop skills in a different environment in the company of different pupils and staff. Pupils reported that they welcomed these clubs, especially at lunchtime, because it gave them time to reflect.

Behaviour

• The behaviour of pupils requires improvement.
• Although pupils were generally well behaved, too many incidents of low-level disruption were seen during the inspection within lessons. There was also some boisterousness in the corridors and in the grounds of the school. This was particularly evident at the end of school as pupils made their way to the bus stop.
• The school has a clear code of behaviour. Most members of the school community are aware of, welcome and follow it. However, inspectors observed incidents where the code was not applied consistently. Inspectors saw some pupils using mobile phones inappropriately in lessons. They also saw pupils smoking on the school site. Pupils reported to inspectors that they had noticed that the school’s rules were not applied consistently by staff.
• Too often pupils are late for lessons. Inspectors witnessed a number of occasions when pupils were up to five minutes late arriving at lessons. This had a detrimental impact on learning. It was also noted that although approximately 35 pupils were seen by inspectors arriving late to school on one morning. The lateness of only 21 of these pupils was subsequently recorded.
• The number of fixed-term exclusions from school for poor behaviour is reducing. However, the number of such exclusions is still too high and disadvantaged pupils are more likely than their peers to be excluded. Leaders are not taking the urgent action needed to reduce the time lost to learning by exclusions such as these.
• Although overall absence from school is reducing, the overall absence and the persistent absence of disadvantaged pupils is still too high. This has been the case for some time.

Outcomes for pupils Requires improvement

• Overall outcomes for pupils require improvement. This is because a significant group of disadvantaged pupils do not make the progress that they should from their starting points. This situation is made worse by the fact that disadvantaged pupils’ attendance is poor.
• Pupils arrive at the school in Year 7 with levels of skills and knowledge that are generally below those expected. For pupils in this year whose skills in reading, writing and mathematics are not strong enough to give them full access to the curriculum, the school offers additional support. This provision, ‘Pathways’, is effective and enables these pupils to catch up and make progress similar to that of their peers.
• Overall, most-able pupils, including most-able disadvantaged pupils, achieve in line with similar pupils nationally. Inspection evidence shows that more could be done to challenge this group of pupils to do even better across the school through opportunities for more challenging work and writing at greater length.
• In 2016, the progress made by disadvantaged pupils was significantly weaker than that of other pupils in the school and others nationally. The school’s own information for the current Year 11 cohort shows a slightly reduced yet still significant difference between the progress of disadvantaged and other pupils.
• The school’s own information suggests an improving picture in Year 10 and in key stage 3. However, inspection evidence does not support the school’s view that the differences between the progress and attainment of disadvantaged pupils and that of their peers are narrowing rapidly.
• The school uses a range of measures to assess the progress that pupils are making across the school. This means that accurate comparisons, between and within year groups and subjects, are difficult. This, and the variability in the quality of teaching, is not helping the school to make accurate judgements about how well pupils are doing.
• Pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities make generally good progress from their starting points.

School details

Unique reference number Local authority Inspection number 139501 Wakefield 10023828 This inspection of the school was carried out under section 5 of the Education Act 2005. Type of school Secondary School category Age range of pupils Gender of pupils Academy converter 11 to 16 Mixed Number of pupils on the school roll 828 Appropriate authority The Pontefract Academies Trust Chair Headteacher Telephone number Website Email address Kebir Berry MBE Hellen Bolton 01977 781555 http://carletonhigh.co.uk/ headteacher@carleton.wakefield.sch.uk Date of previous inspection 14–15 January 2015

Information about this school

• Carleton Community High school is smaller than the average-sized secondary school.
• Almost all pupils are from White British backgrounds.
• The proportion of pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities is average.
• The proportion of pupils who are eligible for support through the pupil premium is above the national average.
• The school meets the government’s current floor standards, which are the minimum expectations for pupils’ attainment and progress.
• Pupil mobility is below the national average.
• The school is part of the Pontefract Academies Trust.
• The school does not meet requirements on the publication of information about the impact of pupil premium funding. Some key policies, such as those regarding behaviour and special educational needs, are overdue for review on the school’s own website and the school’s special educational needs coordinator is not clearly named. There is a link to the Pontefract Academies Trust website, where a trust-wide admissions and equality policy appears.
• The school does not comply with Department for Education guidance on what academies should publish about special educational needs and behaviour because the policies are overdue for review and the school’s special educational needs coordinator is not clearly named.

Information about this inspection

• Inspectors observed pupils’ learning in a range of lessons. Some of these were joint

observations with members of the senior leadership team.

• Inspectors observed pupils’ behaviour and conduct at break and lunchtime.
• A wide sample of pupils’ work from all year groups and a range of subjects was scrutinised.
• Inspectors looked at a range of documents, including the school’s own information on the progress of current pupils, planning and monitoring documentation, records relating to pupils’ behaviour and attendance and documents relating to keeping pupils safe. Inspectors also scrutinised the school’s website, policies and safeguarding procedures.
• Inspectors gathered the views of pupils across the school through formal meetings and informal discussions at break and lunchtime. An inspector also met with the chief executive officer of the academy trust and members of the governing body, including the vice-chair of the governing body.
• Discussions took place with senior leaders, subject leaders and other staff. Inspectors also collected the views of staff through informal conversations.
• Inspectors evaluated the responses of parents to the Ofsted online questionnaire and the free text facility.

Inspection team

Mark Evans, lead inspector Graham Crerar Steven Beverley Lee Styles Her Majesty’s Inspector Ofsted Inspector Ofsted Inspector Ofsted Inspector