East Lothian Leavers’ Unit
East Lothian Council
2 0 Ju n e 20 0 0
Contents
________________________________________
1.
Introduction
Page 1
2.
The Leavers’ Unit
Page 1
3.
How well does the unit perform
overall?
Page 9
4.
How well is the unit performing
in the aspects of the curriculum
inspected?
Page 11
5.
How well are pupils supported?
Page 14
6.
How well is the unit managed?
Page 16
7.
What are the unit’s key strengths?
Page 18
8.
Main points for action
Page 18
Appendix
Inspection of Standards and Quality in
the East Lothian Leavers’ Unit
East Lothian Council
________________________________________
1.
Introduction
The inspection of the East Lothian Leavers’ Unit took place in
March 2000.
HM Inspectors evaluated learning, teaching and attainment,
examined pupils’ work and visited pupils on work experience
placements and at off-site activities. Members of the inspection
team interviewed staff and pupils and examined school
documentation and records. They also interviewed headteachers,
relevant guidance teachers and learning support teachers in all of
the pupils’ secondary schools, social workers, education welfare
officers and representatives of the education authority.
English and mathematics were inspected, together with personal
and social education (PSE) and aspects of physical education and
art and design. Support for pupils and cross-curricular activities,
resource provision and management were also inspected. Results
of questionnaires issued to all pupils, staff and parents were taken
into account during the inspection. Members of the inspection
team also met with some parents.
2.
The Leavers’ Unit
East Lothian Leavers’ Unit provides for pupils who are in their last
few months of statutory education and who have had a history of
non-attendance and behavioural and emotional difficulties at their
secondary schools. Under the education authority’s inclusion
1
policy, pupils are admitted to the unit through a multi-agency
advisory group after strategies to retain pupils in mainstream
education have been found to be unsuccessful. The unit has a
maximum roll of 12 young people. It forms part of the education
authority’s Outreach Teachers Service and serves the six secondary
schools run by the authority. The unit is situated in part of a
former residential school on the outskirts of Tranent. It had been
relocated to that site in August 1999.
At the time of the inspection there were nine boys and three girls
on the roll. Pupils remain on the roll of their secondary school
whilst attending the unit.
Parents’ views
Five parents responded to a questionnaire issued to all parents.
These parents were generally positive about a number of aspects of
provision made for their children at the unit. They were of the
view that:
•
their children enjoyed being at the unit and would be helped if
they had a difficulty; and
•
staff treated children fairly, knew the children well as
individuals and kept parents regularly informed as to their
performance in the unit.
Parents had a high regard for the staff, whom they felt were
committed, caring, and working hard to provide pupils with an
interesting range of activities to improve their attendance, despite
often difficult circumstances.
In responding to the questionnaire and in discussions with
members of the inspection team, most parents expressed concerns
about aspects of the unit.
2
•
They were worried about poor pupil behaviour but credited the
staff for doing their best to deal with this as effectively as they
could.
•
They said that they received little information about the courses
and activities their sons or daughters would be undertaking.
•
They would have welcomed more advice from support services
on how best to help their children, and more opportunities to
meet with unit staff.
Pupils’ views
Eight pupils completed a questionnaire. Most felt that:
•
they enjoyed being at the unit and knew what to do if they had
a worry or complaint;
•
work experience placements were beneficial but were too few;
•
if they were unwell or had an accident that they would be well
looked after; and
•
the unit had helped to prepare them better for some aspects of
life after school.
Pupils raised a number of serious concerns in response to the
questionnaire and/or through interviews or written comments.
•
Most said that they did not feel safe in the unit owing to the
abusive language and bullying behaviour of others.
•
Most felt that staff were not able to deal effectively with
bullying.
In discussion with inspectors, pupils said that the work set for them
was often too simple and that there was little choice in the activities
3
they had to participate in. The girls were of the view that the
activities favoured boys. All complained about the high
temperature in the classrooms and the quality of the lunches on
offer in the unit.
Staff views
The five members of staff who regularly or occasionally delivered
an element of the programme within the Leavers’ Unit were issued
with a questionnaire. All responded and were positive about
several aspects of the work of the unit. Much admiration was
expressed by others for the patience and perseverance of the two
teachers who worked full time in the unit. All felt that:
•
staff worked very hard to promote and maintain good
relationships with parents;
•
unit rules were fair and sensible, and pupils’ successes were
regularly celebrated; and
•
staff showed a high degree of commitment to the care and
welfare of pupils.
Staff also raised serious concerns about:
4
•
the management of the unit;
•
the safety of pupils and staff, and a lack of effective action by
the education authority in addressing concerns;
•
a lack of involvement by unit staff in decision-making about
pupils;
•
the lack of access to subject specialists and facilities for
teaching and specialist support for pupils.
Most staff felt that standards set for pupil behaviour were not
upheld consistently and that there was not always effective
communication amongst staff about care and welfare issues
concerning pupils.
Ethos
There were important weaknesses in the ethos of the unit. The
teachers worked hard to establish good relationships with pupils.
Most of the young people had made a good start to their placement
but several had stopped attending. Staff were trusted by the pupils
but were regularly subjected to unacceptable language. The
general climate of the unit was one of low expectation and pupil
motivation. On a few occasions pupils showed that they could
settle to work but for the most part, lessons were disrupted by poor
pupil behaviour. Pupils regularly took breaks to smoke cigarettes.
The pupils formed a volatile group. There was a high level of
aggression between pupils, and occasional violent incidents.
Several pupils had been excluded formally from the unit for
periods of time for unacceptable behaviour and many had been
informally excluded to allow them to reflect on their actions before
returning to the unit.
There were few opportunities for communal events, and religious
observance did not feature in the work of the unit. Staff took steps
to encourage pupils to give of their best through a simple reward
system but, unfortunately, this was not seen as important by some
of the pupils.
The unit and the community
Staff took some good steps to communicate with parents.
Commendably, teachers visited pupils’ homes prior to young
people taking up a placement at the unit. They also took very good
steps to keep parents informed of how their children were
performing at the unit by mailing a weekly report to them. This
5
focused largely on pupils’ attitudes and behaviour, and further
attention should be given to providing information on pupils’
progress. Teachers made good use of the telephone to keep in
touch informally with parents and to check on pupils’ nonattendance. The teachers had organised an open day for parents to
visit the unit. Overall, however, there were too few opportunities
for parents to meet with staff to discuss pupils’ progress. Written
information for parents, pupils and staff did not describe the aims
and curriculum of the unit fully enough.
Links with other schools and agencies had important weaknesses.
6
•
There were no joint meetings between unit teachers and other
agencies before, during or at the end of a pupil’s time at the
unit. Critically, where placement in the unit was clearly not
succeeding, there was no system for promptly calling a review
meeting and referring the case back to the multi-agency
advisory group for consideration of other options.
•
Secondary school guidance teachers did not receive regular
feedback on pupils’ progress and did not monitor the progress
of their pupils in the unit. Guidance staff were not aware of
any expectations that they should continue to have an oversight
of the attendance and progress of pupils placed in the unit
although these pupils remained on the roll of the secondary
school.
•
Links with associated secondary schools in terms of access to
specialist subject teaching were poor, and this seriously
restricted the pupils’ opportunities to progress academically.
Successful arrangements had been made for pupils to
participate in home economics at Dunbar Grammar School.
•
Links with care staff for pupils in the Council’s residential
homes were patchy and informal. There were no regular
meetings of unit teachers and care staff to review the
educational targets for looked after young people.
•
Some links had been established with colleges of further
education but there was a limited range of courses on offer and
these were seldom well tailored to the needs, aptitudes and
interests of the pupils. Most college placements had soon
broken down.
•
Pupils had gained much from the good input by the Council’s
specialist careers service, and this had been effectively
extended by unit staff.
Unit teachers had been proactive in finding work placements for
their pupils. Maintaining the good will of such providers was not
easy given the poor attendance and behaviour records of previous
pupils whilst on placement. The work placements had not been
subject to risk assessment and were not monitored and evaluated by
the education authority’s staff.
Accommodation
There was uncertainty as to how long the unit would be at its
current site, which it had only occupied for 8 months. The
accommodation had a number of positive features. The building
occupied an attractive setting and provided good space in the form
of a number of rooms of varying size for formal and informal
work. Furniture for pupils was appropriate and at leisure breaks
pupils had access to a pool table and television. Staff made good
use of some local and more distant facilities such as the nearby
sports centre to augment provision. However, there were many
significant weaknesses which gave cause for concern.
•
The unit was in a relatively isolated position, distant from
secondary schools and facilities such as shops. This led to
pupils and staff feeling socially excluded from their peers.
•
The building was austere and unwelcoming. There was no
display of pupils’ work. Security was unsatisfactory, but this
was being attended to at the time of the inspection. There was
no means whereby staff in the main teaching area could readily
7
summon assistance if necessary. The heating required urgent
attention as the temperatures in rooms were too high.
•
There was insufficient access to specialist facilities, including
those for art, science and craft and design, to enable pupils to
experience key aspects of the curriculum in appropriate
settings.
•
Space with an appropriate degree of privacy, for example to
give pupils ‘time out’ from others or to allow specialist staff to
engage with individual pupils, was very limited.
•
The arrangements for pupils travelling in staff cars to off-site
locations needed to be reviewed.
Staffing and resources
The overall staffing of the unit was unsatisfactory. There had been
several changes in staffing over the last 18 months. Insufficient
staff were available to ensure the safety and well-being of staff and
pupils. No member of staff could be spared to visit pupils on work
experience placements or attend meetings about pupils. Teachers
lacked the necessary qualifications to deliver a suitably broad
curriculum to meet the needs of pupils.
Responsibility for the work of the Outreach Service and the
Leavers’ Unit lay with the education authority’s Principal Officer,
Pupil Support, who reported to the Manager, Pupil Support. The
time allocated to the management of the unit required to be
increased.
Resources were fair overall. There was a good range of materials
available to support personal and social education, health and
careers education. Resources for mathematics were generally
good. There was a very limited supply of materials to support a
suitably broad programme in English. There was no library to
encourage pupils to read for pleasure or to browse for information.
There was an over-reliance upon worksheets and workbooks. The
unit had a good supply of computers, including Internet access, but
8
a greater range of appropriate software was required. There were
no resources within the unit for important areas of the curriculum
including home economics, technical education, science and
physical education. Further mobile telephones and first aid kits
were required for reasons of safety.
3.
How well does the unit perform overall?
Quality of attainment
The quality of pupils’ attainment in their coursework was fair. Few
individuals were making sufficient progress in areas targeted in
their individualised educational programmes (IEPs). The unit staff
were to be commended for enabling some of the young people to
complete folios of work in English and investigations in
mathematics. Weakness in the structure of the curriculum and in
aspects of learning and teaching resulted in pupils not reaching
their full potential.
Attainment in national examinations was unsatisfactory. Fewer
than half of the pupils were being presented for Standard Grade
English and mathematics. Other than a work experience national
qualification, pupils were not being presented for any other form of
certification.
Curriculum
The curriculum was unsatisfactory. It was limited by the relatively
short pupil week, the expertise of unit staff and lack of ready
access to specialist teachers and facilities. Pupils had no choice as
to what they studied in the unit. The activities included English,
mathematics, PSE, art and crafts, careers education, information
and communications technology (ICT), study skills, enterprise
activity and physical education in addition to off-site visits and
occasional work experience placements. Taken together, however,
the activities did not provide a suitably challenging, purposeful and
9
motivating programme to prepare these vulnerable young people
for the world of work, leisure and life-long learning.
The programme did not allow pupils to achieve high enough levels
of attainment. There was insufficient time given to developing
pupils’ skills in key areas of the curriculum, including English and
mathematics. The unit offered a much narrower range of
opportunities to gain national qualifications than did the pupils’
secondary schools. Links with secondary schools to allow
individual pupils to continue studying for Standard Grade
qualifications, where appropriate, were very poor.
The curricular needs of several pupils whose placements in the unit
were extending beyond the normal one term should be reviewed.
Learning and teaching
Teachers faced particular challenges in teaching these young
people, whose concentration spans were short and recall of
previous work was very uneven. Pupils’ study skills were poor and
they were reluctant to take responsibility for their own learning.
The quality of lessons observed ranged from very good to
unsatisfactory. Teachers made good use of praise to encourage
pupils to give of their best. In the best lessons pupils were
challenged effectively by interactive, direct teaching. Too often,
however, the tasks were routine and simple, lacked relevance to
pupils’ lives and did not promote pupil interaction. The overreliance upon workbooks and worksheets did not meet pupils’
individual needs. Overall the quality of teaching and learning was
fair.
Teachers’ planning was very limited. The lack of detailed
programmes of study and specific teaching and learning points
restricted the effectiveness of teachers’ efforts. Assessment
procedures were unsatisfactory and little evidence was kept of
pupils’ progress over their time spent in the unit.
10
4.
How well is the unit performing in the aspects of
the curriculum inspected?
English
The following were features of pupils’ attainment in English.
•
Several pupils had made good progress in a short space of time
in completing their Standard Grade folio work.
•
Most demonstrated an ability to listen well to talks or media
programmes which interested them but most were easily
distracted from set tasks.
•
Most could talk readily if the topic motivated them but they
were reluctant to take turns in a conversation or to take account
of the views of others.
•
Most could read for information. When reading aloud they
lacked emphasis and several had difficulties with fluency.
•
A few could write descriptive short pieces but many had
difficulties with basic spelling and grammar.
Overall, pupils’ progress in English was fair.
The English course was fair overall. Fewer than half of the pupils
were following a Standard Grade course with others pursuing a
course which did not lead to the award of a national qualification.
Pupils’ experienced too little time in English lessons to follow a
balanced programme. The programme lacked sufficient structure
to ensure the systematic development of pupils’ skills and did not
identify specific targets to improve their learning. There were
insufficient opportunities for pupils to read for pleasure and to
experience a wide range of texts. Too little attention was paid to
developing writing, particularly of a personal and imaginative type.
Pupils’ abilities to listen to and talk to each other in a socially
11
acceptable manner should play a much higher profile in the
programme.
Mathematics
The following were features of pupils’ attainment in mathematics.
•
Several pupils who were capable and interested in completing
investigations leading towards Standard Grade had done this
successfully.
•
Most pupils’ skills in mental calculations were insecure but
they could use a calculator well to perform basic arithmetical
calculations.
•
The majority could handle money well in practical situations.
Overall, pupils’ progress in mathematics was fair.
The programme for mathematics was fair. There was insufficient
planning to ensure that pupils systematically developed necessary
mathematical skills. Whilst a few pupils followed a course leading
to the award of Standard Grade, others followed a course which did
not lead to any national qualification. The programme needed to
give greater attention to applying mathematics in real life
situations, and skills required for independent living, such as
budgeting, should have a much higher profile. Direct teaching
methods should be used regularly to engage pupils in mental
calculations and problem-solving activities.
Personal and Social Education (PSE)
Overall, pupils’ progress in PSE was fair. Most of the pupils were
knowledgeable about aspects of their current topic work but were
unable to recall details of previous work. All had considerable
difficulty in relating well to others.
12
While it had some strengths, the PSE programme also had some
important weaknesses. The activities included opportunities for
college and work experience and a well-planned approach to
careers education. A specialist careers adviser visited the unit to
provide advice to pupils. In addition, pupils visited the local
careers office, had a mock interview and benefited from a range of
visiting speakers. The PSE programme did not give sufficient
attention to the development of skills for work, independent living,
and parenting. There was no comprehensive programme for health
education and insufficient attention was given to healthy eating and
the dangers of smoking. Overall, the programme required to be
improved in order to prepare the young people more effectively for
life after school.
Physical education
In physical education, some pupils demonstrated a good standard
of performance in badminton and football skills. Most had a good
grasp of basic orienteering rules and some were developing their
swimming skills. Most showed a reluctance to be part of a team.
Overall, the quality of pupils’ attainment in physical education was
fair. There was no detailed programme of study to guide the
progressive development of pupils’ skills in PE. Instruction from
suitably qualified staff was seldom available.
Art and design
In art and design, most pupils responded well to the specialist
sessions delivered by an instructor at the North Berwick
Community Education Centre where they followed a course in
working with clay. Pupils demonstrated good skills in making
models and pots. The drawing and painting skills of most pupils
remained under-developed. Overall, pupils’ attainment in art and
design was fair. There was no defined programme to develop
pupils’ skills and knowledge in art and design.
13
Information and communications technology (ICT)
Inspectors observed very little use of ICT by pupils in the unit.
Some pupils were able to demonstrate independent use of wordprocessing, databases, spreadsheets and the Internet. Staff should
build on this good basis to improve the use of ICT across the
curriculum to enhance learning and teaching. Pupils’ keyboarding
skills required to be developed. Overall, pupils had too few
opportunities to develop and use their ICT skills systematically.
5.
How well are pupils supported?
Care and welfare
The staff in the unit worked hard to promote the care and welfare
of the pupils. Pastoral care was good. However, a risk assessment
of the unit, including work experience placements, had still to be
carried out. A comprehensive framework of school policies and
procedures to cover relevant issues had not been established. Staff
kept a log of the most serious incidents but many minor incidents
went unrecorded. The authority’s child protection guidelines
required to be followed more rigorously, including the recording of
any allegations. Procedures for logging child protection matters,
incidents and complaints should be improved. Staff had access to
few sanctions which pupils took seriously. As a result, pupils were
often sent home to ‘cool off’. This practice of informal exclusions
should be reviewed.
Pupils’ attendance at the unit was erratic. At the time of the
inspection half of the pupils were present on a regular basis. Since
attending the unit the attendance of some pupils had shown
improvement. However, a number of pupils had had very high
levels of absence over many weeks and not all had been traced
despite referral to the Education Welfare Officer service. There
was inadequate monitoring of pupils’ attendance at extended work
placements. Urgent steps should be taken to ensure that the
whereabouts of each pupil are known.
14
Guidance
The two teachers in the unit took responsibility for providing pupils
with guidance and advice. Pupils’ progress and attainment were
not being effectively monitored and reviewed. The poor links with
pupils’ secondary guidance teachers restricted the ability of
secondary guidance and learning support staff to monitor pupils’
progress and provide further advice. Arrangements were not in
place to allow pupils to continue to complete their Records of
Achievement/Progress Files. The respective roles and
responsibilities of staff in the unit, secondary schools and support
services needed to be spelt out much more clearly.
Support for learning
The unit’s links with a range of external agencies required to be
strengthened in order to provide a more satisfactory level of
support. Educational psychologists had not visited the unit to
observe pupils at work and to provide unit teachers with advice on
teaching and learning strategies. The use of their time should be
reviewed to allow them to provide more advice and consultancy for
unit staff. Pupils’ IEPs needed to contain short-term targets which
should be agreed with pupils and shared with parents and all other
adults engaging with them. These targets should address, where
relevant, pupils’ learning difficulties in literacy and numeracy. No
specialist support was available to enable pupils to address learning
difficulties or social, emotional and behavioural difficulties.
Further attention required to be given to raising pupils’ self-esteem.
The management of statutory requirements in relation to special
educational needs was unsatisfactory. Staff in the unit were not
aware that, in two cases, pupils’ special educational needs had been
formally recorded and so they were not in a position to address the
particular needs of these pupils fully. Despite several attempts to
convene a Future Needs Assessment for one pupil, this had not yet
taken place.
15
6.
How well is the unit managed?
Overall management and leadership
There were major weaknesses in the education authority’s
arrangements for the management of the unit. Insufficient time had
been given to supporting the staff in the unit, developing the
curriculum, and monitoring and evaluating the operations and
effectiveness of the unit. Pupil Support Division staff had
insufficient knowledge of how the unit was operating.
Neither of the two regular teachers held a promoted post. The
senior teacher in the outreach team had not been given designated
responsibility for overseeing the work of the unit, although she
visited the unit regularly to offer support. The day-to-day
management decisions were taken jointly by the two unit teachers
who were already over-stretched with keeping the unit running as
effectively as they could. No education authority officer was
monitoring unit teachers’ plans or the implementation of
procedures such as the logging of incidents. Co-ordination of the
work of the various agencies involved with the pupils in the unit
was not effective. The unit lacked clear, strategic leadership. This
was an unsatisfactory situation.
Staff development and review
The unit teachers had not undergone a recent review and were
awaiting the implementation of the education authority’s revised
scheme for staff review. Staff in the unit found it difficult to access
development opportunities owing to the demands made of them in
the unit and difficulties in providing cover for them in their
absence. The part-time temporary auxiliary had not received
training for working with young people with social, emotional and
behavioural difficulties.
16
Development planning
There was no development plan for the Leavers’ Unit. A brief
reference to the work of the unit was included in the education
authority’s development plan for pupil support services but this did
not provide an adequate basis for development. During the
inspection, education authority staff began to prepare a detailed
plan for improvement for the unit.
Approaches to improving quality
Arrangements for quality assurance were unsatisfactory. The lack
of monitoring and evaluation systems and scrutiny of teachers’
planning and assessment by a promoted post holder were
significant shortcomings. There was inadequate monitoring and
evaluation of the work experience programme.
Overall, the Leavers’ Unit had much to do before it would be
providing a very disaffected and potentially volatile group of
young people with suitable preparation for the world of work,
continuing education and leisure. Links between the Education
Authority, the unit, its associated secondary schools and other key
agencies were not strong enough, and this was having a serious
impact on the quality of education being experienced by the pupils.
Effective management and quality improvement procedures needed
to be put in place to improve key aspects including the
arrangements for care and welfare of pupils and staff, the
programmes provided by the unit, the quality of support and the
levels of pupils’ attainment. The education authority was planning
a major review of the work of the Outreach Teaching Service,
including the Leavers’ Unit. This should primarily focus on how
all those with responsibility for the education of these young
people can operate effectively together to provide a much more
purposeful and high quality of education within a socially-inclusive
framework.
17
7.
8.
What are the unit’s key strengths?
•
The teachers, who were working in a very difficult context,
were committed and hard working. They had established good
relationships with pupils and tried hard to offer enjoyable
experiences for the young people.
•
The teachers provided a generally good standard of pastoral
care for pupils. They took good steps to keep parents abreast of
how their sons and daughters were engaging in the activities of
the unit.
•
Some good attempts were made to broaden pupils’ experiences
through careers education, college and work placements.
•
There were good resources for information and
communications technology.
Main points for action
The education authority, working closely with the Leavers’ Unit,
secondary schools, other departments of the Council and support
agencies, should act on the following recommendations.
18
•
The matters of safety and security of pupils and staff raised in
this report should be addressed as a matter of urgency. Steps
should be taken to ensure that the whereabouts of each pupil are
known.
•
The specific roles and responsibilities of all those involved in
supporting these young people should be clarified and joint
working strengthened.
•
Appropriate support should be provided to address the
significant social, emotional, behavioural and learning
difficulties of these pupils.
•
The curriculum should be improved to allow the young people
to achieve the highest possible levels of attainment and enable
them to be better prepared for life beyond school. Appropriate
staffing, facilities and resources should be made available to
deliver this.
•
Rigorous procedures should be put in place for assessing and
reviewing the progress of individual pupils and acting promptly
on the findings of reviews.
•
Steps should be taken to provide effective leadership and
management for the unit. The provision should be subjected to
much more rigorous monitoring and evaluation, and an
effective development plan should be drawn up to guide future
developments.
•
The education authority should use the findings of this report as
the basis of its planned review of provision for disaffected
young people who are reaching the end of their school careers.
HM Inspectors have asked East Lothian Council to provide, by
September 2000, a progress report on immediate action taken on
the Leavers’ Unit. We will return in May 2001 to assess progress
in meeting the recommendations listed in the report.
19
Copies of this report have been sent to the Leavers’ Unit staff, the Director
of Education, local councillors and appropriate Members of the Scottish
Parliament. Subject to availability, further copies may be obtained free of
charge from the office at the address below or by telephoning
0131 244 8437. Copies are also available on our web site:
www.scotland.gov.uk/hmis
Should you wish to make a complaint about any aspect of the inspection or
about this report, you should write in the first instance to Archie McGlynn,
HMCI whose address is given below. If you are unhappy with the
response, you will be told in writing what further steps you may take.
HM Inspectors of Schools
Saughton House
Broomhouse Drive
EDINBURGH
EH11 3XD
Alistair F Marquis
HM Inspector of Schools
on behalf of HM Chief Inspector of Schools
Eastern Division
Crown Copyright 2000
Scottish Executive
This report may be reproduced in whole or in part, except for commercial
purposes or in connection with a prospectus or advertisement, provided
that the source and date are stated.
20 June 2000
20
HM Inspectors use published criteria when making judgements about the
work of a school. These performance indicators relate judgements to four
levels of performance. This report uses the following word scale to make
clear the judgements made by Inspectors:
very good
good
fair
unsatisfactory
major strengths
more strengths than weaknesses
some important weaknesses
major weaknesses
This report also uses the following words to describe numbers and
proportions:
almost all
most
majority
less than half
few
over 90%
75-90%
50-74%
15-49%
up to 15%
21
Appendix
Curriculum, resources and management
We judged the following to be very good
No aspects were found to be in this category
We judged the following to be good
•
•
Communication with parents
Pastoral care
We judged the following to be fair
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Ethos
Partnership with parents
Links with other schools, agencies, employers and the community
Provision of accommodation and facilities
Provision of resources
Attainment in coursework
Quality of teaching
Meeting pupils’ needs
Personal and social development
Quality of curricular and vocational guidance
Effectiveness and deployment of staff
Organisation and use of resources and space
Unit management of devolved finances
We judged the following to be unsatisfactory
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
22
Provision of staff
Attainment in national examinations
The curriculum
Quality of courses and programmes
Quality of teachers’ planning
Quality of learning
Assessment as part of teaching
Guidance role in monitoring progress and attainment
Effectiveness of learning support
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Implementation of SEN legislation
Placement in the unit of pupils with special educational needs
Effectiveness of leadership
Staff development and appraisal
Self-evaluation
The development plan
Implementing the development plan
Quality of lessons observed
HMI also evaluated the quality of the lessons observed. The overall quality
of lessons was very good in 8% of cases, good in 38%, fair in 46% and
unsatisfactory in 8%.
23