Whitecraig Primary School
and Nursery Class
Musselburgh
East Lothian Council
2 October 2007
Contents
Page
1. Background
1
2. Key strengths
1
3. What are the views of parents, pupils and staff?
1
4. How good are learning, teaching and achievement?
2
5. How well are pupils’ learning needs met?
4
6. How good is the environment for learning?
4
7. Leading and improving the school
6
Appendix 1 Indicators of quality
8
Appendix 2 Summary of questionnaire responses
9
How can you contact us?
10
1. Background
Whitecraig Primary School and nursery class were inspected in May 2007 as part of a
national sample of primary and nursery education. The inspection covered key aspects
of the work of the school at all stages. It evaluated nursery children's and pupils’
achievements, the effectiveness of the school, the environment for learning, the
school’s processes for self-evaluation and innovation, and its capacity for
improvement. There was a particular focus on attainment in English language and
mathematics.
HM Inspectors examined the quality of the children's experience in the nursery, pupils’
work and interviewed groups of pupils and staff. Members of the inspection team also
met representatives of the School Board and parent-staff association (PSA).
The inspection team also evaluated aspects of the school’s progress in implementing
national recommendations related to improving aspects of school meals provision.
The school serves the village of Whitecraig and the surrounding area. At the time of
the inspection the roll was 119, including 20 children in the nursery class. The
proportion of pupils who were entitled to free school meals was above the national
average. Pupils’ attendance was in line with the national average.
2. Key strengths
HM Inspectors identified the following key strengths.
•
Good use of the extensive grounds to promote learning and support pupils’
play.
•
Learning experiences in the nursery class.
3. What are the views of parents, pupils and staff?
HM Inspectors analysed responses to questionnaires issued to all parents, P4 to
P7 pupils, and to all staff. Information about the responses to the questionnaires
appears in Appendix 2.
Overall, parents were very satisfied with the school’s provision. Parents of children in
the nursery were very pleased with all aspects of the work of the nursery. Parents felt
welcomed into school and thought teachers were good at providing information about
their children’s progress. They were pleased with the high level of concern that staff
showed for the care and welfare of their children. They felt that the school was
well led. Almost all pupils thought teachers expected them to work hard and told them
when they did something well. They appreciated their involvement in making
decisions to improve the school. They felt safe and healthy. Almost half of the pupils
felt that behaviour was not good. Staff felt that they provided effective pastoral care
1
and regularly celebrated pupils’ achievements. They enjoyed working at the school
and thought they worked effectively as a team. The majority of staff felt instances of
indiscipline were dealt with effectively but were concerned about standards of
behaviour. All staff thought the school was well led.
4. How good are learning, teaching and achievement?
Pupils’ learning experiences and achievements
There were important weaknesses in the overall quality of the curriculum. The school
provided pupils with a broad curriculum but insufficient time was allocated to some
curricular areas such as environmental studies and aspects of the expressive arts. The
curriculum in the nursery was good. However, the balance and structure of the day in the
nursery did not always provide sufficient opportunities for children to engage in free play
experiences. Additional time was given to physical education and all classes participated in
two hours of good quality physical activity each week. Teachers planned a range of
learning experiences across the curriculum but did not always build sufficiently well on
pupils’ skills, knowledge and understanding. The curriculum at the early stages was
enriched by well planned play activities. There was good use of information and
communications technology (ICT) to support curricular areas at all stages. There were a
few examples of very good direct and interactive teaching but overall the quality of
teaching was weak. Teachers were well organised. They gave clear instructions but too
many explanations lacked depth. Teachers consistently shared the general purpose of
lessons with pupils but did not always make clear what they expected pupils to learn. In the
best lessons, questioning was successfully used to check recall and used to assess pupils’
understanding. Teachers’ interaction with pupils was not always productive and a few
teachers found sustaining pupils’ attention difficult. Homework was regular but it lacked
variety and the quality of work produced was not always sufficiently high. Praise was used
effectively in the nursery and at the early stages to build confidence and engage children in
learning.
The overall quality of pupils’ learning was weak. In the nursery, children benefited
from a wide range of stimulating play experiences but there were insufficient
opportunities to develop early literacy skills within play situations. Most children in
the nursery cooperated well with one another, freely making decisions and choices in
their learning. They were making good progress in developing appropriate skills when
using the computer and were learning how to use the interactive whiteboard. A few
children used their imagination well in role-play at the home corner. They were
developing good control of their fingers and hands when using collage materials and
small toys. Many were developing confidence in balancing, hopping, skipping and
jumping and gaining an understanding of personal space in physical activities. Pupils
at the early stages engaged well in practical tasks. Pupils in P7 successfully worked
together in small groups. They clearly understood the different roles within a group
and each contributed well to complete tasks. Overall, however, pupils were not
motivated by class work and did not settle well to their tasks. Activities were not
sufficiently challenging and required to be more closely matched to the learning needs
of all pupils. There were too few opportunities for pupils to be actively involved in
their learning through investigative and practical activities. Overall, the pace of
2
learning was too slow and pupils were often unclear about what they were learning and
why. At times the inappropriate behaviour of a few pupils interrupted the flow of
teaching and disrupted learning.
The school took good steps to help pupils develop their wider achievement. Across the
school, most pupils were developing self-confidence and good social skills. Most
children in the nursery cooperated well with one another and confidently made choices
in their learning. Pupils developed effective citizenship skills by taking responsibility
for specific duties around the school such as playground helpers, reading buddies,
Junior Road Safety Officers, and serving on the Eco committee and pupil council. The
school had received a silver award for enterprise. The school’s health week had
successfully engaged pupils and a few parents in a range of physical activities such as
judo, trampoline, dance and boxing. Most pupils showed a good understanding of the
need to eat a healthy diet and take regular exercise. There was a wide range of after
school activities including athletics, football, basketball, basic moves and recorder but
pupil uptake was low. A few pupils were making good progress in learning to play a
musical instrument. The school promoted and celebrated pupils’ wider achievements at
assemblies, in the newsletter and on the school website. The annual residential
experiences for pupils from P5 to P7 provided good opportunities for pupils to develop
personal and social skills.
English language
Overall, nursery children were making adequate progress in communication and
language. Most children spoke confidently and listened carefully to stories read to
them. They could recognise their name in print and a few were able to write it.
However, staff did not yet provide enough experiences for children to develop early
reading and writing within play situations. The overall quality of attainment in English
language in P1 to P7 was weak. The school had made some progress in improving
pupils’ levels of attainment over the last two years. The majority of pupils were
achieving appropriate national levels in reading and less than half in writing. At the
early stages, almost all pupils attained national levels in reading and most in writing
earlier than normally expected. However, this good progress was not sustained into the
upper stages. The majority of pupils were making good progress in their coursework
but a significant number were capable of achieving higher standards. Pupils’ skills in
listening and talking were not well developed. Too many pupils did not listen
attentively in lessons and did not respond well to teachers’ instructions. By P7, too few
pupils regularly read for pleasure. Pupils’ knowledge and understanding about
language was too variable. Across the school, pupils’ writing skills were not
sufficiently well developed. Pupils’ stories lacked structure and story lines were not
well developed. Pupils required more opportunities to write at length. Overall the
presentation of written work was poor.
Mathematics
Children in the nursery were making very good progress in their understanding of early
numeracy. They recognised basic shapes and successfully sorted and matched them as
they played. They showed very good interest in counting and used mathematical
language during play activities such as baking. Overall, the quality of attainment in
mathematics in P1 to P7 was weak. Over the last two years levels of attainment had
3
not sufficiently improved. The majority of pupils were attaining appropriate national
levels in mathematics. At the early stages, almost all pupils were attaining national
levels of attainment but by P7, less than half were attaining appropriate levels. From
P4, a few pupils were not sufficiently secure at the levels which they had attained. At
all stages, pupils could create and interpret a range of graphs. They used ICT
effectively to create data bases. Across the school, pupils’ skills in mental calculations
were not well established. At the middle stages pupils had difficulty with aspects of
handling money and with measurement. Pupils could identify two- and threedimensional shapes and discuss their properties. At the early stages, pupils had begun
to develop a good understanding of how to approach solving problems, including
mathematical problems. However, at the middle and later stages, pupils had not yet
developed consistent strategies to help them solve problems and most had difficulty in
tackling problems.
5. How well are pupils’ learning needs met?
The quality of provision for meeting pupils’ needs was weak. Too many activities did not
engage or motivate pupils. Tasks set for pupils did not take sufficient account of individual
learning needs. More able pupils lacked challenge and the learning needs of pupils
requiring additional support were only partly met in class. The school had good links with
services to help them support pupils’ learning needs, for example through the educational
psychologist, the speech and language therapist and specialist services for pupils specific
literacy difficulties. The planning for pupils requiring additional support for their learning
was not sufficiently coordinated. Staff had not identified clear learning targets for these
pupils and did not monitor the progress of potentially vulnerable pupils rigorously.
Classroom assistants provided good support for individual pupils and groups of pupils in
classes. The deployment of support for learning and classroom assistants was not
sufficiently well-planned or based on an on-going analysis of needs.
6. How good is the environment for learning?
4
Aspect
Comment
Pastoral care
The quality of pastoral care throughout the school was good.
The school had well-established procedures for ensuring the
care and welfare and protection of all pupils, including safe
administration of medicines. All staff had received
appropriate training in child protection and racial equality.
Staff effectively implemented the school’s approaches to
dealing with any incidents of bullying or racism. Staff knew
pupils well and were sensitive to their needs. Pupils knew
what to do if they had any concerns and were confident that
the school would take appropriate action. Good
arrangements were in place to support the induction of
children into nursery and from nursery into P1, and the
transition of pupils in P7 to Musselburgh Grammar School.
The school effectively promoted aspects of healthy
lifestyles. Pupils were successfully involved in the Roots
and Fruits Project which involved them selling produce to
parents and members of the community on a weekly basis.
Aspect
Comment
Quality of
accommodation
and facilities
The quality of accommodation was very good. The school
provided a pleasant and safe environment. The school hall
provided sufficient space for whole school assemblies,
music and drama. A separate gym hall provided good space
for physical education and was also used as a dining area.
The school’s arrangements for serving lunch required
review to ensure quicker service. Recent refurbishment to
the building including new toilets had enhanced the
accommodation. Effective security measures were in place.
There was full access to the building and access to a
disabled toilet in the nursery. The school was set in
generous grounds which provided extensive play areas for
pupils. The school garden was being developed by staff,
pupils and parents. The kitchen area within the nursery took
up a significant amount of space resulting in less space for
children’s learning.
Climate and
relationships,
expectations
and promoting
achievement
and equality
The school provided a caring environment. Most pupils
displayed positive attitudes and self-discipline but a few did
not show respect for teachers or other pupils. Approaches
taken to create a climate of mutual trust and respect were not
always effective and strategies for dealing with low level
challenging behaviour required to be reviewed. Teachers
did not always make sufficiently clear to pupils the quality
of work expected or set appropriately high standards. Pupils
did not always have positive attitudes to work and many had
unnecessarily modest aspirations of their achievements.
Pupils showed a good awareness of religious diversity and at
all stages they could identify key characteristics of other
world religions. Regular assemblies provided good
opportunities for celebrating pupils’ achievements, and for
pupils to worship together.
5
Aspect
Comment
Partnership
with parents
and the
community
The school had established effective links with parents, the
School Board and PTA. Communication with parents had
significantly improved over the last few years. High quality
newsletters provided good information on the work of the
school and had successfully encouraged a few parents to
respond to school issues. Curriculum workshop sessions
had successfully raised parents’ awareness of the use of ICT
in their children’s learning, the use of a movement
programme and behaviour initiatives. Parents were
consulted on sensitive aspects of the health education
programme and were becoming more involved in reviewing
the work of the school. Pupils’ annual progress reports
provided good information for parents. Parents were
involved in their children’s learning through regular
homework and through effective partnerships with the
nursery. The School Board supported the work of the school
and the PTA regularly raised funds.
7. Leading and improving the school
Appendix 1 provides HM Inspectors’ overall evaluation of the work of the school.
Whitecraig Primary School provided good quality pastoral care. Staff created a well
organised and caring learning environment for pupils and for children in the nursery. Staff
morale had improved over the last few years and there was a growing sense of teamwork.
However, there were substantial inconsistencies in the quality of learning and teaching and
in the structure of the curriculum. Expectations of pupils’ behaviour and achievement were
not sufficiently high, particularly from P4 to P7. Pupils at the middle and upper stages
were not attaining well in English language and mathematics. In recent years, teachers had
introduced new approaches to learning and teaching, including the use of ICT. These had
made a positive impact on pupils’ learning experiences. However, pupils required more
opportunities to take greater responsibility for their learning.
The headteacher had established good relationships with staff, pupils and parents. She gave
conscientious support to the work of the nursery. However, the school lacked strategic
leadership focused on improving learning and teaching and raising attainment. The depute
headteacher had made a very valuable contribution to the school’s work over his two years
in post. He had established positive working relationships with staff. He had successfully
tackled a number of issues such as improving communication to parents and had developed
aspects of the curriculum. The school’s approaches to monitoring its work were adequate.
Procedures were now in place for monitoring and tracking pupils’ attainment and progress
in their learning, but these had yet to make an impact on attainment. Staff were now better
involved in reviewing the work of the school and identifying priorities for improvement.
The school will require significant support from the education authority as it seeks to build
its capacity to improve.
6
Management and nursery staff were familiar with the Scottish Social Services Codes of
Practice and their implications. At the last Care Commission inspection of the nursery
there was one recommendation and one requirement both of which had been actioned.
Main points for action
The school and education authority, in liaison with HM Inspectors, should take
action to ensure improvement in:
•
the overall quality of the curriculum;
•
the quality of teaching;
•
the quality of pupils’ learning experiences and free play experiences in the
nursery;
•
levels of attainment in English language and mathematics; and
•
leadership for learning.
What happens next?
The school and the education authority have been asked to prepare an action plan
indicating how they will address the main findings of the report, and to share that plan
with parents. HM Inspectors will engage with the school and the education authority to
monitor progress. They will publish an interim report on progress within one year of
the publication of this report. Thereafter, HM Inspectors will continue to engage with
the school and the education authority in monitoring progress, and will undertake a
follow-through inspection. This will result in another report to parents, within two
years of the publication of this report, on the extent of improvement that has been
achieved.
Belinda Sheehan
HM Inspector
2 October 2007
7
Appendix 1 Indicators of quality
The sections in the table below follow the order in this report. You can find the main
comments made about each of the quality indicators in those sections. However,
aspects of some quality indicators are relevant to other sections of the report and may
also be mentioned in those other sections.
How good are learning, teaching and achievement?
Structure of the curriculum
The teaching process
Pupils’ learning experiences
Pupils’ attainment in English language
Pupils’ attainment in mathematics
weak
weak
weak
weak
weak
How well are pupils’ learning needs met?
Meeting pupils’ needs
weak
How good is the environment for learning?
Pastoral care
Accommodation and facilities
Climate and relationships
Expectations and promoting achievement
Equality and fairness
Partnership with parents, the School
Board, and the community
Leading and improving the school
Leadership of the headteacher
Self-evaluation
good
very good
adequate
weak
good
good
weak
adequate
This report uses the following word scale to make clear judgements made by
inspectors:
excellent
very good
good
adequate
weak
unsatisfactory
8
outstanding, sector leading
major strengths
important strengths with some areas for improvement
strengths just outweigh weaknesses
important weaknesses
major weaknesses
Appendix 2
Summary of questionnaire responses
Important features of responses from the various groups which received questionnaires
are listed below.
What parents thought the school did
well
What parents think the school
could do better
•
Provided a safe and stimulating
environment.
• Showed good concern for the care
and welfare of all.
• Involved parents in supporting their
children’s learning through
homework.
• Provided good information on their
children’s progress.
•
What pupils thought the school did
well
What pupils think the school could
do better
•
•
•
•
Helped them stay safe and healthy.
Checked homework.
Praised them for doing well.
•
•
•
Deal more effectively with
inappropriate behaviour.
Develop greater mutual respect
between teachers and pupils.
Improve the behaviour of a few
pupils.
Treat all pupils fairly.
Provide more interesting
homework.
What staff thought the school did
well
•
What staff think the school could
do better
•
•
Staff were very pleased with
almost all aspects of the work of
the school.
Improve standards of behaviour.
9
How can you contact us?
If you would like an additional copy of this report
Copies of this report have been sent to the headteacher and school staff, the Director of
Education and Children’s Services, local councillors and appropriate Members of the
Scottish Parliament. Subject to availability, further copies may be obtained free of
charge from HM Inspectorate of Education, Denholm House, Almondvale Business
Park, Almondvale Way, Livingston EH54 6GA or by telephoning 01506 600384.
Copies are also available on our website www.hmie.gov.uk.
HMIE Feedback and Complaints Procedure
Should you wish to comment on any aspect of primary inspections,provision for pupils
with additional support needs, you should write in the first instance to Chris McIlroy,
HMCI, at the above address.
If you have a concern about this report, you should write in the first instance to our
Complaints Manager, HMIE Business Management Unit, Second Floor, Denholm
House, Almondvale Business Park, Almondvale Way, Livingston, EH54 6GA. You
can also e-mail HMIEComplaints@hmie.gsi.gov.uk. A copy of our complaints
procedure is available from this office, by telephoning 01506 600200 or from our
website at www.hmie.gov.uk.
If you are not satisfied with the action we have taken at the end of our complaints
procedure, you can raise your complaint with the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman
(SPSO). The SPSO is fully independent and has powers to investigate complaints
about Government departments and agencies. You should write to the SPSO, Freepost
EH641, Edinburgh EH3 0BR. You can also telephone 0800 377 7330
(fax 0800 377 7331) or e-mail: ask@spso.org.uk. More information about the
Ombudsman’s office can be obtained from the website: www.spso.org.uk.
Crown Copyright 2007
HM Inspectorate of Education
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
thereof are stated.
10