Integrated Inspection by the
Care Commission and
HM Inspectorate of Education of
Banff Primary School Nursery Class
Aberdeenshire Council
29 November 2006
Banff Primary School Nursery Class
Academy Drive
Banff
Aberdeenshire
AB45 1BL
The Regulation of Care (Scotland) Act, 2001, requires that the Care Commission
inspect all care services covered by the Act every year to monitor the quality of care
provided. In accordance with the Act, the Care Commission and HM Inspectorate of
Education carry out integrated inspections of the quality of care and education. In
doing this, inspection teams take account of National Care Standards, Early
Education and Childcare up to the age of 16, and The Child at the Centre. The
following standards and related quality indicators were used in the recent inspection.
National Care Standard
Child at the Centre Quality Indicator
Standard 2 – A Safe Environment
Resources
Standard 4 – Engaging with Children
Development and learning through play
Standard 5 – Quality of Experience
Curriculum
Children’s development and learning
Support for children and families
Standard 6 – Support and Development
Standard 14 – Well-managed Service
Management, Leadership and Quality
Assurance
Evaluations made using HMIE quality indicators use the following scale, and these
words are used in the report to describe the team’s judgements:
Very good
Good
Fair
Unsatisfactory
:
:
:
:
major strengths
strengths outweigh weaknesses
some important weaknesses
major weaknesses
Reports contain Recommendations which are intended to support improvements in
the quality of service.
Any Requirements refer to actions which must be taken by service providers to ensure
that regulations are met and there is compliance with relevant legislation. In these
cases the regulation(s) to which requirements refer will be noted clearly and
timescales given.
HOW TO CONTACT US
If you would like an additional copy of this report
Copies of this report have been sent to the headteacher, staff and
the education authority. Copies are also available on the Care
Commission website: www.carecommission.com and HMIE website:
www.hmie.gov.uk.
If you wish to comment about integrated pre-school inspections
Should you wish to comment on any aspect of integrated pre-school
inspections, you should write in the first instance to Kenneth Muir,
HMCI, at HM Inspectorate of Education, Denholm House,
Almondvale Business Park, Almondvale Way, Livingston EH54 6GA.
Our complaints procedure
If you have a concern about this report, you should write in the first
instance to either:
Complaints Coordinator
Headquarters
Care Commission
Compass House
Riverside Drive
Dundee
DD1 4NY
Hazel Dewart
HM Inspectorate of Education
Denholm House
Almondvale Business Park
Almondvale Way
Livingston
EH54 6GA
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. The Scottish Public Services
Ombudsman is fully independent and has powers to investigate
complaints about Government departments and agencies. You can
write to The Scottish Public Services Ombudsman, 4-6 Melville
Street, Edinburgh EH3 7NS. You can also telephone 0870 011 5378
or e-mail enquiries@scottishombudsman.org.uk. More information
about the Ombudsman’s office can be obtained from the website:
www.scottishombudsman.org.uk.
A copy of the HMIE complaints procedure is available from the HMIE
website at www.hmie.gov.uk or by telephoning 01506 600 258.
Crown Copyright 2006
Care Commission
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.
_______________________________
Integrated Inspection by the
Care Commission and
HM Inspectorate of Education of
Banff Primary School Nursery Class
Aberdeenshire Council
Introduction
Banff Primary School Nursery Class was inspected in June 2006
as part of the integrated inspection programme by the Care
Commission and HM Inspectorate of Education. HMIE carried
out this inspection on behalf of both organisations and consulted
the Care Commission about its findings. The nursery catered for
pre-school children aged three to five years, including those with
additional support needs in the developmental nursery. School
children aged four and five could attend the after school club from
2:30 pm until 6 pm. The nursery was registered for 50 children
attending at any one session. At the time of the inspection the
total roll was 96.
The environment
Standard 2
The nursery was located within a secure, self-contained wing of
Banff Primary School. The premises comprised of a spacious
entrance hall adjacent to a very large playroom, parents’ and
meeting rooms and an outside play area. Children also had
access to the school gym, a soft-surface area, and the play
space outside the playroom. The accommodation was bright,
welcoming and very well maintained. Staff had an effective
registration system to monitor children entering and leaving
nursery, and made contact with parents about any child’s
absence. However, procedures needed to be recorded and
included in the parent information booklet.
Quality of children’s experience
Standard 4 & 5
The developmental nursery class was incorporated within a
partitioned area of the main nursery playroom. Staff had
developed good relationships with children and supported their
learning well. They planned appropriate group sessions and
individual activities within the developmental nursery area to
support and develop children’s development and learning.
Children had good opportunities to access the full range of
activities within the main playroom. The high staffing levels
allowed children to be well supported. Children joined the larger
group for snack time and some group activities. However, at
times, they needed more freedom to explore the learning
environment in the main playroom without direct adult
intervention. Staff planned carefully to support children’s
development. They had established individualised educational
programmes (IEPs) for all children. Staff had created useful
‘passports’ with relevant details about each child’s care and
support needs. They had developed individual folders for each
child containing samples of work and evidence of their
1
achievements. Staff completed very informative reports which
were shared with parents and support agencies at regular review
meetings.
In the main nursery, staff knew children very well and were
sensitive to their needs. Staff used praise appropriately to
encourage effort and make the children feel valued. However,
they did not use open questioning sufficiently well to extend
children’s play or encourage them to think for themselves.
Children were able to make choices within the planned
programme. The balance and structure of the latter part of the
session did not ensure that time was used effectively to develop
all aspects of children’s learning. Although staff planned a wide
range of experiences for children, they did not provide enough
challenge to meet the needs of the more able children. The
activities in the afternoon session did not take sufficient account
of the needs of the younger children.
Staff observed children during their activities but the record
keeping was too general and did not emphasise areas for
children’s individual development. The folios of work which staff
kept were limited and did not show areas for children’s progress
or individuality. Planning was activity based and was not flexible
enough to take into consideration children’s ideas or
developmental needs. Evaluations of the planning did not
indicate next steps in learning for individual children.
Features of the programmes for children included the following.
2
•
The programme for emotional, personal and social
development was good. Children were happy, familiar with
nursery routines, and could follow simple rules. They were
friendly, cooperative and able to take turns. Staff provided
children with good opportunities to share resources and
cooperate with each other. Children concentrated well at
their chosen tasks and at group time. They were encouraged
to take responsibility for a variety of tasks such as personal
hygiene and putting on their coats and shoes. Only the
morning children served themselves snack. Staff could
further support children in their independence by encouraging
all children to be involved at snack time. Children did not
have enough opportunities to plan or influence decisions.
•
The programme for communication and language was good.
Children listened well to friends and adults when at activities
and story time. They could talk to others about their
experiences. Children could access both story and
information books from the very attractive book corner. They
regularly visited the school and local library to extend the
variety of books available to them. Staff made good use of
signs and labels to develop children’s interest in
environmental print. They needed to extend the range of
resources at the drawing table and provide further
opportunities for children to develop their early writing skills
through play.
•
The programme for knowledge and understanding of the
world was good. Staff used visitors and outings in the local
community to develop children’s awareness of the world
around them. Most children knew basic colours, numbers
and shapes, but they did not have enough opportunities to
develop their problem-solving skills or mathematical
language in their play. Children enjoyed using the computer
and recording their own play experiences with the digital or
video camera. Staff provided children with some
opportunities to develop their science skills using a range of
materials including water, sand, play dough and baking
activities. Children had planted a variety of seeds and were
watching them grow. They had good opportunities to learn
about their own and other cultures through the celebration of
a variety of festivals.
•
The programme for expressive and aesthetic development
was very good. Staff provided a wide range of materials for
children to express themselves imaginatively and creatively.
Children had opportunities to paint and create models. There
was interesting role-play in the summer garden where
children pretended to cut grass, look after the flowers and
search for frogs. Staff had created an attractive area where
children could explore and investigate music. Children
created their own band using a variety of instruments. They
enjoyed dancing and watching themselves on the interactive
video link. Children sang along with staff and knew a range
of songs and rhymes.
•
The programme for physical development and movement
was good. Staff provided children with opportunities for
energetic play both inside and outdoors. The programme,
however, was not sufficiently challenging for the more able
children. The outdoor area was on a slope and staff regularly
used the school gym and soft-surface area to provide a more
varied programme for children. A few children showed a
good awareness of space when using the soft-play area.
Children cooperated with each other and took turns when
using the trampoline. They had sufficient opportunities to
develop their hand and finger control through using brushes,
scissors, pencils, construction toys, small world toys and play
dough.
Support for children and families
Standard 6
Staff had created a happy, caring environment where children
and parents were made very welcome. Parents were
encouraged to become involved in the life of the nursery through
the recently updated, informative handbook, regular newsletters,
a very detailed notice board and the use of photographs showing
children at play. Staff worked effectively with families to provide
good support for parents and children. Almost all parents who
responded to the pre-inspection questionnaire, and those spoken
with on the day, were satisfied with almost all aspects of the
service. Some parents wanted more information on their child’s
progress.
The nursery had a well-planned programme for transition into the
primary school and for children beginning nursery. Children, their
parents and staff had opportunities to meet before transition and
detailed information about the children’s progress was
exchanged. Staff had established effective links with primary
school pupils who spoke to nursery children about dinosaurs or
had visited the nursery during their hygiene project. They had
formed very good links with the playgroup and outside
professional agencies.
3
Staff provided high-quality support for children requiring
additional help with their learning. They had a good
understanding of legislation and had developed appropriate
policies and procedures. The nursery worked closely with a wide
range of support agencies. Children attending the developmental
nursery, and those fully included in the main nursery, had
individualised educational programmes. Care plans were in
place, where appropriate. Staff had developed very effective
procedures for recording children’s personal information, and
communicating with other agencies. Children for whom English
was an additional language were very well supported. Staff
made effective use of interpreters to support parents during
school visits and had translated school handbooks and other
relevant documents into the appropriate languages.
Management
Standard 14
The headteacher and depute headteacher worked in partnership
and provided good leadership to the nursery staff. Their remits
and responsibilities were clearly defined and understood by staff.
Both were committed, supportive and had a very good
awareness of where further development was required. The
approachable and committed nursery team worked very well
together to ensure the smooth day-to-day running of the nursery.
Staff had not undertaken child protection training and some were
unsure of the correct procedures to follow. All were aware of
their responsibilities when protecting children. A well-planned
system of staff appraisal was in place and effectively identified
staff training needs. Staff were familiar with the Scottish Social
Services Council Codes of Practice and their implications.
The nursery had a wide range of policies and procedures in place
which were available to both staff and parents. Monitoring and
evaluation was in place but needed to be developed further to
ensure it was rigorous and systematic.
Key strengths
4
•
The attractive, spacious and welcoming nursery.
•
Happy, contented children who concentrated on their chosen
task and cooperated with their friends.
•
The very good programme for expressive and aesthetic
development.
•
The very good support for children who required additional
help with their learning.
•
The commitment of management and staff to further develop
the nursery.
Other Issues
Response to
recommendations or to
requirements made at
previous inspection
There were three recommendations made at the last Care
Commission inspection. Two had been carried out satisfactorily.
The third related to the need to identify next steps in children’s
learning and is included again in this report.
Recommendations for improvement
•
Staff should improve planning and take full account of the
information gained from observations and assessments to
plan next steps in children’s learning.
•
Staff should ensure that children have more opportunities to
make choices and decisions which influence the daily
programme.
•
All staff should be trained in child protection.
•
Management and staff should further develop systematic and
rigorous procedures for monitoring and evaluating the overall
quality of the provision using national standards of
performance.
Care Commission Officers and HM Inspectors have asked the
pre-school centre and education authority to prepare an action
plan indicating how they will address the main findings of the
report. Where requirements are made, the action plan should
include timescales to deal with these. The plan will be available
to parents and carers. In liaison with the pre-school centre and
education authority, Care Commission Officers and
HM Inspectors will monitor progress to ensure improvements are
in line with the main findings of the report.
Doreen Jones
Jane Mason
HM Inspectorate of Education
5