Larkhall Academy
South Lanarkshire Council
12 June 2007
Contents
Page
1. Background
1
2. Key strengths
1
3. How well does the school raise achievement for
all?
2
4. How good is the environment for learning?
8
5. Leading and improving the school
10
Appendix 1
Indicators of quality
13
Appendix 2
Summary of questionnaire responses
14
Appendix 3
Attainment in Scottish Qualifications
Authority (SQA) National Qualifications
16
How can you contact us?
18
1. Background
Larkhall Academy was inspected in February 2007 as part of a national sample of secondary
education. The inspection covered key aspects of the school’s work at all stages.
HM Inspectors evaluated how well the school was raising achievement for all pupils, taking
into account the extent to which pupils’ learning needs were met by the curriculum and
teaching. They also analysed pupils’ attainment in national examinations (see Appendix 3),
the school’s processes for self-evaluation and innovation, and its overall effectiveness and
capacity for improvement. HM Inspectors focused particularly on English, mathematics,
biology and S1/S2 science and business education.
The inspection team also evaluated aspects of the school’s progress in implementing national
recommendations related to improving aspects of school meals provision.
HM Inspectors observed teaching, learning and achievement in lessons and other contexts
and examined pupils’ work. They analysed responses to questionnaires 1 issued to a sample
of parents 2 and pupils and to all staff. They interviewed groups of pupils, including
representatives of pupil councils, and staff. Members of the inspection team also met the
chairperson of the School Board, representatives of the parent-teacher association (PTA), a
group of parents and the school chaplain.
Larkhall Academy is a non-denominational school serving the towns of Larkhall and
Stonehouse and the adjoining villages of Ashgill and Netherburn. It forms part of the
Larkhall Learning Community. At the time of the inspection, the roll was 1216. The
percentage of pupils entitled to free school meals was well above the national average.
Pupils’ attendance was well below the national average.
2. Key strengths
HM Inspectors identified the following key strengths.
•
The quality of pupils’ learning in music, art and design and drama.
•
Pupils’ enthusiastic and effective commitment to creative and enterprising activities.
•
Commitment of staff to promoting pupils’ achievement in wider activities.
•
Partnership with parents and the wider community.
•
The outstanding work undertaken with gypsy travellers’ children.
1
See Appendix 2
Throughout this report, the term ‘parents’ should be taken to include foster carers, residential care staff and
carers who are relatives or friends.
2
1
3. How well does the school raise achievement for all?
To evaluate how well the school was raising achievement for all, HM Inspectors considered
the extent to which the learning needs of all pupils were met through the curriculum and
teaching. They evaluated the effectiveness of the school in promoting the learning and
personal development of all pupils in lessons and in other, broader contexts. They also
considered the standards attained in specific aspects of learning.
Curriculum
The quality of the curriculum was adequate. The school gave most pupils effective support
to choose appropriate courses. The school had introduced NQ courses at Access 3,
Intermediate 1 and Intermediate 2 levels in several subjects at S3/S4. The school had
involved staff, parents and pupils appropriately in discussing these changes. Particular
features of the curriculum included the following.
•
At S1/S2, pupils developed appropriate skills in information and communications
technology (ICT).
•
The school provided appropriate curricular and vocational guidance. Most S4 pupils
benefited from a useful insight into the world of work through work experience.
•
Selected pupils from S3 to S6 benefited from participation in the Council ‘What’s with
Work?’ programme undertaken in conjunction with Motherwell College. Overall,
however, the school’s timetabling arrangements for pupils following vocational
programmes meant that pupils had to catch up with subjects missed while at college
through attending Supported Study classes.
•
At S6, the ‘peer education’ programme enabled pupils to develop new skills in working
with others.
•
Working closely with the school’s library manager, departments had made coursework
and related support materials available on the intranet for online learning.
•
Weaknesses in the school’s curricular links with its associated primary schools meant
that pupils did not have well-planned continuity across all aspects of their learning.
•
A broad and balanced personal, social and health education programme (PSHE) was in
place for S1 to S4. The programme was being developed further to ensure coherence,
balance and consistency.
•
The school did not provide effective and coherent PSHE at S5/S6.
•
Due to a lack of teaching areas there was no core physical education at S5/S6.
•
The school did not provide core religious and moral education for pupils at S3 to S6.
•
Almost all pupils could successfully play a musical instrument by the end of S2.
2
Teaching and meeting pupils’ needs
The overall quality of teaching was adequate. Identified good practice should be shared and
extended to improve consistency and to ensure that all teachers have sufficiently high
expectations of their pupils. Where teachers provided pupils with well-planned and varied
activities, they engaged and motivated pupils very well. In such lessons, open questioning
extended pupils’ thinking effectively. Some homework tasks were well designed and
challenging and developed pupils’ independence. However, this practice was not found
consistently across the school. Often teachers failed to explain clearly to pupils what they
were expected to learn. Frequently they took too strong a lead and gave pupils insufficient
scope to develop ideas of their own. The use of praise to encourage further learning and
acknowledge success varied across the school. In a number of lessons, teachers’
expectations of the amount and quality of pupils’ work were too low.
Overall, the quality of provision for meeting pupils’ learning needs was adequate. The
school had established an extended pupil support team representing all departments in the
school, to keep staff fully informed of pupils’ needs. Most teachers worked hard to support
the learning of individual pupils. A minority did not accept full responsibility for meeting
the needs of all pupils. Overall, there was not enough use of appropriately differentiated
materials. A strength of the school’s provision was the assistance given to gypsy travellers’
children and pupils with additional support needs. Principal teachers of learning support and
behaviour support helped with the early identification of specific needs and the close
monitoring of pupils’ progress. Pupils referred to the ‘Time Out’ room were closely
monitored and given appropriate work to undertake to ensure they were actively involved in
learning. Most pupils with individualised educational programmes (IEPs) and behaviour
support plans were making good progress towards meeting their targets. Classroom
assistants and auxiliaries provided pupils with very good support. Pupils and their families
benefited from a well-developed P6 to S2 transition programme and a wide range of
activities arranged by the home-school partnership worker.
Learning and personal development
The quality of pupils’ learning was weak. In a minority of lessons, pupils helped set a brisk
pace of learning, remained engaged throughout and worked well with minimum supervision.
In the most effective lessons they worked very productively on group tasks and behaved very
responsibly, but they did not have regular opportunities to do so in all classes. A minority of
pupils behaved in ways which disrupted their own and other pupils’ learning. Although
many pupils did want to learn, teacher attention was too focused on keeping order. Pupils
were increasingly assessing their own and each other’s work and setting personal targets.
Where they knew their strengths and how to improve they made good progress. In
extra-curricular activities, pupils demonstrated successful learning across a wide range of
activities. They would benefit from closer links of these activities to their learning in class.
In too many lessons, where teachers took too strong a lead, pupils were not fully engaged in
learning.
The quality of pupils’ personal and social development was good, with some very good
features. Staff gave a high priority to providing pupils with a very broad range of
opportunities to develop their confidence and increase their skills. The school supported
pupils’ health and welfare through a broad and balanced PSHE programme at S1 to S4. It
3
did not provide pupils at S5/S6 with a continuing experience of PSHE, however. Many
pupils had achieved local and wider success through their involvement in the school’s
musical ensembles, including performing at South Lanarkshire’s ‘Gig on the Glen’. Large
numbers took part in concerts and shows, demonstrating high levels of commitment and
teamwork. Among pupils’ sporting achievements, girls’ football and badminton teams had
done particularly well nationally and internationally. Fifteen pupils had successfully
completed the Duke of Edinburgh bronze award. Pupils had won a prestigious ‘Masterchef’
competition on two occasions and had gone on to help prepare the winning menu for 200
pupils at school lunch. Pupils involved in the ‘Determined to Broadcast’ initiative showed
commendable enthusiasm and confidence. They built well on prior learning, demonstrated
awareness of the importance of collaboration and took pride in their work. S6 pupils
developed their leadership and team-building skills during a range of challenging outdoor
education activities. They also responded well to their responsibilities as peer tutors,
members of the yearbook committee, captains and prefects. Although it was an established
feature of school life in previous years, the pupil council had not met so far this session.
Pupils expressed regret at not having their opportunity to contribute to the life of the school
through the council.
English
Most teachers questioned pupils effectively to develop their thinking and were open and
responsive to pupils’ ideas. In most lessons, they set high expectations for the quality of
work to be produced. Sometimes teaching approaches lacked variety, with too much
direction by teachers. Self- and peer-assessment helped pupils understand how to improve
their work. Almost all pupils worked well with minimum supervision. When they
collaborated on well-planned tasks they made very good progress.
The overall quality of teaching, meeting needs and learning was adequate overall.
Attainment was adequate. Particular features included the following.
•
By the end of S2, the majority of pupils made good progress from their prior levels of
attainment. The majority attained expected national levels in reading, listening and
talking. A minority attained appropriate levels in writing.
•
At Standard Grade, the proportion of pupils attaining grades 1-2 was below national
averages overall, although attainment had improved in 2006. The proportion attaining
grades 1-4 was well below national averages.
•
Pupils’ attainment was in line with the national averages at Intermediate 1 and 2. At
Higher, the proportion of pupils attaining A-C grades was below the national average.
Too many pupils at S5/S6 attained no award in English.
Mathematics
Almost all teachers explained work clearly and used questioning well to check pupils’
knowledge. They did not consistently share the purpose of lessons with pupils. Pupils at all
stages benefited from a range of resources. Teaching approaches, including the use of ICT
did not meet pupils’ learning needs fully. Overall, the pace of learning was appropriately
brisk. Pupils had limited opportunities to work together and learn from each other.
4
Overall, the quality of teaching, meeting pupils’ needs, learning and attainment was good.
Particular features included the following.
•
At S2, attainment was stable overall. Most pupils attained the appropriate national level.
•
At Standard Grade, the proportion of pupils attaining grades 1-2 was generally above the
national average. The proportion attaining grades 1-4 was generally below the national
average. Pupils’ attainment in mathematics was much better than in their other subjects.
•
At S5/S6, the proportion of pupils attaining A-C grades was generally in line with the
national average at Higher and above the national average at Intermediate 2. Pupils’
attainment in mathematics at these levels was better than in their other subjects. At
Intermediate 2, the majority of pupils were successful. At Advanced Higher, the
minority of pupils attained an A-C grade.
Biology and S1/S2 science
Teachers used an appropriate variety of teaching approaches and gave clear explanations.
They used questioning well to check what pupils knew and to consolidate key points of
lessons. However, they did not routinely ask pupils to explain their responses and give
extended answers. Most pupils behaved well and listened attentively, although at times
pupils were not fully involved in their learning. In most lessons an appropriate pace allowed
pupils to complete written and experimental tasks. Teachers did not always help pupils to
understand what they were expected to learn and how to succeed. Teachers used ICT well to
enhance pupils’ learning. Visits, for example to the Glasgow Science Centre, enhanced
pupils’ experience and achievements.
The overall quality of teaching and learning was good. The overall quality of meeting
pupils’ learning needs and attainment was adequate. Particular features included the
following.
•
Pupils at S1/S2 understood their coursework and were progressing well. However, they
were not sufficiently confident about links between science and real life contexts.
•
While pupils’ attainment at Standard Grade had improved, the proportion of pupils
attaining grades 1-2 was below national averages and was well below at grades 1-4.
•
At S5/S6, the proportion of pupils who attained A-C grades at Higher was well below the
national average. The proportion of pupils who attained A-C grades at Intermediate 2
was well below the national average, however, attainment had improved in 2006.
Business education
Teachers interacted very well with pupils and had high expectations for all. They set
appropriate tasks for homework and provided well-targeted support to pupils experiencing
difficulties. They shared with pupils what they were going to learn and questioned them
effectively to check on their understanding. The pace of learning was consistently good and
on occasion very good. Pupils behaved well, remained on task and worked conscientiously.
Teachers assessed pupils’ work systematically. While pupils were clear about what they had
to do to succeed they had too few opportunities to take responsibility for their own learning.
5
Overall, the quality of learning, teaching and meeting pupils’ needs was good. Attainment
was good. Particular features included the following.
•
The proportion of pupils presented for Standard Grade administration was consistently
above the national average. The proportion of pupils attaining grades 1-4 was in line
with the national average.
•
The proportion of pupils presented for Standard Grade business management was below
the national average. While the proportion of pupils attaining grades 1-2 was in line with
the national average, the proportion attaining grades 1-4 was well below the national
average.
•
Most of the small number of pupils presented for Intermediate 1 and 2 in administration
and accounting and Intermediate 2 in business management attained A-C grades.
•
The proportion of pupils attaining A-C grades in Higher administration, business
management and accounting and finance had risen from below the national average and
was now above the national average.
•
Pupils consistently performed better in Standard Grade administration and Higher Grade
accounting and finance than in their other subjects.
Attainment
Information about the subjects inspected has been given earlier in the report. Across the
school, particular features of pupils’ progress, results in examinations and other
qualifications, including those awarded by the Scottish Qualifications Authority (SQA)
within the Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework (SCQF) 3 for the three year period
2004-2006, are included below.
By the end of S2, attainment was adequate. Particular features included the following.
•
The majority of pupils attained expected national levels in reading, listening, talking and
mathematics.
•
A minority of pupils attained appropriate levels in writing.
•
Pupils’ progress and attainment varied across departments and classes. Coursework in
S1 did not always build sufficiently on pupils’ prior learning.
3
Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework (SCQF) levels:
7: Advanced Higher at A-C/CSYS at A-C
6: Higher at A-C
5: Intermediate 2 at A-C; Standard Grade at 1-2
4: Intermediate 1 at A-C; Standard Grade at 3-4
3: Access 3 cluster; Standard Grade at 5-6
6
By the end of S4 attainment was weak. Particular features included the following.
•
The proportion of pupils attaining five or more awards at SCQF level 3 was well below
national averages.
•
The proportions of pupils attaining five or more awards at SCQF levels 4 and 5 or better
were below national averages.
•
Performance at SCQF levels 3 and 4 was below that of similar schools, and at level 5
was in line with that of similar schools.
•
The proportions of pupils gaining awards at Credit level were well below national
averages in art and design, biology, chemistry, craft and design, graphic communication,
physical education and history.
•
The number of no awards was well above the national average in craft and design,
drama and French.
By the end of S6, the overall quality of attainment was weak. Particular features included
the following.
•
The proportion of pupils attaining three or five or more awards at SCQF level 6 or better
was below national averages. The proportion attaining one or more award at SCQF
level 7 was in line with national averages.
•
The proportion of pupils attaining A-C grades was well above the national averages in
computing, graphic communication and music and above the average in physics.
•
The proportion of pupils attaining A-C grades was below the national average in art and
design, chemistry, drama, and geography and well below in history and modern studies.
•
The number of no awards in physics was above the national average.
•
The majority of pupils who sat Advanced Higher courses in 2006 attained A-C grades.
•
The school performed less well than similar schools at one, three and five Highers by the
end of S6.
7
4. How good is the environment for learning?
Aspect
Comment
Pastoral care
The school placed a high priority on ensuring the care and welfare of
pupils. All staff had been trained in child protection procedures and
the school had an appropriate policy on safe use of the Internet. It did
not have sufficiently well-developed policies on preventing bullying,
drugs misuse or racial incidents. Pupil support was organised
effectively through a house system and work with partner agencies
provided a wide range of helpful services for pupils, parents and
carers. Pupils were confident that issues of concern would be dealt
with effectively. Through ‘peer education’, S6 pupils supported the
pastoral and learning needs of younger pupils commendably well.
Arrangements for the issue of free school meal tickets were
inappropriate and required to be reviewed. The home-school worker
and home economics department jointly promoted healthy eating and
practical cookery skills to a group of pupils and parents through the
provision of a highly effective evening class.
8
Aspect
Comment
Quality of
accommodation and
facilities
Accommodation was unsatisfactory. Particular features included the
following.
•
The library was bright and attractive and staff provided a good
service to pupils and teachers.
•
Wheelchair users were unable to access parts of the buildings.
•
Dining and social accommodation for pupils was too limited.
•
Pupils did not have access to drinking water facilities.
•
There were no suitable areas for pupils to use in inclement
weather.
•
Limited access to external physical education facilities because of
health and safety issues.
•
Toilet facilities for both staff and pupils required upgrading.
•
Parts of the building were prone to leaks and temperature
variations adversely affected learning and teaching.
•
Many teaching areas were dull and unattractive.
•
Concerns about aspects of security were brought to the attention
of the school and education authority.
The education authority had plans to build new accommodation on
another site.
9
Aspect
Comment
Climate and
relationships,
expectations and
promoting
achievement and
equality
Climate and relationships had some strengths but were adequate
overall. The majority of pupils and most staff felt pride in the school.
At all stages, pupils could exercise a measure of responsibility, for
example, through school teams and pupil councils. However, the low
expectations of a significant minority of pupils adversely affected
their behaviour and attainment. Individual teachers and departments
set and achieved high standards, but across the school staff did not
always do this. Pupils developed their awareness of the needs of
others through active involvement in fundraising for charities. The
annual awards ceremony recognised a wide range of pupils’
achievement. Aspects of racism and equality were addressed in the
curriculum, but the school did not promote these important aspects
sufficiently strongly across all aspects. The school had appropriate
arrangements for religious observance.
Partnership with
parents and the
community
The quality of partnership with parents and the community was very
good. Particular features included the following.
•
The school communicated regularly with parents through reports,
newsletters, letters, meetings and by telephone.
•
Parents supported school events such as award ceremonies,
information evenings and parents’ evenings.
•
Pupils benefited from the school’s strong partnerships with the
School Board, the PTA and Friends of the School.
•
Office staff provided a warm welcome to parents and visitors.
•
The headteacher had effective and productive links with local
businesses, the Rotary Club and local churches.
•
The school had also established productive links with nearby
further education colleges and employers.
5. Leading and improving the school
Larkhall Academy was not meeting the needs and aspirations of all of its pupils and staff. It
was not raising the attainment and achievement of many pupils sufficiently. While a
significant minority of teachers engaged pupils very effectively in their learning, the quality
of teaching was adequate overall. The atmosphere in a minority of the classes was not
conducive to high quality learning. Attainment was weak overall. Some pupils did not feel
safe and secure within the school. Expectations of some staff and too many pupils were too
low and the resulting quality of education provided ranged from weak to adequate. Staff and
10
parents now needed to work closely with the education authority to create an environment
where pupils would be able to work without disruption and achieve the standards of which
they were capable.
The headteacher was generally respected by parents and members of the local community,
and was committed to inclusion and high expectations for pupils’ achievements. He had set
out his vision to improve the curriculum, the quality of learning and teaching and
self-evaluation. Commendably he had delegated aspects of leadership to members of the
teaching staff. However, the pace of change had been too slow and the monitoring of
developments had not been sufficiently rigorous. He had not always ensured that effective
and timely support and challenge were provided to those requiring it. The five depute
headteachers were still adapting to recent changes in their remits. Whilst each made
significant contributions to the work of the school, including some aspects of quality
assurance they did not always operate effectively as a team. They did not implement agreed
guidelines, particularly with regard to encouraging positive behaviour. They provided
helpful support to departments but did not lead them sufficiently to improve attainment,
learning and teaching. The quality of leadership of subject departments varied significantly
across the school. While some principal teachers led their departments well, others had not
shown the leadership qualities necessary to ensure consistently high standards of teaching
and levels of pupils’ attainment within their subject areas. Principal teachers and all staff
now needed to accept more responsibility for meeting the needs of all pupils, raising
attainment and ensuring consistently high standards of pupil behaviour.
The school’s approaches to self-evaluation had major weaknesses. The school did not have
sufficiently effective strategies in place at both school and departmental levels to monitor the
quality of learning and teaching and pupils’ progress. Action points for improvement from
annual discussions of examination results were often unclear, and were not formally
followed up to ensure effective implementation. The use of quality indicators for selfevaluation was not yet sufficiently embedded in the day-to-day work of the school to create
the necessary climate for improvement. As a result, the school did not demonstrate a
sufficient capacity to improve.
11
As well as building on the strengths and addressing the issues raised throughout this report,
the school and the education authority should address the following main points for action.
Main points for action
•
Improve the curriculum, to ensure better continuity in pupils’ learning and to meet the
needs of lower attaining pupils better.
•
Ensure that all staff engage appropriately in meeting learners’ needs to raise pupils’
aspirations and achievements.
•
Improve attainment at all stages.
•
Improve the administration of free school meals to ensure that pupils are not being
openly identified.
•
Address the health and safety concerns over accommodation identified in this report.
•
Improve the way the school evaluates its own performance, especially pupils’ learning,
teaching and meeting needs, so that key improvement targets can be identified and
progress towards them monitored rigorously.
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 and
carers. 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 and carers, within two years of the publication of
this report, on the extent of improvement that has been achieved.
David M Martin
HM Inspector
12 June 2007
12
Appendix 1 Indicators of quality
The following quality indicators have been used in the inspection process to contribute to the
evaluation of the overall effectiveness of the school in promoting learning and achievement
for all pupils.
Section 3. How well does the school raise achievement for all?
Structure of the curriculum
adequate
The teaching process
adequate
Meeting pupils’ needs
adequate
Pupils’ learning experiences
weak
Personal and social development
good
Overall quality of attainment: S1/S2
adequate
Overall quality of attainment: S3/S4
weak
Overall quality of attainment: S5/S6
weak
Section 4. How good is the environment for learning?
Pastoral care
good
Accommodation and facilities
unsatisfactory
Climate and relationships
adequate
Expectations and promoting achievement
adequate
Equality and fairness
weak
Partnership with parents, the School Board and
the community
very good
Section 5. Leading and improving the school
Leadership of the headteacher
weak
Leadership across the school
weak
Self-evaluation
weak
This report uses the following word scale to make clear the judgements made by inspectors:
excellent
very good
good
adequate
weak
unsatisfactory
outstanding, sector leading
major strengths
important strengths with areas for improvement
strengths just outweigh weaknesses
important weaknesses
major weaknesses
13
Appendix 2 Summary of questionnaire responses
The following provides a summary of questionnaire responses. Key issues from the
questionnaires have been considered in the inspection and comments are included as
appropriate throughout the report.
What parents thought the school did well
What parents think the school could do
better
Around a third of parents who received
questionnaires responded. They were
positive about almost all aspects of the work
of the school. In particular, they thought
that:
Almost two thirds felt that school buildings
were not kept in good order.
•
•
their children enjoyed being at school and
found school work stimulating and
challenging;
staff showed concern for the care and
welfare of their children;
•
staff made parents feel welcome in the
school and parents’ evenings were
helpful; and
•
the school was well led.
Around one quarter felt that the school:
•
did not have a good reputation in the local
community;
•
could give them more information about
its priorities for improving pupils’
education; and
•
there was a lack of mutual respect
between teachers and pupils at the school.
What pupils thought the school did well
What pupils think the school could do
better
About three quarters of the pupils responded
to the questionnaire. Most felt that:
Between a quarter and a third of pupils felt
that:
•
at least one teacher knew them well and
they would be helped if having difficulty;
•
teachers did not deal effectively with
incidents of bullying;
•
teachers were good at telling them how
they could improve their work;
•
not all pupils were treated fairly; and
•
•
they got on well with other pupils; and
they did not feel safe and secure in the
school.
•
the school helped them to keep
themselves safe and healthy.
14
Two thirds of pupils felt that the behaviour of
other pupils was not good.
What staff thought the school did well
What staff think the school could do
better
Almost all teaching and support staff felt
that:
A quarter of teachers and support staff felt
that:
•
staff worked hard to promote and
maintain good relations with the local
community;
•
there was not effective communication
between senior managers and staff;
•
•
teachers ensured that pupils received
constructive feedback about their work;
they did not have good opportunities to
be involved in decision making
processes;
•
teachers set high standards for pupils’
attainment;
•
•
they liked working in the school; and
time for continuous professional
development was not used effectively;
and
•
they were aware of the school’s
procedures relating to child protection.
•
there was not mutual respect between
teachers and pupils.
Around half of the teachers and support staff
felt that:
•
pupils were not enthusiastic about
learning;
•
indiscipline was not dealt with
effectively; and
•
standards set for pupils’ behaviour were
not consistently upheld in the school.
15
Appendix 3
Attainment in Scottish Qualifications Authority (SQA)
National Qualifications
Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework (SCQF) levels:
7: Advanced Higher at A-C/CSYS at A-C
6: Higher at A-C
5: Intermediate 2 at A-C; Standard Grade at 1-2
4: Intermediate 1 at A-C; Standard Grade at 3-4
3: Access 3 Cluster; Standard Grade at 5-6
Percentage of relevant S4 roll attaining by end of S4
English and Mathematics
@ Level 3
Larkhall Academy
Comparator schools4
National
2004
92
90
91
2005
79
89
90
2006
87
90
91
5+ @ Level 3 or better
Larkhall Academy
Comparator schools
National
88
90
91
77
87
90
84
89
91
5+ @ Level 4 or better
Larkhall Academy
Comparator schools
National
60
72
77
62
69
76
68
74
77
5+ @ Level 5 or better
Larkhall Academy
Comparator schools
National
18
26
35
20
26
34
29
26
35
2005
66
73
78
2006
64
71
78
Percentage of relevant S4 roll attaining by end of S5
5+ @ Level 4 or better
Larkhall Academy
Comparator schools4
National
2004
64
74
78
5+ @ Level 5 or better
Larkhall Academy
Comparator schools
National
32
37
45
25
38
45
28
36
45
1+ @ Level 6 or better
Larkhall Academy
Comparator schools
National
30
31
39
26
30
39
26
30
38
3+ @ Level 6 or better
Larkhall Academy
Comparator schools
National
15
16
23
14
14
23
9
13
22
5+ @ Level 6 or better
Larkhall Academy
Comparator schools
National
8
6
9
3
4
10
3
5
10
16
Percentage of relevant S4 roll attaining by end of S6
5+ @ Level 5 or better
Larkhall Academy
Comparator schools 4
National
2004
33
41
47
2005
35
39
47
2006
28
40
48
1+ @ Level 6 or better
Larkhall Academy
Comparator schools
National
32
38
44
32
35
43
29
35
43
3+ @ Level 6 or better
Larkhall Academy
Comparator schools
National
19
26
31
19
23
30
18
19
30
5+ @ Level 6 or better
Larkhall Academy
Comparator schools
National
12
13
20
13
14
19
11
11
20
1+ @ Level 7 or better
Larkhall Academy
Comparator schools
National
9
8
12
8
7
12
10
7
13
4
Comparator schools are the 20 schools statistically closest to the school being inspected in terms of the key
characteristics of the school population.
17
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 Executive
Director (Education Resources), 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, 1st Floor, Endeavour House, 1 Greenmarket,
Dundee DD1 4QB or by telephoning 01382 576700. Copies are also available on our
website at www.hmie.gov.uk.
HMIE Feedback and Complaints Procedure
If you wish to comment about secondary inspections
Should you wish to comment on any aspect of secondary inspections, you should write
in the first instance to Frank Crawford, HMCI, at HM Inspectorate of Education, Europa
Building, 450 Argyle Street, Glasgow G2 8LG.
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 email 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 Scottish Public
Services Ombudsman, 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.
18