Minutes of the Post-Ofsted Parents’ meeting held on Monday 11 February 2013
at 7 pm at Fladbury First School
Present:
Panel
The Revd Clive Fairclough (CF) – Chair of Governors
Miss Julie Wilson (JW) – Headteacher
Mr Brian Pengelly (BP) – School Improvement Adviser
Mrs Irene Punt (IP) – School Manager South
Mrs Kate Brunt (KB) – Local Leader in Education – headteacher of an outstanding
Worcestershire primary school (St Clements CofE)
Mrs Ann Mundy (AM) – Diocesan Director of Education
The Revd Canon Dr Stuart Currie (SC) – Chair of Board of Education, Diocese of
Worcester
Governors
Miss Debbie Clarke
Mr Richard Irvine
Mrs Pam Stubbs
Mr Jonathan Brotherton
Dr Martin Ounstead
Staff
Mrs Alison Marlow (minutes)
Mrs Elaine Mather (EM)
35 Parents (sign in sheet attached to master copy of these minutes only)
Welcome and Introduction
JW welcomed everyone and thanked them for attending. She explained that the
meeting was intended for the invited audience only and asked those present to keep
the proceedings confidential. Parents had been asked to submit questions in advance
and the meeting would aim to answer these questions. The panel would not be able to
address issues relating to individual pupils. Parents were encouraged to contact JW if
they had additional questions or wanted further information.
Members of the panel introduced themselves to the audience.
Who is responsible? (IP)
IP reported that she had worked with schools in categories for a number of years.
There was no one reason ‘why’ in Fladbury’s case and indeed there never is. She
encouraged parents to look ahead and pointed out that the School had begun to
address its problems before the Ofsted inspection. She read a section from the Ofsted
report which praised the work JW and CF were already doing. She informed the
1
meeting that she was confident that the School had the expertise and skill to drive
forward improvements.
Why was the whole school graded 4 (inadequate), when Early Years provision
was rated as good? (KB)
KB is an Ofsted Lead Inspector. She explained that the whole school is automatically
graded inadequate if any key stage is inadequate. However, Fladbury was not in
special measures, which showed that Ofsted was confident that it had the capacity to
improve. Questions were invited, but there were none.
Why didn’t you deal with poor teaching quality sooner? (BP)
BP reported that the School had received previous support from the Local Authority
(LA). A review of teaching and leadership carried out in 2011 had found that the vast
majority of lessons were of satisfactory standard; only one was rated as ‘good’. The
LA knew then that improvements were needed.
Since the 2011 review, Ofsted has become more rigorous. Their standards have been
revised three times in five years. What was previously ‘satisfactory’ is now ‘requires
improvement’.
Training was put in place for staff led by an experienced trainer. This training did not
have the impact in Fladbury that it had in other schools, although there was some
improvement in the middle period after training; some teaching at Fladbury is very
good. A key factor was the rigour of monitoring, which was the responsibility of the
headteacher. Monitoring was not as rigorous under the previous head as it could have
been.
BP said that the level of challenge had been raised since 2011. One member of staff
had decided that this level was too great. Another had not made use of the training
provided.
Questions from Parents
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
(David Bruce) – if monitoring is not done, who is responsible for monitoring
the monitor?
(BP) – this is the professional role of the headteacher. Outcomes are
monitored by the Governing Body (GB) and the LA.
(Ian Thorner) – Why was there no mitigation against a headteacher
approaching retirement?
(BP) – I have no answer – I trusted it to happen.
(David Bugg) – This has been a good school in the past and now the teachers
are not good any more. Do teachers stop being good, or are they put under
pressure?
(KB) – There has been a big change to Ofsted. Ofsted is now driven by
standards and progress. Fladbury now has to work harder; standards were
‘good’ before because of pupils’ entry levels. Ofsted now look at the learning
2
rather than the teaching. Behaviour seems good, but learning behaviour needs
improvement.
Q
(Geraint Roberts) – Why did the scrutiny not change after the LA review?
The member of staff who left was either incompetent or not given the structure
and focus to improve; I haven’t seen someone who doesn’t want to improve.
My impression is that staff have not had the training and support. The LA
must take some responsibility too. What is an ‘outstanding’ lesson?
A
(KB) – Fladbury staff have been to see different learning environments at St
Clement’s CE. They have seen what ‘outstanding’ looks like.
(JW) – staff also went on visits 18 months ago.
(BP) – the training was effective in other schools, but I didn’t get it right here.
(IP) – there are occasions when you provide opportunities but something gets
in the way; Ofsted expectations have gone up.
Q
A
If some staff can’t improve, action should have been taken.
(BP) – I saw some improvement, but it was not sustained, which has resulted
in the Ofsted report we have now.
Is being in classes of mixed ages a reason for the inadequate judgement?
KB said that this was irrelevant. Teachers should be able to cater for different
abilities within a class. A single year group could have a wide range of ability.
Managing the group was down to high quality differentiation. BP added that there
were many outstanding schools that had mixed age classes.
Q
A
Do you need to plan for use of TAs in mixed ability classes?
You always plan for the deployment of TAs.
Q
(Simon Adams) – the age ranges in school used to be narrower. The greater
age range stretches the year 3s but holds back year 4s. It’s hard for this size of
school to teach groups separately, but…
(JW) – we are governed by the finances of the school, we need more pupils.
It’s not an issue if the teacher is outstanding, but we haven’t had outstanding
teachers.
A
Mathematics has been a weakness for a few years now, why has this not been
addressed before now and what is being done now?
JW reported that she was working hard to create action plans and that there was
increased scrutiny of the Mathematics subject leader.
Q
A
(Sam Cornelius) – why are pupils not achieving the level they should be?
Only two children from Fladbury went into the top set at St Nicholas last year.
Can you arrange some additional tuition?
(JW) – the first job is to discuss current levels of achievement, establish where
children should be and work out how to get there. There are various measures
in place to support the children e.g. booster classes and good quality teaching.
3
Q
A
Q
A
(Simon Adams) – I have seen some improved homework but there are basics
missing e.g. timestables.
(BP) – we agree. Training is being carried out on number fluency. Lots of
varied activities are taking place in school and there are new text books. All
staff attended maths training on the last TED day. This training had been
given to the subject leader and previous headteacher before.
(Harriet Attias) – if things don’t improve by the end of next term, will you do
something about it?
IP will address this later.
Q
A
Does the school have a maths subject specialist?
Not currently, but we have access to outstanding teachers at St Clement’s and
support from the LA.
Q
(Richard Oakley) – how do we know what levels our children should be
achieving?
(JW) – you should have received this information at parents’ evening; if not,
please come and see me. There is now a formal to ensure that all parents have
the same information. There is a clear structure on reading, writing and maths
and the support needed at home.
A
Q
A
(Alice Jones) – is it the same member of staff who does that assessment?
(JW) - they do the assessment in conjunction with the TA and then meet with
me and I challenge them.
(BP) – there is a wider process of moderation within schools.
Q
A
(Ian Thorner) – do you have maths links with St Nicholas?
(JW) – I don’t know, if not we will do; I’m used to working closely with my
middle school.
How do we know that you’ve got a grip on things now?
Monitoring
JW outlined to the meeting details of the rigorous monitoring programme which had
been in place since January, including lesson observations, scrutiny of work and
planning and pupil progress meetings.
SEN
JW reported that the number of children with SEN was quite high for a school of this
size. She had met with the County Advisor and had begun to assess needs and plan
for better use of TAs e.g. with interventions.
School Strategic Plan
This was a large document that included specific action targets and tight deadlines.
JW was meeting weekly with BP to review the plan and measure achievement against
targets. There was support from a range of people to help the school move forward
4
e.g. two learning advisors, the link with St Clement’s and monitoring from external
sources.
Engagement with parents
JW hoped that parents could see she was working hard to improve communication
with parents and to promote an open door policy. Developments included the
introduction of a parent forum and events in school e.g. today’s Mother’s Day lunch
for parents and carers, which had been a great success.
Q
A
What is the morale of the remaining staff?
(JW) - the GB commissioned its own review of the school last term, which
found that the situation was not good. This meant that I came in knowing
there were things I needed to do. I expected the staff to feel deflated, not
knowing how to improve. I have met with quite the opposite. All the teachers
and TAs are determined to change. We are sorting out issues with staffing and
with teaching and learning.
(EW) – morale of the staff is now good. It wasn’t in December, but JW is
very supportive, we can go to her about anything. I was devastated to read the
report and I am desperate to get the school back to where it was.
How will the head be helped to improve the school?
KB informed the meeting that the whole staff team at St Clement’s is supporting
Fladbury. She was already JW’s professional partner before JW took up her post.
She confirmed that JW has extensive knowledge of teaching and learning and that she
has every confidence she can improve the school. KB will provide practical support
and BP strategic support.
Q
A
Q
A
(Heather Taylor) – how far do our links with St Clement’s go? Until we
achieve good? Outstanding?
(KB) – as long as the School wants us.
(JW) – I see the partnership continuing.
Where does the funding come from?
The advantage of being in an Ofsted category is that there is raised access to
personnel. The support provided is focused advice, rather than replacement or
additional teachers.
What plans are in place for the future?
AM reported that the Diocese recognised and shared the concerns of the School and
LA. There were positive indications that improvements had already been made. The
Diocese was confident that leadership was in place; it had confidence in JW and the
support being made available to her. JW had demonstrated her commitment by
moving very quickly to address the problems. On-going support would be needed and
the School would also need the community’s strong, local support. AM confirmed
that the Diocese was committed to working in partnership with the LA and parents; it
was confident that the action plan would drive up standards.
5
Q
A
What are the plans?
(AM) – everything you have heard. Ofsted confirmed what JW and the LA
had already seen.
Q
A
What plans do you have to make improvements?
There is a 14 months plan to address the priorities specified by Ofsted. There
will be a return visit after Easter and Ofsted will continue to return regularly
until the School is back where it should be.
Will the action plan be available on the web site?
(KB) – We will work on a parent-friendly version for publication on the web
site. Minutes of GB meetings are also available to parents.
Q
A
How often will the LA come into to assess the school? When will we get the next
Ofsted?
IP informed the meeting that this was all about impact; the difference had to be clear
and prompt. The LA had provided a statement of action; Ofsted would then carry out
a monitoring visit at Easter and evaluate whether action being taken was sufficiently
rigorous. They would hold meetings with BP, CF, JW and KB and carry out lesson
observations. They would then write a brief, published on the web site, about
progress made against targets. If progress was good, monitoring visits by Ofsted
would be spread out and a timescale developed to remove the school from the
category.
IP is accountable to the Assistant Director of Education and the Diocese. There will
be a Project Board meeting every month to scrutinise the impact of pupil progress.
Parents will be kept informed.
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Why did it take an Ofsted for any action to take place? You seem only to have
had concerns since December?
(CF) I arranged a seminar for governors with a former Ofsted inspector. We
then carried out our own health check and so we knew what to expect from
Ofsted. I am in school regularly and governors are receiving training.
(David Bruce) – this seems very reactive. Whose responsibility is it to be
proactive in the future?
(BP) – there has been a high level of support since 2011, with training and
visits, around £20,000 worth of work. It did not have the impact it should
have done.
Sounds like a failure of process.
It’s a failure of the quality of teaching.
Q
A
How do you prevent this happening again?
(JW) – we have to get the quality of teaching right. It’s hard now that
goalposts have moved for teaching. Some staff find it difficult to move with
that process, it doesn’t matter what support they have.
Q
My concern is for the Year 4 children who have the least time left.
6
A
(JW) – I am holding pupil progress meetings. The Parent Forum can discuss
whether you want information about where the children are. What’s important
is what you need to do to support them to develop.
Q
(Ezbe Bruce) – The Year 4 parents have been through 2011, our children have
not had an appropriate education, I do not feel trusted. Shouldn’t you step in
now as headteacher?
(JW) – the teacher currently working with that class is an outstanding teacher,
who previously worked as St Clement’s. She will have an impact over the
next two weeks.
A
Further Questions
Q
A
Q
A
(Kelly Brown) – what are pupil numbers like for next year?
(JW) – not good, fewer than this year. We have to promote the school,
particularly Early Years. We now have more pre-schoolers than reception
children. Mrs Stubbs from the GB is working on PR. We need to maintain
the children we have; only one family has decided to move on since January.
(Heather Taylor) – the school has never been at full capacity, there are not
enough families in the area.
(KB) – the School is not in trouble financially; it is not in a deficit situation.
Q
A
Q
A
(Alice Jennings) – will the staff remain the same?
(JW) – no decisions have been made. I want outstanding teachers.
(Joanna Bell) – is Miss Weyman staying? If so, please tell the parents.
(BP) – Ofsted has to decide whether it is appropriate to have an NQT in a
Category 4 school. The School has decided to extend Miss Weyman’s
contract to the end of the year to provide continuity for the children; this is the
right decision.
Q
A
Will there be another meeting like this with parents?
(BP) – I suggest we follow the Ofsted cycle; when a concrete report is
received, we can feedback to you.
There being no further questions or comments, the meeting closed at 8.40 pm.
7