Setting

Ms Sue Farrell St Mary's Bluecoat CofE (VA) Primary School Lodge Lane The Grove Bridgnorth WV15 5EQ

p.1

Education act 2005 to St Mary's Bluecoat CofE (VA) Primary School

Following my visit to your school on 19 November 2012, I write on behalf of Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Education, Children’s Services and Skills to report on the findings of my visit. Thank you for the help you gave me and for the time you made available to discuss the actions you are taking to improve the school since the most recent section 5 inspection.

p.1

Education act 2005 to St Mary's Bluecoat CofE (VA) Primary School

The visit was the first monitoring inspection since the school was judged to require improvement following the section 5 inspection in 20 September 2012. It was carried out under section 8 of the Education Act 2005.

p.1

Evidence

During the visit, meetings were held with the headteacher, deputy headteacher and members of the governing body and a representative of the local authority. The school’s action plan was evaluated. The school’s planning was evaluated, together with the minutes of the governing body’s meetings, the impact of performance management and the school’s monitoring.

p.1

Context

There are no significant changes in context since the last inspection.

p.1

Main findings

The school’s development plan has been rewritten to more effectively cover the issues identified in the previous inspection. However, it does not contain enough Serco Inspections Cedar House 21 William Street Edgbaston Birmingham B15 1LH T 0300 123 1231 Text Phone: 0161 6188524 enquiries@ofsted.gov.uk www.ofsted.gov.uk Direct T 0121 683 3289 Direct email :elizabeth.rashvand@serco.com measureable outcomes. The school’s planning is benefiting from the improved collaboration in of the senior leadership team.

p.1

Main findings

The school has introduced clear expectations for all teachers related to the learning in every lesson. Monitoring of teaching is regular, and senior staff have recognised the need to overcome teachers’ anxiety about being observed. The school recognises that staffing difficulties have placed some limitations on the progress made in addressing issues in Key Stage 1.

p.2

Main findings

The governing body has not taken full advantage of training opportunities to ensure their fully understand information about the school and how they can more effectively fulfil their role. It continues to be the case that the school still has no chair of governors.

p.2

Main findings

Senior leaders and governors have begun to take effective action to tackle the areas requiring improvement identified at the recent section 5 inspection. Following the visit to the school, HMI recommend that further action is taken to:

p.2

Main findings

 include measurable indicators of progress in the school’s improvement planning, so that all leaders can effectively monitor the work of the school and hold staff to account for pupils’ progress  take steps to ensure that staff absence does not have a detrimental impact on pupils’ learning, particularly in Key Stage 1  ensure that all governors attend training so that they can more effectively hold the school’s senior leaders to account.

p.2

Main findings

Ofsted will continue to monitor the school until its next section 5 inspection.

p.2

External support

The local authority knows the school well and has regular discussions about the school’s progress. It has ensured that the school is linked to a local leader of education. This support has strengthened leadership and teaching within the school. The school has begun to use the local leader of education to develop its practice.

p.2

External support

I am copying this letter to the Chair of the Governing Body and the Director of Children’s Services for Shropshire and the Diocese.

p.2