Other · Ofsted report
Setting
Summary
What we read, and from where
Click a reading to see it highlighted in the report.
- Inspectorssingle source
Charles Lowry
- Postcode verified
L39 2DP
Deep dive
What this report says
In plain English
Join free to get a short, plain-English summary of any report.
Tone of the report
How positive or critical the inspectors' language is, from the words they chose. No AI involved.
In line with other reports of this type.
How the report reads, start to finish
Every paragraph in order, sized by length. Tap one to see it on the page.
Strengths
Quoted from the report. Tap to see it on the page.
No standout praise found.
Concerns
Quoted from the report. Tap to see it on the page.
No strong criticism found.
Next steps
Quoted from the report. Tap to see it on the page.
- I hope that these observations are useful as you continue to develop science in the school. p.3
- As explained previously, a copy of this letter will be published on the Ofsted website. p.3
- It may be used to inform decisions about any future inspection. p.3
- A copy of this letter is also being sent to your local authority. p.3
What the report dwells on
Topics by how often they come up, coloured by how they are described. Open one for an example.
Progress & outcomes9
“Pupils work well in science lessons and most make good progress.” p.1
Anatomy of the report
How the report is built, against others of the same type and grade.
- Pages
- 3
- Words of findings
- 773
- shorter than usual (typical 1049)
- Reading level
- Fairly hard
- Flesch 53, typical 45
- Average sentence
- 17 words
- Next steps
- 4
- typical 5
- Hedged sentences
- 11%
- “some”, “not always”, “most”…
Where the words go
Full report text
Aviation House 125 Kingsway London WC2B 6SE T 0300 123 1231 F 020 7421 6855 enquiries@ofsted.gov.uk www.ofsted.gov.uk
p.1
Mr J Rowlands Headteacher Ormskirk Church of England Primary School Greetby Hill Ormskirk L39 2DP
p.1
Ofsted 2012–13 subject survey inspection programme: science
Thank you for your hospitality and cooperation, and that of your staff and pupils during my visit on 22 January 2013 to look at work in science.
p.1
Ofsted 2012–13 subject survey inspection programme: science
The visit provided valuable information which will contribute to our national evaluation and reporting. Published reports are likely to list the names of the contributing institutions but individual institutions will not be identified in the main text without their consent.
p.1
Ofsted 2012–13 subject survey inspection programme: science
The evidence used to inform the judgements included: interviews with staff and pupils; scrutiny of relevant documentation; analysis of pupils’ work; information about pupils’ attainment and progress, and observation of five lessons.
p.1
Ofsted 2012–13 subject survey inspection programme: science
The overall effectiveness of science is good.
p.1
Achievement in science
At Key Stage 1, most pupils attain at least the expected Level 2 in science with an above average proportion of pupils attaining higher than this. Attainment at Key Stage 2 is also above average with most pupils, according to school assessment records, gaining the expected Level 4 by the end of Year 6 and the majority reaching Level 5. This represents good achievement. Although the achievement of pupils who require extra help compares favourably to all pupils nationally, it is not as high as their peers in the school. Pupils for whom the school receives additional funding through the pupil premium make good progress in science. Pupils have good attitudes to learning and say they enjoy science. Pupils are invariably polite, friendly and courteous. Pupils work well in science lessons and most make good progress. However the learning of pupils who require extra help slows when the work they are given to do is not matched well enough to their needs.
p.1
Quality of teaching in science
The quality of teaching in science is good.
p.2
Quality of teaching in science
Teaching is consistently good and lessons well planned, however planning does not always take into account the needs of less able pupils. Teachers’ subject knowledge is secure and they use information and communication technology well to help students understand what they are being taught. For example teachers are using video clips and high quality images as aids to explain scientific ideas. Relationships between the pupils and their teachers in science lessons are good, with a positive atmosphere in the classroom. Pupils’ books are marked regularly and teachers’ comments recognise pupils’ hard work. However, these comments do not always make clear what pupils need to do to improve. In the Early Years and Foundation Stage there are a good range of activities to help the children understand the world around them.
p.2
Quality of the curriculum in science
The quality of the curriculum in science is good.
p.2
Quality of the curriculum in science
The curriculum provides pupils with a broad and enjoyable science experience; helping them to develop their knowledge and understanding of scientific ideas. Increasing the pupils’ knowledge of science is given greater emphasis than the strand of scientific enquiry. This does lead to good science subject knowledge. Parents of former pupils say the receiving High School comments favourably on this. But there is scope for more teaching time to be assigned to the development of pupils’ practical and investigative skills. The school grounds are used as a resource to support the learning of pupils in the Early Years and Foundation Stage. The wooded area gives the children real life experiences of living things and the environment. The weekly ‘Mad Science’ club and a range of science themed days, for example the ‘Electricity Day’ play an important role in maintaining pupils’ motivation and interest in science.
p.2
Effectiveness of leadership in, and management of, science
The effectiveness of leadership in and management of, science is good.
p.2
Effectiveness of leadership in, and management of, science
Leaders and managers have successfully focused on directing time and resources to improving pupils’ progress in literacy and numeracy as a priority. Consequently, as in many primary schools, there has been limited staff training directly related to science teaching and learning. Good records are kept of pupils work, teaching quality in science, and the coordinator monitors regular work scrutiny activities to ensure consistent coverage of the national curriculum. The school has a system for checking pupils’ progress against their targets in science, based on at least three formal measuring points a year. Teachers moderate their judgements within the Year group, and this is checked by the subject coordinator. This informs school leaders about pupil progress, but precise progress targets are not shared with the pupils. Pupils are unable to work out how well they are doing. Plans to make better use of the school site as a science learning resource
p.2
Areas for improvement, which we discussed, include:
continuing to develop activities that meet the needs of all pupils and particularly those pupils who require extra help providing more opportunities for pupils to design their own experiments and carry out scientific investigations making sure that teachers’ comments on pupils’ work are informative and describe what pupils need to do to improve making sure that pupils are aware of their targets in science so that they can gauge their own progress.
p.3
Areas for improvement, which we discussed, include:
I hope that these observations are useful as you continue to develop science in the school.
p.3
Areas for improvement, which we discussed, include:
As explained previously, a copy of this letter will be published on the Ofsted website. It may be used to inform decisions about any future inspection. A copy of this letter is also being sent to your local authority.
p.3
Discuss this inspection
Members compare notes on inspectors and inspections here. Join free to read and post.
Join the discussion