Setting

Ms A Sakhardande Headteacher Kingsley Academy Prince Regent Road Hounslow TW3 1NE

p.1

Requires improvement: monitoring inspection visit to Kingsley Academy

Following my visit to your school on 13 October 2015, I write on behalf of Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Education, Children’s Services and Skills to report the inspection findings. 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

Requires improvement: monitoring inspection visit to Kingsley Academy

The visit was the first monitoring inspection since the school was judged to require improvement following the section 5 inspection in May 2015. It was carried out under section 8 of the Education Act 2005.

p.1

Requires improvement: monitoring inspection visit to Kingsley Academy

Senior leaders and governors are not taking effective action to tackle the areas requiring improvement identified at the last section 5 inspection in order to become a good school.

p.1

Evidence

During the inspection, meetings were held with you, other senior leaders, middle leaders, teachers and pupils. The assistant vice principal joined me on a visit to lessons and together we scrutinised pupils’ work. I spoke on the telephone to the chair of the newly appointed management board which has replaced the governing body, and I scrutinised recent governing body minutes. I evaluated documents, including the school’s action and improvement plans. I also met the regional director of the academy’s sponsor, Academies Enterprise Trust (AET), to discuss the actions taken since the last inspection.

p.1

Context

Since the inspection, AET has replaced the governing body with a management board. This change in governance was in response to the overall judgement of the Ofsted

p.1

Context

Store Street Manchester M1 2WD T: 0300 123 1231 Textphone: 0161 618 8524 enquiries@ofsted.gov.uk www.ofsted.gov.uk most recent inspection, and the fact that the percentage of pupils gaining five A* to C grades at GCSE in 2015 fell.

p.1

Main findings

The inspection report in May 2015 outlined four main areas for improvement, which are to:

p.2

Main findings

 create a strategic school improvement plan and ensure that it is shared with staff so they know what to do to improve outcomes for pupils  improve pupils’ achievement, particularly those who are disadvantaged or White British  improve lesson planning and ensure that there is consistency in whole- school initiatives  improve sixth form achievement by ensuring that pupils receive appropriate advice and guidance.

p.2

Main findings

The report also recommended that external reviews of the school’s use of the pupil premium and governance should take place.

p.2

Main findings

A draft school improvement plan has been written and staff were asked for their input. However, the plan itself has not yet been finalised by the management board. Therefore a final version has not been shared with staff. The draft plan focuses primarily on actions rather than the impact on pupils’ progress. It is not clear who is accountable for priorities in the plan. As a result, different leaders in the school are planning their own actions without clear leadership at senior level. Consequently, different departments have different strategies for how best to monitor pupils’ progress and support their learning. The school’s actions to improve pupils’ achievement are, therefore, inconsistent and lack strategic oversight.

p.2

Main findings

Pupils’ achievement and attendance are being monitored. However, this does not lead to effective support for pupils. For example, current academic progress information indicates that the underachievement of disadvantaged and White British pupils is continuing. There is a lack of academic progress information for pupils in Key Stage 3. Similarly, the impact of strategies to improve attendance is not being evaluated by the school. For example, although the school has identified four target areas to improve attendance, the percentage of pupils who are persistently absent has increased. Therefore, effective action is not being taken.

p.2

Main findings

Some action has been taken to tackle areas where the quality of teaching requires improvement, for example by sharing good practice between subject departments. However, effective systems are not in place to consistently evaluate the impact of teaching on pupils’ progress. Evaluation of the quality of teaching across departments is too variable. The views of pupils also confirm that there is variability in the quality of teaching and marking. They feel that some teachers focus on the progress of some pupils at the expense of others. Teachers do not always share the success criteria for the work they set. Written feedback given by teachers to pupils on how to improve their work is sparse. Some sixth form pupils report that the lack of access to science laboratories and textbooks is preventing them from learning as well as they could.

p.2

Main findings

The school has not focused sufficiently on improving the quality of independent advice and guidance for sixth formers, particularly relating to the university application process. As a result, pupils do not have information early enough on how to apply, or in sufficient detail. Similarly, pupils who are preparing for entry to the sixth form have limited guidance to inform their choice of courses.

p.3

Main findings

In summary, the school has failed to take action with sufficient urgency that will ensure it is judged good at its next inspection. This is primarily because the leadership of the school lacks clarity on how to plan and evaluate the impact of its actions to improve pupils’ progress. While there is a clearer focus on the quality of teaching, current approaches to evaluating the impact of teaching on pupils’ learning are hindering further improvement.

p.3

Main findings

Ofsted may carry out further monitoring inspections and, where necessary, provide further support and challenge to the school until its next section 5 inspection.

p.3

External support

The external review of governance undertaken in July 2015 identified that the school’s action and improvement plans need to be agreed and implemented with more urgency. The other recommendations of the review have been superseded by the reorganisation of governance structure. AET is now providing challenge and support to the school through the newly appointed management board. However, this support has not been provided with sufficient urgency to ensure effective action has taken place. The chair of the management board has accurately identified the reasons why the school is not taking effective action at this point. She has a clear view of what is now required to improve outcomes for pupils. However, given the very recent appointment of the management board, it is too early to evaluate its impact.

p.3

External support

The review of the school’s use of pupil premium funding, also undertaken in July 2015, concludes that pupil premium funding is not being targeted specifically enough to support eligible pupils.

p.3

External support

I am copying this letter as below. This letter will be published on the Ofsted website.

p.3

Her Majesty’s Inspector

Copied to:  Chair of the Management Board, Kingsley Academy  Regional Director of Education London and South East, Academies Enterprise Trust  Director of Children’s Services, London Borough of Hounslow  School.NOTIFICATIONS@education.gsi.gov.uk

p.4