Queen's Park Primary School

Store Street Manchester M1 2WD T 0300 123 4234 www.gov.uk/ofsted

p.1

Mr Ben Commins Headteacher Queen’s Park Primary School Droop Street London W10 4DQ

p.1

Short inspection of Queen’s Park Primary School

Following my visit to the school on 11 July 2017, I write on behalf of Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Education, Children’s Services and Skills to report the inspection findings. The visit was the first short inspection carried out since Queen’s Park Primary School was judged to be good in January 2013.

p.1

Short inspection of Queen’s Park Primary School

The leadership team has maintained the good quality of education in the school since the last inspection. You have brought clear vision and direction since becoming headteacher in September 2016. You have the full support of your leadership team, parents and governing body. The culture and ethos of the school has changed and there is now urgency in the school’s approach to improvement priorities.

p.1

Short inspection of Queen’s Park Primary School

Together with your deputy headteacher, you have prioritised the actions needed to bring about the most effective changes at the school. This has been successful in improving outcomes for pupils across all key stages. You have nurtured a new but determined senior leadership team and they have brought renewed energy to the school.

p.1

Short inspection of Queen’s Park Primary School

The staff, parents and governing body support your plans for the school, and they have worked effectively with you to bring about much-needed improvements. You recognise that there is more work to do in areas like the early years; however, you have demonstrated the capacity to sustain improvement. In the early years, you have improved the learning environment and invested in additional hours for all children at the nursery. You have the full support of the local authority. You also have the overwhelming support of parents and carers. They say that the school has an ‘open door’ policy. They feel that the school supports them and responds to their concerns. Safeguarding is effective.

p.1

Short inspection of Queen’s Park Primary School

The school’s safeguarding procedures are robust. The leadership team has ensured that all safeguarding arrangements are fit for purpose and records are detailed and of high quality. All pre-employment checks for adults working at the school meet statutory requirements. Staff have benefited from appropriate training and understand what to do should a safeguarding issue or concern arise. Staff report any worries they have about pupils quickly. Leaders respond to these concerns quickly, including when pupils are absent from school. Governors are fully involved in the oversight of safeguarding across the school. Parents that replied to Parent View, Ofsted’s questionnaire, report that their children are safe at the school and are well looked after. Parents are fulsome in their praise of the safe and nurturing community their children attend. Pupils speak confidently about how to keep themselves safe, including when online.

p.2

Inspection findings

 My first key line of enquiry focused on the effectiveness of leaders’ actions in ensuring that pupils are achieving a good level of development in the early years. This is because the proportions of pupils achieving a good level of development was below the national average prior to 2016.  Looking at records of pupils’ starting points when they begin at the Nursery shows that their abilities are below expected standards. To address this issue, you have invested in free additional hours for all Nursery children. This has had success in improving continuity for children and helping them to catch up.  Leaders have invested in the outdoor learning environment, which is now a pleasant space for children to develop their physical skills and to explore the world around them. You have decided to create a music exploration area, a water activity and a sand area. Talking to pupils and seeing them learning showed that

p.2

Inspection findings

children do explore freely and engage in a range of planned activities. However, some teaching is not meeting their individual needs. This was evident when adults were not routinely challenging some children, for example in their counting activities. The lack of challenge, particularly for the most able children, is resulting in fewer children working securely at expected standards.  While some pupils make progress quickly from their starting points, teaching is not effectively developing language and vocabulary for some children. This is preventing some children from making the progress they are capable of. You acknowledge that adults in the early years are not providing a rich enough language environment. However, together with your senior leadership team, you have demonstrated the capacity to make further progress.  The second key line of enquiry focused on evaluating the impact of leaders’ actions to ensure that children make strong progress in key stage 1. Leaders

p.2

Inspection findings

monitor progress closely through a range of methods, they visit classes regularly, and teachers are paired to work collaboratively. Leaders have improved resources for teaching phonics and improving pupils’ reading skills.  Observing teaching at key stage 1 showed that pupils demonstrate interest in their work and have positive attitudes to learning. I listened to pupils in Years 1 and 2 reading. They read with increased confidence. Lower-ability pupils used secure strategies for tackling tricky and difficult words. The higher-ability pupils read with confidence and fluency. All pupils demonstrated a love for reading and a love for books. More pupils are making progress from their starting points and some are making accelerated progress.  During our learning walk through key stage 1, we found that the work teachers were giving pupils was not typically challenging enough. This was preventing some pupils from working at a greater depth. We also found that adults did not

p.2

Inspection findings

consistently correct pupils’ spelling and sentence structure to improve their work, as expected by the school.  My final line of enquiry focused on leaders’ actions to diminish the differences between the progress being made by disadvantaged pupils and their peers.  You have created a well-thought-out action plan to address this. Progress is improving quickly in Year 5. Evidence from reviews of pupils’ work shows that intervention in Year 5 is more precise at targeting pupils’ individual needs. This is not the case in Years 3 and 4. Teachers are not routinely correcting pupils’ mistakes in their use of tenses, spelling and grammar when they are writing. Teachers are not always setting work that is challenging enough in mathematics to ensure that more pupils work towards greater depth. Teachers are not consistently giving quality guidance in line with the school’s policy so that pupils know exactly what to do to improve their work.

p.3

Inspection findings

 Leaders are monitoring progress in Years 3 and 4 closely. Precise and targeted interventions are resulting in diminishing gaps between progress being made by disadvantaged pupils and their peers.

p.3

Next steps for the school

Leaders and those responsible for governance should ensure that:

p.3

Next steps for the school

 teachers focus on improving pupils’ speaking and writing skills in the early years and key stage 1  teachers routinely challenge pupils in their learning, particularly disadvantaged pupils, so that they consistently make good progress in line with other pupils nationally.

p.3

Next steps for the school

I am copying this letter to the chair of the governing body, the director of education for the Diocese of London and the director of children’s services for Westminster. This letter will be published on the Ofsted website.

p.3

Information about the inspection

I held meetings with you, the deputy headteacher and other school leaders to evaluate the impact of the school’s work. I met with the chair and vice chair of the governing body. I spoke with a small group of parents. I listened to a small group of pupils reading. I reviewed a range of documents, including leaders’ evaluation of the school’s performance and improvement plans, minutes of governing body meetings and information about pupils’ progress and attendance. The school’s single central record of employment checks and a range of safeguarding documentation was also reviewed. I considered six responses to Parent View and the school’s own survey of parents’ views. I visited lessons in all classes along with the headteacher and senior leaders.

p.4