St Luke's Church of England Primary School

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

p.1

Mr Mark Saxby Headteacher St Luke’s Church of England Primary School Bemister Road Winton Bournemouth Dorset BH9 1LG

p.1

Short inspection of St Luke’s Church of England Primary School

Following my visit to the school on 5 June 2018, 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 your predecessor school was judged to be good in January 2014.

p.1

Short inspection of St Luke’s Church of England Primary School

The leadership team has maintained the good quality of education in the school. Over the past two years, you have skilfully managed considerable turbulence in leadership and staffing. For reasons beyond your control, you have had three different deputy headteachers in this time. You have also been required to make changes in phase leadership and to appoint a new special educational needs coordinator (SENCo). Additionally, there have been changes in governance, with a new chair of governors and vice-chair of governors taking up their roles in September 2017. This has had a detrimental impact on outcomes, particularly at the end of key stage 1. However, structures that you have put in place to strengthen the quality of teaching, learning and assessment have ensured that outcomes for pupils currently in the school are good. This is the case across the whole school.

p.1

Short inspection of St Luke’s Church of England Primary School

The school’s values of acceptance, forgiveness and responsibility are at the heart of its work. Pupils are able to explain clearly what these values mean and how they can apply them in their daily life. The vast majority of parents and carers are positive about the school. They particularly appreciate your caring and nurturing approach, as well as the work that the school is doing to raise pupils’ self-esteem and develop their emotional and mental health.

p.1

Short inspection of St Luke’s Church of England Primary School

Your evaluation of the school’s strengths and areas that require further improvement is generally accurate. However, in some areas, the judgements that leaders have made about the school’s strengths are overly generous. School development planning is focused on the appropriate areas, but we agreed that the plan lacks precision. For example, the criteria for evaluating the success of the plan are not sufficiently specific. As a result, leaders and governors are not able to hold staff to account with the required level of rigour.

p.1

Short inspection of St Luke’s Church of England Primary School

Together with members of the trust, you have ensured that the school’s newly introduced tracking system is enabling leaders and staff to monitor pupils’ attainment and progress. This system has recently been refined to provide leaders with greater information about the progress pupils are making from their different starting points. You recognise that this system now needs time to become fully embedded across the school.

p.2

Short inspection of St Luke’s Church of England Primary School

Governors are fully supportive of the school. They have ensured that the school’s nurturing ethos is supporting pupils’ learning and lowering any barriers that pupils may face. You regularly provide governors with detailed information about pupils’ outcomes. However, governors do not yet have a secure understanding of what this information is telling them about pupils’ progress. You are receiving appropriate levels of challenge and support from the trust. This is ensuring that you are being held to account with sufficient rigour.

p.2

Short inspection of St Luke’s Church of England Primary School

As the designated safeguarding lead, you ensure that all staff are aware of their responsibility to keep children safe. Staff are aware of the signs of abuse they need to be looking out for. Similarly, they are clear about what they should do if they have any concerns. Checks to ensure the suitability of staff, volunteers and visitors are thorough and in line with statutory guidance.

p.2

Short inspection of St Luke’s Church of England Primary School

You have ensured that staff have received the required level of training. This includes awareness training on female genital mutilation and the ‘Prevent’ duty to combat radicalisation and extremism. The school does not, however, have a detailed overview of the training that leaders and staff have received or a system for identifying when any training needs to be updated. As a result, during my visit, we identified that your training regarding the safer recruitment of staff has recently lapsed. Although there are other members of the trust with this training, you agreed that you would update this training as a matter of urgency.

p.2

Short inspection of St Luke’s Church of England Primary School

Pupils say that they feel safe in school and this is a view shared by the vast majority of parents. Pupils say that bullying does sometimes happen, but they are generally confident that, when it does occur, it is dealt with effectively. You have a clear understanding of local risks and have established procedures for managing these, for example, when walking pupils between the two sites. You have also developed links with local agencies, for example the Royal National Lifeboat Institution, to ensure that pupils understand the risks associated with living near to the coast.

p.2

Short inspection of St Luke’s Church of England Primary School

Along with the parent support worker, you have a detailed understanding of your pupils and their families. This ensures that all pupils, especially the most vulnerable, are well cared for. You are tenacious in following up your concerns, both with parents and the local authority. This ensures that the most vulnerable families receive the support, care and guidance that they require.

p.2

Inspection findings

 At the start of the day, we agreed the main areas of focus for the inspection. Firstly, we considered the impact of leaders’ actions to ensure that pupils in key stage 1 make strong progress from their attainment at the end of Reception Year. This is because published assessment information for both 2016 and 2017 shows that outcomes for pupils at the end of Year 2 were lower than those of other pupils nationally with the same starting points.  In response to this past underachievement, you have strengthened the quality of teaching across key stage 1. Effective support has been provided by the trust, including a review of the school’s provision carried out by other headteachers. Teachers now have a good understanding of the expected standards for the end of their year group. This has resulted in them demonstrating higher expectations of what pupils can achieve. This is especially the case for the end of Year 2. As a

p.3

Inspection findings

result, current pupils are making good progress, and outcomes at the end of Year 2 are set to be stronger this year. This is demonstrated by the work in pupils’ books, as well as teacher assessments.  In writing, pupils are well supported in the development of skills. Teachers provide pupils with regular opportunities to apply these skills in independent writing across the curriculum. In mathematics, the introduction of a new scheme of work is ensuring that teaching is pitched appropriately. This is leading to pupils developing their skills in a range of mathematical concepts. However, opportunities for pupils to deepen their understanding and apply their skills through reasoning activities are more limited.  In 2017, published assessment information for the end of Year 6 showed that the proportion of middle prior attainers who achieved the higher standards at the end of key stage 2 was lower than that found nationally. Therefore, our second line of

p.3

Inspection findings

enquiry was to examine how leaders are ensuring that, across key stage 2, middle prior-attaining pupils are being challenged to work at the higher standards.  The school’s tracking information, as well as the work in pupils’ books, shows that the vast majority of pupils are making the progress you expect of them. This is as a result of good-quality teaching and teachers’ high expectations, for example in the application of pupils’ spelling, grammar and punctuation. In mathematics, teachers provide pupils with activities that are linked closely to age-related expectations. As a result, pupils are developing their fluency and have a secure understanding of mathematical concepts. This is proving particularly effective at supporting lower prior-attaining pupils to reach the expected standards. However, as in key stage 1, teachers are not routinely providing pupils with opportunities to apply their mathematical skills and deepen their understanding. You recognise

p.3

Inspection findings

that, across key stage 2, this is limiting the proportion of pupils working at the higher standards.  Additionally, the school’s focus has been on ensuring that all pupils make what it calls ‘expected’ progress. You have put plans in place to set more aspirational targets that will lead to pupils making greater progress, especially towards the higher standards. We agreed that this now needs to be fully embedded in order to have demonstrable impact.  Finally, we agreed to look at how effectively leaders and governors are ensuring that pupil-premium funding is having a positive impact on raising the outcomes of disadvantaged pupils. In 2017, while broadly in line with that of other pupils nationally, the progress of disadvantaged pupils was less than that made by other pupils in the school. Additionally, at the time of my visit, the information on the school’s website regarding the impact of pupil-premium funding did not meet

p.3

Inspection findings

statutory requirements.  Inspection evidence shows that the vast majority of disadvantaged pupils currently in the school are making strong progress from their starting points. In some cases, for example in Year 6, the progress of disadvantaged pupils exceeds that being made by other pupils. It was clear through our discussions that you place a strong emphasis on securing pupils’ emotional well-being. Healthy-living initiatives, through which pupils won prizes in the ‘Bournemouth in Bloom’ competition, are raising pupils’ self-esteem and enabling them to feel more confident about their learning. This is having a positive impact on pupils’ academic outcomes.  While disadvantaged pupils are making good progress, the strategic oversight of pupil-premium spending lacks rigour. Planning lacks precision and does not make it clear how the success of initiatives will be evaluated, beyond their having taken

p.4

Inspection findings

place. This is limiting the ability of leaders to evaluate the impact of their actions. As a result, leaders and governors are not able to plan future spending based on which interventions have proved the most effective in raising pupils’ outcomes.

p.4

Next steps for the school

Leaders and those responsible for governance should ensure that:

p.4

Next steps for the school

 greater proportions of pupils are working at the higher standards, by teachers providing regular opportunities for pupils to deepen their mathematical understanding and apply their skills across a range of concepts  development planning, including for disadvantaged pupils, is linked to pupils’ outcomes and makes it clear how the impact of actions are to be evaluated  systems for tracking pupils’ progress are linked to pupils’ prior attainment and used to set aspirational targets for pupils’ progress  systems are put in place to identify any gaps in safeguarding training, as well as the dates by which any training needs to be updated.

p.4

Next steps for the school

I am copying this letter to the chair of the local governing body, the chief executive officer of the Ocean Learning Trust, the director of education for the Diocese of Winchester, the regional schools commissioner and the director of children’s services for Bournemouth. This letter will be published on the Ofsted website.

p.4

Information about the inspection

During the inspection, I met with you, the acting deputy headteacher and other members of your leadership team. We discussed the school’s self-evaluation, information about pupils’ progress, and improvements made since the school became an academy in July 2015. Together, we observed pupils in classrooms and spoke with them about their learning. With the acting deputy headteacher and the school improvement officer for the trust, we analysed work in pupils’ books from across the school.

p.5

Information about the inspection

I had discussions with members of staff and three governors, including the chair of governors. I also met with the chief executive officer and other members of the Ocean Learning Trust. I looked at a range of written evidence, including documents relating to safeguarding. I spoke with parents at the end of the school day. I took account of the views expressed by 48 parents who completed the online survey, Parent View, as well as their written comments. I also considered the views of staff and pupils who returned their questionnaires.

p.5