Durand Academy

Durand Academy Hackford Road, Stockwell, London SW9 0RD

p.1

Inspection dates 30 November–1 December 2016

p.1

Effectiveness of leadership and management Inadequate

p.1

Quality of teaching, learning and assessment Inadequate

p.1

Personal development, behaviour and welfare Inadequate

p.1

Early years provision Inadequate Overall experiences and progress of children and young people in the boarding provision Inadequate

p.1

Quality of care and support in the boarding provision Requires improvement

p.1

How well children and young people are protected in the boarding provision Inadequate

p.1

Impact and effectiveness of leaders and managers in the boarding provision Inadequate

p.1

Overall effectiveness at previous inspection Good

p.1

Summary of key findings for parents and pupils

 Senior leaders and governors do not ensure that safeguarding is at the top of their priorities. They do not translate policies into effective practice.  Leaders are not fulfilling their responsibilities to ensure pupils’ welfare. They cannot account for the whereabouts of all pupils or ensure an appropriate education for everyone.  Senior leaders and governors do not have a detailed enough overview of the school’s performance. Systems to check quality lack rigour and precision.  Weak leadership and governance do not have the capacity to challenge deficiencies and drive the necessary improvements.  Teaching across the school is too variable. This means that pupils’ achievements are inconsistent. The rapid progress made in key stage 2 is not replicated in the early years or in key stages 1, 3 or 4.  Achievement in writing across the school requires improvement. Many pupils do well, especially in the Year 6 tests. Others, including

p.1

Summary of key findings for parents and pupils

the most able and disadvantaged pupils, underachieve significantly.  Provision and outcomes for Years 10 and 11 are poor. Weak teaching and a narrow curriculum limit pupils’ learning.  The national minimum standards for boarding schools are not met. Safeguarding weaknesses have not been tackled effectively, including in the early years, because there is too little oversight by senior leaders and governors. The school has the following strengths

p.1

Summary of key findings for parents and pupils

 Pupils’ achievements in the Year 6 tests are consistently well above expectations. Results in reading, writing and mathematics are in the top 10% of all schools in England.  Pupils’ behaviour around the building is good, especially moving to and from classrooms. This is because pupils understand what is expected and the routines are well established.  Strong teaching in key stage 2 has a very positive impact on pupils’ achievements. They make rapid progress from the beginning of Year 3 to the end of Year 6.  Arrangements to promote boarders’ health are strong. Meals are of good quality and detailed health plans are monitored well.

p.2

Summary of key findings for parents and pupils

Compliance with national minimum standards for boarding schools

p.2

Summary of key findings for parents and pupils

 The school must take action to meet the requirements of the schedule to The Education (Independent School Standards) Regulations 2014, the national minimum standards for boarding and associated requirements. The details are listed in the full report.

p.2

Full report

In accordance with section 44(1) of the Education Act 2005, Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector is of the opinion that this school requires special measures because it is failing to give its pupils an acceptable standard of education and the persons responsible for leading, managing or governing the school are not demonstrating the capacity to secure the necessary improvement in the school.

p.3

What does the school need to do to improve further?

 Improve procedures and practice for safeguarding to ensure that they promote the safety and welfare of pupils and meet statutory requirements.  Improve leadership and management by ensuring that: – the systems to check the quality of the school’s provision are robust, reliable and accurate so that strengths and weaknesses are identified and tackled quickly – leaders, including governors, monitor how effectively the pupil premium and the physical education (PE) and sport funding are spent so that they can apply the successful interventions in key stage 2 across the school, especially for disadvantaged pupils – leaders at all levels have the time, training and expertise to carry out their responsibilities effectively so that there is greater leadership capacity across the school.  Improve the quality of teaching and learning to enable pupils to make consistently good progress across the school, including in writing and for the most able and

p.3

What does the school need to do to improve further?

disadvantaged pupils, by ensuring that: – teachers have consistently high expectations of what pupils can do, especially in the early years, key stage 1 and key stages 3 and 4 – work is challenging for pupils of all abilities, stretches their thinking and deepens their understanding – there are sufficient specialist teachers in key stage 3 to cover the curriculum.  Provide opportunities for boarders to participate in activities in the local community.  Improve the communal and recreational space for boarders so that it provides a warm, relaxing and comfortable environment. An external review of the school’s use of the pupil premium should be undertaken to assess how this aspect of leadership and governance may be improved. An external review of governance should be carried out to identify how this aspect of leadership and governance may be improved.

p.3

schools:

 The school ensures that the welfare of pupils at the school is safeguarded and promoted by the drawing up and effective implementation of a written risk assessment policy and appropriate action is taken to reduce risks that are identified (6.3).  The school ensures that: – arrangements are made to safeguard and promote the welfare of pupils at the school; and – such arrangements have regard to any guidance issued by the Secretary of State (11.1).  The school’s governing body and/or proprietor monitors the effectiveness of the leadership, management and delivery of the boarding and welfare provision in the school, and takes appropriate action where necessary (13.1).  The school’s leadership and management consistently fulfil their responsibilities effectively so that the standards are met (13.4).  The school’s leadership and management and governance actively promote the well- being of pupils (13.5).

p.4

schools:

 Any staff member or volunteer employed or volunteering in a position working with boarders has a job description reflecting their duties, receives induction training in boarding when newly appointed, and receives regular reviews of their boarding practice, with opportunities for training and continual professional development in boarding (15.1).  The staff supervising boarders outside teaching time are sufficient in number, training and experience for the age, number and needs of boarders, and the locations and activities involved (15.3).

p.4

Inadequate

 Weak leadership and governance, particularly in relation to safeguarding, have failed to provide an adequate level of challenge and support to drive improvement. As a result, the school is not providing its pupils with an adequate quality of education.  Senior leaders do not have a clear overview of the school’s performance and this results in wide variations in the quality of teaching and pupils’ learning. Provision in key stage 2 is strong and pupils reach standards that are well above expectations, but teaching and achievement in the other key stages vary widely. They are inadequate in Years 7 to 11, where pupils are not making the progress they need to in order to be prepared for the next stage of their education.  The school’s evaluation of its performance is neither rigorous nor accurate. The evidence collected by senior leaders from lesson observations and book scrutiny lacks a focus on learning. There is little detailed analysis of the evidence. Senior leaders have

p.5

Inadequate

an inflated view of the school’s strengths and underestimate the seriousness of its weaknesses.  Leaders do not monitor or evaluate practice on the boarding site adequately. This makes it difficult to improve the experiences of boarders. For example, leaders have not analysed complaints to identify areas for improvement, and the development plan does not tackle weaknesses robustly. There is not the capacity to achieve the required improvements.  Arrangements to check pupils’ achievements in key stages 3 and 4 are inadequate. In key stage 3, leaders are unable to provide information about the achievements of current pupils and do not know whether pupils are making sufficient progress. There is no analysis of the progress of different groups of pupils, including by ethnicity, gender, disadvantage or ability. As a result, leaders do not have a secure understanding of which groups, if any, are underachieving. This is a serious concern because the school

p.5

Inadequate

cannot assure that all pupils are being given an equal opportunity to fulfil their potential.  In key stage 4, the lack of information about prior achievement means that teachers’ expectations are low and work lacks challenge. There is no system to track pupils’ progress effectively or to identify those falling behind with their learning. Evidence from pupils’ books shows that standards are well below where they should be for all pupils, including the most able and disadvantaged pupils.  The weaknesses in key stage 4 are magnified by the lack of care and provision for those pupils excluded from the St Cuthman’s site. These pupils continue their education in the main building in London but leaders do not ensure that they are given work that challenges them sufficiently. In some lessons, Years 10 and 11 pupils are not provided with any work and thus make no progress with their learning.  No information about the arrangements for managing staff performance was available

p.5

Inadequate

during the inspection. Consequently, there is no evidence about teachers’ appraisal and how this is linked to salary progression. Newly qualified teachers say that they are supported well by the school and given regular feedback about their performance. The school’s programme for newly qualified teachers has been certified as meeting an international quality management standard. However, other teachers note that they have had no professional development on writing, one of the school’s identified priorities.  The curriculum does not provide all pupils with an appropriately broad and balanced range of experiences. Pupils in key stages 1 and 2 study a wide variety of subjects, including art, music and modern languages. These broaden pupils’ experiences successfully. However, the curriculum for those in key stages 3 and 4 is limited by the lack of specialist teachers and accommodation. Work lacks challenge and pupils’

p.6

Inadequate

achievements are inadequate as a result.  The school has provided details of a wide range of after-school activities. Pupils noted that they have enjoyed trips, and the school’s newsletters provide information about past and planned visits – for example, the Year 1 trip to Vauxhall City Farm last year and the Year 6 School Journey to the Kingswood Centre in Staffordshire next year. Pupils say that they like these trips.  Leaders use additional funding, including the pupil premium funding and the PE and sport funding, to support a wide range of activities. This includes additional teaching assistant support, interventions and activities such as music, swimming, school trips and clubs. However, the impact of this work on pupils’ achievements has not been evaluated. As a result, the school cannot be sure that interventions are improving pupils’ experiences effectively.  The national minimum standards for boarding schools that were not met at the

p.6

Inadequate

inspection in July 2015 continue not to be met.  The management of staff performance on the boarding site is inadequate. Staff do not receive effective supervision to ensure that they are supported and challenged. Professional development is weak. For example, the induction programmes for new staff do not enable them to acquire the skills and knowledge required to carry out their roles effectively.  Training for staff on the boarding site, particularly in relation to safeguarding, is at a basic level. Staff report that they have not received training in child sexual exploitation and radicalisation. Only three staff have received training in first aid, although training is planned for other staff in January 2017. Staff have not received training in managing behaviour. This lack of training and development opportunities compromises the ability of staff to meet the specific needs of the boarders.  The arrangements for monitoring achievement in key stage 2 are broadly effective.

p.6

Inadequate

These provide teachers with a clear view of each pupil’s progress. Team leaders are able to identify those who are falling behind in their learning and to provide extra support. In addition, the tracking arrangements enable teachers to plan learning and respond to pupils’ misconceptions or misunderstandings appropriately. The information helpfully identifies those pupils who are eligible for additional funding through the pupil premium. However, there is no analysis of the progress of other groups, including of those who have special educational needs and/or disabilities. As a result, leaders do not have a detailed enough understanding of the achievements of different groups.  Team leaders, who are responsible for year groups, have a clear sense of purpose and manage the day-to-day arrangements well. They have a reliable knowledge of the progress of the pupils in their class and year group. This is because they meet regularly

p.6

Inadequate

with their teachers to discuss the progress of pupils and take appropriate action to support pupils who are falling behind. However, there is no overall leadership responsibility for drawing all this work together, and links with subject leaders are limited. This means that work to improve achievement in a particular subject is not coordinated with similar work in another year group.

p.7

Governance

 Governance is inadequate and the governing body does not have the capacity to fulfil its statutory duties effectively. There is insufficient oversight by governors of the school’s performance, especially in key stage 4 where provision is poor. Governors do not hold the school to account, nor do they know enough about the performance of pupils in key stages 3 and 4. This means that they are not able to support improvement.  Additional funding, including the pupil premium funding and the PE and sport funding, is used to support a wide range of activities and interventions. These include additional teaching assistant support, and activities such as music, swimming, school trips and clubs. This is having a very positive impact in key stage 2. However, governors have not evaluated the impact of this work on all pupils’ achievements, especially in key stages 1, 3 and 4. As a result, they cannot identify which activities work well and which

p.7

Governance

do not, nor whether the money is spent effectively across the school.  Governors report that they have attended relevant training on safer recruitment, safeguarding and child protection. However, no evidence was provided to support this.  It is recommended that newly qualified teachers should not be appointed.

p.7

Safeguarding

 The arrangements for safeguarding are not effective.  The school was unable to provide information about whether staff have been trained in all aspects of safeguarding, including sexual exploitation, radicalisation and extremism. However, staff know who the designated safeguarding lead is and follow suitable procedures if they have concerns.  The policies for safeguarding and child protection meet current requirements. However, these are not translated into effective practice. Governors have not ratified the safeguarding policy for the boarding site and additional guidance for staff is unclear. In addition, a boarder’s allegation of abuse by a member of staff was not referred to the local authority designated officer for consultation.  Senior leaders were unable to show that the school keeps detailed, accurate and secure written records of concerns and referrals. Similarly, they were not able to

p.7

Safeguarding

provide evidence that they have notified the local authority when they are about to remove a pupil’s name from the school admission register. These are serious concerns that place pupils at risk of harm.

p.7

Quality of teaching, learning and assessment Inadequate

 Wide variations in the quality of teaching mean that too many pupils fail to reach their potential. While some teaching is effective and helps pupils to make strong progress, this is not consistent across the school and subjects.  Teaching in the early years and key stage 1 is inadequate because expectations are not high enough. For example, in a Year 1 English lesson, all pupils were given the same task and the most able pupils were not challenged sufficiently. This resulted in the brightest pupils, including the most able disadvantaged pupils, making too little progress. Typically, pupils are not being stretched by the work they are given and do not reach high enough standards.  In key stage 3, teaching is inadequate. There are not enough specialist teachers and this limits the breadth and depth of pupils’ learning. Class teachers are required to teach subjects for which they lack expertise and, consequently, are unable to ensure

p.8

Quality of teaching, learning and assessment Inadequate

that work is interesting and challenging. As pupils noted, while they may make good progress in English, achievement in mathematics suffers.  Teaching in key stage 4 is weak. However, there is variation across subjects. Teaching in French and business studies is good because it challenges and interests pupils. Pupils are able to grapple with ideas at an appropriate level and in their own way. However, too much of the teaching is pitched at the same level for all pupils and lacks challenge for the most able, especially in science. Some teachers do not understand how to assess pupils’ work accurately. This results in pupils being given poor advice about the quality of their work and how to improve it.  The teaching of literacy and numeracy is mostly effective in key stage 2. For example, Spanish teaching is used to develop pupils’ understanding of syntax and structure. However, in key stage 1, teaching is less strong and does not develop pupils’ literacy

p.8

Quality of teaching, learning and assessment Inadequate

and numeracy skills consistently enough. Similarly, in key stages 3 and 4, literacy and numeracy are not taught well. This limits the development of pupils’ ability to apply their reading, writing and mathematical skills to other subjects and to tackle more complex work.  Too often, teaching assistants are not deployed effectively to ensure that they have a strong impact on pupils’ learning. In some lessons, teaching assistants provide helpful support to pupils who need extra help with their learning. This includes pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities, who are sometimes supported well. However, this is not consistent and teaching assistants are not given appropriate guidance. As a result, their impact on pupils’ learning is inadequate.  Teaching in key stage 2 is effective. Teachers use detailed assessment information well to plan lessons and give pupils challenging work. For example, in a successful Year 6

p.8

Quality of teaching, learning and assessment Inadequate

mathematics lesson, pupils were challenged to develop their understanding by applying what they knew to different problems. As a result, they made swift progress and had positive attitudes to learning. Similarly, mathematics books in Year 4 show that pupils are learning how to do increasingly complex multiplication and division. Learning is supported effectively by the verbal and written feedback given to pupils, which encourages them to improve their work.

p.8

Personal development and welfare

 The school’s work to promote pupils’ personal development and welfare is inadequate.  Senior leaders and governors do not ensure that pupils’ safety and welfare are promoted effectively. There is a lack of focus on safeguarding, illustrated by the poor record-keeping and follow-up to referrals. The school’s response to the statutory guidance on children missing in education is poor and leaves pupils at risk of harm.  The citizenship and personal, social, health and economic (PSHE) curriculum provides opportunities for pupils to develop their understanding of British values. For the most part, pupils have an understanding of different lifestyles and an awareness of the diversity of the community in which they live.  Pupils say that bullying is rare but that if it does happen, staff deal with it quickly and effectively. Most pupils in key stages 1 and 2 enjoy school. They especially like their lessons in art, music, computing and sport, and practical work in science. Pupils in key

p.9

Personal development and welfare

stages 3 and 4 are not as positive and they feel that the secondary school is not set up with the right teaching and subjects. During discussions with some key stage 3 pupils, all said that they were either moving to another school in the near future or considering moving.  Pupils in key stage 2 say that they feel safe in school and are taught how to keep themselves safe. For example, they are taught about online safety and know about safety outside the school and on the way home, including crossing the road. Older pupils noted that the PSHE education programme looks at safeguarding and they know about cyber bullying and internet safety. Visits from the police and Transport for London enhance the school’s provision effectively and give pupils a broader view of how to keep themselves safe. They, too, feel safe in school.  Parents’ views about the school are mixed. The majority are positive and feel that their

p.9

Personal development and welfare

children are safe and happy at school. However, a small minority are concerned about the lack of communication from the school and that its engagement with parents is poor.

p.9

Behaviour

 The behaviour of pupils requires improvement.  Pupils’ conduct around the school is generally sensible and well ordered. Staff take care to ensure that pupils move from classroom to playground, and back again, safely. Pupils respond to teachers’ clear expectations positively and follow instructions without fuss. They are very well mannered, polite and respectful, holding doors open and helping others.  Behaviour in lessons is variable. Where pupils are engaged and motivated by the teaching, they are well behaved and able to concentrate on their work to overcome difficulties. However, where teaching is weak, or where work is not challenging enough, behaviour goes downhill and chatting or low-level silliness disrupts learning.  The attendance of pupils in the early years and key stages 1 and 2 is above average. However, the attendance of pupils in Years 7 to 9 is, at best, average. During the inspection, there was conflicting information about the number of pupils absent in Year

p.9

Behaviour

9. Record-keeping is ineffective and the school was unable to confirm why the information changed during the day of the inspection.  Pupils on the boarding site are polite, respectful and well behaved. However, the excessive number of exclusions resulting from boarders’ inappropriate behaviour disrupts their learning. Incident reports have not always been completed. Behaviour management plans are not in place to provide staff with clear guidance to support boarders. There has been no management review of incidents to evaluate the effectiveness of the response to inappropriate behaviour.

p.10

Outcomes for pupils Inadequate

 Outcomes in key stages 3 and 4 are inadequate. Older pupils make poor progress in English, mathematics and science. Standards in all subjects in key stage 3 are lower than they should be. They are especially low in key stage 4, where pupils are underachieving, including the most able, disadvantaged pupils and the most able disadvantaged pupils. Evidence from pupils’ books shows that standards and progress are well below where they should be at this time of the school year.  Pupils in key stage 2 make swift progress from their starting points at the beginning of Year 3. The results of the 2016 tests at the end of Year 6 were high and in the top 10% of all schools in England.  The achievements of pupils in the early years and key stage 1 are less positive, and pupils’ standards in the 2016 Year 2 tests were below age-related expectations. The proportion of pupils reaching expected standards in the phonics screening check was

p.10

Outcomes for pupils Inadequate

also below average and had fallen for disadvantaged pupils.  In key stage 2, pupils of nearly all abilities and backgrounds make rapid progress in reading, writing and mathematics to reach standards that are well above expectations. However, the progress of the most able pupils in writing, and the most able disadvantaged pupils, is significantly weaker. The proportion reaching the higher scores is significantly lower than nationally. This is because these pupils are not given tasks that enable them to develop their skills to a deeper level or to practise extended writing.  Disadvantaged pupils, including those who are the most able, make rapid progress in key stage 2. However, this is not replicated in other key stages. In key stage 1, too few pupils reach expected standards or above in writing, mathematics and science. The number achieving at greater depth in mathematics is especially low.  Pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities make similar progress to

p.10

Outcomes for pupils Inadequate

their peers. Although leaders can talk knowledgeably about individual pupils in their class, they are unable to provide information about the progress pupils make across the school. As a result, the school cannot be sure that pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities are achieving well enough.

p.10

Early years provision Inadequate

 The provision for children in the early years is inadequate. The proportion of children reaching a good level of development has been below average for the last few years.  Children, including disadvantaged children, make limited progress in the Nursery and Reception classes. This is because they are not given enough work that stimulates their interests or challenges their thinking. In most classes, children are given the same work regardless of their ability or stage of development. As a result, there is insufficient challenge for all children, including the most and least able. For example, although children have started to write in sentences, there is little evidence of them using their knowledge of phonics to support more extended writing.  The outside space for early years limits children’s physical development and does not support their learning. Teachers note rightly that an outside environment is not a

p.11

Early years provision Inadequate

requirement and that they plan the curriculum for indoors. However, there are no defined play areas for children in the Nursery classrooms and the opportunities for children to experience a broad range of activities are restricted.  Children in the Nursery and Reception classes are generally well behaved and mostly understand the class routines. However, when children move from tables to the carpet, or come in from outside play, they can be slow to settle. This detracts from an otherwise positive environment.

p.11

Inadequate

 The majority of staff are newly appointed and inexperienced in boarding. Some have additional roles and responsibilities. Their enthusiasm and willingness to undertake training do not compensate for the overall lack of the skills, expertise and knowledge required to run a successful boarding provision. Consequently, boarders’ experience is affected negatively and more than half reported that they do not enjoy boarding.  Many pupils in boarding feel unsupported. New counsellors have been appointed but time constraints, resulting from an intense focus on academic progress, makes it difficult for boarders to develop meaningful, positive relationships with staff. Seventy- three per cent of the boarders who completed surveys during the inspection do not feel that the boarding staff treat them fairly. Boarders repeatedly commented that they would like more free time.  Safeguarding practices are not robust and weaknesses have the potential to affect the

p.11

Inadequate

welfare of boarders and place them at risk of harm.  Boarders have opportunities to express their views through the student council and food forum. Staff encourage boarders to be involved in planning events and to put forward their opinions. Currently, they are involved in setting up a tuck shop in the downstairs common room. This helps to broaden boarders’ experiences and skills.

p.11

Quality of care and support in the boarding provision Requires improvement

 Boarders are following an intense academic programme which limits their free time. Some boarders are not comfortable talking to staff about issues that concern them. An independent listener is available, but boarders are not accessing this support. Managers have identified the need to increase emotional support for boarders and have recently appointed two counsellors. It is too early to judge the impact of this initiative.  A limited number of evening activities are available on site for boarders. They have limited participation in leisure pursuits in the local area. Opportunities for boarders to enrich and extend their social experiences, and develop new interests and self- confidence, are restricted.  Communal areas do not provide a warm, comfortable environment and are uninviting and neglected. Boarders commented that they are unable to play pool as there are no pool cues available.  Boarders are provided with a choice of nourishing meals. The catering manager is

p.11

Quality of care and support in the boarding provision Requires improvement

aware of any specific dietary needs and is keen for boarders to follow a healthy, nutritious diet.  Arrangements to promote boarders’ physical health are strong. Boarders with diagnosed health conditions have detailed health plans monitored by the school nurse. Medication is managed safely.

p.12

School details

Social care unique reference number SC482938

p.13

School details

This inspection of the school was carried out under section 5 of the Education Act 2005. The inspection of boarding provision was carried out under the Children Act 1989, as amended by the Care Standards Act 2000, having regard to the national minimum standards for boarding schools.

p.13

School details

Number of pupils on the school roll 1,064

p.13

School details

Acting executive headteacher Mr Mark McLaughlin

p.13

School details

Email address headteacher@durandprimary.com

p.13

School details

Date of previous inspection 4–5 December 2013

p.13

Information about this school

 The school does not meet requirements on the publication of information about: - the content of the Years 10 and 11 curriculum - the courses available to pupils at key stage 4, including GCSEs - the date of the next review of the school’s pupil premium strategy - how the pupil premium allocation was spent last year and the impact of the expenditure on eligible and other pupils - the Year 7 literacy and numeracy catch-up premium - the effect of the PE and sport premium on pupils’ participation and attainment in PE and sport, and how improvements are sustainable.  The school does not comply with Department for Education guidance on what academies should publish about an accessibility plan and equality objectives.  The school is larger than the average-sized all-through school.  The school has added an extra key stage since the last inspection.  Durand Academy is based on three sites: one near Midhurst in West Sussex and two in

p.13

Information about this school

London. The Mostyn site in London caters for the early years and Years 1 to 3. The Hackford site houses Years 4 to 9. The St Cuthman’s site, near Midhurst, offers boarding and education provision to Years 10 and 11.  The proportion of pupils known to be eligible for free school meals is well above average.  The proportion of pupils who speak English as an additional language is well above average.  The proportion of pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities is above average but the proportion with an education, health and care plan is low.  The school meets the current government floor standards.

p.14

Information about this inspection

 Inspectors observed learning in classes across the school, including in the Nursery and Reception classes, and on the boarding site.  Pupils’ work in books across the range of subjects was looked at.  Inspectors listened to pupils reading.  Inspectors looked at behaviour at break and lunchtime.  Discussions were held with senior leaders, governors, team leaders, pupils and parents.  The school made available a limited range of documentation and policies. These were scrutinised. They included the school’s self-evaluation, records of pupils’ behaviour and attendance, assessment information and the minutes of the governing body.  Inspectors scrutinised records relating to the quality of teaching and the school’s website, including information about extra-curricular activities, trips and visits.  The available records, policies and procedures relating to safeguarding were reviewed.  Inspectors took account of 33 responses to Ofsted’s online questionnaire, Parent View.

p.15

Inspection team

Brian Oppenheim, lead inspector Her Majesty’s Inspector

p.15

Inspection team

Jan Hunnam Social Care Regulatory Inspector

p.15

Inspection team

Sophie Wood Regulatory Inspection Manager guidance 'Raising concerns and making a complaint about Ofsted', which is available from Ofsted's website: www.gov.uk/government/publications/complaints-about-ofsted . If you would like Ofsted to send you a copy of the guidance, please telephone 0300 123 4234, or email enquiries@ofsted.gov.uk .

p.15

Inspection team

In the report, 'disadvantaged pupils' refers to those pupils who attract government pupil premium funding: pupils claiming free school meals at any point in the last six years and pupils in care or who left care through adoption or another formal route. www.gov.uk/pupil-premium-information-for-schools-and- alternative-provision-settings .

p.16

Inspection team

You can use Parent View to give Ofsted your opinion on your child's school. Ofsted will use the information parents and carers provide when deciding which schools to inspect and when and as part of the inspection.

p.16

Inspection team

You can also use Parent View to find out what other parents and carers think about schools in England. You can visit www.parentview.ofsted.gov.uk , or look for the link on the main Ofsted website: www.gov.uk/government/organisations/ofsted .

p.16

Inspection team

achieve excellence in the care of children and young people, and in education and skills for learners of all ages. It regulates and inspects childcare and children's social care, and inspects the Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service (Cafcass), schools, colleges, initial teacher training, further education and skills, adult and community learning, and education and training in prisons and other secure establishments. It assesses council children's services, and inspects services for children looked after, safeguarding and child protection.

p.16

Inspection team

If you would like a copy of this document in a different format, such as large print or Braille, please telephone 0300 123 1231, or email enquiries@ofsted.gov.uk .

p.16

Inspection team

You may reuse this information (not including logos) free of charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence. To view this licence, visit www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open- government-licence/ , write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or email: psi@nationalarchives.gsi.gov.uk .

p.16

Inspection team

Interested in our work? You can subscribe to our monthly newsletter for more information and updates: http://eepurl.com/iTrDn .

p.16

Inspection team

T: 0300 123 4234 Textphone: 0161 618 8524 E: enquiries@ofsted.gov.uk W: www.gov.uk/ofsted

p.16