Skip to content

Help us get it right

Sign in (free) to send feedback, so we can tell you when it's fixed.

Schools & FE · School monitoring visit

Setting

Inspected — · published 15 May 2024

Help us get it right

Sign in (free) to send feedback, so we can tell you when it's fixed.

Original PDF ↗

Summary

No overall grade in this framework

Stuart Voyce

What we read, and from where

Click a reading to see it highlighted in the report.

  • Inspectorssingle source

    Stuart Voyce

  • Postcode verified

    DL3 0HT

  • Name on report verified

    Longfield Academy This letter sets out the findings from the monitoring inspection that took place on 26

Page 1 of 2
Page 1 of the report

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.

−40Criticalmore positive than 8% of reports of this type

Reads more critically than most reports of this type.

Praiseambitiousimprovedstrengthsaccuratelyclearconsistentaccurate
Criticismseriousweaknessesgapspoorsuspensionspersistently absentnot improvedexclusions

How the report reads, start to finish

Every paragraph in order, sized by length. Tap one to see it on the page.

FindingsWhat needs to improve positive critical
  • Findings223w−67
  • What needs to improve465w−29

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.

Next steps

Quoted from the report. Tap to see it on the page.

What the report dwells on

Topics by how often they come up, coloured by how they are described. Open one for an example.

Anatomy of the report

How the report is built, against others of the same type and grade.

Pages
2
Words of findings
688
shorter than usual (typical 1570)
Reading level
Hard
Flesch 50, typical 47
Average sentence
15 words
Next steps
8
typical 8
Hedged sentences
20%
“some”, “not always”, “most”…

Where the words go

Findings 32%What needs to improve 68%

Full report text

Store Street Manchester M1 2WD T 0300 123 1231 www.gov.uk/ofsted

p.1

Angela Sweeten Headteacher Longfield Academy Longfield Road Darlington DL3 0HT

p.1

Serious weaknesses monitoring inspection of Longfield Academy

This letter sets out the findings from the monitoring inspection that took place on 26 March 2024, on behalf of His Majesty's Chief Inspector of Education, Children's Services and Skills. The monitoring inspection was carried out under section 8(2) of the Education Act 2005 and was the third monitoring inspection since the school was judged to have serious weaknesses following the graded (section 5) inspection that took place in April 2022.

p.1

Serious weaknesses monitoring inspection of Longfield Academy

The purpose of a monitoring inspection is not to grade the school's overall effectiveness, but to identify and report on the school's progress. It is to highlight to the school and parents any improvements that school leaders have made since the school's previous graded inspection.

p.1

Serious weaknesses monitoring inspection of Longfield Academy

During the inspection, I discussed with you, other senior leaders, the chief executive officer (CEO) of the multi-academy trust and those responsible for governance the actions that have been taken to improve the school since the most recent graded inspection. We discussed the ongoing impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. I also visited lessons, alongside curriculum leaders, in mathematics, history and geography. I scrutinised the single central record and met with leaders to discuss behaviour and attendance data. I have considered all this in coming to my judgement.

p.1

Leaders have made progress to improve the school, but more work is

necessary for the school to be no longer judged as having serious weaknesses.

p.1

designation

In 2023, pupils at Longfield Academy made similar progress to other schools in national assessments. However, you have accurately identified that the quality of education across the school still varies. As such, there are some differences in how well pupils achieve in different subjects by the end of key stage 4. Pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds do not perform as well as their classmates in national assessments.

p.1

designation

In most subjects, your school has identified the important knowledge that pupils need to learn. There are some subjects, such as history, where the curriculum is still being refined and improved. This is because your curriculum leaders are new and more time is needed to implement the ambitious plans that they have developed.

p.2

designation

Most teachers have thorough subject knowledge. They know their pupils well. Teachers are given clear information about how to support pupils with special educational needs and/or disabilities (SEND). Pupils with SEND are helped to access the curriculum alongside their classmates. However, some teachers do not present information clearly to pupils. The most important knowledge that pupils need to learn is not emphasised. This leads to some pupils having gaps in their knowledge. Some teachers do not systematically check that pupils have understood what they have been taught, so gaps in pupil’s knowledge go unaddressed.

p.2

designation

Your school’s ‘choices’ (behaviour) policy is now embedded. It is understood by teachers and pupils. Teachers use consistent approaches to managing pupil behaviour. This has led to a rise in suspensions at the start of this academic year. Suspensions have now started to reduce. A small number of pupils have demonstrated very challenging behaviour. Despite the support that your school has put in place for these pupils, it has not improved their behaviour. This has led to a high number of permanent exclusions this academic year. Governors and directors of the multi-academy trust board closely monitor the rates of suspensions and permanent exclusion. They challenge leaders to ensure that the decisions taken are in the best interests of the whole school community. Those responsible for governance are well-informed and have an accurate view of the school’s strengths and areas for improvement.

p.2

designation

Pupils’ attendance has decreased slightly compared to the previous academic year. Leaders know their pupils well. Staff from the attendance, pastoral and safeguarding teams work closely to understand the causes of poor attendance. This informs the school’s actions. As such, the school has reduced the number of pupils who are persistently absent from school.

p.2

designation

I am copying this letter to the chair of the board of trustees, and the CEO of Swift Academies trust, the Department for Education's regional director and the director of children's services for Darlington. This letter will be published on the Ofsted reports website.

p.2

Discuss this inspection

Members compare notes on inspectors and inspections here. Join free to read and post.

Join the discussion