Skip to content

Help us get it right

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

Other · Ofsted letter

Setting

Inspected — · published 31 Jul 2009

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

Tanya Harber Stuart

What we read, and from where

Click a reading to see it highlighted in the report.

  • Inspectorssingle source

    Tanya Harber Stuart

  • Postcode verified

    CA4 0PA

Page 1 of 3
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.

+66Positivemore positive than 90% of reports of this type

Reads more warmly than most reports of this type.

Praisesafefeel safeconfidentpositive
Criticismnot always

How the report reads, start to finish

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

FindingsAbout the inspectionLeadershipWhat needs to improve positive critical
  • Findings386w+64
  • Leadership117w0
  • What needs to improve103w+20

Strengths

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

Concerns

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

No strong criticism found.

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
3
Words of findings
592
shorter than usual (typical 963)
Reading level
Plain English
Flesch 61, typical 48
Average sentence
18 words
Next steps
3
typical 2
Hedged sentences
12%
“some”, “not always”, “most”…

Where the words go

Findings 51%Leadership 15%What needs to improve 14%About the inspection 20%

Full report text

Alexandra House 33 Kingsway London WC2B 6SE T 08456 404040 F 020 7421 6855 www.ofsted.gov.uk enquiries@ofsted.gov.uk

p.1

Ms S Stainton Headteacher Ivegill CofE School Ivegill Carlisle Cumbria CA4 0PA

p.1

Ofsted survey inspection programme – E-safety

Thank you for your hospitality and co-operation, and that of your staff, during my visit on 16 June 2009 to look at work in e-safety.

p.1

Ofsted survey inspection programme – E-safety

As outlined in my initial letter, this visit looked at:  the extent to which schools teach learners to adopt safe and responsible practices in using new technologies  e-safety training for staff.

p.1

Ofsted survey inspection programme – E-safety

The visit provided valuable information which will contribute to our national evaluation and reporting. Published reports are likely to list the names of the contributing institutions but individual institutions will not be identified in the main text. All feedback letters will be published on the Ofsted website at the end of each half-term.

p.1

Ofsted survey inspection programme – E-safety

The evidence used to inform the judgements made included interviews with staff and pupils, scrutiny of relevant documentation, analysis of pupils’ work and a tour of the school by pupils.

p.1

Ofsted survey inspection programme – E-safety

The overall effectiveness of e-safety was judged to be good.

p.1

Outcomes for learners

 The pupils are safe in school, and they feel safe, in school when they are using new technologies. This is because of the good teaching they receive about how they can keep themselves safe.  The pupils have a good knowledge and understanding of what they need to do to keep safe when they are using new technologies. The knowledge and understanding they have is age related with the older pupils very aware of some of the dangers they may face when using new technologies. Equally the pupils are confident about using new technology and have a responsible attitude when they do so.  However the pupils stated that although they did feel safe at home they felt more safe in school because of the knowledge their teachers have about how to keep them safe when using new technologies.

p.1

Quality of provision

The quality of the provision provided is good.

p.2

Quality of provision

 The curriculum provided ensures that the pupils, from the Early Years Foundation Stage to Year 6 are aware of the need to stay safe when using new technologies.  The curriculum is based on the needs and interests of the pupils and they were able to talk about the work they had completed on e-safety. Year 1 and Year 2 were particularly aware of how some people might pretend to be other people on the internet, this knowledge and understanding came from a lesson based on a crocodile pretending to be a rabbit.  The lessons on e-safety are reinforced each time the pupils use the internet. The lessons are enhanced through the Staying Safe Week, assemblies and links with the police.

p.2

Leadership and management

 You have in place acceptable user policies for staff, parents and pupils. Everyone in the school has signed up to these rules and they follow them whenever they are using new technologies. There is also an e- safety policy. All of these policies have been agreed with the governors.  All staff, and pupils, spoken to in the school were fully aware of the policies and procedures in place. They also knew why the policies and procedures were in place and what to do if anything went wrong.  You have worked with some parents to enhance their awareness of e- safety issues. However you recognise that this is an area which you need to develop.

p.2

Quality of training

The quality of the training is satisfactory.

p.2

Quality of training

 All staff are trained in e-safety.  However the training has tended to be ad hoc and is not based on a staff audit. This means that it is not always based on the needs and interests of the members of staff.  The training has had a positive impact on the outcomes for pupils. They feel safe in school and staff are confident about what they need to do to ensure that the pupils continue to feel safe.

p.2

Areas for improvement, which we discussed, included:

 working with parents to extend their knowledge and understanding of new technologies to ensure that the pupils feel as safe at home as they do in school  putting in place a comprehensive and planned training programme which meets the needs and interests of all the staff.

p.3

Areas for improvement, which we discussed, included:

I hope these observations are useful as you continue to develop e-safety in the school.

p.3

Areas for improvement, which we discussed, included:

As I explained in my previous letter, a copy of this letter will be sent to your local authority and will be published on the Ofsted website. It will also be available to the team for your next institutional inspection.

p.3

Discuss this inspection

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

Join the discussion