Other · Ofsted report
Setting
Summary
What we read, and from where
Click a reading to see it highlighted in the report.
- Postcode verified
CH49 3AR
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.
Reads more warmly than most reports of this type.
How the report reads, start to finish
Every paragraph in order, sized by length. Tap one to see it on the page.
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.
- No areas for development were identified during this visit. p.2
- I hope these observations are useful as you continue to develop literacy in your school. p.2
- As I explained previously, a copy of this letter will be sent to your local authority and will be published on the Ofsted website. p.2
- It will also be available to the team for your next institutional inspection. p.2
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
- 322
- shorter than usual (typical 1049)
- Reading level
- Hard
- Flesch 33, typical 45
- Average sentence
- 22 words
- Next steps
- 4
- typical 5
- Hedged sentences
- 7%
- “some”, “not always”, “most”…
Where the words go
Full report text
Aviation House 125 Kingsway London WC2B 6SE T 08456 404040 F 020 7421 6855 enquiries@ofsted.gov.uk www.ofsted.gov.uk
p.1
Mr A Martin Headteacher Greasby Junior School Mill Lane Greasby Wirral CH49 3AR
p.1
literacy
Thank you for your hospitality and cooperation, and that of your staff, during my visit on 3 December 2009 to look at work in literacy.
p.1
literacy
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 without their consent.
p.1
literacy
The evidence used to inform the judgements included: a discussion with you, your deputy headteacher and the special educational needs and/or disabilities coordinator; three 20-minute observations of Year 5 and 6 literacy lessons; discussion with a group of Year 5 and 6 boys; a brief examination of some documentation; and discussion about the progress made in literacy of a specific group of identified boys.
p.1
Features of good practice
High-quality teaching which uses a range of strategies to engage boys and motivate them as writers. The teaching observed ensured strong participation by all pupils, through purposeful discussion and the rehearsal of their views and ideas before settling down to write. The strong leadership and management of literacy: the rigorous monitoring of pupils’ progress, high expectations of teachers and pupils and consistency in teaching and assessment. The school’s focus on building cross-subject links to develop knowledge and skills allows pupils, especially boys, to find something to write about. The boys I spoke to enjoy their English lessons very much and especially enjoy writing.
p.1
Areas for development
No areas for development were identified during this visit.
p.2
Areas for development
I hope these observations are useful as you continue to develop literacy in your school.
p.2
Areas for development
As I explained previously, 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.2
Discuss this inspection
Members compare notes on inspectors and inspections here. Join free to read and post.
Join the discussion