Context
Kibblesworth Academy is a smaller than average-sized primary school where almost all the pupil are of White British heritage. The proportion of disabled pupils and those with special educational needs is lower than the national average. This is also the case for the proportion of disadvantaged pupils for whom the pupil premium provides support, which currently stands at 22% of the school population.
The school currently meets the government’s floor standards, which are the minimum expectations for pupils’ attainment and progress by the end of Year 6.
The school employs seven full time teachers, two part times teachers, and one headteacher.
The school employs the following support staff: One HLTA, five level 3 TA’s, one level 2 TA, and an admin team of three. In addition, there is one caretaker and five lunch time supervisors.
The Headteacher, Acting Deputy Head teacher, School Business Manager, and SENDCO form the current Senior Leadership Team. The SLT meet bi-weekly or more frequently when required, and feed back to staff through the weekly full staff meeting.
There are 177 children on roll at the Academy, 90 boys and 87 girls (May2017). Within this we have 28 children attending nursery. The school has lower than average stability with a declining trend due to an influx of pupils as a result of the expansion of housing. Some classes are particularly heavy in boys (Y4, Y6) and this is taken into account when considering themes and topics in order to engage and motivate boys in their learning.
In school 27 (14%) children are currently on the SEND register, and none have a EHCP, which is lower than the national average.
Although there is a wide range of ability, the attainment and skills on entry are broadly inline with age related expectations. On entry to nursery, many of our children display communication, speech and language difficulties.
SECTIONS / SUMMARY EVALUATION1.Actions to address issues from last inspection. /
- Ofsted Identified Priorities
Actions –
-Teachers plan for increased opportunities for writing, both in English lessons and across the curriculum.
-Develop the core literacy curriculum to increase engagement of pupils, particularly boys.
-Teachers ensure that pupils have the opportunity to address writing targets in all subjects.
-Provide the opportunity for peer mentoring support for class teachers across the school, and with partner schools.
-Increased observation cycle of all teachers.
Impact –
-The majority of lessons exhibit the good criteria for outcomes for pupils.
-Boys are more willing to write at length due to more engaging subject matter. (Pobble)
-All pupils report increased engagement in literacy lessons.
-Gender gap in writing is below 1 term in all year groups except Y4 due to multiple factors relating to boys in that year group. (SEND)
-2016 Year 6 progress writing boys -3.71 cf girls 1.93. This is due to changes which meant boys were unable to achieve greater depth due to handwriting criteria. Attainment at expected standard for boys 100% cf 77% girls (68% / 81% national)
-Although gap remains small, attainment gap is widening slightly in 6 out of 8 cohorts due to improved performance by girls.
1.2Improve the effectiveness of leadership and management –
1.2.1Ensure that governors are regularly provided with easily understood, accurate information, particularly with regard to the performance of pupils in comparison to national standards, to enable effective challenge and support.KEY PRIORITY 1 SDP
Actions –
-Reconstitute the headteacher’s report in governing body meetings.
-Work with the governing body to create an assessment information sharing format that is easily understood by all and allows the governing body to hold the school to account.
-Ensure that all groups are tracked effectively and the information is fed back to the governing body.
-To train all governors on the use of the tracking system, and assessment information.
Impact -
-Understandable information is readily available to all governors.
-Data is presented in a format that is clear and easily understood.
-Group information is fed back to education subcommittee meetings, and is also readily available to the full governing body.
-All governors have a working understanding of the school assessment system, with all attending classroom monitor training July 2016.
-
1.2.2Systems are not in place to allow leaders to have a precise view of how well groups of pupils are progressing. KEY PRIORITY 1 SDP
Actions -
-Group analysis altered across the school to allow accurate data capture and gap analysis.
-Three assessment points set across the year for data capture.
-Interim assessment points used within these timescales to inform intervention and moderate judgements.
-Pupil review and assertive mentoring used to give a clear indication on the progress of groups and individual pupils.
-Internal and external training on the use of Classroom monitor for tracking and target setting.
Impact –
-Clear view of the progress of all groups across the school, allowing much faster intervention to close gaps.
-Proactive approach to maintaining narrow gaps between all key groups.
1.3Provision in the early years requires improvement. Activities do not provide enough challenge in the key areas of mathematics and writing to enable all children to fully capitalise on their starting points. KEY PRIORITY 5 SDP
Actions –
LA to clarify judgements of entry points to Nursery
-Audit resources and accessibility of resources in the learning environment, particularly open ended resources for highest impact.
-Deliver training on adult interaction and role of play partners in EYFS
-Develop the learning environment in line with High Scope philosophy with support from LA and Sue Hedley.
-Ensure Governors and all staff are confident with end of EYFS expectations and approach to learning and progress.
-Improve collaborative partnerships across EY, both within school and across schools.
Impact -
-Moderation and confirmed entry point judgement will support targets set for percentage of children exceeding on exit of EYFS.
-Maximising the opportunities available to all pupils through open-ended resources will support more able progress.
-High quality adult interaction will build relationships between adults and children enabling adults to recognise and maximise individual learning opportunities, or additional interventions, as they arise through child initiated activities.
-High scope’s active learning environment enables direct, hands-on experiences with people, objects, events, and ideas. Children's interests and choices are at the heart of the environment and the home from home promotes confidence and trust as a foundation to build all future learning and highest level of progress.
-A consistent expectation provides clarity and confidence in the direction of the EYFS and progress in all areas of learning with focus on the Prime areas as well as Number and Writing.
-Good practice in Reception is being shared with Nursery, with staff movement which was initiated in Sept 16 to ensure continuity between the two classes working well to date. This is also mirrored in the development of Y1 to ensure the approach continues into KS1 – an area for development in 2017 which still continues into the summer term.
1.4Assessments are not consistently accurate. Work is not always set at the correct levels to ensure that all pupils, but particularly the most able, achieve as well as they can. Teachers mark work frequently, however, the feedback is not consistently effective in helping pupils improve their work. KEY PRIORITY 2 SDP
Actions –
-SLT and subject leaders cross moderate judgements and evidence bases for core subjects in all year groups, including EY.
-Increased focus on the more able in data analysis, target setting, teaching, learning and monitoring.
-The development of the role of GTMA (Gifted, Talented and More Able) co-ordinator (GTMACO)
-Implement a new marking policy to ensure all marking has impact and is purposeful.
-Enrolment on the NACE chartermark for more able provision.
Impact –
-The majority of children make at least two steps progress across a term, with most targeted children making at least three steps per term.
-Teachers can identify groups of children easily, identify their needs, and plan accordingly to meet their requirements.
-New marking policy has been successfully implemented, leading to children now being able to articulate how the marking has helped them to improve their work. The marking policy is continually refined, with the summer term focus being on staggering and differentiating the marking codes in relation to year groups and stages.
-All pupils are responding to marking prompts in their books and the impact of the comment is noted in improvements in future work.
1.5Targets set for the proportions of pupils making rapid progress are not sufficiently ambitious. This limits leaders’ ability to hold teachers to account for the performance of their pupils.
KEY PRIORITY 1 SDP
Actions -
-Leaders use prior assessment data to set challenging termly targets for all pupils.
-Teachers use Classroom Monitor to set appropriately challenging work in all curriculum areas that will allow pupils to make rapid progress.
-Teachers proactively plan for the groups of children within their classes and ensure that any gaps are targeted to close rapidly through challenging targets and carefully differentiated teaching.
-Challenging pupil targets interwoven into performance management objectives.
Impact –
-GTMA pupils clearly identified and planned for in all year groups.
-Identified MA pupils given the opportunity to accelerate their learning and work at greater depth through mentor program.
2.Outcomes for pupils / Strengths / Areas for development
Foundation Stage
On entry data to Nursery indicates that the pupils enter the school broadly in line with age related expectations in Communication and Language and Physical development. A significant number of children enter Nursery with poor skills in Personal, Social and Emotional development. A large proportion of children enter Nursery below ARE in Literacy, Mathematics and understanding the World.
Physical development is a particular strength of the current nursery cohort with 71% in line with ARE and 12% exceeding ARE on entry.
By the end of the EYFS our most recent data indicates that 84% of our current Reception cohort have attained a good level of development (GLD.) (2016) 72% of boys achieved a good level of development compared to 100% of girls. These figures also indicate a three year improving trend. This was moderated by a local authority EY consultant and also by a senior local authority inspector for EY
Key Stage 1
By the end of Key Stage 1 pupils were in line with or above national averages in reading, writing and mathematics in terms of expected level and greater depth.
Reading – 83% achieved expected standard+cf 74% nationally. School outperformed all national figures for groups with the exception of SEN support at expected level (50% cf 74% nationally – no SEN pupils achieved greater depth).Progress against ELG – 94% who completed EYFS at expected level achieved expected level at KS1 cf 85% nationally. 13% achieved greater depth cf 20% nationally. All chn who achieved exceeding in EYFS achieved greater depth, and two additional pupils were added to greater depth over KS1. No disadvantaged pupils achieved greater depth.
Writing – 70% achieved expected standard + cf 65% nationally. Boys achieved broadly in line with national, with girls achieving 91% cf 73%, creating a gender gap of 33%. Greater depth for all pupils 17% cf 13% nationally, with both genders surpassing national averages, although an internal gap of 16% exists. SEN support at expected standard 25% (1of4) cf national 65%
Progress against ELG – 94% who completed EYFS at expected level achieved expected level at KS1 cf 82% nationally. 75% of children who exceeded in writing at end of EYFS achieved greater depth cf 52% nationally.Two children moved from expected to greater depth across KS1. Again, no disadvantaged pupils achieved greater depth.
Mathematics - Expected standard+ 77% cf 73% nationally. Disadvantaged, boys, SEN all below national average at expected level. 23% gender gap exists within school at expected level – 2/3 of class boys which gives each girl a higher
Weighting of 9% cf 5% in this analysis. The above mentioned groups also underperformed against national averages at greater depth.
Progress against ELG – 89% who completed EYFS at expected level achieved expected level at KS1 cf 86% nationally. 11% achieved greater depth cf 18% nationally. All chn who achieved exceeding in EYFS achieved greater depth, but no additional children were added. No disadvantaged pupils achieved greater depth.
Year 1 Phonics – 87% achieved the standard cf 81% nationally. In terms of groups, all groups outperformed the national average. However, The gender gap was 12% compared to a national gap of 7%.
Year 2 Cohort Attainment (July 16)
Subject / Proportion GLD / Proportion ARE / National ARE
Maths / 68 / 77 / 73
Reading / 68 / 83 / 74
Writing / 68 / 70 / 66
Key Stage 2
In 2016, at the end of KS2, 94% of children met the expected standard in Reading, Mathematics and SPaG. 81% of children met the required standard in writing, with 25% securing greater depth. Looking at combined subjects, 75% of children achieved the required standard in Reading, Writing and Mathematics, compared to a national figure of 53% Boys out performed girls on average in all areas. Standards at the end of KS2 are currently above national and Gateshead averages.
With only two disadvantaged pupils in the Year 6 cohort, analysis of trends is difficult, but disadvantaged pupils outperformed other pupils in reading and spelling punctuation and grammar, but were below in maths and writing.
In terms of spelling, punctuation and grammar, overall 94% of pupils attained the expected band or above cf 72% nationally, with 38% reaching the highest band cf 22% nationally.
In reading, the average scaled score for this cohort was 105.3 cf 102.6 nationally. Boys outperformed girls with an average of 106.3 cf 105.1. Disadvantaged pupils outperformed the national average for disadvantaged pupils with a score of 104, and also the national figure for all pupils and other pupils. The in school gap was 1.5. (104 cf 105.5) Attainment was relatively strong in reading for low and middle prior attainers compared to the national averages, with the most able prior attainers being the weakest of the groups within school relatively when compared with the national picture.
In writing, the pattern is repeated, with low and middle prior attainers comparing more favourably against the national picture than the most able. Boys performance at greater depth was poor given their starting positions, which was attributed to changes to the marking criteria relating to handwriting which were introduced during Year 6. At the expected standard, boys outperformed girls by 23%, but lagged behind by 23% at greater depth.
In mathematics – Boys attained more highly than girls in both the expected and higher levels. Boys average score was 108.7 cf 106.2 (girls) Both figures compared favourably to national averages. Disadvantaged pupils were below others, both in school and nationally due to 1 child not achieving the expected standard (50%). This still represented good progress for that particular pupil. Pupils with lowest prior attainment performed better in comparison to national picture than higher attaining pupils. (105 cf 94.4 middle maths prior attainment, 110.5 cf 109.7 high maths prior attainment.)
In SPaG, the average scaled score for all pupils was 107.3 cf 104 nationally, with both genders outperforming national averages. Boys performed better than girls (111.3 cf 106.4) High prior attainers in reading and writing performed well against national averages for high prior attainers, suggesting lower attainment at higher levels for writing is due to other factors, such as handwriting, and not technical accuracy of SPaG. In terms of the spelling element, pupils scored more highly in terms of raw scores in all categories, including full marks, particularly for boys (76% achieved full marks cf 11% nationally)
Year 6 Cohort Attainment (July 16)
Subject / ARE % @ KS1 / ARE %@ KS2 / National ARE
Maths / 81 / 94 / 70
Reading / 81 / 94 / 66
Writing / 81 / 81 / 74
Year 6 Cohort Achievement (July 16)
Progress against the national figure for all pupils, which is zero, was as follows in core areas:
Subject / Progress
Reading / 1.46
Writing / 0.80
Maths / 3.01
Progress for mathematics was Sig+, with the greatest progress being made by pupils starting with the lowest prior attainment – ranked in the top 4% in the country. Low and middle prior attainers made the best progress across all subjects, with the poorest progress being made by the most able. Disadvantaged pupils made greater progress than disadvantaged pupils nationally across all subjects. / Foundation Stage
Read, Writing and Number were the weaker areas of learning however, these were still above the national average.
2.1Focus needs to be placed on supporting children to exceed the ELG in reading, writing and number to 15%. KEY PRIORITY 4 SDP
2.1.1Continued discussion and development of EY offer to ensure it meets the needs of the children as they progress into KS1 and beyond. KEY PRIORITY 4 SDP
2.2 Continue to embed the “high scope”approach across the early years including CPD opportunities for all staff. KEY PRIORITY 5 SDP
2.3Continue to develop the learning environment, both indoors and out to reflect a calm home-from-home atmosphere where children feel safe and secure. KEY PRIORITY 5 SDP
2.4Embed new daily routines across EY with a plan-do-review focus. KEY PRIORITY 5 SDP
2.5Maximise child initiated learning opportunities through the use of floor books to deepen children’s learning. KEY PRIORITY 5 SDP
2.6Continue to improve on adult interaction through CPD sessions. KEY PRIORITY 5 SDP
Key Stage 1
2.7Continue to target gender gap across core subjects in KS1, both at expected standard and greater depth. Although both boys and girls attainment in reading was higher than national, the gap in attainment was 26% cf 8% nationally. This gap was also reflected in the percentage of boys who achieved greater depth – 11% cf national figure of 30%. This also compares poorly within an in school gender gap at greater depth of 44% (11% cf 55%) KEY PRIORITY 4 SDP