This website is changing

View case studies for

Moving beyond the floor target – Thornhill Primary School, Rotherham

Date of issue: Jan. 2008

Theme: Schools Causing Concern (SCC)

School context and profile

Thornhill Primary School

The school takes its pupils from an area of socio-economic disadvantage.
Pupils receiving free school meals: 35%.
59% speak English as an Additional Language (EAL) (home language mostly Punjabi or Urdu).
Pupil mobility high – recent influx of children of asylum seekers and migrant workers.
Attainment on entry is very much lower than is typical for their age.
High staff turnover in last two years. Headteacher and deputy headteacher new to post in September 2006.
Ofsted inspection March 2007 and judged as ‘an improving school that provides a satisfactory education for its pupils’.

Areas for improvement

Raise standards in English and mathematics across the school.
Strengthen links between subjects to enrich the curriculum and introduce more investigative approaches to make learning more enjoyable and effective.
Ensure that infant pupils benefit from a more active and investigative curriculum.

Leadership of headteacher judged to be good and some outstanding features: ‘…her vision and drive ensures essential developments move at a rapid pace.'

2007 outcomes

Foundation Stage: cohort size 39

All areas of learning below the local authority (LA) average. Particularly weak in Communication, Language and Literacy.

Key Stage 1: 30 children

Reading: All below LA and national. Improved from 2006 and highest outcomes in 2004-2007 period.
L2+ 67% L2b+ 63% L3 7%

Writing: All below LA and national. Significant improvement from 2006 at L2+ and L2b+. Average point score (APS): 12.7
L2+ 73% L2b+ 43% L3 3%

Mathematics: All below LA and national. Decline from 2006.
L2+ 80% L2b+ 60% L3 3% APS 13.3

Key Stage 2: 30 children

English: L4+ 57% L5 3% (Fischer Family Trust (FFT) D 71%, 14%) (Statutory targets: 66%, 0%)
Reading: L4+ 63% L5 20%
Writing: L4+ 47% L5 3%

Go to top

For the first two years of the programme the school made limited progress. During the first year of the Intensifying Support Programme (ISP) many staff were new to the school. They moved into the new school building and pupil behaviour deteriorated. The first year was spent focusing on creating/improving the conditions for learning and the school received support from the LA behaviour support service team to implement behaviour strategies. The leadership team changed from September 2006.
Focus on a speedy start to Year 6 to address gaps in learning caused by weak teaching when children were in lower Key Stage 2 year groups.
Inaccurate assessment caused by staff turbulence, high number of temporary staff which meant that assessment outcomes may not have been reliable. High pupil mobility (in and out of school).
The overall quality of leadership.
The Raising Attainment Plan (RAP) was not an effective tool for improvement.
The school’s tracking system was not used effectively to meet children’s needs.
Although targets were there, further development work was needed to ensure positive impact on
learning. Underperformance was not tackled.
Ministerial Advisory Group (MAG) was not used at either a strategic or operational level. The development of the MAG has grown in all ISP schools as confidence in its worth has grown. Initially it was seen as a strategic tool with which senior leaders could monitor progress. Over time its importance has grown to where it is now – valuable at strategic and operational levels.
There were no pupil performance meetings.
Lesson observations were not regularly undertaken.
There were no clear standards for learning and teaching, and too little emphasis given to pupils’ learning.
The curriculum was limited and there were few links across curricular areas.
Parents were not involved in their children’s learning.
Overall the school was somewhat inward-looking and insular.

Go to top

The school based issues – what needed to change?

The overall quality of leadership.
The Raising Attainment Plan (RAP) was not an effective tool for improvement.
The school’s tracking system was not used effectively to meet children’s needs.
Although targets were there, further development work was needed to ensure positive impact on learning. Underperformance was not tackled.
Ministerial Advisory Group (MAG) was not used at either a strategic or operational level. The development of the MAG has grown in all ISP schools as confidence in its worth has grown. Initially it was seen as a strategic tool with which senior leaders could monitor progress. Over time its importance has grown to where it is now – valuable at strategic and operational levels.
There were no pupil performance meetings.
Lesson observations were not regularly undertaken
There were no clear standards for learning and teaching, and too little emphasis given to pupils’ learning.
The curriculum was limited and there were few links across curricular areas.
Parents were not involved in their children’s learning.
Overall the school was somewhat inward looking and insular

What was done?

With very well judged support from the LA the following actions were taken.

The RAP became the key working document to drive improvements.
Assessments were used to set pupils’ levels; groups within classes and intervention groups.
A formula was created for three-part lessons, with the headteacher ensuring that it was always implemented.
Setting targets became a key feature for improvement:

Child friendly pupil targets were set.
Meetings were held with all parents to discuss targets.
Staff were required to submit curricular target analysis forms every half term for analysis by the headteacher; target trackers for each year group were updated half termly and results published to all; target trackers showed the EAL pupils; focus groups in reading, writing and mathematics; when Individual Education Plan targets were met; and when Personalised Learning Tutor (PLT) targets were met.

Underperformance was identified.
The headteacher targeted the use of teaching assistants (TAs) and the effectiveness of interventions. TAs moved with the class on to the next year stage for one term to maintain continuity and ease transition. Thereafter they returned to their original class. This avoided settling in times at new stages.
The headteacher met regularly with the PLT, the Special Educational Needs Coordinator and Learning Support Services to discuss pupils’ progress. The PLT uses results from the curricular target tracker to identify focus pupils who are not meeting targets and who face barriers in their learning. With deep, enriched fun support, these pupils are quickly back on track and are reengaged with peers and learning.
Termly pupil progress meetings held. Two days set aside each term for individual meetings of staff with the headteacher, using a range of data. Teachers were held accountable for their children’s progress.
Monitoring learning and teaching introduced with a focus for each term; paired monitoring developed using coordinators; each week the learning in each class was reviewed on Friday afternoons with pupils.
Coordinator's school self-evaluation weeks established which included drop-ins to classes; scrutiny of pupils’ work; staff and child discussions.
Governor days established; governors responsible for areas of the self-evaluation forms.
Strategies developed for improving writing and mathematics.
Learning walls in each classroom created.
Staff given more opportunities through continuing professional development (CPD) which was targeted at priorities identified in the RAP and SIP.
Learning champions: A priority for Thornhill is the weekly Learning champion sessions in Key Stage 2, where children in tutor groups of six have quality time to reflect on learning and pursue targets.

All of the actions taken have been the result of the very positive leadership and drive of the headteacher. Her leadership has been clear and decisive and very well-communicated to all stakeholders. She has been particularly determined to communicate effectively with children regarding their learning.

Monitoring and evaluation

The headteacher used a range of data to measure pupils’ progress.
The headteacher monitors the sub level progress of each child in reading, writing and mathematics.
Parents used as part of the assessment process.
The RAP and Developing Excellence Plan (DEP) review built into the senior leadership team and staff meetings each half term.
Pupils’ target books monitored.
Ongoing regular discussions with staff.
The monitoring process and performance management gives the headteacher and staff a clear view of pupils’ progress and school improvement.

What has been the overall impact?

The overall quality of leadership has improved and is now very effective.
Pupils’ attainment has improved in English, mathematics and science. In 2007 mathematics has improved from 43% to 76.7%; science from 53% to 76.6% and English from 46% to 56.6%.
The overall quality of teaching has improved.
Staff, many parents and pupils have higher expectations.
Pupils now have a voice in the life of the school.
Pupils’ attitudes to learning have improved, and they are proud of their school.
Pupil attendance, behaviour and punctuality much improved.
Parents now involved in the school and in supporting their children’s learning through weekly Stay and Play sessions, Sure Start play shops, weekly parent and governor meetings, toy library every week and media bags.
Overall there is now a culture of achievement.
The LA has now involved the school as a case study for others to show how improvements can be made. Other schools have visited to discuss how target setting has been effective. Other schools are now taking ISP on board as good practice in Thornhill and elsewhere.

‘The ISP gives a clarity of strategies which allows schools to ensure structures are in place to ensure children’s progress... it makes sure everything happens for the right reasons… it is about achievement.’
‘The LA support for the school has been phenomenal. The support has been well timed and planned, and has raised the profile of the school.’

Go to top

Local authority support and challenge

The overall quality of leadership.
Pupils’ attainment and progress overall.

What was done?

The following describes actions taken following the appointment of the new headteacher.

All of the processes within the ISP have been implemented, and tailored to meet the specific needs of the school. There was a major investment of time in supporting the new headteacher who was quickly identified as having the potential to move the school forward and make the necessary improvements. The significant factor in the improvement process was the attitude and drive of the headteacher who had a strong vision for the school based upon meeting the needs of all children.

The LA continued with the actions it had taken previously and supported the headteacher who clearly took charge of the overall process, in the knowledge that she was being well supported and challenged. The following actions were then taken:

The headteacher was advised to conduct a detailed analysis of pupils’ progress and data.
The use of the LA tracking system was emphasised; as was the value of the RAP and the DEP as working documents.
The headteacher undertook formal monitoring of learning and teaching, supported by the school adviser. They developed useful formats for use and provided feedback to individuals and the whole staff.
There was minimal consultancy support in classes. Support was mainly at the level of subject leaders and developing systems.
CPD was introduced and implemented based upon the SIP (DEP) with those involved being made aware that, following the CPD, there was an expectation of change. The focus was on literacy and numeracy. The headteacher used the monitoring process to check on whether or not the CPD had made a difference.
Short-term targets were identified along with strategies designed to build a long-term capacity to improve.
Inconsistencies in teaching were addressed.
The headteacher conducted the pupil progress meetings in school; the LA discussed pupil progress with the headteacher.
The LA was developing an authority strategy to meet the needs of children with EAL.

Monitoring and evaluation

The LA monitored the situation in the school half termly using the following:

the RAP and SIP and the success criteria;
records of pupils’ progress;
attainment;
checks on how many children are at age-related stages;
the results of the observation of some teaching by the ISP adviser;
discussions with the adviser who was involved in moderating, analysing and discussing with the headteacher and staff on an ongoing basis.

What has been the overall impact?

The headteacher has ownership of the programme for change and is being effective. An Ofsted inspection report in March 2007 reported that, ‘The headteacher’s leadership is good and some features are outstanding. In particular, her vision and drive ensures essential developments move at a rapid pace.’
A big improvement in attainment at Key Stage 1 and Key Stage 2, particularly in mathematics.
Learning and teaching is now overall good, rather than satisfactory.
There is now a culture of success in the school.
There are higher staff expectations.
The school now has the capacity to improve.
The LA now uses the school as a case study for improvement.

‘The school is now a delightful and happy place for children to be… it has very high expectations.’
‘The school has progressed and changed dramatically in a year… it is now a different place.’
‘The authority knows the school… it has a very good knowledge of the school, and a very good relationship with the school based upon openness and honesty.’

Go to top

5. Sustainability – what next?

What mechanisms are there in place to ensure improvements are sustained?

What will the school do?

Continue to embed developments and evaluate their impact.
Fine tune some developments.
Work to gain an Enterprise Award.
The school will not make any additional major changes during this session or next.

What will the LA do?

The school will remain in the ISP for another 12 months depending on attainment and the results of continued monitoring. It will need to be above floor targets in both areas.
SIP discussions in 2007.
ISP discussions with the school regarding predictions and targets for 2008.

Go to top