This website is changing

View case studies for

Moving beyond the floor target - Various Primary Schools, Salford

Date of issue: Jan. 2008

Theme: Schools Causing Concern (SCC)

School(s) context and profile

Barton Moss Primary School

Number on roll (NOR): 184. Age range: three to 11. The school serves an area of high social deprivation and prior attainment is well below average. Approximately 50% of pupils are eligible for free school meals, which is well above the national average (although this varies due to high mobility). The vast majority (93%) of pupils are white British and currently 7% of children speak English as an Additional Language (EAL) and these numbers have shown a recent increase. Almost 27% of pupils have Special Educational Needs (SEN), including learning difficulties, speech or communication problems or social, emotional and behaviour difficulties. This is slightly higher than the national average. The school last had an Ofsted inspection in 2004.

Results Key Stage 2 L4+
2005: English 52%; mathematics 43%
2006: English 62%; mathematics 62%
2007: English 72%; mathematics 80%

St. Andrew’s Primary School, Eccles

NOR: 183. Age range: three to 11.

Prior attainment on entry is well below average and there is high pupil mobility. 33% of pupils are eligible for free school meals, which is above the national average. The percentage of pupils identified as having SEN is well above the national average (36%). There is an above average proportion of pupils from ethnic minorities or who have EAL (48%, subsequently rising to 68%) of pupils arriving at Key Stage 2 without English.

Last Ofsted inspected November 2007 and judged good with some outstanding features.

Results Key Stage 2 L4+
2005: English 59%; mathematics 55%
2006: English 46%; mathematics 43%
2007: English 78%; mathematics 89%

St Thomas of Canterbury R.C. Primary School

NOR: 207. Age range: three to 11.

The school is a voluntary aided Roman Catholic school in an area of mixed housing in the inner city area of Salford. Prior attainment is well below average. Just over half of the pupils (57%) are from minority ethnic backgrounds, including African, Polish and Czech and many are not fluent English speakers. Many pupils leave and start the school at different points in their primary education. Numbers of pupils eligible for free school meals is well above average (63%). Just over a quarter of the pupils have learning difficulties and/or disabilities (25%).

The school has been in Special Measures since July 2006. Issues are to:

raise standards and achievement throughout the school especially for pupils in Key Stage 2;
improve the quality of teaching and raise expectations of what pupils can achieve;
improve monitoring and evaluation and the use of assessment data to accelerate pupils’ progress.

Results Key Stage 2 L4+
2005: English 56%; mathematics 50%

Go to top

Barriers to improvement

Barton Moss

Some pockets of unsatisfactory teaching.
Lack of effective tracking systems.
Low expectations of some teaching staff.
Teacher subject knowledge.

St. Andrew’s, Eccles

A percentage of unsatisfactory teaching particularly in Key Stage 2.
Lack of effective tracking systems.
Low expectations of some teaching staff.
An underdeveloped Senior Management Team (SMT).
Pupil behaviour.

St Thomas of Canterbury

The school was originally part of the Intensifying Support Programme (ISP), however it did not function well due to weak leadership and management. Following the inspection, and special measures category, the decision was taken to bring the school out of ISP. This means there is no Raising Attainment Plan (RAP).
A legacy of weak leadership and management.
Unsatisfactory teaching in the past.
Lack of effective pupil tracking systems.
Low expectations among staff and pupils.
Pupil behaviour.

Go to top

The school-based issues – what needed to change?

Barton Moss

The SMT at the time was focused on management rather than on leadership for learning.
Little or no Continuing Professional Development (CPD) available for staff.
Ineffective tracking and little analysis of data.
No target setting.
A budget deficit which resulted in poor resourcing.
No coherent monitoring of learning and teaching.
Low attainment in literacy and numeracy.

St Andrew’s, Eccles

Poor attitudes and low expectations of staff.
Poor quality teaching, particularly at Key Stage 2.
No consistent behaviour policy or procedures.
Low attainment in literacy and numeracy.
Poor quality learning environment.
Inadequate communication with parents.
A large budget deficit which impacted upon teaching and learning.

St Thomas of Canterbury

On appointment, the new headteacher was clear that the school had to improve. To achieve this he
set out to:

develop a coherent vision for the school which was adopted by all stakeholders;
raise expectations of parents, pupils and staff;
improve the overall quality of teaching and learning;
improve the learning environment;improve behaviour;
involve parents more in their children’s learning;
build upon the strengths of staff and recruit additional staff.

What was done?

Barton Moss

With the headteacher appointment and a new SMT including core subject coordinators, a new leadership style developed. The assistant headteachers attended a middle management course.
The headteacher invited the local authority (LA) to conduct a full inspection of the school. This, coupled with an Ofsted inspection, gave a clear starting point for school improvement.
The ISP programme was introduced and despite some initial staff reluctance all were involved.
There was an initial focus on changing the culture of the school.
The RAP was used to prioritise and focus on achievable targets and actions. SMART targets were agreed, criteria for success confirmed, and subject leaders were made responsible and accountable for progress in their areas.
Improvements in literacy and numeracy were seen as priorities, with an initial focus on reading, and a new reading programme is being introduced.
Pupil tracking was introduced. Staff were involved in regular discussions of pupil progress, and target setting. Discussions raised expectations and included targets in Individual Education Plans for pupils with SEN.
Performance Management System was made more rigorous.
Strategic planning of staff deployment.
CPD programme, focused on meeting priorities in the RAP/school development plan. Teaching assistants (TAs) included; all trained to TA3 level.
Improvement in the quality of teaching and the learning environment. Introduction of Assessment is For Learning (AiFL) procedures and principles, better planning and clear guidance on what constituted a purposeful learning environment.
New procedures for monitoring including observation, discussion of plans, scrutiny of pupils’ work, interviews with pupils, and professional development meetings.
Swift action taken to check on absence.

St Andrew’s, Eccles

Initial focus on improving behaviour and an agreed behaviour policy for promoting positive behaviour introduced. Celebration of success of ‘Golden Children’. Supported by CPD.
A focus on improving teaching and learning. CPD on, for example, guided reading, speaking and listening and writing for all staff. New teaching programmes introduced in speaking and listening, reading and writing.
Weaknesses in teaching tackled: consultants supported teachers in classes; coaching and mentoring put in place; peer observation begun and appropriate action taken where necessary.
Learning environments improved to ensure they were language rich.
Curricular targets set.
A clear culture of accountability introduced which included regular pupil progress meetings and individual discussions with teachers.
An improved tracking system introduced and information used to affect teaching strategies.
Discussion and scrutiny of desktop assessments.
Very effective use made of the RAP to identify priorities: identify action and agree success criteria. This became a working document which increased accountability and involved all staff.
Monitoring system introduced which included staff discussions; learning walks; discussions with pupils on issues in the RAP; sampling pupils’ work and examining the quality of marking; formal class observations; and frequent visits to classes by the headteacher who ‘walked the job’ regularly.
An increased number of meetings held with parents, targets and age-related expectations were shared with them and some family literacy and numeracy courses were held for parents to help them help their children.
Governors were made more aware of the RAP and progress being made.
Strengthening of subject coordinators’ role.

St Thomas of Canterbury

Initially staff implemented a booster programme over 10 days from February to May, which included the introduction of a programme of revision.
An improved tracking system was introduced particularly in calculation, reading comprehension, writing and number for Year 6. Data collected was used to inform planning.
Pupil targets set which raised expectations of pupils for their own learning.
Parents were involved more, they were given advice on how to help with their children’s learning.
Funding was used to employ a part-time teacher for a short term to support a small group of pupils.
A system of quality assurance was introduced which included, for example, classroom observation, scrutiny of pupil’s work, target setting and staff discussion.
AiFL was introduced, initially with regard to writing.
A teaching programme was introduced in writing, and subsequently introduced in reading.
Emphasis was placed on improving pupils’ skills in number.
There was a focus on ensuring high quality in all lessons.
An EAL coordinator was appointed, and new programmes were introduced to support the large number of pupils with EAL. Six TAs were involved in CPD to help them develop their skills with such pupils. Baselines were established for all such pupils, and the impact of initiatives measured.
Greater celebration of success: awards for good behaviour and a house system introduced.
Sensitive consultant support for individual staff raised confidence and morale.
Teachers and TAs were trained in the use of the Support for Ethnic Minority (SEMA) materials.

All three schools had training with SEMA materials to support EAL learners. All schools were supported in dealing with issues related to unsatisfactory teaching. Headteacher and subject leaders were supported when issues of capability arose.

Monitoring and evaluation

Barton Moss

Use made of:

the success criteria in the RAP and termly monitoring;
National Curriculum tests;
pupil progress meetings;
monitoring procedures;
the review of progress with the School Improvement Officer (SIO);
SEN pupil reviews and value added;
a review of attendance figures;
the scrutiny of progress by governors.

St Andrew’s, Eccles

The monitoring and performance management system used to ensure new procedures and decisions implemented and pupils made appropriate progress.
Termly monitoring of the RAP, using the success criteria.
Examination of the number of children working at agreed age-related expectations.
Optional National Curriculum tests used in a system of formal and informal assessments.
A constant review of progress and the effectiveness of intervention programmes.
Regular pupil progress meetings.

St Thomas of Canterbury

Targets were set and agreed with governors and the education authority. These included targets for the quality of teaching, targets for all years, targets to ensure Key Stage 1 became closer to national averages and a determination to ensure the school reached floor targets.
A governor’s monitoring sub-committee was established and was used to hold the headteacher to account every three weeks, and focus solely on school improvement. The school is also supported and challenged by the Diocese.
An ongoing series of pupil progress meetings.
A strong system of quality assurance.

What has been the overall impact?

Barton Moss

More effective leadership for learning.
Higher pupil and staff expectations.
Greater consistency in teaching, and better classroom organisation.
More confident staff.
Good use of assessment data.
An improved school ethos.
Increased attainment and value added.
Greater accountability of all stakeholders.
An improved learning environment, and better behaviour overall.
A more coherent curriculum.
A clearer SEN structure and early recognition of need.

‘The child is now at the centre of what we do.’
‘Being in ISP meant that we all worked together.’
‘This was not about the authority telling us what to do. It was about us driving improvements forward and controlling them – with the support of the authority.’
‘Working together with the authority has increased trust, improved teaching programmes and the quality of teaching and learning. It has given an emphasis for change. The external ‘critical friend’ has been very helpful.’

St Andrew’s, Eccles

Improved ethos and relationships with children. An Ofsted inspection in November 2007 rated ‘care, guidance and support’ as outstanding.
Children now aware of their learning and what they have to do to improve. They have become enthusiastic learners, and have developed a greater sense of responsibility. Children now being congratulated on their behaviour while on school trips.
Parents now aware of the importance of their role, and the need for partnership with the school.
Teachers more aware of the benefits of working with parents.
Higher expectations from parents, pupils and staff.
In November 2007, Ofsted rated 100% of teaching as good or outstanding.
Much more teamwork and a greater sense of accountability within the school.
Monitoring now much more effective.
The school now becoming more creative in the curriculum and introducing, for example, an international curriculum to introduce global citizenship and develop pupils’ skills.
Subject coordinators have been challenged but have risen to the challenge. ‘The programme has been really good and very helpful. It helped me, with the school staff in improving the school… training and support from the authority has been excellent.’

St Thomas of Canterbury

Improved attainment overall.
Improved teaching programmes which were impacting on pupil progress and attainment.
Much improved attainment of pupils with EAL.
An improvement in the quality of teaching: 100% of lessons were satisfactory, 30% were good and 10% were outstanding at the Ofsted inspection in October 2007.
An improved culture for learning.
Higher expectations among staff, parents and pupils.
A greater number of parents attending assemblies.
As a consequence of improved teaching and learning, pupil behaviour improved. ‘We welcome the support and challenge from the authority. We are involved with good quality people who, at times, give us uncomfortable messages in a very supportive manner. We are now working together to improve the school.’

Go to top

Local authority support and challenge

With all three schools the authority implemented its strategy for school improvement which has proved to be effective. What follows, therefore, describes what happened with all schools involved. Thereafter, specific points will be made regarding action taken in the specific schools described above.

The authority Schools Causing Concern group reviews all schools, taking into account those in special measures, those with notices to improve and concerns identified locally. Schools causing concerned are identified, and headteachers and governors notified.
The School Improvement Officer (SIO), with the school, creates an Action Plan, determining the support required and time for consultants. The Plan contains three key elements:
- What needs to be done?
- What is the capacity of the school to deal with the actions?
- What will be the milestones in the plan?
An audit of non-negotiables is conducted, which includes rigorous questioning by authority staff. Evidence is required to substantiate answers, and there is a clear focus on impact. This brings forward areas for the RAP, which adds to issues raised by the school itself.
The RAP begins with a detailed analysis of attainment which is shared with all staff. Foundation Stage teachers are included. Schools identify specific targets, such as to improve the quality of learning and teaching in Years 3 and 4, in a shared document. They also identify criteria for success, timescales and which staff will be responsible for which actions.
Every two weeks the headteacher discusses progress with the RAP with staff. All staff are involved, including TAs. This has the effect of focusing minds and raising expectations. RAP is displayed prominently and objectives highlighed when achieved.
An interesting innovation is the involvement of a TA consultant with school-based TAs. This consultant is skilled in determining whether the school has highlighted the correct pupils for intervention and in tracking their improvement over time. This has the effect of focusing on TA support for children, and an increase in their knowledge and professional development. As part of a work force strategy headteachers are encouraged to make decisions on the basis of what is best forchildren’s learning and are dissuaded from allocating staff in order to give equal shares to everyone.
Pupil progress meetings are held regularly: they are focused on teacher assessment, involve all staff, and are a key feature of the accountability strategy. Staff are given questions which must be answered in advance, and many schools prepare for these meetings by holding their own meetings in advance of the authority-led meeting. While the staff are clearly accountable for children’s progress, the meetings develop a sharing culture, involve all staff and develop the school’s capacity for improvement.
Professional Development Meetings are tailored to school needs with CPD monies being targeted to school improvement.
Headteachers are called in termly to the education office to discuss progress with targets set using a colour-coded traffic system. They are held to account, and discuss all reports on progress made.
Headteachers and subject leaders of ISP schools meet regularly to share good practice.
The authority also works with governing bodies to help governors become critical friends of schools.
Where there have been issues of capability both with teaching staff and senior leaders these have been rigorously pursued and resolved over a short space of time to minimise negative impact on learners.

All of the above steps are taken with every school in the ISP programme and evaluation has shownthat those schools improve when the strategy is implemented and schools join with the authority in developments.

What was done?

In addition to all of the above the authority was involved with the three schools concerned in the
following ways:

Barton Moss

A new headteacher was put in place with a focus on improvement, and some changes were made in staff.
Considerable work was done to empower coordinators, and increase their knowledge and skills.
A ‘learning walk’ was undertaken in every classroom.
The LA established a tracking system.
The headteacher was heavily supported and given structures and systems to use.
Rigour was constant in all of the work undertaken.

St Andrew’s, Eccles

Support was given to the headteacher with regard to making strong management decisions.
Considerable work was done with coordinators to raise their expectations; which they subsequently did with staff.
There was a focus on progress for children with EAL.
Decisions were made on which children to be targeted and for what reasons.

St Thomas of Canterbury

Originally little engagement by the school. Subsequently, an experienced headteacher went in for a term and a project manager became involved, heavily supported by consultants who worked in classes.
A new headteacher was appointed, and there was a continued focus from consultants on support in classes.
There was some teacher movement which helped improve the overall quality of teaching, and focused work was done with TAs.

What has been the overall impact?

Overall the authority’s systems have been effective in both supporting and challenging schools. Decision-making within the schools is now evidence-based in the schools concerned.

Barton Moss

Improvement in the quality of leadership.
Improved teaching and learning.
Raised expectations of staff.
Higher attainment.
Subject knowledge improving.

St Andrew’s, Eccles

A stronger leadership team which included subject coordinators.
Improved learning and teaching.
Higher attainment.
Raised expectations.
Improved behaviour.

St Thomas of Canterbury

Improvement in the quality of leadership.
Raised attainment.
An improvement in learning and teaching.
Raised expectations.
An improvement in subject leadership.
Improved behaviour.

‘The support and challenge role is now well-honed within the authority and exists within a system where there is a good relationship between the schools and the authority.’
‘…the original ISP schools are now carrying on the process developed while they were in the programme.’
‘The high level of scrutiny from the authority has helped build a capacity for improvement within schools.’
‘We have succeeded in becoming the critical friend of the schools involved.’
‘Our teams and our consultants have credibility.’

Go to top

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

What will the school do?

Barton Moss

Maintain and embed improvements made.
Increase self-valuation by staff.
Take action to ensure impact of CPD.
Increase self-assessment.
Develop a programme for the teaching of writing and increase expectations.
Improve pupils’ skills and speed of response in mental mathematics.
Ensure that teaching is good for 100% of lessons.
Improve the learning and teaching for science.

St Andrew’s, Eccles

Continue with the improvements initiated, ensure they are embedded and aim to be outstanding in everything.
Expand the work with parents and establish a Parent Council.
Do more with pupils who arrive with no English.
Improve the attainment of boys.
Develop the science programme and the international curriculum.
Improve the play areas.

St Thomas of Canterbury

The school now has a detailed SIP in place. It is a shared document with action plans defined. A Performance Management Cycle is linked to the SIP as is all CPD. Overall this is seen as a coherent process for improvement.
Middle management is now taking on greater responsibilities; particularly subject coordinators.
The SMT has been extended to include two teachers.
Coordinators are being given time to fulfil their roles, and becoming more focused.
The school is building on lessons learned in implementing their improvement strategies.
Aim to ensure that all teaching is at least good.

What will the LA do?

An exit strategy created for schools who have worked in ISP for three years.
Continued support for the schools concerned where necessary.
The schools continue to be considered within the authority’s overall strategy, which takes account of local information on schools in addition to quantifiable data.
Sharing good practice among schools at different stages within the programme, including those exiting.
Termly health checks supported by SIO and consultant teams for schools requiring less external support and those exiting the programme.
Consultant support available on request to schools exiting the programme.
Continue to use expertise within the ISP schools as support for other schools.

Go to top

Summary, and references to any resources

A handbook for subject leaders – ‘Leading literacy and numeracy through ISP’ includes all forms used; questions set for staff; red, amber, green ‘Success criteria’ sheet. Overall, a very valuable resource.