Help me decode this ofsted report?

[tricot39]

Hi

Here are extracts from the report for our local school. I am struggling to unpick this and decide what it means for a white, native english-speaking family. DS would be starting September 2013 in Y1. He knows his numbers and letters, and is showing some interest in reading/writing his name etc.

"XXX is larger than most primary schools. The largest group of pupils are of Pakistani heritage. The proportion of pupils who are from minority ethnic backgrounds is above average, as are those who speak English as an additional language. The proportion of pupils known to be eligible for free school meals is very high. Most are from homes where English is spoken as an additional language and a quarter of the pupils are at an early stage of learning English. An average proportion of pupils have special educational needs and/or disabilities."

Here are the points I need help with:

1. "By the end of Year 6, pupils achieve well in their learning, because of the high expectations of them. They make good progress from their starting points and reach average levels of attainment."

2. "The quality of teaching is good. Teachers have good subject knowledge and explain points clearly and precisely to pupils. The revised theme-based curriculum engages and motivates pupils. However, teachers are not routinely taking opportunities to develop pupils? speaking and listening skills so as to enhance their use of vocabulary in both speaking and writing. In a small minority of lessons, pace and questioning are not sufficiently developed to match the needs of all pupils."

3. "From below average starting points in Year 1, pupils? progress accelerates as they move through the school and, by the end of Year 6, attainment is average. Through effective monitoring of teaching and learning, pupils? performance has improved, for example, in mathematics. Due to good one-to-one support, guidance and small group work, pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities make good progress, as do those who are at the early stages of learning English."

4. "The school promotes equal opportunity and tackles discrimination well, because there is a strong emphasis on inclusion, and as a result, every pupil has an equal chance to learn. All pupils are effectively supported to achieve their potential and to reduce any differences in the performance of different groups."

What on earth does all this mean?

If we were non native english speakers this school would be great! But DS is likely to be average or above in maths/english when he arrives, and there is no mention of how the school deals with kids in our situation. How likely is DS to get bored?

As an aside, my friend's DS is in the school's nursery and has been labelled "posh". We are probably more lower-middle-class in absolute terms, but in this deprived area he might well be considered posh! Sadly this seems to be a very early age for this sort of thing and it reminds me of my own schooling in a deprived city where I pretended to be dumb to fit in. I often reflect on that and how I wish I could have channelled my energies more productively.....

Any thoughts? What would you do?

I should clarify:
I was specific about white, native english-speaking family as we have lots of kids at the school who are white, non native english speakers!
TIA

I think it sounds pretty good. Inclusive school, and pupils starts below average and end average - so progress while they are in the school is good, they catch up well and have effective teaching.
Is is Good overall? or Satisfactory?
Most important, do you like the feel of it?

I think if they are getting good outcomes with pupils who are relatively new to English language then they must be teaching pretty well.

In comparison, DD's school's last ofsted before she started said - pupils start below average, make little progress and leave still below average, with poor progress inbetween. (it went into special measures and lots changed after that) Also very high free school meals.

Whether or not that means your child might not be in the best place for them academically, I don't know. I'm still not sure about that for our school TBH, DD is pretty bright and I am wondering if only the pupils who drag the stats down get the extra attention, but I am keeping an eye on it and doing stuff at home with her.

You could have a quick look on the league tables on the bbc website to see what the proportion of "higher level pupils" are. These measures aren't perfect, but it would give you some indication of whether there are currently any pupils performing significantly above average. And how this compares to neighbouring schools.

but I agree, that report sounds really positive. I think it is reasonable to assume that if the school was not providing good opportunities to 'above average' pupils then the insectors would have commented on this.

how recent was the inspection?

It sounds like a good school with high expectations for all pupils

Inspected late 2011.
"Overall effectiveness: how good is the school? 2
The school?s capacity for sustained improvement 2"

I agree it all sounded positive, but then I have read a lot of reports for schools in other areas (we were considering moving) and they all sound the same. Unless they are dire and heading to special measures, the reports seem to be constructed using similar words and phrases, and an overall positive impression! I find it all a bit impenetrable.

Thanks for the BBC tip. I didn't know that they had primary schools on there.

Don't look on the BBC, look at the dcsf league tables. Tells you everything about the school that has been published.

If some kids get level 5s, there's every reason to expect your child will.

My DCs attended a primary school who's ofsted report sounds very similar to the one you posted in terms of below average at the start, high proportion of DCs just beginning to learn English etc.

It was a fantastic school, there was a lot of one to one support for children who needed extra help and a lot of focus on getting them to the expected level but the brighter students were very well motivated and the year 6 class both in my dd and DS year achieved outstanding SATS results, amongst the best in the area.

I think it depends on how much you like the school, how happy you are with the head etc.

Your dc could go to an ofsted rated excellent school but it might not be a good fit for them personally IYSWIM

Clearly a perfectly good school - possibly not right for your DS.
Agree with Indigo that you want to see a handful of pupils (ie not just one or two) getting 5s in KS 2 and a bundle of level 3s in KS 1.

When they say "largest group is Pakistani heritage" does this mean 30%, 50%, 90%?

My DCs go to a school where white native English speakers (like them) are a small minority, but because the school intake is made up of a real mixed bag - say 10 ethnic groups of 10% each, it's really not a problem. Socially and linguistically I'd be much more wary of a school withan essentially monocultural intake.

80% are ethnic minority and only 25% (total school) are of pakistani origin so no single group dominates.

OK, that's reassuring OP.

My theory is that it's not ideal to have a "dominant" non-English language in the playground IYSWIM. My reasoning is that it may impede the EAL children's English acquisition and be a social barrier to children who don't speak that language. However that's purely a hypothesis and I'd be happy to be contradicted by primary teachers with experience (or indeed people who've been in that situation as children).

OK So I have looked up the DCSF tables:

KS1-2 CVA Score = 99.8

In 2009, KS2 15% were getting level 5 in English and 33% in Maths.
In 2010, KS2 40% were getting level 5 in English and 48% in Maths.
LA Average is 34% in english and/or maths

Average point score:
2007 = 25.7, 2008 = 28.4, 2009 = 25.5 and 2010 = 28.2

% level 4+ in both English and maths:
2008 = 83%, 2009 = 58% and 2010 = 76%

So what on earth does all of that lot mean?!

I don't know whether the lower 2009 results can be explained by the change of Head Teacher and some of the senior team left. But I also heard that the teaching had switched to being very SATS focussed so that some kids did no art for half a year while they were drilled for the tests :(

TIA

It sounds like a good school - unfortunately, a lot of schools have an increasingly narrow curriculum during KS2 to drill kids for SATS. Blame the system.

On paper it looks good. You need to go and have a look round and see what feel you get for it.

I doubt a change of headteacher would have such an impact on 1 year group - if he/she were a problem you'd be more likely to see a slow decline. Unless possibly the implemented a new way of teaching Year 6 and the teacher was getting to grips with it but even then, I think unlikely.

58% is low - I'm no expert but I would say more likely to be a year group with a lot of children not achieving for a variety of reasons. Even in large schools 2 or 3 children make quite a difference to results. I wouldnt let a 3 year old result worry you.

If native English speakers were not progressing at the same rate as their 'English as an additional language' peers then the report would say so. Equally if gifted and talented children were not stretchedf it would say so. The report specifically says all groups learn as well as each other. Well, you'd hope anyway...ofsted reports cant always be trusted.

I really would put too much energy into 'translating' data and ofsted reports. Go and see the school, chat to parents.

It sounds good. Good teaching, students make good progress.

The figures for CVA are quite interesting because they suggest that the written words from Ofsted "From below average starting points in Year 1, pupils? progress accelerates as they move through the school and, by the end of Year 6, attainment is average." do not match with the reality. CVA is a measure of the progress from KS1 in year 2 to KS2 tests in year 6. A score of 100 is saying that all pupils make the expected level of progress from KS1 to KS2 and 99.8 is going to be within the statistical error for such a figure. So in effect the pupils make good early progress to year 2 KS1 tests and then average progress from then on, if you believe the CVA figure.
The % of level 5 in 2010 is quite impressive. The figures for 2009 are poor but do not fit with any of the other figures so that was obviously a blip year, when the cohort did not perform that well.
I think that you need to visit the school but on the raw figures it looks a school that will look after its kids and give them a good education.

Thanks for all the replies. What are good things to look out for when we visit?

Do try and visit a few different schools. The best advice I heard was to remember that almost all primary schools are lovely places to be, full of beautiful lively children, and only visiting several schools will enable you to distinguish between them.