Moving beyond the floor target case study: Colburn Primary School, North Yorkshire

Date of issue: Jan. 2008
Theme: Schools Causing Concern (SCC)

School context and profile

Colburn Primary School is situated in a town adjacent to Catterick Garrison, the largest army garrison in Europe. The school community has a significant proportion of lone mothers and many of the school community are poorly paid part-time workers on the garrison, which lifts them just above Income Support threshold. As a result, free school meals statistics mask the real level of deprivation in the area. The school’s index of multiple deprivation ranking is 28 out of 328 North Yorkshire (NY) primary schools. The school is in a pocket of deprivation in a rural area.

Key Stage 2 2005 results:

Level 4+: English 57%; mathematics 62%; science 78%

Level 5: English 11%; mathematics 16%; science 32%

Barriers to improvement

• attainment low on entry: proportion of pupils with learning difficulties and/or disabilities (LDD) is above average
• attendance below average for the NY quintile: 3.45 per cent children with no absence compared to 7.15 per cent for the NY quintile; 6.40 per cent had 20 per cent or more absence as compared to 4.4 per cent for the NY quintile
• Ofsted identified the need for more active support from parents to improve learning and attendance
• punctuality of a small minority was poor
• setting had led to wasted time and wasteful movement around school
• recruitment difficulties.

The school-based issues – what needed to change?

• the overall quality of leadership, including governance
• the overall quality of teaching, including planning
• systems of monitoring, including self-evaluation and tracking
• pupil attainment, and a general underachievement of the majority of pupils; Key Stage 2 results below floor targets for previous five years
• pupils making insufficient progress in the Foundation Stage (FS) particularly in Communication, Language and Literacy Development (CLLD), and mathematical development
• pupils’ learning, self-esteem and attitudes to work
• the expectations of staff, pupils and parents.

What was done?

• Headteacher had an agreed support plan and was very well supported by the LA, school management team and the whole staff. A much improved management structure was embedded, and better use was made of management time. School organisation was reviewed, and appropriate procedures were implemented to challenge practice and lead effective learning. The headteacher tackled the issue of weaknesses in teaching.
• The governing body was strengthened, and appropriate training has taken place to focus governors on challenge and monitoring.
• The raising attainment plan (RAP) was tailored to be a termly action plan.
• Better assessment was implemented, using principles of Assessment for Learning (AfL), which led to better planning and more effective differentiation.
• Classroom organisation improved, and time is now used much more effectively.
• Intervention provision map created. A good range in English, but still more to do in mathematics.
• Continuing professional development (CPD) focused mainly on performance management (75 per cent of time used in this way; 25 per cent for other school priorities). Teaching assistants trained appropriately.
• A development of ‘talk for learning’ with pupils being encouraged to discuss their learning. ‘Talking partners’ now a successful feature of lessons.
• Continued focus on behaviour management, and the appointment of a home/school worker.

Monitoring and evaluation

• optional National Curriculum tests used twice a year
• much more focused teacher assessment, using a range of diagnostic tools
• implementation of a comprehensive quality assurance system
• analysis of attainment plus pupil progress
• setting of appropriate targets in attainment and teaching and learning
• in-house moderation plus moderation by the Intensifying Support Programme (ISP) team.

What has been the overall impact?

The following summarises the impact of the initiatives taken to improve the school.

• An improvement in the overall quality of leadership. Headteacher, management team and governors now much more focused on school improvement and setting high expectations. Headteacher focused on leadership for learning and re-energised with regard to his role.
• Improved self-evaluation; clear monitoring timetable in place including observation; work and planning scrutiny; pupil conferencing; specific focus for monitoring; learning walks; staff discussion; peer coaching and support plans for staff when appropriate.
• Much improved tracking system in place; staff inputting information; using it to influence teaching programmes; and identify pupils not making sufficient progress.
• Increased attainment overall in English and mathematics. An improvement at early Key Stage 2.
• Increased achievement.
• An improvement in the overall quality of teaching. The school will hit its target of 70 per cent of teaching and learning being good or better. No lessons deemed to be inadequate.
• Improvements in pupils’ learning. Pupils now taking greater pride in their work, and discussing targets.
• New aspirational targets being set which would not have been considered before.
• Raised expectations of staff and pupils.

The following quotes sum up the impact the ISP programme has had on the school.

• ‘I am actually invigorated and enthusiastic about leading the school. I have regained my focus on leadership for learning, and feel sharper by using the tools ISP has put in place.’ (Headteacher.)
• ‘We are now working much more effectively as a management team.’
• ‘The school is where it is now partly because of the rejuvenation this process has given the leadership team in the time available. Although it has been very pressurised, it has been a good experience.’

What did the LA identify as the key areas for support/challenge?

• the overall quality of leadership and management
• standards of teaching
• behaviour of pupils
• AfL.

What was done?

ISP support for school to:

• enable the leadership team to keep all staff on board with ISP and address inconsistencies in standards of teaching
• establish a monitoring cycle using a range of methods
• develop rigorous assessment procedures for mathematics, reading and writing, and establish a usable tracking system
• implement early intervention packages so that fewer children become labelled as children with LDD
• enable staff to improve the learning environment, and support teachers in helping children understand what they had to do to improve
• supply relevant CPD through fortnightly professional development meetings
• improve governors’ understanding of how to hold leadership to account, and engage parents in their children’s learning
• improve resources, particularly for reading.

School Improvement and Targets Unit/LA funding was used to:

• provide a mentor for the headteacher for care and well-being support; and fund dedicated headship and leadership team time
• appoint additional teaching and support staff in both key stages to target interventions; and appoint a learning mentor
• advanced skills teacher from another school worked in school to act as, and support, mathematics subject leader
• help the school move away from setting arrangements
• train a TA and deliver Reading Intervention (North Yorkshire Wave 3).

Additional support

• good practice visits to schools in NY and beyond
• support adviser in place (approximately 24 days per year); two weeks’ intensive support from seven LA consultants and advisers (30 days per year from consultants, three days’ training for headteacher and governors, three days’ training per year for English and mathematics subject leaders)
• additional governor found by LA to improve governance
• termly ongoing LA reviews
• training for governors
• behaviour support from Access and Inclusion with intensive support from three LA advisers/consultants to model the leadership of good behaviour management
• weekly consultation drop-ins for teachers from behaviour support
• partnership with local school funded at £10,000 to allow two local schools to share and learn from best practice.
• training for teaching assistants on a full range of interventions (Early Literacy Support (ELS), Additional Literacy Support (ALS), Year 3 Literacy Support (Y3LS), Further Literacy Support (FLS), Wave 3 mathematics.
• personal support plan for headteacher.

What has been the overall impact?

• Since the leadership team and the staff have embraced the support and worked in partnership with the LA team, the school has rapidly improved.
• Improved leadership and management, including governance. Governors feel empowered to question the leadership team and have an understanding of performance data.
• The headteacher is now seen as the leader of learning and all discussions centre around pupil progress.
• Systems for school improvement are now embedded and there is a clear timeline for key actions followed by all staff.
• The Foundation Stage team has had high quality intensive support from an Early Years consultant and over the last term this has had a significant impact on linking sounds and letters (LSL) and early reading, raising standards and beginning to affect practice in Key Stage 1.
• Provision in FS is now good, with some outstanding features, and leadership is improved.
• The learning environment is significantly improved across the school and is of a more consistent standard.
• Where teaching is good, all aspects of ISP (tracking, AfL, early intervention, involving pupils in their own learning journey and so on) are embedded.
• Fewer pupils are now on the Special Educational Needs  (SEN) register and LDD identification is more accurate.
• FS Profile higher or equal in all areas except physical development in 2007 from previous years.
• 2007 Key Stage 1 National Curriculum tests: reading 53.8 per cent (up three per cent); writing 46.2 per cent (down 14 per cent); mathematics 84.6 per cent (up 14 per cent); average point score (APS) 12.4.
• 2007 Key Stage 2 National Curriculum test results are the best ever: English 70 per cent (up 14 per cent); mathematics 62 per cent (up six per cent); APS 25.4.
• All results are still significantly below national and LA averages.
• All teachers held to account in all year groups for progress of pupils, using pupil progress meetings as a basis for performance management.
• School above floor targets for English and close for mathematics.
• There is a strong and effective working relationship with the LA and other outside agencies.
• An aspirational, ‘can do’ culture has been developed in the school.

‘This is now a school where the staff have turned a corner regarding their professionalism and expectations. The headteacher is stronger and there is a more effective governing body. The next step is to improve pupils’ attitudes to learning.’

‘The overall programme has been good at improving learning and teaching, leadership and management. This is reflected in test results which are much improved.’

‘Once the school engaged with the authority and worked with them improvements began.’

‘Pupil progress is at the heart of everything they do now, and there is a ‘can do’ culture in the school.’

Monitoring and evaluation

Taken from LA support plan for school:

• The school, through the leadership of the headteacher, has ownership of its systems and procedures, and positive progress is sustained.
• Governance is at least satisfactory. Governors understand and fulfil their role in holding the school to account for the education of its pupils.
• The headteacher’s leadership is at least satisfactory.
• The headteacher holds individuals to account for their contribution to raising standards and achievement (links to headteacher’s personal support plan and cohort targets on action plan RAP).
• 50 per cent lessons observed are good as shown by lesson observations (trajectory towards 70 per cent shown, see action plan/RAP).
• The headteacher leads on the improvement in pupils’ behaviour.
• Behaviour observed in all parts of the school and, at all times, is at least satisfactory and often good.
• All staff consistently address inappropriate behaviours.

What information/data did you use to measure progress?

• LA review outcomes and progress against recommendations
• ISP consultant’s monitoring and progress against recommendations
• support adviser meetings, observations and records of visits
• School Improvement Partner records of visits and progress against agreed actions
• strategy meetings for all LA personnel working in the school
• pupil tracking
• optionals and National Curriculum tests
• behaviour and learning walks around school by support adviser
• monitoring of impact of behaviour policy through reported incidents/attendance and exclusion data as well as qualitative information as above
• impact of spending.

Sustainability – what next?

• Final year of ISP concentrates on capacity of English and mathematics subject leaders to continue to use systems to identify vulnerable pupils; intervene appropriately; and evaluate impact.
• Some intensive support, including continued participation in social and emotional aspects of learning still required to embed a successful behaviour management strategy for the school; and
  involve parents.
• Further improve assessment for learning through participation in LA’s pupil self-evaluation.

What will the school do?

• continue to prioritise decisions in light of progress made
• appoint a learning mentor
• keep intervention for literacy and numeracy at Key Stage 1 and Key Stage 2
• increase provision for intervention for mathematics and behaviour
• continue to monitor the effect of management, and review the use of the senior management team’s time
• retain teaching groups at approximately 25 to 29.

What will the LA do?

• provide intensive help until behaviour management strategies are embedded
• provide support adviser to work with schools’ leaders to build their capacity
• continue to give ISP support with phased withdrawal until July 2008; and encourage the school and headteacher to become independent
• continue to carry out termly reviews throughout 2008
• have a planned exit strategy for the school including partnership with a local school and participation in the LA’s leadership programme.