PRIMARY SCHOOL
ST ALOYSIUS FEDERATION SUMMARY OVERVIEW SEPTEMBER 2016
INSPECTION HISTORY
ST ALOYSIUS INFANT SCHOOL Date of last inspection: September 2013 Overall Effectiveness: Good Areas for Improvement Raise attainment ,especially in writing, by: - ensuring work is sufficiently challenging in all lessons, especially for the mostable pupils - planning more opportunities for pupils to write to the best of their ability - allowing pupils time to have more practice in areas identified for development by teachers when marking pupils’ work. Further improve teaching so that it is always at least good and more is outstanding by: - sustaining an appropriate pace in all lessons to secure the interest and concentration of all pupils but especially the most able - further develop the skills of all staff, both teachers and support staff, exploiting the school’s current expertise to ensure a consistency of approach across the school - reshaping tasks and refining questions teachers ask to ensure all pupils are engaged and challenged in all parts of lessons, and especially the most able. Expected date of next inspection: From Autumn Term 2016 ST ALOYSIUS JUNIOR SCHOOL Date of last inspection: September 2016 Overall Effectiveness: Outstanding Area for Improvement Ensure that all pupils fully understand how to apply their mathematical skills and understanding when solving problems and in practical situations.
1
©Edupedia Ltd 2016
Infant School: Main Characteristics NoR FSM Minority Ethnic EAL SEN Support EHCPs Looked-After Stability SDI Other
Average Average Below average Average Low (Review in the autumn term) 2015: 1 2015: 0 High Above average School is part of the St Aloysius Federation with new Exec HT in post from 09/13. Some staff and leadership changes.
Junior School: Main Characteristics NoR FSM Minority Ethnic EAL SEN Support EHCPs Looked-After Stability SDI Other
Average Above average Low Below average Average 2015: 3 (ASD, SLCN) 2015: 0 High Above average School is part of the St Aloysius Federation with new Exec HT in post from 09/13. Some staff and leadership changes
Early Years Skills on Entry
Below average
% achieving good level of development
2013: 55.9% 2014: 53.3% 2015: 60.3% 2016: 73.8%
Outcomes
Outstanding Good progress made in improving outcomes for boys in 2015. School gap lower than LA gap in 2016. Good progress made in narrowing the gaps for the disadvantaged children. No difference in the proportion of disadvantaged and non-disadvantaged who achieved GLD. 5 children accessed SEN Support in 2016; 1 achieved GLD
2
©Edupedia Ltd 2016
Good progress made in increasing the proportion of children who exceeded expectations in all areas of learning.
ATTAINMENT AND PROGRESS INDICATORS
Year 1 Phonics Screen % passed 2013 2014 2015 2016
% boys passed 68 86 75 82
64 78 73 83
% girls passed 61 71 71 85
National Average 69 74 77 81
Year 1 Phonics Key Points
Phonics programme is very effective; continuous trend of improvement.
No significant trend in the performance of boys and girls
School successfully narrowed the gaps between the disadvantaged and others in the school in 2015. Disadvantaged children did better in 2016.
2015: SEN 1/5 passed; below national. 5 SEN in 2016; 60% passed the screen which is above average
By the end of Year 2 in 2015, 92% of pupils had passed the screen which is Broadly in line with national. 98% passed by the end of Year 2 in 2016 which is high.
Key Stage 1: Historic Data 2013 APS Overall Reading L2B+ L3 APS Writing L2B+ L3 APS Mathematics L2B+ L3 APS
2014
2015
15.3
15.1
15.5
76 17 15.7
77 17 15.7
85 27 16.5
69 5 14.9
57 3 14.1
72 10 15.3
83 10 15.9
73 10 15.3
75 20 16.0
3
©Edupedia Ltd 2016
2016 Attainment Outcomes
Reading
% Expected+ School 85
% Expected+ National 74
% GD School 32
% GD National 24
Writing
77
66
27
13
Mathematics
83
73
33
18
RWM
72
69
20
9
Key Stage 1 Main Issues Historic Data
Attainment is broadly average over time. Good improvement at L3 in 2015.
Standards in writing and mathematics were low in 2014. Average in 2015.
Girls did better than boys in 2013 but not a trend over time. Gap continued to close in 2014. Boys did slightly better in 2015 due to stronger performance at L2B+ in mathematics.
Gaps widened for disadvantaged pupils in 2014. Good progress made in narrowing all gaps in 2015.
No significant issues with the performance of pupils with SEN over time.
2016 Outcomes Pupils made outstanding progress from their starting points in 2016.
% of pupils who achieved national expectations was above average in reading, writing and mathematics and on the combined indicator.
% of pupils working at greater depth was above national in all subjects and on the combined indicator.
Reading: Boys did a little better at the expected standard; a higher proportion of girls achieved greater depth. Performance of the disadvantaged was broadly in line with national but slightly lower than others in the school. 4 pupils had SEN; 2 achieved the expected standard.
Writing: Boys did as well as girls at the expected standard; a higher proportion of girls achieved greater depth. Performance of the disadvantaged was broadly in line with national but slightly lower than others in the school. 4 pupils had SEN; 2 achieved the expected standard.
Mathematics: No difference in outcomes for boys and girls. Performance of the disadvantaged was broadly in line with national but slightly lower than others in the school. All SEN pupils met the expected standard.
4
©Edupedia Ltd 2016
Issues for the school What action is the school taking to increase the proportion of boys who achieve greater depth in reading and writing?
5
©Edupedia Ltd 2016
Key Stage 2: Historic Data 2013
2014
2015
28.9
29.3
29.6
85 75 42 0 28.5
92 82 37 0 28.5
96 91 53 29.9
88
88
93
49
40
29.2
42 0 28.8
28.9
87 72 45 0 28.9
88 77 53 7 29.9
87 72 53 6 29.7
74 57 30 0 27.1 77 23
77 67 45 0 28.2 82 70 23
85 76 55 2 29.5 85 70 32
PROGRESS 2 levels reading 3 levels reading
83 30
88 25
96 43
2 levels writing 3 levels writing 2 levels mathematics 3 levels mathematics
94 49 92 25
95 33 98 42
ATTAINMENT APS Overall Reading L4+ L4B+ L5+ L6 APS Writing L4+ L4B+ L5+ L6 APS Mathematics L4+ L4B+ L5+ L6 APS GPS L4+ L4B+ L5+ L6 APS L4+ R/W/M L4B+ R/W/M L5+ R/W/M
4 levels: 2%
100 36 92 43
4 levels: 3%
6
©Edupedia Ltd 2016
2016 Attainment Outcomes % % Ex+ Ex+ Sch National Reading 83 66
Scaled Score School 105.8
Scaled Score National 103
% HS School 22
% HS National 19
35
15
Writing
90
74
Maths
92
70
107.3
103
43
17
GPS
90
77
105.7
104
20
22
RWM
75
53
13
5
2016 Progress Measures Subject Average progress reading
Average Score 2.1
Average progress writing
2.9
Average progress mathematics
3.3
Risk of Coasting
Low
The school is low risk for being identified as coasting because:
In 2015, more than 85% of pupils achieved Level 4 in reading, writing and mathematics. The school was not consistently below the median % of pupils making expected progress in all of reading, writing and mathematics, and
In 2016, although fewer than 85% of children achieved the new expected standard (75%) the average progress made by pupils in reading, or writing or mathematics was not below a level set against the new primary progress measures. All measures were significantly high.
Key Stage 2 Key Points Historic Data
Attainment shows an improving picture. Combined Level 4+ and L5+ indicators above average in 2015.
Good improvement at Level 5 in reading and GPS in 2015.
Good improvement in GPS overall.
Standards in writing and mathematics relatively static.
No trend over time on the attainment of boys and girls.
7
©Edupedia Ltd 2016
Gaps narrowed for disadvantaged pupils in 2014 and their progress was stronger than others in reading and writing. This positive trend continued in 2015; the disadvantaged pupils did better overall.
Pupils who accessed SEN Support do well because of the very effective support and targeted intervention they receive. In 2015, outcomes in reading were above national expectations.
All value added scores were at least average in 2015 and Sig+ for the lower attainers and SEN.
2016 Outcomes Outcomes were outstanding in 2016.
Performance is above the minimum floor standard overall. The % who achieved the national standard in R/W/M (75%) was above the floor of 65% and national. 77% of girls achieved the expected standard in reading, writing and mathematics against 72% of boys.
Standards likely to be Sig+.
13% of pupils reached the higher standard on the combined indicator; likely to be broadly average.
All scaled scores above average and likely to be Sig+.
Average progress scores very positive overall; all Sig+.
Reading: No difference in the performance of boys and girls at the expected standard; a higher proportion of girls achieved the higher standard. Disadvantaged (11 pupils) did not do as well as others in the school; 0% achieved the higher standard. SEN Support (8): 4 achieved the expected standard and 1 achieved greater depth. Writing: No difference in the performance of boys and girls at the expected standard; a higher proportion of girls achieved the higher standard. Disadvantaged (11 pupils) did not do as well as others in the school; 9% achieved the higher standard. SEN Support (8): 6 achieved the expected standard and 1 achieved greater depth. Mathematics: No difference in the performance of boys and girls at the expected standard; a higher proportion of boys achieved the higher standard. Disadvantaged (11 pupils) did not do as well as others in the school; 18% achieved the higher standard. SEN: Pupils did well especially at the higher standard. EGPS: Girls did a little better than boys, especially at the higher standard. Disadvantaged (11 pupils) did not do as well as others in the school; 9% achieved the higher standard. SEN: Pupils did well especially at the higher standard. Issues for the school What action is the school taking to increase the proportion of boys who achieve greater depth in reading and writing?
8
©Edupedia Ltd 2016
Attendance Infants % PAs 15% % Attendance
2014 1.6 95.6
2015
2016
96.0
96.7
2014 1.7 96.0
2015
2016
95.4
96.3
Juniors % PAs 15% % Attendance
KEY POINTS FROM INSPECTION DASHBOARD
2016: No weaknesses in either data set Strengths
KS1 attainment at the expected standard and at greater depth for all groups was above national
Proportion who met the expected standard in phonics
Attendance
KS2 progress in all subjects; above average in all subjects and for the disadvantaged and those who accessed SEN Support.
Main School Issues
How successful was the school in improving outcomes for the disadvantaged by the end of the Reception year in 2016?
How well do disadvantaged pupils achieve in Key Stage 1?
How successful has the school been in improving teaching since the last inspection in both schools? Are teachers consistently planning a higher level of challenge for the most-able?
What action is the school taking to increase the proportion of boys who achieve the higher standard in reading and writing?
9
©Edupedia Ltd 2016
SCHOOL CATEGORIES/EXPECTED INSPECTION OUTCOMES
Infants Current LA Category: 1 Expected Inspection Outcome: 1 Juniors Current LA Category: 1 Expected Inspection Outcome:1
10
©Edupedia Ltd 2016
INSPECTION HISTORY
ST ALOYSIUS INFANT SCHOOL Date of last inspection: September 2013 Overall Effectiveness: Good Areas for Improvement Raise attainment ,especially in writing, by: - ensuring work is sufficiently challenging in all lessons, especially for the mostable pupils - planning more opportunities for pupils to write to the best of their ability - allowing pupils time to have more practice in areas identified for development by teachers when marking pupils’ work. Further improve teaching so that it is always at least good and more is outstanding by: - sustaining an appropriate pace in all lessons to secure the interest and concentration of all pupils but especially the most able - further develop the skills of all staff, both teachers and support staff, exploiting the school’s current expertise to ensure a consistency of approach across the school - reshaping tasks and refining questions teachers ask to ensure all pupils are engaged and challenged in all parts of lessons, and especially the most able. Expected date of next inspection: From Autumn Term 2016 ST ALOYSIUS JUNIOR SCHOOL Date of last inspection: September 2016 Overall Effectiveness: Outstanding Area for Improvement Ensure that all pupils fully understand how to apply their mathematical skills and understanding when solving problems and in practical situations.
1
©Edupedia Ltd 2016
Infant School: Main Characteristics NoR FSM Minority Ethnic EAL SEN Support EHCPs Looked-After Stability SDI Other
Average Average Below average Average Low (Review in the autumn term) 2015: 1 2015: 0 High Above average School is part of the St Aloysius Federation with new Exec HT in post from 09/13. Some staff and leadership changes.
Junior School: Main Characteristics NoR FSM Minority Ethnic EAL SEN Support EHCPs Looked-After Stability SDI Other
Average Above average Low Below average Average 2015: 3 (ASD, SLCN) 2015: 0 High Above average School is part of the St Aloysius Federation with new Exec HT in post from 09/13. Some staff and leadership changes
Early Years Skills on Entry
Below average
% achieving good level of development
2013: 55.9% 2014: 53.3% 2015: 60.3% 2016: 73.8%
Outcomes
Outstanding Good progress made in improving outcomes for boys in 2015. School gap lower than LA gap in 2016. Good progress made in narrowing the gaps for the disadvantaged children. No difference in the proportion of disadvantaged and non-disadvantaged who achieved GLD. 5 children accessed SEN Support in 2016; 1 achieved GLD
2
©Edupedia Ltd 2016
Good progress made in increasing the proportion of children who exceeded expectations in all areas of learning.
ATTAINMENT AND PROGRESS INDICATORS
Year 1 Phonics Screen % passed 2013 2014 2015 2016
% boys passed 68 86 75 82
64 78 73 83
% girls passed 61 71 71 85
National Average 69 74 77 81
Year 1 Phonics Key Points
Phonics programme is very effective; continuous trend of improvement.
No significant trend in the performance of boys and girls
School successfully narrowed the gaps between the disadvantaged and others in the school in 2015. Disadvantaged children did better in 2016.
2015: SEN 1/5 passed; below national. 5 SEN in 2016; 60% passed the screen which is above average
By the end of Year 2 in 2015, 92% of pupils had passed the screen which is Broadly in line with national. 98% passed by the end of Year 2 in 2016 which is high.
Key Stage 1: Historic Data 2013 APS Overall Reading L2B+ L3 APS Writing L2B+ L3 APS Mathematics L2B+ L3 APS
2014
2015
15.3
15.1
15.5
76 17 15.7
77 17 15.7
85 27 16.5
69 5 14.9
57 3 14.1
72 10 15.3
83 10 15.9
73 10 15.3
75 20 16.0
3
©Edupedia Ltd 2016
2016 Attainment Outcomes
Reading
% Expected+ School 85
% Expected+ National 74
% GD School 32
% GD National 24
Writing
77
66
27
13
Mathematics
83
73
33
18
RWM
72
69
20
9
Key Stage 1 Main Issues Historic Data
Attainment is broadly average over time. Good improvement at L3 in 2015.
Standards in writing and mathematics were low in 2014. Average in 2015.
Girls did better than boys in 2013 but not a trend over time. Gap continued to close in 2014. Boys did slightly better in 2015 due to stronger performance at L2B+ in mathematics.
Gaps widened for disadvantaged pupils in 2014. Good progress made in narrowing all gaps in 2015.
No significant issues with the performance of pupils with SEN over time.
2016 Outcomes Pupils made outstanding progress from their starting points in 2016.
% of pupils who achieved national expectations was above average in reading, writing and mathematics and on the combined indicator.
% of pupils working at greater depth was above national in all subjects and on the combined indicator.
Reading: Boys did a little better at the expected standard; a higher proportion of girls achieved greater depth. Performance of the disadvantaged was broadly in line with national but slightly lower than others in the school. 4 pupils had SEN; 2 achieved the expected standard.
Writing: Boys did as well as girls at the expected standard; a higher proportion of girls achieved greater depth. Performance of the disadvantaged was broadly in line with national but slightly lower than others in the school. 4 pupils had SEN; 2 achieved the expected standard.
Mathematics: No difference in outcomes for boys and girls. Performance of the disadvantaged was broadly in line with national but slightly lower than others in the school. All SEN pupils met the expected standard.
4
©Edupedia Ltd 2016
Issues for the school What action is the school taking to increase the proportion of boys who achieve greater depth in reading and writing?
5
©Edupedia Ltd 2016
Key Stage 2: Historic Data 2013
2014
2015
28.9
29.3
29.6
85 75 42 0 28.5
92 82 37 0 28.5
96 91 53 29.9
88
88
93
49
40
29.2
42 0 28.8
28.9
87 72 45 0 28.9
88 77 53 7 29.9
87 72 53 6 29.7
74 57 30 0 27.1 77 23
77 67 45 0 28.2 82 70 23
85 76 55 2 29.5 85 70 32
PROGRESS 2 levels reading 3 levels reading
83 30
88 25
96 43
2 levels writing 3 levels writing 2 levels mathematics 3 levels mathematics
94 49 92 25
95 33 98 42
ATTAINMENT APS Overall Reading L4+ L4B+ L5+ L6 APS Writing L4+ L4B+ L5+ L6 APS Mathematics L4+ L4B+ L5+ L6 APS GPS L4+ L4B+ L5+ L6 APS L4+ R/W/M L4B+ R/W/M L5+ R/W/M
4 levels: 2%
100 36 92 43
4 levels: 3%
6
©Edupedia Ltd 2016
2016 Attainment Outcomes % % Ex+ Ex+ Sch National Reading 83 66
Scaled Score School 105.8
Scaled Score National 103
% HS School 22
% HS National 19
35
15
Writing
90
74
Maths
92
70
107.3
103
43
17
GPS
90
77
105.7
104
20
22
RWM
75
53
13
5
2016 Progress Measures Subject Average progress reading
Average Score 2.1
Average progress writing
2.9
Average progress mathematics
3.3
Risk of Coasting
Low
The school is low risk for being identified as coasting because:
In 2015, more than 85% of pupils achieved Level 4 in reading, writing and mathematics. The school was not consistently below the median % of pupils making expected progress in all of reading, writing and mathematics, and
In 2016, although fewer than 85% of children achieved the new expected standard (75%) the average progress made by pupils in reading, or writing or mathematics was not below a level set against the new primary progress measures. All measures were significantly high.
Key Stage 2 Key Points Historic Data
Attainment shows an improving picture. Combined Level 4+ and L5+ indicators above average in 2015.
Good improvement at Level 5 in reading and GPS in 2015.
Good improvement in GPS overall.
Standards in writing and mathematics relatively static.
No trend over time on the attainment of boys and girls.
7
©Edupedia Ltd 2016
Gaps narrowed for disadvantaged pupils in 2014 and their progress was stronger than others in reading and writing. This positive trend continued in 2015; the disadvantaged pupils did better overall.
Pupils who accessed SEN Support do well because of the very effective support and targeted intervention they receive. In 2015, outcomes in reading were above national expectations.
All value added scores were at least average in 2015 and Sig+ for the lower attainers and SEN.
2016 Outcomes Outcomes were outstanding in 2016.
Performance is above the minimum floor standard overall. The % who achieved the national standard in R/W/M (75%) was above the floor of 65% and national. 77% of girls achieved the expected standard in reading, writing and mathematics against 72% of boys.
Standards likely to be Sig+.
13% of pupils reached the higher standard on the combined indicator; likely to be broadly average.
All scaled scores above average and likely to be Sig+.
Average progress scores very positive overall; all Sig+.
Reading: No difference in the performance of boys and girls at the expected standard; a higher proportion of girls achieved the higher standard. Disadvantaged (11 pupils) did not do as well as others in the school; 0% achieved the higher standard. SEN Support (8): 4 achieved the expected standard and 1 achieved greater depth. Writing: No difference in the performance of boys and girls at the expected standard; a higher proportion of girls achieved the higher standard. Disadvantaged (11 pupils) did not do as well as others in the school; 9% achieved the higher standard. SEN Support (8): 6 achieved the expected standard and 1 achieved greater depth. Mathematics: No difference in the performance of boys and girls at the expected standard; a higher proportion of boys achieved the higher standard. Disadvantaged (11 pupils) did not do as well as others in the school; 18% achieved the higher standard. SEN: Pupils did well especially at the higher standard. EGPS: Girls did a little better than boys, especially at the higher standard. Disadvantaged (11 pupils) did not do as well as others in the school; 9% achieved the higher standard. SEN: Pupils did well especially at the higher standard. Issues for the school What action is the school taking to increase the proportion of boys who achieve greater depth in reading and writing?
8
©Edupedia Ltd 2016
Attendance Infants % PAs 15% % Attendance
2014 1.6 95.6
2015
2016
96.0
96.7
2014 1.7 96.0
2015
2016
95.4
96.3
Juniors % PAs 15% % Attendance
KEY POINTS FROM INSPECTION DASHBOARD
2016: No weaknesses in either data set Strengths
KS1 attainment at the expected standard and at greater depth for all groups was above national
Proportion who met the expected standard in phonics
Attendance
KS2 progress in all subjects; above average in all subjects and for the disadvantaged and those who accessed SEN Support.
Main School Issues
How successful was the school in improving outcomes for the disadvantaged by the end of the Reception year in 2016?
How well do disadvantaged pupils achieve in Key Stage 1?
How successful has the school been in improving teaching since the last inspection in both schools? Are teachers consistently planning a higher level of challenge for the most-able?
What action is the school taking to increase the proportion of boys who achieve the higher standard in reading and writing?
9
©Edupedia Ltd 2016
SCHOOL CATEGORIES/EXPECTED INSPECTION OUTCOMES
Infants Current LA Category: 1 Expected Inspection Outcome: 1 Juniors Current LA Category: 1 Expected Inspection Outcome:1
10
©Edupedia Ltd 2016
