Inspection Report Longhill High School
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
INSPECTION REPORT LONGHILL HIGH SCHOOL Rottingdean, Brighton LEA area: Brighton and Hove Unique reference number: 114581 Headteacher: Mr G Ellis Lead inspector: John Godwood Dates of inspection: 22 – 25 September 2003 Inspection number: 258695 Inspection carried out under section 10 of the School Inspections Act 1996 © Crown copyright 2003 This report may be reproduced in whole or in part for non-commercial educational purposes, provided that all extracts quoted are reproduced verbatim without adaptation and on condition that the source and date thereof are stated. Further copies of this report are obtainable from the school. Under the School Inspections Act 1996, the school must provide a copy of this report and/or its summary free of charge to certain categories of people. A charge not exceeding the full cost of reproduction may be made for any other copies supplied. Longhill High School - 2 INFORMATION ABOUT THE SCHOOL Type of school: Comprehensive School category: Community Age range of students: 11-16 Gender of students: Mixed Number on roll: 1203 School address: Falmer Road Rottingdean Brighton Postcode: BN2 7FR Telephone number: 01273 304086 Fax number: 01273 303547 Appropriate authority: Governing body Name of chair of governors: Mr D Watts Date of previous inspection: May 1998 CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SCHOOL Longhill High School became a specialist technology college in September 2003. It received a DfES award as a most improved school in 1998 and won the schools achievement award in 2000. The school serves a wide geographical area including Rottingdean and the surrounding villages and a minority of students travel from East Brighton. It is over-subscribed. Students come from a wide range of backgrounds and the socio-economic context is average overall. The number of students joining or leaving other than at the start of the school year is average. Most students are White British; one in twenty are from minority ethnic groups, including very small numbers from Black or Asian backgrounds. There are no students who speak English as an additional language. Students’ attainment on entry is broadly average, but is below average in some year groups. One in five students have special educational needs, which is more than in most schools, and of these thirty- nine have a Statement of Special Educational Needs. The most common needs are learning difficulties or emotional and behavioural difficulties, but smaller numbers of students have communication difficulties, sensory impairment, physical disabilities or autism. In addition, the school has a special facility for students with dyslexia, which serves the eastern half of Brighton and Hove Local Education Authority. The school provides services for the local community, including evening classes and technical support for primary school computers. It runs an on-site nursery. Longhill High School - 3 INFORMATION ABOUT THE INSPECTION TEAM Members of the inspection team Subject responsibilities 18242 John Godwood Lead inspector 9756 Ken Parsons Lay inspector 2740 Betty Barratt Team inspector Special educational needs, history 32229 Mary Comer Team inspector Citizenship, business studies 11838 Derek Cronin Team inspector Modern foreign languages 13734 Harold Davies Team inspector Geography, religious education 18542 Gerald Griffin Team inspector Design and technology, information and communication technology 31135 Rachel Hobson Team inspector English 24891 Jackie Johnson Team inspector Mathematics 8139 Barbara Johnstone Team inspector Music 1779 David Leonard Team inspector Science 23030 Caroline Runyard Team inspector Physical education 10053 Janet Simms Team inspector English as an additional language, art and design The inspection contractor was: Serco QAA Herringston Barn Herringston Dorchester Dorset DT2 9PU Any concerns or complaints about the inspection or the report should be made initially to the inspection contractor. The procedures are set out in the leaflet ‘Complaining about Ofsted Inspections’, which is available from Ofsted Publications Centre (telephone 07002 637833) or Ofsted’s website (www.ofsted.gov.uk). Longhill High School - 4 REPORT CONTENTS Page PART A: SUMMARY OF THE REPORT 6 PART B: COMMENTARY ON THE MAIN INSPECTION FINDINGS STANDARDS ACHIEVED BY STUDENTS 8 Standards achieved in subjects and courses Students’ attitudes, values and other personal qualities QUALITY OF EDUCATION PROVIDED BY THE SCHOOL 12 Teaching and learning The curriculum Care, guidance and support Partnership with parents, other schools and the community LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT 17 COMMUNITY PROVISION 19 THE WORK OF THE SEN UNIT 20 WORKPLACE LEARNING 21 PART C: THE QUALITY OF EDUCATION IN SUBJECTS AND COURSES 22 SUBJECTS AND COURSES IN KEY STAGES 3 AND 4 PART D: SUMMARY OF THE MAIN INSPECTION JUDGEMENTS 39 Longhill High School - 5 PART A: SUMMARY OF THE REPORT OVERALL EVALUATION The school provides a satisfactory education. Students’ achievement is satisfactory overall and good in Years 7 to 9. Most of the teaching is good. Leadership and management are satisfactory. The school has a good ethos and students are well supported. However, planning and monitoring are not sufficiently well structured and, as a result, there is inconsistency in the quality of provision in different subjects. The school gives satisfactory value for money. The school’s main strengths and weaknesses are: · Students are well cared for and there is mutual respect between most students and most staff. · Management systems are too informal to ensure that policies are implemented consistently and standards raised throughout the school. · Some students underachieve in Years 10 and 11 because their curriculum is unsuitable. · The school provides very well for students with special educational needs and is successful in including students with a wide range of learning and other needs. · Assessment data is not used well enough to track students’ progress or to guide planning. · Good community links benefit the school and the local community. The school’s improvement since the last inspection is satisfactory. Standards have risen in line with the national trend, though the improvement has not been steady each year. The quality of teaching is the same as it was in the last inspection. There has been a satisfactory response to the issues in the last report. Provision for higher-attaining students has improved and attendance is better. Religious education is now provided for all students in Years 10 and 11, though in Years 7 to 9 the time allocation has been reduced, and the school does not cover the locally agreed syllabus in full. The school has successfully bid to become a specialist technology college. STANDARDS ACHIEVED all schools similar schools Performance in GCSE/GNVQ examinations at the end of Year 11, compared with: 2000 2001 2002 2002 B B C D Key: A - well above average; B – above average; C – average; D – below average; E – well below average Similar schools are those whose students attained similarly at the end of Year 9. Students’ achievement is satisfactory. It is better in Years 7 to 9 than in Years 10 and 11. In Years 7 to 9, students reach above average standards and achieve well. Standards are above average in mathematics and science and average in English. Achievement is very good in mathematics and geography, but unsatisfactory in modern languages, ICT and citizenship. In Years 10 and 11, standards are average overall and achievement is satisfactory. Standards are above average in mathematics, science, design and technology, history, geography, music and art. The proportion who gain 5 or more A* to C GCSE grades is above average and some achieve well, but some average and lower-attaining students underachieve significantly because their courses do not meet their needs. Students with special educational needs achieve well. Students’ personal qualities, including their spiritual, moral, social and cultural development, are good. Students’ attitudes to school are good and they participate well in activities. Behaviour is satisfactory: most behave well, but a minority of lessons are disrupted. Attendance is good. Longhill High School - 6 QUALITY OF EDUCATION The quality of education is satisfactory. Teaching is good. It is better in Years 10 and 11 than in Years 7 to 9, where it is satisfactory. This is partly because Year 7 students are taught in mixed ability classes and the work does not always challenge students of all abilities. Most teachers have good subject knowledge and establish good relationships. The best lessons set high expectations and use interesting methods, but in a few subjects teaching is rather dull and unchallenging. ICT is often used well. Homework is regular but is light in some subjects. Attainment is assessed regularly, but the data is not used enough to set students targets and inform them how to improve. The curriculum is satisfactory. In Years 10 and 11 there are some successful alternatives to GCSE for a few students, but there are not enough vocational courses that are suitable for all students. There is inadequate coverage of citizenship and too little time is allocated to religious education in Years 7 to 9. Care is good and students who are at risk of being excluded are very well supported. Extra-curricular activities are good, and very good in sport and music. LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT Leadership and management are satisfactory. The headteacher and senior management team have succeeded in creating a good ethos in which individuals are valued and in raising standards. There is a good plan for technology college status. In general, however, the systems for planning improvements and monitoring quality are not robust enough to ensure consistency in the standards achieved in all subjects or in the approach taken by all teachers. The governors make a satisfactory contribution. They are supportive of the school’s aims and general direction and regularly review policies. They know the school well. They helped with the technology college bid but are not sufficiently actively involved in annual strategic planning or in monitoring the quality of provision. PARENTS’ AND STUDENTS’ VIEWS OF THE SCHOOL Most parents are pleased with the school.