Upload
others
View
2
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Osbaston CIW School
Parent survey report – January 2017
In case of enquiries please contact Kirkland Rowell Surveys by emailing [email protected] © 2017 Kirkland Rowell Limited.
Kirkland Rowell is part of GL Assessment, a division of the GL Education Group.
Report generated on 12/01/2017
Parent survey report
Copyright © 2017 Kirkland Rowell Limited Page 2 of 46
Contents
Page
1. Executive summary An overview of findings for this survey with comparison to theprevious survey if applicable.
3
2. Key results Satisfaction levels for non-academic and additional criteria. 8
3. Parental priorities Importance ratings and priorities for improvement. 16
4. Estyn - Questionnaire for Parentsand Carers
Linking your survey data to the current Estyn Questionnaire forParents and Carers.
21
5. Estyn - Common InspectionFramework
Linking your survey data to the current Estyn Common InspectionFramework.
23
6. Standard analysis Analysis of all remaining data which may include gender analysis,healthy lifestyle, parental values and homework.
32
7. Year group analysis Year group scores compared to national averages. 37
8. Appendix Supplementary data and further information. 41
Parent survey report – Executive summary
Copyright © 2017 Kirkland Rowell Limited Page 3 of 46
Executive summaryThis report details the findings of the first Kirkland Rowell Parent Survey for Osbaston CIW School. Thereport measures the levels of satisfaction among the pupils’ parents for a range of criteria, which have beenpreviously identified as being important to the parents of school pupils. The report measures the relativeimportance of the criteria surveyed, as well as providing results tables that identify the perceived strengths andweaknesses of the school in the year to January 2017. The report also measures performance with regard tooverall satisfaction and improvement.
Due to the low number of responses it was not possible to generate Extra Analysis for the question requested“Has your child ever been eligible for free school meals during the last six years?”.
Summary of results for this survey
• 37 completed questionnaires were returned representing a response rate of 17.9%. The response meantthat data could be drawn for all criteria.
• The parents gave a very good overall performance score (79.1%) (see page 5).
• Of the parents whose children were not in their first year at the school 37% said the school had improvedover the last year and 7% thought that the school’s performance was worse (see page 32).
• Of the parents of new pupils, 9% felt that the school had not lived up to their expectations and 18% said theschool was better than they had expected it to be (see page 32).
• With regards to non-academic areas, parents are most happy with Caring teachers, Developing moralvalues and School discipline.
• The parents are least happy with School communication, Out of school activities and Levels of homework.
• The parents' top priorities for improvement are Developing potential, School communication and Levels ofhomework.
Parent survey report – Executive summary
Copyright © 2017 Kirkland Rowell Limited Page 4 of 46
Strengths and weaknesses
The results below are the areas in which the school has the highest and lowest perceived standards ofperformance. Gold represents ‘outstanding’, green is ‘good’, black is ‘room for improvement’ and red is‘attention advised’. Criterion scores in blue are only reliable to within 10% and scores in pink should only beconsidered indicative.
Relative strengths for non-academic criteria Importance Ranking85.8% Caring teachers (90.1%) 4th
83.8% Developing moral values (75.8%) 7th
83.8% School discipline (96.0%) 1st
82.4% Happiness of child (90.1%) 4th
81.8% School security (60.2%) 9th
Relative weaknesses for non-academic criteria Importance Ranking63.5% School communication (48.5%) 10th
65.4% Out of school activities (14.7%) 17th
67.4% Levels of homework (15.6%) 16th
69.6% Suitable class sizes (47.7%) 11th
73.5% Computer access (18.7%) 15th
Parent survey report – Executive summary
Copyright © 2017 Kirkland Rowell Limited Page 5 of 46
Response to survey
37 completed questionnaires were returned representing a response rate of 17.9%.
Proportion of responses (%) Number of responses
Responses from parents of male pupils 62.2 23
Responses from parents of female pupils 37.8 14
Responses from parents of Reception pupils 18.9 7
Responses from parents of Years 1 and 2 pupils 13.5 5
Responses from parents of Years 3 and 4 pupils 32.4 12
Responses from parents of Years 5 and 6 pupils 35.1 13
Overall parental satisfaction
This survey (%)Previous
survey (%)Change (%)
Overall, rate the performance of the school 79.1
Rating ‘poor’or ‘very
poor’ (%)
Previoussurvey (%)
% ChangeRating ‘good’
or ‘verygood’ (%)
Overall, rate the performance of the school 0.0 76.0
Overall parental satisfaction
0% 0%
24%
36%
40%
Very poor Poor Neither Good Very good0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
Per
cent
age
• More parents rate the overall performance of the school as ‘good’ or ‘very good’.
Parent survey report – Executive summary
Copyright © 2017 Kirkland Rowell Limited Page 6 of 46
Overall performance scores broken down by gender and year group
Overall performance scores broken down by gender
79% 79% 79%
All parents Parents of male students Parents of female students0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
Per
cent
age
• The parents gave a very good overall performance score of 79.1%.
• Parents of male pupils scored the overall performance of the school the same as parents of female pupils.
Overall performance scores broken down by year group
All parents Parents of male students Parents of female students
0% 0%
79% 79%
0% 0%
80% 79%
0% 0%
75%
79%
Reception Years 1 and 2 Years 3 and 4 Years 5 and 60%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
Per
cent
age
• Parents of Years 3 and 4 and Years 5 and 6 pupils scored the highest overall from other year groups andare therefore most satisfied with the school’s performance.
• Parents of Years 3 and 4 male pupils and parents of Years 5 and 6 female pupils scored the highest overallfrom other year groups and are therefore most satisfied with the school’s performance.
Parent survey report – Executive summary
Copyright © 2017 Kirkland Rowell Limited Page 7 of 46
Parents recommend this school broken down by gender and year group
Recommend this school scores broken down by gender
98%
95%
100%
All parents Parents of male students Parents of female students0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Per
cent
age
• 97.7% of parents said they would recommend this school to another parent.
• Parents of male pupils would recommend this school to another parent broadly in line with parents offemale pupils.
Recommend this school scores broken down by year group
All parents Parents of male students Parents of female students
0% 0%
92%
100%
0% 0%
91%
100%
0% 0%
100% 100%
Reception Years 1 and 2 Years 3 and 4 Years 5 and 60%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Per
cent
age
• Parents of Years 5 and 6 pupils would recommend this school to another parent more than parents fromother year groups.
• Parents of Years 5 and 6 male pupils and parents of Years 3 and 4 and Years 5 and 6 female pupils wouldrecommend this school to another parent more than parents from other year groups.
Parent survey report – Key results
Copyright © 2017 Kirkland Rowell Limited Page 8 of 46
Key resultsThe core analysis of your survey data; Proportion making progress for non-academic and additional criteria.Explanations have been provided to help you to interpret your results.
Interpreting results
Non-academic and additional questions receiving a score of:
• Over 80% are 'outstanding' (above the gold line)
• 70% to 79.9% are 'good' (above the green line)
• 65% to 69.9% indicate 'room for improvement' (above the red line)
• Below 65% indicate 'attention advised' (below the red line)
Weighted scoresIn the results tables the scores achieved are given as a percentage. A full explanation of how mean scores(lying between 1 and 5) were converted to percentages is given on our website. As there is a measurablebias in the way that parents score criteria, it is necessary to create “weighted” scores so that the score for anyone criterion might be compared meaningfully with the score for any other criterion on a ‘level playing field’.These weighted scores are calculated based upon the average scores achieved from over 700 British schools.Results quoted from the previous survey, if applicable, may show small differences from those originally given,as the weightings applied change slightly from one year to the next.
Statistical reliabilityGenerally all of our results are quoted as being reliable to within less than 5% at the 95% confidence level.Where this is not possible due to the sample achieved, results are quoted as reliable to within less than 10%at the 95% confidence level and are highlighted in blue. Occasionally when results are even less reliable weshow an indicative result and highlight in pink. Where there are fewer than 10 responses we only show “lowresponse” and no further result is quoted. For further information see our website for details. Criteria whichhave not yet been surveyed in at least 30 schools do not yet have an average figure, and therefore, thesescores cannot be weighted against what pupils parents ‘usually’ say. These un-weighted scores are marked *.
Parent survey report – Key results
Copyright © 2017 Kirkland Rowell Limited Page 9 of 46
Understanding your results table
Additional criteria This survey (%) Previous survey (%) % Change
E-Safety 86.2 82.8 +3.4
School uniform 82.6 80.9 +1.7
Access to staff 72.4 66.1 +6.3
Church links and support 72.3 69.6 +2.7
Tailoring workload to childs needs 72.1 68.3 +3.8
Encouraging and listening to pupil views 71.4 71.7 -0.3
Encouraging and listening to parent views 70.8 65.0 +5.8
Celebrating and rewarding achievement 70.1 69.4 +0.7
Handling complaints 69.9 64.9 +5.0
Explaining to parents how to help child 67.2
Ensuring pupils make good progress 67.2 62.1 +5.1
Quality of school management 66.5 65.4 +1.1
Suitable class sizes 66.3
Regular marking of work 65.5 62.8 +2.7
Relationship between tutor and child * 64.3
Extra curricular activities 62.1 74.8 -12.7
School uniform 61.5 63.4 -1.9
Attitude of non academic staff 49.5
Encouraging local community activity Low response
Your results are shown as a weightedmean score. This is a calculationapplied to your raw results using theaverage scores achieved from over700 British schools. It allows eachcriterion to be compared meaningfullyon a ‘level playing field’. This scorecan be over 100%.
The previous survey results mayappear to differ slightly from youroriginal report last year. This isbecause the “weighting” calculationapplied changes slightly from oneyear to the next.
Scores above the goldline are ‘outstanding’.
Scores above the greenline are ‘good’.
Scores above the redline indicate 'room forimprovement'.
* This criteria has not yet beensurveyed in at least 30 schools.As such we do not have anaverage figure and thereforecannot weight this scoreagainst what pupils parents‘usually’ say.
Scores below the redline indicate 'attentionadvised'.
“Low response” indicatesthat there were fewerthan 10 responses.
Criteria scores in pinkshould only be consideredindicative due to a lowsample size, or highpolarisation.
Criteria scores in blueare only reliable to within10% due to the sampleachieved.
Only highlighted changes shouldbe considered significant – agreen highlight shows a significantimprovement, a red highlight showsa significant decline, since the lastsurvey.
Parent survey report – Key results
Copyright © 2017 Kirkland Rowell Limited Page 10 of 46
Non-academic criteria
The following table shows parents priorities for non-academic areas. Where data is available, these arecompared to the same score from the previous year’s survey, and the percentage change shown. Onlyhighlighted changes should be considered significant.
Non-academic criteria This survey (%) Previous survey (%) % Change
Caring teachers 85.8
Developing moral values 83.8
School discipline 83.8
Happiness of child 82.4
School security 81.8
Range of subjects taught 81.1
Community spirit 80.0
Teaching quality 79.7
Social health education 78.4
Developing confidence 78.4
School facilities 77.0
Library facilities 76.0
Developing potential 75.0
Control of bullying 74.3
Use of exams and testing 74.2
Computer access 73.5
Suitable class sizes 69.6
Levels of homework 67.4
Out of school activities 65.4
School communication 63.5
• Parents consider delivery of the following non-academic areas to be ‘outstanding’: Caring teachers,Developing moral values, School discipline, Happiness of child, School security, Range of subjects taughtand Community spirit.
• Parents consider delivery of the following non-academic areas to be ‘good’: Teaching quality, Social healtheducation, Developing confidence, School facilities, Library facilities, Developing potential, Control ofbullying, Use of exams and testing and Computer access.
• Parents consider delivery of the following non-academic areas to show ‘room for improvement’: Suitableclass sizes, Levels of homework and Out of school activities.
• Parents consider delivery of the following non-academic areas to show ‘attention advised’: Schoolcommunication.
• The following non-academic subject achieved a low sample; therefore scores are only reliable within 10%:Caring teachers, Developing moral values, School discipline, Happiness of child, School security, Range ofsubjects taught, Teaching quality, Developing confidence, School facilities, Developing potential, Control ofbullying, Use of exams and testing and Suitable class sizes.
Parent survey report – Key results
Copyright © 2017 Kirkland Rowell Limited Page 11 of 46
• The following non-academic subject achieved a very low sample; therefore scores should only beconsidered indicative: Community spirit, Social health education, Library facilities, Computer access, Levelsof homework, Out of school activities and School communication.
Parent survey report – Key results
Copyright © 2017 Kirkland Rowell Limited Page 12 of 46
Happy versus unhappy parents for non-academic criteria
The following table identifies the percentage of parents who are unhappy (rating poor or very poor) alongsidethose who are happy (rating ‘good’ or ‘very good’) for the school’s performance in each area. Note that theseresults do not include respondents who chose ‘neither good nor poor’, ‘I don’t know’ or failed to answer thequestion.
• Having fewer than 2% of parents who are unhappy with a particular area should be considered‘outstanding’ (above the gold line).
• Having between 2% & 4.9% of parents who are unhappy with a particular area should be considered as‘good’ (above the green line).
• Having between 5% & 15% of parents who are unhappy with a particular area should be considered asshowing ‘room for improvement’ (above the red line).
• Having more than 15% of parents unhappy with a particular area may suggest ‘attention advised’ (below thered line).
Only highlighted changes should be considered significant; green shows improvement, red shows decline.
Non-academic criteriaRating ‘poor’ or‘very poor’ (%)
Previoussurvey (%)
% ChangeRating ‘good’
or ‘verygood’ (%)
Developing confidence 0.0 71.0
Range of subjects taught 0.0 86.7
School discipline 0.0 75.8
School facilities 0.0 70.6
School security 0.0 81.8
Teaching quality 0.0 72.7
Use of exams and testing 0.0 70.0
Suitable class sizes 5.4 70.3
Happiness of child 5.7 80.0
Caring teachers 6.5 80.6
Developing moral values 6.5 87.1
Developing potential 12.1 63.6
Control of bullying 22.9 65.7
Parent survey report – Key results
Copyright © 2017 Kirkland Rowell Limited Page 13 of 46
Additional criteria
Additional criteria were chosen by the school, and investigated with regard to parent satisfaction. The followingresults were achieved with regard to those parents who answered the question. The percentage scores aregiven in descending order. Only highlighted changes should be considered significant.
Additional criteria This survey (%) Previous survey (%) % Change
School's image in the local community 87.8
Attitude of non-teaching/support staff 87.5
Written reports 85.8
Parent evenings 84.7
Regular marking of work 83.8
Encouraging and listening to pupils' views 82.5
Tailoring child's work to their needs andability
80.5
Ensuring pupils do their best/make goodprogress
79.2
Explaining to parents how to help theirchild
79.2
Promoting racial harmony 79.2
Quality of school management 78.9
Celebrating and rewarding achievement 78.4
Encouraging pupils' activity in the localcommunity
78.1
Treating all pupils fairly/equally 77.9
Teaching pupils with special needs 75.0
Encouraging and listening to parents'views
73.6
Homework building upon school work* 71.0
Handling complaints 70.8
• Parents consider delivery of the following additional criteria to be ‘outstanding’: School's image in the localcommunity, Attitude of non-teaching/support staff, Written reports, Parent evenings, Regular marking ofwork, Encouraging and listening to pupils' views and Tailoring child's work to their needs and ability.
• Parents consider delivery of the following additional criteria to be ‘good’: Ensuring pupils do their best/makegood progress, Explaining to parents how to help their child, Promoting racial harmony, Quality of schoolmanagement, Celebrating and rewarding achievement, Encouraging pupils' activity in the local community,Treating all pupils fairly/equally, Teaching pupils with special needs, Encouraging and listening to parents'views, Homework building upon school work and Handling complaints.
• The following additional criteria have not been surveyed in at least 30 schools so we do not yet have anaverage figure, and therefore, these scores cannot be weighted against what pupils parents usually say:Homework building upon school work.
• The following additional criteria achieved a low sample; therefore scores are only reliable within 10%:School's image in the local community, Explaining to parents how to help their child, Celebrating andrewarding achievement and Encouraging and listening to parents' views.
Parent survey report – Key results
Copyright © 2017 Kirkland Rowell Limited Page 14 of 46
• The following additional criteria achieved a very low sample; therefore scores should only be consideredindicative: Attitude of non-teaching/support staff, Written reports, Encouraging and listening to pupils'views, Tailoring child's work to their needs and ability, Ensuring pupils do their best/make good progress,Promoting racial harmony, Quality of school management, Encouraging pupils' activity in the localcommunity, Treating all pupils fairly/equally, Teaching pupils with special needs, Homework building uponschool work and Handling complaints.
Parent survey report – Key results
Copyright © 2017 Kirkland Rowell Limited Page 15 of 46
Happy versus unhappy parents for additional criteria
The following table identifies the percentage of parents who are unhappy (rating poor or very poor) alongsidethose who are happy (rating ‘good’ or ‘very good’) for the school’s performance in each area. Note that theseresults do not include respondents who chose ‘neither good nor poor’, ‘I don’t know’ or failed to answer thequestion.
• Having fewer than 2% of parents who are unhappy with a particular area should be considered‘outstanding’ (above the gold line).
• Having between 2% & 4.9% of parents who are unhappy with a particular area should be considered as‘good’ (above the green line).
• Having between 5% & 15% of parents who are unhappy with a particular area should be considered asshowing ‘room for improvement’ (above the red line).
• Having more than 15% of parents unhappy with a particular area may suggest ‘attention advised’ (below thered line).
Only highlighted changes should be considered significant; green shows improvement, red shows decline.
Additional criteriaRating ‘poor’ or‘very poor’ (%)
Previoussurvey (%)
% ChangeRating ‘good’
or ‘verygood’ (%)
Parent evenings 0.0 93.8
Regular marking of work 0.0 97.1
School's image in the local community 0.0 87.5
Explaining to parents how to help theirchild
11.1 61.1
Celebrating and rewarding achievement 11.8 64.7
Encouraging and listening to parents'views
17.1 65.7
Parent survey report – Parental priorities
Copyright © 2017 Kirkland Rowell Limited Page 16 of 46
Parental prioritiesParents were asked to choose the ten criteria which were most important to them from a list of twenty. Thissection shows the analysis of these importance ratings and of the priorities for improvement.
Parental priorities importance
Ideally those criteria which are most important to parents will be the criteria to which parents award the highestscores. In the following table, the second column shows the percentage of parents who chose each of thecriteria as one of their ten choices of what they felt was most important to them. The third column showshow well the school performs for the criteria ie. 1st = what the school does best, 20th = what the school doesleast well. Only highlighted rankings should be considered as being worthy of note. A green highlight showsthat the school performs well within a criterion that is important to parents, a red highlight shows that theschool performs less well within a criterion that is important to parents. The final two columns show the sameinformation for the previous survey, for comparison.
CriteriaImportancescore (%)
Satisfactionranking
Previousimportancescore (%)
Previoussatisfaction
ranking
Developing confidence 96.0 10th
School discipline 96.0 2nd
Teaching quality 92.3 8th
Caring teachers 90.1 1st
Happiness of child 90.1 4th
Developing potential 86.3 13th
Developing moral values 75.8 2nd
Control of bullying 73.4 14th
School security 60.2 5th
School communication 48.5 20th
Suitable class sizes 47.7 17th
School facilities 30.9 11th
Community spirit 26.1 7th
Range of subjects taught 25.8 6th
Computer access 18.7 16th
Levels of homework 15.6 18th
Out of school activities 14.7 19th
Social health education 11.9 9th
Library facilities 0.0 12th
Use of exams and testing 0.0 15th
With regard to the five criteria most important to parents:
• The school performs well in: School discipline, Caring teachers and Happiness of child.
Parent survey report – Parental priorities
Copyright © 2017 Kirkland Rowell Limited Page 17 of 46
Importance: your school vs. similar schools
Parents were asked to choose ten priorities from a list of twenty criteria. The table below shows which criteriathe parents from your school selected as most important. The second column shows you the percentage ofparents who selected each criterion as one of their ten choices, and the final column compares your school’sdata to the views from parents from similar schools. Position differences of four or more have been highlightedas being worthy of note.
CriteriaImportancescore (%)
Importanceranking
Averageranking
for similarschools
Rankingdifferenceto similarschools
Developing confidence 96.0 1st 6th +5
School discipline 96.0 1st 1st 0
Teaching quality 92.3 3rd 2nd -1
Caring teachers 90.1 4th 5th +1
Happiness of child 90.1 4th 3rd -1
Developing potential 86.3 6th 7th +1
Developing moral values 75.8 7th 10th +3
Control of bullying 73.4 8th 4th -4
School security 60.2 9th 9th 0
School communication 48.5 10th 8th -2
Suitable class sizes 47.7 11th 11th 0
School facilities 30.9 12th 12th 0
Community spirit 26.1 13th 17th +4
Range of subjects taught 25.8 14th 14th 0
Computer access 18.7 15th 16th +1
Levels of homework 15.6 16th 13th -3
Out of school activities 14.7 17th 15th -2
Social health education 11.9 18th 19th +1
Library facilities 0.0 19th 20th +1
Use of exams and testing 0.0 19th 18th -1
• Most of the criteria the parents from your school selected as important are in line with the criteria thatparents of similar schools select as important.
• Parents from your school selected the following criteria as more important than parents at similar schools:Developing confidence and Community spirit.
• Parents from your school selected the following criteria as less important than parents at similar schools:Control of bullying.
Parent survey report – Parental priorities
Copyright © 2017 Kirkland Rowell Limited Page 18 of 46
How parent priorities change as pupils get older
The graph below shows which criteria parents of Reception pupils selected as important compared to whichcriteria parents of Years 3 and 4 & Years 5 and 6 pupils selected as important. This shows us how parentpriorities change as the pupils get older. The table shows the criteria where there is a significant differencebetween the two groups.
Parent priorities
Reception Years 3 and 4 & Years 5 and 6
Caring
teac
hers
Develo
ping
pote
ntial
Happin
ess o
f chil
d
Teach
ing q
uality
Schoo
l sec
urity
Contro
l of b
ullyin
g
Develo
ping
conf
idenc
e
Schoo
l com
mun
icatio
n
Schoo
l disc
ipline
Develo
ping
mor
al
value
s
Schoo
l facil
ities
Suitab
le cla
ss si
zes
Comm
unity
spirit
Compu
ter a
cces
s
Range
of s
ubjec
ts
taug
ht
Leve
ls of
hom
ewor
k
Libra
ry fa
cilitie
s
Out o
f sch
ool a
ctivit
ies
Social
hea
lth e
duca
tion
Use o
f exa
ms a
nd
testi
ng0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Per
cent
age
Criteria where differencein score is significant
Reception rankingYears 3 and 4 &
Years 5 and 6 ranking
Developing potential 1st 6th
Levels of homework 16th 15th
Parent survey report – Parental priorities
Copyright © 2017 Kirkland Rowell Limited Page 19 of 46
How parent priorities change by gender of child
The graph below shows which criteria parents of female pupils selected as important compared to which criteriaparents of male pupils selected as important. This shows us how parent priorities change by gender of thechild. The table shows the criteria where there is a significant difference between the two groups.
Parent priorities
Male students Female students
Happin
ess o
f chil
d
Caring
teac
hers
Develo
ping
conf
idenc
e
Schoo
l disc
ipline
Teach
ing q
uality
Develo
ping
pote
ntial
Develo
ping
mor
al
value
s
Schoo
l com
mun
icatio
n
Schoo
l sec
urity
Contro
l of b
ullyin
g
Schoo
l facil
ities
Suitab
le cla
ss si
zes
Compu
ter a
cces
s
Range
of s
ubjec
ts
taug
ht
Out o
f sch
ool a
ctivit
ies
Comm
unity
spirit
Leve
ls of
hom
ewor
k
Social
hea
lth e
duca
tion
Libra
ry fa
cilitie
s
Use o
f exa
ms a
nd
testi
ng0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Per
cent
age
Criteria where differencein score is significant
Male students ranking Female students ranking
Developing potential 6th 1st
Out of school activities 15th 18th
Parent survey report – Parental priorities
Copyright © 2017 Kirkland Rowell Limited Page 20 of 46
Relative parent priorities for improvement
Parent priorities are shown below compared to parent priorities in similar schools. The school’s previous yearsfigures are also provided for comparison.
Criteria This survey (%) Previous survey (%) Similar schools (%)
Developing potential 29.8 12.2
School communication 14.5 11.6
Levels of homework 13.1 6.3
Suitable class sizes 12.1 8.6
Out of school activities 9.9 8.9
Social health education 6.1 0.8
Computer access 3.7 2.7
School facilities 3.7 6.3
Control of bullying 2.4 8.5
School discipline 2.4 5.1
Teaching quality 2.4 4.7
Caring teachers 0.0 2.0
Community spirit 0.0 1.5
Developing confidence 0.0 4.7
Developing moral values 0.0 1.8
Happiness of child 0.0 2.7
Library facilities 0.0 2.3
Range of subjects taught 0.0 0.0
School security 0.0 4.1
Use of exams and testing 0.0 0.0
• Parents have given a higher priority to the following areas compared to similar schools: Developingpotential, Levels of homework and Social health education.
• Parents have given a lower priority to the following areas compared to similar schools: Control of bullying,Developing confidence and School security.
Parent survey report – Estyn - Questionnaire for Parents and Carers
Copyright © 2017 Kirkland Rowell Limited Page 21 of 46
Estyn - Questionnaire for Parents and CarersBelow are the questions taken from Estyn's Questionnaire for Parents and Carers.
For each of the questions, we have given the weighted parental scores for any relevant criteria included onyour questionnaire.
Remember, gold represents outstanding, green is good, black requires improvement and red is attentionadvised, in terms of parental perceptions.
Score Sample
1. Overall I am satisfied with the school.
Overall 79.1% 30
2. My child likes this school.
Happiness of child 82.4% 30
3. My child is making good progress at school.
Developing potential 75.0% 30
Ensuring pupils do their best/make good progress 79.2% 29
4. Pupils behave well in school.
School discipline 83.8% 30
5. The teaching is good.
Teaching quality 79.7% 30
6. Staff expect my child to work hard and do his or her best.
Developing potential 75.0% 30
Ensuring pupils do their best/make good progress 79.2% 29
7. The homework that is given builds well on what my child learns in school.
Levels of homework 67.4% 33
8. Staff treat all children fairly and with respect.
Treating all pupils fairly/equally 77.9% 34
9. My child is encouraged to be healthy and to take regular exercise.
Healthy Lifestyle - Diet 91.3% 35
Healthy Lifestyle - Exercise 82.6% 35
10. My child is safe at school.
School security 81.8% 30
Parent survey report – Estyn - Questionnaire for Parents and Carers
Copyright © 2017 Kirkland Rowell Limited Page 22 of 46
Score Sample
11. My child receives appropriate additional support in relation to any particular individualneeds.
Teaching pupils with special needs 75.0% 15
Developing potential 75.0% 30
Tailoring child's work to their needs and ability 80.5% 32
12. I am kept well informed about my child's progress.
School communication 63.5% 37
Parent evenings 84.7% 30
Written reports 85.8% 30
Explaining to parents how to help their child 79.2% 29
13. I feel comfortable about approaching the school with questions, suggestions or aproblem.
Encouraging and listening to parents' views 73.6% 29
14. I understand the school's procedure for dealing with complaints.
Handling complaints 70.8% 24
15. The school helps my child to become more mature and take on responsibility.
Developing potential 75.0% 30
Developing confidence 78.4% 30
16. The school is well run.
Quality of school management 78.9% 32
Parent survey report – Estyn - Common Inspection Framework
Copyright © 2017 Kirkland Rowell Limited Page 23 of 46
Estyn - Common Inspection FrameworkThe following section gives the Parental perceptions for each of the aspects of each of the three Key Questionsunder the Common Inspection Framework 2010 (CIF).
These headings should form the basis of your school's annual self-evaluation report; which is the starting pointof the inspection process. Remember that you must also consider other stakeholders' views and internallygenerated performance data in preparing a complete viewpoint in your self-evaluation report.
For each of the aspects of the CIF, where we have generated evidence, we list the relevant criteria with theirrated score, and a summary grade. These grades follow Estyn's 4 point grading scale, as follows:
Excellent = Many strengths including significant examples of sector leading practice.
Good = Many strengths and no important areas requiring significant improvement.
Adequate = Strengths outweigh areas for improvement.
Unsatisfactory = Important areas for improvement outweigh strengths.
Parent survey report – Estyn - Common Inspection Framework
Copyright © 2017 Kirkland Rowell Limited Page 24 of 46
1. How good are Outcomes
CIF 1.1 - Standards and Trends in Performance
CIF 1.1.1 - Results Compared with National Averages, Similar ProvidersRatio of parents saying school improving versus declining
Summary grade for this section = Excellent
CIF 1.1.2 - Standards of Groups of LearnersYour own assessment is required here.
CIF 1.1.3 - Achievement and Progress in LearningRange of subjects taught 81.1%
Teaching quality 79.7%
Ensuring pupils do their best/make good progress 79.2%
Developing potential 75.0%
Use of exams and testing 74.2%
Summary grade for this section = Excellent
CIF 1.1.4 - How Good are Pupils' Skills?Range of subjects taught 81.1%
Social health education 78.4%
Use of exams and testing 74.2%
Summary grade for this section = Excellent
CIF 1.1.5 - WelshYour own assessment is required here.
CIF 1.2 - How do we Evaluate Wellbeing?
CIF 1.2.1 - How Good are Pupils' Attitudes to Keeping Healthy and Safe?School discipline 83.8%
School security 81.8%
Healthy Lifestyle - Diet 91.3%
Social health education 78.4%
Control of bullying 74.3%
Healthy Lifestyle - Exercise 82.6%
Out of school activities 65.4%
Summary grade for this section = Excellent
Parent survey report – Estyn - Common Inspection Framework
Copyright © 2017 Kirkland Rowell Limited Page 25 of 46
CIF 1.2.2 - How much do pupils participate in, and enjoy their learning?Caring teachers 85.8%
School discipline 83.8%
Encouraging and listening to pupils' views 82.5%
Happiness of child 82.4%
Range of subjects taught 81.1%
Tailoring child's work to their needs and ability 80.5%
Community spirit 80.0%
Teaching quality 79.7%
Ensuring pupils do their best/make good progress 79.2%
Celebrating and rewarding achievement 78.4%
Developing confidence 78.4%
Treating all pupils fairly/equally 77.9%
Developing potential 75.0%
Teaching pupils with special needs 75.0%
Control of bullying 74.3%
Summary grade for this section = Excellent
CIF 1.2.3 - What is the extent of pupils' community involvement?School's image in the local community 87.8%
Encouraging and listening to pupils' views 82.5%
Community spirit 80.0%
Encouraging pupils' activity in the local community 78.1%
Out of school activities 65.4%
Summary grade for this section = Excellent
CIF 1.2.4 - How good are pupils' social and life skills?Developing moral values 83.8%
Community spirit 80.0%
Ensuring pupils do their best/make good progress 79.2%
Social health education 78.4%
Developing confidence 78.4%
Developing potential 75.0%
Summary grade for this section = Excellent
Parent survey report – Estyn - Common Inspection Framework
Copyright © 2017 Kirkland Rowell Limited Page 26 of 46
2. How good is provision
CIF 2.1 - How do we evaluate learning experiences?
CIF 2.1.1 - How well do we meet the needs of learners, employers and the community?School's image in the local community 87.8%
Caring teachers 85.8%
Developing moral values 83.8%
Range of subjects taught 81.1%
Community spirit 80.0%
Teaching quality 79.7%
Promoting racial harmony 79.2%
Social health education 78.4%
Encouraging pupils' activity in the local community 78.1%
Treating all pupils fairly/equally 77.9%
Library facilities 76.0%
Developing potential 75.0%
Teaching pupils with special needs 75.0%
Use of exams and testing 74.2%
Out of school activities 65.4%
Summary grade for this section = Excellent
CIF 2.1.2 - How well do we provide for skills?Range of subjects taught 81.1%
Teaching quality 79.7%
Social health education 78.4%
Out of school activities 65.4%
Summary grade for this section = Excellent
CIF 2.1.3 - How well do we provide for Welsh and the Welsh dimension?Your own assessment is required here.
CIF 2.1.4 - How well do we provide education for sustainable development and globalcitizenshipDeveloping moral values 83.8%
Community spirit 80.0%
Promoting racial harmony 79.2%
Social health education 78.4%
Summary grade for this section = Excellent
Parent survey report – Estyn - Common Inspection Framework
Copyright © 2017 Kirkland Rowell Limited Page 27 of 46
CIF 2.2 - How do we evaluate teaching?
CIF 2.2.1 - How do we evaluate the range and quality of teaching approaches?Attitude of non-teaching/support staff 87.5%
Caring teachers 85.8%
Regular marking of work 83.8%
Range of subjects taught 81.1%
Teaching quality 79.7%
Ensuring pupils do their best/make good progress 79.2%
Celebrating and rewarding achievement 78.4%
Developing potential 75.0%
Teaching pupils with special needs 75.0%
Use of exams and testing 74.2%
Levels of homework 67.4%
Out of school activities 65.4%
Summary grade for this section = Excellent
CIF 2.2.2 - How well do we raise pupils' achievement through assessment?Written reports 85.8%
Caring teachers 85.8%
Parent evenings 84.7%
Regular marking of work 83.8%
Explaining to parents how to help their child 79.2%
Treating all pupils fairly/equally 77.9%
Encouraging and listening to parents' views 73.6%
Handling complaints 70.8%
Levels of homework 67.4%
School communication 63.5%
Summary grade for this section = Adequate
Parent survey report – Estyn - Common Inspection Framework
Copyright © 2017 Kirkland Rowell Limited Page 28 of 46
CIF 2.3 - How do we evaluate care, support and guidance?
CIF 2.3.1 - How well do we meet the provision for health and wellbeing, includingspiritual, moral, social and cultural development?Caring teachers 85.8%
School discipline 83.8%
Encouraging and listening to pupils' views 82.5%
Happiness of child 82.4%
School security 81.8%
Healthy Lifestyle - Diet 91.3%
Promoting racial harmony 79.2%
Social health education 78.4%
Developing confidence 78.4%
Encouraging pupils' activity in the local community 78.1%
Control of bullying 74.3%
Encouraging and listening to parents' views 73.6%
Healthy Lifestyle - Exercise 82.6%
Out of school activities 65.4%
School communication 63.5%
Summary grade for this section = Adequate
CIF 2.3.2 - How well are pupils supported with specialist services, information andguidance?Caring teachers 85.8%
Ensuring pupils do their best/make good progress 79.2%
Explaining to parents how to help their child 79.2%
Social health education 78.4%
Treating all pupils fairly/equally 77.9%
Library facilities 76.0%
Developing potential 75.0%
Teaching pupils with special needs 75.0%
Computer access 73.5%
Suitable class sizes 69.6%
School communication 63.5%
Summary grade for this section = Adequate
CIF 2.3.3 - How good are our safeguarding arrangements?Your own assessment is required here.
Parent survey report – Estyn - Common Inspection Framework
Copyright © 2017 Kirkland Rowell Limited Page 29 of 46
CIF 2.3.4 - How well do we meet the needs of pupils with additional learning needs?Attitude of non-teaching/support staff 87.5%
Written reports 85.8%
Caring teachers 85.8%
Regular marking of work 83.8%
Range of subjects taught 81.1%
Tailoring child's work to their needs and ability 80.5%
Teaching quality 79.7%
Ensuring pupils do their best/make good progress 79.2%
Treating all pupils fairly/equally 77.9%
Developing potential 75.0%
Teaching pupils with special needs 75.0%
Encouraging and listening to parents' views 73.6%
Suitable class sizes 69.6%
School communication 63.5%
Summary grade for this section = Adequate
CIF 2.4 - How do we evaluate the learning environment?
CIF 2.4.1 - How well do we evaluate the ethos, equality and provision for equality anddiversity?Developing moral values 83.8%
School discipline 83.8%
Community spirit 80.0%
Promoting racial harmony 79.2%
Treating all pupils fairly/equally 77.9%
Control of bullying 74.3%
Handling complaints 70.8%
Summary grade for this section = Excellent
CIF 2.4.2 - How well do we ensure that the physical environment is appropriate forpupils' needs?School facilities 77.0%
Library facilities 76.0%
Computer access 73.5%
Suitable class sizes 69.6%
Summary grade for this section = Good
Parent survey report – Estyn - Common Inspection Framework
Copyright © 2017 Kirkland Rowell Limited Page 30 of 46
3. How good are the Leadership and Management
CIF 3.1 - How do we evaluate the effectiveness of our leadership?
CIF 3.1.1 - How good is our stategic direction and what is the impact of our leadership?Attitude of non-teaching/support staff 87.5%
Caring teachers 85.8%
Ensuring pupils do their best/make good progress 79.2%
Quality of school management 78.9%
Developing potential 75.0%
Use of exams and testing 74.2%
School communication 63.5%
Summary grade for this section = Adequate
CIF 3.1.2 - How good is the work of our governorsYour own assessment is required here.
CIF 3.1.3 - How well do we meet local and national priorities?Your own assessment is required here.
CIF 3.2 - How do we improve the quality of what we do?
CIF 3.2.1 - How well do we carry out self-evaluation, including listening to learners andothers?Range of Self-evaluation programme
Survey response rate
Summary grade for this section = Excellent
CIF 3.2.2 - How well do we carry out planning and securing improvement?Ratio of parents saying school improving versus declining
Summary grade for this section = Excellent
CIF 3.2.3 - How are we involved in networks of professional practice?Your own assessment is required here.
CIF 3.3 - How do we evaluate the effectiveness of our partnership working?Your own assessment is required here.
Parent survey report – Estyn - Common Inspection Framework
Copyright © 2017 Kirkland Rowell Limited Page 31 of 46
CIF 3.4 - How do we evaluate resource management?
CIF 3.4.1 - How well do we manage our staff and resources?School facilities 77.0%
Computer access 73.5%
Suitable class sizes 69.6%
Out of school activities 65.4%
Summary grade for this section = Good
CIF 3.4.2 - Do we provide value for money?Quality of school management 78.9%
Summary grade for this section = Good
Parent survey report – Standard analysis
Copyright © 2017 Kirkland Rowell Limited Page 32 of 46
Standard analysisThis section of the reports summarises parents’ views on the school’s performance.
Performance and expectations
Performance compared to last year
13%
23%
27%
7%
0%
Much improved Slightly improved Remained thesame
Slightly worse Much worse0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
Per
cent
age
• Of the parents whose children were not in their first year at the school 37% said the school had improvedover the last year and 7% thought that the school’s performance was worse.
Has the school lived up to your expectations
18%
59%
9%
14%
Better As Expected Worse Don't know0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Per
cent
age
• Of the parents of new pupils, 9% felt that the school had not lived up to their expectations and 18% said theschool was better than they had expected it to be.
Parent survey report – Standard analysis
Copyright © 2017 Kirkland Rowell Limited Page 33 of 46
Gender analysis
This section of the report provides an analysis of parent scores and priorities broken down by gender, to see ifthere are any differences of significance worth noting.
Satisfaction scores for non-academic criteria
Male Female
Happin
ess o
f chil
d
Schoo
l sec
urity
Caring
teac
hers
Range
of s
ubjec
ts ta
ught
Develo
ping
mor
al va
lues
Schoo
l disc
ipline
Comm
unity
spirit
Teach
ing q
uality
Develo
ping
conf
idenc
e
Suitab
le cla
ss si
zes
Compu
ter a
cces
s
Schoo
l facil
ities
Develo
ping
pote
ntial
Contro
l of b
ullyin
g
Leve
ls of
hom
ewor
k
Out o
f sch
ool a
ctivit
ies
Schoo
l com
mun
icatio
n0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Per
cent
age
• There are no significant differences between the non-academic satisfaction scores for parents of femalepupils and parents of male pupils.
Parent survey report – Standard analysis
Copyright © 2017 Kirkland Rowell Limited Page 34 of 46
Satisfaction scores for additional criteria
Male Female
Schoo
l's im
age
in th
e
local
com
mun
ity
Attitud
e of
non
-teac
hing/
supp
ortsta
ff
Regula
r mar
king
of w
ork
Paren
t eve
nings
Encou
ragin
g pu
pils'
activ
ity in
the
local
com
mun
ity
Tailor
ing ch
ild's
work t
o th
eir
need
s and
abil
ity
Ensur
ing p
upils
do
their
best/
mak
e go
od p
rogr
ess
Quality
of s
choo
l man
agem
ent
Explai
ning
to p
aren
ts ho
w to h
elp
their
child
Celebr
ating
and
rewar
ding
achie
vem
ent
Treat
ing a
ll pup
ils fa
irly/e
quall
y
Encou
ragin
g an
d lis
tenin
g to
pare
nts'
views
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%P
erce
ntag
e
• There are no significant differences between the additional satisfaction scores for parents of female pupilsand parents of male pupils.
Parent survey report – Standard analysis
Copyright © 2017 Kirkland Rowell Limited Page 35 of 46
Healthy lifestyle
This section of the report summarises parents’ perceptions of whether their children are encouraged to livehealthy lifestyles.
Parents’ responses to the question: ‘Eating a healthy diet?’
This survey Similar schools
91%
9%
89%
11%
Yes No0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Per
cent
age
Parents’ responses to the question: ‘School encourages healthy lifestyle through exercise’
This survey Similar schools
83%
17%
89%
11%
Yes No0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Per
cent
age
Parent survey report – Standard analysis
Copyright © 2017 Kirkland Rowell Limited Page 36 of 46
Homework
This section of the report provides a summary of time spent on homework broken down by year group.Comparable data is provided from the last survey and from similar schools.
For this question, schools typically achieve more than 50% of parents who choose “about right”.
Parent perceptions of the amount of homework given
Not enough Too variable Too much About right
22%
0%
20%
27%
17%
13%
0% 0%
27%
0%
9%
14%
20%
0%
17%
57%
86%
60%
45%
67%
All parents Reception Years 1 and 2 Years 3 and 4 Years 5 and 60%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Per
cent
age
Parent survey report – Year group analysis
Copyright © 2017 Kirkland Rowell Limited Page 37 of 46
Year group analysis
Analysis of year group scores compared to national average
The graphs in this section of the report show the scores achieved for each of the surveyed criteria, brokendown by year group, compared to the national averages. The purple line shows the scores achieved from theaverage of similar schools, where these averages are available. If the bar is above the line, pupils in that yeargroup are more satisfied than the national average. If the bar is below the line, pupils in that year group are lesssatisfied than the national average.
Criteria where evidence was indicative rather than reliable are once again shown in pink.
Year groups where there were fewer than 12 respondents for a criterion are not shown. Note that the yeargroup scores are un-weighted.
Year group analysis compared to national averages for non-academiccriteria
School discipline
Recep
tion
Years
1
and
2
Years
3an
d 4
Years
5an
d 6
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
School facilities
Recep
tion
Years
1
and
2
Years
3an
d 4
Years
5an
d 6
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Developing confidence
Recep
tion
Years
1
and
2
Years
3an
d 4
Years
5an
d 6
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Suitable class sizes
Recep
tion
Years
1
and
2
Years
3an
d 4
Years
5an
d 6
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Parent survey report – Year group analysis
Copyright © 2017 Kirkland Rowell Limited Page 38 of 46
Control of bullying
Recep
tion
Years
1
and
2
Years
3an
d 4
Years
5an
d 6
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Caring teachers
Recep
tion
Years
1
and
2
Years
3an
d 4
Years
5an
d 6
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
School security
Recep
tion
Years
1
and
2
Years
3an
d 4
Years
5an
d 6
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
School communication
Recep
tion
Years
1
and
2
Years
3an
d 4
Years
5an
d 6
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Developing moral values
Recep
tion
Years
1
and
2
Years
3an
d 4
Years
5an
d 6
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Happiness of child
Recep
tion
Years
1
and
2
Years
3an
d 4
Years
5an
d 6
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Community spirit
Recep
tion
Years
1
and
2
Years
3an
d 4
Years
5an
d 6
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Developing potential
Recep
tion
Years
1
and
2
Years
3an
d 4
Years
5an
d 6
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Parent survey report – Year group analysis
Copyright © 2017 Kirkland Rowell Limited Page 39 of 46
Teaching quality
Recep
tion
Years
1
and
2
Years
3an
d 4
Years
5an
d 6
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Use of exams and testing
Recep
tion
Years
1
and
2
Years
3an
d 4
Years
5an
d 6
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Range of subjects taught
Recep
tion
Years
1
and
2
Years
3an
d 4
Years
5an
d 6
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Out of school activities
Recep
tion
Years
1
and
2
Years
3an
d 4
Years
5an
d 6
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Year group analysis compared to national averages for your additionalsurveyed criteria
Parent evenings
Recep
tion
Years
1
and
2
Years
3an
d 4
Years
5an
d 6
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Regular marking of work
Recep
tion
Years
1
and
2
Years
3an
d 4
Years
5an
d 6
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Encouraging and listening to parents' views
Recep
tion
Years
1
and
2
Years
3an
d 4
Years
5an
d 6
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Explaining to parents how to help their child
Recep
tion
Years
1
and
2
Years
3an
d 4
Years
5an
d 6
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Parent survey report – Year group analysis
Copyright © 2017 Kirkland Rowell Limited Page 40 of 46
Celebrating and rewarding achievement
Recep
tion
Years
1
and
2
Years
3an
d 4
Years
5an
d 6
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
School's image in the local community
Recep
tion
Years
1
and
2
Years
3an
d 4
Years
5an
d 6
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Parent survey report – Appendix
Copyright © 2017 Kirkland Rowell Limited Page 41 of 46
AppendixSupplementary data and score breakdowns.
Non-academic criteria analysis
How parents scored the delivery and management of non-academic criteria.
Non-academiccriteria
Verypoor (1)
Poor (2)Average
(3)Good (4)
Verygood (5)
No opinion(N)
Graph
School discipline 0.0% 0.0% 24.2% 33.3% 42.4% 0.0%1 2 3 4 5 N
School facilities 0.0% 0.0% 29.4% 35.3% 35.3% 0.0%1 2 3 4 5 N
Developingconfidence
0.0% 0.0% 29.0% 41.9% 29.0% 0.0%1 2 3 4 5 N
Suitable classsizes
5.4% 0.0% 24.3% 37.8% 32.4% 0.0%1 2 3 4 5 N
Control ofbullying
5.7% 17.1% 11.4% 25.7% 40.0% 0.0%1 2 3 4 5 N
Caring teachers 0.0% 6.5% 12.9% 38.7% 41.9% 0.0%1 2 3 4 5 N
School security 0.0% 0.0% 18.2% 39.4% 42.4% 0.0%1 2 3 4 5 N
Schoolcommunication
13.9% 16.7% 16.7% 25.0% 27.8% 0.0%1 2 3 4 5 N
Library facilities 0.0% 0.0% 19.2% 57.7% 23.1% 0.0%1 2 3 4 5 N
Developingmoral values
0.0% 6.5% 6.5% 45.2% 41.9% 0.0%1 2 3 4 5 N
Parent survey report – Appendix
Copyright © 2017 Kirkland Rowell Limited Page 42 of 46
Non-academiccriteria
Verypoor (1)
Poor (2)Average
(3)Good (4)
Verygood (5)
No opinion(N)
Graph
Levels ofhomework
0.0% 12.1% 24.2% 45.5% 18.2% 0.0%1 2 3 4 5 N
Happiness ofchild
0.0% 5.7% 14.3% 25.7% 54.3% 0.0%1 2 3 4 5 N
Community spirit 6.1% 6.1% 12.1% 30.3% 39.4% 6.1%1 2 3 4 5 N
Developingpotential
0.0% 12.1% 24.2% 39.4% 24.2% 0.0%1 2 3 4 5 N
Teaching quality 0.0% 0.0% 27.3% 36.4% 36.4% 0.0%1 2 3 4 5 N
Use of examsand testing
0.0% 0.0% 30.0% 43.3% 26.7% 0.0%1 2 3 4 5 N
Range ofsubjects taught
0.0% 0.0% 13.3% 40.0% 46.7% 0.0%1 2 3 4 5 N
Out of schoolactivities
8.8% 8.8% 23.5% 29.4% 29.4% 0.0%1 2 3 4 5 N
Social healtheducation
0.0% 0.0% 17.2% 51.7% 31.0% 0.0%1 2 3 4 5 N
Computeraccess
6.3% 0.0% 21.9% 34.4% 31.3% 6.3%1 2 3 4 5 N
Parent survey report – Appendix
Copyright © 2017 Kirkland Rowell Limited Page 43 of 46
Additional criteria analysis
How parents scored the delivery and management of your additional non-academic criteria.
Additionalcriteria
Verypoor (1)
Poor (2)Average
(3)Good (4)
Verygood (5)
No opinion(N)
Graph
Promoting racialharmony
0.0% 0.0% 12.5% 58.3% 29.2% 0.0%1 2 3 4 5 N
Parent evenings 0.0% 0.0% 6.3% 62.5% 31.3% 0.0%1 2 3 4 5 N
Handlingcomplaints
12.5% 4.2% 8.3% 37.5% 37.5% 0.0%1 2 3 4 5 N
Teaching pupilswith specialneeds
13.3% 6.7% 0.0% 26.7% 53.3% 0.0%1 2 3 4 5 N
Quality of schoolmanagement
0.0% 3.1% 21.9% 31.3% 43.8% 0.0%1 2 3 4 5 N
Regular markingof work
0.0% 0.0% 2.9% 58.8% 38.2% 0.0%1 2 3 4 5 N
Attitude of non-teaching/supportstaff
0.0% 0.0% 5.9% 55.9% 32.4% 5.9%1 2 3 4 5 N
Written reports 0.0% 0.0% 3.3% 50.0% 46.7% 0.0%1 2 3 4 5 N
Treating allpupils fairly/equally
5.9% 2.9% 8.8% 38.2% 44.1% 0.0%1 2 3 4 5 N
Encouragingand listening toparents' views
11.4% 5.7% 17.1% 31.4% 34.3% 0.0%1 2 3 4 5 N
Explaining toparents how tohelp their child
0.0% 11.1% 27.8% 25.0% 36.1% 0.0%1 2 3 4 5 N
Parent survey report – Appendix
Copyright © 2017 Kirkland Rowell Limited Page 44 of 46
Additionalcriteria
Verypoor (1)
Poor (2)Average
(3)Good (4)
Verygood (5)
No opinion(N)
Graph
Celebratingand rewardingachievement
11.8% 0.0% 23.5% 23.5% 41.2% 0.0%1 2 3 4 5 N
Tailoring child'swork to theirneeds and ability
0.0% 3.1% 12.5% 43.8% 40.6% 0.0%1 2 3 4 5 N
Ensuring pupilsdo their best/make goodprogress
0.0% 11.8% 17.6% 35.3% 29.4% 5.9%1 2 3 4 5 N
Encouragingpupils' activityin the localcommunity
0.0% 10.5% 21.1% 31.6% 26.3% 10.5%1 2 3 4 5 N
School's imagein the localcommunity
0.0% 0.0% 12.5% 43.8% 43.8% 0.0%1 2 3 4 5 N
Encouragingand listening topupils' views
0.0% 0.0% 10.0% 50.0% 40.0% 0.0%1 2 3 4 5 N
Homeworkbuilding uponschool work
0.0% 3.2% 29.0% 48.4% 19.4% 0.0%1 2 3 4 5 N
Parent survey report – Appendix
Copyright © 2017 Kirkland Rowell Limited Page 45 of 46
Graphs to show raw, adjusted satisfaction scores achieved for each ofthe criterion surveyed, before weightings are applied.
Non-academic areas
4.4 4.4 4.4 4.3 4.3 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.93.8 3.7 3.6 3.5
Caring
teac
hers
Develo
ping
mor
al va
lues
Schoo
l disc
ipline
Happin
ess o
f chil
d
Schoo
l sec
urity
Range
of s
ubjec
ts
taug
ht
Comm
unity
spirit
Teach
ing q
uality
Social
hea
lth e
duca
tion
Develo
ping
conf
idenc
e
Schoo
l facil
ities
Libra
ry fa
cilitie
s
Develo
ping
pote
ntial
Contro
l of b
ullyin
g
Use o
f exa
ms a
nd
testi
ng
Compu
ter a
cces
s
Suitab
le cla
ss si
zes
Leve
ls of
hom
ewor
k
Out o
f sch
ool a
ctivit
ies
Schoo
l com
mun
icatio
n1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
Mea
n
Additional questions
4.5 4.5 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.3 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.1 4.1 4.14.0 3.9
3.8 3.8
Schoo
l's im
age
in th
e loc
al...
Attitud
e of
non-
teac
hing/
supp
...
Writ
ten
repo
rts
Paren
t eve
nings
Regula
r
mar
king
of w
ork
Encou
ragin
g
and
liste
ning.
..
Tailor
ing ch
ild's
work t
o th
eir...
Ensur
ing p
upils
do th
eir...
Explai
ning
to
pare
nts h
ow...
Prom
oting
racia
l har
mon
y
Quality
of
scho
ol...
Celebr
ating
and
rewar
ding.
..
Encou
ragin
g
pupil
s' ac
tivity
...
Treat
ing a
ll
pupil
s...
Teach
ing p
upils
with sp
ecial
...
Encou
ragin
g
and
liste
ning.
..
Homew
ork
build
ing u
pon.
..
Handli
ng
com
plaint
s1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
Mea
n
Parent survey report
Copyright © 2017 Kirkland Rowell Limited Page 46 of 46
A word on Quality AssuranceTo ensure our services have maximum input, our accredited facilitators have extensive experience at seniorleadership level in schools and are all experienced in working with schools on the use of data to inform schoolimprovement and review. In addition, our ISO 27001 accreditation means your data is safe with us.
For further details please visit our website www.gl-assessment.co.uk.