An Roinn Oideachais agus Scileanna

Department of Education and Skills

Evaluation of Schools attached to Special Care Units and

Children Detention Centres

REPORT

Ainm na scoile /

School name Oberstown Campus School

Seoladh na scoile /

School address

National Children’s Detention Centre

Oberstown

Lusk, Co. Dublin

Uimhir rolla /

Roll number 42693V

Date of Inspection: 21-11-2019

EVALUATION OF SCHOOLS ATTACHED TO SPECIAL CARE UNITS The Inspectorate carries out a programme of annual inspections of schools attached to Special Care

Units (SCU) and Children Detention Centres (CDCs). Schools at SCUs and CDCs cater for children with

severe emotional and behavioural challenges, for children who are the subject of special care orders

granted by the courts or for children who have been convicted or placed on remand by the courts.

The inspection approach used in evaluating provision in these schools is designed to address the

particular circumstances in which they operate.

HOW TO READ THIS REPORT

During this inspection, the inspector evaluated learning and teaching under the following headings: 1. Learning, teaching and support for students

2. School organisation and management

3. School planning and school self-evaluation

Inspectors describe the quality of each of these areas using the Inspectorate’s quality continuum

which is shown on the final page of this report. The quality continuum provides examples of the

language used by inspectors when evaluating and describing the quality of the school’s provision in

each area.

The board of management was given an opportunity to comment in writing on the findings and recommendations of the report, and the response of the board will be found in the appendix of this report.

CHILD PROTECTION

During the inspection visit, the following checks in relation to the school’s child protection procedures were conducted: 1. The name of the DLP and the Child Safeguarding Statement are prominently displayed near the

main entrance to the school. 2. The Child Safeguarding Statement has been ratified by the board and includes an annual review

and a risk assessment. 3. All teachers visited reported that they have read the Child Safeguarding Statement and that

they are aware of their responsibilities as mandated persons. 4. The Child Safeguarding Statement meets the requirements of the Child Protection Procedures

for Primary and Post-Primary Schools 2017. 5. The records of the last three board of management meetings record a child protection oversight

report that meet the requirements of the Child Protection Procedures for Primary and Post-Primary schools 2017.

6. The board of management has ensured that arrangements are in place to provide information to all school personnel on the Child Protection Procedures for Primary and Post-Primary Schools, 2017

7. School planning documentation indicates that the school is making full provision for the relevant aspects of the curriculum (SPHE, Stay Safe, RSE, Wellbeing).

8. Child protection records are maintained in a secure location. The school did not meet the requirements in relation to 7 above and therefore was not fully

compliant with the checks undertaken.

EVALUATION OF SCHOOLS ATTACHED TO SPECIAL CARE UNITS AND CHILDREN DETENTION

CENTRES

INSPECTION ACTIVITIES DURING THIS INSPECTION

Date of inspection: 20 & 21 November 2019

Inspection activities undertaken

Discussion with principal and teachers

Meeting with management of school and of

residential centre and Dublin and Dún

Laoighaire Education and Training Board

(DDLETB) director of schools

Review of relevant documents

Analysis of teacher questionnaires

Student focus-group interview

Observation of teaching and learning

Examination of students’ work

Interaction with students

Feedback to principal and DDLETB director of schools

SCHOOL CONTEXT

Oberstown Campus School operates under the auspices of DDLETB. It caters for young people up to

the age of eighteen and a half years old who have been remanded or sentenced to the Oberstown

Children Detention Campus by the courts.

The in-school management team consists of one principal and two deputy principals, all three of

whom are fulltime administrators. There is an overall whole time equivalent of just over 25 teachers

in total. At the time of the inspection, measures were underway, put in place by the DDLETB, to try

and resolve issues within the school arising from an inspection conducted in February 2019.

The school is in two sections to cater separately for the young people on remand and those who have

received sentences. One of the deputy principals is tasked with the day-to-day management of the

remand section which had eight students enrolled at the time of the inspection. The principal and

second deputy are based in the other section of the school where 25 students were enrolled. The

principal has overall responsibility for the education of the students in both sections.

SUMMARY OF MAIN FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:

FINDINGS

The quality of teaching and learning ranged from satisfactory to very good; outcomes were

best where expectations for students’ achievement were suitably high but there was an over

reliance on the use of worksheets in the majority of lessons.

Support for students is good in relation to their emotional needs and all interactions observed

were respectful; teachers’ awareness of students’ specific learning needs and how best to

support them is an area in need of significant development.

School organisation and management is poor; relationship issues among staff and

management within the school and with the residential care staff are impacting negatively on

students’ educational experiences and teachers’ working conditions.

The school is not compliant with the health and safety regulations for learning and working

environments.

A number of initiatives are being rolled out in line with school self-evaluation but the six steps

of the process need to be utilised to ensure initiatives are meeting identified needs, being

implemented cohesively and monitored for effectiveness.

The school was not fully compliant with the Child Protection checks undertaken at the time of

the inspection.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The recent support provided by the DDLETB to develop purposeful student support files must

be followed up by the development and implementation of a system where the additional

needs of students are identified, and where strategies put in place to support learning are

monitored for effectiveness and modified as necessary to meet student need.

Teachers should ensure that individualised lesson planning for students includes a variety of

learning experiences and comprises both short-term and long-term educational goals which

are suitably pitched.

The ongoing management issues need to be resolved with the continued assistance of the

DDLETB.

The school board should ensure full compliance with health and safety regulations and should

develop formal systems to identify and assess risks and to address issues raised.

The school should ensure that full provision is being made for Social, Personal and Health

Education (SPHE), Relationships and Sexuality Education (RSE) and wellbeing and have

planning documentation to demonstrate that there is consistency, cohesion and continuity in

the provision.

DETAILED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

1. THE QUALITY OF LEARNING, TEACHING AND SUPPORT FOR STUDENTS

1.1 THE QUALITY OF LEARNING

The overall quality of learning was good, ranging from satisfactory to very good in the lessons

observed. Outcomes were best where teachers’ expectations in relation to students’ abilities

and knowledge were suitably high and students demonstrated high levels of pride in their

progress. There were many missed opportunities for purposeful learning where expectations

were not suitably pitched.

There is scope to ensure students have more varied learning experiences. In the majority of

lessons, there was an over reliance on completing worksheets comprising low-level tasks, and

as a result, students’ experiences lacked diversity. Teachers should consider the visual,

auditory and kinaesthetic (VAK) styles of learning and include hands-on resources and digital

technology to create varied learning experiences for students.

The learning atmosphere in classrooms created by teachers was safe and positive and all

interactions between teachers and students and among students were respectful. Students

were happy to ask questions and offer solutions. In one lesson, very good collaboration

between the student and the teacher added considerably to the learning experience of the

student. Efforts should be made to create more collaborative learning experiences among

students.

Students are assigned to class groups on the basis of behaviour and while this is an important

factor, it needs to be combined with educational factors to ensure their learning experiences

are as purposeful and consistent as possible.

Tuition time is seriously impacted by the movement of students at all times of transition. Many

of the students are at completely different stages of their educational journeys. As a means

of differentiating learning opportunities, the teacher splits the class time between the two or

three students, further impacting tuition time for individual students. School management

needs to manage transitions and timetabling, and teachers should plan for in-class strategies

where students learn collaboratively, to maximise students’ tuition time.

Questioning was used well to assess progress and understanding. For the most part, responses

required were short. There is scope to develop the use of higher order questioning to assess

progress, check for understanding and provide students with opportunities to use the

language of the subject purposefully and in context.

There was evidence of very good quality of formative written feedback on the work of some

students but this practice needs to be extended to all lessons. Self-assessment was facilitated

in a small number of instances which is commendable and should be used to develop skills for

peer-assessment among students.

1.2 THE QUALITY OF TEACHING

The overall quality of teaching was good in the lessons observed. Practices ranged from

satisfactory to very good. Teachers demonstrated high levels of enthusiasm for and

knowledge of their subject areas.

Classrooms were well decorated and had a combination of sourced materials and students’

work on display. In the best lessons, some of the materials on display were used or referred

to in the lessons by the teachers or the students.

Digital technology was used in some lessons. However, there is significant scope to develop

the use of digital technology to enhance learning by, for example, providing relevant examples

and real life applications for what is being learned in lessons. It could also add to the variety

of learning experiences for students.

Where practices were best, individual lessons were planned as an element of an overall long-

term learning plan for each individual student. In one lesson, it was very clear that the long

term plan for the student in the lesson observed was to complete the junior cycle examination

in the subject. Taking into account the uncertainty of the length of time the student would be

in the school, units of learning were planned to allow for quality and qualifications Ireland

(QQI) certification if the student was to leave before sitting the certificate examination. This

level of planning is commendable and should be extended to all subjects.

There was scope to improve the quality of teaching where the focus was on completing

worksheets without an overall long term plan and teachers’ records of work were largely

retrospective. There is a whole-school over reliance on QQI certification in place of Junior and

Leaving certificate attainment and this needs to be addressed.

A review of certificate examination results showed students achieving very high grades at

foundation level and ordinary level. This would indicate that expectations for ability were not

suitably high. There was no evidence of students taking higher level papers. Students should

be encouraged and supported to strive for the highest level possible to ensure they are

reaching their potential and enjoying purposeful achievements.

There was evidence of collaboration among some teachers which was driven from their own

sense of professionalism. There were limitations to what could be achieved as progress

depended on support from senior management and teachers did not always feel their inputs

and suggestions were valued.

1.3 THE QUALITY OF SUPPORT FOR STUDENTS

The overall quality of support for students is fair.

Support for students is good in relation to their emotional needs and all interactions observed

were respectful. Teachers were adept at judging students’ moods and dispositions and

encouraging them to participate in lessons. The movement of students between classes was

managed to ensure that there was very little interaction between them. There is scope to

review this practice as the students interact with each other far more before and after school

hours. The recent engagement with Management of Actual or Potential Aggression (MAPA)

training, which took place with the residential staff, should support any changes made and

other opportunities to avail of continuing professional development (CPD) to manage

behaviour should be incorporated into a whole-school CPD plan.

Teachers’ overall awareness of students’ specific learning needs and how best to support

them is an area in need of significant development. Despite the fact that a number of teachers

have qualifications in special educational needs (SEN), there was no evidence that their

expertise was being used to develop individual learning plans, to identify additional needs and

to plan strategies on how best to support them. Many of these teachers were supported by

the DDLETB and the school in their CPD endeavours. While the learning is beneficial to their

own teaching practices, the potential to improve overall provision within the school should

also be utilised.

The recent support provided by the DDLETB to develop purposeful student support files for

the current cohort of students must be followed by the development of a system where the

additional needs of students are identified and the strategies put in place to support learning

are monitored for effectiveness and modified accordingly. It must include meaningful input

from all relevant stakeholders.

There is a student council in the school which is commendable and students were aware of

some of the members who represent them. A link teacher supports the work of the members

and students mentioned certain improvements made based on representations from the

council.

2. THE QUALITY OF SCHOOL ORGANISATION AND MANAGEMENT

The overall quality of school organisation and management is fair. While there was evidence that

immediate and co-ordinated whole-school action is required to address a number of areas of concern,

the close attention the school is now receiving from the DDLETB promises to be beneficial to the

overall running of the school.

2.1 LEADERSHIP OF LEARNING AND TEACHING

The overall quality of leadership of teaching and learning is weak.

It was reported that the teachers had attended training for the new junior cycle the day before

the inspection. However, not all senior managers attended. In any school setting it is vital that

all teachers and school managers avail of the training opportunities provided to ensure they

are upskilled effectively.

Programmes offered in the school are the Junior Cycle and Leaving Certificate as well as a

number of QQI certification options. It was reported that the Junior Certificate School

Programme (JCSP) was in place but the full potential of the programme to support students

was not being utilised. One student who had been doing the Leaving Certificate Applied (LCA)

programme before coming to the school was being facilitated to continue with this course of

study.

The principal reported a willingness to provide additional resources when requested but it

was very disappointing to find that a mathematics class observed had no hands-on resources

which would have added considerably to students’ learning. While the mathematics

department and the individual teachers are responsible for the quality of provision, there is

scope for school management, including the board of management, to have a more pro-active

oversight role to set expectations for, and monitor, the quality of students’ learning

experiences and teaching.

It was reported that the school self-evaluation process was being used to improve students’

ability to tell the time and to learn the days, months and seasons of the year. However, a

working clock was not available in every classroom visited and there was no evidence that any

of the students had difficulty with identifying the days, months and seasons. In fact, testing

showed that a number of the students were of high intelligence and would find this type of

improvement target to be demeaning and irrelevant.

Timetabling is done on a daily basis as is often the practice in similar settings. However,

teachers should be better informed of the students they are likely to have for the coming

week, at least. Planning and arranging resources is very difficult when teachers get their

timetable with insufficient time to plan, and when the class groupings change regularly.

There is a lack of transparency around teachers’ timetables and it is practice that a number of

teaching staff are on corridor duty during class times. The use of teaching resources needs to

be reviewed to ensure optimum value to teaching and learning.

2.2 MANAGEMENT OF THE ORGANISATION

Relationship issues among staff and management within the school and with the residential

care staff are impacting negatively on students’ educational experiences and teachers’

working conditions. All parties need to, as a matter of priority, engage purposefully with the

mediation process to address the issues identified.

There have been improvements to the levels of communication with parents and outside

support agencies. Each student’s link teacher now attends the weekly pupil placement

meeting (PPM) where progress and issues are discussed. This is a positive move. However, as

the practice is yet to be outlined definitively in policy documentation, not all parties were

confident that the practice would continue.

School management needs to ensure the work of the school is supported by clear policy

documentation. While some policies were available, there was little evidence of input from all

relevant stakeholders and practices on the ground indicated that there was not a whole-

school awareness of procedures and practices outlined in these.

The school board needs to take responsibility for health and safety within the school and

develop formal systems to identify and assess risks, and to address any issues raised. While

the overall responsibility for health and safety within the entire campus was reported to lie

with personnel outside of the school community, the principal should take responsibility for

the students and staff in the school and all areas where students learn.

A roll book system is now in place to maintain records of students’ attendance and absences.

There were some discrepancies between teacher records and the official roll book. It is

recommended that an online system be developed to ensure accurate records are

maintained. Many of the widely used systems have the potential for engaging with parents

and keeping them informed of students’ progress as well as levels of attendance. Many

students reported high levels of attendance in the campus school.

3. THE QUALITY OF SCHOOL PLANNING AND SCHOOL SELF-EVALUATION

A. THE QUALITY OF SCHOOL PLANNING

The overall quality of planning for individual lessons was satisfactory. Some teachers compiled

comprehensive individual learning plans for their students which were of a very high quality.

However, this was not always the standard and some of the records kept by teachers were

retrospective and with little detail. All students are entitled to well-planned lessons which are

part of a longer term, suitably pitched learning plan. This should be the whole-school

expectation which is set and monitored by management.

School planning requires significant change to ensure that the educational needs of students

are adequately met. Planning should be supported by informed policy development with

purposeful input from all stakeholders.

At the time of the evaluation full provision was not being made for Social, Personal and Health

Education (SPHE), Relationships and Sexuality Education (RSE) or wellbeing. Planning

documentation to ensure there is consistency, cohesion and continuity with the provision was

also in need of development. If provision for certain areas are in collaboration with the care

staff, it must be clearly outlined in the documentation.

B. THE QUALITY OF SCHOOL SELF-EVALUATION

The school’s engagement with the SSE process to date is fair. The six-steps of the process need to be used purposefully to ensure the targets set are meeting the identified needs of the students and that strategies for supporting improvement are implemented on a whole-school basis and monitored for effectiveness.

The school had made progress with some of the recommendations made in previous inspections. However, overall progress made is weak. This is the second time the school has been found to be non-compliant with the Child Protection checks undertaken. A number of recommendations have not been addressed in a timely, cohesive and purposeful manner. The DDLETB is now providing guidance and support to the school.

The potential for purposeful planning for on-going development will not be fully realised until there are good working relationships among staff and with the residential setting. Many teachers demonstrate good levels of commitment to the students and the school, show good capacity for leadership roles and the DDLETB has begun to use some of the potential to make improvements.

Appendix

SCHOOL RESPONSE TO THE REPORT

Submitted by the Board of Management

Part A: Observations on the content of the inspection report

The inspection report was discussed by the Board at its meeting of 17/1/2020. The Board notes the

findings and is adopting all recommendations as a matter of urgency. The Board notes the positive

relationships between the teachers and learners. The Board notes from the report that the quality of

teaching varied from ‘satisfactory to very good’. We look forward to furthering collaboration among

staff and sharing of these best practices.

Part B: Follow-up actions planned or undertaken since the completion of the inspection activity

to implement the findings and recommendations of the inspection

It has been confirmed to the Board of Oberstown Campus School that it is now fully compliant with

the safeguarding requirements including instruction in SPHE and RSE.

A detailed action plan has been put in place to deal with all of the findings and recommendations as

outlined in the report. This plan is time-bound, outcomes are aligned with targeted interventions

and regular review. The Board of Management will have oversight of this plan, its impact and

progress ensuring that all recommendation of this report are implemented in full.

Published February 2020 / Foilsithe Feabhra 2020

THE INSPECTORATE’S QUALITY CONTINUUM

Inspectors describe the quality of provision in the school using the Inspectorate’s quality continuum

which is shown below. The quality continuum provides examples of the language used by inspectors

when evaluating and describing the quality of the school’s provision of each area.

Level Description Example of descriptive terms

Very Good

Very good applies where the quality of the areas evaluated is of a very high standard. The very few areas for improvement that exist do not significantly impact on the overall quality of provision. For some schools in this category the quality of what is evaluated is outstanding and provides an example for other schools of exceptionally high standards of provision.

Very good; of a very high quality; very effective practice; highly commendable; very successful; few areas for improvement; notable; of a very high standard. Excellent; outstanding; exceptionally high standard, with very significant strengths; exemplary

Good

Good applies where the strengths in the areas evaluated clearly outweigh the areas in need of improvement. The areas requiring improvement impact on the quality of pupils’ learning. The school needs to build on its strengths and take action to address the areas identified as requiring improvement in order to achieve a very good standard.

Good; good quality; valuable; effective practice; competent; useful; commendable; good standard; some areas for improvement

Satisfactory

Satisfactory applies where the quality of provision is adequate. The strengths in what is being evaluated just outweigh the shortcomings. While the shortcomings do not have a significant negative impact they constrain the quality of the learning experiences and should be addressed in order to achieve a better standard.

Satisfactory; adequate; appropriate provision although some possibilities for improvement exist; acceptable level of quality; improvement needed in some areas

Fair

Fair applies where, although there are some strengths in the areas evaluated, deficiencies or shortcomings that outweigh those strengths also exist. The school will have to address certain deficiencies without delay in order to ensure that provision is satisfactory or better.

Fair; evident weaknesses that are impacting on pupils’ learning; less than satisfactory; experiencing difficulty; must improve in specified areas; action required to improve

Weak

Weak applies where there are serious deficiencies in the areas evaluated. Immediate and coordinated whole-school action is required to address the areas of concern. In some cases, the intervention of other agencies may be required to support improvements.

Weak; unsatisfactory; insufficient; ineffective; poor; requiring significant change, development or improvement; experiencing significant difficulties;