Peter Staddon, head teacher of Curry Rivel Primary School, which was flooded last year has criticised Ofsted inspectors for "failing to meet their duties".
Inspectors from the education watchdog visited Curry Rivel Primary School on March 7-8th, just more than a year after the school was badly flooded after a storm.
The inspectors published their report, praising the school's early years provision and personal development strategy but concluding that it "required improvement" in every other area.
Head teacher Peter Staddon has responded that the report is "not a fair reflection" of the school, and has made a formal complaint about its findings.
Ofsted reported shortcomings at the school:
Pupils' attainment at Key Stage 2 is "not as good as it should be, and pupils do not make sufficient progress"
Attainment in the three Rs (reading, writing and arithmetic) is not high enough to ensure pupils are "prepared well enough" for secondary school
Teaching has "not been consistently effective" to ensure that all pupils (including those who are disadvantaged) progress
There is "insufficient challenge" for pupils to reach their full potential in writing
The school's means of assessing pupils who may need additional support is "not used well enough"
Staff changes have "had a negative impact on leaders' capacity to maintain and build on some of the school's previous strengths"
The senior leadership team is "not yet having a sustained impact" on areas requiring improvement
Ofsted reported strengths at the school:
There is good teaching at Key Stage 1 and pupils in Nursery and Reception classes "make good progress"
There is "strong spiritual, moral, social and cultural development" for pupils
Pupils are well-behaved, "feel safe and are well cared for", with parents being very supportive of the school
The school's government has improved and effectively holders leaders to account.
Curry Rivel Primary School was rated 'good' at the inspectors' previous visit, which took place back in June 2012.
Mr Staddon said: "As a school we find this result very disappointing. However, we feel that for a number of reasons the report is not a fair reflection of the school at the present time."
"We believe the inspection failed to meet their duties, as directed in The Ofsted Code of Conduct, and consequently we have made a formal complaint."
Mr Staddon claims that the inspectors did not focus on the achievements of current pupils, with their inspection coinciding with a school trip involving children from Years 4, 5 and 6.
He said: "The Ofsted report has based its judgement on historic Year 6 examination results and from a selection of 10 Key Stage 2 books (from a possible 60).
"This is because Year 4, 5 and 6 children were on a residential trip for the entire inspection. None of these children were spoken to, asked for their opinions or given the chance to discuss their learning.
"No lessons were observed in this key area of the school. In fact only two lessons out of a possible 40 were observed. Therefore, inspectors were not able to see for themselves the full extent of the improvements we had already made in this academic year."
Mr Staddon added that he did not think that the school's flooding — for the third time in 11 years — was a factor in the inspectors' decision.
The Village Hall
Old School Room