1. Introduction

1.1 The context
1.1.1 Lochgelly South Nursery and Primary School is set in an area both of deprivation and of regeneration. It has a roll of approximately 200 pupils - seven single stream classes, plus morning and afternoon nursery classes, both with 18 pupils. Every pupil has distinct strengths and needs. We have a non-teaching Head Teacher but no management team or Principal Teachers. Our free school meal entitlement is 24.1 %. The school forms part of a nine school Cluster Group which is made up of Special, Nursery, Primary and the feeder Secondary as well as an Integrated Community School Cluster. Once a thriving mining town, Lochgelly now has a high level of unemployment.

1.1.2 Our school had a Standards and Quality Inspection by HMIE in May/June 2001 which outlined significant failings and difficulties across the school, ranging from the quality of accommodation to delivery of the curriculum. The only noted positive aspect was that the standard of teaching was generally good or, in some cases, very good. However, staff morale was, despite individual teaching strengths, extremely low, as were the overall expectations of both pupils and parents. Community involvement was minimal. These findings were reported in a national newspaper unsympathetically, exacerbating an already unhappy situation. HMIE planned to return for an interim review of progress in one year and to follow this with the return inspection six months after that.

1.2 The challenge
1.2.1 The challenge then facing the school and its Head Teacher, appointed just prior to the Inspection in April 2001, was straightforward but huge. The HMIE audit set out a framework of expectations that the school had to be turned around to meet in order to support the raising of achievement/attainment and the development of confident, articulate and appropriately skilled pupils, taking responsibility (as they now do, see Picture A). HMIEs and the Head Teacher agreed that the development of a positive ethos would both help generate these developments and that ethos itself would in turn become more positive as progress became evident.

However, to succeed we would need to construct a rigorous and dynamic Action Plan, underpinned by professional development. This would not only address the main points for action in the HMIE report but would also foster positive relationships and collaboration between staff, pupils and parents. Community collegiality was in, isolated action definitely out.

1.2.2 We also decided to try to address all the HMIE targets before the interim review only one year ahead, for the sake of the pupils and hopefully obviating the need for a return inspection. This decision was an extra incentive but, with hindsight, also a further stressor for staff (see final section).

2. The Process of change:
Lights, Camera . . . Action!

2.1 The Action Plan
2.1.1 The key points in our Action Plan were:

	The unsatisfactory aspects of the accommodation to be made good.
	Sufficient resources, including staffing, to be provided to deliver an appropriate curriculum and enable high achievement.
	Appropriate programmes to be put in place to raise pupil attainment and build consistently on earlier learning. Each programme should provide agreed practical advice on standards, approaches, resources and assessment.
	Teaching plans for Nursery and Primary classes to identify clearly what was to be learned, how progress would be assessed and what pupils' next steps in learning should be.
	The school to ensure that pupils with special educational needs were carefully assessed and supported across the curriculum, with appropriate input from parents and outside agencies.
	The school to provide parents with relevant information about its provision and to strengthen opportunities for parents to support their children's learning.

2.1.2 When constructing the Action Plan we were aware that this was an imperative in relation to the HMIEs' return visit. However, the longer term and bigger picture of pupils' holistic development and of school life after this made it even more important. The school Action Plan was therefore 'dovetailed' into the Lochgelly Area Group Action Plan, the Lochgelly New Community Schools (from Summer 2001 they became Integrated Community Schools [ICS]) Action Plan, Fife Council's own priorities and lastly, but not least, the National Priorities, thereby addressing key issues at school, area, Fife and National levels.

2.2 Maintaining, monitoring and resourcing progress
2.2.1 Each Action Point of the School Action Plan was sub-divided, with clear targets in every section related to:

	implementation strategies
	timescale (adhered to strictly)
	key staff development/resources required

2.2.2 With Quality Assurance firmly in mind, two aspects were crucial to ensure progress:

	robust monitoring strategies
	clearly defined success criteria

A cumulative report was maintained, recording each term progress relating to all of the sub-aspects of the Action Plan items.

2.2.3 Since the areas that required to be addressed were wide ranging, this necessitated real trust in, and very substantial effort from, the staff team. Our key resource within the school was the staff. Only with their professional development and effective teamwork could the school change, collaborate effectively with pupils, families and external partners and, ultimately, thrive.