BREAMORE Church of England Primary School in Fordingbridge has been praised for “rapid improvements” that have seen it obtain a “good” rating from Ofsted.

The school was deemed good in all categories, including leadership and management, quality of teaching, achievement of pupils, and early years provision.

In a previous inspection Ofsted said the school “required improvement”.

Headteacher Emma Clark said: “We were very pleased with the report and felt that it is an accurate reflection of the school. We are determined we are going to become an outstanding school over time and we were pleased that Ofsted were able to recognise all the hard work put in by the staff and pupils at the school.”

The report highlighted the “strong and supportive relationships” between staff and pupils, which it said “enabled pupils to try their best”.

Lead inspector Liz Bowes said: “Since the present headteacher’s arrival there have been rapid improvements. The headteacher, staff and governors have had a positive impact on the quality of teaching and the achievement of pupils.”

She added: “Teaching has improved since the last inspection and its impact on reading, writing and mathematics is now good. Teachers make clear to pupils what they want them to achieve at the end of each session and as a result progress is good and improving consistently.”

The report also noted the school’s performance in the 2014 Year 1 screening of pupils’ knowledge of phonics had been “exceptional” and it was in the top two per cent of schools in the country.

It said: “By the end of Year 6, in 2014, a majority of pupils attained above the national average in writing and mathematics...”

“Good teaching ensures that pupils of all ages and abilities do well.”

Early years provision was said to be “effective” and ensured children were “well prepared for learning in Year 1”. Also highlighted was the family ethos of the school.

The two areas of improvement in the report were that not enough pupils were making better than expected progress in reading in Key Stage 2 and new middle leaders were still developing their roles and because of this, succession planning was not as strong as it could be.