APPENDIX 9
Memorandum from the British Educational
Research Association (OAR 11)
SUMMARY OF
TOPICS RAISED
Schools' performance in relation to social and academic
characteristics of intakes.
INTRODUCTION
It is difficult for researchers to comment on
HMCI's Annual Report in terms of tests of trustworthiness for
in the Commentary alone there are 96 assertions in the form of
empirical statements, each of which could be audited for validity.
It would be a Herculean task to do this, as it must have been
for HMCI and his team to prepare them in the first place.
However there are six issues in the Commentary
which we think it profitable to put before your Committee. First
however we would like to pay tribute to the general tone of the
Report which shows a welcome move away from HMCI's previous tendency
to populist and negative criticism of schools, towards emphasising
improved results, and how well most schools are coping with the
pressures on them. The listing of schools therefore focuses almost
entirely on those which have received "outstanding inspection
reports", or shown "excellent improvement", or
been removed from special measures. Especially welcome is the
list of "highly effective" Special Schools, the achievements
of which are often hidden because of the prominence of performance
tables compiled from examination and test results.
SIX ISSUES
1. Schools' performance in relation to social
and academic characteristics of intakes.
There is still too little recognition of the difficulty
of matching schools' performance against what might reasonably
be expected given the prior attainment and the social characteristics
of their intakes. For example, there is a disproportionately large
number of academically selective schools among those judged to
be "outstanding"; this may be justified, but deserves
some comment in the context of HMCI's recent remarks on schools
with favoured intakes which appear to be "coasting".
Similar caution should be applied to the judgement of "excellent
standards" in independent schools.
2. Adequacy of evidence on Education Action
Zones
It is doubtful whether "inspection evidence"
will ever be adequate to assess the "profound impact"
of Education Action Zones. That assessment will require more focused,
systematic and expert investigation than is within Ofsted's inspectorial
capacity. It is encouraging however that the need to attract "the
best-quality" staff to work in schools in disadvantaged communities
is clearly recognised. This might well be placed in the context
of the preceding comment on the intolerable gap between the best
and worst schools. Although the evidence is not entirely consistent,
the accumulating effects of parental choice have probably contributed
to widening this gap in the large urban areas.
3. Teacher recruitment
The sanguine comments on teacher recruitment
contrast so strongly with the worries expressed by some knowledgeable
commentators that some justification might have been offered for
accepting HMCI's more optimistic judgement.
4. Resourcing of schools
The reference to the "adequate resourcing"
of most schools is notably complacent, although that statement
is subsequently complemented (and contradicted?) by criticism
of unacceptable variations in funding according to where schools
are located. The "inequitable devolution of resources from
central government to LEAs" is surely a more real problem,
and certainly more lacking in transparency, than devolution from
LEAs to schools.
5. "Anti-intellectual seam" and
education theorising
In his recent speech to the ESRC, David Blunkett
deplored the "anti-intellectual seam" which has run
through government at both political and official levels. This
seam is sometimes displayed strikingly by HMCI, as it is in the
final paragraph of his Commentary. Research has provided a great
deal of evidence of how people learn and how schools become more
effective. To dismiss it simply as an "unnecessary complication"
in any field of endeavour appears short-sighted: to do so in the
field of education is woefully blinkered. An example of the kinds
of "education theorising that obfuscates the classroom realities
that really matter" might have helped to indicate whether
the statement is more than another of Mr Woodhead's non-evidence-based
comments.
6. Teacher stress
"`Is there any point to which you would
wish to draw my attention?' `To the curious incident of the dog
in the night-time,' said Sherlock Holmes." Sometimes it is
important to note the absence of evidence and so we note that
the HMCI report makes no mention of teacher stress caused by inspection
and the incidence of absence and breakdown which may be associated.
Prepared on behalf of the British Educational
Research Association by Professors Tony Edwards, Peter Mortimore
and Michael Bassey.
February 2000
| 
