ANNEX II
OFSTED RESPONSE TO THE SIXTH REPORT OF
THE EDUCATION AND EMPLOYMENT COMMITTEE, SESSION 1999-2000:
STANDARDS AND QUALITY IN EDUCATION: THE
ANNUAL REPORT OF HER MAJESTY'S CHIEF INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS 1998-99
26 May 2000
Thank you for the copy of the Education and Employment
Committee's report on my Annual Report.
We note that the Committee 'welcomes the positive
tone of the 1998-99 Report'. If this means that the Committee
is pleased that standards in school have risen, then we, of course,
agree. If, however, it means that the Committee believes that
OFSTED should be positive whatever the inspection evidence, then
we must beg to differ. OFSTED has a responsibility, as the Committee
itself recognises in paragraph 21, to report on the evidence.
If the evidence shows that there are problems, then the tone of
what we write will not be positive.
We intend to investigate the impact of the initiative
to reduce class size in KS1 in due course.
We already monitor, as the Committee itself notes,
the quality of supply teachers.
We will continue to reflect upon the impact of staff
mobility upon pupil attainment, though it is difficult to imagine
any conclusion beyond that which common sense suggests.
Inspectors are very unlikely to see much direct evidence
of bullying or its effects and we should not pretend otherwise.
Empirical research into the impact of bullying on pupils' attainment
also poses considerable methodological problems. That said, inspectors
will continue to be vigilant on all aspects of pupils' behaviour
and on school policies to deal with bullying.
We note the Committee's enthusiasm for swimming and
will, in due course, supply more detail as a result of our recent
survey.
We note the Committee's 'firmly held view' that statements
made by HMCI should be rooted in inspection evidence. We note,
also, that the Committee gives no examples of statements made
by HMCI which are not rooted in fact.
Chris Woodhead
| 
