3. Memorandum submitted by
the National Union of Teachers
I thought that it would be helpful if I sent
you a letter setting out some questions which arise from the HMCI
report for 2001-02. It is a detailed report and the questions
set out below are not inclusive. There are other, equally pertinent,
questions that arise from the report.
COMMENTARY
1. HMCI notes that approximately 70% of
teaching is now judged good or better and 26% is unsatisfactory.
He then poses the question "is satisfactory good enough given
the demands of pupils and the rising expectations of wider society?"
— How would HMCI define "satisfactory"
in relation to teaching? In what way(s) does his definition differ
from that of the Oxford English dictionary "sufficient, adequate:
(of an argument) convincing?"
— How does HMCI resolve the tension
between his comment that in schools facing the most challenging
circumstances, "satisfactory teaching may not be sufficient
to achieve high standards" and the statement on the following
page that "there remains some groups of pupils and some schools
for whom raising standards remains an almost intractable challenge?"
Does HMCI believe that individual teachers and schools are able
to overcome wider, societal problems in all cases by improved
teaching?
— What impact does HMCI believe his
comments would have on teachers, particularly those working in
schools in challenging circumstances?
2. The report acknowledges the difficulties
facing schools in challenging circumstances, often relating to
socio-economic and other factors beyond schools' control and that
"raising the measurable outcomes of these schools in terms
of performance in public examinations is proving to be a real
challenge, despite "teachers working exceptionally hard and
with intense dedication."
— Given the satisfactory or better
provision offered by the majority of such schools, to what does
HMCI attribute the continuing underperformance of pupils? To what
extent does HMCI believe that schools are able to overcome the
socio-economic background of their intake?
— Does HMCI believe that the achievements
of schools in challenging circumstances are adequately acknowledged
and celebrated currently?
3. There is a section of the report on the
adverse impact of Traveller and refugee pupils in challenging
secondary schools, which was widely reported in the press.
— Where is the evidence for this finding?
4. HMCI warns against two dangers in relation
to Ofsted's work; that inspection should not be "allowed
to wither on the vine, particularly as schools and other institutions
become more proficient at self-evaluation" and that Ofsted
should not be thought to be "impervious to criticism".
— Would HMCI agree that inspection
has, and will continue to evolve to reflect schools' increased
proficiency in self-evaluation? Given the emphasis on self-evaluation
in the revised Section 10 inspection framework, which will become
operational in September 2003, in what ways does HMCI envisage
external inspection might evolve in the next five years?
— What further examples can HMCI give
of Ofsted's "willingness to listen to what others say and
to improve our practices and procedures", which are unrelated
to the Government's commitment to reduce bureaucracy in schools?
PRIMARY AND
NURSERY SCHOOLS
5. The report finds that in the Foundation
Stage, weaknesses in personal, social and emotional development
and physical development are usually due to "children's independence
and initiative being restricted, and insufficient challenge and
access to outdoor play facilities in reception classes" (Paragraph
14).
— Could HMCI expand on the types of
activities and/or pedagogy which restrict children's independence
and initiative? Is there any correlation between this finding
and particular types of early years setting and/or practitioner?
— What steps does HMCI believe are
necessary to ensure that all reception classes have access to
appropriate outdoor play facilities?
6. In relation to the standards achieved
by pupils, the report notes that at Key Stage 1 there has been
little improvement in results for reading and writing and, to
a lesser extent, in mathematics and that at Key Stage 2, the Government's
targets for English and mathematics were not met (Paragraph 19-20).
— How sustainable does HMCI think continual
improvement in the rates of pupil attainment for all schools and
pupils is?
— What further measures does HMCI think
are necessary in order to reach the Government's Key Stage 2 targets
for 2004?
7. The report states that "the gulf
between what pupils achieve in the core subjects and in the rest
of the curriculum remains a concern" (Paragraph 17). Later
in the section, concern is also expressed regarding the quality
of subject leadership (Paragraph 29) and the quality of teaching
(Paragraph 40) for foundation subjects in comparison to that for
the core subjects.
— How does HMCI account for the variation
in pupils' and teachers' performance for core and foundation subjects?
— Would HMCI agree that the national
focus on the core subjects is now counter-productive, in that
schools' energies and resources have become unbalanced in many
schools, leading to poorer quality provision in the foundation
subjects?
8. The report notes that "some schools
find the management of an increasing number of assistants something
of a challenge, particularly as many teaching assistants work
with several classes in a variety of ways and often work part-time.
Although this is improving, few schools consider seriously how
to use assistants in ways which reduce teachers' workload"
(Paragraph 36). Later in the section, the report comments "when
mainstream teachers and specialist support staff work closely
together in the classroom, this helps pupils with diverse needs
to make good progress" (Paragraph 48).
— To what extent does HMCI believe
that teaching assistants, rather than administrative support staff,
can reduce teachers' workload? Would HMCI give some practical
examples of how schools might achieve this?
— Would HMCI agree that the model of
teacher and teaching assistant working together in the classroom
provides the most effective means of supporting pupils?
— What does HMCI believe is the greatest
benefit of the increased use of teaching assistants' support for
pupils or reduction of teacher workload? What evidence does Ofsted
have of these benefits?
9. The report suggests that "the quality
of teaching in lessons where pupils are taught in sets of similar
ability—most frequently seen in English and mathematics—is
marginally better than in mixed ability classes" (Paragraph
39).
— Does HMCI believe this finding is
attributable to the higher instance of good or better teaching
in the core subjects or to the methods of classroom organisation?
— Does HMCI think there is a sufficient
evidence base for the Government's promotion of "setting"
in primary schools?
10. The report identifies that access to
support staff for pupils with EAL is often only available to help
pupils in the early stages of learning English, with advanced
bilingual pupils as a consequence not extending their English
language competence to levels of which they should be capable
(Paragraph 48).
— Does HMCI believe that this finding
has implications for the funding of pupils with EAL?
11. The report finds that "a relatively
low proportion—about one in 16—of primary schools
having a full inspection can demonstrate the ability to combine
high standards in the core subjects with a particularly rich and
varied curriculum" (Paragraph 56).
— Does HMCI believe that the above
findings provide firm evidence of an unacceptable narrowing of
the primary curriculum in the majority of schools, due to an over-emphasis
on end of Key Stage tests and results?
— Would HMCI agree that Ofsted's report
on the primary curriculum last year, which has been widely cited
by Government as evidence that the primary curriculum has not
been adversely affected by the end of Key Stage tests and targets,
presents examples of best practice rather than a report on practice
in primary schools in general?
12. The report identified that in one in
12 schools, there is not a strong commitment to Equal Opportunities
and access is not provided to the full curriculum for all pupils
(Paragraph 57).
— Does HMCI aggress that QCA has much
to do to enable all schools to offer a positive approach to cultural
diversity within the curriculum?
13. The report identified an on-going issue
about universal access to schooling for Traveller pupils (Paragraph
58).
— Does HMCI see a role for inspection
of LEAs to pick up the issue of access to schooling for Traveller
pupils?
14. It is reported that in Early Excellence
Centres "the quality of education is good, but with a few
exceptions is not as good as in maintained nursery schools"
(Paragraph 72).
— How does HMCI account for this finding?
— Does HMCI believe that the increased
emphasis on integration of childcare and educational provision
in the early years may have a detrimental effect on early years
education standards?
SECONDARY SCHOOLS
15. Other than the finding that the proportion
of pupils achieving five A*-C grades at GCSE is higher overall
in specialist schools than in other schools, (Paragraph 78) there
is very little information on specialist schools.
— Why does HMCI's report not refer
to the October 2001 study of specialist schools?
16. The report states that "the improvement
in the schools with the highest level of social disadvantage has
been greater than any other group of schools" (Paragraph
79).
— Why does HMCI think that this is
the case?
17. Paragraph 95 of the report comments
on the importance of training for all staff in raising minority
ethnic pupil achievement.
— Does HMCI have figures for the number
of schools and teachers who have undertaken training in strategies
to raise ethnic minority achievement?
— What factors does HMCI believe are
the main barriers to schools undertaking training in minority
ethnic achievement?
18. The report states that the exclusion
rate of Black pupils has halved in the last five years but it
still almost three times greater than that of white pupils (Paragraph
105).
— Why does HMCI believe that Black
pupils are three times more likely to be excluded, and what further
work can be done in this area?
19. It is stated that there is "a mixed
and sometimes slight effect on attainment in the foundation subjects,
but there are some improvements in the analysis of information
and the articulation of ideas as a result of the strategy"
(Paragraph 113).
— How does HMCI think that the Key
Stage 3 strategy has impacted on the delivery of foundation subjects
at Key Stage 3?
20. The report notes that the use of formative
assessment is "still good or better in only one-third of
schools inspected in 2001-02" (Paragraph 121).
— Would HMCI expand on how this could
be improved upon?
21. The report comments, in relation to
the Key Stage 3 Strategy that "one of the challenges facing
the lead teachers in each strand is to disseminate the ideas and
approaches encountered on training courses to other colleagues"
(Paragraph 116).
— What does HMCI consider to be the
most effecting approaches to professional development to support
the Key Stage 3 strategy?
— Would HMCI expand on the other challenges
related to the Key Stage 3 Strategy facing lead teachers, if dissemination
of training is identified as only one of the issue?
POST—COMPULSORY
EDUCATION
22. The report emphasises that low attainers
aged 16 often have "inadequate access to education and training"
(Main findings, page 31). Later in the section, in relation to
FE provision, the report notes that "the contrast between
the relative worth of choice available to the well qualified A
Level student and the paucity of opportunity open to the less
able across many areas, if not in individual colleges, was stark"
(Paragraph 177).
— How does the HMCI think that this
can be improved upon?
— In HMCI's opinion, how will LSC area
reviews interact with Ofsted area wide inspections to ensure that
the basis for judgements is not purely economic but addresses
the needs of the individual learner?
23. The report outlined how a "pattern
of 16-19 provision has emerged largely without planning or design"
as a result of area-wide inspections (Paragraph 176).
— In HMCI's opinion, how can liaison
arrangements in post-16 provision be made clearer?
24. It is stated that "Nevertheless,
the effect on the curriculum as experienced by the individual
student has been quite modest" (Paragraph 209).
— Could HMCI expand on these findings?
How does HMCI think that Curriculum 2000 can better provide a
broader curriculum, in particular, by referring to the take-up
of Advanced Vocational Certificate of Education (AVCE) programmes?
SPECIAL SCHOOLS
AND PUPIL
REFERRAL UNITS
25. The report notes that "only about
half of schools have set the required whole school performance
targets" (Paragraph 257).
— Can HMCI give an explanation as to
why this is the case?
— Do these schools require greater
support at both local and national level to achieve these requirements?
26. The section on educational standards
is critical of the effect of the Key Stage 3 strategy for English
in special schools and the weaknesses of staff knowledge and consistency
in using "sign and symbol communication systems" (Paragraphs
248-251).
— What measures does HMCI think could
be taken to ensure greater effectiveness of the Key Stage 3 strategy
in raising standards of English in special schools?
— What role does HMCI envisage for
the Teacher Training Agency in providing increased opportunities
for continued professional development in Special Educational
Needs for mainstream class teachers and teachers in special schools
and units?
27. The quality of teaching is found to
be "less than satisfactory" in nearly a third of independent
special schools with curriculum development being seen as "not
strong" in many of the schools (Paragraphs 289-291).
— Does HMCI see this disparity between
special school and mainstream curricular provision as having a
significant affect on the ability of pupils to reintegrate into
mainstream education?
STRATEGIES FOR
SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT
28. The report highlights Ofsted's concerns
about the proportion of schools with serious weaknesses which
fail to make sufficient improvements and subsequently are found
to require special measures. By contrast, schools in special measures
and those which have been removed from special measures have generally
shown continued improvement (Paragraphs 311-320).
— What measures does HMCI think could
be taken to provide more effective support for schools with serious
weaknesses?
— How important a factor is the recruitment
and retention of teachers in the improvements made by schools
in special measures and serious weaknesses? How does HMCI believe
such schools, especially those located in high cost of living
areas, could address staffing difficulties?
29. One of the Government's latest strategies
for addressing underachievement has been outlined in "A New
Specialist System: Transforming Secondary Education" as encouraging
new providers, "including parent and community groups, private
and charitable companies, voluntary groups including church and
faith communities, those offering distinctive educational philosophies"
to bring forward proposals for new schools or to replace existing
schools.
— Does HMCI believe that such providers,
particularly private sector providers, have the expertise to make
a worthwhile contribution to schools which he has described as
posing "an almost intractable challenge?
30. The section on Education Action Zones
(EAZ) presents a mixed picture of the strengths and weaknesses
of the programme in terms of outcomes of pupil achievement and
pupil motivation. It also identifies which strategies have been
successful and which have been less so (Paragraphs 342-353).
— Given that EAZs are to be amalgamated
within Excellence in Cities (EIC) and Excellence Clusters, how
would HMCI recommend that the lessons learnt from the EAZ initiative
continue to inform policy makers and practitioners?
— How would HMCI ensure that the effective
and innovative aspects of EAZ programmes are sustained when they
are incorporated into the more structured EIC and Excellence Clusters
systems?
31. In the section on Excellence in Cities
(Paragraphs 354-370) the findings of OFSTED in relation to Learning
Support Units (LSUs) demonstrate that providing effective on-site
provision for pupils with behaviour problems is a complex issue
which has not always been supported effectively by EIC partnerships.
— Which strategies identified by inspection
evidence does HMCI believe would assist EIC partnerships and participating
schools in ensuring that LSUs can provide maximum support to pupils
and teachers?
TEACHER TRAINING,
DEVELOPMENT AND
SUPPLY
32. The report notes that "a continuing
difficulty for training providers, especially those in large urban
areas, is to find sufficient high-quality school placements for
trainees" and that staffing shortages in some secondary school
subjects such as mathematics and science have exacerbated this
problem (Paragraph 384).
— Does HMCI believe that schools have
sufficient capacity to be able to undertake the increased role
in ITT envisaged by Government in initiatives such as the TTA's
Partnership Promotion initiative?
33. In contrast to last year's Annual Report,
no reference is made to the efficacy of employment-based ITT training
routes, in particular, the Graduate Teacher Programme (GTP).
— Could HMCI provide an up-date on
the quality of GTP provision in comparison to that of other ITT
training routes?
34. The report expresses serious concerns
about the quality of teachers' early professional development
in over half of the schools HMI sampled, in particular, that the
end of induction year review was not used effectively to identify
the development needs of teachers.
— How does HMCI think that the induction
process, including the use of the Career Entry Profile, could
be strengthened to address teachers' early professional development
needs?
— How important a factor does HMCI
believe early professional development is for the recruitment
and retention of teachers?
— What implications does HMCI think
that these findings have for the development of a national early
professional development programme?
35. The report paints a depressing picture
of the recruitment and retention difficulties experienced by many
schools, in particular those in the most challenging circumstances.
It also notes that, whilst the majority of vacancies are eventually
filled, "statistics exclude vacancies that schools are forced
to fill on a temporary basis and give no indication of the quality
of those appointed to vacant posts" (Paragraph 416).
— Would HMCI agree that pupils attending
schools in the most disadvantaged areas are less likely to receive
a high quality education than those attending schools in more
affluent areas?
— What changes would HMCI suggest are
needed to the way statistics on teacher vacancies are collected
in order to give a more accurate picture of school staffing?
36. The report outlines continuing concerns
about the quality of teaching by temporary (supply) teachers (Paragraphs
429-433).
— To what extent does HMCI believe
that a lack of adequate professional development opportunities
have contributed to the poor performance of temporary teachers?
— Given the increased reliance by schools
on teacher supply agencies, and the increased number and profitability
of such agencies, would HMCI agree that teacher supply agencies
should be required to take greater responsibility for the training,
quality and suitability of those teachers they place in schools?
LOCAL EDUCATION
AUTHORITIES
37. The section of HMCI's report on LEAs
confirms the more detailed Ofsted/Audit Commission report "Local
Education Authorities and School Improvement 1996-2001" published
at the end of the first complete LEA inspection cycle. Both reports
highlight the improvement in the performance of LEAs, particularly
among LEAs found to have weaknesses, including those subject to
government intervention (Paragraphs 451-457).
— Is HMCI concerned that private sector
companies involved in outsourcing contracts are "poaching"
the expertise of staff from successful LEAs? What are his views
about the long-term implications for the future career structure
of LEA staff and the sustainability of improvements in LEA performance?
February 2003
| 
