Memorandum submitted by the Association
of Lay Inspectors
While the new Framework is an improvement on
the previous versions the way in which it has been introduced
has been clumsy, resulting in much uncertainty for inspectors
and providers. This, coupled with an unwieldy form of compulsory
training, and the shortening of inspection time, has caused many
inspectors to quit, and others to reserve judgement as to whether
they should.
The recruitment of new lay inspectors has similarly
been less successful than hoped for. A broader social and ethnic
mix than the current one has not been obtained, training has been
too limited, and none of those applying a year ago has yet been
enrolled, or employed on the 2003 round.
To bring lay skills and perspective to bear,
a lay inspector must be attached, by law, to the inspection of
every school, including those where pupils are generally aged
up to 18 in sixth forms. No lay inspector, however, is ever used
in the inspection of the establishments other than schools for
the education of those aged 14-19, such as colleges. Lay inspectors
are generally admitted to perform a valuable function for the
public in the inspection process and this anomaly should therefore
be corrected.
As regards the first point above (2003 Framework
arrangements):
1. Consultation on some aspects of the proposed
process was little and early (Spring 2002). Key elements did not
begin to emerge until the turn of 2003, and inspection providers
had considerable uncertainty trying to assess practical implications
when putting their bids together in January. Quite surprisingly,
for instance, the template for the new format of inspection reports,
affecting their size and who was to write them, was only determined
as late as the summer of 2003.
2. The Committee will no doubt hear from
many others as regards the pain caused by the "one size fits
all" style of compulsory training for understanding and applying
the new Framework. Every inspector was unnecessarily bruised,
and many decided there and then to call it a day.
3. Less time is now allocated to every inspection,
but the number of "black boxes" on which a judgement
has to be scored (from 1-7) has more than doubled. Inspection
now calls for incisive investigation, but broad judgements about
the effectiveness and compliance of each school continue to have
to be made. Time for the inspection of primary schools is particularly
curtailed. Consequences are:
(b)
inspection work becoming less worthwhile to the individual
inspector, followed by their possible detachment from it.
4. The larger Regions now used for the allocation
of inspections are much too large. The rationale is based upon
that of Ofsted's local centres, but the distances involved when
agreeing in principle to undertake an inspection in any one region
can vary by over 100 miles. This is a further factor dismaying
inspectors working to the new Framework in a context of less time
and money.
18 October 2003
| 
