Memorandum submitted by Harrow Council
for Racial Justice
1. The Harrow Council for Justice, established
in 1992, is committed to creating a society based in equity and
social justice. Its aims and work are based upon a rigorous structural
analysis of socio-political and economic situations which affect
the quality of life, particularly of those who are deprived, vulnerable
and under-represented.
1.1 The Council members include parents,
teachers, school inspectors, social workers and quality assurance
managers who are well experienced in MoD and BS procedures.
1.2 The work of the Council is not limited
to Harrow. Over the years, the HCRJ has made substantial contributions
towards developing the criminal justice system, community consultations,
youth and community service, and community care and education
for all. More about the Council and its work is on our website.
2. In our experience Ofsted listens and
learns, has successfully fulfilled its role and has effectively
contributed towards:
— developing a culture of standardisation
in education
— improving the work of the education
providers, particularly the consistency of practices nationally
— raising stakeholders' awareness of
the education provision and outcomes, enabling them to influence
the work of the education providers
— raising education standards
Areas for improvement include:
— sustained focus on teaching
— close scrutiny of inspectors deployment
by the contactors and their working conditions
2.1 Commentary: in the 1980s a wider consensus
of opinion emerged about an urgent need to create consistency
in what the schools teach and how they teach it. Subsequent initiatives
included creating an education `market' so that schools were competing
against each other for "customers" (pupils), the National
Curriculum, National Curriculum Assessments and Ofsted.
2.1.1 Since all these initiatives met some
resentment, when Ofsted started (in 1993) monitoring the work
of the schools through inspections, it was mostly seen as an external
intruder. Ofsted met this challenge successfully and over the
years developed respect for its work to a point that the inspections
are now considered as friendly and effective means for professional
development, sharpening up management practices and raising standards.
2.1.2 Ofsted publications like the inspection
reports and wealth of the statistical information, including the
performance data (for example, the league tables based on value
added scores and test/examination results) have enabled parents
and others to compare outcomes and demand improvement. For example,
we have noticed a shift in parents' expectations about the school—from
the key focus on pastoral aspects before to academic achievements
now and weighing the education providers in terms of what they
offer and achieve.
As an example of how communities can effectively
build upon inspection findings, we enclose a copy of "Every
Child Matters (ECM) in Harrow setting"—our review of
the Harrow LEA.[7]
2.1.3 The questions/issues skilfully raised
by the inspectors during the inspection process as well as the
readily available inspection reports and examples of good work,
enable schools to adopt well proven good practices. It is not
uncommon to see schools hundreds of miles apart using similar
strategies to tackle behavioural problems or to interest and motivate
disaffected pupils, for example.
2.1.4 Extensive focus on teaching and firmly
measuring its effectiveness in terms of pupils' achievement have
resulted in much improved teaching, helpfully raising education
standards. Sharp focus on how learning is planned and the lesson
observations by the senior managers are now common features of
most schools.
2.1.5 Whilst Ofsted school inspections,
started in 1993, were needed to monitor the teaching and learning
and set a framework of coherent practices, there has been strong
feeling that eventually it will be the education providers that
have to evaluate and monitor their own work, especially as this
would be politically and financially more acceptable. In line
with such a rationalisation and having successfully achieved its
previously set key objectives, Ofsted now moves to the stage where
it focuses on checking the education providers self-evaluation
as well as the overall factors that determine the quality of the
providers' work rather than the teaching—an industry based
model for quality assurance.
2.1.6 Ofsted has successfully gone through
a process of development over years. The new inspection arrangements
under the provisions of the Education Act 2005 and within the
available budget are appropriate and imaginative, signifying Ofsted's
maturity, experience and thoughtfulness.
2.2 However, Ofsted can still improve its
work and we recommend the following:
2.2.1 Increased lesson observations during
the inspection, because:
— differentiated teaching based on
pupils' individual or collective needs, though improved over the
years, is still a matter of significant concern and that by helping
each child to do their best, we can improve achievement by all
groups of pupil and can help improve our overall community
2.2.2 Ofsted to urgently, actively and closely
monitor the deployment and working conditions of the inspectors
as an important aspect of their quality assurance measures, because:
— Ofsted has been of the view that
the working conditions of the inspectors are a matter between
the inspectors and contractors, over-looking that the long working
hours, expectations of mechanical rather than the qualitative
work by inspectors, do it or . . . attitudes by some RgIs (the
lead inspector) and contractors have serious implications for
the quality of inspections
— under the new arrangements there
are fewer RISPS and the inspector deployment is almost entirely
through them—there are already indications that the contractors
are treating inspectors in a very cavalier manner
— guidance like, "it is useful
to assign aspects of the school to particular team members, who
can then lead on collecting and synthesising evidence and drafting
report sections" and "the lead inspector must decide
whether bullet points or continuous prose are required from team
members" can lead to inconsistent practices and a situation
can arise where an inspector who is in for the inspection for
only one day might finish up in gathering evidence for the aspect
as well as writing the paragraph for the report (this was a common
practice under the Section 10 inspections)
3. The proposals for a single inspectorate
for children and learners: The HCRJ sympathises with the argument
for having a single inspectorate, particularly as it would bring
the vocational learning into the mainstream, However, we have
reservations about the effectiveness of such an initiative which
no doubt merits in terms of cutting down public service inspectorates
from eleven to four.
3.1 We are not sure about the possibilities
of having a pool of expertise to check multiple provisions for
the diverse needs of children and learners, ranging from the culturally
sensitive social care and support to health care, including mental
health, to provisions for young offenders, including the strategies
for their social integration. Also, that the role of social care
providers, including private and voluntary sectors, is different
than those providing education.
3.2 Given that present inspectorates struggle
in measuring the outcomes of their respective services, it would
be a nightmare for a single inspectorate to evaluate complex outcomes.
Also, we are not at all sure how a single inspectorate could have
an authoritative voice in speaking for the needs of all children
and learners.
4. Having checked with the Education and
Skills Committee secretariat, we have sent a copy of the submission
to Ofsted since we believe in openness where most of our communications
are public.
September 2005
7 Not printed. Back
| 
