Supplementary memorandum submitted by
Ofsted
In the Education and Skills Select Committee
on "The Work of Ofsted", David Chaytor MP asked Ofsted
about the progress achieved on the 18 issues for consideration
raised by the joint report between Ofsted and the Institute of
Education, The Impact of Inspection. [2]Please
find below a summary of the progress achieved to date on each
one.
1. Ofsted and the Government need to consider
the implications of an apparent tension between the purposes of
inspection, established in statute and the Inspection Principles
described by the Office for Public Service Reform, with particular
reference to responsibility for the improvement of service providers
(Chapter 1).
PROGRESS
Her Majesty's Chief Inspector (HMCI) remains
of the view that during the process, the task of inspection should
be kept separate from the task of improvement. However, the report
on the impact of inspection states that there is a probable link
between inspection and improvement in schools, and that frequency
of follow-up is an important ingredient in securing improvement.
The change from a six year cycle for the inspection of all schools
in England to a three year cycle will therefore strengthen school
improvement between inspections. Also, the intensity of scrutiny
by Ofsted of schools that are judged to be inadequate will ensure
that improvement is driven forward where it is most needed.
In addition, Ofsted remains committed to evaluating
the impact of inspection and the part that it plays in early years,
school and college improvement.
Ofsted is evaluating the impact of the new Section
5 school inspections by drawing upon a range of evidence:
the views of head teachers and other
school staff of the quality of the inspection process and of its
helpfulness in setting an agenda for improvement, both at whole-school
level and through feedback to individual teachers;
scrutiny of reports and data from
successive inspections to monitor the progress from one inspection
to the next of schools nationally and of sampled case study schools;
detailed information about the progress
of schools causing concern from HMI monitoring letters. In schools
made subject to a Notice to Improve rather than to special measures,
an inspection judgement has been made that the leaders and managers
have the capacity to bring about improvement. Such schools will
be re-inspected after a year so that it will become apparent how
many have improved significantly in the wake of their inspections
and in relation to the issues identified;
the progress made by successful schools
in maintaining high standards and the effectiveness of inspection
in identifying those aspects of their provision which are capable
of improvement;
the quality of written reports and
of the agenda for improvement which they provide for schools;
and
the developing quality of schools'
self-evaluation as it is reflected in the self-evaluation form
and in the inspection judgements made on this aspect of leadership
and management.
In addition, Ofsted is canvassing the views of
head teachers about the costs and burdens of Section 5 inspections
in comparison with those associated with the Section 10 arrangements.
Work is under way to elicit the views of parents, pupils and governors
about the effects of Section 5 inspections in a sample of schools.
2. Ofsted should consider what more could
be done to integrate inspections with other inspectorial visits
in order to follow up the findings of inspection within the resources
available and promote improvement through inspection more strongly
(Chapter 2).
PROGRESS
The proposals to extend the work of Ofsted to
include some of the work currently undertaken by the Commission
for Social Care Inspection and the Adult Learning Inspectorate
will provide a more integrated approach to inspection.
Also, substantial progress has been achieved
through the development of Joint Area Reviews of Children's Services.
These have integrated what were previously local education authority
(LEA) inspections, children's services inspections, healthcare
commission inspections of children's services and youth service
inspections. The combination of inspection reporting and the work
of the Children's Services Improvement Advisors is designed to
promote improvement. In school inspections, guidance to inspectors
emphasises the importance of feedback to teachers and through
that contributes to their professional development.
3. Self-evaluation or assessment is a necessary
part of the development planning and quality improvement of providers,
not an end in itself. It can contribute usefully to planning an
inspection and can act as an indicator of management competence.
Too great a reliance on self-evaluation findings, however, can
render inspection unreliable. For these reasons, therefore, inspection
should continue to promote and provide training in self-evaluation
and judge its quality, but not use validated self evaluation as
a proxy for inspectors' judgements (Chapter 4).
PROGRESS
In March 2005 the DfES and Ofsted published guidance
for schools[3]
on the link between self evaluation and school improvement. This
guidance also referred to how schools could use the self-evaluation
form for their development and for the inspection process. The
self-evaluation form is now in use by schools. There has been
an increase in the proportion of schools that provide good or
better self-evaluation and a decrease in those that are unsatisfactory
in recent years.
The new section 5 inspections for schools take
account of the self-evaluation but also draw on inspectors' judgements
on a range of areas to provide the final view of the quality of
education for each school. Please refer to the note on paragraph
7 for comments on the integral role of objective performance data
within the inspection process.
4. More should be done to inform users,
particularly learners, about inspection findings. Ofsted should
consider whether and how appropriate summaries of inspection reports
could be provided to pupils of school age, and students in post-compulsory
and teacher education as is already done by some institutions.
Parents strongly favour inspections and many make use of inspection
reports in selecting schools, but they would welcome more up-to-date
reports on their schools, preferably annual reports (Chapter 7).
Ofsted should also consider how socially and economically disadvantaged
parents might become better informed about its work.
PROGRESS
From September 2005 all school inspections are
followed up with a letter to pupils outlining the main strengths
and weaknesses of the school. Also, from the same month the Joint
Area Reviews have produced summative reports for young people,
alongside the main reports for the local authority being inspected.
The new Section 5 inspections lead to reports that are written
in a style that takes account of parents and their need for clear
information.
Work is still under way to elicit the views of
parents about the Section 5 inspection arrangements but a small
sample of parents interviewed during the pilot project for the
new arrangements reported favourably on the accessibility and
clarity of the new style of reports.
5. New models of inspection should continue
to ensure that there are practical arrangements for involving
learners and parents in the inspection process and seeking their
views during the inspection visit (Chapter 6). Parents and learners
should always have avenues for expressing their views and experiences
to inspectors.
PROGRESS
In school inspections, parents now receive a
letter informing them of the forthcoming inspection and asking
them to complete a brief questionnaire. Also, parents are encouraged
to meet with the inspector if they wish to express their views
more fully. The views of pupils are sought both through the school
self-evaluation and through direct conversations that inspectors
have with pupils during the inspection visit. Since September
2003, inspectors have had to explicitly make a judgement about,
and report on, pupils' views of schools. In Joint Area Reviews,
inspectors meet with youth forums and other youth and children
consultative organisations as part of the gathering of the views
of the young people.
6. Ofsted, funding providers and responsible
authorities should together seek to maximise the impact of all
inspections, recognising that the main conditions or levers for
implementation of inspection findings include (Chapters 2 and
3):
competent and effective inspections;
clearly reported findings and areas
for improvement;
understanding and acceptance of the
findings by the provider;
leadership that can generate and
implement a strategy for implementing inspection outcomes, including
effective action planning;
identification of any resources and
support needed to effect improvement;
planned external follow-up to assess
the progress made; and
high stakes, where inspection has
the potential to affect funding or public esteem for the provider.
PROGRESS
Quality assurance on inspections remains a strong
feature of the work of Ofsted. The competence of inspectors has
been assisted by a reduction from a large number to five regional
inspection service providers and one national inspection service
provider, allowing more consistency in communication and the maintenance
of standards.
The action of the Department for Education and
Skills (DfES) provides new improvement roles at school and local
authority level. The work is closely linked to the outcomes of
inspection and provides the main lever for the link between the
inspection and subsequent improvement. Also, for schools that
are in special measures, the expectations for significant improvement
within the year following them being placed in that category increase
the impact of inspection.
7. Improvement strategies should give greater
priority to providers whose performance does not cause concern
but is not judged as good or effective, and should focus on building
the capacity to improve (Chapters 3 and 4).
PROGRESS
More work is needed to raise achievement in schools
and colleges that are judged to be only satisfactory in their
overall effectiveness. This has been a focus of the most recent
report by HMCI.
A key component in capacity building is the use
of effective self-evaluation, so that the institution knows itself
well. This has been referred to in the most recent HMCI Annual
Report. Ofsted has been taking measures to ensure that institutions
use the self-evaluation process intelligently, through guidance
and emphasis of its importance for inspection.
The new 2005 inspection schedule makes a close
link between the pupils' achievement and progress and the judgements
on leadership and the overall effectiveness of the school. The
rigour of the inspection process has increased over time; performance
which would have been considered good six years ago might now
be evaluated as satisfactory on the four-point scale of judgements
and may well emerge as an issue for the school to address in the
wake of inspection. The guidance for inspectors makes it clear
that no school can be judged to be good unless learners are judged
to make good progress. Guidance on what constitutes inadequate
progress is also sharply focused and requires inspectors to draw
upon the powerful progress measures in the new contextual value
added PANDAs. The criteria for judgements about progress make
it clear that the key consideration is the progress made by pupils
from their starting points and in relation to challenging targets.
Ofsted attaches great importance to the use by
schools of self-evaluation as the basis of improvement and, within
the new Section 5 arrangements, as central to the inspection process.
HMCI's annual report for 2003-04 noted both the need for improvement
in the quality of secondary schools' self-evaluation and at the
same time a fall in the proportion which was unsatisfactory, from
22% in 2000 to 11% in 2003-04. The corresponding reduction in
primary phase was from 19% to 9%. No trend was shown for special
schools but self-evaluation was unsatisfactory in one in eight
inspections for the sector during 2003-04. It is too early to
draw conclusions from the first tranche of inspections in the
autumn term, 2005 but the early evidence indicates a continuation
of the improving trend in schools' self-evaluation.
8. Ofsted should seek opportunities to reduce
inspection reliance on the provision of documentary evidence in
some sectors, particularly the inspection of local education authorities,
or children's services provision in the future, in order to reduce
the demands made on such providers (Chapter 6).
PROGRESS
The Annual Performance Assessment for each local
authority requests very few documents other than the Children
and Young People's Plan or its equivalent(s) and a self-assessment.
If authorities wish to draw our attention to other papers they
are asked to provide only the relevant extract or provide us with
a hyperlink to a website copy. If we require other information,
such as context, we use links with other websites to access published
reports (ie the Audit Commission website to look at the latest
Auditor's report on an authority).
Ofsted has sought to reduce the burden of inspection
on schools by limiting the quantity of documentation which head
teachers are required to produce in advance of inspection. One
of the themes emerging from a recent telephone survey of schools
inspected in the last term of the Section 10 regime was the head
teachers' perception that their need to reproduce documents for
inspection purposes has reduced significantly since the last cycle.
This was in part because the requirements were fewer but head
teachers have also become increasingly aware that the focus of
inspection is the pupils' achievement and the quality of the provision.
As a result they are less inclined to generate superfluous paper.
9. There is a strong case for giving little
or no notice of inspections, in order to reduce pre-inspection
stress and increase the validity of inspection judgements that
are based on observation of providers at work. This need not preclude
the use of the development plan as a starting point, self-evaluation
evidence nor opportunities for users to give their views. Such
a strategy would also be ineffective if the interval between inspections
is too predictable (Chapter 7).
PROGRESS
Significant progress had been achieved. The school
inspection process now typically gives two days' notice to the
school and reduces stress and preparation time, whilst giving
a more realistic assessment of the school.
The feedback from head teachers during the pilot
phase of the new inspection arrangements indicated that most preferred
the new system and that satisfaction levels increased during the
lifetime of the pilot project. The burden on schools is likely
to decrease as the writing of the self-evaluation form becomes
absorbed within the regular annual cycle of self-review and improvement
planning.
In relation to our work in early years, Childcare
Inspectors (CCIs) ring childminders the week before the planned
inspection to check what days they will not be at home during
the week identified for the visit. This reduces the number of
wasted visits as childminders are often out during the day taking
the children they mind to the park, zoo, shops and so on. These
phone calls also allow inspectors to check that childminders will
actually be taking care of children at the time of the planned
visit, and that they have completed their self evaluation form.
There has been no adverse reaction from childminders about these
arrangements, and the National Childminders Association continues
to fully support these arrangements which began in April 2005.
As for day care settings such as nurseries and
pre-schools which are usually open each working day, CCIs now
normally arrive to carry out inspections without prior notice.
Once again there has been little adverse reaction to this, with
many providers and their representative organisations stating
that they prefer these arrangements. They feel that there is now
a more even playing field as providers are no longer able to put
on a special show for the inspection visit. We are working with
the representative organisations to tackle some of the inevitable
teething problems, such as some smaller settings, such as playgroups,
keeping their documentation "off site", and owners not
being able to plan ahead to be on site to hear oral feedback from
inspectors at the end of the inspection visit.
10. Stronger mechanisms including further
research are needed to test regularly the reliability and consistency
of inspectors' judgements so as to assure their accuracy, including
(Chapters 4 and 5):
judgements of the quality of teaching
and learning;
the "halo" effect of using
self-evaluation or self-assessment evidence;
judgements about curriculum leadership.
PROGRESS
New quality assurance systems for school inspections
have been introduced from September 2005. The reliability and
consistency of inspectors' judgements are evaluated and where
necessary modified through a stepped approach to monitoring the
inspections. All inspection reports are now read and checked for
reliability and consistency by one of Her Majesty's Inspectors.
Additionally, a sample of inspection visits is checked through
a quality assurance mentor.
The guidance for inspectors indicates that judgements
about pupils' progress should be informed by the contextual value
added data in the PANDA document. This ensures that each inspection
of mainstream schools draws upon objective information which cannot
be set aside without a convincing explanation, the evidence for
which will be reviewed by quality assurance readers. Judgements
about teaching, learning and the appropriateness of curricular
provision must also take account of the quantitative evidence
of the value added data.
11. Ofsted and the Department for Education
and Skills should continue to promote national approaches to self-evaluation
that are consistent with known characteristics of provider effectiveness
and the criteria used by inspectors. These approaches should give
priority to outcomes for learners, teaching and learning and inclusion,
be evidence-based and be carefully focused so as to ensure that
additional workload is kept to a minimum. (Chapter 4).
PROGRESS
As indicated in comments over issues 3 and 7,
joint work by the DfES and Ofsted has ensured that there is a
national reference point for effective self-evaluation. This provides
a strong focus on outcomes for learners. The illustrations from
schools demonstrate how evidence is needed to support any statements
about outcomes.
Ofsted is monitoring the quality of self-evaluation
forms. An assessment of the forms used for the first tranche of
Section 5 inspections is due at the end of November 2005.
12. Ofsted's evidence base has greater potential
for use by external researchers but is not heavily used by them
(Chapter 7). Ofsted should investigate ways to create stronger
links with the most capable researchers in order to maximise the
potential of their complementary data.
PROGRESS
There are specific examples of research being
carried out by universities and the National College for School
Leadership, where Ofsted data is shared. In addition, there has
been active encouragement for universities and researchers to
seek access to relevant data held by Ofsted. Comprehensive promotion
of use of this data is being undertaken through networked parts
of the research community such as the National Educational Research
Forum.
13. Ofsted's technical and operational collaboration
with other inspectorates, both in the UK and overseas, has been
beneficial and should continue (Chapter 7). Ofsted has much expertise
that may have wider applicability in the evaluation of public
and private services or other quality improvement schemes (Chapter
4).
PROGRESS
Ofsted continues to be an active partner in contact
with other inspectorates. Within the United Kingdom, regular contact
is held at Chief Inspector level across the four regions over
educational issues. Ofsted maintains regular contact with the
other statutory inspectorates for England. International collaboration
continues through participation with the Standing International
Conference of Inspectorates. Also, in close collaboration with
the British Council, Ofsted engages in development and improvement
work for inspectorates directly with countries that request it
and where it is a recognised priority.
14. Subject to statutory constraints, Ofsted
should take greater steps to tailor inspections to the needs of
institutions and their users, through regular risk assessment,
leading to proportionate inspection. Ofsted should also be mindful
of the need to safeguard individual entitlement and equity through
an inspection process that is sufficient to do justice to diversity
issues and inclusion (Chapters 5 and 9).
PROGRESS
Work is underway to plan more proportional inspections
for schools. These will be based on risk assessment and will give
"light touch" inspections for very effective schools,
and more substantial inspection to schools that are less effective.
The design of the Joint Area Reviews also includes a risk assessment
so that there is a focus of the review on key areas of risk. All
inspections continue to take careful account of issues of diversity
and inclusion.
15. Ofsted should seek opportunities to
ensure greater cohesion between its inspection regimes, not only
through continuing the development of common frameworks, but also
through ensuring that institutional inspections and thematic inspection
visits complement, reinforce and inform each other (Chapter 9).
PROGRESS
Procedures for routine school inspections now
have much in common with those associated with monitoring visits
to schools causing concern. Both types of inspection take place
at short notice and typically involve two-day visits by small
teams. The evidence gathered during SCC visits can readily be
used as the basis of a Section 5 report, where it is appropriate
to remove a school from a category of concern or to make it subject
to one.
A common grading scale is used for evaluating
the aspects of provision and of pupil achievement from Foundation
Stage to post-16 provision. While specific guidance is provided
for inspectors in assessing provision for learners of different
ages and levels of need, in essentials the inspection schedule
is common to all phases and to the evaluation of provision in
special education. The 2005 Framework for the inspection of schools
makes explicit a common set of characteristics to inspection in
schools and other post-16 provision from early childhood to the
age of 19. Integral to this common approach is evaluation of schools'
provision and performance in relation to the Every Child Matters
outcomes. The deployment of HMI to lead a high proportion of school
inspections makes for further cohesion within the school inspection
system.
16. Ofsted should continue to speak and
report frankly about issues in education and care on behalf and
in the interests of those who use and rely on this provision,
while giving the best possible quality assessment to those who
provide it (Chapter 8).
PROGRESS
Ofsted continues to provide a wide range of publications.
From the time of the publication of the report on the impact of
inspection through to the Education Select Committee hearing,
15 subject survey reports and 56 thematic reports (covering cross
curricular themes) were published. In addition Ofsted provides
a termly newsletter to schools called Ofsted Direct, which keeps
schools up-to-date on new developments. All publications follow
a very high standard of quality assurance and many of the thematic
publications provide descriptions of excellent or outstanding
practice.
17. When evaluating government policy initiatives,
Ofsted needs to be on its guard to ensure that its closeness to
policy development does not render subsequent evaluation of the
implementation of policy either partial or circular in the sense
that it provides a justification of the policy (Chapters 1 and
7).
PROGRESS
Over the years this has been a great strength
of Ofsted. Successive HMCI's have always stated with confidence
that they report with "neither fear nor favour" and
that position continues. Today it is clear from the Annual Reports,
HMCI speeches and thematic reports, that there is no risk of compromising
independent and robust inspection judgements they remain well
separated from policy making.
18. A future evaluation of this type should
focus more on the impact of inspections on sectors that have yet
to enter a second cycle, and quality improvement in the early
years and provision for diverse needs. It should also focus more
on the impact of inspection on special schools and pupil referral
units, which have not been covered in detail here.
PROGRESS
The most recent HMCI Annual Report dedicated
one of the three sections to reviewing the impact of inspection.
It covers early years work and also a study of schools visited
by HMI, including special schools. It also comments on the analysis
of post-inspection questionnaires, which include pupil referral
units. In addition, Ofsted is considering how it can best undertake
a future review of its impact. Any future reviews will consider
the impact of the recent changes to the framework for inspection.
Ofsted's strategies for evaluating the impact
of the new school inspection arrangements do not rely on the analysis
of performance in national tests and examinations and are therefore
as applicable to special schools and to pupil referral units as
to mainstream provision. The focus is on the progress made by
institutions from one inspection to the next and on head teachers'
perceptions of the usefulness of inspection in contributing to
the agenda for improvement. For sampling purposes, the Research
Analysis and International Division within Ofsted is asked to
supply details of a range of schools by type, age range and geographical
location.
November 2005
2 Improvement through inspection-an evaluation of the
impact of Ofsted's work: HMI publication 2244 July 2004. Back
3
A New Relationship with Schools: Improving Performance Through
School Self-Evaluation. March 2004. DfES-1290-2005DOC-EN. Back
|