Select Committee on Public Accounts Minutes of Evidence


Examination of Witnesses (Questions 40-59)

DEPARTMENT FOR EDUCATION AND SKILLS AND OFSTED

27 FEBRUARY 2006

  Q40  Mr Khan: My final question is this: the spin of the Report is there are 980,000 pupils in failing schools. Bearing in mind we have seen an improvement, although it is not fast enough, would you say that is the least number of pupils that have ever been in poorly performing schools?

  Mr Bell: Certainly as far as schools in Special Measures are concerned, we know there are fewer pupils in Special Measures schools because of the decline in Special Measures. In relation to the under-achievement of poorly performing schools, the frank answer is we have not had the data at our disposal until recent years and that in itself is an improvement. By giving schools access to data that tells them how well their pupils are doing against other schools they are going to be in an even better position in the future to target improvement on the basis of that data.

  Q41  Greg Clark: Mr Bell, can you confirm that since the NAO conducted this analysis the percentage of poorly performing schools has risen?

  Mr Bell: In relation to Special Measures there has been a slight increase under the new inspection arrangements that started in September 2005.

  Q42  Greg Clark: The answer is yes?

  Mr Bell: Mr Smith may wish to confirm the overall percentage.

  Q43  Greg Clark: We had a letter from Mr Smith to MPs in which he said: "At the other end of the scale the proportion of inspections resulting in schools being placed in categories of concern was 9.3% compared with an average of 8% during the last three years of the old inspection framework".

  Mr Smith: The number of schools in Special Measures as at 31 December 2005, the difference in the numbers was only two. The proportion is different in terms of the numbers of schools that have entered Special Measures.

  Q44  Greg Clark: We are not playing with statistics, the proportion is clearly what counts. You can confirm the proportion has increased.

  Mr Smith: The proportion of schools going into categories has increased from 8% to 9.3%.

  Q45  Greg Clark: So our schools are getting worse?

  Mr Smith: No.

  Q46  Greg Clark: The proportion of the ones that are poorly performed has increased, that sounds to me as if they are getting worse.

  Mr Smith: I think I would take the data over a longer period.

  Q47  Greg Clark: Part of the point that you make is that you have done a lot more inspections in one term—

  Mr Smith: We have.

  Q48  Greg Clark: —than was previously the case.

  Mr Smith: Yes.

  Q49  Greg Clark: This is quite a significant sample size and there is a very significant increase in the proportion that are causing concern, so surely you must agree they are getting worse.

  Mr Smith: The proportion has increased from 8% to 9.3%.

  Q50  Greg Clark: Correct.

  Mr Smith: I would bow to a statistician to say whether that is quite significant; I am not a statistician.

  Q51  Greg Clark: Mr Bell, are our schools getting worse?

  Mr Bell: No, because what we asked Ofsted to do was to raise the bar. We actually said that the inspection standard has to get tougher. I think it was absolutely right that we asked Ofsted to do so because we cannot—

  Q52  Greg Clark: On that point, Mr Smith, you made no mention of the comparator having changed here. You wrote a letter to MPs making a direct comparison between these figures, you did not say that these are non-comparable, which is the point Mr Bell has just made.

  Mr Bell: We were very clear to Ofsted that the inspection system had changed from September 2005. That was made very, very clear to all the schools and those who took part. As a Department we were also very clear that there had been a raising of the bar, that the expectation to be at least satisfactory, to be good or to be outstanding had changed over time. I think that is absolutely appropriate because I do not think we can be in the position of saying what was acceptable as a standard ten years ago is acceptable now.

  Q53  Greg Clark: We are not talking about 10 years ago, we are talking about the last three years. It says that schools placed in categories of concern has increased. Let us move on, we could spend 10 minutes talking about that. On the inspection regime, the NAO Report on page 9, paragraph 24, makes a very clear link between the quality of the leadership and management of the school and its performance, and I think that has come out in some of the earlier questions. Why does the new Ofsted inspection regime no longer evaluate the quality of leadership provided by a headteacher? Mr Bell, you are a former Chief Inspector of Schools.

  Mr Bell: I will answer the question if you wish. It does describe the quality of leadership because in statute Ofsted is required to Report on the quality of leadership. In actual fact, it could be argued with a stronger emphasis on school self-evaluation and the leadership knowing what needs to be done to improve a school it is more strongly focused on the quality of leadership.

  Q54  Greg Clark: Can I give you an example of what I mean by this. I have got an Ofsted inspection report of 2004 before the changes took effect from a High School in Hereford and in the summary of the main inspection there is "judgments of the leadership of the headteacher", in this case it was classed as three, which is good. The same school was looked at in 2005 under the new arrangements and the equivalent current question on leadership of the headteacher is "Leadership and management. How effectively leaders and managers at all levels set clear direction leading to improvements and promote high quality of care and education". Do you think that is as clear a focus on the quality of the head as it was before?

  Mr Bell: I think I would argue that leadership in a school is not exclusively to do with the headteacher.

  Q55  Greg Clark: Indeed, but the report emphasises that the head can have a very significant role. My point is that specifically the head is no longer identifiable in your reports. That is correct, is it not? You have gone to a definition which is about the leadership process: "leaders and managers at all levels", the head no longer appears in the report.

  Mr Bell: I do not know if Mr Smith or Ms Rosen want to comment on that detail. What I would say is by focusing on the leadership of the school, which of course includes the headteacher, as a Department we are continuing to say that it is vital that Ofsted reports on the quality of leadership and in actual fact that is what Ofsted does. I think strong emphasis—

  Q56  Greg Clark: Mr Bell, we do not have much time. I quite agree with you about the importance of leadership in the round but there is a specific contribution that a headteacher makes. On page 13, paragraph 37, the NAO's Report says: "The headteacher is key to sustaining performance and improvement in any school." The system that we have now in place to monitor this has left out the headteacher in favour of a leadership team and that seems to be a step backwards, not forwards.

  Mr Bell: The guidance that Ofsted gives its inspectors to come to the judgment about leadership that you have described does include an emphasis on the role of the headteacher. I accept that is not quite the same as saying the headteacher, but I do not think any inspection team could make a rounded judgment about the quality of leadership in a school without considering the contribution of the headteacher.

  Q57  Greg Clark: It would have been helpful to have some report on the headteacher. Just on the inspection, the inspection regime is about to change again, or is changing, to rely more on self-assessment rather than the inspector's judgment which you have indicated might be a guarantor of standards. Indeed, schools now have a self-evaluation form, self-assessment form, and there is a section on leadership and management in which headteachers, presumably leadership teams, themselves are invited to say how good they are. The particular item is "Effectiveness and efficiency of leadership and management" and they are invited to rate themselves as "outstanding, good, satisfactory or inadequate". Do you think it is reasonable for a headteacher to be expected to tick the "inadequate" box?

  Mr Bell: We have already had some discussion this afternoon about the quality of self-evaluation. As I understand it, there have been schools where the internal judgment has been made that the leadership and management is inadequate, so looking internally—

  Q58  Greg Clark: How many cases have there been, Mr Smith?

  Mr Smith: 87.

  Q59  Greg Clark: 87 schools around the country have described themselves as being inadequate?

  Mr Smith: No, 87 schools from September to December have been judged as requiring Special Measures.


 
previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2006
Prepared 17 October 2006