Memorandum submitted by Harrow Council
for Racial Justice
1. The Harrow Council for Racial 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, community care and education for
all, and NHS provision. 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 their work;
— raising stakeholders' awareness of
the education provision and outcomes, enabling them to influence
the work of the education providers; and
— raising education standards.
Areas for improvement include:
— sustained focus on teaching;
— more proactive role in raising the
stakeholders' understanding of inspections; and
— 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 in the areas like management practices and raising
standards.
2.1.2 Ofsted publications such as the inspection
and research 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.
2.1.2 As an example of how communities can
effectively build upon LEA inspection findings, we have previously
sent a copy of "Every Child Matters (ECM) in Harrow setting"
to the Select Committee. It is rather unfortunate that the Harrow
LEA administration 2005 did not benefit from our thorough and
professional review of their work due to the local politics!
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 underachievement, behavioural problems and
to 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. The lesson observations by SMT and sharp focus on how
learning is planned are now common features of most schools management
practices.
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 who
have to evaluate and monitor their own work, especially as this
would be more acceptable politically and financially. 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 influence the quality of the
providers' work—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 More proactive and effective role
in raising the stakeholders' awareness and understanding of the
purpose, mechanics and the process of Ofsted inspections since
the LEAs do not always do this well:
— In our experience most of the complaints
by parents and schools about the inspections and their outcomes
are because of the wrong expectations or inadequate understanding
of Section 5 school inspections.
— Ofsted can consider to facilitate
an internet discussion forum where the stakeholder can raise concerns,
exchange views and develop a shared understanding of the issues
surrounding the Ofsted inspections.
2.2.3 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 expectations
of mechanical rather than the qualitative work by inspectors,
do it or... attitudes by some 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 demands.
For example, situations arise where an inspector who is in for
only one day in a 2 days inspection finishes up in gathering evidence
for the aspects as well as writing the paragraphs for the report
by the end of the day.
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.
November 2006
| 
