Memorandum submitted by Christopher Jolly, Publisher of Jolly Phonics programme and Managing Director of Jolly Learning Ltd

 

Summary:

 

• My interest, which includes my publishing work, is to see standards in education rise. I am responding with that in mind.

 

• I see the current inspection process being weak in raising standards. It is intimidatory, leading to conformity, not excellence. It has become over associated with enforcing government policy.. However it does provided a mechanism for dealing with failure in schools.

 

• I am replying to just some of the questions in the invitation to respond. As a result I have stated the question before my response.

 

 

Responses:

 

1. Is it right in principle that schools should be held accountable for their performance?

 

There are two forms of public accountability: to the state as paymaster, or to parents as customers on behalf of their children. At the moment, accountability is taken to mean mostly, or entirely, the first - an accountability to the state. However parents are overwhelmingly the main beneficiaries and are likely to be more effective at holding a school to account. The Select Committee is invited to recommend that Ofsted see themselves as primarily reporting on the school to the parents, and more so that to government or society at large.

 

2. For what should they [schools] be held accountable?

 

Schools should be held accountable for meeting their understanding of the collective wishes of the parents. This should take precedence over, for instance, conformity with government curricula.

 

3. How should they [schools] be held to account?

 

There should be more than one level of accountability:

a) Each of a child's teachers should account individually to the parents and the pupil at least once a year in the traditional form of a short face to face meeting at a parents evening.

b) The assessment of the school should be reported to the parents, say in written form by post. For schools in special measures, or where many of the parents have requested it, the report should also be at a meeting (in an evening or at a weekend).

c) On a website for society at large.

 

4. What should be the consequences [of accountability].

 

The accountability system should not just lead to potential negative effects on the school. There should be the possibility of positive effects too. Schools that do well should be given greater responsibility over their affairs. For instance, a secondary schools gaining two excellent reports, or results, might be given the same freedoms as an academy. In turn, as now, schools that do poorly would have greater controls imposed on them.

 

5. Is an independent inspectorate an appropriate mechanism for holding schools to account?

 

In an environment where parents do not have effective school choice a mechanism such as an independent inspectorate is necessary. Parents are not able to express their views by moving their child to another school. However it is not clear that an inspectorate would be more effective in raising standards than if school choice was greatly extended.

 

6. What is the impact of the inspection process on school performance, including confidence, creativity and innovation?

 

The impact on confidence: The inspection process can be traumatic on schools. It produces high levels of stress in teachers and they do not see it as supporting them in their job. The effect rebounds on the inspectors who feel huge pressure to give a positive report, so undermining some of the purpose of the inspection process.

 

The impact on creativity and innovation: The effect of the inspection process is stifling. Teachers play safe and conform. In particular teachers are reluctant to teach beyond, or outside, the stated national strategy documents even when they are well aware that their pupils would do better if they did so.

 

7. Is it appropriate for inspection reports to be placed in the public domain?

 

It is probably appropriate. However the example of Finland should be noted. I understand that this educationally high achieving country has inspections, but the inspectors do not report them publicly. Instead they are reported (presumably separately) to the teachers and parents. The inspectors see themselves as helping the teachers achieve in their job.

 

8. In an inspection, how should emphasis be balanced between educational attainment and other aspects of a school's provision. such as Every Child Matters outcomes?

 

Again, the guiding principle should be the school's understanding of the collective wishes of the parents. It is likely that the parents will be much more concerned with educational attainment than with conformity to Every Child Matters, or other national strategies.

 

While some schools may feel that the 'parents wishes' is too uncertain a concept, it should be noted that private schools achieve good results with such a guiding principle. It is also likely to be more consistent over time than the periodic changes in the national strategies. This guiding principle does not invalidate the national strategies, or indeed curriculum advice from other sources, such as publishers. It just asks that such strategies are accepted by parents as effective ways of meeting their wishes. This guiding principle also allows schools to respond in different ways, depending on the profile and aspirations of the parents in the area the school serves.

January 2009