Memorandum submitted by the National Deaf
Children's Society (NDCS)
KEY POINTS
1. In the absence of wider data on outcomes
for deaf children, NDCS believes that Ofsted have an important
role to play in ensuring that provision for deaf children is of
a high quality. However, it is apparent that Ofsted inspections
of provision for deaf children are not always conducted with the
necessary rigour and awareness of the needs of such children.
2. If SEN inspection judgements of all schools
are aggregated, NDCS believes an impression is given where much
of SEN provision is good. However, this is not the picture presented
by Ofsted thematic inspections of SEN undertaken by inspectors
with knowledge, skill and experience in SEN. It is also contradicted
by data on attainment. Deaf children in 2007 were 42% less likely
to achieve five GCSEs at grades A* to C (including English and
Maths) than all children.
3. These conclusions are supported by a RNID
report from 2005, At the heart of inclusion. This quotes
from Heads of Support Services who reported:
— A lack of expertise in or experience
of deafness on the inspection team.
— Failure to observe teachers of the deaf
either in the base or in the mainstream classroom.
— Failure to provide inspectors who had
British Sign Language (BSL) skills or BSL interpreters for teams
inspecting BSL provision.
— A lack of interest among inspectors in
the deaf pupils as members of the school.
Parents and professionals have also reported
similar concerns to NDCS repeatedly since 2005 (see Annex A).
4. The Apprenticeships, Skills, Children
and Learning Bill proposes that if a school is good or outstanding,
it will not be subject to a full inspection. In a debate on this
Bill, the Minister for Schools and Learners stated that Ofsted
has a new framework: "It is highly unlikely that a school
would be judged good overall—if progress for SEN pupils
is anything less than good." However, NDCS is unclear
as to how the new framework will ensure this does not happen.
NDCS is also unclear—given it is known to occur under the
current system—what are the circumstances in which a school
might be judged good overall if provision for SEN pupils was not
good. NDCS believes this eventuality should be ruled out.
POSSIBLE QUESTIONS
TO RAISE
How many days training on SEN do inspectors
receive and does it cover low incidence needs such as deafness?
Given there are currently four inspectors with specialist
training in sensory impairment, what plans do Ofsted have to increase
this? Are Ofsted able to give figures for the number of specialist
units or schools which are inspected per year by those who do
not have the necessary expertise in SEN?
When inspectors are visiting a school where
deaf children whose first language is British Sign Language are
present, will inspectors be required to be accompanied by a fully
qualified and independent interpreter? How many BSL interpreters
have been employed in the past year?
Can the new framework guarantee that a school
will not be judged as good overall if provision for SEN pupils
was not good?
April 2009
Annex A
CASE STUDY
An Ofsted report of a primary school in London
in 2008 stated that:
"Pupils in the PDC (provision for deaf
children) progress well because they are supported by highly experienced
staff who ensure that pupils enjoy their work and are fully included
in school activities."
However:
— The unit did not have a teacher in charge
who was a qualified teacher of the deaf—or who was even
a teacher.
— No evidence was provided to substantiate
the claim that deaf pupils were progressing well.
— The acoustics in the classrooms were
poor and constitute a hostile listening environment.
The inadequacy of the unit was known to the
local authority, as evidenced by a Tribunal over a child who was
experiencing difficulties at this school. An advisory teacher
of the deaf for the local authority reported that "appropriate
leadership" was not in place and that there was insufficient
focus on children's progress.
Annex B
RECENT WRITTEN PARLIAMENTARY QUESTION
Glenda Jackson: To ask the Secretary of State
for Children, Schools and Families if he will take steps to ensure
that Ofsted inspections of educational provision for deaf children
are carried out by inspectors who (a) have adequate levels of
training and expertise in (i) education for the deaf and (ii)
communication with deaf children and (b) are accompanied by a
skilled interpreter. [265779]
Jim Knight: This is a matter for Ofsted. HM Chief
Inspector, Christine Gilbert, has written to my hon. Friend and
a copy of her reply has been placed in the House Libraries.
Letter from Christine Gilbert, dated 2 April
2009:
Your recent parliamentary question has been passed
to me, as Her Majesty's Chief Inspector, for a response.
Ofsted recognises that inspecting provision and
outcomes for deaf or hearing impaired pupils requires particular
specialist knowledge and skills with regard to issues such as
language development, communication methods, and acoustic conditions.
You asked how Ofsted ensured that its inspectors
had adequate levels of training and expertise in education for
the deaf and communication with deaf children. Ofsted has a small
core team of four Her Majesty's Inspectors (HMI) who are specialists
in the inspection of sensory impairment who are routinely deployed
in the inspection of schools for deaf and hearing impaired pupils.
Ofsted also requires our contracted Regional Inspection Service
Providers to provide inspectors who are suitable for each individual
inspection. Every effort is made to inspect special schools with
inspectors who have expertise in that particular field. Where
there is specific provision for pupils with SEN in mainstream
schools, then every effort is made to provide the inspection team
with an inspector with expertise in the particular field of SEN
provided by the school. Training on inspecting special educational
needs (SEN) in mainstream schools, special schools and pupil referral
units was provided for HMI and Additional Inspectors (AI) during
2008, and is being updated for the coming year. All inspectors
have access to extensive guidance available to support this area
of work.
You also asked whether inspectors are accompanied
by a skilled interpreter. It is necessary for inspectors to be
able to communicate effectively with deaf and hearing impaired
pupils: this may require competence in British Sign Language or
other methods of communication, or use of a skilled interpreter.
Ofsted is reviewing these requirements for the new inspection
arrangements for September, including the requirement to have
an interpreter on inspection.
| 
