Ofstead

[sashh]

For anyone looking at Ofstead reports before picking a school have a look at these teachers experiences of inspectioins.

community.tes.co.uk/forum/t/568049.aspx?PageIndex=2

I guess teaching is the only profession that no one is good enough to judge, criticise or comment about!!! I wonder why

No, not too good to be judged but would be nice to be judged by someone with some experience. Examples are things like teachers given ratings for lessons that were not observed. Or observers sleeping through lessons. Or the 11 - 16 school that got a rating for its post 16 provision

Some others such as:

Lay Inspector (to my NQT colleague): the behaviour in that lesson was very poor, so I'll have to give you satisfactory overall. Colleague: could you give me some strategies to help e improve my behaviour management please? Lay Inspector: i don't bloody know love. I'm not a teacher.

A friend of mine said in the full ofsted inspection at her school only 20 minutes of actual teaching was observed by the inspector. Most of the time was spent looking at the childrens records and school policies.

I have quite a bit on hands on experience with Ofsted (both good and bad things) and I believe it should only be used as a tool alongside other things such as your gut instinct and visiting the school unannounced whilst children are there in their normal lessons (ie not at an open day). An outstanding school is not necessarily better than a good school. There are so many things to consider such as when the inspection was carried out (ie 2 months ago or nearly 4 years - a lot can change).

That doesn't mean they aren't able to reliably pass comment on whether behaviour is good or bad.

But it does mean that they aren't able to effectively comment on the behaviour management techniques that are in place.

If you took your car to the mechanics to find out why it wasn't stopping when you pushed the brake pedal, and all they could tell you was that it was because the brakes aren't working, you wouldn't be terribly impressed.

Teachers should be judged by people who know how to teach, and have taught; people who have realistic expectations of behaviour (and everything else); people who can offer constructive advice for improvement.

To take another analogy: Anyone can see and identify a sloppy piece of extended writing. Would you hire a teacher who could do that, but not offer any advice on how to improve said writing?

I don't bloody think so.

Except they don't make a binary judgement, either. They float in the middle, making value judgements between outstanding, good, satisfactory and unsatisfactory, but are unable to say how to improve from one to the next.

If they can't identify how to move from one level to the next, how can you trust their judgement on what constitutes a demonstration of each level?

Let's use NC levels as an analogue, to improve on my earlier one. Would you trust the judgement of a teacher who said your child was a level 3b in numeracy, but could not explain why? Or how they would move on to a 3a? Particularly if that judgement had come from a 20 minute snapshot of their entire schooling across four years?

School Improvement Partners are meant to help schools improve.

Ofsted aren't SIPs.

Ofsted are there to monitor schools - not to help them improve.

Ofsted are there to monitor schools - not to help them improve.

I know this wasn't your point, but to be honest, I think that says it all.

Sunscorch, but inspectors CAN indicate what it would take to move from one level to the next - it's all there in the level descriptions for each grading.

So for example if a particular grade says 'All children make good progress during the lesson' then an inspector makes a judgement as to whether the observed lesson meets that criterion or not. If a group of children were not making good progress due to low-level or higher level discruption, then that grade cannot be given, and an inspector can say 'To get the higher grade, all children should be making progress, and to do that low-level disruption needs to be reduced', which indicates what was wrong with the lesson and what needed to be done to reach the higher grade.

The minutiae of coaching a specific teacher with a specific class as to HOW to manage the behaviour of a class so that they all make good progress during a lesson is not within the Ofsted report's remit. That is up to the SMT and if necessary SIPs to work on with the teacher concerned, with TAs, with the SENCo, with outside agencies and further training.

Just because an Ofsted inspector does not offer 1 to 1 coaching does not mean that they don't indicate how something can be improved - they can point to the descriptor for the higher grade and say 'to get that grade, you need to do this'. HOW that specific teacher or school manages that, with their pupils and in a particular context, is up to the management of the school.

SunScorch - Do you think schools shouldn't be monitored?

i agree indigoBell.
One doesn't need to be a cook to be a food critic.....
One doesn't need to be a good author to edit a book.

When it comes to sleeping during observation, well that shows what type of society we are in.

Many bad teacher would love to do without any type of monitoring or accountability.

ssssssssssssss

Talk to other parents if you can, their experiences will be different as children are different. Look round and go with your gut. Would my child be happy here? Read Ofsted but go with an open mind.
best of luck!

So for example if a particular grade says 'All children make good progress during the lesson' then an inspector makes a judgement as to whether the observed lesson meets that criterion or not.

What constitutes "good" progress?
Should every lesson realistically be expected to move children's progress?
What about a lesson for consolidation? What if the inspector decides to visit for 20 minutes where you're reviewing past learning before moving on for the last hour of an afternoon session? What about a lesson where the children are finishing some extended creative writing?

SunScorch - Do you think schools shouldn't be monitored?

Not by people who don't have a current, comprehensive knowledge of teaching.
Not by people who judge four years of teaching on a twenty minute observation.

Schools should be monitored realistically.

well short of CCTV cameras running all day everyday, anything observed in a lesson is only a snap shot no matter how fantastic the person observing it is.

That's the equivalent of saying "Well, it'll never be perfect, so why bother making it better?".

The current system doesn't give a fair impression of the quality of teaching. This should change.

Or do you not agree that the monitoring system should be as accurate and fair as possible?

Well, I'm talking mainly about teaching quality. A lobotomised monkey could compare two sets of "attainment grades", leaving aside the arguments for their relevance and worth.

Do you really, truthfully believe that a twenty minute observation of one single lesson is enough to pass a judgement on the quality of a professional?

I don't. I won't apologise for that.

I don't think a driving test, which you can retake, and is twice as long, and under controlled conditions is quite comparable to a teaching observation. Particularly when you consider that you have to be really bad, or really unlucky to fail it at all.

But perhaps you're right.
I'll assess my class on reading, writing and mathematics on the basis of a 20 minute observation from now on. It'll certainly be more convenient than keeping track of their work all year.