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 spoke to an excellent chap at Ofsted on the phone about sponsored academy schools and inspections.

He made the point that Ofsted are like an auditor.
They go in and see what is right and wrong.
They then let the management take the steps needed to make the changes
it is NOT their place to suggest what to do - as otherwise they could not comment on the effectiveness of the changes next time they visited
it is up to the school to hire in help to make it good

admittedly NOT what the politicians and daily fail would have us believe ofsted is there for
but as an accountant used to explaining the audit "perception gap"
if more teachers got their heads round the fact that ofsted observe what other implement the whole system might start to work better

But Sunscorch, it simply isn't true that a 20 minute observation is used to judge the quality of a professional.

Thye Ofsted inspector has a lot of sources of information about the teaching and learning of children in the school - or in a particular class - over time. There is progress data for children, going back over the last 3 years. There are book trawls, to look at children's progress and quality of marking. There are interviews with children. There are lesson observation records from the SMT. There are details of interventions and IEPs for children with SEN. The observation is another piece of information to add to that overall picture - does the inspector's observation and judgement match with SMT observations and judgements? Is there 'from the lesson' evidence of children making progress that supports observations from books?

So 'grading' a 20 minute lesson is not 'judging the quality of a professional ' - it is a grade for what the inspector saw, on that day, and contributes to (but does not necessarily coincide with) the overall judgement of the quality of the teaching and learning in that class. In the same way as a teacher doing a fabulous 'show' lesson and getting an 'outstanding' for that observation will count for very little if there is no evidence (from books and from tracking data) of that quality of teaching and learning being maintained over time, a teacher having a 'bad day at the office' and getting a 'satisfactory' or lower for a particular observation will not sway an Ofsted inspector unduly if all the other evidence points to normally excellent teaching and learning.

If the lesson observation is such a tiny piece of the puzzle, then why bother with it at all? "A grade for what the inspector saw, on that day" in 20 minutes is next to meaningless.

At the very, very least, the inspector should watch an entire lesson, surely?

It depends on how long the inspector needs to get the evidence they need, surely? Recent inspection, times in different lessons ranged from 20 minutes to 3 lessons in the same class, 2 hours 15 mins in total.

Basically, short observations were those classes where data and book trawl said progress was good and where the observation findings agreed with everything in the school observation folder - and also where the same subject could be observed in several classes across the school. Longer and repeated observations were where there was a question about the data as identified in the pre-inspection report or interviews with SMT, where progress shown in books or in data was not so good, where there was a disagreement between the inspector's initial 'short' observation grade and the longer-term evidence from in-school observations, or where this was the only opportunity for the inspector to gain information about the teaching of a particular subject.

TeamEdward, I suppose my question is why even a good teacher would make a good inspector - I appreciate that a teacher might have good 'subject knowledge' (though not always - English teacher visiting Physics lessons?) but they would not necessarily have the strategic knowledge, the ability to draw broad coimparisons across numbers of schools, the ability to data-crunch etc that a good inspector has?

It's a bit like saying that the workers within a company would be better auditors than accountants are, or that builders would make better building controllers or planning inspectors than trained building controllers or planners....

I can watch a sport like diving and know before the marks go up whether a dive is top notch - but I cannot dive

I audit organisations that I could not run - but I CAN spot whether they are well run and point out the areas that could be run better
I do NOT tell them exactly how to make it better - that is the job of management
and I review an organisation in a matter of hours
and my judgments often turn out to be pretty good

a good ofsted inspector will know in seconds whether a lesson is going to have the desired effect
and whether the paperwork they checked before going in supports what they are seeing

Ok, really dumb question here. But why do teachers care so much what the ofsted inspector says about them?

• it doesn't effect their pay
• they can't lose their job over it
• the judgement (of a teacher) is never published. It's private.

So why do people get so wound up about it?

too much pride and arrogance I guess.

I think the letters they send addressed to the children post inspection are deeply flawed.

Children don't need to know that some of the teaching is weak but teachers try their best etc. If, when I was a child, officials came in and sent me a letter to say the teachers were poor I'd quickly lose respect.

The letter our children received thanked them for putting up with the inspection and quickly went on to say they'd noticed some disruption in some lessons but it wasn't the children's fault etc. 'We know you try your best but sometimes you get distracted. Some of the teaching is not very strong and the lessons can be a bit dull but the teachers do their best'. 'Please try to concentrate' etc.

Honestly, people wonder why children are entitled and say teachers have to earn their respect! I am astonished by these sort of letters and am sure they're not sent out in the private sector!

TE, not quite sure what you mean - ex teachers will surely have 'some knowledge of the everyday life of a school' so should fulfil your requirements exactly? Surely an ex teacher, who has then been fully trained as an inspector and gained experience of inspecting a wide variety of schools, would be your 'ideal' candidate??

Failed teacher, now that IS a bigger issue, and Ofsted needs rigorous quality control of its own inspectors. However, given that the skill sets required for inspectors and for class teaching are very different, it may be possible that someone who is not a great class teacher but is very, very strong on data and analysis etc, could be a very good inspector without ever having been a great class teacher.

Recent inspection, times in different lessons ranged from 20 minutes to 3 lessons in the same class, 2 hours 15 mins in total.

The way you describe this seems far more reasonable, but it isn't everyone's experience of inspections =/

I audit organisations that I could not run - but I CAN spot whether they are well run and point out the areas that could be run better

I daresay that your audit doesn't take into account how well, for example, architects can produce blueprints? Or a baker ices his cupcakes?

An audit of a company's finances is not comparable to a school inspection in terms of remit.

But why do teachers care so much what the ofsted inspector says about them?

Oh, goodness. I don't know.
Possibly, though, it's because the thought of putting your heart and soul into helping a class learn and achieve, only to be told you're a grade 3 because two children had a ten second chat during carpet time is rather distressing.

sunscorch
my audits are far more about internal controls and compliance than the numbers

it is not up to me whether the architects blueprints are good
but if the systems controls and procedures are poor, chances are they will not be.

In a school if the teacher starts the lesson with a clear plan, calls the class to order and carries it out
and is backed up by an SMT that monitor and enforce learning and discipline, the school will probably produce decent results

when DH visits schools where the kids are charging along corridors shouting and swearing and there is a lock on the inside of the staffroom door, chances are the outcomes will not be excellent

the ability to recognise a controlled organisation and highlight specific areas of weakness that can be addressed is what an audit is about

• there is no point criticising the school for having a poor intake
• there is a point in criticising the school for not introducing a breakfast club to ensure that kids are in a fit state to learn

one does not have to ever have been a teacher to work that out.

I think I've made it quite clear that I'm talking specifically about the assessment of the standard of teaching.

And effective teaching does not rely solely on "control and compliance".

But the standard of "teaching" can only really be measured by the standard of "learning" - which is where the whole 'context' comes back in.

I think what we can ALL agree on is that it is deeply unfair that Ofsted phrase their reports in such a way that undermining comments are made about identifiable teachers - BEFORE the teacher has had ANY opportunity to act upon the recommendations.

Frankly if it takes an Ofsted visit to realise that a teacher is struggling, WTF have the SMT and the SIP been doing in the interim?

Maybe it was time SIPs were taken to task for being lazy (the one I had dealings with was an utter waste of time and space)

and I do despair about how Academy schools that are not under the umbrella of the LEA will cope with less than glowing reports ....

But the standard of "teaching" can only really be measured by the standard of "learning" - which is where the whole 'context' comes back in.

And that, in turn, depends on the very narrow definition of learning that Ofsted inspectors are required to follow.

(And yes, I do agree about the letters, and impotent SMTs.)

Thinking about it...... Teachers get hired by only being observed for 20 mins or so......... Doing their best lesson.....

Teachers get hired by only being observed for 20 mins or so

Actually, you'd be lucky to have nothing more than a 20 minute observation.
Besides, after that 20 minute observation, you have a discussion about it with the observer; a chance to point out your own mistakes, explain your choices and so on. You get none of that after an inspection.

"You get none of that after an inspection."

Again, this must differ from inspector to inspector, as this type of discussion very much took place in the inspection I mentioned above.