derby teaching schools alliance: changes to school inspection

Derby Teaching Schools Alliance

Ofsted update

November 2015

Emma Ing Senior HMI, Senior

Operational Lead

Objectives

I will give a brief overview of the changes to school inspection including

Workforce arrangements

Section 5 inspections


I will share concerns and findings around outcomes for students from disadvantaged groups: some positive, some less so.

We will have a chance to discuss these matters

Signposts

Aims of the changes

The new workforce

The difference between section 5 and section 8 inspections

What’s new in section 5 inspection

The new short inspections

The regional priority groups

New from September…

We have:

Made significant changes in how we source, train, contract and manage all inspectors who deliver schools and FES inspections

• tightened up selection criteria that all inspectors have to meet

developed structures for much closer working relationships between:

contracted Ofsted Inspectors (OI)

Her Majesty’s Inspectors (HMI)

Senior HMI (SHMI)

The inspection workforce

Quality and consistency

As a result we will:

expect a higher standard of inspections and consistency among inspectors when making judgements

place more emphasis on directly providing high-quality ongoing training, mentoring and development for all inspectors

quickly and fairly address underperformance, putting in place training where needed or terminating contracts where performance does not improve

oversee quality and consistency in regions to ensure all providers have a positive experience of inspection.

A new Common Inspection Framework

The new CIF provides greater clarity, coherence and comparability for learners, parents and employers.

Inspectors will make graded judgements on the same areas across the remits:

effectiveness of leadership and management

quality of teaching, learning and assessment

personal development, behaviour and welfare

outcomes for children and learners.

And

greater emphasis on the curriculum and safeguarding, ‘a golden thread’ through all inspection activity to gather evidence about all aspects of safeguarding

Section 5 inspections vs section 8 inspections

Section 5 Education Act 2005

(1)It is the duty of the Chief Inspector—

(a)to inspect under this section every school in England to which this section applies, at such intervals as may be prescribed, and

(b)when the inspection has been completed, to make a report of the inspection in writing.

This is the basic, standard, school inspection.

Section 8 Education Act 2005

Any school can be inspected under section 8 at any time if there are sufficient good reasons.

‘If requested to do so by the Secretary of State, the Chief Inspector must inspect and report on such school, or class of school, in England as is specified in the request.

(2)The Chief Inspector may inspect any school in England in circumstances where he is not required to do so by section 5 or subsection (1) above’

Types of Section 8 inspections

Section 8 inspections take place as a result of one of the following circumstances:

Short inspection of school judged good at their most recent section 5 and of outstanding schools that are not exempt from section 5

Monitoring inspections of schools that require improvement, or have serious weaknesses, or are requiring special measures

Any inspection in other circumstances where the inspection has not specific designation (S8 nfd)

Unannounced behaviour inspections

Good and outstanding schools

Outstanding schools (except outstanding special schools) are exempt from routine inspection but they may be inspected under section 8 if, after risk assessment, concerns are raised about the performance of the school.

Schools judged good at their previous section 5 inspection will receive a one-day short inspection, carried out under section 8, approximately every three years as long as the quality of education remains good.

All details can be found on www.gov.uk

School Inspection Handbook-

Handbook for inspection schools in England under section 5 of the Education Act 2005

Published August 2015

Reference number 150066

School inspection handbook-section 8

Handbook for inspection schools in England under section 8 of the Education Act 2005

Published August 2015

Reference number 150077

Myth busting

It is up to schools to determine their practices and for leadership teams to justify these on their own merits rather than by reference to the inspection handbook.

Inspectors must not advocate a particular method of planning, teaching or assessment.

Ofsted does not expect evidence to be provided in a specific format or generated for inspection purposes.

Myth busting

Ofsted does not require any specific frequency, type or volume of marking and feedback or written record of oral feedback provided to pupils by teachers.

Ofsted does not require a particular frequency or quantity of work in pupils’ books.

5

Myth busting

Ofsted does not require evidence for each teacher for each of the bulleted sub-headings of the Teacher’s Standards or specific details of the pay grade of individual teachers who are observed during inspection.

It is unrealistic for inspectors to necessarily expect that all work in all lessons is matched to the specific needs of each individual.

Myth busting

The evaluation schedule is not exhaustive. It does not replace the professional judgement of inspectors.

It is up to schools themselves to determine their practices and for leadership teams to justify these on their own merit.

Regional Priority Groups

Poor children

Closing the Gap

Poor, unseen children

‘Poor, unseen children can be found in mediocre schools the length and breadth of our country.

They are often found in leafy suburbs, market towns and seaside resorts. They can be found in comparatively prosperous communities, many of them achieving far less than they should.

They are labelled, buried in lower sets, consigned as often as not to indifferent teaching. They coast through education until – at the earliest opportunity – they sever their ties with it.’

Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector – speech from the launch of Unseen Children June 2013.

Closing the Gap

What gap?

Reflecting on 2015:

What percentage of young people nationally attained 5A*-C including English and mathematics?

What percentage of young people eligible for free school meals attained 5 A*-C including English and mathematics?

What percentage of children looked after achieved 5 A*-C including English and mathematics?

Closing the Gap

What gap?

What percentage of young people nationally attained 5A*-C including English and mathematics? 56.3%

What percentage of young people eligible for free school meals attained 5 A*-C including English and mathematics? 33.7%

60.7% of non FSM students attained 5 A*-C including English and mathematics. That is a gap of -27%. Only three LAs in the EM had smaller gaps than this. (For the right reasons?)

Closing the Gap

Gaps in the East Midlands

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

EYFS GAP (2014 %)

EYFS - achieving a good level of development FSM (%)

EYFS - achieving a good level of development NFSM (%)

National Non-FSM

National FSM

Closing the Gap


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

KS2 GAP (2014 %)

KS2 - level 4+ reading, writing and maths FSM (%)

KS2 - level 4+ reading, writing and maths NFSM (%)

National Non-FSM

National FSM

Closing the Gap


0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

KS4 GAP (2014 %)

KS4 - 5+ GCSEs A*-C inc. Eng & maths FSM (%)

KS4 - 5+ GCSEs A*-C inc. Eng & maths NFSM (%)

National Non-FSM

National FSM

When support for disadvantaged pupils is less effective, common weaknesses related to:

Senior leaders and governors do not regard the performance of disadvantaged pupils as a priority.

Leaders do not have the monitoring systems in place to track this group, or are not making use of the information they have. Weaker performance of disadvantaged pupils is masked by

the generally strong performance of other pupils.

Governors do not receive enough information about the performance of disadvantaged pupils and are not clear about the impact of pupil premium spending.

Transition arrangements are weak. Leaders are not well

informed about the work that feeder primary schools are doing with disadvantaged pupils. At Key Stage 4, leaders do not analyse destination data for disadvantaged pupils in comparison to other pupils.

October 2015

Closing the Gap

Less successful approaches

Spending the funding indiscriminately on teaching assistants with little impact and not managing their performance well

Spending the funding on one-to-one tuition and booster classes –that go on forever…and do not relate to class teaching…and are not audited or quality assured

Planning spending in isolation – not part of the school action plan

Assuming that pupils eligible for the Pupil Premium will have learning difficulties

Comparing the performance of pupils eligible for the Pupil Premium with other eligible pupils nationally, rather than all pupils – lowering expectations.

When support for disadvantaged pupils is most effective, common strengths included:

Leaders ensure that pupils’ personal development, behaviour and welfare needs are identified and supported alongside their academic needs.

High quality day-to-day teaching in all lessons is the first priority in supporting disadvantaged pupils.

Leaders ensure that detailed analysis of the achievement of disadvantaged pupils, in all key stages, is part of the school’s self evaluation and improvement planning

High aspirations are set from Year 7 onwards and continue throughout all Key Stages.

Well-targeted careers education is increasing the number of disadvantaged pupils that enter further education, training or employment at the end of Year 11.

October 2015

Closing the Gap

Characteristics of successful approaches

Where schools spent the Pupil Premium funding successfully to improve achievement and narrow the gap, they shared many of the following characteristics, they:

never confused eligibility for the Pupil Premium with low ability

understood the importance of ensuring that day-to-day teaching meets the needs of each learner rather than relying on interventions to compensate for less than good teaching

tracked and monitored achievement data to check whether progress was being made and whether any interventions were working – and then made adjustments

ensured that the allocation and spending of the Pupil Premium was about individual need

Closing the Gap

They….

Got the balance right between the group and individual needs

ensured that a designated senior school leader linked to a governor had a clear overview of how the funding was allocated and what difference it was making

ensured that all teachers knew which pupils were eligible so that they could take responsibility for accelerating their progress

made sure that support staff (particularly teaching assistants) were highly trained and understood their role in helping pupils to achieve

thoroughly involved governors in the decision making and evaluation process.

Closing the Gap

Key Barriers and examples of good practice

Physical

Social

Emotional

Academic

Closing the Gap

Key Barriers and examples of good practice

Transition: is less successful for vulnerable pupils –Factors that identify a successful transition can be summarised as:

Social adjustment

Institutional adjustment

Curriculum interest and continuity

Children looked after

Looked After Children | 35

Number of Looked After Children 2014

Looked After Children | 36

Key Stage 4 2014

Number

eligible

to sit

GCSEs

LAC

5A*-C

including

En and

ma

All

children

Attainme

nt gap

England 4,800 12.0 56.1 -44.1

East Midlands 340 10.8 53.2 -42.4

Closing the Gap

Being looked after- meeting needs

Every child is different and their experiences are different – but few will have had it easy

In addition to those adjustments that we need to make for poor children

Proactively working with VSH and SC to get the best for the child

Listening to the child to establish need/desires and aspirations

Closing the Gap


Attachment awareness

Transition and induction

Adjustments to timetables

Working with carers to support learning

Making sure that PEPs are about learning not just staying the course

Closing the Gap


Making sure that these pupils stay in mainstream –even though this will entail support and flexibility

Making schools welcoming and meeting personal need- should all schools for CLA be good+?

Forming good relationships: the child needs to know that they matter

Working to get access to CAMHS

Closing the Gap

Key Barriers

Physical

Social

Emotional

Academic

Closing the Gap

Further reading

‘What makes a Successful Transition from Primary to Secondary School?’ Maria Evangelou, Brenda Taggart, Kathy Sylva, Edward Melhuish, Pam Sammons and Iram Siraj-Blatchford. Effective Pre-school, Primary and Secondary Education 3-14 Project, Institute of Education, University of London 2008.

Further reading

‘What makes a Successful Transition from Primary to Secondary School?’ Maria Evangelou, Brenda Taggart, Kathy Sylva, Edward Melhuish, Pam Sammons and Iram Siraj-Blatchford. Effective Pre-school, Primary and Secondary Education 3-14 Project, Institute of Education, University of London 2008.

‘The educational progress of looked after children in England: linking care and educational data’ Judy Sebba, Steve Strand, Nikki Luke, David Berridge, November 2015, Rees Centre Oxford.