The first chief inspector of schools, Stewart Sutherland, was replaced by Chris Woodhead, who proved to be the most controversial incumbent to date. Critics accused him of using data out of context to attack schools and his pronouncement that 15, teachers were unfit to teach left the profession reeling. In reality, this represented only three per cent of the total workforce and so was hardly a contentious figure. But the remark set him on a collision course with schools that was to remain throughout his time in office.
Nevertheless, Woodhead, due in part to his combative style, had established Ofsted as a permanent and influential part of the education system — to the point where it is unlikely any future government would now abolish it.
The mids saw a less bureaucratic inspection regime which was more responsive to the circumstances of individual schools. The change of government in established a slimmed down but tougher Ofsted, led by former headteacher, Sir Michael Wilshaw, who made clear his intentions shortly after his appointment.
To many, it smacked of a return of the dark days of Chris Woodhead. Ofsted continues to divide opinion. Parents are thought no longer to pore over its findings to the degree that they used to when choosing a school for their child — they are just as likely to speak to other parents to get an opinion. Headteachers continue to challenge inspection findings, more so now that it has become harder to get a good grading, though on occasions they have complained that a good report for an ineffectual teacher has undermined their efforts to deal with the case.
Academics have also been critical. He was keen to know if different inspectors would pass the same judgement on a school. So, has Ofsted improved schools?
If you are a registered early years childcare provider, you will have to be inspected regularly. This includes childminders, often working from home looking after very young children in private residencies. Ofsted are never far away from news headlines, and many of these stories are attracting negative publicity. The Guardian newspaper has challenged the very existence of Ofsted in a recent piece asking the question of whether schools would be better off without an authority looking down on them.
Bonuses have even been talked about, which begs the question of what activities would warrant such a pay reward.
When a school receives a very negative and public report, local newspapers are usually the first to jump on the bandwagon. A typical inspector will phone the institution that they are visiting the day before. This call is not to scare the provider. Instead, many Ofsted officers see this as an opportunity to begin a relationship.
But they do want to make sure they are prepared and have all the relevant paperwork at hand, a fine balancing act.
We have heard stories of schools over-preparing for a visit. An inspector needs to get an accurate description of the provider, and this means that staff should go about their everyday business as usual. Inspectors, on the whole, are very good at spotting disingenuous activities and they receive a very accurate picture once they have spoken to staff, students, and parents.
We have to bear in mind that inspections happen over a relatively short time, and sometimes inaccurate judgments can be made. Over the years, Ofsted has tried to improve this process by taking a rounded picture of the provider. This includes observations, interviews, and data. They will inspect any organisation offering teacher education including schools, alliances and colleges. Ofsted are very keen at being seen as an evidence-led organisation. For too long in England, the educational workforce has been drip-fed ideas that have not necessarily been empirically researched.
Ofsted see themselves as an evidence-informed entity that promotes and monitors best practice. There is a significant move to remove much of the burden associated with an inspection.
The organisation wants to decrease unnecessary workload for anyone that encounters an inspection. A key role that Ofsted plays is the publishing of the reports that they carry out. These are public documents and have the capacity to make or break a school system. If a school continually fails then the head teacher is at risk of being dismissed. Many of these dismissals are seen as unlawful and school governors have the power to sack senior leaders at very short notice.
The role of Ofsted is to promote excellent care and education in England. Reporting directly to the government, Ofsted pride themselves on being impartial and independent. The organisation also have the power to regulate any children and young people's service.
Having a large workforce across eight different regions, the services Ofsted provide are extensive. They have an estimated inspectors and around employees.
Many of these inspectors are head teachers of outstanding schools. If you are considering a career at Ofsted and do not want to relocate you are in luck. A school inspector is typically required to travel frequently so that they can serve their allocated geographical region. Many of these inspectors balance full-time headships, which is demanding in itself.
Positions are often advertised on civil service job sites and the Ofsted site directly. If you are ever concerned about the welfare of a child or young person, you can contact Ofsted anonymously and use their whistleblowing policy to report anything suspicious. All schools in the UK will have procedures for dealing with concerns. Report formats are standardised and are fairly easy to understand. You can read the St Lukes School report to understand how the information is presented.
Ofsted is a relatively new government organisation being formed in According to the National Audit Office, in , the average time between inspections of good schools was 4. Institutions placed into special measures receive intensive support from local authorities, additional funding and resourcing, and regular reappraisal from Ofsted until the school is no longer deemed to be failing.
Furthermore, the senior managers and teaching staff can be dismissed or the governing body replaced by an appointed Interim Executive Board. A new Education Inspection Framework EIF was introduced in the autumn of and details the current process of school inspection. A Section 5 inspection is also known as a full inspection; whilst a section 8 inspection relates to a monitoring visit. When inspectors find serious causes for concern, they may extend the section 8 so it becomes a section 5 with the additional legal powers.
Defenders of the current system Supporters of the current arrangements point to the large degree of public support for the simple four point grading system operated by Ofsted. A study by the group ParentKind showed that parents made relatively high use of Ofsted reports. It is said to allow for resources, in terms of subsequent inspector times and follow up, to be most effectively allocated to those institutions requiring additional support.
Criticism of the current system For much of its lifetime, Ofsted has existed in a state of high tension with schools and other educational institutions, because of its perceived willingness to criticise and find fault. It is suggested that Ofsted impacts negatively on the health and well-being of staff and drives teachers out of the profession.
It was suggested that teachers worked a 50 to 57 hour week, and over half of that was spent outside the classroom, on meetings, and data entry tasks prescribed as preparation for Ofsted inspections. Those critical of the current structure of OFSTED point to how the simplified grading system can place an enormous amount of pressure on schools and head teachers.
It has been also been reported that it is particularly difficult and challenging to provide accurate grades for very large and complex further education and skills providers that are spread across a range of settings or regions. It is suggested that the high-stakes nature of accountability in terms of the current grading system can lead to providers gaming the league tables. A particular criticism is directed upon the practice whereby outstanding schools are exempted from routine inspection, with some outstanding schools not being inspected again for over 10 years.
0コメント