How Reliable Are Ofsted Reports as a Measure of School Effectiveness? Essay

This assignment examines the reliability of Ofsted judgements that were made on School X in 2009 and 2012. It will discuss how the two inspections were carried out-were they carried out in the same way? Were they felt to be fair? School X is a large 3-11 mixed school with 35.1 % of pupils who are eligible for free school meals FSM. The pupils are mainly Pakistani, Indian and Bangladeshi. The proportion of special educational needs and disabled pupils is similar to other national schools. The attainment and progress in both English and mathematics meet the current government standards. (Ofsted report 2012). How Ofsted reach an overall judgment about school effectiveness? The inspectors reach the overall judgments by considering the four key areas: achievement of pupils, the quality of teaching, behavior and safety, leadership and management. Inspectors also consider the quality of the curriculum and how the spiritual, moral, social and cultural development of pupils at the school. They will also look if the school is meeting the individual needs in particular the needs of special educational needs and disabled pupils. The judgment they make is based on the overall evidence they gather from their observation, parents, pupils, interviews and the raise online, which is â€Å" a secure web-based system that provides schools, local authorities and inspectors with a range of analyses including: Achievement at the end of Key Stages 1 and 2; Progress from Key Stage 1 to 2; Absence and exclusions; and The characteristics (often referred to as ‘context’) of pupils. (Dave Thomson, RM Education, 2011). In addition, their judgments on the quality of teaching are based not only on classroom observations â€Å"snapshots†, but they are also checking pupils’ books, sequences of work, pupils’ academic progress and parents’ perspectives on their children’s progress. Ofsted: A summary of Evidence. Ofsted judgements on teaching through classroom observations face several challenges. First, there is the Hawthorne effect, whereby the pupils or the teacher might change their behaviour because an inspector in the room is a novel experience (Cohen and Manion 1994, Robson 2011). Additionally, Grubb (1999) stated that teachers complain that it is hard for inspectors to evaluate a full lesson from a â€Å"snapshot† as the unobserved part of the lesson may be crucial to interpreting what is happening in the observed part of the lesson. However, the above-mentioned methods that inspectors used to make a judgment on the quality of teaching mush be considered. According to Mr Jonathan Harris, as cited in the report from the Education sub-committee (1999), he was critical of possible changeability of judgements between inspections team where he argued that different inspection teams could make different judgments about the same school in the inspection reports which he stated â€Å"unacceptable†. Thus, there is no evidence which guarantee that Ofsted judgments are reliable. It is not just a matter of reliability as far as the validity of data concerned too. As Gorard (2009) points out, â€Å"if the initial relative error in either the actual or the predicted score is greater than 10%, as it almost certainly would be in reality, the error in the CVA result would be even greater than this, 40 times more than the size of the result itself.†, which makes serious doubts about the validity of the data. On the other hand, Ofsted keep raising expectations and the criteria used by Ofsted which are shown in appendices 1-3 could be one of the causes that the school has a satisfactory in 2009.Figure 1 It is also necessary to consider the fact that Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector raises expectations to ensure a good education for all focusing on the quality of teaching â€Å"the heart of good education†. Thus, a proposal was conducted to improve the education system. (A Good Education for All .2012). Thus, in the new framework it was stated that, â€Å"Schools will be judged on a smaller number of core aspects than before, but we will be examining them in greater depth. The changes will result in more streamlined inspections, with fewer judgments and grades, leading to sharper reports on the quality of education provided by schools and the most important aspects of their performance.† (Ofsted new framework 2012). Ofsted judgments on the school Ofsted judgements on School X’ Figure 1 Figure 1 shows the Ofsted grades for School X in 2006, 2009 and 2012. In each report, the first three judgments of â€Å"overall effectiveness†, â€Å"achievement of pupils† and â€Å"quality of teaching† were given the same grade.The common issue that was raised in all of the reports was about the quality of teaching. For instance, in 2006 they asked the school to ensure the good quality of teaching across the school. In 2009, they said; raise the proportion of good and outstanding teaching. In 2012, they said raise the quality of teaching through appropriate questions that cover different needs of different pupils. First of all, it was the same comment written differently each time and the last one they pointed how. Discussion and description (School’s perspective). Having considered the above-mentioned arguments about Ofsted judgments, it is also important to discuss the validity and reliability of the above-mentioned judgments. An interview was constructed to find the school views towards these judgments. The Deputy Head of School X points out that, children vary in their abilities each year and believed that Ofsted do not take this into account. She argued that when the school went down from outstanding down to satisfactory to good, it was because they had a lot of special needs children ,consequently, they were not able to get up to the standard of the government at that time. Although, the students made progress in Key stage 2 but they did not meet the government standards. (School Data included Appendix 4 & 5). Before considering how the two inspections were carried out, it is important to note that the inspectors in general are subjective people not objective. The deputy head mentioned this particular Ofsted inspector who came in 2009, he walked through the door on the first day and said: â€Å"I am Mr, so and so, if I had come to your school six months ago, I would have given you an unsatisfactory school and put you in special measures†. That clears straightaway that he is not on their side as he had this thought in mind. She also felt that they were making negative judgments not positive judgments about what they are seeing in the school. Indeed, the Deputy Head gave an example of that when the inspector went around the school then said to the Head teacher, â€Å"Where is the White English Board showing the Culture of the White English indigent’s people in Britain?† The Head teacher and the Deputy Head felt that the way the inspection went wasn’t fair. First, they received a call from the department of education the next morning as the notes went to a moderator who looked at the evidence then changed the curriculum from unsatisfactory to satisfactory. Second, within the next two days they received another call from the inspector himself saying that he has changed Leadership and management from satisfactory to good. As (Gibbon and Forster, 1999) point out, Ofsted revealed that there is no issue on who inspect the school and when, but, if two inspectors inspect the same school, the lesson, or the department, and they there was a variation in their judgments. Which inspector do we believe? Then, the Head teacher and the Deputy Head found out in the internet that fifteen schools with the same lead inspector that had the same exact comments in their reports as if they cut and paste the same comment in other reports. â€Å"The National Association of Head Teachers general secretary Russell Hobby said he had heard anecdotal reports of â€Å"cut and paste† reports, adding such a practice was â€Å"not acceptable given that the fate of the school rests on what is written.†BBC News. In contrast, the Deputy Head mentioned that the 2012 inspector was fabulous, open-minded looking for good things, the inspector said, â€Å"This is a good school, you are improving school, I can see your results are going up, they are not quite national, yet, as soon I walked through this door I can feel this is a good school and I want to know what you are doing good? How can you prove this? Where is the information for that? † In this respect, the Deputy Head argued that it depends on the inspector who comes around. However, these remain opinions of people as we cannot treat them as objective fact. Also, we cannot assume that all inspectors are subjective people because people look at things from different angles. For instance, if two inspectors attend the same lesson together and each one has his own believes about teaching, one of them might grade a teacher centered lesson as satisfactory and the other one sees it from a totally different angle. Conclusion. The leaders of this school believe they were judged unfairly and that general evidence on Ofsted points to the risks of unreliable judgements. As Ofsted keep raising the expectation it would be hard for a school to be outstanding as it would be rarely possible to find a school with a big proportion of an outstanding quality teaching. Thus, schools should be flexible and understand that the aim of Ofsted is to improve education for children which is what school is all about. Teaching is the core of school improvement and schools should raise the proportion of good and outstanding teaching. References â€Å"Cut and Paste’ Ofsted Report Claims.† BBC News. BBC, 06 Aug. 2012. Retrieved from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-18353533 Cohen, L. & Manion, L. (1994).Research Methods in Education. London: Routledge. Gibbon, C, T & Forster, N, J, S. (1999). Is Ofsted Helpful? In C. Cullingford (Ed.), An inspector calls (pp. 97-118) Harlow: Longman. Gorard, S. (2010).Serious Doubts about school effectiveness British Educational Research Journal, 36:5,745-766. Grubb, N. (1999). Improvement or control?. In C. Cullingford (Ed.), An inspector calls (pp. 70-96). Harlow: Longman. Ofsted 2006 inspection Report for School X Ofsted 2009 inspection Report for School X Ofsted 2012 inspection Report for School X Ofsted. A Good Education for ALL. Feb. 2012. Retrieved from http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/resources/good-education-for-all Robson, C. (2011). Real World Research. United Kingdom: Wiley THE EDUCATION SUB-COMMITTEE. THE WORK OF OFSTED. Rep. no. 4. UK: Parliamentary, 1999. Retrieved from: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199899/cmselect/cmeduemp/62/6212.htm The Framework for School Inspection from September 2012.† Ofsted. 05 Sept. 2012. Retrieved from http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/resources/framework-for-school-inspection-september-2012-UK Thomson, Dave. RAISE online for Governors of. Rep. UK: National Governor’s