Lorna Fitzjohn, Regional Director, West Midlands gave the keynote address at 'Be inspection-ready – not preparing for inspection': a conference by SSAT the schools, students and teachers network on 20 April 2016.

1. SSAT - The Schools, Students
and Teachers network
Lorna Fitzjohn
West Midlands Regional Director
20 April 2016

2. Inspecting schools and improving
education
Key messages informing our priorities
Changes to inspection
Improving schools
What does the future hold for inspection?

3. Key messages informing our
priorities

4.  The overall performance of secondary schools continues
to lag behind that of primaries.
 This is a divided nation after the age of 11: children in the
North and the Midlands are much less likely to attend a
good or outstanding secondary school.
 Structural solutions alone will not be enough to address
this gap in quality. We need better oversight, more good
leaders and teachers, and a greater focus on the most
disadvantaged, particularly in isolated areas of the
country.
Annual Report 2014/15

5.  Schools working in isolation are more likely to decline
than those working as part of a group of schools,
whether that is with the local authority or a multi-
academy trust.
 In the further education (FE) and skills sector, we have
seen the pace of improvement slow, and in general FE
colleges in particular, performance has declined.
Annual Report 2014/15

6. Changes to inspection

7. Understanding the changes

8.  A new Common Inspection Framework
 Short inspections for all good maintained schools and
academies
 Short inspections also apply to good and outstanding
special schools, pupil referral units and
maintained nursery schools
 Full inspections for all non-association independent
schools within three years
We will:
 Do everything we can to remove the pressure for schools
to ‘get ready for inspection’ – we want to see what you do
daily for all of your pupils.
Changes to the way that we
inspect:

9.  Emphasis on impact across all key judgements
 Impact of the culture of the school
 Importance of safeguarding as a golden
thread throughout all judgements, including the
testing of leaders’ work to meet the new Prevent
Duty
 The importance of a broad and balanced
curriculum
 A new judgement – personal development,
behaviour and welfare
 Alignment of the judgements on early years and
16-19 study programmes.
CIF Key messages

10.  Ofsted does not require self-evaluation to be
provided in a specific format. Any assessment
that is provided should be part of the school’s
business processes and not generated solely
for inspection purposes.
Myth busting

11. Effectiveness of leadership
and management
Increased emphasis on:
impact of leaders’ work in developing and sustaining an
ambitious culture and vision
tackling mediocrity and using robust performance
management to improve staff performance
ensuring that safeguarding arrangements to protect pupils
meet statutory requirements, promote their welfare and prevent
radicalisation and extremism.
An example from the descriptor for grade 1:
Leaders and governors have a deep, accurate understanding of
the school’s effectiveness informed by the views of pupils, parents
and staff. They use this to keep the school improving by focusing
on the impact of their actions in key areas.
CIF

12.  Ofsted does not require schools to undertake a
specified amount of lesson observation.
 Ofsted does not expect schools to provide
specific details of the pay grade of individual
teachers who are observed during inspection.
Myth busting

13. Teaching, learning
and assessment
Increased emphasis on:
the importance of developing pupils’ knowledge,
understanding and skills in all aspects of the curriculum
and across key stages – not just English and mathematics
assessment in all its forms.
No grading of lesson observations – removing myths
CIF

14.  Ofsted does not award a grade for the quality
of teaching or outcomes in the individual
lessons visited. It does not grade individual
lessons. It does not expect schools to use the
Ofsted evaluation schedule to grade teaching
or individual lessons.
Myth busting

15.  Ofsted does not require schools to provide
individual lesson plans to inspectors. Equally,
Ofsted does not require schools to provide
previous lesson plans.
 Ofsted does not specify how planning should
be set out, the length of time it should take or
the amount of detail it should contain.
Inspectors are interested in the effectiveness of
planning rather than the form it takes.
Myth busting

16.  Ofsted does not expect to see any specific
frequency, type or volume of marking and
feedback; these are for the school to decide
through its assessment policy.
Myth busting

17. Personal development,
behaviour and welfare
Personal development:
A key focus on pupils’ self-confidence and self-
awareness, and their understanding about how to be
successful learners
Welfare:
Physical and emotional well-being, including
healthy eating, fitness and mental health awareness
Staying safe online
Safe from all forms of bullying
CIF

18. Personal development,
behaviour and welfare
Behaviour:
Emphasis on attitudes – are pupils ready to learn?
Behaviours that show respect for the school and
other pupils
Conduct and self-discipline
Attendance
CIF

19. Outcomes
Key message:
In judging outcomes, inspectors will give most
weight to pupils’ progress. They will take account
of pupils’ starting points in terms of their prior
attainment and age when evaluating progress.
Within this, they will give most weight to the
progress of pupils currently in the school,
taking account of how this compares with the progress
of recent cohorts, where relevant.
CIF

20.  Ofsted does not expect schools to provide
evidence for inspection beyond that set out in
the inspection handbook.
 Ofsted does not expect performance and pupil-
tracking information to be presented in a
particular format. Such information should be
provided to inspectors in the format that the
school would ordinarily use to monitor the
progress of pupils in that school.
Myth busting

21. Judgements on early
years and 16 to 19
Early years
Two year olds on roll now inspected under section 5. Are
practitioners knowledgeable about their typical development
and characteristics?
Comparability – corresponds to the overall effectiveness
judgement for other early years provision.
16-19 study programmes
How study programmes build on prior attainment,
stretch learners, provide effective careers guidance and
prepare learners effectively for the next stage
Comparability – this area is judged in the same way as
16-19 provision in FE and skills providers.
CIF

22. Lessons learnt so far on the new
framework
Key principles are being met:
Inspect the right things in the right way through a
standardised inspection framework.
Provide comparable and accurate information for
parents, carers, learners and employers to inform their
choices.
Deliver timely inspections where there are signs of decline
or improvement.
Have a proportionate approach to inspections.
Ensure rigorous quality of all inspections.

23. Busting myths about school inspections
Sean Harford, Ofsted’s Director for Education, has launched a
mythbusting campaign in a bid to dispel some common
misconceptions around school inspections. These include myths on
lesson planning, self-evaluation, grading of lessons, inspection
preparation, marking and pupil feedback.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/school-inspection-handbook-f
Series of short videos available on YouTube ‘OfstedMyths’
Daily tweets #OfstedMyths

24. Short inspections

25. A different kind of inspection
 All short inspections are led by HMI for 1 day approximately
every three years.
 One HMI in most primary schools; two HMI in secondary schools
 No requirement to prepare documentary evidence solely for
inspection purposes. No preferred format for documentation.
 Two judgements: Is the school continuing to be a good
school? Is safeguarding effective?
 If more evidence is needed to reach a decision, or there is
evidence of improvement/decline, it will be converted to a
section 5 inspection.
 A short inspection will not change any of the graded
judgements for the school nor the overall effectiveness grade.
Short
inspections

26. Professional dialogue
between HMI and school
leaders
 HMI will begin the discussions with leaders from the
starting hypothesis that the school remains
good.
 School leaders will need to demonstrate that the school
is still good, where there are areas for development, and
how they are tackling these.
 HMI will test leaders’ and governors’ assessment through
a range of inspection activity including observations and
discussion with pupils, staff, governors and parents.
 Professional dialogue with ongoing feedback to school
leaders throughout the day.
Short
inspections

27.  Have the leaders got a grip on the institution? Do they fully
understand its strengths and weaknesses?
 Have they communicated their strategy for raising standards to the
key stakeholders?
 Are they focussed on what really benefits children and young people,
rather than wasting their time endlessly preparing for an Ofsted
inspection which could be years away?
 Do they refuse to accept excuses for underachievement and are they
prepared to go the extra mile to compensate for family background?
 Are they presiding over the status quo, content to take the path of
least resistance or are they prepared to challenge staff and students
to do better?
 Have they built, or are they developing, a culture that is calm, orderly
and aspirational?
Questions for school leaders in short
inspections

28.  Schools receive half a day’s notice, as at present.
 Every good school is different. There is no ‘standard’
short inspection timetable.
 Meeting the headteacher/leaders throughout the day.
 Gathering first hand evidence from observing learning
and behaviour in lessons and around the school.
 Meetings with governors, leaders, staff and parents.
 Talking to pupils in lessons and at break/lunchtimes.
 Gathering evidence about the effectiveness of
safeguarding – not just relating to statutory requirements,
but all aspects of safeguarding.
The short inspection
day
Short
inspections

29. When will school leaders know if the inspection
is converting?
Regular dialogue throughout the day, with a final
decision usually no later than 4pm.
Does a conversion always mean that the overall
effectiveness grade of the school will change?
No! Once the additional evidence to complete a full
section 5 inspection is gathered, inspectors may still find
the school to be good.
Converting to a full
inspection
Short
inspections

30.  If the school remains good and safeguarding is
effective, the HMI will write a letter outlining the
findings.
 The letter will be written to the headteacher,
using language that is accessible for parents.
 If the short inspection converts to a section 5
inspection with a full team, the HMI will write a
section 5 inspection report.
The inspection report
Short
inspections

31. Conversion rates
 998 short inspections were carried out across all phases
between September 2015 and April 2016
 The large majority of schools remain good
Short
inspections
Phase
Short
Inspections
(number)
Conversion rate
(%)
Primary 723 34
Secondary 181 50
Nursery 20 20
PRU 17 47
Special 57 23
Total 998 36

32. Reasons for conversion
 From the 364 inspections that converted:
- 100 inspections, or 27%, were because there was sufficient
evidence to suggest the overall effectiveness judgement
might be outstanding
- 248 inspections, or 68%, required more evidence
- 16 inspections, or 4%, identified concerns regarding
safeguarding that required further investigation
(Percentages may not add up to 100% because of rounding)
Short
inspections

33. Outcomes after conversion
 Based on the 364 inspections that converted, just over half
of these schools remained good or improved.
Short
inspections
Outstanding
Good
Requires
improvement
Inadequate

34.  Self-critical leadership
 An aspirational culture in which the whole school
community was striving to do better
 Commitment to enriching all aspects of school life
 Robust plans in place for addressing weaknesses and
headteachers able to demonstrate how these are
making a difference to performance
(Taken from HMCI monthly commentary January 2016)
Common threads of schools remaining
‘good’ or improving
Short
inspections

35.  Evaluations of the school’s performance are
inaccurate, often based on over-generous views
about the quality of teaching or school standards
 Poor strategic leadership and a lack of clarity on key
performance issues
 Leaders and governors often slow to identify
weaknesses or fail to act quickly and decisively to
turn these round
 Too much inconsistency and variation in
performance across the school, particularly in the quality
of teaching, behaviour of pupils or middle leadership
(Taken from HMCI monthly commentary January 2016)
Common threads of schools that
declined from ‘good’
Short
inspections

36. Improving schools

37. Improving
schools
HMCI commentaries
and national reports
Rich sources of key messages and other information for
providers to help them to improve their provision can be found in:
HMCI monthly commentaries:
Improving primary schools (October 2015)
Governance (November 2015)
Short inspections (January 2016)
Teacher recruitment and retention (February 2016)
National reports, for example:
Key Stage 3: the wasted years?
Alternative provision

38. Teacher recruitment and
retention

39. Teacher shortages in
England
“England has a serious teacher recruitment and retention
challenge on its hands. As a nation we are simply not
attracting enough new entrants into the profession and those
we do attract are not applying to schools where they are
needed most. This is having a detrimental impact on schools
right across the country but particularly those located in more
deprived, unfashionable and isolated areas.”
Improving
schools

40. Retaining teachers
 For NQTs, a continuum between their initial teacher
training, induction and their first few years of teaching is
important.
 During inspections, information will be gathered to:
 Assess the effectiveness of the support, mentoring
and professional development in place for those at
the early stage of their teaching careers, particularly
in dealing with issues like pupil behaviour.
Improving
schools

41. Key Stage 3: the wasted
years?

42. Some of the key findings from
the Key Stage 3 survey
 Key Stage 3 is given a lower priority than other key stages in
regard to timetable, assessment and monitoring. Key Stage
3 classes are often split or taught by non-specialists.
 Pupil premium funding is not being used effectively to close
gaps quickly in Key Stage 3.
 Teaching in MFL, history and geography at Key Stage 3
often does not lead to good levels of development because pupils
are not sufficiently challenged or engaged. Low-level
disruption is a key detractor from pupils’ learning in MFL.
 Transition arrangements from primary school give greater priority
to pastoral over academic needs. Progress and engagement of the
most-able is particularly affected.
Improving
schools

43. Some of the key findings from
the Key Stage 3 survey
 Many secondary schools do not build sufficiently on pupils’ prior
learning. Pupils indicated that repeating work is more of an
issue in mathematics* and English than in foundation
subjects.
 Developing pupils’ literacy skills is given a high priority at
Key Stage 3 but the same level of priority is not evident for
numeracy.
 Homework is not consistently providing the opportunities for
pupils to consolidate or extend their learning in Key Stage 3.
 Careers education, information, advice and guidance
(CEIAG) in Key Stage 3 is not good enough.
*This type of repetition in mathematics is distinct from the ‘mastery’ approach which is studying the same topic or
concept but in greater depth.
Improving
schools

44. Inspectors will:
 make sure that inspections focus even more sharply on the
progress made by Key Stage 3 pupils
 report more robustly on how schools ensure that all pupils
make the best possible start to their secondary education.
Improving
schools

45. Alternative provision

46. Some of the key findings from
the alternative provision survey
 Some schools do not take enough responsibility for ensuring the
suitability of the placements they set up, such as checking
for themselves that the relevant safety standards are met.
 Some providers contravened regulations about registration
and schools do not check providers’ registration status.
 An increasing proportion of schools are working in partnership
with each other to find and commission good quality alternative
provision.
 Providers are usually safe places with a reasonable quality of
accommodation and resources but classrooms are
sometimes unsuited to promoting high academic standards.
Improving
schools

47. Some of the key findings from
the alternative provision survey
 Schools share good quality information about individual
pupils with providers however sometimes the information about
pupils’ academic capabilities was insufficient and providers
were unclear of how to use it to support learning.
 In a quarter of schools surveyed, the curriculum for pupils
who attended alternative provision was too narrow.
 Some pupils identified as ‘full-time’ were not actually receiving
a full-time education.
 Pupils have highly positive views towards their provision,
what they are learning, the support they receive and the impact
of the provision on improving their behaviour, attitudes,
attendance and outcomes at school.
Improving
schools

48. What does the future hold
for education inspection?

49. Government proposals for Ofsted
inspections
The Government’s White Paper: Educational Excellence
Everywhere, published March 2016, announced the
transformation of England’s schools and included specific
reference to the work of Ofsted through two key proposals.

50. Government proposals for Ofsted
inspections
The paper proposes:
 the removal of the specific judgement on the quality of
teaching, learning and assessment from our
inspections of schools, early years and further education
and skills.
A consultation process to canvas views about how this
might work and the impact it would have will start
sometime in the new academic year of 2016/17. This will
ensure that everyone with an interest is given the
chance to contribute their views.

51. Government proposals for Ofsted
inspections
The paper proposes:
 new leaders of challenging schools will have ‘inspection
breaks’
- It will become established policy to carry out a re-inspection, of
a school that was judged to ‘require improvement’ at its last
inspection, around 30 months after the previous inspection
when a school has appointed a new headteacher.
- Similar arrangements are proposed for existing academies
where a new sponsor takes over the operation of the
academy. The academy would not normally be inspected
before its third year of operation, in line with the current policy
for new schools.

52. Raising standards through inspection
 The White Paper makes clear that inspection remains an
important part of the accountability system.
 Ofsted looks forward to continuing our work with the
Government and listening to the profession to alleviate
unnecessary burdens on school leaders and classroom
teachers.
 Ofsted will never decrease the rigour of our inspections as we
champion the rights of every child to a good
education.

53. Questions?

54. https://www.gov.uk/ofsted
http://reports.ofsted.gov.uk/
And many of our presentations are at:
Ofsted on the web and on social media
https://uk.linkedin.com/company/ofsted
@Ofstednews
http://www.slideshare.net/Ofstednews