Terry Cook
Head of Educational Achievement,
Improvement, Leadership and Governance
November 2012

•
Not a completely new framework
• But… important changes / changes of emphasis
•
2 million pupils in schools less than good – focus on proportionate inspection of grade 3 schools
•
Inspection history – if previous issues not addressed likely to be no better than requires improvement
• Sharper focus on pupil premium

•
Outcomes for groups of pupils – SEND – narrowing the gap
•
Strong focus on additional adults in classes
•
Teaching – promote learning and pupils’ achievement – observing learning over time
•
Emphasis on impact
•
Importance of website and SEF
•
Parent View

•
An expectation that all schools will be at least good
•
Enhanced focus on achievement, particularly literacy
•
Increased focus on the effectiveness of governance
•
Exploring the management of performance to improve teaching and learning

More key documents have been issued
– Subsidiary Guidance
– SEF Guidance
– Deferral Policy
– Pupil Premium
– Getting to Good
– Inspections – unable to contact school the day before
– Monitoring visits / support for schools requiring improvement

•
Serious weaknesses indicate that the school has shortcomings, but the capacity to address them
• Special measures indicates that the school has shortcomings, but does not have the capacity in terms of leadership and governance, to address them

•
Depends on the last inspection: if satisfactory last time, expect a two-year cycle with increased monitoring
•
Good last time means an annual risk assessment starting three years after the previous inspection. If school remains good, re-inspection every 5 years
•
Outstanding – not routinely inspected
•
PRU/Special/Nurseries – continue 3 year cycle
– with variations

•
Call the day before (no Monday inspections!) with no performance questions
•
No pre-inspection briefing – VITAL that the school’s website is live and updated!
•
Little change to the information required, except for anonymised PM information and
“documented evidence on the work of governors”
•
Refer to new guidance re unable to contact school

•
On or after noon to announce the inspection
•
The call should
–
Be Short
– Focus on practical issues
– Not be used to probe the school’s SEF
•
Inspector should invite the school to send the
SEF summary to the inspection provider
(SERCO) but nothing else – however best to reflect/review and present on morning of the inspection

•
No Pre Inspection Briefing (PIB)
•
Lead Inspector may share broad starting points for inspection with the
Headteacher at start of Day 1

•
Learning and progress of groups is key
•
How pupil premium is used to overcome barriers to learning
(include on the school website)
•
Strong emphasis on progress of pupils supported through pupil premium – how effectively gap is being narrowed with pupils nationally – children looked after; FSM;
Children of Service families (RAISEonline data + inspectors to consider school analysis)

• LA support re progress data for Service Children
(contact Simon Davis 01603 303310)
• Key sections: page 17 framework, 27 handbook and for SEN pages 12-14 Subsidiary Guidance (paras 40-
41 key re identification of SEN and impact of intervention)
• Likely that governors will be asked to explain the impact of this spending as it is their decision about its deployment

During inspections, inspectors pursue the following:
•
What the school is spending pupil premium money on
•
Why is the school spending it in this way
•
How it is making a difference for disadvantaged pupils
•
How governors are holding their school to account for the way in which this money is spent
Can be reported in achievement or leadership and management sections

• Governance has assumed a different profile –
Handbook para 122 - no grade for governance, but inspectors required to comment
• How do governors create ‘optimum opportunities for pupils’?
•
Overall Effectiveness likely to be influenced by governance
• Inspectors may speak to governor involved in HT’s
P.M
•
Do governors seek an independent view of their effectiveness?
• In relation to serious weaknesses/SpM (bullet point
8) could put the school into a category!

•
Grade descriptors for L/M contain increased reference to governors/governance – sometimes in combination with other leaders/managers – see L/M outstanding (bullet points 2/3/10) and good (bullet points 1/5/9) grade descriptions
•
Inspectors must be clear re improvements required in L/M – including governance – sufficient emphasis must be given to governance
•
Greater emphasis on whether governors are supporting/challenging leaders and holding school sufficiently to account

During inspections, inspectors are asked to pursue particular lines of enquiry including the extent to which the school’s governance:
•
Provides challenge and holds the HT and other senior leaders to account for improving the quality of teaching and pupils’ achievement
•
Uses performance management systems to improve teaching / leadership / management
•
Uses the pupil premium to overcome barriers to learning
Not enough to just comment whether governance is fulfilling statutory duties for safeguarding

Report to comment on governance knows:
• what is happening in the school and whether overall provision is good – or not
• about the quality of teaching, use of performance management, what is being done to recognise and reward good teachers and what is being done to tackle underperformance
• and understands the data and comparative performance of the school in relation to similar schools
• the budget, particularly the pupil premium and whether this is being used to close the gap for FSM/CLA/Service Children
That governors are being professionally trained and developed.

• Full evaluation of governance – as a paragraph not bullet points
• Where governance judged to be weak and if school requires improvement or has serious weaknesses and graded 3 for leadership and management – governance is an area for improvement in the report recommendations
•
Autumn Term 2012 HMI led inspections such reports include a recommendation that an external review of governance should be undertaken ‘An external review of governance should be undertaken in order to assess how this aspect of leadership and governance may be improved’

•
Check out paragraph 57 of Handbook!
• How does PM influence teaching quality?
•
How is professional development linked to identified need?
•
How are PM, appraisal and salary progression linked?
• What use is the school making of ‘Teachers’
Standards’?
• How do PM targets relate to the school’s SIDP?
• Inspectors will examine the link between HT’s PM and school performance

•
Inspectors should consider the full range of monitoring/support for improving teaching, including that forming part of PM
•
Key is impact ie quality of/improvements in pupils' achievement/progress/behaviour; teaching /learning; morale/commitment to school vision
• Robustness in addressing underperformance
•
Strong link between PM/ appraisal and salary progression
• Coherence and effectiveness of professional development – especially early in career
•
Initial phone call request to have PM information available at start of inspection
• PM info used to evaluate how effectively the targets for staff performance lead to improvements in the school

• During lesson feedback opportunity for inspectors to evaluate impact of PM
• Inspectors can ask how well support has focussed on specific areas for development, to compare impact with the lesson observed
•
There must be specific comments on whether governors know about the quality of teaching, how well they understand performance management and know what is being done on salary progression and promotion issues within the school
• Inspectors professional judgement is required as many school leaders have inherited a profile that they cannot alter
– inspectors concerned with current practices and their impact on teaching and achievement

•
Call the Duty Desk – schools are required to notify the ‘appropriate authority’
•
Update your website in line with Management
Information Sheet 134/12
•
Maintain a SEF summary of around 4 sides of
A4
• Check Parent View and gather school’s own evidence
•
Keep your own analysis bang up to date!

•
No paper-based questionnaires (or pupils – staff is optional)
• Parents encouraged to comment on ‘Parent
View’
• Inspectors will check out ‘Parent View’ at the end of Day One
•
Schools can contact Ofsted in relation to malicious use of ‘PV’

•
Key change – paras 107/8 Subsidiary guidance – role of the LA/ Academy Chain – need to ring Duty Desk
•
Schools causing concern regulations paras
71/81 of the Handbook 45/47 of the
Framework. Informing the HT paras 58/67 of the Handbook
•
Role of LA Duty Desk during the inspection re advice and support
– 01603 307797 / 307750
–
Out of hours: 07876137828