14 July 2015 – Ofsted Inspection
Update
London Borough of Bexley
Meena Wood
School Improvement Officer
Future of Education
Inspection
Update
‘Better inspection for all’
consultation
New Common Inspection Framework (CIF)
Maintained
schools and
academies
Further
education
and skills
Short inspections for
good providers
Early
Years
Nonassociation
independent
schools
Two-year-old
offer
Baseline
exercise
Direct contracting of inspectors and changes to workforce
Future of inspection | 3
Changes to the way Ofsted
works
To prepare for September 2015, Ofsted is :

Making significant changes in how Ofsted source, train, contract and
manage all Ofsted inspectors who deliver inspections.


Tightening up selection criteria that all inspectors have to meet

Developing structures for closer working relationships between:
Complaints investigated through Panel of Senior HMI and
educational leaders ( not Ofsted inspectors)
 Ofsted Inspectors (OIs) – 70% are current practitioners
 Her Majesty’s Inspectors (HMI) – liaise with/support OIs to
share knowledge and experience of inspections.
 Senior HMI - manage OIs
Future of inspection | 4
New Common Inspection
Framework

Schools, non-association independent schools, further education and
skills providers and registered early years providers.

Four graded judgements across all remits.
 leadership and management;
 teaching, learning and assessment;
 personal development, behaviour and welfare;
 outcomes for children and learners.
Greater emphasis on safeguarding, SMSC, Prevent Duty and
curriculum. There will still be a grade for Early Years/Sixth form.


Framework will provide greater clarity, coherence and comparability
for users, learners, parents and employers.
Future of inspection | 5
Features of S5 inspections

For schools judged outstanding one judgement of the four key
judgements may be G2 so long as the school is moving to G1.

Outcomes will be judged through attainment and pupils’
progress in each year group and across curriculum, in particular
in English and Mathematics; disadvantaged pupils and SEND –
matches or/ is improving against other pupils.

Curriculum underpinned by ‘assessment without levels’ ;
assessment feedback to pupils vital element of evidence;
observations triangulated against data-progress over time

SMSC is linked to curriculum; increasingly more important as
evidence for OE judgement
Inspection focus

Safeguarding – ‘golden thread’ throughout inspection.
Prevent Duty- evaluating impact through talking with pupils.

Schools expected to have evidence of how they have addressed
the following six strands:

Leadership and governance- awareness of what constitutes
radicalisation; training for school staff; engagement with
external parties; referral pathways

School policies and practices (schools do not necessarily need a
specific ‘prevent policy’ solely about radicalisation but it must be
reflected in other school policies such as safeguarding policy, IT
policy, policies about visits and visitors, school policy on lettings
and bookings

Curriculum- formal and informal curriculum (such as debating
societies/website forums in schools)
Short inspections for
‘good’ providers
Frequent, shorter inspections for ‘good’ schools, academies
and further education and skills providers – approximately
every three years.


More proportionate: the right sort of inspections at the right time.



Help support rising standards with greater professional dialogue.
Designed to check if the quality of provision is being sustained,
and whether leaders have the capacity to drive improvement
Regular reporting to parents, carers, learners and employers.
Identify decline early and give schools/providers opportunity to
demonstrate improvement sooner or to recognise ‘outstanding
providers’.
Future of inspection | 8
Short inspections for
‘good’ providers

The HMI begins from the premise that the school will still be
good

The main purpose of a short inspection is to evaluate:
 Whether the school remains good
 Whether safeguarding is effective or not
 The capacity of leaders, managers and governors to drive
continued improvement – track record of improvement,
accuracy of self-evaluation

Half day notice (special schools one day)
Short inspections for
‘good’ providers

One HMI in Primary, two in secondary for one day; not a S5
inspection, S8 methodology

Verbal feedback and letter, published on the Ofsted web site.
This letter will not include graded judgements. Commentary on
effectiveness of safeguarding arrangements, whether the
school remains good and any next steps.

The potential for conversion into a full S5 if the HMI is
questioning whether or not the school should remain as good
or move to outstanding/RI/Inadequate. In this case Ofsted
inspectors arrive between 24 -48 hours of being contacted.

HMI will inform the school by 2 pm and certainly by 4 pm that
they are calling a S5 inspection.
Focus in short inspections for
‘good’ providers

Assumption that school is ‘good’ on short inspection and leaders
should be honest about weaknesses – HMI will look to see
whether leaders have credible plan to improve – to test through
data/observation/dialogues.

HMI ‘mantra’ – show me! The ‘Quality of leadership’ is the final
judgement; is there effective leadership that is moving school
forward.

Impact of leadership SMSC more important now embedded in
curriculum – vital part of school work.

Culture of school and ethos
Short inspections for
‘good’ providers

Focus in short monitoring inspections on capacity,
systems leadership, identifying accurately strengths
and weaknesses; ‘no excuses culture’;
communicating the school’s strategy for continuous
improvement to stakeholders




Check school’s leadership of teaching
Evaluate quality of teaching/ assessment/learning
Concise and accurate school self-evaluation.
Identifying ‘great ‘maverick’ leaders’ – these
support doing things differently to support pupils’
interests
Framework

Personal development and wellbeing (1 judgement) and
behaviour (1 judgement)

Lower grade will determine outcome. Careers guidance will
be within in this judgement; readiness for next phase.

Personal development and well being and behaviour
 Attitudes/resilience
 Respect, conduct and self-discipline
 Physical and emotional wellbeing judged through SMSC.
Framework



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.
 actively promote British values
 make sure that safeguarding arrangements to protect
children, young people and learners meet all statutory and
other government requirements, promote their welfare and
prevent radicalisation and extremism.
For a definition of these values, see the Prevent Strategy;
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/protectingchildren-from-radicalisation-the-prevent-duty
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-use-of-socialmedia-for-online-rad
What you as school leaders can do

How effective and accurate is the evidence of the impact of
teaching, assessment, behavioural attitudes and SMSC on
accelerating pupil outcomes ( attainment and progress over
time)?

How forensically analytical is the SEF? This is the starting
point for inspection:
 does it reflect the capacity of leaders and managers to

know the strengths of their school and the areas of
weaknesses that they have tackled either successfully or
not;
 how effectively the school evaluates its strategies and is
putting in place different strategies that work more
effectively.
How do you ensure yourself that you have a deep, accurate
understanding of the school’s effectiveness informed by the
views of pupils, parents and staff?