The future of inspection

There is still no mention of inspectors providing a supportive role, as well as inspection. Without this the proposals simply replace a six-yearly inspection over two weeks with three-year inspections over one week. This is intended to reduce bureaucracy, cost less, and enable schools to spend time on quality improvement rather than dealing with inspection. Where there are excellent support services for schools, they may welcome this approach. Where there are not, schools may feel it resembles an “early morning raid”, the knock on the door that signals an examination without a chance for any revision. We need less inspection, it is true, but we also need more sustained help for teachers, such as that suggested by the Adult Learning Inspectorate.

The paper states that Ofsted inspections should contribute to improvement, but makes no suggestion as to how this will be done. Inspection, by itself, is not a sufficient condition for school improvement. The suggestion is that there will be less observation of teaching and more reliance on self-evaluation. Experience in the further education sector is that both are needed. It is true that self-evaluation is getting better, but this requires effective classroom observation by peers and help through benchmarking with other education providers.

Reduced contact with parents and governors (and employers in the college context) cannot be a good thing. Less classroom observation means more judgements made without triangulating the evidence for them through talking to learners and other stakeholders. This change needs safeguards to ensure that the voice of those who are not managers or teachers is heard.

The consultation paper proposes greater coordination of inspection ‘0-19’, but fails to recognise that adult learners of all ages are covered by Ofsted-led inspections conducted with the Adult Learning Inspectorate in the college sector. This is a telling omission from the common principles (paragraph 52).

The paper proposes discussions with partners and other inspectorates (such as the Adult Learning Inspectorate) but makes it clear that Ofsted’s position is that a common approach is essential between inspections through all its work and this includes colleges (paragraph 56). NIACE assumes that dialogue has already taken place but there is little evidence of this in the discussion paper. For example, the ‘no notice’ inspection suggested for schools would simply not be possible in a multi-site organisation such as a college, with complex timetables. NIACE would wish both inspectorates to work together on proposals, and looks forward to seeing both offer a support and development function, as well as the making of judgements.