Ofsted New Framework - Hampshire outcomes Spring term '12

tendencyrheumaticInternet and Web Development

Nov 12, 2013 (3 years and 9 months ago)

92 views

Hampshire Governor Forum


22
nd

May 2012

New Ofsted Framework



(implemented from January 2012)


Rationale:

‘Raising standards and improving lives’
-

(
Ofsted 2011
)


Academic year 2010


2011 nationally:



70% schools good+



20% of schools declined (40%of these

had been outstanding)



Fewer good schools serving most deprived pupils 48%, compared to 71%
of
those
serving least deprived pupils


New framework is ‘different, more challenging and not comparable to those gone
before’ (Ofsted Lead Inspector)


Key Changes:


Ti
ming:



Outstanding schools exempt from routine inspections



Less frequent inspections of good schools,
(
within five years
)



Introduction of remote ‘risk assessments’ of good and outstanding schools

Structure:



Reduced to four graded key judgements: achieve
ment, quality of teaching,
behaviour and safety, leadership and management



Four key judgements, plus consideration of how well the school meets the
needs of pupils with SEN and disabilities, promotes SMSC and the progress
and destination of leavers, all c
ontribute to the overall effectiveness grade




















Key strands:



Reading at primary level / literacy at secondary level, mathematics and
communication across the curriculum



Quality of teaching, behaviour and safety


what the are typically,
tr
iangulation of evidence



Impact of the school leadership including governance on improving teaching
and achievement

both recent and overtime

for all pupils

-
‘closing the gap
’.

Overall

Effectiveness

Achievement

Behaviour &

Safety

Leadership &

Management

Quality of

Teaching


Promotion of

SMSC


Meeting needs

Pupils with
disability

& SEN

Progress &
destination of
leavers


Outcomes during the first term

for
Hamps
hire Schools:


Forty three school plus t
wo education centres were inspected during this period.

NB:
-

One of the schools wa
s a new school and

this was the first inspection
of the
school, as such it is not included in the table below
.



Ofsted New Framework
-

Hampshire outcomes Spring term ‘12


44

total


Primary

16 schs

Infant

5 schs

Junior

12 schs

Secondary

9 schs

Education
Centres

2

Improved

18
(41%)

8

(50%)


3

(60%)

3

(25%)

3

(33%)

1

(50%)

Static

14
(32%)

7

(44%)


1

(20%)

5

(42%)

1

(11%)

0

(0%)

Declined

12
(27%)

1 cat.

(6%)


1 cat.

(20%)

4

cat.

(33%)

5
-

3xcat.

(56%)

1

(50%)


(All 12 schools which declined were previously inspected 2 or more frameworks ago)



In summary:
(care should be taken due to the small numbers involved)



73% remained static or improved



27% declined



20% put

into a cat
egory ( 5 schools SpM, 4 given a NTI)


Mo
re positive outcomes
seen in:



Infant and through primary schools



Moving from satisfactory to good


12 schools, all phases represented


Least positive outcomes

seen in:



Junior and secondary schools


Key Messages and

findings so far:




The ability to demonstrate and articulate

the

rigour, challenge and

impact of
L&M at all levels

(
including governance
)

on bringing
ab
out improvement
,

is
crucial



Feedback from parents, pupils and staff plays an important role, therefore a
n
accurate under
standing of perceptions is needed together with

strategies to
address any inaccuracies that might exist



E
vidence

needs to be robust with
a triangulated model

used
to demonstrate
improvement overtime as well as

the

current position



Pupil per
formance needs to be measured, analysed and presented against
national norms as well as school aspirations


evidencing ‘closing the gap’





‘A Good education for all’


A

consultation

led by Michael Wilshaw

HMCI which ran from the 9
th

February until
3
rd

May 2012. It proposes

seven main changes to the framework
,

described above
,

to be
implemented fro
m

September 2012
. The LA response to the consultation, outlined in
italics, was submitted in relation to each of the proposals as described in the
consultatio
n paper.


The proposals and LA responses are
as follows:




Outstanding teaching

needed

to be

outstanding


overall



(agree)



Acceptable standard



good


or

outstanding




(agree


however

an

improving school in

requires improvemen
t


needs to be


recogni
sed)



Single judgement of

requires improvement


to replace

satisfactory


and

notice to improve




(all children deserve a

good


school


journey from

special measures


to


good


for a school must be achievable

in the tim
e
scale
)



Schools in

requires im
provement


subject to re
-
inspection after 12
-
18 months


(
agree


recognition needs to be given to

the

trajectory of the school)



Only judged as

requires improvement


on two consecutive inspections before
deemed to require

special measures



(agree schools

need to improve rapidly, disagree if a school has improved

significantly from

Sp
ecial

M
easures’

and done all it could be expected to do

but just misses
‘good’
-

needs to be some flexibility / lifeline for such schools)



No notice inspections


(agree)



Ana
lysis of anonymised performance management of all teachers as
evidence for L
eadership
&

M
anagement

judgement


(
agree


if used I the manner described in the consultation document)



Pam Simpson

District Manager