How
Ofsted Grading Criteria Can Be Manipulated
This
is the second post in a series showing you exactly how Ofsted grading criteria
can be manipulated in order to fit an inspector’s or other assessor’s personal
agenda. Exam marking schemes have recently been described by a TES forums
poster as, “so vague you can drive
a coach and horses through,” and this comment appeared in a recent Ofqual
report.
This is not the only framework that is too
vague, virtually everything in teaching is tacit, subjective and relies on
opinions as evidence, and the Ofsted grade descriptors are no exception. You
could argue that this is the most important post in this series, because this
is the one that is used to judge your teaching.
2.
Grade Descriptors: the quality of teaching
Outstanding: Much of the teaching in the subject is outstanding and
never less than consistently good. As a result, almost all pupils are making
rapid and sustained progress.
Good: As a result of teaching that is mainly good, with
examples of outstanding teaching, most pupils and groups of pupils, including
disabled pupils and those who have special educational needs, are achieving
well in the subject over time.
Satisfactory: Teaching results in most pupils, and groups of pupils,
currently in the school making progress in the subject broadly in line with
that made by pupils nationally with similar starting points. There is likely to
be some good teaching and there are no endemic inadequacies across year groups
or for particular groups of pupils.
Inadequate: As a result of weak teaching, pupils or groups of
pupils currently in the school are making inadequate progress. Teaching over
time fails to excite, enthuse, engage or motivate particular groups of pupils,
including those who have special educational needs and/or disabilities.
So,
the opening sentence for the criteria for outstanding, states that the teaching
needs to be outstanding. This is repeated in the good category as well, where
the teaching needs to be ‘mainly good’. I think this is the best example I’ve
found yet of how vague these descriptors really are. Can you not give us more
information?
There
is also an emphasis on student achievement here: so that whether they fail or
succeed is solely your responsibility and none of theirs. Your teaching ability
is judged on their learning ability, and this creates the current situation
where best practice from the best teachers is to spoon feed to the point of
virtually doing the work for them.
Also
the only mention of engagement and motivation appears in the inadequate
category, so that if students show any signs of boredom, you’ve failed your
lesson observation. It also says ‘over time’, which begs the question: how much
time? Inspectors aren’t going to come back and observe you throughout the year,
so how can that possibly be assessed?
Outstanding: All teachers have consistently high expectations of all
pupils.
Good: Teachers have high expectations of all pupils.
Satisfactory: Teachers’ expectations enable most pupils to work hard
and achieve satisfactorily and encourage them to make progress.
Inadequate: Teachers do not have sufficiently high expectations.
I
don’t understand this section at all. The difference between good and
outstanding is ‘teachers’ and ‘all teachers’ – so the judgement of your
teaching is based on all the other teachers in your subject doing the same.
Secondly,
expectations don’t actually enable anyone to do anything: there is much more to
getting students to work hard than simply expecting it to happen. The
requirement of high expectations is designed to stop teachers from discouraging
low ability students. That’s it.
Outstanding: Drawing on excellent subject knowledge, teachers plan
astutely and set challenging tasks based on systematic, accurate assessment of
pupils’ prior skills, knowledge and understanding. They use well judged and
often imaginative teaching strategies that, together with sharply focused and
timely support and intervention, match individual needs accurately.
Consequently, pupils learn exceptionally well. Teaching promotes pupils’ high
levels of resilience, confidence and independence when they tackle challenging
activities. Teachers systematically and effectively check pupils’ understanding
throughout lessons, anticipating where they may need to intervene and doing so
with notable impact on the quality of learning. Time is used very well and
every opportunity is taken to successfully develop crucial skills, including
being able to use their literacy and numeracy skills. Appropriate and regular
homework contributes very well to pupils’ learning. Marking and constructive
feedback from teachers and pupils are frequent and of a consistently high
quality, leading to high levels of engagement and interest.
Good: Teachers use their well developed subject knowledge and
their accurate assessment of pupils’ prior skills, knowledge and understanding
to plan effectively and set challenging tasks. They use effective teaching
strategies that, together with appropriately targeted support and intervention,
match most pupils’ individual needs so that pupils learn well. Teaching
generally promotes pupils’ resilience, confidence and independence when
tackling challenging activities. Teachers regularly listen astutely to,
carefully observe and skilfully question groups of pupils and individuals
during lessons in order to reshape tasks and explanations to improve learning. Teaching
consistently deepens pupils’ knowledge and understanding and teaches them a
range of skills including literacy and numeracy skills. Appropriate and regular
homework contributes well to pupils’ learning. Teachers assess pupils’ progress
regularly and accurately and discuss assessments with them so that pupils know
how well they have done and what they need to do to improve.
Satisfactory: Due attention is often given to the careful assessment
of pupils’ learning but this is not always conducted rigorously enough and may
result in some unnecessary repetition of work for pupils and tasks being
planned and set that do not fully challenge. Teachers monitor pupils’ work
during lessons, picking up any general misconceptions and adjust their plans
accordingly to support learning. These adaptations are usually successful but
occasionally are not timely or relevant and this slows learning for some
pupils. Teaching strategies ensure that the individual needs of pupils are
usually met. Teachers carefully deploy any available additional support and set
appropriate homework and these contribute reasonably well to the quality of
learning for pupils, including disabled pupils and those who have special
educational needs. Pupils are informed about the progress they are making and
how to improve further through marking and dialogue with adults that is usually
timely and encouraging. This approach ensures that most pupils want to work
hard and improve.
Inadequate: Learning activities are not sufficiently well matched
to the needs of pupils so that they make inadequate progress. Pupils cannot
communicate, read, write or use mathematics as well as they should, as
appropriate, in the subject.
I’ve
had to present the rest in one large chunk, as it’s so difficult to match
similar sentences to make clear sections, such is the lack of clarity in these
descriptors. The result is that it’s very difficult to look for a certain
aspect of teaching and grade them: for example, there is no mention of subject
knowledge in the satisfactory and inadequate criteria.
The
descriptor for inadequate omits the most information, including differentiation
and core skills, and not much else. Therefore, it doesn’t take much in the way
of evidence to fail a teacher’s lesson observation.
Finally,
interest and working hard form part of the outstanding and satisfactory
descriptors respectively, which I consider to be something completely outside
of the teacher’s control. You can promote hard work and be interesting, but
that doesn’t mean that students are actually going to do that. Hence the
phrase, “You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make it drink.”
If
you want to read the full Ofsted grade descriptors they can be found at this
link.
Do
you disagree with anything else that appears in these grading criteria? Have
you been given a satisfactory or inadequate for petty or far-fetched reasons?
Please comment below.
Similar
post: How Ofsted Grading Criteria Can Be Manipulated
0 comments:
Post a Comment