Recent
Most read
Get the best experience in our app
Enjoy offline reading, category favourites, and instant updates - right from your pocket.
Ofsted will update toolkits to 'clarify' approach to disadvantage
Watchdog director insists that achievement grades from inspections are ‘fair’ – despite fears that schools with more disadvantaged pupils are being penalised
Ofsted will update its inspection toolkits to clarify how it judges the performance of disadvantaged pupils, a senior director has told 91.
The move comes amid criticism that schools with more disadvantaged intakes are less likely to hit Ofsted’s “expected standard” on achievement in new report card inspections.
This trend is confirmed in figures published by the watchdog today showing that 43 per cent of schools with an above-average proportion of pupils on free school meals (FSM) fell under the “expected standard”, compared with 16 per cent of schools with a below-average proportion of pupils on FSM.
Headteachers’ leaders have previously criticised Ofsted’s decision to compare school outcomes against national averages when judging the “achievement” category.
From next month, Ofsted will make it “clearer” that, when looking at whether a school is at the “expected standard”, the attainment of FSM pupils is compared with that of FSM pupils in other schools - rather than with overall national averages.
Speaking to 91, Lee Owston, Ofsted’s national director for education, insisted that the achievement grades being awarded were “fair” and that inspectors did take context into account.
He said: “We are being fair in terms of the grades that we award. Context is baked into the ‘expected standard’ for achievement where we are comparing the achievement of disadvantaged pupils within a school with all disadvantaged pupils nationally.”
But Mr Owston told 91 that an update to the inspection toolkit on achievement, to be published next month and coming into effect in September, will make this clearer.
He said: “What we’ll be doing for this September is to outline what we compare with what, just to make it clearer that this isn’t just about the headline measures...this is about looking at the specific groups within a school where we can have fair comparisons.
“There will be clarity in terms of what we compare, instead of talking around about the extent to which a school’s outcomes compare with national outcomes. It’s about unpicking what that means and saying, ‘Actually this is about disadvantage to disadvantage.’”
91 asked Ofsted whether inspectors compare the performance of disadvantaged schools with those that have a similar profile - for example, with similar levels of students on FSM or with special educational needs and disabilities.
Mr Owston said inspectors “do consider a school’s context and use fair metrics” to evaluate achievement, but added that “there isn’t yet a specific tool to compare performance with similar schools”.
He said that a new Department for Education data tool for comparing schools will allow inspectors “to have even better conversations with leaders about the contexts they serve”.
Ofsted accused of tying itself in knots
Paul Whiteman, the general secretary of the NAHT school leaders’ union, said: “The analysis claims that inspectors take disadvantage into account, but the evidence is clear that the ‘achievement’ grades have been lower for these schools.
“We await detail on how the promised similar schools data will be used - but while seemingly a tacit admission that the current system is flawed, this seems very unlikely to wholly mitigate the illogical use of national average performance measures in determining whether a school is achieving at least the ‘expected standard’.”
Mr Whiteman added that it “increasingly feels like Ofsted is tying itself in knots when it comes to the use of performance data”.
An published today shows that disadvantaged students’ Attainment 8 scores were significantly lower in schools receiving the lowest grades on achievement.
While the average Attainment 8 score for disadvantaged students was 34.9, in schools rated as “exceptional” this rose to 63.8.
It was 47.2 for schools at a “strong standard”, 35.9 for those at the “expected standard”, 30.4 for “needs attention” and 27.3 for “urgent improvement”.
Ofsted began inspecting schools under this framework in November last year. It no longer gives schools an overall effectiveness grade but grades school across at least six main evaluation areas using a five-point scale.
Grades breakdown
Ofsted’s commentary shows that achievement is the evaluation area with the highest proportion of schools judged to be below the “expected standard”.
Some 27 per cent of schools inspected so far have been rated as “needs attention” on achievement, and a further 3 per cent are rated as “urgent improvement”.
This evaluation area is followed by curriculum and teaching, where 20 per cent of schools are rated as “needs attention” and a further 2 per cent are judged as “urgent improvement”.
Ofsted’s commentary suggests that these inspection outcomes reflect the amount of time it takes for schools to have an impact in different areas.
It adds: “The actions of leaders commonly have a quicker impact on pupils’ personal development and wellbeing, their behaviour and their attendance. Leaders’ work to improve curriculum and teaching tends to take a little longer, and for this to have impact on achievement takes longer still.”
As 91 revealed last week, the two areas where schools perform most strongly are personal development and wellbeing, and inclusion.
Ofsted’s data shows just 6 per cent of schools were below the “expected standard” on personal development and wellbeing, and just 10 per cent were below it on inclusion.
Ofsted defends inclusion judgement
Questions have been raised about whether Ofsted’s inclusion checks are working and whether the framework is actually penalising inclusive schools.
There are also questions over whether inclusion should be a separate graded judgement.
Mr Owston said he “categorically does not think” that the current framework penalises inclusive schools.
“I think we are getting it right. I think inclusion is really important. I’m really pleased, the management information shows that we are getting strong results in terms of inclusion,” he said.
Mr Owston said that the inclusion grade is about “leadership intention, it’s about how well they identify and meet the needs of the children in front of them, the community that they serve.”
He added that inclusion also runs through the other evaluation areas “like a stick of rock” but that it is important to have it as its own graded area.
“Report cards are for parents and carers. Parents told us that they wanted to know whether the school they were sending their child to, or intending to send their child to, would identify and meet their needs,” Mr Owston said.
Similar schools tool
The DfE and Ofsted have beenworking together to develop a similar schools model.
Ofsted’s commentary says thatit will allow inspectors to “look at how a school is performing both compared to national benchmarks and to other schools in similar contexts”.
It will introduce this comparison into the IDSR (Inspection Data Summary Report) in the new academic year and further detail will also be shown in the DfE’s new digital service which will enable schools to benchmark their performance and connect with similar schools.
A DfE spokesperson said: ”Aspart of ourwork to create a self-improving school system, built on collaboration and shared learning between schools in similar circumstances,we have confirmed similar schools datawill beavailableto inspectors fromtheautumnterm.
”Drawing on our successful approach to issues like attendance, the data will add to schools’ and inspectors’ understanding of how schools in similar circumstances tackle shared challenges and create opportunities for their pupils.”
