What inspectors must and mustn’t do around judging the quality of teaching.
All the ‘musts’ in this *have* to happen. They are expectation of inspectors from HMI and are taken from the handbook. Same with the ‘must nots’ If I, or one of my team, didn’t follow these expectations, I would not be surprised if the school made a complaint.
What inspectors used to do in grading the quality of teaching (and what many schools did).
Inspectors used to grade the quality of teaching the see on offer to the pupils in lessons (though they hadn’t graded lessons per se since 2007, IFIRC) and corporately, the team still grades the quality of teaching offered in the school. There were no specific criteria for grading the quality of teaching in a lesson in the last framework, though inspectors were minded to use all the information in the handbook, bullets and grade criteria, to judge the quality of teaching. Now, the situation has changed and no grade for quality of teaching should be entered on a lesson EF (Evidence Form) however, inspectors *must* evaluate learning over time and not just over 2 days in the school.
What inspectors must do to grade the quality of teaching (and perhaps what schools should do?).
- inspectors must use evidence from all lessons observed to inform the evaluation of the overall quality of teaching over time and its contribution to learning;
- inspectors must scrutinise work to gather evidence to support the quality of teaching over time;
- inspectors must look at data to judge how outcomes for the pupils support the quality of teaching over time;
- inspectors must talk to pupils about their work to gain evidence for the quality of teaching over time and to gain pupils’ perceptions of typical teaching;
- inspectors should look at all activities within and outside of the classroom, such as additional support and intervention;
- inspectors should consider and evaluate the quality of teaching received by pupils who attend off-site alternative provision;
- inspectors must record aspects of teaching and learning that they consider to be effective and identify ways in which teaching can be improved;
- inspectors should be looking at and reflecting on the effectiveness of what is being done to promote learning;
- inspectors should gather robust evidence to judge and report on how well pupils acquire knowledge, learn well and engage with lessons;
- inspectors must evaluate the use and contribution made by teaching assistants. They must also consider how well the school ensures that teaching assistants have sufficient knowledge of the subjects in which they provide support;
- inspectors must evaluate the effectiveness of assessment;
- inspectors should consider the extent to which the ‘Teachers’ Standards’ are being met.
What inspectors must not do (and perhaps what schools should not do?):
- inspectors must not grade individual lessons;
- inspectors must not expect teachers to prepare lesson plans;
- inspectors must not be seen to favour any particular teaching style;
- inspectors must not inspect, or report on the quality of teaching in any way that is not stipulated in the inspection handbook;
- inspectors must not expect to see pupils working on their own, or in groups, for periods of time in all lessons;
- inspectors must not criticise ‘passivity’ as a matter of course, unless it is stopping pupils from learning;
- inspectors must not expect to see all aspects of learning in a single observation.
(P15, P16 and P57-59: ‘School Inspection Handbook’, September 2014)
Thus, in my view, teachers need to inform themselves fully about the intricacies of how the inspectors will grade T&L in the schools, as their PM may be based on assessment similar to/the same as that used by the inspectors. HT/SLT can help them in this. I couldn’t have helped my “A” level geographers well for exams, without clear and direct reference to assessment criteria and I don’t believe many HTs would like to risk doing that for their staff facing regular inspections. Whether they should have centralised CPD is another matter. Perhaps teachers should be trusted to explore inspection for themselves; I always had this nagging aversion to being told and I think that is true of most staff in schools!
The very best schools have already begun to find ways of performance managing teachers without giving grades. They are doing this by judging the quality of an individual teacher’s teaching over time through the use of many of the Ofsted criteria above and additional, criteria of their own. However, they are all still coming to conclusions about how well each teacher teaches and this I feel is absolutely necessary. One thing I do believe is that a school should do the same as Ofsted and not judge the quality of individual lessons, but that is a very personal viewpoint and judging the quality of teaching in a school is down to HT/SLT.