An interesting report (pdf) comparing the inspection regimes of England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland finds that:
“Stakeholders across the four nations say that inspections encouraged more compliance with the inspection
framework than innovation. They believed that going beyond inspection frameworks by, for example, focusing
on an aspect of the curriculum that it is not assessed by the inspection held little value, especially when doing
so risked taking away time from the intended effects outlined in each framework (such as quality of education).
Stakeholders prioritised their resources and actions according to the hierarchy communicated through the
frameworks, so the main sections were interpreted as areas of policy enforcement”
Yes, well, I think we all knew that. When I worked as an Ofsted inspector I was shocked when one lead inspector told me to ask the head of ICT if they had implemented the Key Stage 3 ICT Strategy. The implication was that if they hadn’t, they should justify their decision and prove that what they had implemented was better. Perhaps that person was a rogue inspector, because at the time there was nothing in the Ofsted framework (as far as I recall) that specified that a school had to implement the Key Stage 3 ICT Strategy, which was, in any case, voluntary — though you’d never think so from the way it was rammed down everyone’s throat.
As a head of department myself, when I was inspected there was an (implied, though not very subtly) expectation that I would be using the official example units of work and following the ICT programme of study to the letter.
Thus in my experience, an expectation of compliance was baked in to the system, and that really does mitigate against innovation. For example, doing anything deemed to be outlandish immediately put one in a potentially defensive situation. It didn’t bother me personally, because I always took the view that I knew what I was doing, and I had the results to prove it, but it’s not the point. Speakers at conferences and government spokespeople are forever banging on about the need for innovation, but the way school education works in this country is that compliance is systemic.
I did once point out at a conference that all the schools the government representative held up in his talk as beacons of good practice all had one thing in common. They had acted as mavericks and ignored everything they were “supposed” to do.
Now we learn that subject inspections are back on Ofsted’s agenda. There is no national strategy in Computing (thank goodness), but will inspectors be expecting schools to have adopted Computing at School’s curriculum?
If you have an exciting scheme of work that addresses the Computing programme of study, and delivers (or promises to deliver) great results, I hope you will resist the temptation to opt for compliance rather than innovation for the sake of a quiet life.
