Teachers threaten to boycott Ofsted Inspections

[StoneRoad]

I wish that the unions / teachers had boycotted ofsted from the start.
Although I quite like the idea of a stable national curriculum, and national standards there is far, far, far too much paperwork in education.
The more the minister / government / civil servants interfer the worse the deal gets for the pupils / students.

 

[pseudonarcissus]

Educational theorists (and health policy theorists) may be the problem, however they seem to drive policy. It just seems that the unions have become so resistant to change, any change, with the desire to go back to very little responsibility for outcomes, however they should be measured.

I'm not convinced it is not possible to measure data intelligently and control for a lot of the variables you mention. The league tables of A level grades would seem to be a ridiculously crude measure, but going back to the bad days of the 80s should not be an option. The problem with the cruder measures is often lack of peer review.

That is particularly the case with the medical profession, and yes, surgeons should be rewarded for above average performance and the bar should be high for firing the bad ones. Medical data is one area where careful data collecting is making a huge improvement in quality of care in some NHS Trusts. The reduction in hospital borne infections is thanks to the 6-sigma people working in the NHS, not the doctors. Even simple data analysis would have stopped the Bristol baby killing scandal earlier.

I accept teaching is more complex as you are not just counting MSRA infections or dead bodies. A-level success is tempting, but way too crude, and what about the heroic teachers that work with special needs? There are internationally used methods, in which Britain does not come top of the class.

I just think saying we should not try to measure effectiveness because its difficult is not going to work anymore. There also has to be a method of identifying weak or burnt out teachers and helping them improve or retrain as Ofsted inspectors or something. At the same time it would seem logical to try a reward the outstandingly teachers, and doing that through the pay packet would seem better than having a "teacher of the month" parking spot next to the headteacher's.

 

[pseudonarcissus]

And labour were as ad as the Tories, to be fair

 

[spanglechick]

Educational theorists (and health policy theorists) may be the problem, however they seem to drive policy. It just seems that the unions have become so resistant to change, any change, with the desire to go back to very little responsibility for outcomes, however they should be measured.

I'm not convinced it is not possible to measure data intelligently and control for a lot of the variables you mention. The league tables of A level grades would seem to be a ridiculously crude measure, but going back to the bad days of the 80s should not be an option. The problem with the cruder measures is often lack of peer review.

That is particularly the case with the medical profession, and yes, surgeons should be rewarded for above average performance and the bar should be high for firing the bad ones. Medical data is one area where careful data collecting is making a huge improvement in quality of care in some NHS Trusts. The reduction in hospital borne infections is thanks to the 6-sigma people working in the NHS, not the doctors. Even simple data analysis would have stopped the Bristol baby killing scandal earlier.

I accept teaching is more complex as you are not just counting MSRA infections or dead bodies. A-level success is tempting, but way too crude, and what about the heroic teachers that work with special needs? There are internationally used methods, in which Britain does not come top of the class.

I just think saying we should not try to measure effectiveness because its difficult is not going to work anymore. There also has to be a method of identifying weak or burnt out teachers and helping them improve or retrain as Ofsted inspectors or something. At the same time it would seem logical to try a reward the outstandingly teachers, and doing that through the pay packet would seem better than having a "teacher of the month" parking spot next to the headteacher's.

listen - i stand to be well-rewarded under PRP, and I don't want it, because it isn't fair.

it's incredibly easy to manage weaker teachers out of the profession now. in fact, a huge number of excellent teachers are being caught in the process, because in some schools, it only takes one bad lesson... and we all have those.

if there are all these measures, then why do we need more? what is the benefit? i don't need a reward for being good at my job. i do need to be given the professional credit to get on with it the way that i think works best.

one of he problems with PRP is that cash strapped heads are going to look for excuses to keep more experienced staff at the lower end of their pay bracket. they will also be at a disincentive to grade teachers as outstanding.

 

[pseudonarcissus]

So, what's the answer?

So that education secretaries can claim education is getting better and teachers are allowed to get on and teach, and we get consistency across all schools?

Oh, and that kids will be come out of the system better educated than we were...which is the only way we progress as a society

I do accept a few years with no change to the curriculum and no change to assessments might help, the constant change cannot be helpful to anyone, other than the Minister who wants do be doing something, anything.

I'm not sure boycotting OFSTEAD will achieve a lot.

I'm not trying to be critical, I am incredibly lucky that politicians don't understand what I do at work, and don't think they could do it better. But teaching has always been like that. And I can't recall any constructive discussion being reported in the media, where teachers and educational theorists seem to be engaging with each other.

 

[purenarcotic]

Social services is a prime example of an area that is consistently fucked over by Government. People with absolutely no understanding of social work (or basic psychology one oh fucking one frankly) swan in and every new Government brings in a sweep of changes that don't work because they've never bothered to try and understand what social workers or the social care professional generally is trying to do. So the system is fucked and ultimately people die unnecessarily.

It seems that the exact same shite is happening to teachers and it's wrong.

 

[spanglechick]

So, what's the answer?

So that education secretaries can claim education is getting better and teachers are allowed to get on and teach, and we get consistency across all schools?

Oh, and that kids will be come out of the system better educated than we were...which is the only way we progress as a society

I do accept a few years with no change to the curriculum and no change to assessments might help, the constant change cannot be helpful to anyone, other than the Minister who wants do be doing something, anything.

I'm not sure boycotting OFSTEAD will achieve a lot.

I'm not trying to be critical, I am incredibly lucky that politicians don't understand what I do at work, and don't think they could do it better. But teaching has always been like that. And I can't recall any constructive discussion being reported in the media, where teachers and educational theorists seem to be engaging with each other.

thing is, by most standards, education is getting better. certainly kids have got better at passing exams, and teachers have got better at passing ofsteds. but then what we have is an automatic assumption that these must be due to declining standards.

i've been teaching on and off for getting on for twenty years, and teaching is better than it was. it's certainly better than the chalk-and-talk bollocks i sat through at school.

but nowhere, no one, ever acknowledges this.

 

[ymu]

To add to the examples above, my sister-in-law teaches primary. They, very sensibly, split the classes by birth months so that the younger kids don't get left behind. Some of the teachers can offer more to the younger kids, some more to the older, but they have to rotate to avoid the one that teaches the youngest getting fucked over because they are teaching a class with less potential (compared to their year group, at that age).

My only experience of Ofsted at school was an inspector in an A' Level maths class. She objected to me being the only girl. I thought this was made-up ridiculousness, but it turned out that there had originally been another girl wanting to do double maths and that was the only reason I'd been allowed to do it. If I'd been the only girl wanting to do it, I would have been screwed over to please Ofsted.

The parallels with medicine that purenarcotic makes are good. League tables tell us nothing at all: Celtic and Rangers dominate Scottish football but would struggle in the Premiership, and targets get gamed to produce the results which will secure funding rewards rather than genuinely drive up standards.

I think teaching and doctors, especially GPs, are going through a crisis of de-professionalisation, whereby they are not trusted to make the right decisions for their practice and those in their care but instead have to hand over control to a box-ticking exercise controlled by professional managers who are complete amateurs in the field they're supposed to be managing.

It'd be really interesting to contrast the experiences of those working in the private sector for teaching, and also those that work at the inner city 'sink' schools compared to places like Manchester Grammar or Aske's. It does seem that the system is relatively harsh on those schools with the most demanding intakes.

 

[pseudonarcissus]

I think teaching and doctors, especially GPs, are going through a crisis of de-professionalisation, whereby they are not trusted to make the right decisions for their practice and those in their care but instead have to hand over control to a box-ticking exercise controlled by professional managers.....

Purenarcotic has a very valid point about social services, maybe they have it hardest.

In the early 90s there was an attempt to impose a hospital management class in hospitals; clever people without a medical education. This was to split the clinical from the management role. 20 years later I wonder how much better things are.

I think education has at least not had this. I think headteachers are still expected to be teachers, even if the potential school managers avoid challenging teaching early in their careers.

GPs are an interesting case. They get to refer you to the specialist. do you want to go to the best? Or do you want to go to the guy your doctor plays golf with? How do you tell what you are getting? You have no way of telling unless someone tries to look at mortality rates statistically. There is zero correlation between bedside manner and competence. The paediatric heart surgeon defending the Leeds hospital today may have a valid point. Or she may think she's god. You have to have a lot of self confidence to cut open a little baby and rearrange their hearts. She is probably not best placed to give dispassionate interpretation of incomplete data sets. The local MP and the Bishop of York are certainly not.

I'm digressing from OFSTEAD. I think the function is necessary, they just seem to be making a hash of it and lack of engagement from the unions is probably not helpful. And the former LibDems seem to have failed to facilitate dialogue. The always Tories could not be expected to do so

 

[ymu]

The Leeds heart stuff is too early to say, IMO. The six sigma approach purenarcotic pseudonarcissus mentions is part of it, especially post-Shipman and the Bristol child heart surgery scandal, but even then results have to be considered by caseload. Major teaching hospitals get the hardest cases because the hardest cases get referred to the best hospitals (those with specialist centres), as it should be. The league table approach encourages doctors not to take on patients with a poor prognosis lest their statistics worsen. The raw data for Leeds will mean very little because they're a major teaching hospital and research centre.

There was a scandal over the in-hospital death rate in Wolverhampton a few years ago. But Wolverhampton has very little hospice provision. People were dying in hospital because there was nowhere else to discharge them to. It's a hopelessly bad metric, as were many of Labour's targets.

With GPs, it's about getting paid for for things which they get paid bonuses for doing. If it might be heart disease, diabetes or cancer-related, you're likely to be over-tested and over-treated but if it doesn't fit into a box with a financially-rewarded target, they're not interested.

 

[purenarcotic]

I don't think I referred to six sigma? What is six sigma ymu? I wasn't talking about the medical profession either, specifically social workers and social services.

 

[ymu]

That's bizarre, no one mentioned it - but I'm sure I saw it.

Sigma is the greek letter used for standard deviation in statistical equations. In a normal distribution, ~95% of the data points lie within +/- 2 sigma and ~99% with +/- 3 sigma and so on. Six sigma is an idea originating with quality control procedures in manufacturing which got a lot of attention within Public Health post-Shipman in developing systems to flag up outlandishly high death rates.

 

[ymu]

Oh, I am getting my posters beginning with p mixed up. pseudonarcissus mentioned 6-sigma (searched thread for the wrong term!).

 

[purenarcotic]

Ah I see. I was more saying people die because of under resourced and over stretched SWers trying to deal with very complex cases. The system has been so fucked about with that vulnerable people are killed or die because social services is no longer permitted to do the job it is supposed to be doing.

 

[spanglechick]

Oh, I am getting my posters beginning with p mixed up. pseudonarcissus mentioned 6-sigma (searched thread for the wrong term!).

i have to say, when pseudonarcissus started representing for PRP, i thought t was purenarcotic and was quite shocked!

 

[purenarcotic]

i have to say, when pseudonarcissus started representing for PRP, i thought t was purenarcotic and was quite shocked!

If I ever do start punting that rubbish you know it's time to call in the nice folk in white coats.

 

[Red Cat]

But teaching has always been like that.

No it hasn't! There was 1 education act between 1944 and 1980. There have been 40 since. And I didn't write dates down for this but until fairly recently the Sec of State for education had 3 powers, s/he now has 2,400.

As for education theorists - which education theorists do you have in mind? By most accepted measures, Finland has the best ed.system in the world. And they don't have SATS testing, setting or streaming, school ranking or inspections. The education theorists that I read are really supportive of such schooling.

 

[ymu]

They brought PRP in for us (not a school), with arbitrary limits on how many could be awarded 'outstanding'. We had decent bosses so they told us they'd award the outstandings to different people every year, starting with those on the lowest pay. Never caused a moment of angst after that.

 

[treefrog]

I'm another teacher who (I'd like to think) would benefit from PRP. Experienced, engages the kids, tries to do all the cool stuff I wish I'd done as a student, organised. Other teachers tell me how much my students rave about my classes and that Science is now one of the most popular subjects in our Personalised Learning Community (quite). I even run after school clubs and have given professional development to teachers on subjects as diverse as literacy in science and being culturally sensitive when teaching Maori students.

And PRP scares the fuck out of me. I don't mark kids books as often as some accountant might imagine I should. My lesson plans are a brief sentence written in a notebook (if that). I let the kids sit where they want rather than in literacy/numeracy tracked groups. Sometimes I forget that I have a half-hour duty monitoring a crossing once a week (I am the world's most rubbish lollipop lady, sorry I'm not sorry).

Someone who walks into my classroom on a Friday afternoon to sit in judgement upon my vocation might not know that Jayden is sitting listening to headphones because he's autistic and his music calms him down in a busy classroom. They won't see that Jasmine has cochlear implants under all that hair, and she's acting out because of frustration over being able to speak clearly because she's tired. They won't see a class who just don't have the mental patience to write much on a Friday afternoon so that's the lesson when we learn about science by jumping on chairs, using skateboards etc because I KNOW these kids and I know they'll happily sit next lesson and write up the Friday "Fun Time" in clear, enthusiastic sentences. All the inspector will see is a class not writing the "success criteria" correctly and a lack of explicit numeracy and I'll get slammed for not beng able to track the progress of my students in a way that's neat and sanitised by their ignorant standards.

I refuse to treat any judgement of my profession that is made by someone who has never been a teacher seriously or with respect. Kids aren't numbers and statistics, they're chaotic and complex and wonderful and to turn them and what we do in the classroom into data packets like so many robots is nauseating and goes against everything I go to work for. It's not what teaching is.

 

[Monkeygrinder's Organ]

That's bizarre, no one mentioned it - but I'm sure I saw it.

Sigma is the greek letter used for standard deviation in statistical equations. In a normal distribution, ~95% of the data points lie within +/- 2 sigma and ~99% with +/- 3 sigma and so on. Six sigma is an idea originating with quality control procedures in manufacturing which got a lot of attention within Public Health post-Shipman in developing systems to flag up outlandishly high death rates.

As far as I understand it it's specifically applied to the production of products where the aim is absolute standardisation - production lines knocking off a hundred thousand widgets a day type stuff - it's very hard to see it being any use in education or health.

 

[Miss-Shelf]

I'm another teacher who (I'd like to think) would benefit from PRP. Experienced, engages the kids, tries to do all the cool stuff I wish I'd done as a student, organised. Other teachers tell me how much my students rave about my classes and that Science is now one of the most popular subjects in our Personalised Learning Community (quite). I even run after school clubs and have given professional development to teachers on subjects as diverse as literacy in science and being culturally sensitive when teaching Maori students.

And PRP scares the fuck out of me. I don't mark kids books as often as some accountant might imagine I should. My lesson plans are a brief sentence written in a notebook (if that). I let the kids sit where they want rather than in literacy/numeracy tracked groups. Sometimes I forget that I have a half-hour duty monitoring a crossing once a week (I am the world's most rubbish lollipop lady, sorry I'm not sorry).

Someone who walks into my classroom on a Friday afternoon to sit in judgement upon my vocation might not know that Jayden is sitting listening to headphones because he's autistic and his music calms him down in a busy classroom. They won't see that Jasmine has cochlear implants under all that hair, and she's acting out because of frustration over being able to speak clearly because she's tired. They won't see a class who just don't have the mental patience to write much on a Friday afternoon so that's the lesson when we learn about science by jumping on chairs, using skateboards etc because I KNOW these kids and I know they'll happily sit next lesson and write up the Friday "Fun Time" in clear, enthusiastic sentences. All the inspector will see is a class not writing the "success criteria" correctly and a lack of explicit numeracy and I'll get slammed for not beng able to track the progress of my students in a way that's neat and sanitised by their ignorant standards.

I refuse to treat any judgement of my profession that is made by someone who has never been a teacher seriously or with respect. Kids aren't numbers and statistics, they're chaotic and complex and wonderful and to turn them and what we do in the classroom into data packets like so many robots is nauseating and goes against everything I go to work for. It's not what teaching is.

great post treefrog

I now teach adults who work during the day
sometimes they're full of energy and on task as planned
sometimes one of them falls asleep(I recently found that student is running the household for her siblings as well as dealing with her mumwho has seroius MH problems day and night)
sometimes theres a lot of unease if people have jyst picked up their marks before class
sometimes an amazing discussion arises which I didnt forsee and the rest of the lesson is ditched in favour of it
sometimes I planned something to the hilt which just didnt fly with that group

teaching cant be reduced to a package of pre planned input if it is going to move people to grow and learn

 

[ymu]

As far as I understand it it's specifically applied to the production of products where the aim is absolute standardisation - production lines knocking off a hundred thousand widgets a day type stuff - it's very hard to see it being any use in education or health.

It's just a statistical approach for identifying when things are not as you would expect them to be.

 

[Miss-Shelf]

It's just a statistical approach for identifying when things are not as you would expect them to be.

i would hope that many unexpected things happen in education or whats the point

 

[spanglechick]

i just read the goldacre thing. it depressed me. evidence-based research will lend athority to dictats which increasingly tell us there is one, correct way to teach. but teaching is not something you do with your actions, it is something you are with your personality. my closest colleague, in music, is also an outstandng teacher - but she rules with a rod of iron. her lessons are all about structure and control. it works wonderfully for her, but i cannot teach that way. conversely, my teaching is about mutual happiness and emotions and respect and freedom. about jokes and laughing. we are both outstanding teachers, but neither of us can say "do as i do, and you will be outstanding too" - it just doesnt work that way.

 

[Ich bin ein Mod]

My only experience of Ofsted at school was an inspector in an A' Level maths class. She objected to me being the only girl. I thought this was made-up ridiculousness, but it turned out that there had originally been another girl wanting to do double maths and that was the only reason I'd been allowed to do it. If I'd been the only girl wanting to do it, I would have been screwed over to please Ofsted.

I think teaching and doctors, especially GPs, are going through a crisis of de-professionalisation, whereby they are not trusted to make the right decisions for their practice and those in their care but instead have to hand over control to a box-ticking exercise controlled by professional managers who are complete amateurs in the field they're supposed to be managing.

Precisely. I'm fed up hearing "this is what HMIE are looking for" when it's not the right thing for the children in my care. Education shouldn't be reduced to a simple "do x get y" process, and I'd highly doubt that it can be.

 

[catinthehat]

Disempowering and deprofessionalising about hits the nail on the head. Its been a steady attack for years now. Whilst its true to say that many parents are starting to catch on that the service is being dismantled its a bit late. The Education Reform Act in the 80's was the start - targets, league tables, 'choice', tearing up of silver book, taking FE out of LA control, heavy handed ideological inspection regimes and so on. This has just been added to over the years and at each turn teachers pleas of 'this is not going to work/it is not working' can be shot down because they have been labelled by politicians and the media as a bunch of trots who are either nonces or lazy or both. Thus their complaints have been able to be dismissed because the government were 'on the side of parents and children'. Experiments and failings do not come to light immediately but teachers can often spot them coming but if you discredit them as a group what they say does not count.

Testing is not about improvement more about manufacturing data - you don't fatten pigs by weighing them. Funding has become so complex it takes an army of support staff to manage it. When I first started in FE about 25% of the staff were support - now they outnumber the teaching staff and no one is in any doubt who rules the roost. The rise in support staff has also coincided with the rise in the amount of admin done by teaching staff - if its not documented it has not been done. What counts for students is people who know their subject, can impart it with enthusiasm and in interesting ways, who care about their progress, who understand the assessment mechanisms and prepare them well and who have a bit of time for them when they need help or support. They want consistency and continuity. The same ejits that bang on about employability then say each students preferred learning style must be attended to - if you give varied classes then you cover these. Providing students with materials in only their 'preferred style' as per HMIE dictats hardly makes them employable. 'Could you include a range of images in my contract please - I am a visual learner'........

 

[pseudonarcissus]

I refuse to treat any judgement of my profession that is made by someone who has never been a teacher seriously or with respect. Kids aren't numbers and statistics, they're chaotic and complex and wonderful and to turn them and what we do in the classroom into data packets like so many robots is nauseating and goes against everything I go to work for. It's not what teaching is.

I really don't mean to be judgemental, I' think I've leant a lot from this thread...thank you for your understanding
And purenarcotic, sorry for any reputation all damage due the similarity in names

 

[kittyP]

Due to being a learning support assistant I have had the privileged of working with many many different teachers over the years and seen many different styles and ways of teaching.

In the main the teachers I have enjoyed working with most are those that are able to embrace chaos and throw caution to the wind for the sake of having engaged and fulfilled students.
But they are often crushed by inspections/inspection standards and constant supervision and testing.

I have worked with a few teachers who tick every box, meet every mark and look glowing on test sheets but there students are ultimately disengaged, unfulfilled and in one or two cases just scared in to sitting still and putting pen to paper.

Ultimately, what does the government want out of education?
Do they want to produce free thinking, maybe brilliant but maybe sometimes unpredictable adult members of society?
OR do they want to produce adults that fit in to nice little boxes and do what they are told?
I think there in may lie the answer.

 

[equationgirl]

With GPs, it's about getting paid for for things which they get paid bonuses for doing. If it might be heart disease, diabetes or cancer-related, you're likely to be over-tested and over-treated but if it doesn't fit into a box with a financially-rewarded target, they're not interested.

Slight-aside but my GP is obsessed with running tests on me for diabetes (I don't have it). My blood sugar reading is borderline because of one of my meds (this is well-documented and known about by the manufacturer). Even the receptionists are now apologetic when they call me in for my tests. I refused to have them redone for the third time recently because I was so fed up with the whole thing.

He doesn't give a shit about my kidney problems or chronic pain conditions either (guess they're not part of his targets!).

 

[toggle]

With GPs, it's about getting paid for for things which they get paid bonuses for doing. If it might be heart disease, diabetes or cancer-related, you're likely to be over-tested and over-treated but if it doesn't fit into a box with a financially-rewarded target, they're not interested.

Nods. met oneds like that. if you'[re lucky though you find one that treats a complex problem as a puzzle that needs an answer rather than a problem that needs to go awayt.