3Di in Focus

Ofsted and Progressing Schools

September 2011.

“There is a clear trend of improvement. School data and pupils’ books indicate improvements in attainment………progress has accelerated……….after significant changes to staffing, the school has a core of experienced senior staff with high levels of expertise.”

“In the most effective practice, the teachers planned outcomes that were challenging for the pupils and they drew high quality responses from them.”

“Teaching was well structured and delivered at a suitably brisk pace.”

“There was a good range of teaching styles that successfully engaged pupils and enhanced their understanding.”

“Teachers’ expectations were well pitched and modified to meet pupils’ different needs.”

These are all quotes from the Ofsted monitoring report on a school that was given “notice to improve” as an outcome of an inspection earlier in the year.

The previous Section Five inspection had stated, “This school requires significant improvement, because it is performing significantly less well than in all the circumstances it could be reasonably be expected to perform.”

It went on to say that there were inconsistencies in teaching, that work was inappropriate for the levels of pupil understanding and that the more able pupils were not being stretched.

On a more positive note, it said that the pupils had a “strong sense of wellbeing”.

However, improvements were made, and things appeared to be progressing well, as further comments from the monitoring report made clear.

“Regular evaluation” “Good subject knowledge” “Setting realistic targets” “Perceptive questioning” “Rigorous procedures have been implemented for tracking pupil progress” “robust analysis of the quality of teaching and learning”.

This all seems to be a successful case of Ofsted’s “ability” to diagnose a problem in a school, and the management of that school having the “capacity”  and “capability” to make changes that adhere to the guidelines and protocols for an effective place of teaching and learning.

Changes in schools do take time, and it is positive to hear that this school managed to turn their criticisms into actions that significantly improved the quality of education for their pupils.

So why did the head teacher feel a need to resign from his position a mere five months after receiving a note from Ofsted in September to say that progress was indeed on track?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2012/feb/11/headteacher-downhill-quits-row-gove?INTCMP=SRCH

Leslie Church resigned from his job after another Ofsted inspection in January 2012. Why did a school receive a full inspection within twelve months of the previous inspection? It wasn’t even placed in Special Measures.

When a school is placed in Special Measures they receive a series of monitoring visits, not a full Section Five inspection. So how did this school receive this special treatment?

Apparently Mr. Michael Gove ordered it.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2012/jan/17/michael-gove-inspection-school-academy?INTCMP=SRCH

The governors and senior management of the school did not want to change the status of their school but Mr. Gove had other ideas.

“The school has been told that either Gove will make an "academy order" or the governors can vote to do so themselves "by no later than 27 January 2012". The school will be run by a private sponsor, possibly an existing academy chain, a business, university or private school.”

The Guardian – January 2012

Mr. Church complained about the undemocratic process involved here.

"We have a democratically elected governing body, a democratically elected local authority. If you are dissatisfied with the performance of the school you have the right to un-elect these governors, un-elect these local authority councillors. In an academy, that is not the case."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2011/dec/15/michael-gove-undemocratic-treatment-school?INTCMP=SRCH

So how did Mr. Gove manage to do this? How does he suddenly have the power to intervene in a situation and order a school to change its status from a local authority maintained school to academy status – i.e. under the direct charge of centralised government?

He managed it by sweeping in a range of subtle or rather unsolicited changes within the Education Bill that was passed at the end of last year. The Secretary of State for Education now has more power than the position has ever had, and fifty more powers were introduced within the bill.

Fifty!

http://davidwolfe.org.uk/wordpress/archives/1064

On a whim, the Education Secretary now has the power to intervene in any situation, and not just in the case of a school being placed in Special Measures. He or she (when there is a change in management) can decide on the fate of a school, on the fate of the pupils within that school, on the fate of the careers of the professionals within that school if the local authority are concerned about the school, if Ofsted gives a “notice to improve” or if it is placed in Special Measures.

Furthermore, the Secretary of State has the power to order an inspection as and when he feels like it.

The irony of this is mesmerising and terrifying. The government espouses a clear direction of accountability, stating clearly within their manifesto and their coalition agreement that they want services for the people in the hands of the people – true, real, effective, localised democracy. So how do the powers of the Secretary of State link into this philosophy of governance?

The ideal is that schools are self-governing, free from the constraints of local authority doctrines, able to make decisions about their teaching and learning without the restrictions of a prescriptive National Curriculum, and yet simultaneously, the government wants all schools to become academies or free schools which essentially places the accountability and the governance right back at the heart of central government, in the jurisdiction of THE Secretary of State for Education.

The case of Downhills Primary School in Haringey is frightening for so many reasons. The lack of democracy is appalling. The powers of the Secretary of State are all too clear. The consistency of Ofsted and their independence is massively under question here, and the sad truth is that this is surely not the only school in this position.

Had the governors and the head teacher complied with the original plea for the school to become an academy, would they have had this further Ofsted inspection, and let us remind ourselves what Ofsted allegedly stands for.

It is the Office for Standards in Education and is supposed to be independent from government, enabling them to make objective decisions and judgments.

Is this really the case here?

What would have happened, for instance, if the Ofsted inspection had found out that, further to the improvements recorded by one of their inspectors in September, the school was progressing well?

If that had been the case wouldn’t Mr. Gove have a considerable amount of egg on his face in such a high profile case? So what choice did the Ofsted team have other than to comply with the request from their boss?

It is cases like these, and they are not single cases at all, that need to be highlighted.

Referring back to the Will Hutton report in the Observer, many schools and many good managers in schools are only too happy to receive objective and helpful criticism of their work. Most managers in schools are there for the purpose of supporting and enabling young people to enjoy learning and flourish in life.

Accountability is essential, and no manager is going to shy away from that.

However, it is the manner of that accountability that is in question, and its independence and objectivity, as well as its over-emphasis on one aspect of learning and one aspect of intelligence.

Referring back to the first inspection report on Downhills Primary School, it stated that the children felt secure and calm in school, that there were good relationships throughout the school and the pupils were aware of their self-worth.

Surely, a more positive intervention would be to see this essential and vital positive description of a school and see how these relationships and the security that the children felt in school could be used to enhance and develop their learning experience?

The school has 40 languages in the school. The proportion of pupils that receive free school meals is “well above the national average”. Pupil mobility is a significant issue with many children transferring in and out of school within each and every year.

Added to this the school is in one of those precarious and ridiculous situations whereby they are placed on an outer London per capita funding for their pupils but they have to pay their staff Inner London weighting. Before they have even had to deal with the difficult circumstances to improve and enable learning, they are at a financial deficit.

This is preposterous.

How can Ofsted possibly be seen as an independent, consistent and objective organisation of accountability to support and critique schools with the new powers that have been granted to the Secretary of State for Education?

How can we, as parents, teachers and management trust in the judgments of Ofsted when such mixed messages and contradictory comments about a school are reported on in such a short space of time?

How can we trust in democracy and accountability if the real power of decision making is placed in the hands of one person?

Isn’t it about time that we really looked at what schools are being judged on and whether these are truly the essence of effective education and not just effective schooling?

Spiritual Intelligence and Human Values

Many people appear completely baffled by, or have real problems with understanding, the idea of spiritual intelligence. Whilst learning to be spiritually intelligent may not be easy, it’s fairly clear what we need to do.

The foremost task of parents and of schools is to teach pupils how to learn and how to become independent learners – how to ask questions, and how to seek answers. Intelligent schools and homes see learning as something that’s as natural and as desirable as breathing and eating, and something that’s crucial to every individual’s growth and well-being. Such schools and homes try to help all members of their community or family towards a love of learning, and recognise the truth in the saying, “More than wealth or power, education is the key to human dignity”.

We need to recognise that individuals learn in different ways, and must ultimately find their own answers, beliefs and truths which will enable them to fulfil themselves as individuals and as members of communities and societies. Lifelong, self-directed seeking after knowledge, truth and meaning inevitably leads to greater enlightenment, peace and productive living for us all.

So what? you may say. The problem is that many schools and homes do exactly the opposite – they expect their children, their students, to be passive and not active learners - they tell them what to think and what to remember. They operate a “transmission” model of teaching and learning, and they teach in a didactic manner, which is traditional in many societies. (Even though as far back as Socrates many scholars and philosophers have believed that learning should be based on dialogue and not didacticism.)

Back in the 19th Century, at the beginning of the State education system in Britain, Charles Dickens, a truly great writer in the English language, wrote a wonderful book called Hard Times, which is in part a satire on an education system that he believed stifled, strangled and stunted children. The book begins with the words, “Facts. Give these children nothing but facts.”

Whose facts? Which facts? In modern societies we recognise the difficulty in believing  there are so-called key facts that should be ‘understood’ and assimilated by everyone. Such beliefs are especially problematic in multi-cultural, multi-ethnic, multi-faith societies populated by diverse peoples of different traditions, different beliefs, and different values. Whatever is recognised as factual and true in one section of the community is nothing of the kind to many other people.

Consider the struggle in the United States between “creationists” and others – those who consider the words written in the Christian Bible to be literally true, and those who do not. There we see prosecutions of individuals whose only crime or misdemeanor has been to reiterate the tenets of ‘Darwinism’ and the theory of evolution – the belief that human beings have their origins in and are descended from the family of the apes, and not through creation by a Divine Being. Imagine this situation in reverse – with fundamentalist Christians being prosecuted, victimised and demonised by Darwinists.

Herein lies the key problem for our societies and our schools – how to promote pluralism, tolerance, and respect for others of different backgrounds, beliefs and values.

We must consider the extent to which our schools are truly inclusive places:
* Open to pupils of all abilities and backgrounds
* Free from the need to promote particular beliefs
* Able to help all pupils consider for themselves, and to make decisions about, different sets of values and beliefs
* Able to help all pupils become “spiritually intelligent” - to learn proper respect for themselves, and respect for others who adopt different beliefs and values.

So how well do schools perform according to these criteria? Is there a respect for children, and a determination to treat them with kindness, and with the same courtesy and consideration we would show to adults?

At 3Di we value high academic achievement and the development of the intellect, but we don’t consider these forms of learning and intelligence to be superior or of greater priority – indeed it’s difficult to see how children’s academic and intellectual potential can be optimised without the underpinning of a balanced development of all their intelligences, all their potentials, through meeting all of their needs – personal, spiritual, social, emotional, physical, instinctual and intellectual.

In a spiritually intelligent community, where there is also a high degree of emotional intelligence and social intelligence, there is the potential for harmony and non-aggression, for cooperation rather then competition, and collaboration rather than isolation and suspicion. In other words there is an atmosphere of peace and trust, of sharing and giving, where the whole is greater than the sum of the parts.

Where all of this comes to fruition, in certain high-performing schools for example, to the average visitor it might seem like stepping on to another planet, and entering a place where lives are lived according to different rules, different values, different expectations. It seems almost impossible to understand – how children who can be seen acting with aggression and violence and hatred in other contexts – in the streets and estates and parks – can be seen exercising self-discipline, cooperation and respect for others in an inclusive, spiritually intelligent community called a school.

The curriculum for spiritual intelligence consists for the most part of the ‘informal’ learning that goes on from the moment a child enters the school – whether as a 4 year old or as an older child transferring – and they discover that “this is the way we do things here, this is how we interact, how we solve problems, how we relate to one another”.

This curriculum promotes what the Japanese call “zest for living” – developing an appreciation of how good it feels to live, learn and work in a community where there is the appreciation and love of other people, where there is an appreciation of beautiful and stimulating surroundings, of freedom from aggression and injustice and fear, appreciation of being accepted and respected for who one is and what one believes, whatever that might be, whatever one’s current level of ability or learning. Such places develop high levels of enthusiasm, and feelings of joy and well-being, as well as greater commitment to learning, and confidence that one can be successful.

Certain key concepts for developing spiritual intelligence can be found in 3Di’s schemes of work with a sharp focus on human values and human virtues. These are values that are subscribed to by humanists and also by people of no particular religion, as well as by members of the many different faith communities throughout the world – values that give meaning to life and help to direct our most positive beliefs and actions. They are values that help to make our families, our communities and our societies better places to live in for all of us. Without such values we descend into strife, conflict, selfishness and aggression.

The following list is a summary of the key words and concepts we need to understand as part of our curriculum for human values and spiritual intelligence.

If your children score highly in understanding these key ideas, and also in living life according to these human values, then they will indeed be high in emotional, social and spiritual intelligence, which means that their school will almost certainly be doing a good job, and their parents will too.

TRUTH
Curiosity, Equality, Honesty, Integrity, Intuition, Optimism, Truthfulness, Self-knowledge, Reasoning

LOVE
Caring, compassion, friendship, forgiveness, generosity, helpfulness, joy, kindness, tolerance, sharing, sympathy, patience

PEACE
calmness, contentment, dignity, discipline, happiness, honesty, humility, understanding, patience, reflection, self-confidence, self-control, self-discipline, self-respect, optimism

RIGHT CONDUCT
Contentment, Courage, Dependability, Duty, Ethics, Gratitude, Good behaviour, Healthy living, Helpfulness, Leadership, Initiative, Unity, Respect, Responsibility, Sacrifice, Self-confidence, Self-sufficiency, Simplicity, Perseverance

NON-VIOLENCE
Appreciation of others, brotherhood/sisterhood, citizenship, compassion, concern for all life, consideration, cooperation, unwillingness to hurt, equality, forgiveness, global awareness, good manners, loyalty, social justice, service to others, respect for people and property, unity, universal love, collaboration

© Gary Foskett 2011

This is a revised version of an article that was first published in The Promota magazine in 2008