10.30
Ofsted Regional Director, Christopher Russellwill attend for a discussion with the Committee.
Minutes:
Christopher Russell, Ofsted Regional Director, had been invited to attend the Meeting to discuss with the Council in what ways it could work with Ofsted to ensure the best educational outcomes for all the children in Oxfordshire. The debate would also provide a chance to raise awareness of the key challenges faced by the Council in the provision of Education and improvement of educational standards across the County.
During questions and discussion members:
· Established that the new Ofsted Chief Inspector, Amanda Spielman, would be fiercely independent and interested in evidence based training and would inevitably bring new flavour and individualism, but that it was envisaged that not too many changes would be made. There would be a strong focus on validity – a chance for Ofsted to look critically at what they were doing and to look at whether they were looking at the right things to assess whether a school was good. The bringing in house of schools inspections would improve things dramatically. There was a very strong direction in terms of focusing decisions and making them evidence based. Ofsted would also be carrying out a large survey to look at the curriculum.
· Established that an inspection converting from short to full did not always mean that a school was bad. Mr Russell reported that the starting point for a short inspection was whether the school was good, it had to be focused to be good. There might be things inspectors needed to look at in the first day such as safeguarding. If this was the case, the inspection would then convert to get around that. There was no suggestion that if the inspection converted that the school was bad, sometimes there was just a need to convert to get a full judgment. Many schools had converted and got outstanding. It was new for Ofsted, although it was felt the mythology had been tested and inspectors were now leading. Ofsted had to focus on safeguarding.
· In relation as to whether the new Chief Inspector had any intention to do something on standards and social mobility and whether there were any plans to change the Ofsted framework, established that when Ofsted had significant evidence they would make those statements. In relation to the framework, it had to evolve and move on in terms of feedback, it would therefore change, had changed this term bringing Ofsted inspections in. Ofsted were always looking at it and considering it. They did try to keep the inspections about key things and make sure the sector was consulted on changes.
· In relation as to whether Ofsted have a view on inadequate schools that were in limbo waiting for an academy sponsor to come forward and whether Ofsted could revisit in this period which could be substantial, confirmed that the routine monitoring that Ofsted had carried out had now ceased as it could take a very long time and was in no-ones interest. If there was a safeguarding issue Ofsted did go back within 3-6 months and could take the school out of the category. Ofsted were currently looking at the situation more generally. Now once it got to 5 months a review would be triggered.
Ofsted further recognised the issue of sponsors not coming forward due to schools needing a lot of investment due to being in a very bad state of repair. Ofsted were looking at an alternative to routine monitoring. Mr Russell confirmed that Ofsted shared the Members concern and confirmed that the Chief Inspector would escalate the situation up to Government if evidence showed this happening across the County.
· The education scrutiny committee recognised that there was underperformance of disadvantaged children in Oxfordshire schools and that there were some areas of advantage with small numbers of disadvantaged children. In relation to how Ofsted viewed and take small numbers into account when inspecting these schools, Mr Russell reported that in the case of small schools it was often a common sense judgement. When there was a small amount of children not performing well, inspectors looked for an alga rhythm. What Ofsted would want is for that to be properly evaluated. There was a need to insure inspectors received the correct training and were able to apply professional judgement. In answer to questions from members about whether Ofsted had any intel on how small schools were performing in Oxfordshire, Mr Russell confirmed that the picture for Oxfordshire was generally good with a bit of a dip for primary and gave an undertaking to have a look at primary and to get back to the Committee if there were any issues.
· In relation to how Ofsted would take into account (when carrying out inspections) the declining funding for both designated early years grants and all local authority school improvement services, established that Ofsted had a framework and criteria and that there job as inspectorate was to make a judgement against those criteria. Ofsted were aware that schools were funding differently. The window for inspections was on the journey from 5 years to 3 years. It would not be right or possible to change the standard, but Ofsted did recognise the issues. It was the organisations job to do individual inspections, but if during inspections they found common themes it would be reported on.
· In relation to Ofsted’s own budget and staffing decreasing and the possible impact on inspections going forward in Oxfordshire, the committee noted that Ofsted funding had decreased year on year as an organisation so they were used to it and there were clear plans in place to deal with it. Ofsted changed how they inspected in terms of frequency and tarrifs etc, it was easily manageable. Mr Russell confirmed that Ofsted had no plans to change how often they inspected schools, so they knew where the funding was going.
· On the issue of when schools were re-inspected they were often less than good and that the assumption should not be that good schools remained Good, Mr Russel confirmed that Ofsted were aware of this issue and that the movement from 5 to 3 years inspections was hoped to improve this situation in that Ofsted could hopefully influence what sometimes might only be a dip and therefore stop schools falling out of that category. He stressed the importance of a ‘good inspection’ setting people at ease and of schools not getting stressed about the inspection and his hope that the shorter inspection reducing stress.
· With regard to the annual detailed school data analysis by the local authority which highlighted outstanding schools which were declining, members questioned whether there was any scope for the local authority to liaise with Ofsted to potentially bring forward an inspection. In response, Mr Russel commented that although Ofsted always made their own judgement as to when to inspect, they would be happy for local authorities to bring issues to their attention and that if standards were dropping significantly, Ofsted would welcome the intel.
· In relation to safeguarding coming into the framework and how Ofsted were going to ensure there were no safeguarding issues in outstanding schools, Mr Russel explained that if Ofsted picked up any intelligence regarding safeguarding issues at a school they would go straight in. He highlighted the importance of Ofsted and the local authority working together on this issue.
· Members questioned how Ofsted would authenticate any evidence received during a school inspection, regarding the local authority involvement. In response, Mr Russel reported that that they would triangulate and check the information out. Firstly, Ofsted would meet with the local authority and if there were concerns about how the school was being supported by the local authority there were clear strategies in place.
· Inspectors were trained to get underneath the evidence to see what the impact was on the ground. Ofsted also held forums and had an annual meeting with local authorities for raising issues. Professional development was achieved by inspectors consistently learning from carrying out inspections.
· Regarding Ofsted’s view of how Oxfordshire managed the provision of education for Looked after Children placed both in county and out of county, Mr Russel commented that their overview came mainly from inspections and that the most recent inspection was very positive in relation to children in care. Ofsted only tended to pick up if there were issues
Following the question and answer session, the Chairman thanked the Regional Director for a positive discussion and AGREED that he be invited to attend again in a year.