OFSTED (Office for Standards in Education)

Teachers in the UK have a favourite organisation towards which we all turn with awe and trembling - OFSTED. This is the organisation that inspects schools, child care providers and initial teacher training providers.

The inspection outcomes for schools are now largely determined by examination outcomes data and the self evaluation form ("SEF") completed by the school itself. The notice period for an inspection is two working days, but with only two days of on-site inspection evidence gathering - typically OFSTED will ring on the Friday to let a head teacher know they are coming on the Tuesday or Wednesday of the following week. We were told this would reduce the stress of inspection by removing the weeks of lead in to a known inspection date when everyone panics. Not so. When schools know they are due an inspection because it is three years since their last inspection they go into a permanent state of inspection panic which can, as in the case of my school, last for a whole year ...

My school got the phone call on Friday, and the inspectors are in today and tomorrow. Half the science staff, and some other staff, went in to school on Saturday and Sunday (not me, I hasten to add).... Panic or what! Personally, I have evaded it entirely - lesson 1 this morning all the inspectors were in meetings with the Senior Leadership Team, Lesson 2 they were "evidence gathering" but I was taking part in a meeting elsewhere in my trade union capacity .... and I don't teach again until Thursday afternoon by which time it will all be over. As a colleague said to me this morning when they saw me in school and hadn't expected to see me: "I thought you were avoiding OFSTED ...".

It is my second encounter with OFSTED this year, as they carried out a short inspection of Maryvale Institute's PGCE course in May. This came out with a judgement that "the overall quality of training is at least good". One of the key strengths identified was "the reflection encouraged by intellectually challenging assignments". The text of the report also commented that "Assignments are carefully marked according to clearly defined and regularly reviewed criteria and trainees receive extended feedback". The assignments are not the only area of the course I contribute to, but they are the area to which I have contributed most. So I did enjoy those parts of OFSTED's report.

Only one point for action was identified: "ensuring that the training meets the needs of trainees working in non-Catholic schools and from non-Catholic backgrounds". The PGCE has always had some trainees who are non-Catholics - mostly Christians of other denominations, but also Muslim and Jewish students. Their response to Maryvale as a Catholic institution is very positive. If you look at some of my posts in recent months, you will see a number addressing the issue of dialogue, particularly inter-religious dialogue. This has been in part prompted by the OFSTED reports point for action. Whilst one can perhaps see a secularising agenda on the part of the OFSTED inspectors, from Maryvale's side it can be seen as a fair question about how the organisation enters into dialogue with its students from other religious backgrounds at the same time as retaining its integrity as a Catholic institution.

Every Child Matters - a parent's comment

The following has come via a comment on the post "School bans girl's crisps". I publish it here as a discrete post. The comment is of interest as one thing I did not say in the post it responded to was... that the school involved was a Catholic primary school. I have also just amused myself by looking up its OFSTED report, published in January of this year. The school achieved an overall effectiveness grade 2 (good).

From the text of the report:

"Pupils have an excellent understanding of how to live healthy and safe lives. One said, 'I run up and down the stairs - it warms me up and gives me exercise!'"

And then from the list of judgements at the end of the report:

"The extent to which learners adopt healthy lifestyles grade 1 (outstanding)
The extent to which learners adopt safe practices grade 1 (outstanding)"

Well, there are circumstances where it may be quite safe to run up and down stairs (I can think of an experiment sometimes done in science lessons to work out the power of a person); but, as a general rule, for primary age pupils in their general movement around a building, it would be discouraged in favour of walking! Oh, wonderful, wonderful, OFSTED.

Though I know of the "All that I am" programme to which this comment refers, I am not familiar with the content of the programme and its materials. I would be happy to receive comments with other people's experiences of the programme. I am not sure that I would agree with characterising the ECM agenda as "evil" per se, but I can see that it is giving rise to serious difficulties. I suspect, as this comment seems to indicate, that Catholic schools need to be a bit more critical/assertive in the way in which they respond to the demands of ECM.

I did leave a comment earlier about my experiences of ECM, as a parent. It must have somehow got lost on the worldwide web. I shall try again.1.Collecting my children from school earlier this year, a question on the way home in the car from my son: "mum, what`s child pornography". The two 7 year olds in the back asked as well, as I tried not to steer the car off the road into a tree. They had a visit from the local policeman who, as it turns out, went into some detail about what child pornography is and why it gets on the internet and to please ring them on this number if they suspect they have seen any. It led to many questions from my children about why people would want to view this stuff or produce it in the first place. I was shaking by the time I got home. This part of the timetable came under something called "personal health and safety" and my enquiries showed that it is part of the Every Child Matters Agenda. We know every child matters. Show me anyone who actively believes "Only Some Children Matter". Those who don`t think any children matter will eventually be dealt with by the courts, as with Victoria Climbie's killer( which gave rise to this ECM stuff).It is complete nonsense and being used to enforce a secular/anything goes agenda in our Catholic schools. THEY are the ones affected by it, not the community schools. It is ONLY in a Catholic school that children will be taught that certain things are moral absolutes and wrong: abortion, pre-marital sex, divorce, to name the 3 obvious ones. What ECM is succeeding in doing (because teachers do not want to ignore a government directive - their jobs depend upon it)is under-mining parents' right to educate their Catholic children in matters of the faith. And these are literally matters of life and death. My childrens' dignity was assaulted by this health and safety lesson. They and I were violated. But parents have no recourse. Everyone in authority supports this ECM nonsense. NO-one wants to rock the boat for fear of being unable to pay their mortgage in 6 months' time..

2.My son in year 5 last year was put through a programme called " All that I Am". This is a sex education programme that has been approved by the Department of Health and funded by them, in co-operation with the Church for use in our schools. The last time I checked, the DOH didn`t share my values about sex education for chlidren. However, that aside, and trusting that it would be fine - this is a Catholic shcool, after all - I ticked the box agreeing to it. My son, at the end of the week relayed to me all that he had learned. I had also taken the trouble to read the programme myself. It is big on dignity, self-worth, God's love. Doesn`t mention chastity once. The teacher (non-catholic) taking them through the programme expanded onto teenage sex, and how many teenagers are getting STDs because they are becoming sexually active "too early". Sexuality was not taught within the context of the Sacrament of marriage. It was taught as an animal bodily function with a bit of spirituality thrown in. This was a real mistake on my part to have allowed my son to go through this. I should never have put his soul in this position, and it has caused enormous distress. I do not know how I could have been so utterly stupid. With hindsight, I should have removed him from school, for the week, and taken him through the teaching myself. I have since, with the help of Grace, ironed out the misunderstandings and filled in the teachings of the Church for him. I will not make the same mistake again.These are just 2 small examples, Joseph, of how ECM is being used to enforce, by stealth, (you can be sure most people aren`t even noticing)this government's anti-Christian agenda. They are not anti-faith, as such. We parents just have to put up with it, or take our own evasive/curative action. NO-one is listening to us -our priests (with notable vocal exceptions - Fr Tim Finegan understands this perfectly), our teachers or our governors. NO-one wants to speak out.And, the government has also brought a supplementary document to ECM called " Every Muslim Child Matters". When I rang the Schools Department to ask for a copy of "Every Catholic Child Matters", they told me that that was not one of their publications. We are not imagining this, Joseph. ECM is evil. MY children matter to me, and I will not have their dignity and my authority udnermined by ECM. I do believe I am not alone, but as you can appreciate, with so very little support, you have be robust to speak out.

I am glad you have raised ECM. Because it certainly matters to me, and many parents. I believe, from terrible experience, it is much more serious than low fat crisps.

"School bans girl's crisps"

"Allergy girl told off for eating low-fat snack.

A mum believes her daughter is being discriminated against at her school - because of her dietary needs. AG says her daughter N, 11, who has wheat allergy and attends X school, was told she could not have her low-fat crisps as a lunchtime snack because they were not allowed under the school's healthy-eating policy....

N suffered seven painful years with Irritable Bowel Syndrome before she was diagnosed with the allergy. Since her diet change, her IBS has calmed.

Her packed lunch now consists of wheat-free pitta bread with ham or chicken, a rice crisp bar, a packet of low-fat crisps and fruit...AG said her daughter used to be overweight but she worked with Havering PCT's junior weight programme and lost 2 st in nine weeks last year."

This is from my local paper this week. One might see the point to a school encouraging healthy eating in the food it provides for its school meals, but it gets a bit alarming to see that being extended to monitoring the packed lunches of pupils. The paper's report ends with the paragraph:

"A Havering Council spokesman said: 'The school has offered to arrange a meeting with AG and invite a dietician to help them discuss the matter and find healthy eating alternatives'."

So it is not just a case of a member of staff at the school saying something when they are unfamiliar with the medical background - it looks like a policy being enforced. One would have thought the school could recognise the special need relating to this pupil, particularly given the medical history and previous collaboration with health initiatives.

But, of course, OFSTED now report on how well pupils in a school adopt healthy lifestyles (the "be healthy" strand of the Every Child Matters framework, which includes a measure relating to how many young people are eating their "5 portions a day"), and what they eat at school is an easily measurable aspect of this. I wonder if this is influencing this school's approach here?