Secret Teacher - letter to Ofsted Inspectors

Gove looks spooky, so he must be wrong, or at least suspect.
Kids must get the basics at the first stages of education, I'm pretty sure we did so 80 years or more ago, Many then went on to learn, perhaps after they left school, they had the tools, they could read, and write, some could even add up. If they couldn't they knew when they were skint.
Learn the basics ,even if by rote, then progress can be made. Iv'e stated before that some uni courses cannot begin until the new students have been brought up to an appropriate standard to enable them to start the course. A term or so wasted. This cannot be good enough.
Someone, I can't remember who, or when, said that their was more to be studied now, thats true and is apparent on some general knowledge quiz shows, where many teachers show up badly not having a good general knowledge and sometimes are not to good on the subject they are teaching .Specialisation should be reserved until a good general knowledge has been attained.
And whats wrong with grammar schools, we don't expect someone who can only swim a width attempt a channel crossing.Work on their abilities by all means, but don't hold back the good swimmers.
The only targets that should be concentrated on should be the aim to get everyone reading and writing at a very early age. I've got nothing to "blue" but no doubt a counter argument is out there, and some agreement.

It's made more difficult when in some areas English is the second language of the majority of the students.

Brilliant letter in the Guardian. It's no wonder we have problems with the 3 Rs when one of them begins with "w" and another begins with "a".

Read this somewhere, "Letter from an immigrant to his parents" Love it here in England, only been here 6 months and can already speak Polish.

Ha bloody Ha Deserving - send us the link ... or do you not know how to 'blue'.

Can't really agree with you there mamie. As school governors we have a school improvement officer on our backs all the time with sheets of data telling us that we are not meeting national targets for each year and that this is what OfSted wants - with 30% SEN children in school how can we meet these targets? - and I would not wish to. I want children to meet their own potential not Gove's target.

Are you sure that it is not national data for progress in similar schools, Mishap? This is from the DfE's website:

"The measures of progress used are: transition between key stages; levels of progress; and value added approaches. The main way that progress will be measured is by simple transition tables from one key stage to the next."

I don't think simple comparisons with national standards have been the sole measure for a long time. Have you used the "dashboard data?". It should give you the rates of progress against similar schools.

We have the "dashboard data" and it directly contradicts our regular monitoring of the children's progress throughout the year.

But to be honest, even if it didn't, I do not think this data has any value whatsoever in helping teachers to deal with the needs of each individual child.

There is far too much monitoring and too little scope for teachers to have the freedom to teach well, rather than teach to data or tests, which truly is what they have to do. I just admire the way that they manage to create quality learning and a caring environment when they are put under such pressure all the time.

The data compares the actual results of the tests, Mishap. Are you saying that the school's monitoring of progress doesn't match its actual test results?
I have to disagree with you about the usefulness of data. One of my link schools had a very challenging intake and a large proportion of pupils with SEN. By careful monitoring of progress and targeted teaching the school was in the top 100 in the country for progress compared with similar schools. The monitoring and use of data should be to inform and improve teaching, otherwise there is not much point.

I was educated in the 60s and 70s. I'm literate and numerate and, just as importantly imo, I have a love of learning. I didn't leave school and think, 'that's it...I don't have to bother to learn anything else or ever read a book again.'

I was also able to move into adult society with an understanding of my place in it and how it works because I had been more than a receptacle to fill with knowledge in order to achieve targets.

OK, VQ, let's forget having been teachers, advisers, governors, inspectors for a minute.
Is that really what you see happening to your grandchildren? Because I don't. My GDs are in Years 3 and 6 in a normal state primary. I see huge excitement and love of learning in what they do, day to day. The younger is doing rock formation in Year 3, she can tell you about different rock formation, describe the experiment she did crushing biscuits with buried sweets to make fossils and spell igneous, metamorphic and sedimentary. She can find her way around YouTube to watch films of volcanic eruption. The elder moans about how much time she spends on homework to practise spellings and tables, but the school has ignited a love of history; they have visited Roman villas, had Victorian days, made sarcophagi for mummified bananas etc
I can't believe their school is unusual.
I think many teachers are demoralised by the very negative view of them that is expressed by politicians and the press. I think that despite that, many do manage to retain the joy in teaching and learning that is at the heart of what they do.
I think it is important to distinguish between the misuse of data by press and politicians and the effective use of data to inform teaching and learning.

Yes - that is exactly the situaiton mamie - the data we look at from the school at each governors' meeting does not tally with the dashboard stuff, which shows a gloomier picture. Where does this dashboard stuff come from? I am on the case with trying to get to the bottom of this.

I do not object to teachers monitoring the progress of their pupils - they always have done this and this is how they know how things are going and how best to help each child get on. What I dislike is the comparisons with other schools and the demoralizing effect that this can have - how can you get a true comparison? - where is there another school with 46 pupils, a third of whom have SEN?

The inter-schools comparison is not helpful to anyone. It just puts teachers under pressure to behave in ways that they may not feel are right. When you have children in the class who have huge family problems (a terminally ill sibling, a mother who has just died etc. - these are true examples of what is happening), the staff have other duties to those children in terms of sensitivity and making allowances for slow progress; and to the rest of the class, who, in such a small school, are also affected by what is happening to their classmates.

Does this help, Mishap?
dashboard.ofsted.gov.uk/School%20Data%20Dashboard%20-%20similar%20school%20methodology.pdf
It is complicated, but it should give you the data on expected progress between Key Stages, based on what similar schools achieve. It should show how much improvement is to be expected based on the prior attainment of the pupils in your school. Obviously your smallish intake makes the data less reliable, but the percentage of SEN should not affect it. It is based on similar schools with similar socio-economic data and similar ability range. Of course SEN does not automatically equal low ability either.
There is another part of the site where you can put in the school name and see the quintiles on the "dashboard".
If the data says that progress should be better than the school's monitoring suggests, then it is perfectly legitimate for governors to ask questions. It may be about teaching, assessment methodology, mobility of intake (lots of children in and out), but it should be possible to find out why expected progress is not happening. Many schools used colours on spreadsheets to show how many sub-levels of progress the children are making. You can see at a glance when pupils are not making expected progress, based on their ability. Of course it all depends on good assessment procedures, but there are lots of established models out there.
Hope this helps!

VQ

I am interested in the different posts you have put on this thread. I thought reading your first posts you were a teacher, now I don't know given your last post.

I would not normally be interested in asking a personal question but I am interested in this case as I like to read and digest what posters say and genuinely try to apply it to the OP.

Please do not read any malice nor attack in my question that is certainly not my intention I assure you.

Thank you for the link - I will sit and study it when I've had some sustenance.

I am still unconvinced of the arguments in favour of comparitive studies between schools. I trust the professionalism of teachers to know thei pupils and to move them on as appropriate to their needs. What some other school might be doing does not seem at all relevant. It's not a competition or a race.

The children leave our school and are well up to scratch when they reach secondary school.

Yes it needs sustenance!
I think it is better to see it as a comparison between groups of pupils rather than schools. It isn't that school A can do something that school B can't do, it is about how groups of pupils make progress. So if, for example, higher-attaining pupils are performing better in 80% of schools who are "statistical neighbours" then that is something that the school would need to know and consider.
Happy to help if you need any more info.

Blimey!!! I need a lie-down!

I know LA staff have been cut to the bone everywhere, but is there no governor training that could help with this, Mishap?
When I think how many evenings (usually wet Mondays like today) I spent doing "Understanding Performance Data" sessions.....

I do broadly understand what is going on with these statistics, but it is the interpretation that worries me.

The stats show that the school is in the lowest quintiles for attainment in maths and English, but much higher up for progress, 3rd and 2nd quintiles - and then I look at the school context and it says that we have 36.4% of pupils on SAP or on SEN register, which is of course in the highest quintile.

The one seems to me to explain the other - if you see what I mean!

And in the context of only 46 pupils, the stats become highly dubious in my view. The "Similar schools" comparitor is about attainmentr and not abour school size.

Do you think that the evenings that you spent doing "Understanding Perrformance Data" were well spent? Might you not have gained more from preparing a lesson or just recharging your batteries with a glass of gin in front of the TV!?

Yes that seems to make sense Mishap. Progress is the important bit. It is not a big cohort, but if attainment on entry is low and progress is good overall then the trend is right. Forty-six is not that small, I used to work with schools that had a year group of ten!
School improvement was my job as an LA inspector, so evening sessions were very, very frequent.
I am so glad I don't have to do them and then get in the car at 9pm and drive 30 miles home in the rain anymore....