We have an outstanding Ofsted school near us. Every inspection says the same thing. Students get among the best scores in the county. Granted, not the very best, but in a pure numbers game, more of his students get the required set of five GCSEs, A * to C in old money, than most of his competitors.
No colleges, but competitors.
Because like pretty much every other educational institution in the country, the school is constantly fighting for the students and the money they bring. It is not the only company that celebrates its outstanding status. There is a large banner outside, indicating that anyone passing by who leads their child through the gates will prepare them for life.
Such advertising is not really necessary because the school is so oversubscribed that it can fill its seats five times. Nevertheless, the drive to success continues. And that means exam results, exam results and exam results. Regardless, Tony Blair’s “Education, Education, Education” is what matters, the most blunt results.
But read under the headings, and a slightly different picture emerges. Lesson standards need to be improved, some recent inspections said, often less than forty students attended classes, and many young people were left behind to keep up with a relentless regime of homework and stress. If this stress catches up in sixth grade and a student begins to fall behind the expected top grades, he has no chance. Outstanding.
The school is a high school. The admission requirements go beyond those of Eton and Harrow and, in terms of academic potential, of all extremely selective independent schools. These are students who should really achieve their best GCSEs and A levels – most do; around 70%. But that leaves the other 30% down? Still, it’s good enough for Ofsted. Outstanding.
It is no wonder that those who cannot find a place there feel like they are being referred to a third-class institution. With all the problems that this brings with it. Labor wants to get rid of OFSTED; The party believes the control body is overly positive about middle class schools. Well, although this is not correct, such schools tend to get better test results, and since Labor, regardless of political claims, is the yardstick by which the most important judgments are made, Labor is right on this occasion.
Clever schools play the OFSTED system. My first real main job was in a failed primary school. the local authority had implemented it in special measures, although it really wasn’t that bad. This judgment was largely due to the results of SATs – exams – but in small schools like this, a “weak” year can change the picture significantly. Nevertheless, there was still a lot to do.
As the OFSTED time approached, my deputy and I played the system. We have checked the criteria and made sure that we have reached the highest level wherever possible. Certainly our SAT scores have improved a lot (a few “strong” years are as influential as a weak one) and the school was popular, but we were more outstanding at OFSTED than an outstanding school. I do not apologize for our behavior. The school became more attractive because of the excellent. This meant that more parents registered their children and our income increased. This allowed us to do more for our students. Playing the system is not right, but taking care of our children.
The latest PISA tables suggest that OFSTED ultimately contributed to a general raise in standards in English and math. But at what cost? Elementary school students must adhere to a curriculum that basically only includes English and math, even if it is sometimes offered under a different name. Some secondary school students make their GCSE option selections at the end of eighth grade when they may be only twelve years old.
Students are stressed by the job expectations they face. an enormous narrowing of the curriculum; A focus on the limited view of what OFSTED or its political masters think is right. Or expedient.
So, yes, OFSTED’s time is up. Unless we believe that training is only about exam results, and then mostly in the narrow range of English, math, and some science. Plus one. It is difficult to draw a different conclusion. Or is it?
As experts, we should certainly count on being subjected to a thorough examination for our work. It is certainly a good thing that everyone has standards at work that they have to meet. Many people my age will have been exposed to the pseudo-child-centered approach of the 1970s (unless they went to high school, and in this case, their Latin has helped them all their lives). In my case, this meant that the poor teacher listed the work items for each member of the class. Every week. Of course, thirty one-to-one lessons were impossible, so the lessons were broken off and we only started to work on exercise books. My buddy and I found that we had the same job; He was good at math and science and did this while completing the English-based subjects. Then we exchanged books, made a few “deliberate” mistakes so that we weren’t accused of cheating, and our work was done for the week on Tuesday morning.
We spent the next 80% of our learning time playing games and running projects in local stores. None of us made progress for two years. not the majority of our colleagues. That would not happen today.
The problem is that OFSTED is used as political football. Many voters have children and all have an opinion about education after going through some form of it themselves. This makes the topic a hot but influential potato in the area of political popularity. Let’s face it (sorry to New Labor), but we haven’t had a government since the late 1970s that deviates from the center or even the right wing. OFSTED anticipated this, unfortunately for a few years now, at the age of thirteen.
Therefore, the organization has been supervised throughout its life by parties who believe that education should be judged on rankings. hence competition with wins and losses that are decided by the test results.
Most teachers believe this is wrong, but most politicians don’t care. To be fair, not the media either. It likes things that are simple; Classy schools good, bad schools bad. OFSTED qualities fit the floor.
So we could conclude that there is a place for OFSTED if it can operate outside of political influence, and the media conclusions are no longer simplified. Let’s be honest; that will not happen.
Education is about students and what’s best for them. Most teachers agree that obtaining a four in math is not the be-all and end-all, even though the secretaries of state could claim one after the other. All in all, the reality is that OFSTED can work theoretically, but never in practice. So it has to work.
1- More good and outstanding schools than ever before, but Ofsted still failing?
2- How can we improve Ofsted’s role in improving school?
3- Key findings from Ofsted’s annual report
4 – Ofsted blames school principals for teachers’ workload
5- Less than one in five teachers think Ofsted is “trustworthy and reliable”.
Note: We are not the author of this content. For the Authentic and complete version,
Check its Original Source