Monday 29th January 2024 - thought for the day
MPs are lobbying for the scrapping of Ofsted single word/phrase awards. First of all, along with perhaps the majority of our population, I believe that the whole system needs overhauling and I speak from fairly close contact with much of this, BUT...
...using a phrase or single word description is immediately emotive one way or the other, and despite dictionaries that define, words and phrases can have different nuances for different people. When anybody makes a statement, however they intended it to sound the result that matters is how it is interpreted by the receiver.
If say a five star system was used a lot of the emotive interpretation would be removed. A parent considering a school that had four out of five stars would usually think that sounds ok, perhaps accepting the fact that not many schools would have five stars anyway.* With three stars or less the parent would likely take the trouble to dig deeper and find out the reason which may well not be something that was directly relevant to their or their child’s situation. It might even reveal a strength in an area that was actually relevant to their situation.
I realise this is a somewhat naive comment on a very complicated issue and I am not making a wholesale plea for adopting a star system, but just trying to illustrate how many things can be improved when common sense and an appreciation of the needs, thoughts and emotions of all parties are considered - in this instance that is fourfold starting with pupils, then teachers, then parents and then the Establishment.
-----------------
* When I occasionally complete a survey or review on the Internet I believe that four stars means "good" and five stars must be for something exceptional and beyond normal expectation which of course is rarely awarded.
I think every survey I have completed over the last few yrs have used the star system. It seems to work well and I agree with you.
ReplyDeleteAlan R - it is not perfect, especially when one wants to make a more detailed answer.
ReplyDeleteOf course you would need explanations, definitions if you like, of what the star ratings mean.
ReplyDeleteConrad - I agree, single emotive words are unhelpful to say the least. However, a star system has to have some sort of rationale otherwise how is the rating arrived at? That’s all I’m saying really. Hope your eye is now fine.
ReplyDeleteI'm not going to comment on the Ofsted matter as my knowledge of the near collapse of state education standards in the 60's, 70's and early 80's made me a cheerleader for the 90's drives to expunge the nonsense being peddled about children's education and for the reforms forced through against the kicking and screaming of teachers unions, progressive (indeed ? retrogressive ) educationalists and doctrinaire elements in teacher training and the DoE itself.
ReplyDeleteBut to confine this comment to that of the star rating of comments : my response to those who complain (as it often seems they are) about 'only' four (or any rating one less than the best on their system) is that, as you suggest, the maximum is for really exceptional performance, not the everyday excellence one should expect by right, in that the maximum reflects perfection, which, as we all know, is reserved for the Gods, and, as we all know, for humans to attempt to emulate the Gods, is to be struck down from the Olympian heights, stone dead. That usually shuts them up.
Gimmer and Alan R - Thanks for your input. Neither did I want to get into a detailed discussion of the system as a whole. Without specialist knowledge that would be pointless. Regarding my simplistic look at a points system I still think the inspectors could come to a subjective award of the appropriate number of stars based on the the overall assessment rather than being defined by one particular item. Parents could then read the report and decide if the attributes or otherwise were for them and their offspring. It would be important to emphasise that the maximum stars would only be reserved for rare cases of overall above and beyond performance, and its non-award should not been seen as a criticism ( you could even have six stars to allow for that?) Better still scrap the points system altogether, but I suppose that would discriminate against parents with reading difficulty. Blimey! Is there such a thing as progress?
ReplyDeleteI said wouldn't but . . . despite my general support for the Ofsted process, I have often doubted the wisdom of the single word classification - I know this is simple for the placards and the casual observer, but it cannot be beyond the wit of man, or even the DoE, to devise a equally simple but broader summary of judgement. Like many such attempts at inquiry and investigation, the results are often manipulated by outside (and interior) lobbies, and the more detailed the conclusions, the easier to ignore them due to 'individual' circumstances, but the choice of a school is not like an election with one winner for a short period, but can - and should - affect the whole of a child's life and thus be capable, for those who take even a moderator interest in their child's education, be guided by more than a catchy one word slogan. So even if we went for stars, one still needs a `(very) few categories of judgement, not just a single score.
ReplyDeleteThe whole other question of how the inspections are carried out and the relationship between the school and the inspection is as important, as the process is meant to inform and encourage, not alienate or harass.
gimmer - thanks for that balanced reply. I'm glad to read that you are in favour of an overhaul of the system to include a more harmonious relationship between the assessors and the teaching profession. I tried to use an alternative word there to replace "inspectors." We had them in the bank and they were renowned for their aggressiveness and guilty before proved- innocent approach, putting mortal fear into the hearts of many a seasoned manager.
ReplyDeletePresumably , when your bank was taken over, they all got jobs at . . . the Post Office . . .
ReplyDeletegimmer - I admire the brevity and clever use of punctuation in that remark. I couldn't help a little chuckle, but really it is no laughing matter. If you used that as the basis for a novel you would be accused of fantasy and implausibility.
ReplyDeleteReferring to the PO matter - it really is utterly incomprehensible to me how these cretins thought a/. they could behave like that, b/. that they thought they could get away with it and c/. that despite probe and investigation again and again, they were able to dodge and suppress the truth for so long.
ReplyDeletePublic Servants indeed - behaved like gangsters
'Heads must roll' has never been more literally appropriate.
gimmer - replied by email
ReplyDelete