Accessibility options Site map Skip to main content

Accountability and Inspection

Print this page

New inspection framework in England

A revised Ofsted inspection framework for schools was introduced in January 2012. The changes to the framework are significant and all members, School Representatives and members of school leadership teams should familiarise themselves with the new framework. The NASUWT has produced advice and guidance that can be accessed in the resource box on the right hand side of this page.

Conference 2011 calls for survey on inspection frameworks

In England performance tables are published annually and are claimed to facilitate pupil and parent choice. The Ofsted inspection system is closely linked to school and college self-evaluation and operates on the basis that a school or college considered to be more at risk of failing will receive more frequent inspections than one deemed to be good or outstanding. Schools and colleges are assessed and held to account in three main ways: the use of performance tables, the inspection system and markets and contestability.

Conference asserts that the inspection frameworks for schools and colleges have had a detrimental effect on the wellbeing of teachers and are used by some schools and colleges to justify the imposition of onerous monitoring that increases workload and undermines the work/life balance of teachers.

Conference calls upon the National Executive to:

(i) conduct a survey of members regarding their experiences of the inspection frameworks and report to Conference 2012;
(ii) campaign for inspection frameworks that respect and support the professionalism of classroom teachers and
(iii) continue to support members in schools and colleges and challenge unacceptable workload practices resulting from school inspection.

Wales - Conference 2011 condemns Estyn inspection framework

Conference is concerned that the new Estyn framework and associated guidance is not fit for purpose.

Conference acknowledges that Estyn has:
(i) recognised the need for schools to employ appropriate strategies and processes to meet the statutory requirements arising from the National Agreement;
(ii) addressed the requirement that curriculum co-ordinators and subject leaders must be in receipt of teaching and learning responsibility payments;
(iii) reduced the notice period for inspections to four weeks and
(iv) suggested that school self-evaluation reports should be no more than five pages long.

Conference condemns Estyn for:
(a) failing to communicate the expectations of the new inspection framework to inspectors;
(b) promoting consideration of the effective use of teachers’ planning, preparation and assessment time, rather than ensuring provision of such time for all teachers;
(c) supporting programmes of lesson observation, including observation by consultants and local authority advisers, in addition to those required for performance management;
(d) suggesting that pupils should be involved in the preparation of the school improvement plan and the appointment of new staff and
(e) excessive commenting on the use of incidental Welsh in schools where the language is not the main language of teaching and learning.

Conference calls upon the National Executive to lobby the Welsh Assembly Government to ensure that Estyn publishes revised inspection guidance and a new self-evaluation manual that will promote the eradication of such unacceptable practices.

While Wales, Scotland and do not make formal use of performance tables in the same way, statutory inspection is a feature of the education system in each of these nations and incorporate some form of self-evaluation and enagagement with wider stakeholders including parents and pupils.

Most schools are inspected on a regular cycle, although all inspection systems in the UK allow for schools which are judged to be giving rise to concerns to be inspected more frequently outside the regular schedule of inspection.

Schools judged to be satisfactory may be inspected more frequently. The format of inspection varies between the systems across the UK but all have a strong focus on teaching and learning through observations of lessons and scrutiny of pupil's work.

The introduction of market mechanisms are claimed to facilitate choice for consumers and users of services. These changes were designed to encourage public sector providers to compete for ‘customers’ and contracts, and open up public services to competition from the private sector.

The NASUWT has published guidance materials for teachers, school leaders and Workplace Representatives on school inspection. The Union also produces detailed responses to national consultations on inspection and accountability and strives to ensure that members’ voices are heard and their concerns understood.

The NASUWT Position

NASUWT and its members understand the need for schools to be accountable. The Union does not have a knee-jerk negative response to systems of accountability which support the highest standards in schools and colleges.

However, NASUWT does have well-justified concerns about key aspects of the systems currently in place in all four nations of the UK which can result in outcomes that are counterproductive, undermine teachers confidence in their own professional judgement and have a negative impact on the shared ambition to raise standards.