![Sample our Education journals, sign in here to start your access, latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5932/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Education.jpg"})
Abstract
Background: Since 1995, the Office for Standards in Education (Ofsted) has inspected the quality of all Initial Teacher Training (ITT) provision in England on behalf of the Training and Development Agency for Schools (TDA). Ofsted inspection results are published and are highly significant because the TDA has a statutory duty to take account of them when allocating trainee numbers, funding ITT provision and making accreditation decisions. Yet, concerns have been expressed over the reliability, validity and credibility of inspections as well as over limitations in the methodology and/or the ‘high stakes’ involved. In recent years, however, there have been revisions to the inspection framework and the inspection arrangements in place at the time of writing, which comprise full and short inspections, propose to be effective, efficient, cost-effective and less burdensome.
Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to provide a critical account of the authors' most recent ‘short’ Ofsted Inspection of ITT at Loughborough University as a follow-up to earlier papers published by the authors and colleagues on the inspection of their secondary Physical Education ITT provision. In particular, the authors consider the extent to which the process is effective, efficient, cost-effective, less burdensome and represents a ‘brief encounter’.
Method: The account is informed by data from various sources. ITT staff kept journals for a period of seven months leading up to, during, and following the inspection in which they detailed their Ofsted activities, experiences and reflections. Staff periodically completed their journals recording the preparation, work and meetings they were involved in, and noting and reflecting on any problems, issues, concerns, anxieties, frustrations and/or other emotions they experienced. Documentary evidence in the form of Ofsted Handbooks, Guidance plus other paperwork the inspection generated was also collected for analysis. Finally, to augment and support the findings from the journals and documentary evidence, a review of related literature was undertaken. Analysis of the data involved identification of key issues.
Discussion and conclusion: Based on the authors' experiences and reflections and the findings from the literature, a number of issues and limitations with the inspection process and framework are highlighted. Given these, the authors declare that they remain cynical about the whole process and the validity of the outcomes. They contest the notion that the inspection process is effective, efficient and cost-effective and feel that it continues to place an enormous burden on providers.
Notes
Ofsted is the inspectorate for children and learners in England. It is a non-ministerial government department accountable to Parliament that inspects the quality and standards of publicly funded education and childcare services. Ofsted inspects, reports on, and regulates schools, colleges, teacher training, childcare, children's services, and youth work.
The TDA is an executive non-departmental public body of the Department for Education and Skills. It was formed in 2005 from the merger of the TTA and the National Remodelling Team. The TDA has responsibility for the initial recruitment and training of teachers and for promoting teaching as an attractive career option. In addition, it has the wider remit for the training and development of the whole school workforce. With regards to ITT, the TDA has a statutory function to accredit and fund providers of ITT who can demonstrate that they will satisfy the Secretary of State's criteria for ITT and to allocate trainee numbers.
PGCE courses are university-based ITT courses for graduates and those with equivalent level qualifications, which, on successful completion, lead to recognition of Qualified Teacher Status (QTS). The duration of a PGCE course is normally one year, with 24 weeks of the course being spent in at least two different schools.
The TDA has a legal duty to make decisions on ITT allocations based upon quality of provision and use Ofsted inspection gradings/categories as the quality measure. Due to achieving a grade 1 for Management and Quality Assurance following our previous inspection, Loughborough was assigned ‘Category B priority’ status under the previous inspection framework. Under the formula that was applied, and in line with other Category B priority providers, we were subjected to an overall 11% reduction in numbers across three years. However, the other two ITT subjects offered at Loughborough are both shortage subjects and are therefore protected from any cuts. As a result, PE was particularly disadvantaged in that it had to carry the entire reduction.
Circular 2/02 (DfES and TTA Citation2002) set out the Standards for the award of QTS and the requirements for ITT (new Standards and requirements were introduced by the TDA in September 2007). The requirements for ITT specify what providers must do and cover entry and training requirements, management, and quality assurance. Within Circular 2/02, under ‘management of the ITT partnership’, all providers were required to work in partnership with schools and actively involve them in planning and delivering ITT and in the selection and assessment of trainees.
The QTS Standards are outcome statements that set out what a trainee teacher must know, understand and be able to do to be awarded QTS. At the time this research was undertaken, these were organised in three interrelated sections: Professional Values and Practice; Knowledge and Understanding; and Teaching.
Under the 2005 (and the preceding) inspection framework, the only providers protected from the TDA's allocation cuts are Category A providers. However, this framework does not allow good or very good providers to shift from Category B to Category A status following a short inspection. It only permits confirmation of a previous grade. Furthermore, as a good or very good provider, providers are not eligible to receive a full inspection.
The RAE is conducted by the Higher Education Funding Council for England and assesses the quality of research in universities and colleges in the UK. The RAE provides quality rating for research in each HEI across all disciplines and the outcomes are published. Its main purpose is to enable the higher education funding bodies to distribute public funds for research selectively on the basis of quality. Thus, institutions conducting the best research receive a larger proportion of the available grant.