Ofsted Talks

Here's the report discussed in this episode of the podcast: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/thematic-review-of-the-quality-of-education-in-young-offender-institutions-yois

Mark Leech  0:03  

We'll get on to the report I mentioned in a moment. But first, let's talk a bit about young offender institutions and how they work. Charlie, before you joined HMIP, you were Chair of the Youth Justice Board, so this is an area you know really well. Could you give us a bit of a background, please, about YOIs and the children who they cater for? 

Charlie Taylor  1:05  

Mark Leech  1:57  

Charlie Taylor  2:02  

Mark Leech  2:43  

Charlie Taylor  2:54  

Mark Leech  3:36  

Sir Martyn Oliver  3:49  

Mark Leech  4:52  

Maria Navarro  5:09  

Mark Leech  7:27  

Sir Martyn Oliver  7:40  

Mark Leech  9:09  

Charlie Taylor  9:35  

Mark Leech  9:49  

Charlie Taylor  12:01  

Sir Martyn Oliver  13:09  

Mark Leech  15:12  

Sir Martyn Oliver  15:39  

Charlie Taylor  17:01  

Mark Leech  18:14  

Charlie Taylor  18:28  

Maria Navarro  19:26  

Mark Leech  19:27  

Sir Martyn Oliver  19:29  

Charlie Taylor  20:18  

Sir Martyn Oliver  21:04  

Host Mark Leech listens in to Lisa Pascoe, deputy director (regulation and social care policy), Helen Humphries (specialist adviser for residential care) and Jenny Bird (research lead) as they discuss the findings from our recent research report ‘Good decisions: children with complex needs in children’s homes’.

Read the report 'Good decisions: children with complex needs in children's homes'

Read the blogs:

Providing good experiences for children with complex needs

Transcript

Mark: Hello and welcome to Ofsted Talks. My name is Mark Leech, and in this episode, we're going to be hearing about children with complex needs and what that means to local authorities, children's services and those working with children who live in children's homes. Earlier this year, we published a research report called good decisions children with complex needs in children's homes, and I listened in to colleagues from our social care policy and research teams as they discussed the findings.

Lisa: I'm Lisa Pascoe. I'm the Deputy Director here at Ofsted with responsibility for regulation and social care policy and I'm joined today by Helen, our specialist advisor for residential care, and Jenny, our research lead.  Jenny, let's start with you. It would be really helpful to set out for people why we did this research.

Jenny: Yeah, absolutely. So, it follows on really from a piece we'd done previously, which was looking at local authorities plans for sufficiency. And from that piece of work, we could see that local authorities were really struggling to find supportive homes for children who have complex needs. So we wanted to look at that even more. We knew as well that stakeholders were concerned about children's homes not accepting referrals for children with complex needs. We'd heard some things about them holding out for children who present fewer risks and, sort of preferring to take referrals for those children. And we heard as well about some concerns around the potential impact it could have on Ofsted inspections. So we really wanted this research to look into that further and to highlight good practice that was already out there, as well as the challenges that still exist, and what action could potentially be taken, either across the sector or by ourselves.

Lisa: So how did we make it work? Jenny, what did we actually do?

Jenny: So we used a two-phase design in this research. We started off at the start of 2023 with a survey that went out to all local authority Children's Services and all registered children's homes, and we asked them things like what they think complex needs means, what happens when they try to find places or are approached with a referral, and what the facilitators and the barriers are to finding good homes for children.

Lisa: If I remember rightly, Jenny, didn't we publish something after phase one?

Jenny: We did, yeah. We published a blog in around May time to highlight the findings of that survey in more detail.

Lisa: And then we moved into phase two.

Jenny: We did, yeah. So that built on phase one, and it was made up of two parts. The main bulk of the work was case studies. We'd completed 10 case studies, which we identified through working with three different local authorities across two regions. And in those we spoke to people who were involved in making decisions about children's care or in providing the care itself, as well as children. To supplement those, we also ran some focus groups with other groups of professionals who are involved in the care of children with complex needs. So that was people from the Association for Virtual School Heads, as well as staff who work in local authority commissioning. And we also held a focus group with some of our own Ofsted inspectors as well to talk about how they experience inspections when they're going to homes where children with complex needs are living.

Lisa: I think one of the things, Helen, was about this use of the phrase complex needs, wasn't it? I mean, it camouflages what's actually happening for children.

Helen: Yes, it's a global term that I think is on unhelpful and categorizes children into this uncertainty which is complex needs, instead of actually saying this child's particular need is related to their mental health, or, because of that this is what happens and this is how their behaviour is demonstrated.  It just draws children into a classification that actually isn't helpful and we'd really prefer not to have that phrase bandied about and used so much.

Lisa: Yeah, I mean, I think there was some common themes. Weren't there. There were certainly children who needed help from a variety of professionals. They needed specialist help from, you know, from health services. They needed specialist input and there was certainly some common kind of characteristics of the children Jenny, as well wasn't there in terms of children, particularly children with serious mental health needs, but also children who had needs that led to behaviours that were placing either themselves or others at risk? There was certainly some commonality there, but I think as an umbrella, it certainly masked what was actually happening for children, rather than thinking about them as individuals.

Helen: Yes, I think it stops professionals looking any further. And I would imagine that if a children's home received a referral that just described the child as having complex needs, that might be straight away, this isn't a child we can help, rather than actually looking underneath that and saying, well, actually, what are these children's needs? Is there something here that we can provide some help and support to?

Lisa: one of the things we weren't surprised at, sadly, was that there was 91% I think it was Jenny of local authorities that had difficulty finding the right homes for children.

Helen: Because of that, some children are waiting months, or in one of the examples given, they were waiting years to find that placement that could actually meet their needs, which meant that they were then moved through a variety of placements, and to a large extent, that could have made the situation and the challenges even worse.

Lisa: absolutely, and we certainly found that these were the children who were most likely to be placed out of area weren't they? As you say, Helen, experienced those unplanned moves. You're absolutely right. When children's homes were looking at those referrals, the fact they'd had those unplanned moves sort of became a bit of a self-fulfilling prophecy, and how difficult it then became to find the right place for them.

Helen: yeah, absolutely. I mean, you can't imagine what it must be like for a child living in a children's home knowing that any day, any moment, they could receive the information that they are then moving again and how that, you know, how that must make them feel.

Lisa : And, we certainly heard quite a lot from commissioners, didn't we, about how challenging it was for them to negotiate what they needed.  We heard examples of bidding wars with other local authorities, about having to purchase beds in advance, sometimes buying more beds than they needed to try and secure a placement. There was a whole range of experiences from commissioners about the difficulties that they felt. But I think we must sort of counteract that with the other side as well, in terms of what the managers were telling us about the quality of the information that they got.

Helen: That's right. And when we started to look at the things and some of the factors that means that placements work? Well, it was definitely around honest communication between the local authority and the home, and with providers saying that if it was an honest referral, that actually was far better.  And, that children's homes and commissioners who had built up honest, trusting relationships so that a manager of a children's home could read a referral and be confident that this was all the information that they needed, and that none of it had been exaggerated or none of it had been redacted, meant they had confidence in accepting that referral.  But, also the commissioner had confidence in making that referral, that there was a likelihood that the children's home would be able to say yes, and would be honestly, be able to say yes we think we can possibly care for this child. So there was definitely, definitely something about building up honest and trusting relationships

Lisa: And as well as the referrals, it was really clear how the statement of purpose was quite important to commissioners as well, wasn't it?

Helen: Absolutely and the statement of purpose needs to clearly set out what a home can do so that the commissioners can place confidently and that placements are less likely to break down. And the and the other thing that became clear was that building on the notion of the positive and trusting relationship is that children's homes felt more confident in taking children who had a range of difficulties that they then weren't going to be sort of left with the child.  That the local authority would continue to be involved in the child's life, that they would support partnership working, that they would they would support the placement, perhaps by adding in things and putting them in touch with other professionals who could support the placement.  So that it really was a true partnership, and not a feeling that, well, you've got the child now, you just need to get on with it, and so that it was far more positive, far more positive outcomes.

Lisa: And that right educational placement was something else that supported stability, wasn't it?

Helen: Absolutely so that children feel more settled because they're going to school, but also that the school feels that they're working again, in partnership with the children's home and with the local authority as well.  And there was also something about how the children's home had accepted the referral. They'd gone more than just reading the referral, they talked to people who knew the child well, and very often, that's when the child comes to life. Really, it's not in a written referral, it's about talking to the adults and professionals who've been involved in those children's lives can actually then bring that child to life and helps the children's home in making those decisions.

Lisa: I mean, it was great to see so much that was working well and some of those things felt relatively simple to put in place, didn't they that quality relationships with staff? I mean, that's a consistent theme for us in inspection, isn't it that we know that that's what makes the difference for children. But there are some things that worried us Helen weren't there?

Helen: Certainly, yes, absolutely. And I mean, this isn't new. This isn't a new story. We've talked about this before. We do remain concerned about the increasing number of children on orders that deprive them of their liberty. The numbers are just increasing at an alarming rate, and this really does worry us. We want to try and get underneath some of this and really understand why there's been this rapid increase of the number of children on orders. We worry again about the use of unregistered provision, particularly for children who are on those on those orders, and because actually, who's got eyes on those, on those children?

We also worry that, and we're not clear that high staff ratios always helps children in a positive way. It must feel very unnatural for a child living on their own in a small children's home then to be surrounded by four, five, we've even heard of eight members of staff, and how actually does that support children to develop their skills and their strategies in order to go forward in their adult lives. And then, just some very practical situations, where, how can a child go to the supermarket and buy food when they're surrounded by eight adults. Or how can they go out and access activities if they've if it's been determined that they need five members of staff with them at any one time, how can you go out to the to the cinema or go and do bowling, if it means that not everybody can go, because actually you can't get six members of staff in and a child in a car. So, there's some worries, there's some practical challenges, and we also worry about children in solo homes. There may be appropriate times that where a child needs to live on their own because they actually can't interact and manage to live with other children. But should that be their long term solution? Does that prepare them, then for when they move into supported accommodation, when they become when they become older? So yeah, that we retain these worries, which I know not only we have, but other organizations as well.

Lisa: Yeah, and in that unregistered children's home space, I mean, obviously, you know, we're very close to that, but commissioners are telling us that they're being forced to use those placements that they don't want to use because they can't find the right place so they can't find registered provision can they that want to offer services to these to some of these children.

Helen: That’s right and then we worry, why would the unregistered placement take the child if a registered children's home won't take the child?

Lisa: Yeah, and we also, I mean, we know, across the sector, don't we, that there's challenges in recruiting and retaining staff, and we've been talking about this for some time now, haven't we?

Yeah, the turnover, the vacancy rate for children's home managers, you know, it's really high. It's about 12% isn't it, of children's homes that don't have a manager in place that's registered, and that has got to leave a gap for children, hasn't it?

Helen: Absolutely, and the churn of staff in children's homes as well.  We always know, and it's always been a challenging role, a challenging job to work in children's homes, but the churn of staff turnover is much higher than it's ever been. And providers do talk to us and do comment how difficult it is to recruit staff who want to do this work and are willing to stay and maintain those because we also know that one of the most important factors of making placements work is the relationship between staff and children, and if there's a permanent churn within the staff team, then that is extremely difficult to manage.

Lisa: Yeah, it's almost like these worries and concerns are sort of the flip side of the things that can go well, aren't they, because, you know, the same point about finding the right educational placement for children. You know, we've said, haven't we, that that's one of the things that creates stability. But we know that for some of these children, finding and maintaining a school placement is really difficult. We know that some academies are reluctant to offer places to some of these children, and all of these things make it much more difficult. I think one of the virtual school head teachers described it as being like waiting for the stars to align, to get the education and the home together.

Helen: Yeah, absolutely, it must be incredibly challenging.

Helen: but we remain anxious about comments that continually appear that homes are reluctant to take children with a range of needs because it will affect their inspection judgments. And this is something that has worried us for a number of years now and we still try to understand what we can do in respect of that, to try and get underneath that statement.

Lisa: yeah, and it feels very real to the sector. And so, you know, we can't ignore that, can we, you know. So it's really important that if people think our approach is unfair or, overly risk averse, and that's certainly something, again, that I've heard from people, then then tell us. You know, talk to your inspector, people you know. If that doesn't feel comfortable, then Helen, I really hope people do come and talk to, you know, inspection managers. You know, there is a process there that people can use to speak to us if they think we're not landing our inspection in the right place.

I know that when we've looked at the grade profiles, it's really hard to get underneath this, isn't it, because there's nothing we can see in the grade profile that supports it. But I go back to if this is how people experience it, we just can't ignore it. Can we?

Helen: We can't ignore it. There has to be something there that we're not quite getting, although our evidence is that we can't find examples of where if a home has taken a child with a range of needs that has affected their grade profile. The worry is, I think, that people think it might so therefore don't take the chance on taking the child. So, we really, really do need to any information that will help us to understand that better than we want to listen.

Lisa: And it is, we know, that there's no such thing as a perfect placement. We also know that children who have experienced trauma and abuse and neglect, you know, their progress isn't going to be linear. It isn't going to be straightforward. They live in sort of a risk environment all the time, and children's homes are constantly, aren't they, managing and reassessing that risk? And that's why, you know for us, inspection has got to focus on yes, are these children making progress, but it's also about what's the quality of their day to day experience. Is this a staff team that are sticking with this child despite everything that that's difficult and challenging, staying with them, doing all the right things, trying to improve their lives, trying to help them, you know, feel secure and have that sense of belonging so that they can start to make progress. I mean, that feels really important to me. You know that they're the messages that our inspectors have, and that's our expectation of what inspections should look like.

Helen: Yes, because we know that if children are receiving positive experiences from staff who are interested in them and they've got good relationships with them, then progress follows on from that. But, for children with a whole range of needs, that progress will move about and how they interact with staff will change and be difficult. And it's those placements that stick with children, against all those adverse actions, that then often comes through at the end and children start then to make progress.

Lisa: Yeah, in summary, really, I think we think complex isn't that helpful of a term. It camouflages a lot of what's going on. We should really focus on children's strengths and be honest about their needs, that people can do the right thing.

I genuinely think it's really important that we see residential care as a positive option for some children, because it can be, and it is, and it does make a difference, and it's really right. You know, when we see local authorities wrapping services around residential care, it can make a real difference. That multidisciplinary approach from health services, education services and care services, when everybody's doing all the best possible jobs they can for children with these multiple needs, it really can and does make such a difference.

I really want to be really clear that we want to address homes concerns and reassure them, that we really do want to focus on the progress and experiences that children make, and we do understand that people are working with risk on a daily basis.

In terms of what we've done, we have got a priority application process for homes caring for children on deprivation of liberty orders.  We did publish some guidance, probably about October, November last year, making our position around the legalities around registration and deprivation of liberty really clear. And our social care common inspection framework, we continue to make adaptations to that, and we made some last year, just to keep you know making this point as clear as we can, that we really want homes to work with children with multiple needs. We really want you to stick with children, and that's what we really want to see through those progress and experiences.

Mark: Thank you, Jenny, Lisa and Helen. That was very interesting. And if you enjoyed this episode and you don't want to miss the next one, please don't forget to like and subscribe wherever you get your podcasts.

Jenny : If you are interested in reading the full research report called good decisions children with complex needs in children's homes, you can find it on the Ofsted website. On the website, you can also find other publications about this research, which is the blog outlining the findings from the survey, and a new blog post highlighting the areas of good practice we saw in the case studies.

In this episode, Mark Leech (Deputy Director, Communications) speaks with Wendy Ratcliff (HMI, Early Education), Dan Lambert (SHMI, Schools) and His Majesty's Chief Inspector, Sir Martyn Oliver, about Ofsted's Big Listen. 

Ofsted's Big Listen closes on 31st May and we want to hear from everyone we work with and work for. Take part here: https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/ofsted-big-listen. 

Transcript:

Mark: Hello and welcome to another edition of Ofsted Talks. Actually, this episode, could be renamed Ofsted listens because we're going to be talking about our Big Listen, the huge consultation that we kicked off at the beginning of March. We're now recording this in early May. So there's still a few weeks left for people to give us their views. We want to hear from parents, we want to hear from all of the providers across the different sectors that we work with. So if you haven't given your views yet, please go to gov.uk/ofstedbiglisten. So today we're going to talk to a couple of colleagues who have been part of the Big Listen - they've been out and about meeting with the public, meeting with people in the sectors that we work with and hearing what people are saying. So we're joined by Wendy Ratcliff, who is one of our HMI. Wendy works in early education. And we're joined as well by Dan Lambert, who is a senior HMI for the East of England region at Ofsted so welcome Wendy and Dan. Wendy, I’ll start with you, what's been your take as you've been going out and about? Where have you been and what have you been hearing?

Wendy: So we've been out and about in early education, as we usually do. And we've been out on some of our curriculum roadshows at the moment, which are focusing in on the key messages from our best start in life research review. And so we've been speaking with early years practitioners, we've been speaking with managers, we've been speaking with those who provide early years in schools and childminders as well. So we've been hearing things around that fear factor of Ofsted. And we've also been hearing things around notice periods, childminders, for example, one of the things that makes them more anxious is the fact we phone them five days before their inspection and then they're not certain which day we're going to go. So actually, that makes that anxiety worse. And the other thing I guess, is nursery managers, we make that call around midday the day before the inspection. And again, thinking about is that the right time, our inspectors are really good at saying is this a good time to have that conversation, but actually calling a day nursery at lunchtime, the day before the inspection is due, is that the best time for us to be making that notification call? So there's some of the things that people are telling us that they'd like to put forward in the Big Listen.

Mark: That's really interesting, because we're getting straight into the really meaty issues, aren't we and we’re trying to capture as much from people through the consultation online. But I think it is important that people understand that as well as that we are out listening to people on the ground and we've also commissioned some external organisations, some independent organisations to do some further work with the sectors that we work with. And to do some further surveys and some focus groups to hear from different groups of people that perhaps it's a bit harder to reach. So it's really interesting the notice period thing, because there's a lot of talk about that in schools and people talk about whether we're giving enough notice to teachers and to school leaders that we're going to be in. We normally give them a call the day before. As you say it’s slightly different with childminders, it’s different, again with further education providers. Dan, are you hearing much about notice periods? What else are you picking up more in the school sector?

Dan: Yeah, I've had some really great meetings with big and small groups of head teachers, senior leaders, governors and staff in schools as well. And notice periods, it's something that I think lots of us struggle to put our finger on. I was a head teacher a while back, and I certainly had the phone call the day before. And I couldn't quite say whether a little bit more notice, or a little bit less notice would be right for me if I put my hand on my heart and think about that. The message from leaders is they really want to be in their schools when Ofsted inspect, they feel that that allows them to put their best foot forward. But they also don't want that extended period, where they think actually, this will only raise my anxiety if I have more time to think about that. Incidentally, a lot of my work is in the independent sector, where much of our work is carried out with no notice. And I think you'd be amazed just at how calm that is. And it's been fascinating discussing that with head teachers and school leaders who've acknowledged actually that may be a nicer way of doing things. But as I say, always with that, that opportunity to make sure that they're on site during the day.

Mark: I think you've both been talking, they're really about the sort of anxieties that build up around Ofsted. And obviously, a big part of the Big Listen is us sort of reflecting on what we can do to reduce that because, you know, we want to be going into schools, nurseries, colleges, we don't want to be winding those institutions up. We want to see them as they are and be able to judge them fairly. There's been a lot of talk about whether people can comment about our judgments, our gradings. There is a section of the Big Listen about reporting. People I think understand that the grading system is not something that we can wave a wand and change it's a part of a bigger government machinery. But are we hearing a lot around the way we report back to parents but also to the to the schools themselves, the institutions themselves?

Dan: Yeah, I've certainly found that governors that I've spoken to have said they really valued that external validation of the work that's happening in the school. They're committed to helping to improve their schools and governors up and down the land, trustees up and down the land are hugely selfless and giving with their time, but they also want the very best for children in their schools. The feedback that Ofsted give them is invaluable to what they do. And I've heard that, but they also worry about their head teachers, and they worry about the impact that inspection may have on the leadership team and the staff in the school. Lots of head teachers and school leaders have talked to us about the one-word judgments. And there were some really strong feelings on this particular subject. Lots and lots of colleagues in schools have told us this through the Big Listen. And as some have commented, there isn't a direct question about that, but you can tell us about that in the free text box in the survey, and there are several of them, but particularly the one at the end asking, is there anything else you'd like us to know. However, there needs to be a balance here, because there are some people that have said it helps them to understand how a school is performing without having to read an in depth report. So we need to consider all of that, of course, before we come to a conclusion.

Wendy: And of course, in early years, some of our providers have told us that actually, that one word judgement links to the funding that's available to them. So again, there's lots of views out there, and it'd be good to capture all of them. We've been doing a lot in early education to try and put straight some of the inspection misconceptions that are out there. Because ultimately, we're charged with finding out what it's like to be a child in this place, and actually then report that back to parents. So that parents have got that understanding of what it's like for their child when they're in their preschool with their childminder, or in their out of school provider. And, with some of those changes we have already made, we are hearing, for those who have had a recent inspection, they're saying that they are finding that our inspectors very much are taking those messages on board and taking account of wellbeing and treating people with courtesy respect and empathy.

Mark: That is really, really good to hear because that has been a big focus of work over the last few months. I think like everything, it takes an awfully long time sometimes to get these messages across and, and perhaps around the fear factor we've been talking about, it is about people seeing that, people seeing a change on the ground, perhaps but also getting to know over time about the changes that we've made, the changes that will come out of the Big Listen too. I mean another way obviously is bringing more people into Ofsted and some people who are listening might not be aware of just how many of our inspectors don't work for us full time, actually are out there running schools, running nurseries, they come and give us some of their time to take part in inspections. Have you been meeting with some of our, we call them Ofsted inspectors, so that the staff that come in temporarily?

Wendy: Yeah, we are Mark actually we are just in the throes of doing our conferences. We have two conferences a year for our early years workforce and I was in Cobham in Surrey and was sitting with a group of our Ofsted inspectors. And it was a really positive day. And there was lots of opportunity for them to talk about some of those issues that they're facing when they're back in their settings. But also some of those messages and changes we've made, we've been able to cover some of those off in our conferences.

Dan: I was an Ofsted inspector before I was one of His Majesty's inspectors. I think our professional colleagues, those colleagues that come out of their setting for that short time to help to lead and team our inspection work provide that invaluable insight to the challenges on the ground. I spend the majority of my time in schools so I don't think that I'm too far removed from that reality. But I'm also not doing that day job anymore. And so hearing the views of those colleagues, it is really, really important. And they bring a unique perspective as well because they see it from both sides. Because for part of their week, they are sat to doing the day job dealing with the realities, the challenges and the joys that that brings. But then for a few days a week or a month they’ll be working with us and understanding the complexity of getting that work right. They bring a huge amount of knowledge, a huge amount of credibility and understanding to our workforce and they're absolutely invaluable.

Mark: That's great. Thank you very much. And I'm pleased to say that listening into all of this has been the man whose brainchild the Big Listen was – His Majesty's Chief Inspector, the boss of Ofsted, Sir Martyn Oliver. Martyn, what's your reflection, both on what Wendy and Dan have had to say, but also the Big Listen itself? I know you've been doing a tremendous number of meetings with all sorts of different organisations. What have you learned?

Martyn: Well, thank you, Mark. And thanks, Dan and Wendy. It's fascinating to hear what people have said to you so far. And you know, our inspections have come under a lot of scrutiny in the last year and my priority was to make sure that we've been able to review and to make changes about the way that we work and as Wendy was saying, our work should be carried out with professionalism, courtesy, empathy and respect. Because we really want to improve as an organisation. We want to make sure that we listen to everyone that we work with, and everyone that we work for, particularly listening to children and to parents. And yesterday, I had the pleasure of meeting 10, inspirational young men in a youth offending institution and listening to what they have to say. And that was one of the groups that was carried out not just by the survey that we've got on the go right now that we launched in March, and it runs until the end of May. So there's still an opportunity for the listeners to this podcast to take part in our survey, just go to gov.uk/ofstedbiglisten to take part - we want to hear from all of your views. But on top of that, we've actually got these two consultations that are put in place from from groups. And one of these groups yesterday were conducting the survey with these 10 young men in this youth offending institution. And we were finding out about what's it like when we inspect in their prison education, what was it like when they were in school before they ended up into the youth offending institution, what's it like when they were in care, many of them were, and how does that affect our work. And this is why it's such an important thing that we hear every voice. And I've also been really clear in saying, Mark, that nothing's off the table. So, we want to hear every voice because nothing is off the table. And after May, we're going to analyse all of the feedback from the survey, and then from the groups who are coming out all these consultations on our behalf to get to these more vulnerable and marginalised sectors, and make sure that we hear everything they've got to say, and then we're going to present it in the beginning of the next academic year, as our response to this exercise. I think it's a great opportunity. So it's not just my views, but it's the views of the entire sector, something like 97,000 institutions that we inspect and regulate, because a lot of people think about Ofsted, and they think about the schools, the 22,000 schools. But as Wendy is a perfect example. There are some 67,000 and growing number of early years providers out there. So we have a wide remit, and we want to hear from everyone.

Mark: Thanks, Martyn. And for people out there who haven't looked at the survey yet, could you just tell them what to expect when they go to the website to fill it in?

Martyn: Yeah, so we've got two particular surveys, one for adults and one for children. And when you go on to the survey, for example, as an adult, you can see that you can select any of the aspects of the work that we do. And so we asked four big themed questions. But alongside the questions that we've set out, every single one of them has a free text box, I think there was something like 30 free text boxes. So if you don't think we're asking the right question and you want to tell us something else, then please feel free to write into that free text box what you think because we really are listening.

Mark: That is important. We hear comments from people and we know people have said well you haven't asked a question about grading or you haven't spoken about a particular aspect of work in further education or whatever it might be. Those free text boxes are going to be looked at and analysed and we will be capturing those thoughts so I think that's really important point. Thank you everyone. Thank you, Martyn. Thank you Dan, thank you Wendy for taking part. It just remains for me to say again if you haven't had your opportunity to have your say through the Big Listen, please do fill in the survey. It is open until the end of May at gov.uk/ofstedbiglisten. As we are recording this, so still with a couple of weeks left, we are over 16,000 responses making it the biggest consultation that Ofsted’s ever run and more than 3,500 of those have come from children which is absolutely fantastic. So do fill it in yourself and if you have a child who wants to express a view about how we inspect their school or their college, please do ask them to complete the survey as well - special survey for children which is a little bit easier to navigate. Thank you all for listening. I hope you will join us again on the next Ofsted Talks. Please subscribe wherever you get your podcasts.

Briony Balsom  

Mark Vickers  

Briony Balsom  

Grace  

Briony Balsom  

Mark Vickers  

Grace  

Briony Balsom  

Steve Shaw  

Briony Balsom  

Jo Fisher  

Briony Balsom  

Grace  

Briony Balsom  

Mark Vickers  

Briony Balsom  

Steve Shaw  

Mark Vickers  

Jo Fisher  

Mark Vickers  

Briony Balsom  

Steve Shaw  

Briony Balsom  

Grace  

Briony Balsom  

AP thematic review: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/alternative-provision-in-local-areas-in-england-a-thematic-review/alternative-provision-in-local-areas-in-england-a-thematic-review

In this episode Mark Leech, Deputy Director of Communications, talks to Kirsty Godfrey, Senior HMI, and Zoe Enser, HMI, about Ofsted's recently published English Subject report. 

Transcript

Mark Leech  02:02

Hello and welcome to another edition of Ofsted Talks. My name is Mark Leach and today we're going to be talking about English. We've recently published our subject report looking at the teaching of English in primary and secondary schools and I'm joined today by Kirsty Godfrey and Zoe Enser. Hello, nice to have you with us.  Hello.  Hi, Mark.  So we've published this report. It has quite a lot to say about the different components of of English teaching right across across the age groups. Should we start by just talking through some of the main findings of of the report?

Kirsty Godfrey  02:40

Yeah, I mean, I think one of the really good news stories is about reading. We found that the teaching of reading has improved. And that is really to do with all of those things that have happened over perhaps the last 10 years. So we've had the phonics screening check. We've got systematic synthetic phonics that's been put into the national curriculum. We've had our focus in Ofsted are looking at reading so in every inspection with primary age pupils, we're doing an early reading Deep Dive. And there's also the English absolve, they work so lots of policy government changes and our autofocus have really turned schools attention to the importance of teaching reading, and we know that that's been a real success story. Obviously, there's more to do. And particularly when children get to that point of finishing phonics and moving on. We know this sometimes can be less well understood really about how that curriculum is developed, their fluency is considered. And sometimes there's a rush towards going straight to reading comprehension and what those tests might look like at the end of key stage. So that's an area for further improvement, as is that teaching for those children who might be behind with their reading when they enter key stage two, sometimes they don't get sufficient practice to really embed that knowledge or the right sort of practice to make sure that that they quickly catch up.

Mark Leech  03:59

And we see that strength in reading taken through into into secondary school Zoe because I'm interested as well, we talked about sort of the mechanics of how do you how do you teach children to read but there's, there's part of how do you then use that to access the rest of the curriculum, but also how do they learn to love reading with pleasure? Is that something that we're seeing carried through into secondary school?

Zoe Enser  04:24

Well, there's two very different strands there and what we're talking about when we think about the text that pupils encounter in their engagement with reading, you're absolutely right. That access to reading and the mechanics of reading is going to make a huge difference to how they can then access the curriculum more widely. But we've got that reading culture that development of that interest in reading that habit of reading, that is being strongly developed in secondary schools. There are lots of opportunities in Tutor Time where teachers have really thought about what is it that we want our pupils to encounter what kinds of texts nonfiction short stories, poems, that's all being pulled? together as part of that? And then the separate strand around that is what texts do we study for literature? And it was really pleasing to see that there had been a lot of thought that had taken place around what were the most appropriate texts for pupils. To then use as a vehicle for that literary analysis, analysis, sorry, literary analysis, that understanding of the kind of critical approach that we take to text because they they serve different purposes. We've got the text that we enjoy and share and talk about, and then we've got the text that we also study as part of that. And that had been a real shift. And they've really thought about the concepts that they wanted people to understand, and which texts were going to be allowed, allowing them to think about things like themes, different genres, and considering aspects like kind of authorial intent, and how that we've been preparing them for GCSE and beyond.

Mark Leech  06:02

Okay, so that's, that's a really positive picture around around reading and reading. The other key component, of course, is, is writing and it's quite interesting. Children today have a sort of different way of engaging with the world and certainly I had many, many years ago. And I wonder whether whether that does impact on basic writing skills? Because you're looking at looking at primary school looking at the teaching of handwriting, for example. Yeah, something I was never any good at.

Kirsty Godfrey  06:30

We didn't see. We didn't tend to see schools giving enough teaching and practice to help pupils get a high level of fluency with spelling and their handwriting. So that transcription element of the curriculum is something that is perhaps underdeveloped. In schools. For example, teachers are rarely using dictation as a way to help people to practice their spelling and handwriting. And sometimes instead, what pupils are asked to do is do an extended piece of writing well before they've actually been given that knowledge and skills through the teaching that they've received. So as an example, you might have children being asked to write about their weekend or write a story or character description. But in actual fact, they aren't able to form the letters yet, or spell words that they want to write. So that can be that tendency to rush straight into things that are much more an advanced level. So so the main message really is about providing enough practice. So that for teaching first but then sufficient practice so that she'll become fluent with the transcription just like they need to become fluent with their reading. Because of course, it avoids that working memory overload then and they can really focus on what it is that they want to communicate through their writing, when they're not having to think about how to form those letters and spell those words.

Zoe Enser  07:47

I was going to agree from a secondary school point of view because though a lot of pupils are coming up to secondary and they've mastered that and they have got that ability to use that transcription. Well, there are still some pupils, particularly post COVID, who arrive at secondary school where they really struggle with that. Just Kirsty said that places that increase their working memory, and it's then really difficult for them to tackle those even more challenging tasks, is making sure they are getting the most purposeful practice at that point to be able to, again, access that word curriculum to be able to make use of that. And the other thing I would say with writing, particularly in secondary is to, you know, the strongest schools are really thinking about giving them those wider opportunities to write as well once they're ready to do so once they've got that knowledge. And that includes knowledge of the topic, to be able to then write exciting things, stories and poems and descriptions that are not constrained necessarily by the GCSE requirements that are broadening that out and giving them that opportunity, but equally, giving them the tools, the knowledge, the skills that they'll be able to do that with.

Mark Leech  09:02

It's really interesting that you you mentioned COVID there and it's a fairly obvious point that I hadn't really thought of it but remote education not being able to essentially you know, if you're practising writing your book to your teacher, and have them work with you on how you improve your handwriting. Have we seen that as a kind of a widespread issue right across across the country? Following

Kirsty Godfrey  09:27

COVID? Yeah, writing was something that schools really reported to us that had become much more of a challenge for them. You know, just in the amount that children could write and their speed just because they hadn't had that practice. They'd often been working on keyboards and computers and, and not having, you know, that writing with a pencil or a pen. So yeah, it's something that but actually, I think it's also about schools. If not, perhaps thought about what that curriculum needs to look like in those small steps to gain that really important foundational knowledge to be able to become fluent, so that their working memory isn't overloaded.

Mark Leech  10:03

I think I think that's really, really interesting. I mean, is there a bigger shift because people are so used to working on on keyboards, obviously, there's something there about developing as you say, the kind of muscle skills required to write with a pen, but also spelling as well. Everything's automated. Everything's checked for you. Is that that must be a challenge for for teachers where children are used to that sort of way of growing up.

Zoe Enser  10:30

I think I've just come in there from the secondary point of view, because again, I think there can be an assumption that with young people, they are using keyboards, but what they tended to be using more likely is telephones and the and the apps on the phone. So when it comes to then switching and saying okay, so you've got a handwriting, difficulty here, you're finding that difficult to do that speed. Many of those same pupils will still be finding it really difficult to pick up that other touch typing approach. And that places a different kind of load on their working memory for them to then be thinking about all of the other component parts of writing, they've got to think about the vocabulary they'll use, they'll say, I've got to think about the content. They've got to think about the syntax or the grammar, and now they're using a keyboard as well. And that makes it even more challenging for some of those pupils. Whereas if they are developing that transcription, and that's developing over time, and they're being given the precise opportunities to be taught that and to practice that, then those pupils again will be much more fluid and able to pull everything together to compose a piece, but it needs to be stepped in stage it needs to take time

Mark Leech  11:38

talking about how children communicate with each other, brings us on I suppose to the other the other part of of English which is spoken language. And in the report we've said that spoken language isn't isn't perhaps quite such a rosy picture as we're seeing and reading

Zoe Enser  11:56

for example, but I just want to make really clear when we're talking about that we're talking about the spoken language element of the national curriculum. And we're really thinking about what does it mean to develop that curriculum where pupils are being given again, the vocabulary, structures, the opportunities to practice that building up over time, and sometimes, it can see that pupils haven't got the confidence to be able to speak of course, some of that comes with practice and those opportunities, but equally that comes from their knowledge. What does it mean to engage in a debate and a discussion? How might you respond to questions that are framed like that? And so thinking about how that, again, is taught and practice over time is really important. And that starts early, isn't it first, and it also really helps

Kirsty Godfrey  12:42

children with later reading and writing and becoming independent with both of those if they've got that spoken language to draw upon, because then they know how to compose a sentence or relate they can obviously do that in writing so it is really about providing enough time for for children to be able to practice those important skills. I'm really valuing some of the things like storytime and the discussions that take place about stories. And that's because all children get involved in those discussions, not just those ones who are willing more readily because they really got a lot of that knowledge and we find it easier to to be able to contribute. So it's really about how to be very practical that making sure everybody gets the practice that they need in that foundational knowledge that will support them with a

Mark Leech  13:14

later beginning right then and when we move into a secretariat with with coding language, so what's what does good look like when we'll be seeing the good schools doing?

Zoe Enser  13:22

Really good schools is thinking about how they might draw on the models and examples that people have seen an experience so if they're learning about things like rhetoric as part of their nonfiction and exploration of speeches, thinking about how they're presented, how are they then translating into what pupils are doing? Have they seen those opportunities? Are teachers modelling them further and where they are? That's where the people are able to tackle those critical, challenging ways of speaking. They've got their bodies there.

Mark Leech  13:44

So thinking about what this was doing, how is that teaching? Is really well, how are they picking up on the struggling pupils who perhaps aren't where they need to be with their reading their writing and their spoken language? What sort of dimensions are being put into it?

Zoe Enser  13:55

I think the first thing is to be diagnostic and quite forensic about what are the barriers that those pupils experience or is it about adapting their phonics it may or may not be at that stage? Is it about their fluency around the aliotta blends? And can they do that? Is it something about vocabulary? Is it about background knowledge, and they're really thinking about those areas and identifying them, and once they have identified them, that's when they really have that retargeted approach. Biggest challenge on site is when you've got a lot of pupils who are coming into your school from various different product partners. Who might have different gaps in their learning and their understanding. And so taking that time to really think about that, as opposed to perhaps using more blanket approaches, which can be useful for those people to continue to build their fluency in different areas, but those that have the most needs. They really need that same kind of Totti provision that we wouldn't have seen

Kirsty Godfrey  14:40

in primary school. I think it's right on the very beginning is about schools that do not really are the ones that make sure that all people keep up with the curriculum, so that they don't need to have that catch up and those sorts of interventions at a later stage as often. So it's really about the day to day assessment and spotting straightaway which children have grasped it and who needs a bit more help and a bit more practice writing lessons for the next day. And also, there's a challenge for schools because different children will take a different amount of practice to secure the exact same knowledge as their peers and therefore trying to provide the right amount of practice for every single child is always a challenge. And so, you know, going into each new year group, we've got to just resist that temptation to try and expect children to do too much but make sure we go back to the point that they are in the curriculum, and make sure that really secure with that in those basics so that they do become fluent, and it doesn't hold them back. Otherwise, what we do find is that gaps tend to widen rather than close. Thank you.

Mark Leech  15:40

Most of the posts that we've we've done looking at different subjects we talk about the importance of continued professional development for teachers. What does that look like in English?

Zoe Enser  15:50

This was one of our key recommendations because there's been some fantastic work that's happened around reading and to understand by early reading that development of the phonics programmes and then taking that through, as I say, in literature, teachers have really thought about the concepts that they want pupils to encounter, but now it's about that time to really think about what do we make that curriculum for spoken language? What do we need to build on from primary into secondary about their writing? How are we going to see where perhaps some of those gaps are or areas that just need strengthening? They might know it, but they need to have that strengthened? So some time for teachers to really sit and think about that, to consider how they would plan for it. And indeed, that support more widely for what actually that does look like and that sharing of best practice.

Mark Leech  16:41

That's interesting. Thank you. Thank you both. Before we finish, is there anything else that you'd like to add?

Zoe Enser  16:47

I just wanted to give a really big thanks to the schools who welcomed us in and it was a real privilege to spend that time talking to them about their practices, and find out about their contexts.

Mark Leech  16:58

Thank you, Kirsty. And Zoey, that was really interesting. I hope you've enjoyed listening to this podcast. If you have any views about how Ofsted goes about its work you can take part in the big lesson we want to hear from parents and from professionals about every aspect of our work. You can find more about [email protected] forward slash Ofsted big Listen, please like and follow us wherever you get your podcasts and we'll be back again soon with another Ofsted Talks.

Ofsted will inspect supported accommodation from September 2024. To support this work, we carried out a consultation where we not only received responses from the sector, we spoke to young people about what they wanted and needed from their supported accommodation.

Read more here: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/ofsted-confirms-plans-for-inspecting-supported-accommodation

Briony Balsom  0:09  

Matthew Brazier  0:44  

Briony Balsom  2:06  

Anna Willow  2:17  

Tia  2:58  

Briony Balsom  3:50  

Lisa Pascoe  4:10  

Matthew Brazier  5:00  

Briony Balsom  5:28  

Matthew Brazier  5:37  

Anna Willow  5:51  

Tia  8:32  

Briony Balsom  9:53  

Matthew Brazier  10:00  

Lisa Pascoe  10:57  

Briony Balsom  11:36  

Lisa Pascoe  11:47  

Anna Willow  12:10  

Tia  13:06  

Briony Balsom  14:03  

In this episode, Briony Balsom (Head of Internal Insights) talks to our new HMCI, Sir Martyn Oliver. 

Transcript

Briony: Hello, I’m Briony Balsom and welcome to Ofsted Talks, the Ofsted podcast. Ofsted Talks is the official Ofsted podcast, and we cover everything from early years to schools, social care to further education and skills, alternative provision, special educational needs and more. Today you join us for a slightly shorter but also slightly special edition where we take the opportunity to get to introduce Ofsted’s new chief inspector, Sir Martyn Oliver. Welcome, Martyn.

Martyn: Hello, Briony – thank you.

Briony: Martyn, you've had a full career in education as a teacher, then a Head and most recently as Chief Exec of multi academy trust. But, can you tell us a little bit about what it was that drew you to teaching in the first place?

Martyn: Yeah, feels like an awful long time ago now. It must be 29, soon 30 years, ago and it wasn't one thing that started me in teaching. If I look back to my own school career, there were some teachers that absolutely stood out to me. But then it was a passion for my subject, art - fine art - which I absolutely love and I spent my entire childhood engaged in seeing some of the great galleries in the country. But it wasn't just that, it wasn't the inspirational teacher, it wasn't just the subject, it was the fact that I think I've always just enjoyed teaching. I've enjoyed working with people. I love the idea of getting up in the morning and wanting to help other people. And so being a teacher, the act of teaching, was something that I was just really drawn to, and then with my subject expertise, and then my inspirational teachers that I had as a child, it pointed me naturally to this, all those years ago.

Briony: Wonderful. And I was about to ask what was that you enjoyed most about teaching and leading schools. It sounds very much like it was the people overlaid with the subject?

Martyn: Children and working with children and seeing the joy of teaching something new and watching children really get it. And then, you know, even whether it was children who enjoyed the subject and wanted to pursue it themselves, or those that just found it an interesting moment, or part of their week, that all gave me joy. But also, what is incredible about teaching and working with people who care about children is you just come across likeminded professionals. Just such good people that work in the sector.

Briony: You talk incredibly glowingly of teaching. What was it about the role of HMCI that really intrigued you enough to apply?

Martyn: It's interesting because all of my - well, certainly the last 14/15 years - of my career, I've tended to go in after Ofsted into schools that were in difficult circumstances and pick them up. So, I've always had a tremendous amount of interest in Ofsted’s work and its role and the importance of what we do in finding and supporting schools and providers and helping the system to understand where things can be better. So, I've always been a long admirer of the importance of the work. And then I was encouraged by a tremendous amount of people. It's very humbling to see so many people ask me to consider to apply. And so, taking the importance of it, the fact that I was encouraged by so many of my peers to go for the role, it’s something that I thought I should do. And I've come to try and make sure that for young people and parents and how then for the staff in all of our settings - not just teachers or staff in schools, all of our providers, childminders, people who work in children's services, everyone everywhere, further education and skills, making sure that we can provide them the most modern, fit for purpose inspectorate that supports all of them to do their really important work for those children and young people.

Briony: Absolutely. And you've touched on this a little bit, but now that you're in role and you're bringing the weight of your vast experience to bear, can you tell us a little bit about your priorities?

Martyn: Yeah. And today when we're recording this, it's an interesting day because the Education Select Committee’s just published a report, and we welcome those findings. And if people were to listen to what I said when I appeared myself in front of the Select Committee, and some of the things I've talked about in the media, it's about making sure that we are a professional, courteous, empathetic and respectful inspectorate that understands the difficulties of the moment and how hard it is in the system right now. And this holding the system to account in a way which is gentle and for children, and for young people, making sure that their voices are heard and the voices of parents are heard. So, we're going to do an awful lot of work on that. But really importantly, Briony - I don't think I've spoken about this before - that the system should be subject to the new chief inspectors thoughts alone. And so, the most important thing is that we're going to begin a ‘Big Listen’. A lot of people have said an awful lot, especially in the last few weeks and months, about Ofsted. But we want to hear and make sure that we get to as many groups, especially not just the sectors but the parents and the children themselves. And that together, we co-construct this modern, fit for purpose inspectorate, not just for the medium term, but for the long term that will deliver for everyone.

Briony: And I think our listeners will be incredibly interested in our ‘Big Listen’, which we’ll be launching in March. Just to say that we’ll be publishing another podcast then with more details so if you don’t want to miss it, please follow and subscribe.

Martyn, thank you so much for taking time out with us today.

Martyn: Thanks, Briony. And thanks everyone for listening.

On this episode, we're talking to two further education and skills leads from Ofsted about the FES curriculum and what it means for students and teachers. And have you seen this report we've published into FES curriculums for business, both classroom-based and work-based?

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/further-education-and-skills-report-business-education

Anna Trethewey: So, today we’re talking about what high-quality education looks like in the further education and skills sector, with two FES Senior His Majesty's Inspectors – Dr Richard Beynon and Dr Becca Clare, from the FES policy team.

Richard, could you say, succinctly, what high-quality education is in FES?

RICHARD BEYNON: Yes, I’ll try. As with all education, the curriculum is the key. High-quality education means good curriculum design, coupled with effective teaching. And good curriculum design means selecting the content that is the most important and useful in a given subject, and then teaching the content in an order that helps learners to understand it. In maths, for instance, that means, probably, teaching learners to calculate area before volume. That doesn’t change, whether it’s further education or education for children.

The evidence shows that it’s really important to think about the key building blocks of a curriculum – what foundations need to be laid first so that learners can make connections and build secure knowledge? What we learn isn’t retained in isolation.

Instead, what we learn is connected in our memory to all kinds of other things we have learned before, and forms connections to things we learn later.

Sometimes we refer to knowledge as ‘sticky’ – that’s because some kinds of knowledge enable other components to ‘stick’ to them and this helps to expand our expertise in a given area. Think about the really fundamental knowledge in any subject – it’s probably like this. In English, for instance, if we know what a noun is, we can build on that to learn about sentence construction, proper nouns, collective nouns, abstract nouns. In maths, if we understand about division, we can go on to learn about fractions, peRebecca Clareentages, proportion, ratio and so on. In carpentry and joinery, if we learn about the properties of wood – how and why some wood is soft or hard, how different kinds of wood absoRichard Beynon moisture, structural defects such as knots – we can work out which kinds of wood are suitable in which situations.

REBECCA CLARE: So, the curriculum content that is selected and put in place early in the curriculum really makes a difference to what learners can learn next. We often explain this by using the image of a Jenga tower – what are the knowledge and skills that really need to be at the base of the tower? What do they support? What happens if that component is missing – what can the learners not learn, if they don’t understand division, or sentence structure, or the properties of wood, or basic sociological concepts like class and gender, or – in beauty therapy or health or sports - anatomy and physiology. The key thing is to select the really key content that learners need if they are to develop expertise in that subject. What are the foundation stones? What content needs to be in place to enable further content to be learned?

And in terms of teaching methods, it involves using methods that help learners really to embed the knowledge and skills they’re learning. I can remember – just – when I was at school, and quite often, as soon as I’d sat an exam, I’d forget the stuff I’d learned – because I’d only learned it for the exam. A really good education isn’t about just teaching to the test, though of course exam results matter. But it’s about teaching learners so that they can remember what they learn long term. Then, if they learn it well, they can use what they learn in their lives and jobs, they can add to it, evaluate it, critique it, apply it in all kinds of situations. It’s the opposite of the jug and mug approach, really. Sure, learners need to remember what they are taught – but it’s not about filling up memory just for exams – it’s about real learning, to enhance real jobs and lives.

RICHARD BEYNON: and that is likely also to involve a curriculum that helps learners learn about how knowledge is produced and evaluated – so, not just learning about atoms, but learning about scientific method. Not just learning about theories of leadership, but learning about how such theories are produced, tested, revised. What counts as knowledge in a given subject or job? Why? What are the rules of the game? Knowing the rules helps learners develop real expertise at work and in further study. It also helps them, incidentally, to know how to tell the difference between a warranted conclusion and an unwarranted one, high-quality information and fake news, a valid conclusion and a conspiracy theory.

Anna Trethewey: Thanks. So, what else can we say about curriculum design? What should be included?

REBECCA CLARE: One thing to think about is: is the curriculum broad and ambitious? A high-quality curriculum is knowledge- and skills-rich. It focuses on the content learners need if they are to increase their expertise in a given subject. What do learners need to know if they are to go on to become expert joiners, bricklayers, mathematicians, hairdressers, chefs and engineers? What content needs to be in place now, at the level the learners are studying, to provide a foundation for later development of increasing expertise? Of course, some learners may choose not to go further, but that should be their choice, not the teacher’s. A good curriculum opens more doors; it’s up to the learner to choose which doors to go through and which to close. If the curriculum itself closes doors because it misses out key knowledge and skills, learners’ options are limited. This is the opposite of an ambitious curriculum.

RICHARD BEYNON: and in terms of teaching, learners need several things. First, it’s usually best if the teaching methods really focus clearly on the curriculum to be learned, if there is plenty of time allocated to the subject, if teachers use methods that evidence shows encourage recall and support understanding (methods like very clear explanations for and spaced repetition of the most crucial content, expert demonstrations of skills in the classroom and at work, use of case studies, explaining how new fits with old, reducing distractions), that usually has a positive impact. Teaching is an evidence-based profession – there is a good deal of reseaRebecca Clareh about what works. Of course, there’s room for innovation too, but really good teachers are familiar with the evidence and have expertise in what is sometimes called pedagogical content knowledge … that means, they know how to make a subject accessible to learners. We’ve all met experts who really know their subject but can’t teach it for toffee… well, an expert teacher not only knows their subject, but they know how to teach it in ways that help learners to understand it too.

REBECCA CLARE: Yes, and that means having really high expectations of what learners can do. You know, Amanda Spielman talks about the fact that social justice is at the heart of high-quality education, built around a rich curriculum. Amanda’s view is that the best way to tackle inequality and the lack of social mobility is through high-quality education – given we are all educators, that’s presumably a view we share. Knowledge is power. The more knowledge and skills we have, the more options we are likely to have and the more control we have over our own careers and lives. Of course, other things contribute – but, in our role, we are concerned with the transformative power of education. A really high-quality education – which means a really high-quality curriculum, taught well – should be available to all. Our job is to help ensure it is.

Anna Trethewey: knowledge is power, and life transforming. What about skills? Is there a divide between knowledge and skills?

REBECCA CLARE: we can think of skills, actually, as a kind of knowledge – it’s sometimes called know-how, or procedural knowledge. Think about the skill of planing a piece of wood, or playing the guitar, or changing a tyre. And lots of skills – think about giving a facial massage, for example – are actually really very complex composites, made up of a whole collection of individual parts that learners have to master before they can do the skill. So, beauty students have to learn about facial anatomy and physiology, contraindications, beauty products, client care, massage strokes, and more, before they can give an expert facial massage. This is crucial – in FES, learners and apprentices are learning really very complex material – learning the theoretical knowledge (like anatomy and physiology) AND, often, a skill such as different massage strokes … and then, they need judgement to know which knowledge and skills to apply in which situation. That really is the development of expertise – knowing how to work out the products and techniques to use for different clients, knowing which wood to use for garden furniture and which for bookcases, knowing how to make decisions that result in profitable, thriving businesses, how to diagnose and remedy faults in cars and software. So, there are different layers of curriculum content, and it's not possible or sensible to say that the theory is more important than the skill. They go together. I think it’s also interesting to think about what some people call ‘muscle memory’, or embodied cognition … think about learning to play an instrument, or dance, or knead bread.

RICHARD BEYNON: and, of course, there is the need to think about, in apprenticeships particularly, the knowledge that is learned on the job too – the workplace knowledge, sometimes tacit, that needs to be passed on, the sequence of things that are learned in the classroom and on the job. We’ve seen really good examples of education providers working with employers to plan a curriculum that helps learners and apprentices make great progress and do really well at work – for example, by ensuring that the apprentice chef has learned about food hygiene before they start working in the kitchen.

Anna Trethewey: Of course, parts of FES have such strong links to work and the economy, and to making sure learners and apprentices have the right skills for the economy.

REBECCA CLARE: Yes, and the right knowledge and skills for their own careers and lives. Education is about an enriched, empowered life, holding conversations and holding jobs.

Anna Trethewey: So, a high-quality curriculum often has a line of sight to work.

REBECCA CLARE: yes, to broad careers especially. A really good curriculum prepares a learner to be a master carpenter/joiner who can turn their hand to a wide variety of different jobs and employers and self-employment. It doesn’t just prepare them to perform a narrow range of tasks for one housebuilder, for instance.

Anna Trethewey: Got it. And I guess that’s one of the reasons why it’s important to include really fundamental principles and theoretical knowledge, rather than what used to be called a competency-based approach?

RICHARD BEYNON: Yes. If learners just learn competences, or just learn by imitation, without understanding the reasons and theory underneath what they’re doing, they have a narrow understanding. They can perform a technique, but they might not understand why they are doing certain things and what the effects will be. They almost certainly won’t be able to judge for themselves what is the right thing to do – they won’t have the expertise.

Anna Trethewey: so, is there one approach to curriculum design in each subject that is best?

REBECCA CLARE: There are usually multiple effective ways of planning the curriculum. Some subjects, like learning to read, probably require a more consistent approach – it makes sense to start novice readers of any age with phonics, rather than handing them pieces of text. But, think about a subject like music, where there might be a number of different starting points – learning stave notation, or listening to plainsong, or finding out about the history and context of the development of jazz and blues, for instance. Similarly in sociology – would you start with teaching Marxist theory? Or stratification? Or the key social institutions? Or crime and deviance?

The important thing is that curriculum choices make sense and help learners to make good progress. For example, if I am teaching English and I want students to analyse a political speech before I’ve taught anything about rhetoric, the students may well make less progress – that is, they would understand less about the speech – than if they’d studied some rhetoric first. I might also need to pre-teach some of the political concepts in the speech.

RICHARD BEYNON: When we’re inspecting, we have conversations with teachers and curriculum leaders about the components they choose, and the order in which they teach them. We want to understand teachers’ decisions. We also find out about the impact on learners – can they in fact analyse the political speech well? Can they read music, or explain the origins of jazz and blues? It’s no use asking a learner to debate something if they have no knowledge of the topic; it’s no use expecting learners to cook a souffle if they don’t know how to crack an egg. So, logical sequencing to enable the learner to progress through the curriculum is crucial.

REBECCA CLARE: and if learners and apprentices aren’t making much progress, then we need to think about why that is. Is it because the curriculum design has gone wrong? Or is it because it hasn’t been taught in ways that help learners learn?

Anna Trethewey: is that different for adult learners? Do they need different ways of teaching?

REBECCA CLARE: The novice / expert distinction is key, not the age difference. An adult just starting out on a new curriculum is a novice, and novices need clear exposition, plenty of practice, tasks that enable them to learn the curriculum, and corrections of misconceptions. However, there is evidence that novices and experts learn in slightly different ways. Once a learner has developed expertise in a subject, they may well benefit from more group work and debate and discussion, as there is less risk of sharing misconceptions and more chance of sharing knowledge. Bear in mind that an expert is an expert in a particular curriculum. A learner might have a PhD in maths but be a novice on an art curriculum. And the effect applies regardless of age – group work and debates and independent learning are more likely to work with learners of any age who have mastered some of the curriculum and who have knowledge to share and build on.

Anna Trethewey: What does success look like for learners in FES?

RICHARD BEYNON: It means, first and foremost, that they have learned and can use more of the curriculum. Chefs understand the fundamental principles of cooking and can apply them to a wide range of dishes in lots of different ciRebecca Clareumstances. Sociologists understand sociological theory and reseaRebecca Clareh methods and can apply both to a wide range of topics. If learners learn more, remember more, understand more and can use more of the curriculum over time, that’s likely to be reflected in achievement rates, promotions, good grades, good jobs and so on.

Anna Trethewey: Is there not always a positive correlation between making progress through the curriculum and passing exams?

RICHARD BEYNON: Almost always, but not always. For example, very occasionally we see high grades that are a result of learners being on a course that is too easy for them. But usually, the best way to exam success is to learn and understand more of a high-quality curriculum – it’s usually win-win – learners develop expertise, and this is reflected in exam results and other things, like more responsibilities and promotion at work.

REBECCA CLARE: Success is relative to the curriculum too. For instance, in adult and community learning and on programmes for learners who have high needs, learners may not be on courses that have exams. Success might mean increased independence or reduced isolation or greater involvement with the community. You can see, though, the common theme – it’s empowering learners and apprentices, whatever the context.

Anna Trethewey: Thank you Richard and Rebecca – empowerment is probably a good point to finish on!

In this episode, Mark Leech (Director, Strategy and Engagement) talks to Paul Joyce (Deputy Director, Further Education and Skills), Helen Flint (Specialist Policy Adviser, Quality and Training) and Commander Kate Scott of the Royal Navy about Ofsted's recent Welfare and duty of care in the Armed Forces initial training report. 

Transcript

Mark Leech

Hello, welcome to another edition of Ofsted Talks. And today we're talking about an interesting area of work. And one I thing a lot of people are quite surprised at we are talking about inspecting training facilities in the armed forces. This is what we do on behalf of the Ministry of Defence. And every year we publish a report summarising this work, which is called the effectiveness of care and welfare arrangements for recruits. trainees and Officer cadets. We've just published this year's report, and I'm delighted to be talking about it with some great guests. So I'll start with my Ofsted colleagues, and we're joined by Paul Joyce, who is the director, looking after all of our further education work. We're joined by Helen Flint, as well as specialist advisor in the further education team and our Armed Forces lead. And Helen, I think you also have a bit of a background in the Armed Forces yourself before you joined us here at Ofsted.

Helen Flint 

Yeah, that's correct, Mark. I did spend nearly 20 years as a training education specialist in the Royal Navy. I have to point out that was actually over 10 years ago and I've done many things since joining since leaving the Royal Navy including being an HMI since 2014.

Mark Leech 

I'm also really pleased to say that we're joined today by Commander Kate Scott of The Royal Navy and Kate is also the Ministry of Defence link for us here at Ofsted. Kate did you want to talk a little bit about your background and how you ended up in this role?

Commander Scott 

Yes, yeah. As you say, I'm Kate Scott and I have been in the Navy just over 20 years and I am what is known within the Navy as a Training Management Specialist. I have done several roles across many of the training domains. Looking particularly at the introduction of new equipment and the training associated with this and this is my first foray into Ofsted and carry on welfare and duty of care from an MOJ perspective.

Mark Leech 

Thank you. So Paul and Helen. As I said this is work that a lot of people will be a bit surprised to know that Ofsted does it sits within our further education team. How did it come about? How did we get to a position where we were asked by the Ministry of Defence to inspect training in the forces.

Paul Joyce

Thanks Mark. You're right. It's a relatively small piece of the further education skills remit. But an incredibly important part, Helen, I think you know the background to this really, really well. Would you like to just explain why we're doing this.

Helen Flint 

Thank you, Paul. So this work all stems back from some deaths in the army in the late 1990s and the early 2000s at a place called Deep Cut barracks in Surrey. And there were a number of young people in that particular establishment who, over that time period took their own lives. And that was followed by a number of inquiries and reports. The outcome of one of those was that the then adult learning Inspectorate was asked by the Ministry of Defence to be an impartial and independent Inspectorate. Looking at what went on in basic training amongst all of the armed forces and effectively be exposed to civilian look at what's going on inside those establishments primarily through a care and welfare lens. So this work stems right back to that time, the adult learning Inspectorate was then if you'd like subsumed into Ofsted, and Ofsted has now completed 15 different cycles of inspection into basic training, which is if you'd like the Phase One element, which is where you civilians, join the armed forces and go through basic training in the Army, the Navy and the Royal Air Force. And then on to their trade training, which teaches them to be all the different job roles that you can possibly get in the armed forces. So teach them for example, to be engineers or chefs, or infantry folk. All of that is what happens in their initial trade training or their phase two. Our remit as Ofsted, as commissioned by the Ministry of Defence, is to go and look at how well those different training establishments are looking after the care and welfare of those young people. And that includes looking at it through the lens of training because at the end of the day, that's what they are doing in those establishments. They are there to train, but they also live there. They've got a full experience that goes on, and it's our responsibility to go and see how well the Ministry of Defence is looking after them through those training. Those training phases.

Mark Leech 

Thank you so much. Okay, so I suppose what's the view from the other side of the fence as as the MOD representative, clearly going all the way back to the deep kind of really serious and sensitive area. A big focus now for the armed forces.

Commander Scott 

Yeah, absolutely. We absolutely as the emoji are delighted that Ofsted come and see our, our initial training. We've got an enormously good relationship with Ofsted. And welcoming new into our establishments to have a independent third party, assess how well how well we deliver the duty, duty of care aspects of our obligations to those people that join the armed forces. is absolutely key. And the inspectors that comes to the establishments have a wealth of knowledge. They are able to look at a number of establishments in each inspection cycle, and their ability to then triangulate that triangulate their data and allow us to see the trends and the consistency of which we are delivering the duty of care where we can develop our policies and procedures and where best practices is being delivered allows us really to, to get after those areas where we can do better for our people, and where we can bring a mindset of continuous improvement through the inspections that you deliver. So absolutely. We welcome them. They're very good for us and yeah, may they continue.

Mark Leech 

Thank you. And Paul, so you said this is quite a quite a small team. How many people do we have and how many places do we inspect? I mean, obviously on the list, you've got some pretty famous names, Sandhurst. Where else are we going?

Paul Joyce 

Well Mark as you quite rightly say, and as Kate has just said, it's influential work. Because what our inspections find and the recommendations we make, do make a real difference to the establishments that we inspect. It's a slightly different framework. So whilst as Helen has already said, it is training that we are looking at, but it's specifically the welfare and duty of care aspect, in addition to that training, that's important, and we do around 20 inspections, a year 20 inspections. Each cycle, and we are alone with Kate and MOD colleagues. Helen decides where to visit, what units to visit. And that's done on a sort of a risk and priority basis. And we then go and inspect and as we do in our other remits, we report as we find, but the difference in in this remit particularly the reports already very, very high level by senior and MOD staff. There's an annual report produced signed off by our chief inspector and by the Minister responsible for defence, and importantly, as a result of individual establishment inspections and the annual report, improvements are made and improvements are made not only to training, but also to infrastructure to resources. And to accommodation.

Mark Leech 

Just out of interest. Do you inspect reservists as well as regular units?

Helen Flint 

Actually this year because we have not been to inspect any reservists other than the university service units. Which aren't strictly reservists because we are doing a piece of work alongside the Ministry of Defence to review the training in each of the armed forces, reservist organisations and look at the best way that we could possibly inspect those. So this year coming we are going to do a piece of work alongside Kate and her team and alongside the single services to look at how training is in the reserve world for certain parts of the organisation. So the nice thing about the work that we do is it doesn't it changes often we do different things we don't we're not fixated on what we look at, the MOD will ask us to look at something different perhaps this year, next year, the year after. And we are agile enough to look at what we do and say that we can try and do things differently. That's a really nice piece. of work that Paul, you talked about that relationship between the Ministry of Defence colleagues and ourselves and we are responsive to something that they might like us to go and look at outside of what we've looked at in the previous year.

Mark Leech 

So just looking at the kind of span of places that we go and inspect. We've talked about some of the sort of famous officer training establishments or centres where else do we go?

Helen Flint 

Yeah, absolutely. Mark. We went to all three of the very prestigious officer training Establishments this year, so we went up to RAF Cranwell, and also we went to the naval College in Dartmouth, as well as Sandhurst, as you mentioned, but we also have been to the Phase One training establishments at RAF Halton, we've been to some of the army training establishments such as Winchester. And then we've talked about the sort of phase two which is the initial trade training, which is where the recruits will go next to learn about their trades. So we went to places like Portsmouth, Fareham near Portsmouth and we also went up to Cosford, and I mentioned about the fact that these were places that sorry, there were places that we've seen make definite improvements. And those last two are really good examples of establishments that we have inspected that we did not think we're good for reasons various people can read the previous annual report if they want to know why they weren't good the previous time, but when we went back this year, both of those establishments are good examples of places that have gone from requires improvement to good so they're really good news stories.

Mark Leech 

Thank you for the process of inspecting the establishments. I'm interested in how that how that differs perhaps from some of the other inspections that we do. So most people obviously think about school inspections where our inspectors will go in and they'll sit at the back of a class and watch some children being taught. They'll talk to leaders in the school, they'll run through curriculums and really look into the level of detail I mean, how hands on do we get in inspections in Ministry of Defence?

Helen Flint 

To be honest, Mark the type of activities we do on any sort of inspection are fairly similar. So the activities that inspectors in the MOD team will do will be fairly similar to the sorts of things they would do for example, they were going to visit a college but there's just a slight sort of nuance in the emphasis so they will still go and look at training that's happening it's sometimes in a classroom but often it's out in in the field or a workshop or on an assault course or out on the playground. And we do that because we are interested in the quality of the training and we've got as Kate mentioned, we've got a huge wealth of experience in our in our inspection workforce, who many of whom have been inspecting either post 16 education or been involved in post 16 education and training for many years. So that we find is something to have useful conversations with the mid about but we're also spend a lot of time talking to new recruits and trainees at these establishments and finding out what life there is like from their perspective. And one of the things that we do that possibly colleagues and other inmates wouldn't do is we go and have a look where these where these young people are living because we're really interested in the sorts of accommodation facilities that they are experiencing in their time while they're under training. And we'll go and see where they eat, and we'll go and see where they are able to relax out of their working time because these are all things that we have. Over the years our experience has shown them really important for the well being and care of those young people who, for whom this training is is actually quite robust and quite physical. They're doing stuff they may never have done before. They're living away from home for the very first time. Some of them are particularly some of those who are a bit younger. So we do want to explore all of those things with them and find out how well they are being supported and cared for by the establishment staff both uniformed and non uniform. Because let's not forget there are a lot of civilians working in these organisations as well as military and all of those things will help us sort of get a rounded picture of what life is like for those people going through that training under those circumstances, and yes, we will also spend a lot of time talking to staff and a lot of time talking to the senior leaders or the command team of the are responsible for the training for the care for the welfare of those new recruits and trainees. So those activities are similar, but as I say slightly nuanced, slightly different because we do have an emphasis on how good the infrastructure and the resources are, because of our experience over the last nearly 20 years is what an impact they can have on the well being of people that are going through that training off the top off state.

Mark Leech 

Yes, and then the infrastructure is something that I know we've drawn out in the latest report and in previous reports. Should we talk a bit about what we've found over the course of the last year and what people can read about if they do pick up a copy of our report?

Helen Flint 

Yeah, sure. Well, first thing to say about our report and about our findings across this year's cycle, which the report talks about, is how good the training is in all of the places we visited. And not a single establishment or University Service Unit.

Mark Leech 

If I can just stop you there. Helen, would you mind just letting our listeners know where the University Service Unit is?

Helen Flint 

So we went to 11 Different regular training Establishments this year and by regular I mean regular army regular Navy and regular air force. We also went to a number of university service units. And this year we chose the RAF and we went to some of the university air squadrons visited a number of those across the country. And remember that these are not just in England like Ofsted. Other work often tends to be in England, but these are all over the United Kingdom. So we visited a number of those. And these are units that are attached to universities. So you can go to university as a student, and you can apply to be a member of the University service units which are what really what they say on the tin they are service organisations which train students who are effectively become officer cadets in their time there and they train them to do various different activities. There's no requirement to join the military afterwards. That's not what these organisations are about, but because they are paid service people because they are effectively doing what could be constitute as a sort of phase one phase two type training. Then the then the mid asked us to start inspecting those in around 2018.

Mark Leech 

That's great. Thank you for that. Going back to what we found this year during the inspections. You were saying that all the training we inspected was good.

Helen Flint 

What we found everywhere we went is that the training and the quality of support that all of those young recruits and trainees were experiencing in the places who went to this year was good. Not a single one was not so that's a really good finding. And I'm really delighted for MOD colleagues. That that is the that is the case. There were pockets where we were saying hang on a minute. Some of these young folk going through training. They haven't quite had enough time, for example, to really think about what they've learned before you then teach them something new. So let's have let's have a look at that, please. And that's one of the recommendations in the report. We've also said please can you remember that they also have to have time to to maintain the level of fitness that you've got them to because that's something else that we found within the report. We've asked the RMIT colleagues to seriously think about the level of nutrition that recruits and trainees have and teaching recruits and trainees more about the nutrition that what they need to fuel their body particularly when they're undertaking quite strenuous physical activity and strenuous training. So there's a conversation about that. And that's one of the recommendations. Two of our major recommendations, though, and your listeners may well have actually seen these in the press because some of these were picked up by some of their large newspapers and indeed, I think some of the meet other media outlets were that we did find that if you're a woman or if you are a smaller, recruit or trainee, not everything fits as well as we'd like it to. That's particularly around some of the kits such as body armour or rucksacks. Or also known in the military is Bergens. So there was a recommendation around the making sure that clothing uniform and equipment fits properly. And our major recommendation this year, as it was in the previous year, and indeed the one before that is about improving swiftly the particularly that combination for other infrastructure. And that was a major finding this year because sadly this year we actually went to probably one of the worst places in terms of infrastructure that we've seen in in quite a long time. And that particular institution, we felt so bad that we gave it adequate rating overall. And that's quite rare. Which comes back to my first point, which is most of what we see across the military state across military training is good. And we do report that.

Mark Leech 

I think I think that is really important because obviously there was a lot of focus on on some of the some of the infrastructure. Kate, I'm not trying to put you on the spot at all, but do you do recognise some of that? Is that a fair assessment do you think of the current current state of play?

Commander Scott 

Yeah, I think Ofsted inspections are always fair. I I shadow a few to understand how Ofsted undertake their inspections. I think that's part of my role. It allows me to talk to the command in the command in command and chains of command within the establishment with a more informed view of how inspections have been undertaken. And it helps me in in my role when I'm answering questions. So absolutely. I think the MOD absolutely recognises that across what is essentially an extremely large training estate, that there are certainly buildings that are require much more investment we have quite a quite a number of graded buildings, which the investment for which is obviously enormous. And there is a mid infrastructure strategy that is is developing how we then look to modernise our training estate to ensure that we absolutely get after these issues to ensure that the defence view on duty of care and care and welfare for our trainees not only covers all of the welfare side, but also all of those sides that Helen mentions including accommodation and infrastructure. So yes, it is recognised and I think the MOD strategy is strong, it will take time, but it's absolutely on the radar. And I think when it comes to equipment, certainly across all of the services, there are absolutely programmes in place to develop the equipment that we have for both males and females. To ensure that when we undertake not only our training, but also throughout our careers, that the equipment we have is the best that it can be. And it allows us to do the jobs that we do to the best of our abilities. So once again, that takes time to develop but it's absolutely there.

Mark Leech 

And have you seen over the season over the years that Ofsted has been doing these inspections and someone's gonna have to correct me on the number of years we've been involved in this. Have you seen some steps forward? On the on the back of some of the reports that we put out?

Helen Flint 

So absolutely we do and I'm reminded of a little story of when our some of our inspectors were at an RAF establishment that shall remain nameless. And we had we pointed out that it wasn't really great that they didn't have hot water and heating in that particular establishment and the young people going through the training that was phase two training stuff, couldn't have hot showers because the heating system kept failing. And some inspectors went back a little while longer. A little while after that and they were taken to a big hole in the ground by by one of the establishment staff and so they go we're putting in new heating. It's not quite there yet but we're putting in new heating and when we did go back to inspect that fully. The big hole have been filled in I'm very pleased to say but they've actually got their heating system sorted out and there was such thing as heating and hot water and that might sound a bit trivial to people that listening that are thinking wow, these are rough tough to service people and you know they've got to live to learn in in quite harsh conditions and that is true. But when they're out there doing the job properly. Not while they're learning to be sailors and soldiers that's really important that we as a society give people the chance to do things like wash themselves when they've been out crawling through mud or running around and assault course. You know, those are basic, we think basic sort of requirements really in this country and it's right and proper that the mid should fix things when they are broken. And to be fair, wherever we have gone back to reinspect. Somewhere that we have set an aspect isn't good enough without any exceptions. There has been improvement every single establishment where we've said in the in an inspection. This isn't good. This requires improvement. We've gone back and we've seen an improvement without exception.

Mark Leech 

That's really good. I think your point is really well made as well. You know that this idea that might exist out there that Oh, well. You know, the whole point of joining the armed forces, you've got to be tough enough to deal with cold showers and all the rest of it but we're talking about young people starting out in a career in the military and it's as you say, it's only right and proper that they that they have a modern lifestyle when they're when they're not out doing their actual day to day training.  I mean, I'm interested as well in what we've learned as an organisation from this work because obviously your area of work covers whether education colleges or comes prison education as well. What have we learned from our experience working with the armed forces?

Paul Joyce 

A great deal, Mark. I mean, it's great that our inspectors have this as a an additional element to their work stream. So Helen, as has been said before, has a small team of of experienced inspectors that do this work, but they learn an awful lot from the inspections they do in MOD and they're of course able to bring that back into our work and into the training that we do for the other activity. I mean, what's most striking for me here is the relationship that exists between Ofsted and the MOD so between Helen and Kate and colleagues. And the biggest learning point here that we try to replicate throughout the remit is around that communication is around that risk management that risk intelligence and about communication in terms of conducting inspections and making recommendations. Because as we've heard from Helen and Kate, this is work that is influential, it does make a difference. If we find something that needs improvement, and we get that recommendation right. The MOD act on that those improvements. So it's a really good additional sub remit to the work we do in Further Education and Skills

Mark Leech 

That's interesting thank you and I suppose just bringing it back to where we started is this sort of sensitive area, the inspection of these facilities, the welfare concerns came out of some difficult times in the history of the armed forces around Deep Cut and elsewhere. We've talked about things that have been learned through inspection on the sort of facilities and improving the infrastructure. Kate, how do you think there's been changes made that have made a material difference in terms of that wider care of recruits?

Commander Scott 

Yeah, absolutely. I mean, out of out of Deep Cut, we had a significant report  and that had over 30 recommendations. And it is it is from those recommendations we have absolutely based on care and welfare and duty of care for our for our recruits and trainees and, and that stems from the need for us to make sure that not only our trainees are, are well cared for but also our trainers are in the best position to deliver the responsibilities that we give them as trainers within HR establishments. So we have absolutely put in place levels of training for trainers. We've got strategies for additional training, whether that be on radicalization and bullying. We've now got self harm strategies. We've got suicide awareness strategies. And all of this as part of that continuous improvement mindset that we've got for both our trainers and trainees with regards to how can we continue to develop the care and welfare and duty of care aspects of our training that goes so, so hand in hand with also delivering the military side and the capability side that we want to instil in these trainees that come into the armed forces? So absolutely, we we have changed as an organisation post deep cuts, and for the right reasons and we continue to change and develop and that's exactly where Ofsted provide that underpinning data alongside lots of other reports and strategies that we have at the defence level to provide us with that constant check to ensure that we are going in the right direction and that we are sharing the best practice across the establishments so that we are absolutely doing the best for the people that join the armed forces.

Helen Flint 

Yeah, I'd endorsed what Kate's just said there, Mark because I think the landscape has changed considerably since those days and Ofsted are really proud partners in that journey. You know, the Ministry of Defence I've done so much work in these areas. And it really is a very, I've been kicking around for a very long time since those days up until now and they've made such significant changes in the way that trainers are trained and as well as the way that trainees are trained and the whole the whole way that young people are looked after I say young because they're all younger than me. I mean that doesn't mean that there's some of them are in their 30s. So there's still a lot younger than me. But the whole the whole way that this system, the training systems within the armed forces are run is markedly different as they were really proud to have worked hand in hand with the Minister of Defence during that whole journey.

Mark Leech 

Thank you. It's clearly really, really important work. Thank you so much for talking today. Thank you, Paul. Thank you, Helen. Thank you, Kate. I hope you've enjoyed listening. Do give us a like and follow and we will speak again another topic soon.

In this episode, Mark Leech (Director of Strategy and Engagement) talks to Richard Beynon (Senior HMI, FES Policy) and Kate Hill (Specialist Adviser, FES Policy) about enhanced inspections and how colleges are meeting skills needs. 

Mark Leech

Hello everybody and welcome to another edition of Ofsted Talks, the Ofsted podcast. My name is Mark Leech and today we're going to be talking about an area of work in our further education and skills inspections. We're going to be talking about enhanced inspections of colleges. So this is inspections that particularly are focused on how colleges are meeting skills needs. Today, I'm joined with two colleagues from our further education and skills team, Richard Beynon, and Kate Hill, welcome to you both. Let's start with you Richard, perhaps we can have a little chat about why this is important and what the expectation is on colleges in terms of meeting skills needs. 

Richard Beynon

There's a growing force behind this I think that we've seen developing across the past three or four years and it came to a head I suppose in 2022. There was some legislation that actually directed colleges to think about their skills work but colleges have always been the engine of skills in our economy. They've always dealt with vocational skills, they've always dealt with personal skills for a lot of learners. They've always been responsible for the upskilling of adults who come back to learning after a pause or a gap in their education. So colleges have always been there with this skills work. I think it's just that in the last couple of years, government has focused attention on that area of colleges work.

Mark Leech

Is it sort of looking nationally or more regionally? How wide are they supposed to be casting their net?

Richard Beynon

It's both really, because some colleges for example, land based colleges or specialists dance and drama colleges, serve a national need.

Mark Leech

That's really interesting. Kate, so that's what we expect colleges to be doing, our role obviously is to go out and check that it's happening on the ground. How do we go about doing that?

Kate Kill

We actually have usually two dedicated inspectors, one will lead on the skills aspect, and then they'll have a colleague that will work with them. What they'll do is they'll spend some time talking to different stakeholders attached to that particular college. We came up with some headings and they were community, education, employers, and civic. When we make a call to plan the inspection, we ask that the leaders arrange calls with their main stakeholders from those four groups so we start to get a picture of how they're contributing to the priority sectors in the region or area or nationally. At the same time, our team inspectors are deep diving into some chosen subjects. If we looked at health and social care, for example, we would ask the Curriculum Manager to arrange for a couple of calls with some health and social care stakeholders that might come in and talk to learners, might be involved in designing the course and having a say in what they think would be useful for them to learn, or in what order they might need to learn things. 

Mark Leech

Thanks Kate. I suppose the big question then is what are we finding on these inspections? We've been doing them now for a little over a year. How many have we done and what are we finding?

Kate Hill

We've completed 65 of these enhanced inspections, that's as of the end of the academic year. Out of those, we have found that four of those colleges or providers, we judged them to be making a limited contribution to meeting skills needs, 40 were reasonable, and 21 were strong. Overall, 94% percent were strong or reasonable.

Richard Beynon

It's worth saying we use a three scale criteria for this skills judgement. We don't use the normal four scale grades that we use for other things on inspection. We just say that a college is either strong in its contribution or reasonable or limited.

Mark Leech

So what's the difference? If you're strong, what are you doing that the others aren't?

Richard Beynon

For college that strong, typically you'd find that they have a good range of stakeholders that cover different fields. They might be employers, they might be civic stakeholders, they might be community groups. So there'd be a diversity in that range of stakeholders. Also, those stakeholders would have a good contribution to the strategic thinking and positioning of the college's curriculum. So senior leadership teams might involve stakeholders in discussions about where the college positions itself and where it's heading in the broadest top level terms. But also to be strong, a college would need to have curriculum engagement with stakeholders. And that could be, for example, engineering staff when they're devising their curriculum, work with local engineering employers who come in and deliver a bit of the curriculum or who revise the curriculum each year with the teaching staff and make sure it's up to date and captures all of the things necessary for the sector. It would vary depending on the curriculum area. For sixth form college with A-levels, the stakeholder group might be universities who might come in and deliver talks to students about the sorts of things they do at university if they were studying law, or accountancy, or whatever it might be. So the nature of the stakeholders is different depending on the type of college. But with that strong judgement, we want to see the top level strategic stuff going on, and the curriculum input. It's very important to see it both in the classroom and at the top level strategic thinking.

Mark Leech

Kate, so looking at the other end of the spectrum, I'm sure if there are college leaders listening, they'd be interested in where colleges are perhaps falling down on on this measure. So where we have found that they've not been up to scratch, what typically isn't happening that should be?

Kate Hill

I think it would be fair to say that most of the colleges are making a reasonable contribution to meeting skills needs. Where they are not quite meeting the strong criteria, generally they're not consistently involving those stakeholders in the design and implementation of the curriculum to make sure they're preparing those learners for future work or future education. And that's one of the criteria that we see repeatedly that it's not consistently done. It might be happening brilliantly in A-level psychology, but there's nothing really happening in the engineering level three course. The other area is making sure that not only is that curriculum well planned and well taught, but those learners including apprentices are actually learning skills they need.

Mark Leech

Do we talk to the learners and apprentices to get their perspective on their training and how well they feel prepared? 

Richard Beynon

Yes very definitely and to the employers of apprentices as well. So we'd ask the employers, what are the skills that the apprentices bring to the workplace and are they up to date and current and useful? And we'd ask the apprentices how they feel about the skills they're learning. Are they learning them in a coherent way? The usual kind of curriculum questions.

Mark Leech

I'm interested in this area of how we're preparing learners for the local economy and the national economy. We talked a little earlier on the balance between the two. To what extent are we reflecting what's already there broadly speaking in terms of job opportunities I guess. And to what extent are we trying to move that market to create more skills in the economy in certain priority areas? So I'm thinking about a green technology, for example, now how much of that plays into our work.

Richard Beynon

Well, as inspectors go into each college for an enhanced inspection they receive from our data and insight teams in Ofsted, a very detailed skills analysis which looks at the part played by the LSIP in the area, the Local Skills Improvement Plan. It looks at skills shortages across the region, sub region, and in the local economy. So the inspectors are very well briefed about the way the college positions itself and about the needs of the local and regional economy as well. Often we'll find that, colleges have identified a shortage area with their stakeholders. And maybe they haven't put courses in just yet, but they're planning those things. Not everyone can react to a skills shortage or a skills need instantly. It takes several years to perhaps develop programmes and develop expertise amongst staff, but we recognise work in progress where it's happening.

Mark Leech

And how much of this sort of enhanced element feeds through into the overall grade that we give a college. How does it stack up with the other aspects that we look at on inspection?

Kate Hill

There's always an influence very much. When we're talking about skills and making sure that learners are developing the skills that they need. There is of course, a crossover with the quality of education. Then there is of course, a crossover with how well the leaders and managers are leading and managing that aspect. But as Richard already said, we make a sample judgement using a set of criteria, which will give them a separate judgement separate from the overall effectiveness and the key judgments, even though there will be an element of it that will filter into at all.   

Mark Leech

You can certainly see why this area is so important because ultimately it is about people leaving college with something that's really useful to them in terms of the future economy and in terms of its future health. 

Kate Hill

And it may be that, you know, we find that for example, construction is a particular need and a sector priority in an area and the college we go to doesn't offer construction. But they will say to us in one of our many conversations, well the reason we don't do it is because the college down the road are doing a jolly good job of it. And so therefore, we work with them and they do construction and we focus mainly on engineering because that's where we are experts. And so the conversations we have with the leaders and managers make sure that we understand how the sector priority is met if it's not directly themselves.

Richard Beynon

It's important in a metropolitan area or a large city that we take into account the other providers in the neighbourhood in the kind of locality. And we look at the way providers map their provision across one another to make sure there's no overlap and no unnecessary duplication.

Mark Leech

That's really interesting and thanks very much. I think that's been a really good look at this area of work. It's clearly really important and growing in importance. So thank you for your time Richard and Kate and thank you to everybody who has listened to this podcast. If you want to hear more from us, do subscribe wherever you get your podcasts and listen out for the next episode.