|
||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||
|
With the Secondary Heads Association (SHA) identifying at least 127 bodies to which schools in England are legitimately answerable, there can be few who doubt that accountability is at the core of education.
Yet, in the prominent BBC sponsored Reith lecture series in 2002, Professor Onora O'Neill laid bare concerns raised in early GTC advice that modern accountability is in danger of failing the public. She believes that this is because of a lack of trust in and emphasis on the professional judgement of teachers and other practitioners.
Objective indicators?
Writing in the GTC magazine in summer 2002, she argued that a mushrooming audit culture, developed over the last 20 years, had marginalised teachers' professionalism, replacing serious accountability with a 'tick box' approach that supposedly uses objective indicators.
The creation of Ofsted and a national framework for inspecting schools in 1992 followed a series of other pieces of the accountability jigsaw, including the national curriculum and testing, the restructuring of governing bodies, local management of schools, and measures encouraging parents to be consumers of education.
The last decade has seen the further development of performance indicators, targets and published tables which O'Neill believes have been chosen "for ease of measurement and control rather than because they measure quality of performance accurately."
Parent bodies appear sympathetic. "Most parents like the reassurance of an Ofsted inspection but recognise that such inspections can be unduly burdensome and stressful," says Margaret Morrissey, a representative from the National Confederation of Parent Teacher Associations (NCPTA).
International approaches to accountability
Taking an international perspective, it is possible to find strikingly different models of accountability. For example, schools in Rhode Island in the United States are evaluated by teams of teachers and school leaders from other local schools, who approach the school as a research project, finding out what it is like to teach and learn there, without a pre-decided set of criteria to judge against.
A change for the better?
England is far removed from this US example, but there are encouraging noises from a government that appears committed to forging a new relationship with teachers and schools, with the promise of a system of intelligent accountability.
'Our interest is in promoting quality outcomes, not policing in detail every activity that might contribute to the how those are achieved,' Education Minister David Miliband told the audience at the North of England Conference on 8 January 2004.
Ofsted's review of school inspection is seen as contributing towards intelligent accountability. It is proposing shorter inspections every three years, with the shortest possible notice, and a greater emphasis on a school's ability to evaluate its own effectiveness.
Balancing assessment demands
Additionally, as part of the drive towards personalised learning, the Government seems prepared to review the balance of internal and external assessment demands at particular stages of 5-19 education. David Miliband defines personalised learning as: "An education system where assessment, curriculum, teaching style and out-of-hours provision are all designed to discover and nurture the unique talents of every single pupil."
In tandem, the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (QCA) is concentrating on e-learning and e-assessment, which it believes has massive potential to increase participation, learning and performance.
How far this vision of personalised learning can be reconciled with some of the existing components of the accountability framework - such as national tests and performance tables - is unclear. However, the Government's proposals provide an opportunity to shift away from the dominance of external testing as a means of quality control. A further indication of a change of direction in government thinking is the emphasis and priority given to assessment for learning - or formative assessment - in the proposals on key stage 3.
What is the GTC doing?
"The GTC is committed to developing thinking on a future accountability model that ensures public transparency and accountability, encourages teacher professionalism and trust, supports the development of teachers' informed practice and best informs school improvement," says Valerie Dennis, chair of the GTC's Teaching and Learning Committee.
She has been chairing a series of seminars with teachers, researchers and policy-makers examining the future of assessment. She says: "While there is a greater emphasis on assessment for learning and greater emphasis on the needs of the individual pupil, there are still differences at specific key stages. For example, the primary strategy reveals that target-setting processes may be changed at key stage 2, but there are no changes being proposed to the tests."
The GTC's collaboration forum on accountability is bringing together key partners - including teachers, researchers, governors and parents, the teaching unions, the DfES, Teacher Training Agency (TTA), Ofsted and others - to influence policy. A major focus is to identify the barriers and opportunities for strengthening school self-evaluation.
Says Valerie: "The development of shorter and more focused inspections will result in greater reliance on the schools' own evaluation of the effectiveness of its teachers. Schools will need to ensure that their performance management arrangements and their observation of teaching and learning processes are rigorous and high quality." The GTC believes the school's management of its stakeholders' perspectives, including the role of pupils as stakeholders, is a crucial aspect of self-evaluation. The GTC's forum has taken evidence from schools and researchers on positive practice, which it will incorporate into advice being presented to the Education Secretary later this year.
Changing perceptions of Ofsted
Of course, the move towards self-evaluation will not in itself change the way that many schools and teachers view Ofsted. "Ofsted will need to demonstrate a commitment to a change of culture that goes beyond rhetoric," says the GTC's Chief Executive, Carol Adams. "It will need to train its teams very carefully and sensitively to handle their role and much will depend on the quality of self-evaluation frameworks."
The GTC supports the move to include teachers and heads in the inspection teams in ways that will benefit them and their schools. "Their involvement will help to rebuild professional confidence in Ofsted as a source of constructive support and challenge, rather than a feared inquisitor," adds Carol.
