An inspector calls (less as it costs money) ~

For those outside the UK what i am sharing may seem confusing at best, silly at worse. The schools inspection quango ofsted have announced a new regime to raise standards and reinvigorate the process.

See http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-15108865

So, if you manage to get outstanding, which from personal experience is not as big a mystery as it may seem. You will not get inspected again unless your data slips or there are 'reported concerns'.

If your centre is good, it will go from 3 year intervals to 5 years, those that are satisfactory get the normal three year cycle and those who are week get more visits (where the latter two are no different than before).

With this in mind, i wonder what the incentives may be?

Is the inspection body under pressure to adapt the metrics to ensure there are more grade 1, outstanding schools. This will reduce costs as well as show that during the term of this current government there is an overall increase in the number of schools getting better inspection results as a direct result of their 'intervention'.

Those who are good, will have the time to 'improve', saving cash and enabling the inspection body to 'prove' they are in a process of helping the continual rise in standards.

The rest, now nothing has changed, but on the grapevine (so subjective information i am afraid), i hear that many satisfactory and unsatisfactory schools are being forced to become academies. Not that there is a hidden agenda here.

I will rant some other time on the changes in certifications and qualifications as this is interlinked into the bigger picture. But currently, if your local school miraculously gets outstanding, please stop and think about who this actually serves.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Wikipedia editors never walk alone: Hillsborough changes can be traced ... from @ConversationUK

Image
By Andrew Smith , The Open University According to the Liverpool Echo , UK government computers have been used to make offensive comments on the Wikipedia page detailing the 1989 Hillsbourgh Disaster over a number of years. The newspaper reports that revisions to the page have been made from computers using the government’s secure intranet since 2009. They include insults to Liverpool fans and a comment suggesting that fans were responsible for the football ground disaster, in which 96 people died. This case highlights the continual issue of trolling and cybervandalism on Wikipedia. It also shows how journalism is using good, technical forensic tools at the disposal of every cybercitizen. Cybercitizens can be good or bad So many of us use Wikipedia on a daily basis that it is one of the most visited websites in the world. Yet not that many of us really understand how it works. Wikipedia is based on the principle that the community can create, edit and refine pages covering
Read more

If airlines offer in-flight Wi-Fi, they should invest in an extra black box for security ...

Image
Yijun Yu , The Open University and Andrew Smith , The Open University In-flight Wi-Fi is one of the most sought-after facilities for air travellers these days, now that laptops and smartphones are so common and so much of our working and personal life revolves around online services. But a US Government Accountability Office report has suggested that many in-flight wireless networks could expose the plane to being hacked or remotely controlled . In fact it’s of such a concern to US authorities that when a well-known computer security expert made an admittedly ill-thought-out joke about doing so on Twitter, he was promptly arrested, his computers confiscated, and subsequently banned from the airline . And all he was suggesting was to make the oxygen masks drop down. So it would appear that the stuff of Hollywood may jump from fiction to fact: Liam Neeson and Julianne Moore starred in the 2014 film Non-Stop , where a passenger hacking the aircraft’s internal wirel
Read more

Highlights and lowlights of 2014, a golden year for cybercrime from @ConversationUK

Image
Looking back, 2014 was not a good year for keeping things safe under digital lock and key. If a score was being kept, it might seem that the cybercriminals are in the lead, despite the valiant efforts – and own goals – from the cybersecurity profession worldwide. Cast your mind back to March , everyone was panicking about the HeartBleed bug. Based on an error in code upon which the majority of the world’s secure servers relied, experts had plenty of time to fix the issue. Sadly there was an array of conflicting information about changing passwords, leading to widespread confusion. While most IT administrators made sure this was managed in a professional manner, it created a stir that seemed to set the tone for the year. In May , online auction giant Ebay admitted to having been compromised. The site said its systems, with personal details of tens of millions of users, may have had been vulnerable for months. Everyone was advised, indeed forced, to change their password. In the
Read more