For the upcoming school year, Ofsted has laid out some new principles for their inspections and judgements, which will undoubtedly influence school policies. Although many of the changes are welcome, inevitably there will be problematic responses from some schools as they work to implement the changes.Some of these things could happen in English schools following the new Ofsted framework. Which do you think are most likely?
Some of these things could happen in English schools following the new Ofsted framework. Which do you think are most likely?
- Scrapping use of ‘internal data.’ Because Ofsted no longer will be asking to look at it.
- Retention of the majority tracking and monitoring systems which facilitate identification of, and intervention with underperformers.
- Imposing ‘interleaving’ onto schemes of work. As Nick Rose of Ambition Learning Institute warns, while it may be potentially helpful, ‘this idea can give rise to the potential “lethal mutation” that it’s best to chop-and-change different topics from lesson to lesson in order to achieve this spacing.’
- Blanket use of knowledge organisers. A resource with merit in some contexts may not necessarily be appropriate in others – Maths or Dance for example. In some schools, a drive for homogeneity may lead to reduction in the quality of resources.
- Book Scrutinies may have unintended consequences, as the link between written work and teaching effectiveness is not as clear as we might assume. For example, in a CEBE case study from 2017, it appeared that an increased emphasis upon showing progress in books had the unintended consequence of discouraging students from taking risks for fear of making mistakes.
- Staff being required to memorise particular curriculum rationale (implementation, intent, and impact) statements. Or being appointed head of intent, implementation or impact—perhaps all three, perhaps just one.
- Schools neglecting aspects of pedagogy which do not fit in with the categories and approaches focussed on in this particular framework.
- Rewriting schemes of work in order to please an audience of one. For example, I was recently asked to review a proposed curriculum redesign which framed RE around a series of possible careers—as ‘that’s what Ofsted want us to be able to show.’ Jesus’ miracle at the Wedding at Cana was included in the ‘events management’ topic.
It is highly likely that some of these things will likely happen in some schools. Such changes would be ill-advised and unproductive. However, it is not helpful to write them off as examples of irrational or misguided decisions by school leaders. They are predictable responses to the most recent attempt, at policy level, to solve the wicked problem of school improvement.
Wicked problems
In policy research, ‘wicked problems’ are defined as social issues which are hard or even possible to define, to which solutions are not clear, and which cannot be fully solved. Examples include financial crises, health care, income inequality and school improvement.
School improvement is arguably a ‘wicked problem’. It is impossible to fully solve, and the essence of the problem and plausible solutions to it, appear differently to every beholder.
Because we do not agree on the essence of the problem, neither are we likely to agree on how it should be tackled. As Rittel and Webber put it: ‘The analyst’s “world view” is the strongest determining factor in explaining a discrepancy and, therefore, in resolving a wicked problem.’1 Or, as Maslow rather more pithily put it ‘I suppose it is tempting, if the only tool you have is a hammer, to treat everything as if it were a nail.’2 Each concrete definition of a wicked problem includes within it a hint about what might be considered a plausible solution.