Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ofsted inspectors 'make up evidence' about a school's performance when IT fails

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 81 posts

Re: Ofsted inspectors 'make up evidence' about a school's performance when IT fails

#11

Post by strken »

vdaea wrote: post #8
DicIfTEx wrote: post #2

For context, Ofsted is the much-maligned government inspectorate of schools in England. They are currently under increased scrutiny following an inquest into the suicide of a headteacher following an inspection that concluded at the end of last year: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-67639942 and https://www.bbc.com/news/education-67639943

What is that first link saying? That teachers need LESS oversight? This must be a joke. Also what does software have to do with that case?

It's probably suggesting that oversight which is made public as a one word rating like "inadequate" is not a good way to fix problems in a school, since the exact same experienced teachers and principals you'd need to turn a school around are the most likely to avoid an "inadequate" school.

Presumably this feels even more unfair if the computer eats the inspectors' homework.

Re: Ofsted inspectors 'make up evidence' about a school's performance when IT fails

#12

Post by rcxdude »

vdaea wrote: post #8
DicIfTEx wrote: post #2

For context, Ofsted is the much-maligned government inspectorate of schools in England. They are currently under increased scrutiny following an inquest into the suicide of a headteacher following an inspection that concluded at the end of last year: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-67639942 and https://www.bbc.com/news/education-67639943

What is that first link saying? That teachers need LESS oversight? This must be a joke. Also what does software have to do with that case?

Could well be that the kind of oversight that teachers are getting in the current system is counterproductive to the stated goals of said oversight.

Re: Ofsted inspectors 'make up evidence' about a school's performance when IT fails

#13

Post by 6c696e7578 »

dazc wrote: post #5

'Replacing notes from memory' is not ideal but it's far removed from 'make up evidence' used in the headline.

Indeed, but memory is fine, then why take notes at all?

I think the point is that if the inspector only finds out by chance that the notes were not committed then they might have to make it up from memory in a day or week, it just isn't reliable.

Why not double account, why not have a separate (software?) dictaphone and write notes? If one is lost, there's the other.

Re: Ofsted inspectors 'make up evidence' about a school's performance when IT fails

#14

Post by vdaea »

lkdfjlkdfjlg wrote: post #10
vdaea wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is that first link saying? That teachers need LESS oversight? This must be a joke. Also what does software have to do with that case?

> What is that first link saying? That teachers need LESS oversight? This must be a joke. Are you suggesting this is a binary decision, where the only options is choosing "more oversight" or "less oversight"?

The status quo is "the same amount of oversight". And this article seems to say that since a teacher killed herself for getting "bad grades" then we should have less oversight.

Re: Ofsted inspectors 'make up evidence' about a school's performance when IT fails

#15

Post by 6c696e7578 »

oxfordmale wrote: post #6

How often does their IT fail? Outsourced to Crapita or Fooljitsu by any chance? With Google Docs/Office 365 the last time I lost a full document is years ago now. I am old enough to have stored my laptop in the fridge when writing my PhD thesis, to keep the fault rate down. However, that is when hard drives where still mechanical, and online backups not a common thing.

I don't know, but offstead things might contain "incidents" with child names and whatnot. Google Docs may not comply with the standards needed. I think the bigger clouds have the security levels, but there may be costs involved. Don't know basically but it might be a deal breaker.

Re: Ofsted inspectors 'make up evidence' about a school's performance when IT fails

#16

Post by edstock »

vdaea wrote: post #14
lkdfjlkdfjlg wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What is that first link saying? That teachers need LESS oversight? This must be a joke. Are you suggesting this is a binary decision, where the only options is choosing "more oversight" or "less oversight"?

The status quo is "the same amount of oversight". And this article seems to say that since a teacher killed herself for getting "bad grades" then we should have less oversight.

How about "better oversight", "constructive oversight" or "beneficial oversight"? Let's not fall into a trap by restricting the space to a single dimension of quantity.

Re: Ofsted inspectors 'make up evidence' about a school's performance when IT fails

#17

Post by cqqxo4zV46cp »

vdaea wrote: post #14
lkdfjlkdfjlg wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What is that first link saying? That teachers need LESS oversight? This must be a joke. Are you suggesting this is a binary decision, where the only options is choosing "more oversight" or "less oversight"?

The status quo is "the same amount of oversight". And this article seems to say that since a teacher killed herself for getting "bad grades" then we should have less oversight.

This is such a simplistic conclusion to draw that I can’t help but see it as intentionally dishonest.

Oversight is not a knob that you turn up or down. I speak as someone with experience in this field when I say that education like a lot of other things is complex enough that “overnight”, especially with output suitable for public consumption, is far from trivial to deliver.

Again, I don’t think that you’re arguing in good faith.

Re: Ofsted inspectors 'make up evidence' about a school's performance when IT fails

#18

Post by tailspin2019 »

vdaea wrote: post #8
DicIfTEx wrote: post #2

For context, Ofsted is the much-maligned government inspectorate of schools in England. They are currently under increased scrutiny following an inquest into the suicide of a headteacher following an inspection that concluded at the end of last year: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-67639942 and https://www.bbc.com/news/education-67639943

What is that first link saying? That teachers need LESS oversight? This must be a joke. Also what does software have to do with that case?

> What is that first link saying? That teachers need LESS oversight? This must be a joke.

Here's what it's saying, literally:

> An Ofsted inspection "contributed" to the death of head teacher Ruth Perry, an inquest has ruled.

> The inspection "lacked fairness, respect and sensitivity" and was at times "rude and intimidating", senior coroner Heidi Connor said.

> Mrs Perry, 53, took her own life in January while waiting for an Ofsted report to be published.

Seems entirely uncontroversial for them to review their practices and nowhere in there is it saying that teachers need less oversight.

Re: Ofsted inspectors 'make up evidence' about a school's performance when IT fails

#19

Post by concordDance »

vdaea wrote: post #14
lkdfjlkdfjlg wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What is that first link saying? That teachers need LESS oversight? This must be a joke. Are you suggesting this is a binary decision, where the only options is choosing "more oversight" or "less oversight"?

The status quo is "the same amount of oversight". And this article seems to say that since a teacher killed herself for getting "bad grades" then we should have less oversight.

I believe the point the parent was making is that this isn't a single axes. There are a variety of different types of oversight that can be done on different aspects of schooling.

Re: Ofsted inspectors 'make up evidence' about a school's performance when IT fails

#20

Post by ck425 »

vdaea wrote: post #14
lkdfjlkdfjlg wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What is that first link saying? That teachers need LESS oversight? This must be a joke. Are you suggesting this is a binary decision, where the only options is choosing "more oversight" or "less oversight"?

The status quo is "the same amount of oversight". And this article seems to say that since a teacher killed herself for getting "bad grades" then we should have less oversight.

It's not saying that. It's saying that the current oversight is highly flawed and urgently needs changed. You're falsely equating qualitative change to quantitive change.
Post reply on HN