Is The End Nigh For Graded Lesson Observations?

When I was training to be a teacher all those moons ago, lesson observations were generally a pretty positive experience. They were essentially pass or fail, and would have to be pretty awful to fail. They would focus on the following:

• What went well (where have I heard that before?);
• Even better if (Groundhog Day?) I did a couple of things - how I could have improved the lesson;
• My target is (Deja vu?) to try some new stuff to improve my teaching.

I actually quite liked lesson observations, although I wouldn't say that my day was made by one, but I saw them as a positive way of improving my practise.

Nowadays, in the era of "performance related pay" and express capability procedures brought in during Michael Gove's watch as Secretary of State for Education, although I suspect others would have brought it in as a desperate attempt to tighten education's belt, lesson observations can make or break a teaching career or a school, depending on who the observer(s) is. They have moved away from their supportive nature and become a threatening entity in education.

For those (presumably few, if any) of you who don't know, lessons are graded by management or Ofsted inspectors on a scale from 1 to 4:

1. Outstanding.
2. Good
3. Requires Improvement
4. Inadequate

In order to avoid "action plans" or "capability" procedures, a teacher must be consistently a 1 or 2, although the odd 3 is acceptable as everyone has a bad day, but expect to be seen again pretty quickly and make sure you get a 1 or 2 or else! You'd think that's fair enough, and so would pretty much every teacher as we all, as educators, want to produce lessons that encourage and enhance learning. And actually you knew where you were when Ofsted had a particular style of lesson/teaching that they wanted to see, because ultimately the observation was a box ticking exercise.

Now I'm not saying that I agree with Ofsted wanting to see a particular type of teaching, in fact I actively oppose it, but if a teacher's livelihood depends upon lesson observation gradings, then I don't see that you there is any fairer way. The problem is that now Ofsted have actively said that they don't want to see a particular style of teaching as long as learning is "rapid and sustained".

This therefore leaves observers in a bit of a dilemma when grading lesson observations, because it now becomes a personal opinion, which is anything but fair. One would hope that observers could set aside personal opinions regarding the teacher and just grade the lesson, but in my experience, this is seemingly impossible. Comments such as "I would have done it this way" and "I didn't like that" in the feedback are fairly commonplace, and surely it's irrelevant what the observer thinks; what the children in the class think is the important thing. Gradings that are linked to pay or, at worst, capability, become a personal opinion; expect numerous lawsuits for wrongful dismissal

So, as a result, some schools are abandoning lesson observation gradings to make teachers more comfortable and allow them to try to improve their practise without fear of reprisals if it doesn't go to plan straight away. It's brave but actually sensible. My school won't do it (for many reasons, most based upon the personality of the person at the top of the tree), and the fact that we now have numerous leaving speeches every term seems to be the modern trend (I personally find this cut-throat attitude towards staff/people unpleasant). The fact that children don't respond well to constantly changing staff seems to be ignored now, and please don't think that if a teacher is not up to the job then they should not be moved out, but many teachers who are "forced" (I did use the correct word there) out are actually pretty good in the classroom, but not liked by the person/people making the decisions. And what is rarely taken into account is whether the teacher being forced out can be replaced with somebody as good or better - often this isn't the case.

But what this also should mean is that Ofsted inspectors will no longer need to observe lessons, making an Ofsted inspection less stressful for classroom teachers, and ensuring taht leadership in schools actually earn their hefty pay packets. A "learning walk" (I hate that name too, but you all know what it means) will be sufficient to judge the atmosphere for learning in a school. Consistently good lessons will deliver consistently good results in exams. Inspectors therefore, will just need to look at the data of the school, aided by some informed words from SLT, to judge the school. This won't happen as I get the impression that inspectors like going into classrooms and making teachers uncomfortable; maybe I'm wrong.

The trouble is that I think that Messrs Gove and Wilshaw like threatening teachers, so the status quo will remain and the DfE budget will soar as thousands of teachers face capability based on the whim of SLT, or possibly because that particular member of SLT finds separating personal and professional feelings difficult.

This is without mentioning the potential exodus from the profession that already has a huge shortage ,in certain subjects, of adequate staff. Politicians and suits in large offices really are working wonders in education...

Lesson Observations

Let's be honest, lesson observations are a necessary evil; an evil that few teachers enjoy. When I first started teaching lesson observations were a pain but generally supportive and useful. I think it's fair to say that nowadays their usefulness is generally limited. It all depends who is doing the observing of course. The trouble is that many observations are given by senior leadership who rarely teach (and occasionally never have) due the the mountainous paperwork now involved in school management.

So what's changed? Essentially, not a lot. They have always been an indicator of whether a teacher should be encouraged to move on, whether to another school or another career. The main difference, and the teaching profession has Ofsted to thank for this, is that feedback is a lot more aggressive nowadays.

What does that mean though?

Ten or more years ago the lesson observation was there to check that your classroom wasn't a warzone and that you, as a teacher, were imparting the correct knowledge in a meaningful way to your cohort. Plenty of warning was given to the teacher (which probably shouldn't have happened as it gave the opportunity to refine their lesson which made it too artificial) and a relatively simple lesson plan required. There wasn't a particular style of teaching or focus (unless that was thought useful); individualism was acknowledged and respected. Students were expected to listen and do what they were asked. Feedback pointed out your good points and areas that needed work, with suggestions made as to how lessons could be improved. Phrases like "What you could have done was..." and "Something that you could try is..." were commonplace. There was little or no threat of competency, or if there was, it was uncommon and probably deserved. The grading was essentially pass or fail.

The experience isn't even close to that now. Schools try to replicate an Ofsted inspection by giving little notice for observations (a day or so is fairly commone, which should be enough in all honesty). Full lesson plans and detailed seating plans are required which show all the students with special needs and whether they speak English as a second language or receive free school meals which is a current target group for government/Ofsted and therefore schools. Books must be marked with current grades or levels and a dialogue between teacher and student which will probably involve an individual question that forces the student to practise a teacher-noted gap in their learning. During the lesson the teacher must continually assess each child individually and refer back to the lesson objective. Each child must be called upon by the teacher to give or explain an answer by name and be able to tell the observer exactly what they are learning and convince them that this happens every lesson. Lessons and activities must be "active", which means that the students discover new concepts rather than get told/taught them. The feedback then gives the teacher a grade from 1 to 4 (3 and 4 are no go areas and risk competency - they should be renamed "You are crap") and involve phrases like "They will pick up on..." and "They will expect to see...", with the "they" referring to Ofsted. Any positives are glossed over and the weaknesses are pointed out endlessly, although often no ways of improving are suggested coherently. The teacher will often leave the feedback feeling pretty down, regardless of their grade.

So the differences are:

• It has gone from a relatively positive thing (possibly too positive at times) to being a threat to a teacher's livelihood when there is a shortage of decent teachers.
• The focus has moved from how you could improve your teaching to what Ofsted would want to see, which is usually a guess as it's not clear that Ofsted really know what they want either.
• Individualism was encouraged to a certain extent but now frowned upon for fear that the inspectors have a particular teaching model.
• Teachers aren't allowed to teach; the sudents have to teach themselves as the "teacher" wanders around "facilitating" discussion.

This is purely because Ofsted now have ultimate and unquestioned power over all state funded schools in England. Their judgements are unquestioned with the impression being amongst teachers that the inspectors make their judgement before they turn up and find evidence to back that judgement up. Despite what Sir Michael Wilshaw, Chief Inspector of Schools says, inspectors have a set image of a "decent" lesson and if you don't do that you are knackered.

But apparently education in England is rigorous and fit for purpose. I beg to differ.

Ofsted Don't Want A Show

Sir Michael is out of his hibernation period and greets schools with this: Click here!

This interview only goes to show how out of touch the Chief Inspector of Schools is. I have a number of issues with this:

1. Not for one minute does he consider why teachers "put on a show" for Ofsted inspectors.
2. He claims that Ofsted don't have a preconceived idea of the ingredients that make a good lesson.
3. Schools should just carry on as normal when Ofsted are in.

Ofsted holds all the cards in education at present - they have outgrown their remit. Their judgements go unquestioned and unchallenged in the main. When someone does dare challenge an Ofsted judgement they are accused of not being forward thinking, happy with mediocrity and various other politically barbed comments from various parts of Whitehall.

Ofsted has the power to make or break careers in education with one of their judgements. Many teachers firmly believe that inspectors judge a school before they have actually arrived based upon exam results, value-added etc. As any half-competent mathematician will tell you, data can be made to show what you want it to show without too much effort. Lesson observations and conversations with management are also subjective. Observations can go a number of ways that are generally out of the control of the teacher. A really bad lesson is obvious to both inspector and teacher, but otherwise it's harder to call unless you literally tick off bulletpoints in a list of things inspectors want to see. So Wilshaw's claim that there isn't a particular type of teaching expected has to be at least partly rubbish, or the message hasn't filtered down to the Ofsted minions.

Wilshaw claims to want to see children engaged in their learning, but his inspectors seem to regard this as meaning "the teacher says as little as possible" and the students "discover" what they would have been "taught" is bygone eras. There are some things that are very difficult to "discover" and need to be "taught", although this is frowned upon by Ofsted as the learning is deemed "passive", whereas Ofsted want to see "active learning". If you are playing Education Buzz Word Bingo you may be close to shouting "HOUSE" at this stage.

A teacher should be allowed to decide whether their charges can "discover" something new or need to be "taught" it. Teachers are (still) professionals, for the time being at least. The trouble is that this decision is taken out of their hands. Thousands, if not millions of pounds are spent by schools every year on speakers who tell staff that Ofsted want to see teachers leading less from the front, "playing the Ofsted game". This money could be used to resource faculties fully rather than giving tips on Ofsted hoop-jumping. The fact is that these (presumably rich) people are employed by many schools each year, and must know what they are talking about in order to keep getting invited. So Wilshaw claiming that there is no game is frankly wrong and the fact that there is a market for Ofsted inspectors to charge £600 per day to "help" schools get through an inspection only proves this (see this article from The Independent: Click here!).

The main thing is that teachers are rarely sure of what Ofsted actually wants and their "show" for the inspectors is just like a pet trying to impress its owner, which many appear to get panned for. With Ofsted regularly changing the goalposts since Sir Michael's ascension to the "throne", teachers have no idea what to do.

Eventually teachers will just give up in a number of ways. They could leave the profession as many are doing, to be replaced by fresh faced top graduates through scheme like Teach First, but these schemes are a mixed blessing for the future of education as many of these graduates leave teaching after just a few years. How teachers should give up is by not caring what Ofsted say, and they can do this in a number of ways:

• Don't get lesson feedback - by getting feedback you are showing the inspectors that you actually value what they think, and let's face it, no teachers really do. So don't bother.
• Only be civil to them, never go out of your way to smile at them, even if they smile at you. Let them know that they are unwelcome because they are. Some inspectors delude themselves into thinking that they are doing schools and teachers a favour (I have had an interesting conversation with the partner of an inspector who was brave enough to call themselves "Anonymous"). They are not, they are an expensive political animal that no-one wants or likes except other inspectors, their partners or narcisistic politicians.
• Get them involved in a lesson by asking them questions. Embarrass them; put them on the spot; after all that is what they are doing to you and your colleagues so why shouldn't they taste their own medicine? If they make a stupid comment, make it very clear that you think it's a stupid comment; I once replied to an inspector who observed a challenging class and said "They seem like a nice bunch" with the following: "How would you know? You've seen them for half an hour and just looked at books and folders, not talking to a single one of them." He left with his tail between his legs after he asked if I wanted feedback and I replied "There is nothing you could possibly tell me that would be of any benefit to my teaching practise".

Wilshaw can make all the noises he likes from his ivory tower in Whitehall, with his direct line to his mucker Gove. Ofsted is now a political vehicle, used unapologetically to drive through ill-conceived government policy without question. Wilshaw may appear to disagree with Gove on some issues but his inspectors don't appear to.

Ofsted has outgrown it's own remit and really should be abolished for the future of education in England. If this doesn't happen the exodus of staff will continue and there won't be enough teachers left.

A Week In The Life Of A Bog Standard Teacher

Now is the time of year that those who are thinking of doing a PGCE next September are spending a fortnight in a school observing things as part of the preparation for the course. We have a few in our school, and I pity them. I've therefore decided to write a week-long diary so that if they search for "Typical Week For A Teacher" in a well-known, or even not very well-known search engine, this might appear to warn them off. Please remember that I don't teach in an inner city school, I teach is a pretty well-to-do town in a leafy county. I am also not making any of this up!

Sunday:
I've got some planning to do today which should take a couple of hours, plus I want to spend some time with the family (wife, children etc.). They will probably have to wait because I don't want to get caught on the hop with a "drop-in" from senior management, which is bound to happen if I put this planning off.

I did the planning and spent the rest of the day barking at my daughter and wife because I know I have to go back to school tomorrow and try to get "above average" progress out of a load of pupils who genuinely care for little other than gossip, where their next cigarette is coming from, and social networking sites. All my planning since I got my current timetable has been to try and create interest in my subject with kids who have no interest themselves and are supported fully in this attitude by their parents.

Monday:
I have 4 lessons today, two with Year 11 who have mocks starting soon and are currently fairly keen, although having said that during one of the lessons the guy sat in front of me talked all lesson about computer games various other irrelevant stuff despite my attempting to persuade him that perhaps those conversations weren't the most productive. He's a nice lad too, intelligent, nice parents who should do fairly well in the summer but won't get what he should do because he will leave everything to the last minute, which rarely works.

My other two lessons are with bottom sets, one in key stage 3 and one in key stage 4. These will be constant battles to stop them talking, essentially playing musical chairs until we find a seating arrangement that is quietest. In fact the musical chairs in key stage 3 lasted longer than normal and my classroom isn't a hexagon, so all the people I wanted to sit in corners (ie. as far away from the people they wanted to talk to), I couldn't. The key stage 4 lesson was actually worse where they all think that qualifications are irrelevant because they have "work experience", to the tune of pot washing in a cafe, selling weed in the local park etc. You ask them to get on with some work and they look at you as though you've just torn them away from a close relative's funeral. The teaching assistant was equally baffled as to what to attempt, so I said she could go and help some people who actually wanted it.

Meeting after school to discuss all the students in my house who has "cause for concern", The list was lengthy, although I know that we actually get off quite lightly. Nine of the names that cropped up were from my tutor group, and that doesn't include my Year 11s, many of whom are being mentored separately. It all boils down to the same thing: "the kids mess about in lessons (not just mine), and when their teachers ask them to do some work they turn on them". The meeting was not a happy one and consensus seems to be that behaviour is on a very slippery and steep slope at present.

I arrived at about 7.45am this morning and am now leaving at 5.15pm. I still have a bit to do when I get home.

Tuesday:
I woke up at 2.30am and eventually got up at 4.15am having attempted to get back to sleep but my mind distracted by various work issues, mainly centred around a boy in my tutor group who I also teach. He can be unpleasant, but hasn't really been recently. I did get a snotty email from the school's head of special needs the other week regarding him though, and I need to feedback to her on his recent performance in my lessons, which include attempting to talk to seagulls in the playground, annoying/distracting as many people as he possibly can, and shouting at a bloke walking past the school. A far as I can see the only thing that's wrong with him his that he's a sociopath, but I've not doubt that he's been diagnosed with some form of special need as his parents try to excuse their inadequate parenting with medical certificates.

Not many lessons today due to Year 11 mock exams, which is great. I do have reports to write though, and various other things to get my teeth into, so it won't be a tea and chat day, I will be sat at my desk for almost all of it. I may even have a look through some exercise books and write a formative comment along the lines of "Well done Johnny, your method for doing this is excellent, but next time, to push you on to the next level, why not attempt a question like this...". The kids won't read my comments, but Ofsted will think it's wonderful, and that's the main thing I'm told, as we are expecting them soon.

Quite a nice day actually due to the mock exams and even the student who ruin every one of one particular class' lessons wasn't in today, so superb. Spent about 3 hours marking, but it's out of the way now so I don't have to worry about it any more. Tomorrow will be worse, so I made the most of today! I still arrived at 7.45am and left at 4.45pm plus did a couple of hours in th

Wednesday:
I teach every lesson on a Wednesday and it's hard work! II woke up but as most teachers will tell you, being away is more hassle than going in when you rubbish. What many don't realise is that a sick teacher still has to get up and plan all their lessons, which isn't easy when you know that the person covering is unlikely to be a specialist in your subject.

I made it anyway, and got a bonus free due to mock exams. Only got sworn at once and had a massive struggle trying to get a couple of classes to do something was like extracting blood from a stone, mainly due to a couple of snowflakes coning down early on.

I got in as usual at 7.45am and left at 4.45pm but have marking to do when I get home which will take a good hour and a half. I will probably cook dinner for the family and then settle down to it after that.

Thursday:
Four lessons today, but two tests thanks to the fact that we have to track every student and therefore they do an exam paper every half term. This is so that we knbow how each child is progressing, but puts pressure on teachers to fit the entire curriculum in, but on the other hand at least the kids get used to exams and the types of questions that are asked. It does add marking pressure on to teachers, but we can get the class to mark their own for some of it - in a different coloured pen of course, to avoid cheating!

What is the main thrust of this though? You guessed it, Ofsted. As time has gone on it does appear that everything that schools and teachers do is geared to what Ofsted would think rather than what's best for the children. In general Ofsted are trying to do the right thing, with little success, and seem not to have grasped the fact that there are only 24 hours in a day and a teacher has to have a bit of time for sleeping and eating. Take, for example, out new marking policy, all based on what Ofsted expect to see. We have to mark every book fortnightly, which doesn't sound too bad, but not when each book has to be checked and the3n around half a page covered with some praise, a tip on how to move onto the next level, plus a challenge question for the kids to have a go at. Marking a set of books takes between an hour and 90 minutes, and at my school each teacher has around 6 classes. That's 9 hours per fortnight, which is all your free time at school. Add to that the lesson planning as well as other paperwork a teacher has to do, meaning that in order to get by you have to work at least a 9 or 10 hour day during the week, plus a bit at weekends.

Started at 7.45pm and left at 5.15pm, plus did a couple of hours in the evening. I forgot to mention that I had duty (unpaid) before school, during break and after school.

Friday:
Five lessons and lunch duty on the playground. Ok, so I get paid for the duty but I didn't choose to have it on a day when I have no free periods - I was stitiched up a bit by the guy who organises it and isn't a teacher. There you go.

The day went as usual with a mixture of apathy and abuse, and that was just from the staff! In all seriousness it was a pretty miserable day where one student, who has already been told that they should think about applying for another school before he forcibly has to find another school told me to "F Off" and was generally vile. As well as that I got a volley of abuse from one of my tutor group who had a detention, not set by me, but another subject area. I was just the messenger, but had to take it as that's just how it seems to work with students from a certain background who are essentially untouchable discipline-wise.

This time of year as we near the end of the longest term of the school year, the children are tired as are the staff. It's dark and cold and thoroughly miserable. One comes to accept the fact that the students will get a bit tetchy and so will the staff.

Started at 7.45am and left at 5.15pm. I've decided to leave the work I need to do for the weekend. A couple of hours should do it.

No Music In Music Lessons

Ofsted have moaned that too many music lessons don't contain music, and you'd think that it would be a pre-requisite of music lesson - to play/create the stuff.

The trouble is, and this is true of all subjects, is that the teachers are receiving mixed messages from the inspectors. And by that I mean the following:

1. A room full of children, many with a limited aptitude for music, trying to create a masterpiece would be most people's idea of hell and totally unrealistic. It would just be a cacophony unless headphones were employed and then the teacher can't actually teach because the class can't hear the teacher. The class need to learn the fundamentals of creating listenable music before actually attempting to do it. Very few people are capable of writing something good in their teens or below, unless they are named Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart. And unless all that is produced, sound-wise, is recorded, there is little or no evidence of the children actually doing anything or crucially, making progress. Ofsted wouldn't put up with this - evidence in the form of data/marks is key to tracking progress. Ofsted slating immediately on the grounds of "how do you know they have progressed?"
2. In order to gain evidence something needs to be produced by each and every child, and the obvious thing would be something written down by the class. Unless they play an instrument with their foot whilst writing something down (where's Daniel Day Lewis when you need him?). Ofsted want to see music though, so once again Ofsted slating is on its way despite the creation of evidence.

Essentially you can't win, and I know that I'm taking it to the extreme in these cases and ideally you need a mixture of the two, but the point is that the messages from those who "know" are totally mixed and this is the entire problem with teaching at the moment - nobody has a clue what they are supposed to be doing.

I'm kind of getting used to it now.

Gambling Lessons

The latest bright idea from the Department of Education: lessons in gambling and the odds/probability of winning, or not as the case may be.

Genius - well done! That stuff is never covered in maths lessons after all, not that anyone has bothered to ask maths teachers around the country. During my teacher training I was first shown a worksheet or two on the topic, and have used or at the very least, discussed it when covering probability in class. In fact I purposely cover gambling and how the odds are stacked in favour of the bookies, casinos or bingo halls. The old phrase "you never see a poor bookmaker" springs to mind.

However the government clearly see this as a vote winner, and no doubt millions will be spent implementing this new "idea", with resources having to be written by expensive consultants, training having to be provided by expensive consultants, and then the printing/distribution of resources to all schools. All this will need paying for when maths departments up and down the country are perfectly capable of delivering what the resources they already have to hand.

The whole drive behind this new policy is that more and more people are apparently accruing mountains of debt with the numerous online gambling sites, from bingo to spread betting to poker, available to anyone who is prepared to hand over their bank details. Advertisements are all over the television for these sites, and one can't fail to think that there surely can't be a market for so many, but presumably there is as new sites seem to be advertised on almost a weekly basis.

In my opinion it's not the lack of understanding that more often than not you will end up losing money - I actually believe that the government underestimate the intelligence of much of the population (how much intelligence do you need to work out that you are unlikely to win?). The problem is two-fold:

1. The "Somebody's got to win, so why can't it be me?" attitude. This is fair enough, and is part of the reason that people have gambled away their earnings for hundreds and thousand of years.
2. "I want something for nothing". This is education's fault, or should I say, education policy-makers' fault. Students have left school with certificates oozing from every orifice for the last 15 or so years, many having not actually lifted so much as a finger to gain these "qualifications". In other words, school has taught them that they will be just fine whether they work or not, so when they can't get meaningful employment, they turn to gambling as a potential quick fix. Obviously not every young person leaves school with this attitude, but the fact that a record number of 18 to 24 year olds is currently unemployed would suggest that many are.

Gambling is a relatively healthy hobby, in moderation and kept within a gambler's means. The problem is that the more desperate one gets, the bigger the risks and the more they tend to lose. That is not a lack of understanding of gambling and the odds associated with it, that's looking for a quick fix. So why are we just about to waste millions of pounds implementing an expensive new policy that has been happening in classrooms up and down the land for years?

I'm not sure I'll ever understand those people up in Whitehall.