Occasional papers
	ICT and learning ICT Subject Leaders An ICT policy	Inspecting ICT  ICT in Geography  Digital Imagery in the  Classroom
My CV Publications Occasional    papers Services Steam pages Home	© Paul Heinrich 2000  © Portsmouth City Council 2000  Article first published in Connected 4 Inspecting ICT Are you awaiting the brown envelope? Do you know what to expect from the inspection of ICT, especially with the new framework and revised National Curriculum to cope with? At one level satisfactory attainment, teaching and management are no different in ICT than in any other subject or aspect of the work of the school. However, ICT does bring with it a number of problems. In this article I hope to show you how to overcome these and have a successful and pleasant(!) OFSTED experience. The inspection of ICT is a complex and challenging process, for inspectors as well as teachers. Remember that many primary phase inspectors are generalists as you are, and may not have extensive personal ICT expertise. Secondary inspectors "converted" to the primary phase may have ICT knowledge but less understanding of primary practice. Generally, in secondary inspections, the inspector leading on ICT will be a specialist. However, regardless of background all will be thoroughly trained in the application of the OFSTED framework and are skilled at reviewing standards, teaching, the quality of resources and subject management. What standards? This can be confusing. What do we mean by high standards in ICT. Is it about skills, understanding of the ICT tools or outcomes? Some schools have long checklists of skills and have adapted their curricula to teaching these, often in very artificial contexts. Others simply look at the outcomes without consideration of the level of the skills and processes used on the way. Too often, apparently high quality outcomes have involved only the use of low-level skills and understanding. Thus the story or poem, carefully copy typed, may look good but demonstrates only that the child can enter text. The same story or poem created from scratch using word processing demonstrates skills of loading the application, entering text, perhaps altering fonts and layout and even more crucially the ability of the child to review, modify and evaluate their work - and this in Year 2. Actual attainment is only part of the story for there must be evidence of progress over time. The not uncommon situation where the same low-level activities appear in every year group should not happen. Remember the expected levels of attainment at the end of each key stage: KS1 - 75% at level 2 or above KS2 -75% at level 4 or above KS3 -75% at level 5 or above Reference to the QCA schemes of work for ICT offers a valuable insight into expectations, with each defining the expected outcomes for above average, average and below average attainment. As yet exemplars are not available but should be produced by QCA or others before too long. Inspectors will expect to see evidence of standards achieved at the end of each Key Stage and covering all of the ICT themes. Yet in my own experience these crucial materials are often missing from the work samples provided for review. Include them wherever possible, direct the inspector to wall displays or portfolios and make sure that they have the information they need and which show what you have achieved. Prior to the inspection the lead inspector will have made a careful evaluation of existing evidence on standards. The inspectors prompt sheet poses these questions: From the previous inspection: What were the standards in each Key Stage? Was raising standards a key issue? What could pupils do well? What could pupils not do well? Were any aspects of ICT not covered? Were any differences in attainment reported in relation to gender or ethnic background? Were pupils who had SEN, EAL or were gifted/talented making good progress? From Form S4: Is ICT referred to in Improvement since the last inspection or Priorities for development? From the school development plan: Is raising standards in ICT included? Do success criteria include a reference to raising standards in ICT? Has the school set targets for raising standards in ICT? Are they challenging targets? What reference is there to meeting the needs of different groups of pupils. From the pre-inspection commentary: Is there reference to standards in ICT? From examination results: How does performance compare with national averages? How does performance compare with other subjects in the school? What are the trends over time? Any significant differences in the attainment of boys and girls? You will wish to consider these questions in advance. Teaching This is not just about the teaching of ICT as a subject, but also concerned with the use of ICT in all curriculum areas at both primary and secondary levels. We should all be aware of the OFSTED criteria for good teaching, and these apply whether working with a class in an ICT suite or a small group with two systems in a classroom. Direct teaching of ICT is often good or better, the poor lessons are typically those where ICT is treated as an unwanted extra and the pupils left to fend for themselves. The other potential problem area concerns the use of ICT in other subjects. Here the inspector will be concerned with the benefits offered by the use of ICT and how these are exploited in the teaching. Gabriel Goldstein, HMI's guru on ICT matters expects an inspector to look at ICT as they would the use of books, video and other resources, though if course the judgements made also inform the overall judgement on ICT. He gives an example of data logging in a science class, questioning whether watching a graph being drawn on screen is any more valuable than drawing it yourself - it does not engage the pupil intellectually. However, where a pupil is inputting data and the screen starts to tell a story then with suitable involvement of the teacher and careful questioning the outcomes can be explored and real learning take place. Pupils gaping at a screen is neither good data logging nor good science much as the English example above is similarly poor practice. Be aware that technology can and will fail at the most inopportune times. Not having a fall-back activity in the event of technical problems, or using the technology inappropriately is a waste of resources and may contribute to a judgement of poor teaching. The resource issue The question of resources is a major aspect of the inspection since it impacts both on the teaching of ICT and the use of ICT across the curriculum. The way in which resources are deployed can reveal the whole approach of a subject or department to ICT issues In the face of an inspection reference to inadequate budgets, lack of space, non-availability of training or even, "Governors don't think ICT is important," are not valid excuses. Where, for example, does your school stand in relation to national average provision (1 system per 13 pupils in primary, 1:9 in secondary in 1999). How much do you spend on ICT in a year and why are there so many machines old systems? An inspector will look closely at the provision of modern systems, i.e. those under five years old and your planning for ongoing replacement of older systems as well as for improvements in the computer to pupil ratio. On the software front it is quality rather than quantity that counts. A core software set covering all basic requirement, supported by well chosen subject materials is the ideal, with use of clearly identified Internet resources where appropriate. Primary schools must not forget that they need to cover control technology, sensing, measurement and monitoring. Thus sensor packs for the Roamers, perhaps control buffer boxes (or control simulation software) and portable data loggers are also required. Management matters Not only subject management - ICT is a whole-school issue and therefore leadership must come from the top, even though the routine is devolved to a subject leader. The school improvement plan itself should address ICT issues, though the detail will be in the subject plan. The scheme of work and associated assessment, recording and reporting strategies will also be of more than passing interest. While it is non statutory, the QCA scheme of work provides a valuable framework for individual school planning. Suffice it to say that if your practice is significantly at odds with the QCA scheme you may look forward to an interesting discussion. Secondary schools especially need to take good note of the range of work and the expectations inherent in the scheme. Inspectors will also take account of the quality of assessment records and procedures, checking also that ICT is properly reported in pupil's annual reports. Schools and departments also need to be careful of over-reliance on the skills and interest of one teacher. Resources and expertise need to be managed so that all pupils benefit, not merely those in one or two classes. Thus inspectors may raise questions related to policies on staff training, time made available for planning and support, how dependent the school/department is on individuals and whether the school management understands the implications of ICT. The short inspection These are concerned with issues rather than a detailed review of all subjects and aspects. ICT will be an issue if there were unsatisfactory standards at the previous inspection, poor resources, planning, or curriculum coverage; if development planning makes no reference to ICT and, in secondary schools, if examination standards to not show a rising trend and/or if progress towards an ICT qualification for the majority of pupils is not apparent. Survival! The profile of ICT in inspections is rising, after all government is at last spending money on ICT but at the same time HMCI continues to identify poor standards, teaching and management. Rigorous self-review will enable any school to identify its own strengths and weaknesses in the subject leading to an improvement strategy to remedy the problems over a realistic time scale. Support is available for those who need it. Home    Other essays and publications Last updated: 16th September 2001 This article may be freely copied provided that its source is acknowledged. The copyright remains with the author at all times