As the last cycle of inspections limps to an end amid delays and challenges due to Covid, the Independent Schools Inspectorate (ISI) has just announced a consultation on its proposed new framework for the next six year cycle. But what will this latest revision in ISI inspection mean for independent schools?
It’s clear that, in developing the revised framework, ISI has clearly been paying attention to the zeitgeist. Critics, at first glance, may view the centrality of pupil wellbeing to the new framework as some sort of warm, fuzzy attempt to ensure that schools are a place where students are encouraged to knit their own yoghurt and practice mindfulness. Or they might feel that ISI is running scared of movements such as Everyone’s Invited and Black Lives Matter, and that the revisions are an attempt to placate a wide range of activist groups.
In fact, neither of these (very flippant) extremes reflect the reality. ISI’s proposed new framework does place the wellbeing of students firmly at the centre of the work of schools but it is neither warm and fuzzy, nor a sop to any movement. Instead, the new framework attempts to streamline the work of the inspectorate to ensure that the focus of any inspection is on the most important people in a school — its students.
“Critics might feel that the revisions are an attempt to placate a wide range of activist groups.”
By taking as its core the five strands of the statutory definition of student wellbeing, and inspecting schools through the lens of these strands, the entire framework now places students at the heart of its processes. The proposals retain the very important “so what?” question — drilled into inspectors in a previous revision — which encourages them (and schools) to consider the impact of any activity on student outcomes but in addition, the new framework ensures that the focus of all inspection activity revolves around this in relation to student wellbeing.
Gone too is the dual economy of FCI and EQI inspections– schools can expect to be examined on all aspects of their operation a minimum of twice within the next six year cycle. I’d suggest that this is a good thing — the FCI/EQI duality has sometimes led to a strangely skewed focus where an FCI is seen by teachers as “lighter touch”, with more focus and thought given by the whole school community to “the big one” every six years. Under the new framework, everything is inspected, at each inspection, which is much more straightforward for a busy school.
“ISI’s proposed new framework does place the wellbeing of students firmly at the centre of the work of schools.”
There are a few additional “tweaks” which further enhance the new proposals. First is the ability to recognise areas of practice within a school as “exceptional”, but without the caveat that all a school’s activity needs to be excellent — there is explicit recognition that schools can have outstanding outcomes in one area of activity whilst simultaneously needing to improve in others.
Second, is recognition that even in excellent schools, there is always room for further development, named in the consultations as “areas for action”. In the new framework the explanation of this is clearer and thus makes it easier for parents (and governors?) to understand that the work a school has done should be celebrated and, that suggestions for development are a plus. The agreement of these areas in collaboration with school leaders (such that inspection is done with rather than done to a school) is also a bonus.
“The framework takes account of the fact that, for a small group of students, even a very good school can be a difficult place to be.”
It is also heartening to see ISI’s commitment to developing new inspectors with its new associate inspector role: one of the biggest frustrations as a school leader is the difficulty of ensuring staff can access to this valuable professional development.
Finally, the framework references the different levels at which all schools operate, which takes account of the fact that, for a small group of students, even a very good school can be a difficult place to be. The challenge posed to schools to think deeply about the experience of every child and not to pass off negative experiences of misogyny, racism, or homophobia as “one-offs” is to be welcomed.
Good schools have always placed the wellbeing of students at the heart of everything they do. They recognise that wellbeing has many facets and care for each student as an individual, and the new framework reflects, and celebrates, this. I, for one, am looking forward to seeing it in action.