This week, we wrote a brief draft of our literature review and focused on finding more sources to read. My role was to investigate what Ofsted does and how what factors it considers when giving a school a rating. For this, I read several Ofsted reports on schools around the whole of England. I found this quite interesting as there emerged similar patterns among low-rated schools that were far apart geographically. At times it was disheartening to read the reports, specifically when inspectors would recommend that teachers needed to believe in students more, which made me more appreciative of how important supportive adults are in a child's life. This also made me more appreciative of the Oxford and Sunderland sports trial, since it focused on raising childrens' confidence and providing them with an adult that believes in them, which is so clearly needed in many cases.
On a more positive note, we also visited a school in Blackbird Leys during the beginning of the week. I found this very interesting and wholesome. It was amazing to see how the headteacher knew all of his students by name and was so involved in the running of the school. We received a tour of the school, including their garden and playground, and I was really happy to see that there were so many enrichment opportunities for students, especially ones involving nature. Apart from the visit itself, I enjoyed getting to know my graduate impact advisor and the researcher involved in the sports trials more on the bus ride there and back.
The visit itself was also very informative for our research. The headteacher answered all of our questions in incredible depth, and it was very useful to get an account of how education policy actually affects education. We had not previously realised that Ofsted combining behaviour and attendance as a single metric meant that schools with good behaviour would be hurt by low attendance, especially considering that low attendance is often due to factors exogenous to the school itself. Further, we learned that Ofsted reports and ratings were not contextualised, which seems rather counterintuitive. Indeed, when reading the reports later, I would sometimes read reports criticising schools for, for example, not spending enough time on numeracy, only to look up the school and realise that it specialised in SEND and that they spent most of their time on life skills, meaning that students were actually performing very well.
Overall, I found this week very informative. I feel as if I'm really beginning to get a grasp on education policy in England, and the school visit is perhaps what contributed most to this. As for the actual work, I feel that I've become more and more interested in education policy as I start seeing the various problems with the current way it is shaped, so I'm looking forward to doing more reading over the coming weeks.
Please sign in
If you are a registered user on Laidlaw Scholars Network, please sign in
Dear Wiktoria,
Thank you for another excellent reflection. I really enjoyed reading it. It demonstrates both intellectual curiosity and a growing willingness to engage critically with education policy rather than simply describing it.
I particularly liked your reflections on reading the Ofsted reports. Your observation that similar patterns emerged across schools in different parts of the country shows that you are beginning to look for broader trends rather than treating each report in isolation. Equally, your comments about the importance of supportive adults demonstrate that you are connecting policy documents with the lived experiences of children, which is an important perspective to maintain.
Your visit to Orchard Meadow also seems to have had a real impact on your thinking. I was especially interested in your reflections on contextualisation. Your example of a SEND school being judged against measures that may not fully reflect its educational priorities raises important questions about how accountability systems recognise success. Those are exactly the kinds of questions educational researchers should be asking.
One suggestion I'd offer is to continue asking why as well as whether. For example, you question the way attendance and behaviour are combined, and you notice that reports may not always appear sufficiently contextualised. The next step is to ask why accountability systems have been designed in this way. What trade-offs are policymakers trying to manage? What problems are they trying to solve? Understanding the rationale behind a policy—even if you ultimately disagree with it—will strengthen your analysis and help you develop more balanced recommendations.
Finally, I was struck by your comments about the Headteacher knowing every pupil by name. It's a small observation, but an important one. It made me wonder about the relationship between leadership and recognition. Knowing people as individuals can have a powerful influence on belonging, trust and motivation. As you continue your research, it might be interesting to reflect on how seemingly small behaviours by leaders contribute to the culture of a school, sometimes in ways that are difficult to measure but deeply significant.
I'm delighted to see your interest in education policy growing. Curiosity is one of the most valuable qualities a researcher can have, and I'm looking forward to seeing how your thinking develops as the project progresses.
Best wishes,
Ben