Last week, we had the opportunity to visit a local primary school. Having grown up in the American public school system, it was helpful to get a glimpse into a state school in the UK. We spoke to the head teacher who introduced us to the many programs and activities their school puts together for their children. What really shone through that visit was his love for his students and his commitment to enriching their lives. Since our project revolves understanding the use of non-attainment-based evidence, which covers things not related to the academic achievement of students, we asked about some of the challenges in the standards schools are held to and whether enough attention is given to the non-academic side of education.
We spoke of the challenges presented to schools by the Office for Standards in Education, Children's Services and Skills (Ofsted) inspections. The head teacher spoke with some positivity of the latest white paper, coming from the Department of Education which does make an effort to stress the importance of enrichment for students and provide guidelines for providing more enrichment opportunities. However, in my reading of the white paper, ‘Every Child Achieving and Thriving’, I felt that although an emphasis on enrichment was placed it was usually framed as a tool for improving academic achievement. I think it will be helpful going forward to have another look at the white paper to see if I pick up on some of the things highlighted by the head teacher.
Our conversation also highlighted a frustration that schools have with Ofsted’s labelling of schools. By putting schools in certain bands, schools can become attached to a negative label that discourages parents from sending their children to that school. This, then, has the potential to lead to adverse selection. The families with engaged parents choose to send their children elsewhere and a school is left with disengaged families and low funding. The head teacher explained how in Oxford, most schools do not max out their enrolment so families can choose which primary school to send their child to and schools must compete to guarantee enrolment. So schools at the borderlines are quite dependent on how their Year 6 students score in standardized tests. While community organisations are interested in pursuing activities with the younger years, the head teacher explained that they don’t bother with the Year 6 students because the organisations know that the students don’t have time but for their exams. I found this quite strange that so much focus was put on standardized testing at such a young age. I also completed yearly standardized testing from around year 2 to year 7 and then in year 9 and year 11, but I don’t ever remember it being the only focus of those years where tests took place. I wonder if this is just a difference in the UK educational system versus that of California where I grew up or that the schools I attended generally had good exam performance and never had to worry about meeting state and national standards.
My visit with the head teacher has left me with new questions and angles to approach in our research. I am very grateful for the insights that were shared and the time taken to speak with us. In the following week, I’m hoping to zoom in on these new angles and get a clearer picture of what our ultimate report will look like.
Please sign in
If you are a registered user on Laidlaw Scholars Network, please sign in
Hi Gina,
Thank you for another excellent reflection. I really enjoyed reading it during my coffee break. What stands out most is your willingness to compare different educational systems and to use those comparisons to generate thoughtful research questions rather than immediate conclusions.
I particularly liked your discussion of the visit to the primary school. Rather than simply describing what the Headteacher told you, you reflected on how his perspective interacted with your own experiences of schooling in California. That comparative perspective is a real strength and enables you to notice features of the English education system that those of us who have grown up within it can sometimes overlook.
Your reflections on Ofsted and school accountability were also insightful. I thought your discussion of how inspection outcomes might influence parental choice, school enrolment and community partnerships demonstrated that you are beginning to think in terms of systems rather than isolated events. Those kinds of connections often lead to the most interesting research questions.
One suggestion I'd offer is to remain curious about alternative explanations. For example, the experience described by one Headteacher is undoubtedly valuable, but it is also worth asking whether leaders in different contexts might view these issues differently. Good researchers are always asking themselves, 'What other perspectives might exist?' That habit will strengthen your analysis and help ensure your conclusions are well grounded.
Finally, I was struck by your opening observation about the Headteacher's commitment to his pupils. Throughout your reflection, there seems to be an underlying question about the relationship between leadership and accountability. How do school leaders continue to prioritise children's broader development when external systems place considerable emphasis on measurable outcomes? This is not only a policy question but also one of character. Qualities such as integrity, courage and moral purpose may become especially important when leaders are required to balance competing demands. It would be interesting to see how your thinking on this develops as your project progresses.
I'm delighted to see that the school visit has left you with more questions than answers. That's often a sign that meaningful research is beginning, and I'm looking forward to seeing how those questions shape your work over the coming weeks.
Best wishes,
Ben