Archived decisions

Contact: Clive Erricker - County Inspector - RE (02392 441459)

1. Summary

1.1 Under Ofsted's new inspection framework Governing Bodies of Schools can potentially be identified as unsatisfactory because the school does not meet statutory requirements. These include collective worship and RE.

1.2 Ofsted has published an update on Governance (Appendix 1). The two main factors to be taken into account are:

· whether non-compliance has an impact on pupils' achievement, their learning and the teaching they receive, or on their safety and welfare; and


· whether the governing body has done all it reasonably can to ensure the school meets it statutory duties.

Recommendation

That SACRE note the report.

Background Papers

The following documents disclose facts or matters on which this report or an important part of it, is based and has been relied upon to a material extent in the preparation of this report.

NB The list excludes:

1. Published works.

2. Documents which disclose exempt or confidential information as defined in the Act.

Appendix 1

Entry from Update 43

GOVERNANCE

Introduction

The inspection framework introduced in September 2003 makes explicit the differences between leadership, management and governance. The Handbooks for inspecting schools of all types give clear grade descriptions for the effectiveness of governance. Registered inspectors and schools have queried the apparent severity with which the grade descriptions are applied to non-compliance with statutory requirements, compared with the previous framework, and have requested further guidance from Ofsted. As a result, further guidance has been prepared to support inspectors where there are breaches of statutory requirements.

Summary

· From the date of this issue of Update, inspectors should additionally report formally in the summary and full inspection reports whether or not there is compliance with statutory requirements.

· The overall judgement on governance will continue to take into account all aspects of governance, including compliance or non-compliance with statutory requirements, but with an emphasis on whether any non-compliance has an impact on pupils' achievement, their learning and the teaching they receive, or on their safety and welfare.

· There is likely to be a range of circumstances in which minor breaches of statutory requirements do not outweigh other evidence that governance is at least satisfactory.

· The overall judgement on governance should also take into account whether or not the governing body has taken all reasonable steps to ensure compliance.

Recording and reporting non-compliance with statutory requirements

Where the school is in breach of any statutory requirements, the area of non-compliance should be recorded:

· in the relevant text section of the Record of Corporate Judgements (RCJ) and

· with the response Yes in the relevant line (P1 - P12) of the grade boxes on page 20 of the RCJ.

The summary of the inspection report should include an additional judgement that the school is in breach of its statutory duties, adjacent to the overall judgement about governance. The areas of non-compliance should then be listed in the final section of the summary report, following the key issues, as stated in the guidance to the report template.

All non-compliance with statutory requirements, other than a self-explanatory oversight that can be remedied simply (for example, a minor omission from the annual report), must be explained in the commentary in the full report. This could be either in the section on leadership and management, or in the relevant section of the report, as appropriate to the issue and the context of the school. The explanation should refer to the role of the governing body and senior staff as appropriate.

Where the school's governing body feels it is unable to meet a statutory requirement, an explanation of the school's and the inspection team's views should be given in the commentary in the full report, in the section on leadership and management.

Reaching a judgement on the overall effectiveness of governance

The judgement about the overall quality of governance should take account of all aspects of governance, including the failure of the school to fulfil its statutory duties.

Where there is non-compliance with statutory requirements, the main factors to take into account in determining whether governance is unsatisfactory are:

· whether non-compliance has an impact on pupils' achievement, their learning and the teaching they receive, or on their safety and welfare;

· whether the governing body has done all it reasonably could to ensure the school meets its statutory duties; and

· where the balance of the judgement lies, taking into account other evidence of a governing body's effectiveness.

The descriptors set out in the Handbooks for each grade for governance (page 112 Primary and Nursery, page 138 Secondary, and page 130, Special and PRU) are `best fit' descriptors and remain valid. In each school, the weight attached to any breaches of statutory requirements when deciding whether or not governance is unsatisfactory should be determined using the first two factors above.

Examples

Collective worship not daily: A school provides an act of collective worship of high quality for all pupils on only three days a week because of space limitations. The acts of worship support pupils' spiritual and moral development very well. The governing body feels that a class-based act of collective worship on the other days would fulfil the requirement for collective worship to take place daily, but too few staff are prepared to take an act of worship for this plan to be implemented. The governing body has done all it reasonably could to ensure compliance and so this issue alone should not be allowed to outweigh other evidence of the governing body's effectiveness. If governance is at least satisfactory in all other areas, the overall judgement on governance is at least satisfactory.

Assemblies do not contain an act of collective worship: A school provides a daily assembly for all pupils but very rarely includes an act of collective worship. Partly as a result of this, pupils' spiritual development is poor. The governing body sees the content of assemblies as a matter for the headteacher and has not ensured that all pupils take part in a daily act of collective worship. Governance in this case is unsatisfactory as the non-compliance affects pupils' achievement. A similar judgement would result from a governing body taking an active stance against collective worship.

Non-provision of the full National Curriculum: A school does not provide the full National Curriculum because parts of the programmes of study are not in place in some subjects (typical examples would be elements of information and communication technology (ICT), citizenship in Key Stages 3 and 4, and physical education in small primary schools). The governing body has ensured that the school provides all the subjects of the National Curriculum for all pupils, and has been assured by staff that all programmes of study are fully in place. Pupils' performance in the subject is similar to that of pupils in similar schools. Here, underachievement is not a major issue and the governors could not reasonably be expected to undertake the sort of specialist evaluation that would reveal the shortcomings. Taking this issue alone, governance is at least satisfactory. However, if governors had previously been made aware of the shortcomings in a previous inspection report and had taken no action to remedy the situation, then governance is unsatisfactory.

Non-provision of subjects of the basic curriculum to all pupils: A school does not provide a suitable course for all pupils to meet the requirements of the curriculum defined in the Education Act 2002 (typical examples would be schools not providing religious education (RE) in Key Stage 4 and the sixth form, ICT for all pupils in Key Stage 4, or non-core subjects of the National Curriculum in primary schools). The governing body has not required any evaluation of the school's provision and none has been presented to it. Here the non-compliance has had an impact on pupils' achievement and governance is judged unsatisfactory.

Poor child protection arrangements: The governing body has adopted appropriate child protection procedures but has taken no further interest in monitoring their operation. Staff are not aware what to do when disclosures are made and few have had training in this area. Here the safety of children has been put at risk and governance is unsatisfactory.