Search

School inspections are a common feature of many education systems. These may be informed by quantitative background data about schools. It is recognised that there are pros and cons of using such quantitative information as part of the inspection process, though these have rarely been succinctly set out. This paper seeks to fill this gap by presenting arguments both for and against the use of quantitative data in informing school inspections. We argue that while quantitative data provide objective information about important outcomes, their usefulness is limited somewhat by a range of factors including missing data, small sample sizes, the creation of perverse incentives, and the fact that most readily available measures capture aspects other than school quality. We conclude by discussing how the Office for Standards in Education, Children's Services and Skills (Ofsted) – the school inspectorate in England – currently makes the trade-off between these pros and cons. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

School inspections are a common feature of education systems across the world. These involve trained professionals visiting schools and reaching judgements about the quality of education they provide. Yet there is currently little academic research investigating the consistency of school inspections, including how judgements vary across inspectors with different characteristics. We present new empirical evidence on this matter, drawing upon data from more than 30,000 school inspections conducted in England between 2011 and 2019. Male inspectors are found to award slightly more lenient judgements to primary schools than their female counterparts, while permanent Office for Standards in Education, Children's Services and Skills (Ofsted) employees (Her Majesty's Inspectors) are found to be harsher than those who inspect schools on a freelance basis (Ofsted Inspectors). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

School inspections are a key component of the accountability system in many education systems, including England. The judgments and reports produced through these inspections are widely used by parents when they are choosing a school for their children. But should they be? This paper presents new evidence on this issue. We illustrate how parents selecting secondary schools using Ofsted judgments will often be basing their decision on dated information. Indeed, half the time, this will be based on a period in which the school had a different headteacher. We find there are almost no differences in future academic, behavioral, school leadership and parental satisfaction outcomes between schools rated as good, requiring improvement and inadequate in the inspection data available to parents at the point of school selection. That is, parents who choose a "good" secondary school for their child will not leave with appreciably better outcomes than a parent who selects an "inadequate" school. The one exception to this is an Outstanding judgment, which does predict future academic outcomes – though only if the inspection was conducted within the last five years. We thus advise parents that – besides choices involving Outstanding schools – Ofsted judgments are of limited use to them in selecting a school. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]