Since September, schools have been getting to grips with the new Ofsted inspection framework, and in particular the process of the deep dive. The concept of a deep dive is a thorough investigation into all aspects of a particular subject area, including its design (intent), delivery (implementation) and assessment (impact).
For a subject like music, which many primary schools are underconfident about, the idea of a deep dive can be a frightening prospect. Even for schools that are confident in their music provision, if music is bought in with little or no oversight from the school, this can also pose a problem. In either case, we may start to see changes to the way the primary music curriculum is designed, delivered and assessed as schools ready themselves for the deep dive process.
Design
During the deep dive, inspectors will want to ascertain how you ensure that a progressive music curriculum is covered across the school. Many of us will know schools where only certain teachers deliver music while others avoid it, creating patchy provision across the year groups. This may be an area that gets better as a result of the new Ofsted framework, as teachers are encouraged and supported to embrace teaching music as a way to create parity across the school.
We may also know schools where parts or the entirety of the curriculum are covered by bought-in providers, with the school having little or no oversight about what is being taught. While there are many arguments for the benefits of ‘specialist’ provision, the presence of specialists shouldn't mean that schools are completely divorced from their music curriculum. The music subject lead will need to be able to demonstrate that they know what is being covered and how progression is ensured across the entire school, whether or not they have any direct input into what the specialist provides. This in itself is a positive step, since it puts schools back in control of an important part of the curriculum, allowing them to ascertain if their specialist provision is providing real value in terms of learning outcomes over time.
Many primary schools organise their learning through cross-curricular topics, which often relegates music to ‘topic songs’ or musical activities that are unconnected to the ones from the previous topic. This strategy will need a rethink if the music subject lead is to demonstrate that the entire music curriculum is being covered in a progressive manner across the whole school.
Quite rightly, inspectors are likely to want to know how music is adapted and made accessible for children with SEND (special educational needs and disabilities).
Dr Elizabeth Stafford leading a primary music session
This is often quite a contentious area in music. We have a system that is deeply rooted in the idea of ‘talent’; you either have it or you don't, and therefore we don't really worry about helping the ‘non-talented’. This doesn't just affect pupils with SEND or those of lower ability, but also pupils of higher ability, as we can treat their achievement as ‘the norm’ and not stretch them to further develop their potential. Add to this the lack of musical confidence among some primary teachers, who may feel that the ‘gifted and talented’ pupils are better at music than they themselves are, and you can see how problems can develop. Schools will need to be armed with differentiation strategies (techniques and adaptations for teaching pupils with diverse learning needs in the same classroom) that demonstrate their commitment to inclusion and the musical progress of all children.
Sounds logical and simple, right? Well don't forget that unlike English or maths, music is a practical, noisy subject, and any form of differentiation by task is likely to add to the noise level and/or create confusion as different groups of children get to grips with different musical tasks in the same confined space. Considering all of the above, it's no wonder that differentiation is quite often discarded or ignored in music. This means that this area is probably the one that will need the most work to prepare for a successful deep dive.
Unfortunately, the deep dive process is unlikely to be just a friendly chat. Schools will need to ensure they have evidence of the thought process behind their music provision, such as a music policy and curriculum scheme of work. When asked about schemes of work currently, the most common answer given by schools is: ‘We use Charanga’ (a commercially available primary music scheme). While Charanga is an impressive resource, the inspector is unlikely to be convinced if music subject leaders don't actually know its content, so at the very least schools will need to print off the (very comprehensive!) planning documentation that comes with it.
Delivery
Inspectors will want to know how the school ensures that the curriculum is being delivered appropriately, and this will not just be a question for the music subject lead, but for any teachers who are observed teaching music.
This means that schools may need to address teacher confidence around music once and for all through CPD (continuing professional development) provision, which, aside from the cost and time implications, can be seen as a broadly positive development!
Primary schools that have already had a music deep dive report that the music subject lead was asked to carry out joint observations alongside the inspector before the two compared feedback to ascertain whether the subject lead's judgment was reliable. This process may prove problematic if the subject lead is not a confident musician, so again CPD may be required to ensure that the school can demonstrate that music is being overseen and evaluated effectively.
Assessment
Assessment in all subjects has undergone a radical overhaul in recent years since the abolition of levels in 2014. Many schools have replaced the official levels with their own version and have created vast datasets that demonstrate progress against these levels over time. However, the deep dive process will be more concerned with direct evidence than data, and for music this means audio and video recordings rather than written work or photographs. While this makes perfect sense, it may cause issues of equipment, storage, data protection, safeguarding and so on for some schools.
This focus on evidence rather than data is actually a positive step, since it reverts the process of assessment back to its original intention: to help individual students to progress. Schools will need to be able to discuss how they address individual pupil progress and gaps in learning, rather than proving that everyone has moved up on a target trajectory over time. Schools have expressed concern about the burden this might put on subject leads to know every child's progress in one subject across the whole school. But of course, the inspectors aren't expecting all that information to be stored in the subject lead's memory. There just needs to be some form of easily accessible evidence showing that schools are tracking individual student progress over time and then acting on this information through assessment-for-learning processes.
While many schools may view the deep dive process as yet another pointless bureaucratic change to get their heads round, it does present an opportunity to redesign and reinvigorate the music curriculum. And for those of you thinking, ‘But Ofsted Inspectors are probably just as scared of music as teachers are, so they probably won't do a music deep dive’ – I'm afraid that the deep dive training given to Ofsted inspectors used music as its exemplar! In short, scrutiny is coming, and we need to be ready.
Dr Elizabeth Stafford is director of Music Education Solutions and senior lecturer in music education and business at Leeds College of Music. She will explore this subject in more detail in a session at the London Music and Drama Education Expo in March 2020.
