As the dual inspection system in early years provision draws increasing criticism, Ruth Thomson asks what should replace it.
This April, money to fund free places for three-year-olds will be made available nationwide; in September, the foundation stage and new early years curriculum will come into place. Together these changes will draw ever more children into publicly funded nursery provision and create a distinct early years phase for children aged three to the end of reception year. Yet while settings and children will be unified by curriculum, they will remain divided by inspection system.
So, isn't it time to move towards a single system? And if so, what should it look like?
Jean Ensing, president of Early Education, agrees it is time for a rethink. 'The introduction of the foundation stage and funding for three-year-olds makes it very timely that there should be a lot more discussion about inspections, and that we move towards an inspection system that is appropriate.'
At present, maintained and independent schools are inspected by Ofsted under Section 10 of the Schools Inspection Act 1996, while the private and voluntary sector inspections are inspected by Ofsted, under Section 5 (now Section 122) of the Nursery Education and Grant Maintained Schools Act 1996, and also by social services, covering Children Act 1989 requirements.
With most four-year-olds now in reception classes and more three-year-olds taking up the nursery school and nursery class places vacated by them, the need for a rethink on inspection has become more pressing.
One London Ofsted inspector who signed up to do pilot inspections of settings with funded three-year-olds found there were few to be carried out as most of the funded places were in maintained settings. NDNA chief executive Rosemary Murphy believes the same is true in other areas of the country, with day nurseries in the Lancashire partnership area reporting 26 per cent vacancies.
'Wherever there's a possibility of three-year-olds being in a maintained setting they will be,' says Rosemary Murphy. 'But Section 10 inspections don't cover care aspects and were never designed to be for three- and our-year-olds.'
Assessment is one of the five areas up for scrutiny by the Education and Employment select committee inquiry into early learning. Submissions to the Committee, due in last week, also cover appropriate content, approach to teaching, staff and qualifications, and the age at which formal schooling should begin.
The inquiry will coincide with the progress through Parliament of the Care Standards Bill, which will create the new arm of Ofsted. Now at committee stage, the Bill should be passed next summer with implementation expected in autumn 2001.
Rosemary Murphy is dismayed that the Bill, while merging Section 122 and social services inspections, will not extend to the maintained sector. 'There should be a level playing field,' she says. 'The private and voluntary sectors are going to be overly regulated and the maintained and independent schools are all going to be outside the new system, and it seems that there's nothing in the bill that can change that. There was a promise of a level playing field.'
Peter Coles, the previous chief education officer for Hampshire County Council, believes that the higher the public investment, the more robust the inspection system should be, and that simply calling for a single system is not as straightforward as it may first appear.
'The money does matter. If the state is putting five or six times more money into maintained provision, there should be greater accountability. However, there should in principle be one inspection system, because people want to make comparisons of quality and that can only be achieved through a single inspection system.'
Strengths and weaknesses
Simply extending one of the current systems across the sector is not an option, according to early years experts, who point to fundamental weaknesses in both Ofsted systems. Primary among these are:
Time
- Section 122 inspections last only one day with a minimum of five hours, insufficient time to truly assess performance and gather evidence of continuity. Section 10 inspections usually last three to four days, making them more rigorous.
Inspectors
- Section 122 inspections involve only one person and so give only that person's judgement. Section 10 inspections are carried out by a team, providing a corporate and, therefore, more reliable judgement.
- Training is longer and more thorough for Section 10 inspectors.
- Weaker 122 inspectors have generally been weeded out but some still lack appropriate knowledge and expertise. There is also a shortage of specialist early years knowledge among Section 10 inspectors, which can result in overly tough or weak, and inappropriate, judgements.
Evidence
- Section 122 inspections allow inspectors to collect evidence of good practice in a freer way. Section 10 evidence is collected on a subject and lesson basis, which is alien to the way good early years settings work and disregards the complexity of children's learning in the early years, making it more difficult for inspectors to assess practice effectively.
- Section 10 inspections require detailed and separate comments on social, moral, spiritual and cultural development, while these are lumped together in Section 122 inspections.
Parents - Section 10 inspections take more seriously the views of parents and allow parents to make their views known, something lacking in Section 122 inspections.
Best aspects
Any new system, believes Early Education chief executive Wendy Scott, should:
- last more than one day
- involve parents
- gather evidence in a way that reflects how children learn in the early years
- have more of a sense of partnership
- encourage self-evaluation and self-
education - retain the advisory element that is currently carried out by some social services departments.
'Most people are frightened by inspections when they should be a very good opportunity for professional development. What we want to move towards is a system that is positive and to do with development rather than negative and associated with blame,' she says.
A new system should be achieved, she believes, 'by bringing together the best aspects of all the systems', as there have been some improvements in each.
'Section 10 inspections are better established but a lot has been achieved with Section 122 inspections in a short time,' says Peter Coles.
As for social services inspections, says Sue Torkington, operations director for Kids Unlimited, which has to deal with local authorities from south Lanarkshire to London, Oxfordshire to Chester, 'Standards are becoming more uniform, but there is still some way to go and the creation of a new arm of Ofsted is an ideal opportunity for retraining to bring inspectors up to date and to make them into inspectors for the 21st century.'
The national standards for care aspects of inspections that will be used under the new arm of Ofsted are now in their draft form. Rosemary Murphy is cheered by what she has seen. 'They're very good but I'll be interested to see how the standards will be integrated into the inspection system.'
Jean Ensing agrees that picking the best of all systems is the way forward. 'A merger of the existing three systems could be applied across all settings, so inspectors would all be looking at the same thing in the same way,' she says.
So will the early years sector yet have the inspection system they want? Only with the 'right' inspectors, believes Jean Ensing. 'The inspectors have got to have the relevant experience and training and continuing in-service training.'
The head of the new arm of Ofsted and the type and quality of information he or she receives will also be crucial. 'At the AGM, Early Education members passed a resolution calling for an early years expert to head up the new arm of Ofsted. It's important to have someone in charge who understands the complexities and sophistication of early years work.'
A Department for Education and Employment spokesperson says, 'The Care Standards Bill sets in place the framework to integrate daycare and nursery inspections, and we will be working with Ofsted on how to further this integration.'
There may be resistance, however. In a meeting last October between Early Education representatives and Ofsted chief inspector Chris Woodhead, he said there was no intention to alter current arrangements for Section 10 inspections.
Money too will inevitably influence any changes. Peter Coles says, 'I can't imagine a system developed to the highest level because there is a limited amount of people and money. And at the end of the day we'd better off spending money and using staff on provision rather than inspection.'