Attainment Vs Learning & Progress

Ofsted will now judge schools based on Learning & Progress against Attainment. No longer can schools get outstanding if they are 'below national average' but have an astounding CVA.
Example: School A; deprived area, 60% FSM - attainment lower than national average, CVA ++ which is statistically significant will only score a 2 or 2/3 overall.

**Special schools will still only be measured on their Learning & Progress **

This change of emphasis means that schools that do well (not outstanding) but good in a school that is well below national average, will likely score 4 and go into a catagory.

On the other side of this coin, schools that have an intake of above average and consequently coast or make little progress over a Key Stage will, however, Attainment is excellent, will now be in danger of scoring a 4 and consequently be deemed inadequate.

If you can't demonstrate that EVERY CHILD has made adequate progress, you're probably in trouble.

Lessons will no longer be graded, their will be no aggregation at teacher level.
Learning will be judged under the following catagories for each lesson:
*Learning
*Attainment
*Behaviour
*Meeting needs
*Teaching

On the upside, their should be more of a collaborative discussion with the inspection team, so if a lesson is deemed inadequate there is room for negotiation to have another look in that lesson.
If a teacher is deemed inadequate, then teaching in that school can get no higher than satisfactory, but more than likely be deemed inadequate.

Finish this on a positive note... Satisfactory is now Satisfactory, it is no longer the 'new inadquate.' this was explained to me with when the trainer stated: it's going to be very difficult to be an outstanding school under the new framework, so good is good and satisfactory is satisfactory...not sure if that is a positive way to finish... ;)