Ofsted has sought feedback on its revised inspection framework. In order to inform our response to the consultation, we held a series of roundtables in March, focusing on the areas of inclusion, curriculum and attendance. These roundtables are only part of the work informing our final response and are complemented by an online survey as well as reviews of existing literature and data.

Our online roundtables were attended by Chartered College Fellows and members from a range of schools and settings, representing Early Years to Initial Teacher Training, mainstream schools to specialist provision, as well as some practitioners who are also Ofsted inspectors and Fellows who are His Majesty’s Inspectors (HMIs).

Each discussion has fed into our response to the current Ofsted and Department for Education (DfE) consultations around the inspection framework and measures proposed. It should be noted that the views summarised here are those of colleagues attending the roundtables and reflect their experiences with and opinions of the inspection system. They are not necessarily representative of the entire teaching profession or the Chartered College of Teaching as an organisation but they are important to share as part of the evidence informing discussions going forward.

In a previous blog post, we shared headline findings from our consultation. In this series, we share more detailed insights on some of the focus areas, which have also been shared with Ofsted.

This blog focuses on the focus area of ‘developing teaching’ in Ofsted’s proposed new framework.

The focus on teacher CPD and an evidence-informed professional learning culture as part of this focus area is very welcome given what we know from research about the importance of high-quality CPD and school culture for teacher retention. However, a few changes appear necessary to ensure an evidence-informed CPD culture is encouraged in schools.

Evidence-informed practice

We know from research that evidence-informed teaching can positively impact student outcomes and teacher job satisfaction (Bell et al., 2010; Burns & Schulle 2007; Malin et al., 2020; Malin and Brown, 2022; Mincu, 2014). The mention of ‘high-quality research evidence’ in the ‘strong’ descriptor is therefore welcome and has the potential to positively impact teaching quality and student outcomes. However, it is not clear why engagement with ‘high-quality research’ is only deemed desirable or necessary as part of the ‘strong’ descriptor. We would strongly encourage its inclusion from the starting point, i.e. the ‘secure’ category of evidence-informed school cultures are to be encouraged across the sector. The step from no mention of research to an expectation of teachers drawing on high-quality research at the ‘secure’ level seems incoherent. If teachers (and leaders) are to be expected to engage with research at the ‘strong’ level, the basis for such engagement should be laid at the ‘secure’ level.

Furthermore, evidence-informed practice is not a top-down process but requires the careful combination of high-quality research evidence with teacher expertise and context-specific implementation (Scutt, 2019), which in turn requires the development of critical research appraisal skills. This should be captured in the framework, which currently only speaks of teachers ‘drawing on high-quality research evidence’ but does not mention the need for critical engagement or context-specific implementation.

This leads nicely into inspector training. It is important for inspectors to develop a nuanced understanding of evidence-informed practice, including what constitutes ‘high-quality’ evidence and what its careful, context-specific implementation looks like.

The framework should also specify that the professional development programme itself is informed by what we know about most effective approaches to teacher CPD (e.g.: close to classroom practice, with opportunities for peer learning and implementation etc., cf. Sims et al., 2021; Cirkony et al., 2022).

Moreover, we know that current workload pressures preclude many from engaging in high-quality professional development, so it will be important for inspections to consider what factors could preclude teachers and leaders from engaging in CPD and seek to address these as part of inspections.

Steps to improve the proposal:

• Set an expectation for evidence-informed school cultures from the ‘secure’ level.
• Set an expectation for CPD approaches themselves to be evidence-informed.
• Ensure that inspectors are trained adequately, so they develop a nuanced understanding of what constitutes ‘high-quality’ evidence and the need for its context-specific implementation instead of top-down approaches to evidence use.
• Recognise and encourage the need for career-phase specific approaches to CPD that provide alternatives to leadership positions and recognise expert teaching in order to improve teacher retention.

References

Bell, M., Cordingley, P., Isham C. et al. (2010) Report of professional practitioner use of research review: Practitioner engagement in and/or with research. www.curee.co.uk/files/publication/1297423037/Practitioner%20Use%20of%20Research%20Review.pdf (accessed 25/04/2025).

Burns, T & Schuller T (2007). The evidence agenda. Evidence in education: Linking research and policy, 15-32.

Cirkony, C., Rickinson, M., Walsh, L., Gleeson, J., Salisbury, M., Cutler, B., Berry, M. and Smith, K., 2021. Beyond effective approaches: A rapid review response to designing professional learning. Professional Development in Education, pp.1-22.

Malin, J. R., Brown, C., Ion, G., van Ackeren, I., Bremm, N., Luzmore, R., Flood, J. & Rind, G. M. (2020). World-wide barriers and enablers to achieving evidence-informed practice in education: what can be learnt from Spain, England, the United States, and Germany?. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 7(1).

Malin, J. R., & Brown, C. (2022). Introduction: What Can Be Learned from International Contexts about How to Foster Evidence-Informed Practice?. In The Emerald handbook of evidence-informed practice in education: Learning from international contexts (pp. 1-13). Emerald Publishing Limited.

Mincu, M. (2014). “Inquiry Paper 6: Teacher Quality and School Improvement – What is the Role of Research?” In: British Educational Research Association/the Royal Society for the encouragement of Arts, Manufactures and Commerce (eds.) The Role of Research in Teacher Education: Reviewing the Evidence edited. Available from: https://www.bera.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/BERA-RSA-Interim-Report.pdf, accessed 22/03/2024.

Scutt, C. (2019) Is engaging with and in research a worthwhile investment for teachers?. In: Carden C (ed) Primary Teaching. London: SAGE Publishing, pp. 595–610.

Sims, S., Fletcher-Wood, H., O’Mara-Eves, A., Cottingham, S., Stansfield, C., Goodrich, J., Van Herwegen, J. & Anders, J. (2023). Effective teacher professional development: new theory and a meta-analytic test. Review of Educational Research, 00346543231217480.