OFSTED updates Conducting EY inspections again

[Simona]

We had a recent update on 20 August...followed by another on 16 October...on 24 October 'Conducting EY inspections' was updated again

Look out for paragraph 93...1st inspection within 30 months not 7

Having said that this change already appeared on the 16 October update.....this is utterly confusing

keep calm and grab a glass of wine!!! :angry:

Ofsted | Conducting early years inspections (http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/resources/conducting-early-years-inspections)

[Simona]

Does anyone have any comments on paragraph 94?

My feeling...others agree as well.... is that it should be updated because the change in para 93 make that statement in 94 null and void...according to Ofsted Nick Hudson?

I will put it on my agenda for OBC so I welcome your comments.

[moggy]

Does anyone have any comments on paragraph 94?

My feeling...others agree as well.... is that it should be updated because the change in para 93 make that statement in 94 null and void...according to Ofsted Nick Hudson?

I will put it on my agenda for OBC so I welcome your comments.

Yes, Paragraph 94 is outrageous, considering the delay to 30mths is to help us all 'embed good practice' etc. Surely, 30mth is time enough to self evaluate, sustain improvement and show children's progress over time?

The tricky part for them is they say inspection 'WITHIN 30mths', not AT 30mths. So, it COULD be possible to have your first inspection after 6 or 7 mths (or 8mths or 20mths...!) in which case it MIGHT be that you are not able to self evaluate, sustain improvement and show children's progress enough to be awarded Outstanding in that short time.

It needs to be re-worded to reflect that.

[rickysmiths]

I don't think there is anything wrong with Paragraph 94. All it says is if there is an earlier Inspection and there could be, 30 months is the longest time but they could come a lot earlier. I think it is fair to warn inexperienced cm that they may not get Outstanding. They are not saying the won't just that it is unlikely which is perfectly fair.

[Simona]

I don't think there is anything wrong with Paragraph 94. All it says is if there is an earlier Inspection and there could be, 30 months is the longest time but they could come a lot earlier. I think it is fair to warn inexperienced cm that they may not get Outstanding. They are not saying the won't just that it is unlikely which is perfectly fair.

I agree RS...the wording leaves it open....yet again...or is it the speed in which the factsheets were updated without consultation or thinking or listening to those who were expressing concerns?
1st inspection could be within 30 months and Ofsted have said clearly they would inspect earlier if they had reason or info regarding the provider
There is ...in my view...a vast difference between getting inspected in 7 months and somewhere close to 30...

A longer time before inspection is ...however... the reason Hudson gave: to imbed good practice...or bad practice for that reason....or as many suspect shortage of inspectors and Ofsted being behind schedule??
Why not be open and frank...and why not listen to concerns?

So if that longer time allows a practitioner to evidence their practice why should they not be rewarded with an Outstanding if it is deserved?
7 months was too soon I agree.

It is early to judge as we have no statistics on how those inspected later are doing and which grades they are being awarded.
It is a question of concern to OBC