IPPN

Published: 27 May 2021

Given the small cohort involved in the pilot project, the potential benefits, issues and challenges arising from the ERTAL model that will become evident when it is fully rolled out, may not be reflected in submissions received. A further review may be warranted to ensure that the model is fit for purpose across all school contexts.

Significantly, there was considerable positivity in the feedback in relation to what worked well, including:

• The experience was generally considered to be positive, cordial, courteous and thorough by the relevant inspectors. This was very much appreciated by schools
• Sufficient notice was provided to the school in most cases
• Both mainstream and special education settings were observed, including both live and pre-recorded lessons
• The post evaluation meetings were affirmative and recommendations were generally sensible and fair
• One school commented that their experience of Remote Teaching and Learning has ‘reinforced their Vision, Values and Aims’. Another stated that it had ‘enabled us to build on our strong partnership approaches which has improved outcomes for learners'
• Several schools mentioned that the process helped them to affirm that the activities they engaged in during school closure, were appropriate to the inspectorate's evaluation standards. Other schools said that it had provided positive feedback and useful tips and strategies for enhancing their practice
• The process itself was not considered overly intrusive in most cases, in terms of time or additional demands on the principal or the staff
• A few schools commented that they were glad they had participated and felt they had contributed to the process.

There were a number of additional points raised by individual schools. Overall, the engagement with schools from the inspection teams was considered to be very positive.

What schools found challenging included:

• organising teachers to facilitate other classes when they were engaging in online meetings with the inspectors
• observing on-line live lessons has the added concerns that the technology will work etc. over and above the usual stresses of any inspection process
• a number of schools found it challenging to explain to the inspectors remotely how their learning platform operated
• a few schools were approached the week before the inspection or had the visit confirmed the week of the visit
• several commented that the technology the Inspectorate used – Webex - was challenging and suggested that their own systems be used instead. In some cases, a workaround was agreed, which worked a lot better
• online lesson observations - for some of the teachers, this could have been more interactive with the inspectors engaging with the pupils.

Again, individual schools raised a few additional concerns and challenges.

IPPN Recommendations
IPPN has stated that a shift from ‘inspection’ to ‘co-professional evaluation‘, is vital to respect both the professional leadership and engagement of schools and the expertise the inspectors bring to schools. From the feedback received from the seven schools involved in the ERTAL pilot process, it would seem that this co-professional approach was very much in evidence, particularly with the inspectors’ comments that they themselves learned a lot from the process. This is very heartening and the Inspectorate is commended on its positive engagement with schools, as well as the affirmation of schools’ efforts during the pandemic.

One school made an interesting suggestion. Five of the six areas of evaluation had a direct focus on learning. One had the focus on feedback between home and school. The school suggested a seventh area - on the effectiveness of whole-school initiatives to support distant learning. There was a significant amount of work involved in putting together the infrastructure to facilitate distant learning and this was not reflected in the evaluation in a structured way. The inclusion of this seventh area of evaluation would highlight for other school initiatives what may be required to promote pupil engagement in distant learning in some circumstances.

While the inspectorate team verbally acknowledged and positively commented on such initiatives in the feedback to the school leadership representatives, the six evaluation areas included in the pilot were limited in their ability to report on them.

Other recommendations:

• Regarding any requirement for further school closures, school leaders and teachers need simplicity and clarity from education system leaders and their colleagues in health
• If the Department wants to assess 'distance teaching and learning' in the future, it is critically important to review and fully resource the Digital Strategy, to pair expectations with support to ensure all staff have access to high quality digital devices, adequate broadband, appropriate software, as well as IT support to trouble-shoot technical issues
• It would be beneficial for the Department to provide training for inspectors in the use of the most commonly-used systems, so as to avoid technical issues during inspections.
• Definitive guidance for remote teaching and learning is required for schools to ensure clarity and equity across schools in the event of further mandated closures. A consistent set of guidelines backed up by a structured CPD plan for all teachers will be essential.
• Clarity is needed around what is expected of parents and what to do when they don't engage
• A number of the schools commented that the technical infrastructure in the school is so poor, especially relating to broadband, that the schools progressed more with digital learning when everyone was at home
• Flexibility around what is expected of teachers during periods of remote learning would be appreciated
• It would be beneficial to more clearly outline a pragmatic approach to the evaluation of students' learning during periods of remote learning, as well as after the return to school buildings, given all of the constraints outlined.