Draft Minutes

Meeting between representatives of the Irish National Teachers’ Organisation (INTO) and members of the Inspectorate

Thursday 10 December 2015

15.30- 17.50

Purpose of meeting: To provide representatives of the INTO with an opportunity to meet with members of the Inspectorate to discuss and provide feedback regarding:

  • proposed revisions to seven existing evaluation guides and to three new draft evaluation guides
  • current school self-evaluation practice, the next phase of SSE, and the draft revised domains and standards for school leadership and management.

In attendance:

  • Emma Dineen, President INTO
  • Peter Mullan, Assistant General Secretary INTO
  • Pat Crowe: CEC representative District 14 INTO
  • John Boyle: CEC representative District 8 INTO
  • Harold Hislop, Chief Inspector
  • Emer Egan, Deputy Chief Inspector (Acting)
  • Suzanne Dillon, Assistant Chief Inspector
  • Deirdre Mathews, Assistant Chief Inspector
  • Mary Culhane, District Inspector

Participants were welcomed and invited to comment on the draft documents.

Contributions from INTO:

Draft inspection guides

INTO representatives:

  • Outlined the draft findings of a research study commissioned by INTO into the Health, Safety and Welfare of Teachers. They indicated that the preliminary findings of the research were worrying in that up to 90% of teachers find their job stressful, challenging, hectic and up to 30% find it less enjoyable/rewarding. In the context of this report and current contextual challenges, the need to accommodate change in a manageable way for schools was proposed
  • Pointed out that the number of inspection models was confusing and, in their view, unnecessary and consideration should be given to one model which addresses different contexts
  • Stated that any attempts at aligning primary and post-primary guides was flawed as there were significant differences between the two sectors particularly in relation to teaching principals and middle management.
  • Deemed it unreasonable to expect teaching principals to complete School Information Forms for evaluations within the timeframe outlined. They suggested that consideration should be given to the simplification of the School Information Form
  • Pointed to a lack of consistency in the documentation requested of schools by different inspectors. They welcomed the fact that specified documentation was requested in some guides, and suggested that this should be extended to all guides
  • Stated that the current notification period for all inspections should be retained
  • Indicated a discrepancy between the written preparation required of teachers in primary and post-primary settings. They suggested that a working group should be established to address and clarify this issue
  • Sought clarification in the draft guidelines regarding the number of board minutes that should be made available to an inspector in the course of an evaluation
  • Sought clarification regarding meetings with non-affiliated parent associations in the course of evaluations.They suggested that few parent associations are affiliated to the NPC-P.
  • Suggested that
  • inspection reports should comment on contexts outside the control of the school (resourcing, class size, lack of middle management) which have negative consequences on the learning outcomes of pupils
  • reference to roll books and registers should be omitted as these was out-of-date given new electronic arrangements
  • schools subject to a DEIS evaluation should not have to undergo a WSE in the short-term
  • planning documentation could be presented in digital form
  • Sought clarification on the selection ofpeople to attend a focus group meeting as part of an inspection

School self-evaluation

INTO representatives:

  • Felt that the moratorium on promotion was impacting negatively on schools’ ability to engage in SSE
  • Suggested that a one-year focus on a topic for SSE was sufficient rather than focussing on the topic over a three year period
  • Considered that the new language curriculum was another imposition on schools and would impact on the time available to engage in SSE. They indicated a need: to slow down SSE in order to allow the new language curriculum to embed; and a need for the language curriculum to be properly resourced and mediated

Response of Inspectorate

The Inspectorate assured the representatives that:

  • Planning and documentation may be provided in digital form
  • Principals would be consulted when selecting participants for focus group discussions
  • Consideration would be given to the further specification of documentation required of schools in the guides
  • The provision of a simplified school information form would be considered
  • While different inspection models focused on different elements of school practice, serious consideration would be given to the provision of a link to the relevant guide when schools are notified of an inspection
  • A DEIS evaluation is considered to be a whole-school type inspection and schools who have experienced DEIS evaluations are not generally selected for a WSE in the short-term
  • The focus of SSE will remain on teaching and learning
  • SSE is a process that can be utilised to introduce any new curriculum initiative, including the new Primary Language Curriculum
  • Recognition is given to the contextual factors which impact on a school’s engagement with SSE
  • They would look favourably on submissions on how the school self-evaluation report and school improvement plan might best be communicated to the school community

The Inspectorate indicated that:

  • They would welcome submissions regarding the domains and standards outlined in the Leadership and Management document. These are intended: for self-reflection and self-evaluation by school leaders and boards of management; to inform the work of the Centre for Leadership and the development of school leadership programmes. They will also be useful for Boards and Patrons when appointing persons to leadership positions in schools. Finally, they will inform the external evaluation process.
  • Leadership and management refers to all positions of leadership and management in a school whether linked to promoted posts or not
  • INTO should communicate to the Chief Inspector unreasonable requests made of schools by inspectors in the course of evaluations