gail330:

Do you feel they are out of context, and that grade one is unachievable as an everyday session (23 hrs per week?) do you feel that grade 2 should be the new grade one, which would enable us to keep a consistency in the room?

I'd agree with you but clearly Ofsted don't. See last week's TES.

My criticisms are twofold; that observations are snap shots in time when teachers are wearing their Sunday best and are therefore unreliable as a real measure of 'quality', and that secondly what really counts in terms improving learning is relfective practice, and this can't be measured without using a developmental model of observation.

cosmos:

I was once observed teaching the class from hell - Level 1, all boys. I was complimented on my ability to maintain order and discipline, on my ability to react to the class dynamics, on my flexibility and then had my grade 1 taken away because my lesson plan did not reflect the activities that had taken place.

Been there for sure.

I was once criticised for a lack of differentiation. I pointed out how the exercise questions I was using were progresively harder and graded, and how I expected some students to complete all questions, whilst some only had to complete the basic ones. The observer (who was also an Ofsted inspector) accepted this but; 'it wasn't in your lesson plan so I can't give your credit for it'

C'est la vie

You need to look at Dr Matt O'Leary's research. He's the expert in the field and is based at Wolverhampton University

I think there is an underlying conflict between giving people a grade and improving their performance. If we are being given a grade we need it to be the best it can be so we will not deliver a normal lesson. Therefore, the observation is not valid.

Internal observations are also notoriously subjective and used as a way to reward favourites and get rid of the unfavoured.

If we want to improve teaching, observations should be ungraded and the observer should work with the observee over a number of weeks to show them how to address any weaknesses. I would never say to a student "You need to use more commas and I'll come back in a year and see whether you are" which is in effect what happens with teaching observations.

I understand that Ofsted need to measure quality and that grades are the most obvious way to do this but I don't see anything useful about the yearly graded internal observation.

Where I work we see the lesson observation as being an opportunity to show what you can do as a teacher with an acceptance that this is not going to be the normal standard of everyday teaching - that we will be turning out 2s on a day to day basis with some 1s and some 3s. 

As I read the criteria for a grade 1 lesson however it gives the impression that to get this you should be consistently delivering this standard of teaching.  The students have to be clearly motivated, highly engaged and making spontaneous relevant comments.  They must be turning up raring to go and leaving reluctantly, still talking about the work. 

Unless the teacher is prepared to work him/herself into the ground preparing every lesson to the nth degree, risking burn out in the process, this is clearly impractical.

I have had conversations with people from a different college where they have 2 week period when any lesson could be observed.  Teaching staff are required to show the lesson plans for previous and subsequent lessons for the lesson observed.  The observers see a small but significant number of grade 4 lessons and have to take action to deal with them.  We rarely if ever see a grade 4 lesson being delivered.

So what is the best way to deal with this?  Making level 2 the new level one seems realistic and would reflect more accurately the standard of teaching around us.  Can this be done without accusations of lowering standards?  Possibly not.