Information Commissioners Office – List of Awareness Guidance documents

I made this FoI request to the ICO having come across a numbered awareness guidance document on the ICOs site.

Their response was a little confused, I thought, and I decided to clarify it here in my own words.

Firstly, they say the series has been discontinued, although some of them are still in play. In other words, they decided for some reason to replace some of them and not call the replacements “Awareness Guidance”. Fine.

Secondly, there used to be an index and they pointed me to it in the National Archives. But the old index only points to archived versions of the guidance. So I copied the relevant portions here below, and have edited it so that the guidance that is still relevant is linked from here while the no longer relevant stuff points to the archive. Hopefully I will be able to find the replacement documents and link them from here, which might make it all a whole lot clearer.

So in the list below, all the links point at the National Archives EXCEPT where it says “ICO” after the name. With this latter set, the link points at the current latest version on the ICO site.

Detailed specialist guides

 

 

Links from FoI Request

Awareness Guidance 5
[4]https://ico.org.uk/media/for-organisatio…
[5]https://ico.org.uk/media/for-organisatio…
Awareness Guidance 9
[6]https://ico.org.uk/media/for-organisatio…
Awareness Guidance 10
[7]https://ico.org.uk/media/for-organisatio…
Awareness Guidance 12
[8]https://ico.org.uk/media/for-organisatio…
Awareness Guidance 13
[9]https://ico.org.uk/media/for-organisatio…
Awareness Guidance 14
[10]https://ico.org.uk/media/for-organisatio…
Awareness Guidance 19
[11]https://ico.org.uk/media/for-organisatio…
Awareness Guidance 26
[12]https://ico.org.uk/media/for-organisatio…
Awareness Guidance 27
[13]https://ico.org.uk/media/for-organisatio…

UKGovcamp 2012 – The Ofsted Project

It’s UKGovcamp time again and this year is a little different. It runs over 2 days, with the Friday being the traditional unconference. The Saturday event is a hackday of sorts. And the organisers are looking for suggestions of projects to be developed. And I have a good idea.

There has been loads of opendata published in the schools arena in recent years with the initial Edubase data release being a key part of the data.gov.uk launch. And last year the DfE released a new school comparison site (together with all the comparison data !!!) that does a really good job.

This means we now have 3 government sponsored schools data sites, Edubase, the comparison site and the DirectGov site. And there is one thing that’s missing from all of them. The judgement of the Ofsted inspectors during their last visit. The reason why that is missing is worth discussing but not right now.

Suffice to say I think it would be useful for prospective parents (and others) to see at a glance how Ofsted view each school especially in relation to its neighbours. So I propose that we build one on Saturday.

And it’s not as if the information isn’t available. All of the sites mentioned above provide links from each school’s page to an Ofsted home page for that school, listing the inspections of that school. But to find out the judgement of the inspectors – a very important piece of metadata – you need to open a pdf file and read through the report. If you are not familiar with Ofsted reports this is not an easy task. But Ofsted do actually store this metadata somewhere in their internal databases, but they don’t expose it on their website. It is published in a series of Excel files which Ofsted publish on a regular basis and have pointed to in response to a number of FoI requests.

The problem with these spreadsheets are twofold:

  1. the spreadsheets are poorly structured for data access
  2. they have a termly lag-time i.e. they are published termly in arrears

And this leads to the full proposal ….

The Pitch

I want us to build a prototype web service that will allow 3rd party sites (including .gov.uk sites) to grab some very useful Ofsted information in format(s) suitable for web use and display it on their site. The information to include:

  • the date of the last Ofted inspection
  • the overall judgement of the inspector(s) on the school at that date
  • a link to the schools Ofsted homepage, in order to provide context to the user if the want/need it

The second part of this project is for the non-geeks. It’s a policy/engagement issue. I’d really like to get some talking heads to put together some ideas for how we can engage with Ofsted and persuade them to do some or all of the following:

  • take over the hosting and publishing of the service
  • reduce the latency of the published data by included ALL recent inspections in the service
  • publish the source data in more open and accessible formats rather than the current cumbersome Excel files

There’s something there for everyone – developers, data bods, policy wonks, as well as the persuaders. I look forward to seeing you there.

Postscript

I’ve hacked the spreadsheets previously and cobbled together a combined datasheet of all the relevant inspections from 2000-2009 and uploaded them to my public dropbox folder. That can be used as the source data for a prototype.

If also had a couple of thoughts on data structure and I guess I’m thinking that the returned data should probably be available in xml, json and perhaps (x)html.

An XML snippet might be something like:

<inspection urn="123456">
     <date>2012-01-20</date>
     <judgement_grade>2</judgement_grade>
     <judgement>Good</judgement>
     <comment>This information should be interpreted in the context of the full report which is available from the Ofsted page below</comment>
     <ofsted_uri>http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/inspection-reports/find-inspection-report/provider/ELS/123456</ofsted_uri>
</inspection>

Continue reading

Tech development in school

It is generally agreed that there is a real need to move forward with coding4kids agenda now. We’ve done the talking, now is time for action. So my action pledge is to develop an idea for structural change at the top of educational foodchain.

My idea is to require that in every English school (the devolved governments can make their own structural change), one of the performance management (PM) targets for the headteacher, will have a technological focus. Every year.

The governing body of each maintained school appoints 2 or 3 of it’s members as the PM committee whose role is

  • to set 3 PM targets for the Head for the current year
  • monitor and evaluate the Head’s progress towards those targets
  • make recommendations to the GB at the end of the year about salary uplift for the ead

If we can get government to recognise the tech deficit, then surely an overall programme of tech awareness, understanding and adeptness will begin to pay dividends. And our schools can be the cradle for this innovation, just like they were when that first BBC Micro arrived at the school reception 30 years ago. But we will need some subtle pressure and oversight to ensure it happens. So the Heads PM rules need to be tweaked to give our headteachers one of the lead roles in driving the country forward.

The tweaking needs to ensure that at least one of the PM targets for every Head will have a tech development focus. But that doesn’t require us to turn every Headteacher into a geek. On the contrary, many schools will probably need to look at their own tech infrastructure and resources – including human resources – rather than at the tech curriculum. At least in the first instance.

So let’s outline some examples of possible targets as a starting point:

  • To undertake a tech skills and resources baseline assessment of the entire school community (pupils, staff, parents, local community, at school, at home, in public buildings) and to publish the results back to the whole community in a 21st century format within the current academic year
  • To partner with local businesses and community to start a Computer or Coding Club and ensure it appeals to a wide cross section of pupils, parents and staff before the spring half-term
  • To take school website maintenance in-house and reduce the cost of maintaining a web presence by 70% in the next financial year

Each of these examples are SMART. I’m sure the dev and activist communities can produce another 10 example SMART targets within 24 hours.

If the government can commit to making this change to the PM rules, then the quid pro quo from us would be to create a free support and advisory infrastructure for Heads and Governing Bodies to enable them to make this work. A starting point would be some simple wiki pages, but that will need to expand into a database of local geeks able and willing to lend a hand in devising appropriate targets and in measuring success. But the will exists to do that now, so lets harness it now.

Expectations vs Offerings

Conversation overheard on NHS paediatric ward last evening:
15 year old boy: what’s the wifi password on this ward?
Nurse: what?
15yob: you know, the wifi? I can see it, but when i try to connect it’s asking me for a password. what’s the password?
Nurse: (slightly flustered) oh that! That’s not connected. You can’t use it. I’ll go and ask.
(and she scampers off – 15yob returns to phone game and then swaps over to his iPad)
(10 minutes later nursey returns looking triumphant )
Nurse: Well I have talked to the staff nurse, and she says that is only for the doctors, it’s not connected, and if it was you’d have to pay for it. So that’s that.
(and she turns and waltzes away)

15yob returns to his game.

A quick look around the ward shows that it is teaming with hitech kit. A PC, a PS2 and a PS3, a Wii, an Xbox (of incredible vintage), flat screen tv, old CRT for PS2, blue Ray, and an array of remote controls. I can understand why a 15yob might expect to be able to connect to the wifi that he can see.

Let’s look a little more closely at his expectations of the NHS and compare it to the actual offerings.

15 year old boy: what’s the wifi password on this ward?

Expectation 1: there is a wifi connection – I should be able to use it
Expectation 2: The nurse will know the password and will probably give it to me

Wow! I don’t know about you, but I find it extremely uplifting that our teenagers (and future electorate) feel that if there is a wifi signal in a public place they should be able to connect to it. That tells me where society is moving to and that we will eventually have a tech enabled society.

That 15yob would expect the nurse to know the password is a little strange to me. I wouldn’t expect that. But I think the implied expectation, that ‘those in the know’ would know the password, is one that again uplifts me and gives me a sense of hope.

Offering 1: There is a wifi connection available in the ward. It is password protected. Not sure if anyone/anything is actually using it. One thing is certain. Patients currently can’t use it.

Conclusion

So where does that leave us? The NHS is not living up to the expectations of our kids, because it doesn’t understand what our kids want or expect.

So politicians, please don’t make grandiose plans for the future of the NHS when the organisation doesn’t understand the basics.

The Revenue Balances FAQ

It’s always fun to see the silly Revenue Balances argument raising it’s ugly head again. The DCSF are obsessed with what they see as a huge wastage in devolved funding, where schools don’t spend every brass farthing that is devolved to them. Some schools have, over the years, managed to underspend the money that the government allocate to them, via the loacl authorities. And because the ministers are under pressure from the treasury to reduce spending, they find all sorts of red herrings and excuses to maintain their argument for ever larger budgets.

So I decided it was necessary to explode some of the myths, and put everyone straight. These FAQs are the result. Enjoy.

What’s a Revenue Balance when it’s at home?

Good first question, but unfortunately it’s at the heart of the myths around the subject. There seems to be a modicum of disagreement about the definitive definition. In general terms, a Revenue Balance (in English schools terminology) is the amount left over in a school’s budget at the end of a financial year.

What is so complicated about that?

Well, lets look at an example. Suppose an average sized primary school receives £500,000 for its annual budget, and during the year spends £500,000, what would be it’s Revenue Balance?

Thats easy. It’s £0 isn’t it?

You would think so wouldn’t you. Actually, it depends on how much they started with. Suppose they carried forward a balance of £50,000 from the previous year, then the Revenue Balance would be £50,000.

That doesn’t make a lot of sense, does it?

You’re quick, you are. And that’s not the only thing that doesn’t make sense. What the DCSF are getting stressed about is not that schools are not spending the money devolved to them each year. They’re also peeved if schools don’t spend everything left over from last year. And that’s the economics of the madhouse.

The economics of the madhouse? What on earth do you mean?

Let’s look at what has been going on with the total Revenue Balance figures per year (see table below). In his ministerial statement, Vernon Coaker suggest that about £500 million of that is excessive.

2000 £740,691,354
2001 £1,085,602,004
2002 £1,256,776,093
2003 £1,192,864,397
2004 £1,325,397,369
2005 £1,532,855,786
2006 £1,570,348,360
2007 £1,670,198,878
2008 £1,918,768,630
2009 £1,781,973,700

But surely Vernon and his colleagues really don’t know how that balance got there in the first place. Looking at those annual figures, most of it could be leftover from previous years. If we go back to our average school (School A) above, with a budget of £500K, assuming they are a primary school, they are allowed 8% (£40K) as abalance before it becomes excessive. Let’s also assume that there is a neighbouring school – School B – which has exactly the same budget, the same staffing structure, the same pupil profile, and that coincidentally it is identical to School A in every respect except one.

Lets suppose School A has a very nice parent who has 3 businesses; one which does grounds maintenance, another which does boiler maintenance and the last which does ICT support. And this parent gives the school a really good deal in those 3 areas, saving them £10,000 per annum. In 5 years School A will have an’ excessive’ balance, at least in DCSF terms, because they have a kind and helpful parent.

I guess Vernon Coaker’s response would be that the school should have a set of optional priorities in it’s School Development Plan to spend the money on, and he’s right. Unfortunately he doesn’t have a copy of the SDP and doesn’t know what the school’s priorities are. But here is a group of people who do. They are the school’s governors. I’ll bet they know what the £50K is being kept for.

How can you be so sure?

I can’t, but I’m willing to bet my own money that in most schools I’d be right. And anyway, if the governors don’t know what the money is being saved for, then they should. It’s an indication that this school is not being managed/governed very well. But that’s a different problem, and the answer to it is not clawing back some of the excess. Instead it’s about taking back the whole delegated budget. But (un)fortunately that’s unlikely to happen.

Why?

Because that’s a response usually reserved for failing schools that tend to overspend.

Are you suggesting that there is a link between revenue balances and school performance?

Yes I am. Because I was sick and tired of hearing this uninformed nonsense coming from the DCSF, I decided this year to see if I could make a link. And I suceeded.
Using the Revenue Balance figures recently released, and all the Ofsted Inspection judgements for the last 5 years, I was able to correlate the overall Ofsted judgement against the revenue balance of the school that year.

But first I Xtabulated school phase against school type and averaged the Revenue Balance %age. Interesting to see that it is foundation schools – most of them old GM schools – which retains the lowest percentage. But there is not much in that analysis.

Phase Community Foundation VA VC Average
Middle deemed primary 7.26% 6.43% 6.52% 5.77% 6.99%
Middle deemed Secondary 5.02% 5.32% 5.00% 4.92% 5.03%
Primary 7.28% 7.48% 7.52% 8.32% 7.49%
Secondary 3.40% 3.98% 3.46% 2.75% 3.51%
Grand Total 6.70% 5.34% 7.03% 8.10% 6.88%

So then I added the Ofsted Inspection judgements to the mix and I Xtabulated Ofsted grade against school type and averaged the Revenue Balance %age. This was much more interesting. While there is not much difference between and amongst Outsanding, Good and Satisfactory schools, those schools deemed Unsatisfactory by Ofsted tend to have much lower Revenue Balances.

Outstanding Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Grand Total
Community 6.80% 6.82% 6.53% 5.55% 6.64%
Foundation 5.07% 4.78% 5.18% 3.23% 4.84%
Voluntary aided 7.16% 7.07% 6.33% 4.50% 6.79%
Voluntary controlled 7.88% 7.86% 7.41% 5.79% 7.66%
Grand Total 6.92% 6.98% 6.59% 5.29% 6.76%

Are you saying that those schools which retain the least are the worst schools?

No I am not. What I am saying is that there is a statistical correlation between unsatisfactory Ofsted judgements and low retained balances. And it seems a bit silly to me for the DCSF to be encouraging schools to make their retained balances lower.

Please feel free to disagree or dispute any of this. I’m not a professional statistician. Prove me wrong and let me know when you have.

Ed Ball’s letter to governors regarding the SATS boycott

Ed Balls has written (belatedly in my humble opinion) to school governors regarding the NAHT boycott of the SATS. Unfortunately the pdf of the letter on the governornet site is a scan, and the text of the letter isn’t available anywhere. I think the actual text needs to be indexed and made available, so I have included it below.

Dear Colleague

You will be aware of the NAHT and NUT decision to take industrial action to frustrate the administration of this year’s Key Stage 2 National Curriculum Tests. We are deeply disappointed that they are pursuing this action when the clear majority of heads and deputy heads do not back this action – over two-thirds of union members did not vote to support disrupting the tests.

The unions have been clear they have no problem with testing, but they do not want to see the results being made public. While we have proposed different ways in which information about school performance is made public in the future, including the report card, we believe it is unacceptable to deny parents a full picture of the progress their child is making and information about their local schools. Schools should be fully accountable to the public and communities they serve.

We are also introducing changes to KS2 tests following discussions with NAHT in order to place more emphasis on teachers’ own assessments of pupils’ progress, which is an objective we know heads and teachers share. From this year, teachers’ assessments of pupils’ progress will be published alongside KS2 test data and we will introduce locally based, light touch moderation from 2011 to ensure that standards are applied consistently. But we know that the great majority of parents value the information currently provided by the tests and that Governors of both primary and secondary schools, and local authorities use externally validated test data for planning and accountability purposes.

It is not simply that heads have a legal duty to oversee the tests: even more importantly, they have a professional and moral duty to pupils and parents. Pupils and teachers have been working hard all year, have been preparing for the tests and pupils are now expecting to sit them. They should all be given the opportunity to demonstrate their achievements in tests which are set and marked properly. It would be very unfair if some children were prevented from doing so at the last minute. Parents will also be concerned about the effect of any test boycott on the information that secondary schools will be expecting to receive for their children this year. We hope that those head teachers who voted for action will think hard before disrupting children’s learning, confusing and inconveniencing parents, and damaging the profession’s reputation. We believe that it is vital that this year’s tests take place as planned between the 10th to 13th May, as children and parents are expecting.

Advice to Governors

As you will know, alongside the head teacher’s statutory duty to administer the tests, Governing Bodies have a statutory duty to ensure that the tests take place. We recognise that you will be placed in a very difficult position if your head wishes to frustrate the administration of the tests and this advice is designed to help you.

Firstly, you should of course find out whether the head teacher intends to administer the tests. If a head does not intend to do so, you should remind them of their statutory duty to administer the tests.

If a head teacher still does not intend to administer the tests themselves, it would be wrong for them to frustrate another competent person from administering the tests, and you should establish that they would not do so.

When you have established this, we recommend that you speak to your local authority and/or diocesan authority about next steps. If necessary, you may consider whether to instruct the head teacher to remain absent from school at times when the tests are due to take place, while another person administers the tests.

You should be aware that staff belonging to other trade unions and those members of NUT who are not in leadership positions are not part of the industrial action, and should be carrying out their duties normally, including in relation to supervising tests or handling test papers. However, those staff cannot be expected to take on any duties which heads are specifically responsible for but are refusing to take on.

In addition to ensuring that parents understand whether the tests will be taking place, Governing bodies should ensure that the QCDA’s National Curriculum assessments help line on 0300 303 3013 is informed of any instances where it is known that tests will not be administered.

Further advice, including Frequently Asked Questions can be found on the GovernorNet website: http://www.governornet.co.uk and you can also speak to
Governorline, the national governor helpline on 08000 722 181.

Where to now?

This is an amazing turn up. Ed Balls has admitted that what these teaching unions want is to turn back the clock.Gorbals Mick Brookes ‘Gorbals’ Mick Brookes is making the same mistake as his namesake did as speaker. Ed Balls has candidly admitted – for the first time as far as I’m aware – that the NAHT are okay about the tests themselves. They just want the results hidden from the public which pays for them. This recidivist attitude just won’t wash in the 21st century, no matter how much lobbying Mick Brookes and Co. does over beer and sandwiches at Great Smith Street. Has Mick never heard of Freedom of Information or the Information Commissioner? Ed Balls recognises that parents want this information.  He hasn’t talked about parents’ right to information, although undoubtedly they have serious rights.

If Mick Brookes isn’t careful, he’ll find his members don’t have time to administer SATS for answering FoI requests from parents for things like the SEF, SDP, SIP Reports, etc, all of which ARE public documents and should be available to all as public documents.

data.gov.uk – missing datasets

The recent launch of data.gov.uk has shown that there is much demand for raw data out there. But despite there being a fascinating array of educational data released, there are a couple of missing datasets.

A recent FoI Request of mine released the information that Ofsted have for many years been publishing the data from their inspections. This information seems not to be widely known, but is very welcome. The published format (Excel files) and presentation is not necessarily to my liking, but at least its available.

The second missing dataset is an odd one. The School Revenue Balances data is published annually by the DCSF and purports to show how much money is being hoarded by naughty headteachers and school governors, instead of being spent on the pupils. It doesn’t, at least not in the way presented. But that argument is for another post. It’s still a very useful dataset and a still bit of reverse engineering can give data such as individual school budgets going back to the millenium.

There are a couple of small problems with this data as presented. Firstly, schools are not identified by their URN, a primary key used in most other educational datasets. Instead it uses a 2 field key of LocalAuthority-EstablishmentNumber. This is the way schools were previously identified, but has been superceded by the URN, for quite some time now. The other issue is that it is not normalised. This is a database design term relating to how data is structured. But this is inherent in the data format (excel) and presentational requirements.

But that does mean that any meaningful queries of the data need to be preceded by some in depth hardcore data manipulation.

Both datasets are valuable and deserve inclusion on data.gov.uk. I’m working on improving the format and presentation and I’ll blog thatand make it available here when I’m done.

%d bloggers like this: