Two multinomial logistic models1 were constructed based on the level of
satisfaction with the inspection and the impact of the inspection on (the contribution of the inspection to) school improvement. This Appendix presents detailed results from the satisfaction model and Appendix B presents detailed results from the impact model.
The satisfaction level of senior leaders with the inspection was indicated in the answers to a survey which allowed responses of: very satisfied, quite satisfied and not at all satisfied. This outcome was modelled against self evaluation, oral feedback, view of the inspection process, view of the written report and a number of background variables including grade, region, inspection period, school type and school size.
Table A shows whether variables were significant for the satisfaction outcome: significant variables having a positive impact have been identified with an asterisk (*), and significant variables having a negative impact have been identified with an asterisk and a negative symbol *(-).
For the model described in Table A, the normalised coefficients can be found in Figures A.1 and A.2. For each variable, the estimated normalised coefficient is plotted as a diamond, with a vertical line indicating the 95 per cent confidence interval for that estimate. Any variable whose line intersects the bold horizontal line can be regarded as not statistically significant (at the five per cent level).
Any variable with an odds ratio of greater than one implies a positive relationship with the outcome variable; for example if we look at Figure A.1, the odds ratio for ‘outstanding’ grade is more than 1. This can be interpreted in the following way: if a school has an Ofsted grading of outstanding rather than good, they are more likely to be satisfied with the inspection report. The same type of interpretation applies to all other variables with an odds ratio of greater than 1. If the odds ratio is less than one then a negative relationship exists between the independent variable and the outcome of interest.
1 Models in which the dependent variable consists of several unordered categories can be estimated with
the multinomial logit model, and these models can be easily interpreted. There is no need to limit the analysis to pairs of categories, or to collapse the categories into two mutually exclusive groups so that the (more familiar) logit model can be used. Indeed, any strategy that eliminates observations or combines categories only leads to less efficient estimates.
Table A Significant variables using multinomial logistic modelling: results for school satisfaction
Significant variables for the multinomial models (satisfaction): very satisfied and quite satisfied versus not at all satisfied
Variables Very satisfied Vs not at all satisfied Quite satisfied Vs not at all
satisfied Baseline variables
Graded outstanding by Ofsted
*
Good
Percentage of free school meals
*
There was appropriate guidance for completing the SEF (q2 k yes)
*
No Did Specific school actions follow from these Ofsted
recommendations?
*
No How useful was the oral feedback at the end of the
inspection visit?
*
*
Not at all useful Did the findings from the inspection broadly match the
school's initial expectations?
*
No
The written report completely consistent
*
*
Not at all consistentThe narrow approach to performance data * (-) * (-)
Disagreement not experienced Disagreement experienced due to misinterpretation of
data in general *(-)
Disagreement not experienced Disagreement experienced due to lack of
professionalism of inspection team *(-) *(-)
Disagreement not experienced Disagreement experienced due to inspection team not
accepting evidence *(-) *(-)
Disagreement not experienced Disagreement experienced due to grading system too
rigid/structured *(-) *(-)
Disagreement not experienced
SEF graded Overall effectiveness higher than s5 *(-) *(-) No difference in grading
SEF graded Achievements and standards higher than s5
*
No difference in grading
SEF graded Curriculum and other activities higher than s5
*(-)
No difference in grading
SEF graded Leadership and management higher than s5
*
No difference in grading
The s5 inspection provided valuable confirmation of our SEF
*
Strongly disagree
Disagreement completely resolved
*
*
Not at all resolvedNot applicable
*
Not at all resolved
Primary school *(-) Secondary school
variables variable names
q2kyes There was appropriate guidance for completing the SEF (q2kyes) q8_1a completely disagreement resolved(q8_1a)
q84a Not applicable (q8_4a)
q9c_1 The narrow approach to performance data (q9c_1) q9c_4
disagreement experienced due to misinterpretation of data in general (q9c_4)
q9c_5
disagreement experienced due to lack of professionalism of inspection team(q9c_5)
q9c_6
disagreement experienced due to inspection team did not accept evidence (q9c_6)
q9c_7
disagreement experienced due to grading system too rigid/structured(qc_7)
q10_1 The written report completely consistent (q10_1)
q11a_3 SEF graded overall effectiveness higher than s5 (q11a_3)
q11b_2 SEF graded Achievements and standards higher than s5 (q11b_2) q11e_3
SEF graded Curriculum and other activities higher than s5(q11e_3)
q11g_2 SEF graded Leadership and management higher than s5 (q11g_2) q21yes
Did Specific school actions follow from these Ofsted recommendations (q21yes)?
q24b the inspection helped us to identify our main priorities(q24b) q24e
The s5 inspection highlighted some important new areas for improvement(q24e)
inspection date 1st January -14th of February inspection date 15th of February -31st March
Size of schools
Small Medium Large
Primary Up to 182 182-279 280+
Figure A.1 How satisfied with the inspection: q31=Very satisfied Vs Not at all satisfied
How satisfied with the inspection: q31-Very satisfied Vs Not at all satisfied
0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.00 out s tnading pc fs m 05 q 2 kye s q10_1 q9c _1 q9c _4 q9c _5 q9c _6 q9c _7 q11a_3 q11g_2 q24k _1 q8_1a q8_4a Od ds Mu ltip lier
Figure A.2 How satisfied with the inspection: quite satisfied Vs Not at all satisfied (q31) 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 q21 y e s q10_ 1 q9 c _ 1 q9 c _ 5 q9 c _ 6 q9 c _ 7 q11a_ 3 q11e_ 3 q8_1 a Od d s M u ltip lier