that the inspection process will vary, to some
extent, from school to school. Consequently,
the published data on the effectiveness of
the school (and its teachers) is based on
professional but subjective judgements
made by the particular Ofsted team involved
at the time, using similar, but not identical
inspection processes.
The published evidence from school
inspections over the last three years (table 1)
strongly suggests that schools are generally
effective in fulfilling this aspect of their
statutory responsibilities, the secondary
phase slightly more so than the primary.
I would argue, however, that the scope for
inconsistencies in coming to those
judgements is such as to cast real doubt
upon the validity of the data. But the task of
promoting children’s spirituality remains a
statutory duty and conscientious teachers
will seek to meet the challenge – if they can.
Promoting Pupils’ Spiritual
Development - Some Tentative
Suggestions
Because of the slipperiness of the
spirituality concept, school leaders and their
staff need first to define what it means within
their particular institutional context and to
ensure that its self-evaluation is consistent
with that definition. Stated aims and mission
statements should be such that they signpost
how the school seeks to help pupils’ spiritual
development, and subject areas need to
indicate how they can contribute towards
that development. It is, after all, a statutory
duty.
When spirituality is adequately defined it can
be characterised as a series of discreet but
connected attributes that reflect the
(secular and/or religious) concepts of
spirituality outlined in the inspection
guidelines; for example, developing
awareness – both of self and of others,
sensing mystery, wonder and delight,
reflecting on meanings and events – both for
themselves and for others. Teachers can then
identify mechanisms for helping children
access their inner lives; for example, through
encouraging reflective talk, discussing their
emotions, through drawing, written journals
either public or private and simple
meditation.
immensely valuable, does not (and should
not?) lend itself to objective pseudo-scientific
measurement.
successfully meet this difficult and complex
challenge – though they may never be able
to quantify the extent of their influence.
Summary and Conclusion
It is equally clear to me that the criteria and
methodology used by Ofsted when
inspecting this aspect of school’s work, which
is not subject specific but a ‘whole school
responsibility’, is open to subjective, albeit
professionally informed, judgements that
lack transparency and replicability. Different
inspection teams can approach their task in
different ways with different schools.
Consequently, the validity and reliability of
the data the process generates can be
questioned.
This paper has briefly described the historical
background to the statutory duty laid on all
schools in England to promote, among other
things, the spiritual development of pupils,
noting both its Christian based origins and
the difficulties in assessing its
implementation in our current pluralistic
society.
It has tentatively suggested strategies
through which schools and teachers can seek
to fulfil their statutory duty while meeting
the requirements of those inspecting the
effectiveness of their efforts.
It is clear to me that, providing the task is
carefully defined, conscientious teachers can
ethos magazine
positive education for the future
I do not think the development of children’s
spirituality, and the efforts of teachers in
aiding that development, are suitable
subjects for inspection and (spuriously
objective) grading.
Andrew Morris
What I am suggesting is a form of adult/child
engagement in an experiential learning
environment which, while it can be
Table 1 - Section 5 Inspection Data
Primary and Secondary Schools Inspected September 2008
to July 2011
Academic Year/Phase
Total
Number
Sept 2008 - Primary
July 2009 Secondary
Sept 2009 - Primary
July 2010 Secondary
Sept 2010 - Primary
July 2011 Secondary
Sept 2008 - Primary
July 2011 Secondary
5032
955
4617
841
4155
794
13804
2590
Number & Percentage of Schools by Grade
Outstanding
Good
Satisfactory
Inadequate
1595 31.7% 2416 48.0% 970 19.2%
51
1.0%
331 34.7% 469 49.1% 154 16.1%
1
0.1%
842 18.2% 2917 63.2% 847 18.3%
11
0.2%
151 18.0% 449 53.4% 240 28.5%
1
0.1%
566 13.6% 2878 69.3% 704 16.9%
7
0.2%
156 19.6% 456 57.4% 180 22.7%
2
0.3%
3003 21.8% 8211 59.5% 2521 18.3%
69
0.5%
638 24.6% 1374 53.1% 574 22.2%
4
0.2%
SOURCE: Ofsted 2010/2011/2012
16
17