Only four of these incidents resulted in inspectors returning to gather extra evidence, while the inspectorate said it was “confident that the judgment…is secure” in the other 187 cases. However, Ofsted<\/a> has refused to name the providers affected.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The EEG system replaced pen and paper records in 2019. Ofsted said it enabled inspectors to better \u201creview and synthesise their notes\u201d and offered a \u201cnotable improvement\u201d in security.<\/p>\n\n\n\n But Schools Week<\/em> revealed last year that the system had been plagued with long-standing issues with evidence being wiped<\/a>, prompting chief inspector Sir Martyn Oliver to commission a rapid review.<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n Inspectors described situations in which their screen \u201cfroze\u201d and evidence \u201cdisappeared\u201d in front of their eyes during visits. Others discovered evidence had been wiped upon returning to their hotel room.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In a submission to the Parliamentary education committee last year, a group of six former inspectors, including former trust leader Frank Norris, warned the EEG\u2019s effectiveness had been \u201chindered by a lack of trialling and an unwillingness to accept its flaws and feedback\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Ofsted\u2019s review found that \u201coccasionally, a system or human error can result in some of an inspector\u2019s notes not saving in EEG\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Of the 191 instances where evidence was wiped, four resulted in inspectors returning to gather additional evidence.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Of the remaining 187, Ofsted found inspectors whose notes did not save \u201cshared their findings verbally in the end-of-day team meetings\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cThe inspection team considered these findings, alongside the recorded notes, when making their final evaluation and reaching judgments. This is in line with standard inspection practice.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Ofsted\u2019s policy states that inspectors who find their evidence has been wiped should \u201crecapture the salient points from memory as soon as possible after they detect that any notes are missing\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In \u201cmost instances, only a small proportion of the evidence base is affected\u201d, meaning the inspector can \u201crecall and record their notes before the end of the inspection\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n This happens \u201cwithout any disruption to the inspection process\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cWhere the amount of unsaved notes is more extensive, inspectors should record a summary of what is lost as soon as they are able. This review has found that the extent to which inspectors summarise their notes varies.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n The review found that in 182 inspections, the inspectors affected followed Ofsted policy and summarised their missing notes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In the five cases where this was not done, the \u201cother notes recorded by the inspector or colleagues in the inspection team, and\/or the summary drawing together the team\u2019s findings, supported the judgment\u201d. <\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cTo conclude, we can confirm that in all 187 events, the full range of inspectors\u2019 findings was considered when reaching final judgements. The written notes available in EEG are enough to support these judgments.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Norris said the issues were \u201cdirectly raised with the former HMCI but the evidence in the report makes clear that a satisfactory solution was not found\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cTo suggest inspectors shared their evidence at the end of the day so their evidence is secure isn’t good enough. Anyone who has inspected knows that the recorded evidence is referred to during evaluation meetings at the end of each day.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cUsually lead inspectors challenge inspectors to ensure they have the evidence recorded in case it leads to a complaint. So, what happened in those 190 inspections?\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Ofsted said it had reminded all inspectors of the need to summarise notes that do not save and updated guidance.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cEEG has many benefits for individual inspectors, inspection teams, providers and the wider organisation. The integrity of inspections is our priority. Policies are in place to make sure that this is not adversely affected if a technical or human error occurs with EEG.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cEEG is built on a Microsoft platform, which offers security, speed of development and future-proofing. However, there have been issues with the stability, reliability and useability of EEG over time. These have caused uncertainty and additional workload for inspectors.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n The watchdog said it was in the process of moving EEG to a new version of its Microsoft technology which \u201coffers improved offline capability and is expected to perform well with intermittent and low connectivity.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" But in almost every case inspectors were still able to consider the findings when reaching judgments, says watchdog<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":70,"featured_media":107252,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"om_disable_all_campaigns":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[4],"tags":[25],"post-theme":[2378],"class_list":["post-223327","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-news","tag-ofsted","post-theme-ofsted"],"acf":[],"aioseo_notices":[],"aioseo_head":"\n\t\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t![\"Sir](\"https:\/\/schoolsweek.co.uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/05\/Martyn-Oliver-chartered-feat.jpg\")
Evidence wiped for 191 inspections<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
‘Not good enough’ says former senior HMI<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Ofsted updates its software<\/h3>\n\n\n\n