School lf-evaluation: a respon to the Byron Review
This briefing note has been compiled in respon to the request, in the Byron Review of e-safety in schools, for a short study of what schools are saying in their lf-evaluation forms about e-safety. Ofsted conducted a small-scale study of 100 lf-evaluation forms of schools that were being inspected in the summer term 2008. The study found considerable variation in how schools monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of their e-safety policies. A considerable proportion of schools do not indicate how they know whether their policies are effective or not in ensuring learners’ e-safety.
Age group: 5-18
Published: December 2008
peva
Reference no: 080203
School lf-evaluation: a respon to the Byron Review
School lf-evaluation: a respon to the Byron Review In September 2007, Dr Tanya Byron was asked by the Prime Minister to conduct an independent review to look at the risks to children from potentially harmful or inappropriate materials available through electronic means. In her report on the review, Dr Byron included the following recommendations to ensure that the system delivers better outcomes for children in this area:1
‘that Ofsted takes steps to hold schools to account and provide Government with a detailed picture of schools’ performance on e-safety.’ In particular: - Ofsted to provide the Government with a snapshot report on school respons to question 4b of the lf-evaluation form (regarding e-
safety) by summer 2008. - Ofsted should comment on the state of internet safety training in
schools as part of its forthcoming long report on information and communication technology (ICT) due for publication in 2008. - Ofsted to u its annual ICT school surveys to evaluate the extent to
which schools teach learners to adopt safe and responsible practices in using new technology.
Ofsted undertakes a thematic study on the teaching of e-safety and media literacy in all school curricula.
‘if by 2011 evidence indicates widespread concerns in relation to school delivery of e-safety, I recommend that Ofsted considers making an asssment on performance in regard to e-safety in all school inspection
reports.’
In September 2007, Ofsted introduced a new prompt into the lf-evaluation form that schools are invited to complete prior to an inspection. Question 4b asked schools to comment on ‘the extent to which learners adopt safe and responsible practices in using new technologies, including the internet .’ The following report provides a snapshot of respons to that question, as requested by the Byron Review. Key findings
reporter
The analysis of the sample of schools’ lf-evaluation forms found that the proportion of schools providing sufficient evidence of their strategies for ensuring e-safety was low, especially in primary schools.
The schools surveyed relied heavily on external bodies, such as their local
authority or external contractors, to provide a degree of e-curity. They rarely evaluated the quality of the support received.
1
Safer children in a digital world: the report of the Byron review , DCSF and DCMS, 2008; v.uk/byronreview/
School lf-evaluation: a respon to the Byron Review The schools were uncertain of their responsibilities when e-bullying extended beyond the school day.
Some of the schools made clear public statements about the misu of electronic means of communication, such as mobile phones, and a number had banned their u entirely; however, there was no clearly consistent pattern of control of the u of electronic communication.
Few of the schools indicated how they obtained evidence about the extent of cyber-bullying in their school, which rais questions about whether they really recogni how extensive it is. Even fewer of the schools provided information about how they evaluate the effectiveness of their e-safety measures. Other schools said that they were aware that cyber-bullying was taking place but had little confidence in their ability to tackle the problem.
Recommendations
The Department for Children Schools and Families should:
re-emphasi the duty of schools to ensure their pupils’ e-safety
if用法
issue brief guidance on how to evaluate the effectiveness of e-safety policies, providing examples of effective interventions
work with Becta and local authorities to help develop and maintain schools’ experti in e-safety, incl
uding advising them on legal issues surrounding the u, or confiscation, of private electronic property on school sites 2
advi schools on how they might work with families and other agencies to help combat misu of privately owned equipment outside school hours. Ofsted will:
retain references to e-safety in the current school lf-evaluation form
ensure that the training and guidance for inspectors include an appropriate focus on e-safety, for example within the evaluation of safeguarding and the care and support of pupils.udf
Evidence
考研专业课试卷In May and June 2008, Ofsted conducted a short survey of the recently updated lf-evaluation forms of 50 primary and 50 condary schools. This analysis showed that the schools concerned appeared to give insufficient priority to the safe u of new technology.
2
Becta is the government agency that promotes the innovative u of information technology in learning; www.becta.uk/.
School lf-evaluation: a respon to the Byron Review
4 In primary schools, just under half made no mention of e-safety in their respon to question 4b in the lf-evaluation form; 25% responded with some detailed comment, but the remainder made only a passing reference.
Figure 1: Primary schools’ comments on lf-evaluation form question 4b ‘New technology’ No Comment 46%
Comment 28%anyother
Comment 26%
In condary schools, the results were slightly better, with over a third offering a comprehensive and thoughtful respon to the question. However, it was still the ca that almost half made no comment at all.
School lf-evaluation: a respon to the Byron Review
5
Figure 2: Secondary schools’ comments on lf-evaluation question 4b ‘New technology’ No Comment 48%
How do schools make their new technology safe?freeskyf
The schools that did respond to question 4b indicated that they promoted e-safety through:
technological restrictions and monitoring via filtering software and restricting access to some websites
acceptable-u policies, often requiring parental support
ic是什么意思
teaching pupils and parents about the dangers via internet safety ssions. Most of the schools surv
eyed that evaluated their e-safety explained that their
internet access was provided through a regional broadband consortium, which filters known problematic websites. A majority of the schools that responded to question 4b commented that they had blocked access to popular social networking websites and instant messaging clients in an attempt to stamp out cyber-bullying during school hours. They had put similar controls on email u, with one school mentioning a word tracker that flagged up words that might indicate an abu of the system. The u of mobile phones (particularly camera phones) for bullying was raid as an issue by veral schools. As a result, a number of them had banned the u of such equipment during school time. Schools highlighted the problem that much of the ICT equipment in a school, including sophisticated types of camera phone, was brought to the site by the pupils.
take up什么意思
School lf-evaluation: a respon to the Byron Review 6 Cyber-bullying was en as a continuing problem by schools that were aware of it; many gave talks to parents and pupils on the dangers of internet misu, and discusd the topic in ICT class. Only one school mentioned tting aside tim
e for further staff training around the subject of e-safety.
A common theme in schools’ respons was the u of an ICT ‘contract’, signed by both parent and pupil, agreeing to terms and conditions regarding the responsible u of email and internet. Pupils without a signed contract were barred from using the internet or email at school.
To corroborate the evidence collected from the SEFs, Ofsted surveyed 50 school
websites to e what information was provided to parents and others about e-safety, including whether or not camera phones were permitted at the school. Approximately half of the schools publish information about e-safety at the school, either directly on the website or by a link to the school’s prospectus. However, in general, condary schools provide more detailed coverage than primary schools. The best provided extensive information so that parents and pupils could be in no doubt as to their policy. Some were very specific about the policies and the reasons behind them, for example:
‘The mobile phone policy has been reviewed recently and takes into account the potential of modern technology which allows us to make
phone calls, nd text messages, take photographs and access the internet. The policy also reflects national concern over the role of mobile
phones in bullying and child abu issues… as a result, all mobile phones are banned in school.’
Another school made detailed reference to the nature of mobile phone misu:
‘Camera phones…enable students to make still images of each other and nd them to other phones, or post them on the internet. Sometimes
the can be candid images that have been taken without the connt or even knowledge of the subjects…with malicious intent.’
Both of the examples are from condary schools. Few of the primary school websites sampled made such detailed references to e-safety; fewer than half of the primary school websites included an internet safety statement. However, it is likely that many more schools do have e-safety policies, which are available in other formats.
bbf
How successful are the methods?
It is clear that relatively little is known about how effective e-safety is in schools. Children on bullying, by the Children’s Rights Director, reported the views of a group of looked after children and young people and noted that 40% of them had experienced cyber-bullying and 31% thought it was a growing problem, connected to
