Ofsted will inspect the quality of education in schools by carrying out ‘deep dives’ into a chosen sample of
The deep dive approach will also be used for Section 8 inspections, as well as for Section 5 full inspections.
- There will be three to five in primary schools (always including reading, and often including mathematics)
- There will be four to six in secondary schools
- They will always include at least one foundation which is subject being taught during the inspection.
- Inspectors may do deep dives into other foundation subjects not being taught during the inspection.
- Deep dives can only be carried out in curriculum subjects. So, there will not be cross-curricular deep dives themed on pupil groups, such as disadvantaged pupils, or by prior attainment or phase.
- If there is sixth form or early years provision in a subject undergoing a deep dive, that element would be included as part of the subject deep dive.
- The quality of education for disadvantaged and SEND pupils are threads which run through ALL deep dives into subjects.
Deep dives are about trying to connect evidence gathered through a range of inspection activities. For each
subject, these activities will include:
- ‘top-level’ discussion with school leaders
- discussion with curriculum leader with responsibility for that subject
- lesson visits
- scrutiny of pupils’ work
- discussions with pupils
- discussions with subject teachers
Inspectors will try to ensure discussions with leaders and curriculum leaders happen at the start of Day 1 so
these discussions frame the rest of the deep dive. However, if logistics prevent this from happening inspectors
will carry out these activities in whatever order is necessary.
We advise leaders to take any reasonable steps to help ensure discussions with leaders and curriculum leaders
can take place early in the deep dive, while taking into account anything which could substantially undermine
the education of pupils or wellbeing of staff. Identifying when these meetings can take place will form part of the
90-minute phone call.
Through the deep dive process inspectors want to get to grips with the thinking that curriculum plans are
based on and how they are enacted by teachers. This means that simply having some sort of vision statement
is not sufficient.
‘Top-level’ discussion with school leaders
Some evidence for this part of the deep dive might be gathered during the 90-minute phone call (see Section 2)
but it is likely that inspectors will want to seek leaders’ perspectives on deep dive subjects early on Day 1 of the
In particular, inspectors will make an “evaluation of senior leaders’ intent for the curriculum in this subject or
area, and their understanding of its implementation and impact
Inspectors will want to see evidence in person and are likely to use the mantra ‘let’s see that in action together’.
Arguably, this is where the focus of inspection has most shifted in the new framework. ‘Curriculum leaders’ is
likely to mean heads of department in secondary schools but in small primary schools it could be that it is a
senior leader who oversees a particular subject. This is why Ofsted is not referring to these people as ‘middle
leaders’ - they could sit at different points in the school structure. As far as Ofsted is concerned, the curriculum
leader is the person who leads the curriculum in that subject.
Inspectors will make an “evaluation of curriculum leaders’ long- and medium-term thinking and planning,
including the rationale for content choices and curriculum sequencing
In particular, inspectors will be interested in exploring:
- Are plans and schemes in place and appropriate?
- How does prior content prepare for what’s coming in the curriculum (eg next month, next year)?
- Are content choices and activities appropriate for the subject?
- How is assessment used to check that necessary components are learned?
- What systems are there to support non-specialists/inexperienced teachers?
- How do whole school priorities affect the quality of education at the subject level?
At its most simple, inspectors are trying to probe the rationale for decisions curriculum leaders make about
the curriculum, especially in relation to choices over what to teach and the order it is taught in. This can be
summarised by two key questions: why that, and why then?
Inspectors will carry out an in-depth work scrutiny as part of each deep dive, usually alongside the curriculum
- Minimum of six books per year group (minimum of two year groups – doesn’t have to be consecutive)
- Not about judging progress from one point to another. Inspectors are looking to see how the intended curriculum is being implemented effectively
- In some subjects, work is not written or in books; evidence will be in quality of pupils’ performance (eg in art, music, drama).
- If at start of academic year and little work in books, inspectors will give greater weight to other aspects of deep dive.
This part of the deep dive is primarily concerned with finding out how the intended curriculum is being enacted
by teachers. Is it consistent with the aspects discussed? Inspectors will assess the sequence of lessons, not
individual lessons and as such, individual lessons and teachers should not be graded.
Inspectors should seek to contextualise within the lesson sequence notable aspects of curriculum
implementation that are observed. For example, if inspectors notice that pupils are spending what appears
to be a long time on a particular piece of learning, rather than judged this to be ‘low challenge’, inspectors
should try to find out why this curricular decision has been made. It may, for example, be that the teacher is
deliberately trying to help pupils over-learn so they become fluent in their understanding and application. This
may be an entirely appropriate curriculum aim and inspectors need to dig into such questions rather than make
superficial judgments. This is why inspectors should not consider individual lessons to be the unit of analysis; it
is sequences of lessons that matter.
- Inspectors will visit four to six lessons per deep dive.
- Inspectors will spend at least 15 minutes in each lesson.
- Inspectors are assessing sequence of lessons, not individual lessons.
- Feedback to teachers is not on individual basis but as a group. This meeting also gives inspectors an opportunity to talk to teachers about the quality of education and follow up any queries.
- Inspectors will probe the selection and sequencing of the curriculum. These two simple questions are a useful rule of thumb: Why this? Why then?
- Inspectors will consider how teachers support pupils to remember content long term.
- Inspectors don’t expect primaries to teach by subject, but they will explore subjects as the focus of deep dives.
- Inspectors will explore the subject specific pedagogy teachers use. Are the activities right for the curriculum intent?
- Inspectors may also gather evidence towards other judgements as they go, such as behaviour and attitudes.
- If it's not possible to gather full evidence of one particular type (for example only a small number of lessons being taught in a particular subject during inspection), inspectors will balance this by making sure that the evidence they collect through the other deep dive activities is particularly secure and robust.
Discussions with teachers
- Pupils are likely to be drawn from the lessons inspectors visited
- Inspectors likely to select the pupils (or at least classes they are drawn from)
- Pupils in two-or-more year groups
- Talking to pupils with their books is likely.
- Extent to which a love of reading is promoted across the school should always be at the back of inspectors’ minds.
Bringing it together
- Undertaken with groups of staff from the deep dive subject
- Will try to include all or most of staff seen teaching, plus others not seen teaching
- How are teachers helped to improve their subject knowledge, alongside their pedagogical knowledge?
- How are non-specialists supported?
At the end of Day 1, inspectors will collect together the evidence they have gathered in each deep dive subject
and begin to explore as a team any emerging threads. They will try to identify any ‘systemic’ issues (these could
be strengths and weaknesses) and these will then be explored on Day 2.
If Day 1 is described as being about ‘deep dives’, Day 2 could be described as being ‘broad and shallow’,
exploring a few systemic curriculum threads across a wider sample of the curriculum.
Inspectors should not be talking in terms of ‘emerging judgements’ at the end of Day 1 as these judgements
can’t be made until the end of the inspection. The end of Day 1 is about inspectors forming hypotheses about
systemic issues, which can then be explored on Day 2. It is not about making judgements.