To think criticisms of the new Ofsted ratings are self-serving?

It doesn't look unreasonable to me either.

There is a tendency for people to blame everything on underfunding and/or the government (or previous Government). Of course that has a place to play but it's by no means the main story. My own local secondary school is far better now than it was when I was considering it at the end of the last Labour Government. As far as I can tell, the difference is mainly down to the quality of school leadership.

I am not a teacher but many family and friends are. Over the years most have talked about how stressful the Ofsted experience was - not because the inspections themselves were stressful but because for months in advance the leadership teams invented endless pointless and time-consuming things for them to do in order to impress Ofsted.

In complete contrast was my daughter's first experience of Ofsted last term. The head had told all staff he was expecting an inspection soon and told them not to worry about it, that they were all doing a good job and they should just carry on as normal and not do anything different. In my view that was the behaviour or a competent and confident leader (or possibly a deluded one)!

The inspection happened. My daughter had an inspector in one of her lessons and she also spoke to one about her wider role. She didn't find either experience stressful.

The school came out of the inspection with flying colours. It was assessed as outstanding in every category and the report described it as "exceptional".

It is a great pity other schools are not as well run. There are over 20,000 state-funded schools in England and the difference between the best and the worst is huge. Ofsted has an important role in trying to bring the weaker ones up to the level of the best.

Yes, I do quality inspections as part of a team in a different kind of service, and we don't 'rate' the provision, but we provide both commendations, conditions (things they have to do to make it up to standard) and recommendations. In practice it is pretty easy to tell how 'good' an outcome is from the balance between them, but I don't think it is necessary or helpful to sum that up in 'ratings'.

Problem is that a school that wants to improve and is working hard at that, will find Ofsted a distraction to what they are trying to do.

A school that is oblivious to their issues, and hides any problems from parents/governors needs to have someone external to come in and help them see what is going wrong.

And you can't always tell which a school is.

I had a relative who often told me about their wonderful school their little ones was in. I was frequently thinking "that's not right" or "that's not good". The parent reacted badly if I said it out loud.
Well, they had Ofsted in and honestly it was the worst report I've ever read .. and I was nodding all through it thinking that I'd seen evidence of that etc.
School's reaction?
The head initially put out something saying how mean horrible Ofsted had come in just to be nasty and none of the things they said were issues at all.my relative swallowed it hook line and sinker.
Then the head and the governors put out a statement saying they resigning "in protest". Okay Ofsted had told them to go.
The parents that remained spent most of the next year objecting to anything that the interim head tried to do.
After a year of supply teachers who never lasting more than a fortnight for either DC, no work really done in a year and the ex-head and ex-governors stirring happily on the side lines, my relative finally saw the light and left.
They'd still tell you it was all because of nasty Ofsted. I'll tell you I had concerns from the first contact they had with school (first contact was a governor saying directly that they could make sure any child got in if ... Back handers implied)

But an external body who swoops in for two days, delivers their judgement and then publishes it for the world to see? I can't readily think of another profession with a similar system?

You are joking?!?
Health and social care, housing associations, prisons...

What actually is the alternative though? You couldn’t have only internal evaluations, since schools are public institutions and therefore must be accountable to the public in ways that private businesses aren’t.

And as far as making the evaluations public, there would seem to be very little point in having the evaluations if they were not, since they are done to allow parents to make informed choices and hold schools accountable.

I do agree that the two-day snapshot model is flawed, and perhaps induces unnecessary stress for school leaders. It also incentivized schools to put on a “show” for the brief time when the inspection is taking place.

When we have an audit at work, we get a set of actions to change. Not just a judgment.

We don't have to deal with lazy parents or those lacking in basic parenting skills.

The new system is better than a single word judgment, but will not do much to improve education, or change the lack of parenting which affects most schools, I expect.

Nursing homes, hospitals, prisons.......

What other professionals have anything similar to Ofsted, OP? Internal appraisals, yes absolutely. But an external body who swoops in for two days, delivers their judgement and then publishes it for the world to see? I can't readily think of another profession with a similar system?