First headteacher refuses to be Ofsteded in boycott

[noblegiraffe]

There has been talk on twitter over the weekend of a boycott of Ofsted in protest at its ridiculous system of stressful high-stakes inspections and public shaming, following the suicide of a headteacher in January after her outstanding primary was downgraded to inadequate.

This morning the first brave headteacher has put her head above the parapet. Ofsted called to notify of an inspection tomorrow and the head said no.

twitter.com/florascooper/status/1637760884243066881?s=46&t=vKGM6xpoeW3wdlaVVVagQA

She is calling for people to come to the school tomorrow morning to support the boycott (details on twitter).

I hope this becomes the catalyst for a serious review and reform of the inspection system.

People who are arguing that there was a school safeguarding issue and therefore the Ofsted grade was valid need to consider whether they are in favour of:

The headteacher being publicly named and shamed

The headteacher knowing that the report is going to be published in a couple of months time publicly naming and shaming them, and with devastating consequences for the school but not being allowed to discuss it with supportive family and friends

I think she might have posted a second message saying not to come to her school as she needs to protect the staff and students so people might want to read her updates before they do anything.

Those of you asking ‘well what instead then’?

as well as the many suggestions on this thread, there’s also this:

I believe safeguarding should be an entirely different check, apart from ofsted. And neither should be graded as they are in their current form.

Safeguarding, as so important, should be an annual check - admin side, continual support/advice, access to answers for queries available at all times, etc. A simple - yes, all is fine or a this needs checking, this is how, we will check in in xxx days to see it's been done.

At the moment even a basic safeguarding admin check can render a whole inspection inadequate, before the inspector has even walked into a classroom.

Ofsted - non-graded; is this school providing children with the national curriculum requirements? Is leadership supportive and effective? Are results in line with national averages, for the make up of this type of school and catchment?

There are already systems for teacher/TA and other staff monitoring in schools, done by management teams, SLT, etc. these include internal observations - done over time, not a one day snapshot.

We've just had ofsted. 3 subject areas were selected and observed over two days. 3 out of how many? What happens if one of those is poor, but the chosen ones are good? Rest is ignored under the current system.

The inspecting team, or single inspector, can be good but they can also be awful, coming with an agenda with their mind made up before they even arrive. In my years of teaching I've experienced far more unsupportive inspectors than supportive ones, and every inspection has been a highly stressful event regardless of the outcome.

The current system is not fit for purpose and it needs serious reform.

As for a department that feels it is appropriate to add a throw away bullet point detailing the headteacher's death, which is reported to be as a result of that ofsted inspection based in what her family and friends have said - well, it's just callous and inappropriate. I mean, when someone typed those words what in earth were they thinking?!

Giraffe - but people are ‘named and shamed’ if you like in these sorts of roles. It must be absolutely shit at a personal level, but I can’t see how this can be avoided without the HT of the school being freely available information.

Re not being allowed to discuss with family and friends - I don’t know. I imagine most people don’t adhere to that, tbh, but it isn’t unique to teaching. Things like jury service and social work and aspects of policing will all have similar. In any case, I’m not sure it would have made any difference to this cases tragic outcome.

Well the checks have changed over the years since 2006 and for much of the time they have been should not must. References being a classic example. Ofsted slated schools in 2012 about not having historic references (or indeed current ones) but it was not a a requirement- just a should

dera.ioe.ac.uk/11296/2/Safeguarding_Children_Guidance.pdf

I’m really sorry @OutDamnedSpot but I’ve no chance of reading that!

At the moment even a basic safeguarding admin check can render a whole inspection inadequate, before the inspector has even walked into a classroom

Well - yeah. I think this is where I differ in my view to a lot on here. To me, it’s like saying it’s a brilliant experience, so enjoyable and so much fun. Could maybe do with checking the parachutes would open first but hey, tiny detail.

It really isn't
It is mostly historic recruitment where Ofsted can shift the view of what was the legal requirements (as opposed to best practice) at the time.

Many Ofsted inspectors and HMI are not even DSL trained and don't understand the basics and need it explaining to them. Plus each LA has nuances and they assume it is like their LA- when often it isn't.

Fair point @Treaclehair I didn’t realise it would come out so blurry. Here’s the link: twitter.com/shirleyclarke_/status/1637837308870238212?s=46&t=T5MONBZUqaCrLk8l9EWw1g

The gap between the HT knowing the result and being able to share it / it being published is pretty cruel.

If they need that time to write the report, better to not let the HT or staff know the result until the report is published. Having to wait 2 months for the knife to fall is particularly awful and yes, I think could make someone in that waiting period feel very lonely and awful. Ironically, the more honourable they are (in sticking firmly to the 'don't speak about it' rule) the more isolated they'll be. Headteachers do need to be accountable but this gap of time having to wait is almost designed to isolate. No consideration of the headteacher's wellbeing at all.

It really wouldn't be hard to just refuse to let anyone know immediately.

Giraffe - but people are ‘named and shamed’ if you like in these sorts of roles. It must be absolutely shit at a personal level, but I can’t see how this can be avoided without the HT of the school being freely available information.

If the inspections were lower stakes, if there wasn't a grade, if the safeguarding inspections were yearly checks and separate to the rest of the inspection, then I don't think it would be anything like this.

saraclara
I'm afraid they have. It's been a lunchtime phone call the day before, for years now.

Not in my experience.

---

Other than in very recent weeks due to strikes, that's been the case for OFSTED for a long time. It was changed due to strikes to allow the phone call to happen on a Friday for a Monday/Tuesday inspection.

Over the last 10 years we've had 3 ofsted inspections at my current school. The phone call is received at or just after lunchtime. The phone call then lasts for 2-3 hours + where the inspectors outline what they need to see, which subject areas will have deep dives, any paperwork or books they wish and any other requirements they have.
The inspection then takes place the following morning, with the inspector(s) arriving around 8am usually.

All fine, but that paperwork and books need to be ready for 8am the next day, timetables changed to match the deep dive subjects being inspected, paperwork for attendance, safeguarding, subject deep dives, results, etc all printed out, etc. All has to happen after school - hence the flurry of work that evening.

As parents you will receive an email and/or text with links to parent view and pupil questionnaires which need to be completed in a relatively short time period, so that the inspector can view them.

I'm wondering if your children are mixing up ofsted with school improvement officers from the LA, Mocksteds, etc.

Thanks. My error then. I must be quite a bit out of date. That does explain why there's been no mention of it!

In nurseries we have to do a 'learning walk' to showcase our curriculum and the positives of our nursery. As well as proving the 3 'I's all this takes a staff member from planning and caring for the children to simply make us ofsted ready. This is on top of a crazy workload caring for the children, planning their learning and implementing it. Dealing with SEN issues etc. All for barely above min wage!

Her sister has been interviewed. She speaks very persuasively about the change overnight in her sister. Family and friends are submitting text messages from before and after the inspection to the coroner as proof of what it did to her. Of course an inquest is more conclusive, but their testimony is very powerful

Yes, I'm aware of what the family have said - though not the content mentioned - and am also aware that suffering an awful tragedy doesn't always do a lot for objectivity, which is one of the reasons we have coroners/inquests

And noticeably, for all the talk of supportive friends, fewer one word headlines and the rest, nobody's yet answered the point about someone having to be the one to say safeguarding (or whatever) isn't good enough and what's likely to follow in terms of parent reaction, irresponsible media and so on

Some pre employment checks had been done. A dbs had also been done. The paperwork issue re the safeguarding in the instance discussed earlier was due to a teacher from overseas having different enhanced background checks that weren't fully chased up. A normal dbs was done.

nobody's yet answered the point about someone having to be the one to say safeguarding (or whatever) isn't good enough

Yes they have. It's not the fact that someone has to inspect safeguarding that's the issue.

Ofsted call from about 10.45. Rarely earlier.

The admin team call first to check details
Then the inspector calls- 1 or 2 calls - usually complete by 3pm ish

Having read the report I think there should have been specifics added . When you are making a serious accusation then you should state how many staff were not checked properly , what checks were not adhered to . How long they had been there . As a parent I would want that information.

the inspections we have state the problem exactly . With detail . And a plan and timetable of improvement.

we get notice of inspection , but trust me when you are busy and under staffed there is always a last minute scramble to check everything .

If it was one member of staff I think the report is sloppy then as it says “some “;

Safeguarding should not be graded.
Ofsted should not be graded.

Safeguarding monitoring should be an ongoing process, checked annually, with support and advise being the main driver.

@Abraxan its not massively reassuring, in fairness.

Thanks @OutDamnedSpot . Will look now.

@noblegiraffe but someone ultimately has to be the one to say that a school (not necessarily this one) is not adhering to safeguarding and children could be at risk. I’m not sure there’s a soft way of saying this.

This poster turns up on every thread like this, insisting that the entire profession is wrong about the notice period and they know better. So silly.

Quite. All that will happen as a result of this example is that schools will choose not to recruit teachers from overseas, because the safeguarding process for those staff is too onerous. If they can ensure they keep their "good" in their safeguarding strand of the inspection by recruiting only staff from this country for whom it is easier to check background, then that is the path they will choose to take. The path of least resistance. Is that an improvement in the standard of our children's education? Of course it isn't, but it's what will happen as a result of these inspection frameworks.

but someone ultimately has to be the one to say that a school (not necessarily this one) is not adhering to safeguarding and children could be at risk. I’m not sure there’s a soft way of saying this.

Can you think of a harder way of saying this than telling a head that their entire school will be branded inadequate, with serious consequences in two months time in a report that will detail their personal failings but they're not allowed to talk to anyone about it?

I mean, people seem to think it's either the current system or some sort of free for all where safeguarding is just ignored.

There are other options.