Ofsted's new report cards for schools are a pile of bollocks

[noblegiraffe]

Changes are being made to the way Ofsted reports school inspections. Instead of grading 4 areas Inadequate, Requires Improvement, Good and Outstanding (overall grade has already gone) they want to grade schools on 9 areas, Causing Concern, Attention Needed, Secure, Strong and Exemplary

There's a video here explaining how it will look

There aren't enough words to express how much additional work this is going to create for schools. How many extra middle management positions to cover leadership in each of the 9 areas. How many extra ring binders of evidence, learning walks, mock Ofsteds. How many education consultants writing books called 'How to get Exemplary in "Developing Teaching".'

Oh but parents will appreciate the extra information - sure, is a school that is strong in 5 areas and secure in 4 better or worse than one that's exemplary in 2, strong in 3, secure in 2 and requires attention in 2?

And how is deciding whether a school is secure or strong anything but subjective on the day? You hope for rigorous rubrics? No, there are fluffy grade descriptors that are hard to decipher.

To illustrate this, a quiz has been put together. Can you decide whether e.g.

A) "Leaders continually monitor the progress of their pupil premium strategy and make helpful and proactive adaptations, as appropriate"

is better or worse than

B) "Leaders make sure that the delivery of their pupil premium strategy is sustained and monitored effectively, including through ongoing training and support for staff"?

I got 2/5 correct... you can see if you can do any better here https://schoolsweek.co.uk/ofsted-quiz-can-you-spot-a-strong-rating-from-a-secure-one/

The government consultation is running till April https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/improving-the-way-ofsted-inspects-education/improving-the-way-ofsted-inspects-education-consultation-document#proposal-1-report-cards

I completely agree that one grade had no nuisance at all, and that a report card over four or five areas would be better, but having five levels for each demands a level of detailed assessment that simply isn't possible in the time allocated to the inspector. Its too detailed for someone there for a couple of weeks, frankly. Three levels for each area would be much more realistic.

So you've learned to "talk the talk" but can't read all the valid criticisms from the actual boots on the ground telling you that this won't make any meaningful differences and instead dismiss the whole lot as "calling it guff"?
Wow.
I work in marketing these days, where we bullshit with weasel words with the best of them, it doesn't mean that any of it actually fixes what's wrong with a given system.
Impact should always be front and centre, not "what on earth do the shit phrases mean?" otherwise someone's failed at their job massively. Or maybe with the new descriptors that should be, "someone's performance is causing concern."

Teacher here. 2/5. And they wonder why they can't retain teachers
I'm only three and a bit years in and already looking for a way out. I love the teaching but the shit that makes up the rest of the job is insane.

Anyone who is due Ofsted 25/26 should be really worried about this.

Assistant head here that got 5/5.

The language comparison made me realise which one was deemed higher in their eyes.

It really is a load of fluff though. I'm guessing a trainee discovered Co-pilot.

I never thought I'd prefer to stick with what we've got.

Yep. That's us.

Also... I make a living from words, and these "descriptors" are bullshit. You shouldn't need a sodding case study to be able to apply them "correctly"

You need to be forwarding that consultation to everyone in your school and getting them to express their opinions in the strongest possible terms.

But, we know from previous government consultations that they don't pay the slightest bit of attention to them, so you're basically doomed.

I got 4/5. I'm a senco, have taught for decades and been through 5 Ofsteds. I got the SEN question wrong!

What a joke. I can see the coloured banners being printed now with 37/40 or whatever the score is.

'New' Ofsted is up there with learning objectives, scrapping levels, the purple polishing pen of pointlessness, APP, thinking hats, Mantle of the Expert and learning styles. What a crock of shite.

I have just spent half an hour filling in the Ofsted consultation though-I hope lots of people do it.

and I think if you saw case studies with the two scenarios in play that would be evident.

Coming back to this, you just know that 'case studies' for the 'exemplary' ranking would become 'What Ofsted are looking for' INSET sessions faster than you can say 'jumping through hoops'.

We had that shit before, when they had to release the "Ofsted Myths" document saying stuff like 'no, we don't actually need to see lengthy conversations with pupils in their books' because it had been commented favourably upon in an inspection report.

I can’t bring myself to read it, but your quote has made me laugh. Years ago they brought out all these new grade descriptors for secondary science, across all these different strands. Accompanied by a booklet of case studies. I remember some guy coming to do training with us saying that by asking kids in science questions about green gas being trapped inside a jar he could assign a level to a kid in five mins 😂

I could assign a level to a kid in one minute without even asking them about a fart in a jar, the real question is 'would someone else assign the same kid the same level'?

And if they wouldn't, that's where the whole thing falls apart.

If you can't even decide which level is the better one, it's a complete non-starter.

I mean... I just assigned that guy a level and I've never met him.

King of the Bullshitters

I just find the whole concept of Ofsted unbelievable. You’ve got a group of ‘experts’ who have been to see schools doing excellent things. They then tell you your school isn’t. But they don’t tell you what the other schools or doing or how you could change things. Not one piece of their valuable knowledge. Instead they leave you to stew on it for a few years and then come and look at you again. How is that useful?

Oh and in 16 years of teaching I’ve never
been observed and only spoken to one Ofsted inspector who asked what I was reading. I didn’t have the heart to tell him I’m quietly confident I’ve read more than he ever will but that I was currently reading ‘Who gives a crap’ about potty training.

I spend 90% of my time at the coal face. Don’t patronise me. Share some innovative teaching ideas.

Oh god those grids

How do these descriptors work in reality, so subjective.

As a parent, I got 0/5. 👏🏻

I understand that teaching professionals know how to decode the questions in order to try and provide the correct answer (bit like doing a personality test as a psychologist).. But what do parents looking at schools see in the end?

It can’t be the matrix of 9 (?) word salad descriptors, with ratings for each?

So worse for schools and teachers who have the additional admin as well as their extremely important day job, and worse for parent who want clear information.

Was this the aim when revisiting Ofsted ratings? It’s hard to think how they could have made it worse for all concerned. Apart from the consultants paid to come up with this rhubarb. And Labour who will somehow claim all schools have improved.

I’d love to know if some of the people that worked on those grids worked on this!

I've been a teacher for 27 years. I got 1/5. Fuck you, Labour, you duplicitous bastards.

I genuinely don't understand why we can't get an equivalent of a www, ebi situation...

I’m an assistant head and got 5/5-probably by luck but also by looking at the difference between the key words.
There also seems to be a bit of a distinction between leaders doing things well themselves and leaders empowering others to do things well.
But yes it’s complete waffle and I agree it looks like AI has produced it.
There was quite a lot of nit picking over the wording in the previous judgements. This will be even worse.

I’ve been teaching for over 30 years and don’t think I’m a complete imbecile. I got 2 out of 5.

I’m genuinely appalled that the new proposals actually seem worse than the old system. Surely just a narrative of things that are good and tips for improvement would be better than this utter gibberish, which will mean nothing to parents and is deeply unhelpful to staff.

Unless you work in regulation, you have no idea of the challenges. Parents want an indication of an excellent schools so they can move to that catchment area, yet don't agree with the process.

What do you suggest as an assessment tool that would meet your needs, provide the school with the guidance they require, and ensure good care/education? How would you do this in a fair, just and equitable way across all schools, all levels? Try it and see just how many areas/parameters, not all obvious, that have to be considered? Then how do you weight each parameter for scoring, because some will be more important than others?

Public required every public service to be assessed and rated. Trouble is, too many places to assess (schools, universities, health-care providers via CQC, etc) and not enough peoplle or time to undertake it all.

So much easier to criticise than be constructive.

What's the alternative? Should there be some sort of review externally of schools or not ?

Has this been designed by someone whose only knowledge of schools was the GCSE system?!

Perhaps they should just grade the poor schools 9-1 in Geography, Maths, Art etc and have done?

I agree with the narrative about things that are good and list of things to improve idea.
More support to improve these things
No need for headline judgements at all.