To try and give an Ofsted analogy, to help people understand better

[Nimbostratus100]

Imagine you run a fleet of taxis in a city called Ofstopolis.

In Ofstopolis, the rules are that MOTs are carried out by a group of Ofstopolis inspectors, without warning, on a random basis, and your taxi firm will get a grade, based on these random MOTs, which will be:

Green - ( you can carry on trading)

Amber - ( you need to make changes immediately to carry on trading)
or Red ( you lose your job and your livelihood and are banned from driving a taxi/ owning a business indefinitely)

You were last inspected 2 years ago, and got graded Green, but you are now approaching that time frame where you know that the Ofstopolis inspectors are going to descend again at some point, and MOT all your taxis.

You keep abreast with all current guidance on how to pass an MOT inspection.

Over the next 5 years, you do not get an MOT inspection, but following the guidance in order to be ready for the MOTs, you do the following:

Paint all the cars red as Ofstopolis inspectors are saying this is the safest way for children to notice cars and not get run over

Paint all the cars green, as another but of research a few months later now says red cars have more accidents

Move all the steering wheels to the left hand drive in preparation for a change of side of road you drive on. Then move them back as that plan is abandoned.

Make sure all drivers have photo ID with their name on, showing at all times

Make sure no driver has their surname showing, as this is now considered a data breach

Make sure every driver is trained never to say anyone else's name

Make sure every driver has the latest insurance documents to hand in their car.

Make sure every driver stops carrying around insurance documents, and instead copies the relevant details into a notebook kept securely in a locked glove compartment

Change every driver to a different insurance company which is currently in favour

change all the tyres to blue tyres forgotten why, but Ofstopolis inspectors are currently insisting on this

Change all tyres to green tyres...err...

Change specification of lock on glove compartment...

make sure all drivers are trained in mindfulness

Make sure all drivers carry proof they are trained in mindfulness

Make sure all drivers are change the proof they are carrying, that they are trained in mindfulness, to a certificate exactly 154 mm square, no more, no less, change the size of all glove compartments to fit this exact certificate, take previous lock off glove compartment and fix it to a strong box in the boot to keep the (recently changed again) insurance documents in there, add a lock of a different specification to the glove box to keep the mindfulness certificate in, change the tyres to yellow, and the windscreen wipers to pink

And a thousand thousand other details of procedure, or whims based on highly suspect research, or politically motivated directives

NONE OF WHICH HAVE ANY BEARING AT ALL ON DRIVING YOUR CUSTOMERS

ALL OF WHICH IMPEDES YOU IN YOUR DAILY TASK OF DRIVING CUSTOMERS

Finally the day arrives and the Ofstopolis inspector descend.

YOu are bumped down from green to red, because a driver is found to have a mindfulness certificate which Is the correct size, and IS kept in the correct size glovebox, and DOES have the correct specification of lock on it.. BUT

he had his surname on it, which is a safeguarding breach, as surnames are not allowed - and he had mistakenly thought that the mindfulness certificates were supposed to have surnames on, to prove who had been trained, so this is a management failure, as the correct procedure had not been explained to the driver, and noone had checked it was being followed.

(And my most recent experience of ofsted, a few months ago, I was reprimanded because a student handed in an exercise book with their surname one)

And I hope this explains why teachers feel ofsted has a hugely negative effect on education

In the recent tragic case, we have seen how a school can go from Outstanding to Inadequate in a single day. It’s time to get rid of these arbitrary labels. They’re virtually worthless and do so much damage.

The system is such that if they decide your safeguarding is not up to scratch, then you are inadequate, regardless of anything else.

The thing I think parents don't realise is that this doesn't mean a good or outstanding school has not had serious safeguarding issues- just that they have dealt with them in an Ofsted approved way. It doesn't necessarily mean your child will be any safer at school.

No, not in a MAT

@Fairislefandango

Yes I am aware of that and had made the same point in my first and 2nd paragraph of this post.

Sounds no worse than an Environmental Health inspection frankly.

So if the school is not in a MAT and it gets an inspection of inadequate or requires improvement, it will be obliged to join a MAT. Usually, although not always, the MAT will want to bring in a new head or leadership team, but regardless, they will very often change the character of a school drastically.

Obviously, I hope this does not happen, but I've seen it happen to a number of schools locally.

It's very, very common for schools that are resisting academisation to be downgraded.

Sounds no worse than an Environmental Health inspection frankly.

And? Unnecessary whataboutery. Nobody's claiming that no other inspections are bad except Ofsted. Feel free to start a thread about Environmental Health inspections if you think anyone will be interested. The point of this thread is presumably to explain what's bad about Ofsted to parents and other interested people who mistakenly assume that Ofsted is a force for good, that it accurately assesses which schools are good and bad, and that it improves children's learning. Not to say "Inspections in other sectors are great, so you all have to feel sorry for teachers, because ours are awful." Is that what you thought the OP meant?

Not at all, I think schools and their leaders should be held accountable and if Ofsted is the way that happens then so be it. Whilst I'm very sorry for the Head and her family in the recent news story, I don't think this should be a reason to abolish the primary way of assessing schools.
I welcome the EHO and all that entails in my industry. It's very stressful when they turn up (unannounced every 18 months or so) but I know that it means that all food service establishments are being checked, and hopefully no one will be seriously ill or die of food poisoning as a result!
I think the recent news story is just another reason for a number of people in the teaching staff to carry on about how terrible teaching is...and once again makes me wonder why they do it.

To be fair, schools and nurseries have environmental health inspections as well, and they are nowhere near as horrific as Ofsted inspections. The inspectors are reasonable for one and are generally not out to destroy your livelihood the way Ofsted inspectors are.

I understand that the results are published in the same way that Ofsted ratings are published, and that a poor inspection can have devastating consequences for a food business. But so long as you can show a decent amount of record keeping and you don’t have rodent droppings under the work units, you are going to pass. If you get a poor rating in the food industry, you generally deserve it. Ofsted inspections are not like this at all.

That’s utterly appalling. WTF was she even doing in school if no allowance could be made for her illness. No wonder the fuckers all fought so hard to refuse my DC a place.

@Thunderpunt, with respect, I am not saying your inspections aren't hard, but children aren't involved in your inspections. Schools are SO complex. I'm a teacher and have been involved with social workers and on a child protection panel. I can't begin to describe the complexity of what goes on. I have a situation going on with a pupil of mine at the moment that is so emotional, I have been in tears. Ofsted on top of this is just about enough to tip me over the edge! Children like this child, though, is why I do the job. I don't do it to be judged by a crappy system which isn't in the best interests of my school or its children (some of whom, last time Ofsted visited, cried as they didn't know the answer to some of the inspectors' questions. They were 8 at the time).

we kept her happily occupied and close to her old friends for many years, she was happy and enjoyed school, it was only ofsted that demanded actual results from her

I think the witchcraft issue comes as part of the Prevent training rather than general safeguarding? If I remember rightly it’s to do with ritualistic abuse, and can be a problem in specific communities.

The taxi firm analogy is really good.

Thank you to all those teachers who are making such a positive difference to our children, despite Ofsted stress.

Ok, that sounds reasonable if she was happy and not under stress. My experience has been huge pressure to perform (or fuck off) placed on the child by schools who are chasing ‘outstanding’. Who cares if they’re outstanding through exclusion; the whole system is broken. Also, I enjoyed your analogy OP.

Some of us leave. There is a recruitment and retention crisis in UK teaching.

@Thunderpunt You are yet another one who has misunderstood the issue here.
We are not asking to "abolish the primary way of assessing schools."
We are asking for changes to be made as to how it is done and reported.

Can I ask what you think of schools who exclude children too much, according to OFSTED?

So, in DDs high school, OFSTED complained they exclude too much. This is part of why the school remains fantastic. They're not messing about with their behaviour expectations. Behave or leave is the crux of it.

Obviously, sickness is a different matter and I know they support poorly children very well at DDs school.

They also take in kids from schools with terrible reputations on managed moves. These moves are highly successful (on the whole) and these kids go on to buy into the school's behaviour ethos.

Hi @Dacadactyl, my off the cuff cynical view is that sure, I bet it’s easier for your DD’s school to be ‘fantastic’ if they ultimately don’t engage with any of the difficult cases. But fantastic for who, and to what end?

If they have an exclusion rate high enough for ofsted to have noticed it as a problem it must be really high.

My more nuanced view would involve a lot of questions about what they mean by ‘behave’ and how well/whether they are meeting or indeed discovering support needs in their pupils or whether they are only using the paradigm of good/bad behaviour rather than needs at all. Some behaviour is ‘bad’. Some stuff that looks like forgetfulness, nonchalance or rudeness is down to poor processing ability etc. that needs to be supported properly to improve behaviour.

I would also be suspicious of what they’re like during the admissions process. I’d hazard a guess they’re doing a lot of work to put off parents and DC who have an EHCP in place that allows the school to see the issues coming, so to speak.

Hm, actually I wonder if a school that excludes ‘too much’ for ofsted is just being too clumsy about their discrimination; not playing the game well enough. Not ‘succeeding’ well enough at putting off potential families, or at causing them to withdraw before they’ve been officially excluded. Now that’s cynical.

@AmericasfavoritefightingFrenchman OK fair points. However, OFSTED also state that they have higher than the national average of children with SEN at the school.

In terms of pupils with an EHCP, this year they are slap bang in the middle of high schools in the Borough, when it comes to allocating places. So half the schools in the Borough have more kids going to them with EHCPs and half have less.

Do you think that behavioural issues in schools are part of the reason teachers are leaving too?

Surely a school with a robust behavioural policy is better for teachers too?

I think having a good behavioural policy is really important. I don’t think good is the same as punitive or ‘robust’ though- I think good behaviour policies have more to do with being clear and straightforward to understand, functioning in a context where the pupils are encouraged and helped to have self-respect and pride, where they are able to learn from mistakes and ablr to want to do their best, and where pupils with neurodiversity or disability are supported, not penalised simply for being.

@AmericasfavoritefightingFrenchman thanks for answering. According to my DD the school are good at supporting children with SEN. Those who have been excluded have been so because they brought drugs to school, apparently. There are very few instances where children are permanently excluded. The school does however use fixed term exclusions, for perhaps fighting or something of that nature.

I agree. There is a world of difference between these inspections they can't really be compared at all.

@Multiblue ok