Ofsted ‘not fit for purpose’ and ‘toxic’

[homeeddingwitch]

New inquiry. What does everyone think of this?
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/national-education-union-children-lord-berkshire-newbury-b2450223.html

I personally think it’s accurate (ex primary teacher).

Ofsted will stonewall it and things will continue exactly as they are.

Well known to anyone who works in a school, has ever worked in a school, or is close to anyone who has worked in a school, but, sadly nothing will come of it.

Lets thing about the MPs and other bigwigs in Parliament who have been found guilty of bullying and appalling behaviour in the last couple of years by independent enquiries, and how they were just allowed to carry on.

An independent inspection regime in some form is necessary imo. The idea that schools can inspect themselves is unworkable. Ofsted have a valuable role in identifying where there is significant mismanagement, safeguarding issues and behavioural problems.

However it is possible to inspect in a more supportive and constructive manner. Too many inspectors fail to consider the wider context schools are operating in: budget constraints, recruitment issues. A good example is attendance. It has become very very difficult for schools to maintain pre-covid attendance levels because many parents simply do not feel full attendance is something to aspire to and are far readier to keep children at home when mildly unwell. But Ofsted don't recognise that society has changed and breeze in with their heavy, tone-deaf judgement. They need reform.

We were told in 2021 that there were no excuses for the impact of Covid. This came directly from the government.

I agree they need reform. There is a place for supportive and progressive work with outside agencies but they need to be current school staff (not just head teachers) and need to be real about what schools are facing in terms of funding, SEND support, behaviour and attendance.

However it is possible to inspect in a more supportive and constructive manner.

I agree-there has got to be a better way. I think setting out different frameworks for primary and secondary would be a good place to start. It’s probably reasonable that a ‘Deep Dive’ into a particular subject wouldn’t be so unreasonable for a secondary school Head of Department who is likely to have a degree in it, teach it all day every day and has a good understanding of the subject progression.

For a primary school Deep Dive it’s completely different. Primary teachers get a subject landed on them usually with no choice (it’s often whatever the teacher you’re replacing was the coordinator of) and you will probably get given a different subject the next year (and the next), so you probably have no qualification in it, have no time out of class to monitor it/observe it and if you teach in early years, might get given a subject you don’t even teach. The Deep Dive process is the same though.

In smaller schools, it’s even worse, you might easily end up being the maths, phonics, history and PE lead as well as safeguarding lead and senco-so the Ofsted inspectors will want to grill you in meeting after meeting all day about different things. This is not only a massive load of work for those few, but also a really brutal experience.

On the Facebook group-Exit the classroom and Thrive-which now has thousands of members-the stress of Ofsted is posted about time and time again as the reason people are just quitting a job that they really loved.

What happens in other countries? I think that Labour would do well to start looking at countries that do inspections well and begin rethinking our whole inspection regime.

but they need to be current school staff (not just head teachers)

I couldn’t agree with this more. Not ex-heads, not academy CEOs, not the head of Michaela, not a room of head teachers, but a selection of actual school staff.

There's way too many people who either have never taught or don't teach anymore making decisions about schools.

All good points from posters.

Such a sad situation for teachers/schools.

We already have to produce School development plans which include measurable targets. We also (in Wales) have a government school improvement advisor whose job it is to come and view the school and see how we are doing and provide a report and points for improvement and this happens far more regularly than inspections - we are currently way overdue as we had our last one over 8 years ago.

I've often said that this is a better model. Let schools identify their targets. Have the gov school improvement people come and do their bit, and add in a layer where they are moderated to ensure it is a worthwhile and valuable thing.

Maybe we should make a list of reforms we’d like to see to start the next Ed sec off!

I’d definitely start with separate frameworks for each phase.

Apparently no other countries have such a stringent inspection regime. And there is no evidence that it raises standards

I blame Ofsted amongst others for the problems with gender identity ideology in schools. The ideology is anti-safeguarding anti-scientific and politically partisan. Ofsted should have picked up on all of these aspects.

They didn’t and still aren’t - probably because they were signed up to Stonewall.

#SafeguardingFail as Safe Schools Alliance would say.

I think there should be some form of external checks (20 years teaching, 3 inspections so far).

But I think areas like safeguarding should be pass/fail with immediate support if not satisfactory. Then other areas like curriculum etc should be target based - what is going well, what to improve on.

For our prof development our observations are no longer graded which is a vast improvement.

Well I totally agree. They made a right mess of our last inspection. In fact they have had to apologies to us and we should be having a reinspection, but can't now duebto RAAC (all schools on the RAAC list have been told no Ofsted inspections will be taking place). So now we are in limbo without a report.

Excuse my ignorance, I'm not a teacher. But aren't they valuable in the same respect as cqc?

You’d think so wouldn’t you.

On paper it seems reasonable to have a body to inspect schools but unless you have worked in schools or live with someone who has, you wouldn’t know just how accurate this report is.

Read all the posts above and read the actual report which is online and you’ll get a good idea of why they should be fit for purpose but aren’t.

Also have a look at what triggered this report. The suicide of the Head Teacher in Reading 😞

I think ofsted, or any future inspection body, be solely focused on safeguarding. That is essential really. But judging departments, schemes of work, lesson plans etc? School results are published, progress 8, attainment 8 etc, surely that will tell if the education is at a good enough standard. Judging schools on pupil attendance is ridiculous - if they get the results and student attainment is positive then does it really matter if the school only has 92% attendance? Big picture

Ofsted grades feel meaningless - an 'outstanding' school near us is dreadful: terrible behaviour, bullying, violence all rife. Whereas another nearby school graded RI is very nurturing and calm. It feels like such a huge, immovable institution that will never admit any need for change - and the former head of Ofsted has been in the news this week complaining about parents, with no recognition of Ofsted's own failings. Trying to keep up with Ofsted demands takes up enormous resources in schools that could be put to much better use. I agree we need some inspection and oversight, but as it stands I'd agree Ofsted isn't fit for purpose and does more harm than good.

I disagree. In my area there are some fantastic achools, which Ofsted recognises, and there are a couple of appalling schools which ruin children’s life chances and where children are not physically safe, and Ofsted is the only organisation interested in what those schools are doing wrong and in trying to improve them.

What I do think should change is how public Ofsted’s critiques of schools are. School funding can be changed and headteachers changed or told to improve without basically publishing the head’s employment appraisal online for all to see. It’s the public humiliation that’s the problem, not the inspections.

Has anyone got any views on the structure of Ofsted? The UK appears to be wedded to the idea that every public body must have a Chair and NEDs, and, running on a parallel track, a Chief Exec/Chief Inspector and the Directors/Senior Execs. I once sat as a NED on the board of an NHS Trust and it was an absolute shitshow of pre-determined decisions from the Directors being brought to meetings for the rubber stamp. If the Chair isn't strong, you can kiss goodbye to good, creative governance.

Successive Chairs of Ofsted allowed the successive safeguarding failings that led to the circumstances we have now, where Stonewall beliefs became more important than the actual safeguarding and welfare of children and staff, and where Ofsted doesn't appear to understand its own inspection priorities or the rationales behind them.

It mirrors the story of NHS Trusts and the Civil Service/politicians, which is the story of people losing their grip way.

The basic problem with OfSted is that it does not result in school improvement. They tick their boxes, make their judgements and bugger off over the horizon leaving chaos and disillusionment in their wake.

The old system of schools inspectors was coupled with action - help offered to schools that were struggling.

Pretty much what @Mischance said.

I worked in a Fresh Start school in the early 2000s. The number of inspections, that made absolutely no difference, was ridiculous, including one, where an inspector berated me in public, with students and staff passing by, for something that wasn’t my fault and was a direct result of the inspectors need for a particular space.

It scarred me, was completely unwarranted and unprofessional.

This happened locally:
https://www.cambridgeindependent.co.uk/news/amp/ofsted-to-reinspect-cambridge-primary-after-legal-challenge-9317828/

6 years ago, our perfectly fine primary school got put into an IEB situation over safeguarding. It felt unexpected and contrived. The IEB steered the school toward becoming part of an academy trust. Local councillors got involved to let parents know they could vote becoming part of an academy trust down. Parents did so.

A colleague is in exact same situation with her local primary school. Another school in same local authority same but did become academy trust.

Upshot, very little local support for Ofsted. A lot of mistrust.

and Ofsted is the only organisation interested in what those schools are doing wrong and in trying to improve them.

If only OFSTED did ANYTHING about trying to improve schools. Then that could be helpful and supportive. However, they don't.

HMI used to. They came in to support HTs when schools needed support. OFSTED don't. They go through their ticklist, make all staff feel like shit, and bugger off. There is NO help and NO support.

Oh, and they come in with an agenda, not an open mind.

Ruth Perry's inquest is taking place this week.
https://schoolsweek.co.uk/ruth-perry-felt-inadequate-grade-was-end-of-career-husband-says/