Are your children’s vaccines up to date?

Set a reminder

Please or to access all these features

Primary education

Join our Primary Education forum to discuss starting school and helping your child get the most out of it.

Devastating OFSTED. Should I change schools?

105 replies

jlt23 · 01/05/2012 21:32

My 4yr old is in reception class at school. We have just had notification of the OFSTED report which is absolutely awful. The school has gone from one of the best in the area to the absolute worst. Completely inadequate across the board including health, safety and welfare. It states that the decline of the school is set to continue and they have been placed on special measures. Would I be to hasty in looking to move her to another school? Would love to hear what other Mums would do.

OP posts:
Are your children’s vaccines up to date?
SchoolsNightmare · 02/05/2012 18:01

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

ragged · 02/05/2012 18:25

Worst Ofsted report I ever read was 8yrs ago, for a local school that is now considered the bee's knees, pupils literally being turned away. The turn around in reputation only took about 3 yrs, iirc.

auntevil · 02/05/2012 18:32

Our school went from good to special measures in 3 years - because of specific management issues. Special measures was the best thing ever. Shed loads of £ and support. Teachers feeling more valued, improved management etc.
Some parents moved their children straight away to another local school.
Ours came out of special measures early, now some of these parents want to come back, as they realise that this is actually their preferred school. Some classes still had places, some didn't. Its a risk. The grass isn't always greener.

fluffywhitekittens · 02/05/2012 18:56

The change in Ofsted criteria has led our local primary school being put under notice to improve because it was satisfactory :(

jlt23 · 02/05/2012 19:17

seeker there have been no changes that come to mind. Have you seen the report?
Thinking of moving my daughter was probably a knee jerk reaction, saying that, I will still wait to see what measures are being put in place. Thanks everybody for the advice. I'm new to all this, lol

OP posts:
dancingwithchocolate · 02/05/2012 19:30

Does anyone know how long it takes from an ofsted inspection to produce an ofsted report (we had one at the end of last term).

wheredidiputit · 02/05/2012 19:44

Dancing we had ours around the 20th of march and our report came out last friday.

As for the 'new' framework its estimated at least 25% of good school will go into special measures, and even more when the 'new new' framework comes in September.

daisymaybe · 02/05/2012 20:01

OFSTED are bananas at the moment, all over the place. A school I work with had a recent terrifying close call. See what they say in the meeting but if you like the school then stick it out.

specialmeasures · 02/05/2012 23:03

Hi jit23 - you asked last night what we're going to do in similar situation (not same school!)

At the moment my thinking is we'll stick. Like you we've had a good (OFSTED agree!) reception and DS is very well settled. Like you the problems start in yr 1 but I was very reassured at the meeting that there is clear action plan to tackle that and it is already in place. In many ways the SM is a great thing for our year as they get all the attention thrown at them. I think our school has a lot going for it - very warm caring atmosphere, sense of community amongst the children, good behaviour and support from parents and some years with very good teaching - the LEA person said she'd never been to a school in special measures that had so much good teaching within it (obviously she was trying to reassure us but I think there is something in it). The school's problems are real but quite specific and I think things are in place to deal with it.

I have thought about moving but not in any serious way. I worry that if we move there is no guarantee that the same thing won't happen again. As many have said, it is so difficult to evaluate a school even when your child is there and I am worried about unsettling DS, going to a new school on the back of reputation/OFSTED and then discovering problems. Our school was very good, OFSTED good, great reputation, well over 90% getting level 4 in SATS (and well over 50% getting level 5) etc till three years ago and then there were some key people who left or went on leave and problems started. What's to stop that happening anywhere...

Having said that I'm keeping it under review and if the pace of change slows or there is not a decent head in place within a reasonable time then we would look to move.

That's all very specific to us but I hope it is useful

specialmeasures · 02/05/2012 23:05

wheredidiputit- our report took 2 months. I think that is on the long side. Apparently there is quite a process to go through for a SM report and there are a lot of them at the moment so the process is taking longer...

Rosebud05 · 02/05/2012 23:22

As for the 'new' framework its estimated at least 25% of good school will go into special measures, and even more when the 'new new' framework comes in September.

Is this true? No point in thinking about moving your child then, if every other school is going to be in special measures by the end of the year.

And all miraculously out again in time for the next election, I expect!

Aerobreaking · 02/05/2012 23:51

Thoroughly agree with what other people say about OFSTED reports being all over the place at the moment, a lot of school's are getting bad reports and certainly in our area there seems to be no doubt that it is to pave the way for academies. We are getting our first primary academy next september (rural s.e. england) and I'm sure there is going to be plenty more in the next few years. Frightening stuff.

And to be completely honest, I'm not sure just how much use OFSTED reports are. I would focus on your child. Is she happy? Is she fulfilled? Is she performing how you think she should be? Because in the end, that is all that matters. Of course with changes of children and changes of staff and the fifty thousand billion changes of policy and direction from goverment and Mr Gove that they introduce every other week, then it becomes inevitable that schools are embroilled in politics. The goalposts shift all the time, and not always in the direction of better schools I believe. An inspection is just a biopsy; and in the same way a skin biopsy from one part of the body may not reveal the infected lesion that sits elsewhere on the skin, a 3 or 5 day visit can in no way (in my opinion) reflect the life of a school. It can give you a snapshop, yes - it can tell you whether that Maths lession on the Monday morning was satisfactory or otherwise - but it can't tell you the nuances - whether it was windy that morning and all the kids were hyped up, or whether someone was upset that their guinea pig had died that weekend, or whether someone else was acting out because they were angry that their Dad hadn't turned up for contact that weekend. I'm not saying that a bad OFSTED doesn't mean you have no cause for concern, but there are more to schools than OFSTED. Your daughter doesn't care what grades the school was given. She cares if she feels safe, if she feels loved, if she feels inspired by what goes on around her. OFSTED can't give you that, it tries, but nothing so 2-dimensional can encapsulate it. The way I see it, is that a good school will make a child into one who is confident and proud within themselves, who is happy to get stuck in and learn new things, and who is excited by the world around them. Once all that is in place, they learn to read, write and count along the way. If your child has that, then I wouldn't worry. You go to a new school, in 18 months time they might have an OFSTED, in which time the staff has changed somewhat, the report framework will definitely have changed, and the political agenda has shifted again. Then it gets a bad OFSTED and we are back to square one. These reports make me mad, especially for primary. If you're happy, and she's happy, and there is some learning going on, then you've got the recipe for success.

And one last thing (promise!), the health and safety concerns may or may not be an issue. For instance, the most lovely school I know recently got dragged down hugely in their OFSTED due to the fact that the school is not locked/secure at all times. Now, whilst I know that child abduction may happen, it is incredibly rare, and the gate that is kept open by the nearby farmer who has a field that backs onto the school playing field, and often opens it to allow some of his animals onto the field who the children adore and get to pet and look after, brings a far greater benefit than the miniscule safety risk (I do realise that this may be different for a school that is not a small, rural village school where everybody knows each other).

Rosebud05 · 03/05/2012 08:37

I agree 100% with aerobraking.

The eminent educationalist Dylan Williams wrote a piece in TES a few months ago saying that you can't predict the outcome of a premiership match by watching just 20 minutes of the first half, so why try to pretend that an Ofsted appellation like 'Satisfactory' means anything substantial?

The important part of teaching is the outcome ie happy, well-rounded children who feel cared for an part of a community and progress well academically. It matters not a jot if Ofsted judge a teacher to be 'outstanding' for 20 minutes if he/she doesn't achieve these things over the course of a year.

wheredidiputit · 03/05/2012 13:50

"Rosebud05 Wed 02-May-12 23:22:56

As for the 'new' framework its estimated at least 25% of good school will go into special measures, and even more when the 'new new' framework comes in September.

Is this true? No point in thinking about moving your child then, if every other school is going to be in special measures by the end of the year.

And all miraculously out again in time for the next election, I expect!"

Afraid so as from September schools will be either outstanding/good or in some form of 'special measures'. You will only be able to get a 'good' if all your teachers can be judged as good. There will be no leaway for children who come into below the national average, even if they are making the 2 point or more progress that is expected of them.

Piggychunk · 03/05/2012 14:07

My dH was visited by ofsted very recently and he was almost in tears through stress. My husband is so strong and usually can't be phased.
The pressure from ofsted is insane at the moment.

I agree totally with what Aero said and she wrote it far better than I ever could.

seeker · 03/05/2012 14:35

Ironic isn't? There are always threads about low standards in primary schools, and bright kids being allowed to coast and all the rest.

Then when somebody does something to tighten up standards that's not right either.

Disclaimer. Those are not necessarily my views. But I do see the irony.

Rosebud05 · 03/05/2012 15:05

But the new framework isn't 'tightening up standards'. It's continually moving and adjusting goal posts to fulfil a political agenda.

wheredidiputit · 03/05/2012 15:44

There is nothing wrong with tightening standards. The probelm comes from having national average which can not be met by a lot of schools as the standard of pupils coming into school for example not speaking english, having little or no parental imput. Or mobility where schools have children moving in and out of school constantly.

These children are coming in at a much lower levels, and although they make very good if not excellant progress far more then the 2 levels in a KS then they don't meet the 'national average' so you as school/teacher are failing them according to ofsted.

OrmIrian · 03/05/2012 15:50

How do they know that things are set to decline further? That is quite odd.

specialmeasures · 03/05/2012 16:26

seeker - I don't think that people are necessarily complaining about being put into special measures per se. Certainly at our school, once it was clear from the delay that things weren't going well, people were hoping it went into special measures. To have just managed to scrape out of the category would have been much worse. I have no problem with an approach that tries to catch coasting schools early. I also don't think that OFSTED were wrong in our case from all I've heard. They don't just look at lessons, it was clear from the kids books that they came out of reception doing really well and then didn't make much progress for 2 years. I think there are two core concerns (from a parent's point of view):

  1. If there is just one category 'special measures' for schools that aren't doing well then it's very difficult to judge how badly your school is really doing. This is particularly the case when the reports look like cut and paste jobs from the OFSTED criteria. This is made worse by the number of schools going into special measures. Of my nearest schools 2 have just gone in, one has come out, a couple of the others are changing heads etc so who knows what will happen. How do you as a parent know how to judge?
  1. The link between SM and academy status is just incomprehensible. I can see (but not necessarily agree wtih) the argument that a good school might benefit from more freedom as an academy. I can see (same caveat) the argument that a particular school in sm might have a close connection with a school that's doing well and becoming an academy might help. I cannot see even the smallest argument in favour of requiring ALL schools in sm to become academies (and that seems to be the policy). That just seems to put an extra dimension of insecurity and work on a school that's already in crisis. It just seems to be a way of achieving a contentious political policy by imposing it on schools that are not in a position to resist. This is particularly the case for schools going through it now as, apparently, the DofE haven't got a clue what they are doing and the answer to every detailed Q (according to our school) is 'we don't know'. It just seems a mess. Given that then it's difficult to trust the idea that the new OFSTED criteria necessarily has the children's interests at heart. It looks like a way of catching lots of schools and creating a bunch of academies. Catching these schools early also means they are quick to turn around so will look like a success for the academy programme (so justifying the next round). I can't see how any of this (forced academy status) puts the children's education first.
specialmeasures · 03/05/2012 16:28

wheredidiputit - do you have a source for the 25% figure?

wheredidiputit · 03/05/2012 17:08

Thats just a rough estimate using raiseonline, which is what ofsted use to compile their initial data.

Was at a governor training session a couple of weeks ago about data and the 25% was figure quoted by the LA who were doing the course.

nlondondad · 03/05/2012 17:13

You also have to bear in mind a crucial difference between a sponsored and a non sponsored Academy. It comes down to who is in charge.

A school that is rated good, can choose, if it wishes, to become an Academy. It does not have to find a sponsor, as it were it sponsors itself. Most schools that have chosen to become an Academy who have given a public reason for doing so have cited the improved funding, at least initially. (They are also mostly secondary schools; they appear to feel that becoming an Academy by choice does not change the way they already operate- much - but they get a bit of extra money in principle to compensate for the loss of organizational support from the LEA so why not?) The only primary school that I know of that became an Academy did so because of a disagreement with the LEA over an issue important to them. Converting by choice meant the disagreement with the LEA became a dead issue. A voluntary converting Academy gets to choose how its Governing Body is made up; they mostly just copy over their current structure complete with a large, and influential block, of elected parent governors.

A School that is put into Special Measures is now required to become a sponsored Academy. And of course this is irreversible; when the school comes out of special measures it will still be a sponsored Academy. In a sponsored Academy two rules apply to the Governing Body. A majority of it MUST be appointed by the sponsor and parents get one member of the GB only, and they may be appointed and not elected.

The Governing Body (as is usual in state schools) appoints the Head and other staff. It is also the only body that can remove a Head. So the sponsor decides who the head and the staff are. Parental influence will only exist to the extent the sponsor believes it should. (The GB of an Academy because it has no relationship with the LEA has also got greater powers than a "community school" and again in a sponsored Academy the sponsor decides how this are to be used.)

The education system is being transformed in a direction which diminishes the role of parents, introduces a new group with considerable power and influence (The Sponsors) increases the power of the Secretary of State and virtually abolishes Local Education Authorities.

Some of you will think this a bad thing, some a good thing, but it is a thing anyway.

Aerobreaking · 03/05/2012 17:20

Totally agree with wheredidiputit plus we can't forget the fact that the powers that be who set the 'targets' don't actually appear to understand statistics. They seem unable to understand what a national average actually means. By definition, whichever type of average they use to calculate the figure, there will be some children who do not reach the expected level of an average pupil. Otherwise it wouldn't be an average. And then they blame the teachers when not all of the children make it to their targets.

We once had the ridiculous situation where our targets for 4b KS2 sats was 84%. We got 80%. All hell broke loose; meetings, governers, letters to parents, etc etc. Until we pointed out that as there were actually only 10 children in year 6, of which 2 had SEN which meant they were always going to struggle to reach level 4b, we hadn't actually done too badly.

specialmeasures · 03/05/2012 17:33

Thanks for that figure wheredidiputit