Failing schools/Requiring Improvement

[thatdearoctopus]

Would welcome views from fellow teachers on the subject of schools which have either failed an Ofsted inspection, or been deemed as Requiring Improvement.

We have anecdotal evidence of a worrying number of local schools who were perceived to be doing well, and then have ended up in the above categories due, according to them, technicalities. These technicalities usually involve Safeguarding issues. So, for instance, if anyone on the staff does not have 2 references to their name on file, then that's an instant down-grading.

Are these urban myths? Or is there some truth to it all? And if so, do you believe there's any political agenda underlying it? My colleagues and I are all feeling even more angsty and unsettled now.

We were good with elements of outstanding. New head, not quite on top of safeguarding and now we are on our way to bring an academy. What's more, our teaching was good, but because safeguarding means an automatic 4 for leadership, teaching has to follow suit. Angry doesn't cover it. It was clearly political from the minute the men in black walked in the door.

We have an enormous academy chain just waiting to snap us up. They've also got contracts for free schools round here too. Soon there won't be a choice for parents at all.

I didn't know those schools had both applied for fences previously though. It's all bizzare. And I don't understand why this (highly successful!) corner of the county is being targeted. There's still a lot of schools waiting for ofsted too.

@phlebasconsidered - one of the local schools got a 4 for their post 16 education. The write up is all positive. The grading is solely because of the safeguarding.

Now don't get me wrong, safeguarding is obviously essential, but the untrained eye would assume that was a failing sixth form and it's really not.

@Truth hehehe probably not... but let's not ask too many questions ;)

Please don't misunderstand me if I ask what the current obsession is with Safeguarding?

Newish rule. It's not just the teacher but their 'household' who have to have no criminal convictions.

'household' is subject to interpretation. Young teacher sharing a house with others? Live in gardner? Person who walks your dog?

There was a teacher on MN bricking it that her teenage son was about to get a conviction.

Sadly, there is a lot of truth in that. Some school might fail on some paperwork while there are some vile schools, where senior managers are good at PR and the school doesn't fail despite being so awful that I wouldn't wish working or studying there on my worst enemy.

There is an Ofsted guidance March 17 issue 9 relating to single central records clear that it is whatever the guidance was at the time of appoint if before 2002, our LA guidance has said best practise to get two with Specific questions about safeguarding if not possible to get additional ref and or no interview notes do a risk asses. Seems to be latest thing for Ofsted to bat schools with and I say that with every due regard for the importance of safeguarding.

We were inspected last week and the inspector checked some random personnel files. She expected to see 2 references and also a record of the questions asked at interview where she made sure that there was a safeguarding question asked. She also wanted to check that the applicant had signed their application form.