The problem with Ofsted

[Postapocalypticcowgirl]

So, I used to work at a school which was graded "inadequate" due to safeguarding issues. On the previous report, the school was graded "good" for everything except leadership and management, which was "inadequate", due to the safeguarding issues, and so the whole school was given an inadequate grade. The report before that, which was over ten years ago, had everything as "good".

School gets taken over by a MAT, lots of staff leave, school struggles to recruit replacement staff (combination of high cost of living, awkward location, general shortages in the wider area/country, and the inadequate tag probably doesn't help). In the years following the inspection, there was pretty high staff turnover, including the leadership team- things became pretty unsettled and this had a knock on impact on behaviour and results.

So, the school has now been reinspected. It's got RI in every single category. So that means things like quality of education, behaviour and attitudes, sixth form, and so on, have all gone from "good" to "RI". Assuming that's true (and having read the whole report, I think their judgement in this case is actually quite fair and balanced and reflective of the situation in the school when I left it- which was before the inspection). This means that most things which impact the day to day experience of students have got worse in Ofsted's eyes in the last couple of years (unfortunately, I would agree with this). They noted academic outcomes had got worse since the last inspection.

Yet, the current head, and the MAT have been able to sell this to the local press as a success- that they're improving the school, even though it's a long journey, things are getting better. And unfortunately, the local paper hasn't dug into their narrative in any way, and they're billing this as a big success for the school. I think, unfortunately, a lot of parents will just look at the grades and think "oh, things are getting better".

Obviously parents also talk, and I do think many parents are aware of the staffing shortages, etc, though .

Anyway, I think this highlights two major problems with Ofsted- one: That giving a school an "inadequate" grade for just one factor can actually start a downwards spiral. Two: That changing grades can still mask major issues within a school.

I'm not sure there's a point to this thread, except that I just was sent the article in the local paper by a friend saying "isn't it nice X school is doing better?" - except X school isn't doing better...

The grade means that people don't bother with the full report- even if each section was graded, rather than the school overall, I think that would still be an improvement.

<not a teacher>
Would it be better to just stick with ratings in the 4(?) different areas and not have one overall grade?

At work we had Project reports that had on report on Timescale, Budget & Risk level of our projects, because if you only had to report on one then that is what would be focused on to the detriment of others.

Personally, I'd prefer something closer to the Irish system, where schools get reports which detail areas for improvement and strengths, but no grades at all are given.

I think this would encourage parents to read reports in full, and gain a full picture of what's happening in the school.

But it's also about the impact an inadequate grade on a school- the school was providing a good education for the vast majority of students- and now it's very much not. Being forced to join an academy trust has destroyed the school in many ways- but somehow the trust is spinning this as a win and will no doubt use this to justify actions that have been really damaging to the school.

My biggest concern is that on the back of this, the trust will be allowed to take on other "failing" schools in order to "improve" them.

I find that circumstances often have to get worse before they get better. I would put money on the school coming out 'good' in the next inspection. I feel sorrow for the staff who will be involved in the mission though! The best school I ever worked in was in special measures.

The grade means that people don't bother with the full report- even if each section was graded, rather than the school overall, I think that would still be an improvement.

This is a good point because all other successes then mean nothing.

The ones I feel most sorry for are the kids- the situation with staff turnover has been ongoing at this school for at least 18 months- it's actually cited as an issue in the Ofsted report. Because, in part, of factors outside of the school's control, it's not an easy place to recruit to. If they could get onto a good footing in terms of staffing, I do think the school would start to recover, but I think it's got into that vicious cycle of not enough staff/can't retain staff/can't recruit/not enough staff, which is hard to break out of.

I really hope, for the sake of the kids, things improve and they get some stability in terms of staffing. I don't think results etc will really improve until they do, and I don't think they'll get "good" unless that happens (except, possibly, for political reasons).

Obviously, I do feel sorry for the staff who are still there and really want to improve the school- most are lovely, committed people who really care and that's why they haven't left yet. But if things carry on as they are, I do think more will leave if something suitable comes up. And they won't be easy to replace.

I do think the MAT needs to do something about retaining existing staff, urgently- as I say, a lot of the factors around recruitment are outside of their control, so they need to acknowledge this, and prioritise not losing any more staff!

On another note, an ex-HMI admits it's impossible for small primaries to get outstanding: https://www.linkedin.com/posts/adrian-gray-23642442_ofsted-inspection-leadership-activity-7051843820904144896-kVOz?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop

I agree - get rid of the grades. Just a report which highlights what the school is doing well, and what they should look to improve on. Parents can read the report and draw their own conclusions.

As for safeguarding or other safety concerns, I'm unconvinced they should get as far as the report; what needs to happen is that things get fixed, fast, and that ought to be on a timescale that means it's done by the time the report comes out. I'm envisaging that the school gets told "sort out this paperwork, get these specific staff on a course, get someone in to do whole-staff inset, within the next six weeks". The report can then say just "some safeguarding issues were apparent but have now been dealt with". If they don't get the required things done within six weeks, the report is held up until they have. (Probably sensible for there to be a repeat visit after six months or a year to double-check.)

The point of Ofsted ought to be to improve schools, not threaten them.