UKH

BBC News - Ofsted: Head teacher's family blames death on school inspection pressure

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-berkshire-65021154

It isn't just the heads who commit suicide, it's also the heads and teachers who have their peace of mind completely trashed. I knew many. 

Why do we let them do this? In all areas of public work Britain chooses an adversarial mode. Why can't we choose a collaborative model in education, in law in policing that aims for best outcomes? The only thing we can't think to do is kick, kick, kick.

Summing up a multi day inspection by multiple inspectors with one word - "Inadequate" is clearly ludicrous, and cruel. 

I remember when grade 3 was described as "Satisfactory" rather than the current "Requires improvement" A Tory minister, I think it was Michael Howard when interviewed on Today on R4 stated: "X% of schools were only rated as as Satisfactory and this is just not Satisfactory" 

I despaired.

I experienced that twice, personally I'd say the staff on those occasions were on average more hard working, professional, inspirationaletc. than on the four occasions the school I was working in got outstanding. Simply doing away with those grades would be a massive improvement. Perhaps it would result in some parents actually reading the reports. The two schools I worked in most recently have both been inspected since covid. It probably won't surprise you that both reports highlight significant improvements since I've left, but they have both been downgraded from good to RI.

Mrs J taught for nearly thirty years, over twenty as Head of Science, she hasn't been in a school for over 4 years, but I won't talk about this thread with her, because of the upset it will cause. 

Was that the one where they said that only 50% of schools being above average wasn't good enough? 

I can't wait to get my hands on the next Ofsted inspector who visits. I'm done with being subservient. 

Back when I was teaching, we had an Ofsted report which refered to the children "having supervised internet access in the library". The only problem with that was the school didn't have an internet connection in those days! No idea what the inspector thought he was seeing!

What's the plan? 

Honesty.

I can bob down and hold your jacket for you. And egg you on. 

I’ve sorted your plan:

Step one: greet the inspector with a firm handshake, but have one of those joke electric shockers in your hand.

Step two: announce ‘I think that requires improvement’

Step three: plant a custard pie in the inspectors face

Step four: announce ‘that was outstanding’

I'll get one of those squirty flowers too  

It’s a multi day inspection that has found a school inadequate.

What term would you prefer was used?

Step five: "tell me about your teaching experience.. "

I kind of struggle to know the point of Ofsted.

This tragedy highlights what a distraction blunt bureaucracy exerts onto those who give themselves to educating our youngsters 

Don't get me wrong. There should be an inspection regime and schools should be monitored and challenged. More importantly, they should be supported to improve 

At present, inspections are punitive only.

There is only challenge, no support and constant moving goal posts.

I have seen many of my colleagues crushed by an inspection. Pointlessly. Good people doing their best for the children reduced to shells of themselves. 

Agreed. 

a long term, ie some sentences, a paragraph? at least as much effort as is required for an A level essay?

I'd like the inspectors to go into schools and demonstrate how the job could be done better.

In retirement I used to observe student teachers in lessons.  This convinced me of what I already knew: watching is far easier than doing. Also, that teachers are working their hearts out.

I was lucky to be inspected by human beings. If I'd been unlucky it would have finished me.

Ofsted has now been in existence for around thirty years and during that time has repeatedly failed to come up with any worthwhile evidence that inspection leads to improved standards, as measured in the hard currency of a school's exam results. It has proved no more effective than the old system of LEA inspection and support, yet has come at an exorbitant cost in term of staff stress. By any measure it's not fit for purpose and never has been. Woodhead, Wilshaw, Spielman and whoever else has helmed this shipwreck of an organisation should hang their heads in shame.

Did you read the OFSTED report?

Do many people, beyond school leaders and OFSTED inspectors? Most teachers and parents are busy, isn't the point of a summary to save people time. A side, possibly two, of A4 outlining what the school does well and some areas for development would IMO be useful. One of two words aren't. 

I quite like the idea of Inspectors doing a few days supply teaching in a school and then having a meeting with Leadership at the end. It's sort of what I've done for the last few years. I'd say I getter a better insight into the school than inspectors do and even if my feedback is deemed rubbish and ignored at least I've done something useful to the school for a few days  

Sort of, if you don't care about the accuracy and  impact of your observations. How many leaders and inspectors follow up and review their impact. I tried to and came to the conclusion that I'm an ineffective observer. 

I come across very few who aren't. 

The current system is a bit of a lottery. There are many good inspectors, but IME they were often frustrated by the system as well, many around their hands being tied as to what judgement they could give.

I think part of the problem is that some staff in schools graded outstanding and to a lesser extent good believe they are better and more hardworking. Some might be, but most are just luckier. 

I read it for my daughters High Schoolafter it was moved down to inadequate from outstanding.

It was sobering reading  at the time and also correct.

But I do not think that is the issue. 

It’s how the phrases are then used by others that is the issue. for example estate agents sell properties in an area based on outstanding schools. So it creates stupid and unrealistic pressure on heads from communities. 
 

It’s time another measure was produced.  But inspecting schools is clearly required. 

Or in wealthy areas which do not have the social issues. 

If you are determined to distill a report into a single word, there needs to be a few more words to choose from.

The reduction could be much better distilled into marks out of ten for limited number of categories e.g. Pupil engagement / Pupil progress (based on the concept of "added value") / Pastoral care / Behavioural standards etc

Yep, I should have said rigged lottery rather than just lottery. In the days when tables were about attainment rather than progress all the 160+ selective schools were good or outstanding. I knew staff who thought they were oudtanding even though there results were the worst of any grammar school in England. 

The school was graded in five different categories.

Only one was inadequate, the rest were good.

Unfortunately the inadequate bit was down to the leadership and in particular their failure to safeguard pupils.

‘ Leaders have not ensured that there is always appropriate supervision during breaktimes. This means that pupils are potentially at risk of harm. Leaders need to urgently address these significant weaknesses in safeguarding arrangements.’

Seems like a reasonable report to me.

The whole OFSTED report for the school in question is little more than two sides of A4 long. 

They aren't really very long. The last one for where I work is 8 pages, but all the real content is in 6. Mainly bullet pointed. I remember reading through it in about 5 minutes. 

I've read others to others schools , including my kids', in similar times. 

Ha ha, good luck to you!

You reminded me of this guy:
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2019/sep/13/new-zealand-man-copywr...

So why try to summarise it in one word? 

I hope there is more to it than simply a member of staff panicking about last minute prep for an observed lesson and forgetting to to break duty. Even if it is more substantive and requires say employing a mid-day supervisor it's something that could be sorted quickly. Would the same concerned have been raised if the inspection had been a day earlier or later? I don't know, perhaps there was evidence of sustained bullying over a period at time due to lack of supervision at break? 

In this instance, due to the failure of the leadership to ensure the safety of their pupils, I think that inadequate is a good summary of the school.

Anyone who wants more details of the inadequacies can read the full report.

All inspections are a snapshot of a school and therefore are not always a true reflection of the school’s performance.

The best job I had for 5 years, we we're encouraged to judge our own practice on a regular basis. Internal 'inspections' with caveats, far preferable than external judgements. Plenty of caveats to this otherwise you'd end up with a Met Police situation.

Seriously, why? If this were true why isn't everything inspected in the same way. I'd argue OFSTED is an expensive and damaging anachronism that ignores most modern quality enhancement best practice.

Not sure if this has already been highlighted but as I understand it everything about that school was good or outstanding apart from the leadership. There’s something odd going on if the inspectors didn’t see that both of these things can’t be possible. Proof of the pudding in the eating, anybody?

It's hard to think of a more damning verdict on this woefully ineffective system than the fact that its verdicts aren't always a true reflection of a school's performance.

I don't object to schools being monitored. My brother has had a similar experience to Neil, the selective school his eldest went to was dismissive of concerns he raised with them and used a 14 year old outstanding judgement as evidensce. Schools I currently have concerns about correlate more to how long it is since their last visit, than the judgement they received. 

Such evidence would be clearer (if not a problem avoided altogether) from utilising modern quality systems.

There are only 4 grades though. Outstanding / Good / Requires Improvement / Inadequate.

Surely scoring out of 10 would be better? 

That would just lead to (some) parents searching for the school that scored 11.

Only if they  it was accurate and people understand what it means. What is the difference between RI and good? Who knows what the difference between a 5 and a 6 will be? Going back a long way OFSTED graded lessons 1 to 7, I really wouldn't advocate bringing that back 

If a school did managed to turn it up to 11, it wouldn't be a case of parents choosing to send their kids there, it would be up to the school who they let in 

Isn't that exactly what the education system does to pupils with exam results?

They cannot even be bothered to write a whole word.

I was a teacher for 10 years in a couple of schools - midlands and south west based. Specifically I taught maths in a state secondary school which later became an academy. When it was a school it was a maths specialist school. The school was inspected 8 times in the 9 years I was there and came out grade 2 or 3 every time. 

After the first couple of inspections I just relaxed into it and took the attitude that they will come and see what goes on and you can't produce some kind of magic/out of the ordinary experience for the inspectors if your teaching isn't magic/out of the ordinary.

During later inspections I had leadership responsibility for examinations and reporting throughout the school. The pressure of scrutiny on the paperwork targets was pretty high for sure. The experience of being inspected is never an enjoyable one.

The main takeaway from these multiple inspections for me came when we had a subject specific inspection conducted by a former "HMI" (her majesties inspectorate) who had become a subject specific ofsted inspector. Of the 8 inspections I underwent (I was observed teaching every time) this is the the only time I felt that the inspector may have been able to deliver the lesson themselves and potentially even improve on it. His knowledge was excellent, his practice was evident in his feedback, and his advice was certainly valuable.

He gave me some feedback on the lesson which I told him I thought wouldn't have worked in the lesson - we agreed that he would come back in the next day and I would try it out... and he was correct.

In summary - inspections don't have to be the harmful stressful experience that current ofsted guidelines have created. They should be constructive as well as offering a judgment against pre-shared targets.

I'm well out of teaching now (10 years doing something else) and although I miss teaching sometimes I don't miss the politics and pressure brought upon leadership and then redirected to staff. It was certainly stressful at points.

A modern quality system is also usually Independently verified. Which just breeds a similar situation.to what exists.  

You hold a higher opinion of these systems compared with my experience.  

I agree. I think this is a gigantic flaw in the system.

Any alternative suggestions, most other countries do similar? At least pupils get their own grades, not sure moving to a system where every student in the school is awarded the same average grade would go down well 

I blame the exam boards rather than the teachers, pretty sure all pupils will have had a considerable amount of constructive feedback both written and oral from their teachers, during their time in school, before receiving their letters or numbers 

They saw a pupil doing the floss (a dance move from the video game Fortnite) in the playground. From this they inferred the children were being sexualised. From this they deduced safeguarding was an issue. From this they concluded leadership was inadequate. Do you think this is a strong chain of logic? It’s absolutely ridiculous to claim that kids doing a dance routine confirms that leadership is inadequate in a school. Just shows they wanted to find a criticism and one confirmation bias later there you go. 

It's only a flaw if reproduction and amplification of inequality isn't what the system is meant to do.

That's the sequence as reported by some news sources, but I suspect it was a somewhat more complicated. 

You wonder to what extent the whole situation is more complicated than has been perceived. As a teacher and as a human, I feel terrible for Mrs Perry and her family. Back before Christmas I went to event that had nothing to do with my job, and started chatting to another attendee who turned out to be a very interesting woman who was head of a primary. She had been a head or senior leader for a long time but had also had roles outside of schools doing policy work so definitely saw the 'big picture'. They had recently been ofseted and she said despite getting outstanding it was overall a horrible experience and she would retire before the next one. So from my own work, and talking to people like her, I can see how difficult an experience it can be. But I still wonder if this was the only, or even the main reason for this tragic event. That doesn't mean that Ofsted don't have a case to answer, but the sociologist in me tends to be a bit wary of clear narratives. 

Ofsted inspectors are, by and large, ex teachers who couldn't hack it.  I'm afraid I've yet to meet one who could meaningfully suggest ways to improve upon my own performance.

My own rather bitter anecdote is this: I was teaching in a school which was struggling somewhat - nothing disastrous but hovering around Satisfactory (before it was renamed) and Good.  I prepared all my lessons religiously and, when my turn came, did my thing.  The inspector's feedback (limited as it was) was glowing, and my lesson was duly rated as outstanding.

Almost exactly twelve months later we were re-inspected.  As chance would have it, I was observed teaching the equivalent class doing exactly the same topic, and I gleefully pulled the old lesson plan out.  If anything I performed a little better this time around.

I was rated as satisfactory with good features, and got hauled over the coals by senior management for doing such a bad job when they were relying on me.

This kind of absolute nonsense is a large part of why I left the classroom soon after.  I now make the same money for about half the hours tutoring privately, with no management to answer to, no inspections, and rather fewer chairs thrown at me.  

That did cross my mind. I've been though some tough, (and in some cases agenda-driven and overly agressive), regulatory inspections.

I think it's simplistic to think someone would commit suicide purely on the basis of an inspection, no matter how damning.

However I can easily see how it could tip someone already struggling with their mental health over the edge. Something inspectors should be acutely aware of.

Good point. 

We don’t know the ins and outs of course, but I wouldn’t be sceptical if this is the full story. I know the head of a primary school where the Ofsted inspector said the attendance was inadequate and a cause for concern. When it was pointed out this was government required two week isolation for covid the inspector told him “I don’t want to hear that word, it’s just an excuse.” Many of the inspectors are under pressure to find points of criticism and are more than capable of blowing up individual incidents to fit a bigger picture narrative that suits them. 

Thousands of pupils go through the process getting bad results and survive just as schools go through the inspection process and get bad results without this tragic outcome.

There has to be more than just the inspection result going on in this case, was ofsted to blame or was there a lack of support elsewhere?

We had one inspection praise the school for it's depth of knowledge and experience due to high staff retention, and the following inspection criticise the school for it's low staff turnover (exactly the same staff).

Yes. Nothing happens in isolation. There is always context. 

However, I think you possibly underestimate how much some teachers care and what a gigantic portion of their life this. It's so much more than a job for many. 

For me, it's becoming more and more like a job. 

My wife runs a school, and has done for over 12 years.  It is very successful by any measure you would care to use.  When she started, she had about 46 regulations she had to follow.  It's now about 380 or so.

She recently opened a nursery - because it's part of a bigger school, the nursery gets a whole lot more (like qualified teaching staff).  It is well staffed, well run, in a brand new building etc.  The rest of the school is subject to inspection by ISI, but the 1-year old part of the nursery gets an OFSTED inspection. 

They had two observations - 1) it took too long to put bibs on for lunch.  Each member of staff had two bibs to fit.  They were not aware that there is a target time for bib fitting.  2) a child wandered off a bit during a music lesson.  The child was 1.  

That is enough to move a nursery down from Outstanding to Good.  The staff are distraught.  The whole place gets an ISI inspection though and that will reset the balance.

My wife's response is not work-safe.  

She's an ISI inspector.  She's stopped that and she's quitting it all next year too.  And she is below retirement age.

This is the sort of agenda-driven bollocks that must be stamped out. Inspections should be honest and consistent. Too many similar examples of inconsistency have been given in this thread.

I'm not a teacher (my parents were, and my dad was a lecturer at a teacher training college...), but I have carried out a number of subcontract project audits over the years. I have tried to be open & honest with everybody concerned, and understanding of the balance between the realities of engineering developments vs the ideal process.

We had an inspector do a practice inspection who had apparently reduced teachers to tears  in previous Ofsted inspections. He clearly felt he had a reputation to live up to and gave all and sundry a real grilling, sadly including the children, some of whom were clearly shocked.

Perhaps a paradox.  Just went past  the local comp high schools minibus. All over it in big letters are adverts saying 0fsted “outstanding” High School. Maybe headteachers and schools should need not be advertising  their glory points?  Tone it down.  

Totally agree.

But what workable system would ever be a true reflection?

The pre OFSTED system was equally flawed.

We could take the teachers’ word for it but we’ve seen how accurate that is when they were asked to give out GCSE grades during Covid.

Surely, we don’t know how accurate teachers assessments were, we don’t have anything to judge them against.

Didn't affect me, but to be fair to most teachers if say I had four students in a class who were borderline 6/7 I'd have predicted them all 7's. Is that wrong, when probably two would have got 6's in normal year? Some degree of grade inflation was expected, although there did sem to be more when the parents were paying directly. 

Except, strangely enough, the number of pupils achieving higher grades, rose when teacher assessments were used.

Obviously, just coincidence 😀

If an outside body went in to inspect anything else or anybody else in the manner that ofsted  behaves they would be thrown out and the unions who down tools and walk out . That’s what teachers should do . Management should stay in and comply with the law but the classroom teachers should down “tools “ and walk out  . 
Im not sure if it’s been mention above but the tories plan for sone time has been to break the state education system and privatise it . What better way than to direct an inspectorate to fail all but the poshest of state schools or academies belonging to large chains run by ……guess who ? 
edit : I can only hope that this poor woman’s death is a catalyst for some direct action . 
 

I'd agree. A system based purely on teacher judgement would also be flawed.

I don't think a perfect system exists, but other counties trust teacher assessment much more, but then they don't have league tables, ofsted and pay progression dependent on exam results, perhaps that is why they have suffered less grade inflation over the last 30 years than we have. 

I worked both under the Ofsted system and under the system which preceded it - ie inspection by LEA inspectors who then went on to work with each school on how it could improve and where necessary arrange support and mentoring from other local schools. It was my experience that the LEA system was both more effective and less destructive of teacher morale. One of its major advantages was that it enabled a much more balanced and accurate evaluation, because it drew on evidence gathered over a reasonable time scale. Obviously, this is only my personal experience, but I worked in a number of authorities in a range of senior roles, including twelve years as a head. I "enjoyed" three Ofsteds in the hot seat. There is no decent academic research evidence of which I am aware to back my view up - but nor do I know of any for saying it was equally flawed. It is however clear that the Ofsted system is incapable of delivering school improvement.

You are absolutely right. 

It's all in context and there are huge systemic issues. 

I think a big problem is simply that no one has been able to agree what education is for. 

I have an idea but so does everybody else! 

One could argue that it’s not OFSTED’s job to improve schools but that responsibility lies, ultimately, with Head Teachers.

Too many of whom appear unwilling or unable to deliver a respectable education to too many of our pupils.

Or to accept the blame when their failures are revealed by the inspection process.

I thought you weren't a fan of teacher assements (or in the case of ofsted ex-teacher assessment) You seem to think exams were more reliable (even though we have had 30 years of grade inflation) , so why bother with inspections when there is plenty of data available exam results, attendance, exclusions etc. Just sack the bottom 10% of heads? If you did this accurately wouldn't it result in raising standards? 

Just sack the bottom 10% of heads? If you did this accurately wouldn't it result in raising standards?
 

Probably.

Good effort, blame the teachers and the heads. You should apply for a job at Ofsted, you’d be a shoe in. Or better yet, go for PM, then you can really teach those teachers a thing or two about how crap they are. 

I think this comment is in pretty poor taste, given that it's all too easy to believe that blaming herself for her school's downgrading may have been a significant factor in Ruth Perry taking her own life.

So does that mean OFSTED judgements are probably not accurate, as there has been no raising of standards?

An inadequate judgement basically means the end of the road for a head, unless there are some mitigating circumstances like they have only been in post for a few months. 

I haven’t blamed teachers.

Head Teachers yes.

If you want a discussion about inadequate teachers then that will need a whole new thread.

Can we stick to discussing those teachers and head teachers, who can't hack teaching kids or managing school anymore and become inadequate OFSTED inspectors. They are probably a minority, but are having a significant effect on many teachers morale and in some cases their mental health. 

You are correct.

I should have been more thoughtful.

I don’t know why you’re choosing to ignore the vast numbers of people raising legitimate grievances about the rationale and nature of Ofsted inspections as counter productive. If you cared about children getting a good education you would want teachers to feel motivated and empowered, not punished for never being good enough. If you’re looking for reasons why the education system is struggling I suggest you’re blaming the wrong people. I’d love to hear what you’re got to say about inadequate nurses and work shy doctors too. 

You seem to think that those who work in the professions that you named are not representative of society.

There are those who work tirelessly, those who do a good job and those who are workshy.

Some of the best days in school were when OFSTED were in and all teachers did what they didn’t always do when they weren’t being inspected.

And here's the fundamental problem with education.  Everyone has been to school, and therefore everyone thinks they know how it works and what is best.

To deliver those lessons you thought were so good, the staff put in a 60 or 70 hour week.  How long do you think they can keep that up?

True, but that's one of my issues with OFSTED (and poor school leadership) The first two groups are negatively affected by OFSTED. The increased workload due to the perception of what inspectors want to see (triple marking is the worst offender I can remember off hand) have resulted in teachers working longer hours than when I started, but with no raising of standards, surely this means OFSTED have successfully driven down productivity (perhaps this is a contributory factor in the UK's overall low productivity). 

Those who are workshy and don't care aren't affected and generally don't last long in teaching anyway. 

I totally agree with this but in my opinion most of the stress during inspections comes from the demands and expectations of the Senior Leadership Team who instead of protecting their staff choose to place unreasonable and unnecessary pressure on them.

Well I’m nearly 40 and I trained as a teacher when I was 31. Worked ten years out of university in a variety of jobs, some long hours/ high stress (cheffing), some low stress and low satisfaction (production lines), some weird ones (cleaners/ furniture removal). I can safely say teaching is the hardest job I’ve done in terms of the continual demands on my time and the expectations. All the teachers I know are equally dedicated and genuinely care about the kids. Sorry if you had a bad experience at school but that doesn’t make an inspection system that doesn’t improve things a good idea. Surely you’d want the ones who care to say, rather than thinking “eff this anyway” and leaving the whole system in a poor state. I agree with the person above who said an inspectorate that is designed to be a mentoring/ coaching system that develops a relationship with a school would be beneficial - I do believe in scrutiny and accountability but this has to be done with respect for the context in which teachers operate. The current system is a cycle of ever increasing demands, burnout and failure. 

Well as the whole point of this thread is, the expectation comes from Ofsted. If they see a kid dance in the playground in a way they don’t like that’s inadequate and you get labelled as such. So, no, it’s Ofsted saying jump and the wxhool desperately trying to go so high they can’t fail. Again, blaming the teachers and SLT is totally missing the point. 

Seems this tragedy is having some effect. Quite a few Heads are now removing positive  OFSTED grades/comments from posters and parental  literature. I really hope that becomes widespread, but am not holding my breath, market forces and all that 

Do OFSTED no longer have to provide evidence for the judgements that they make.

And no matter how bad OFSTED is that doesn’t absolve the SLT from their duty of care to their staff.

On what are you basing this opinion? Are you a teacher who has worked in a number of schools where you have seen such behaviour? I went out of my way to protect my staff throughout my time as a head - including during Ofsteds - and I knew plenty of colleagues who did the same. The pressure is primarily coming from the ideological anti-progressive zealots who have fragmented the national education system with their idiotic pseudo-market for illusory parental choice and the intellectually bankrupt inspection system used to dish out trip advisor ratings to schools. Sigh 

Yes my observation is based upon three different schools were SLT were very poor and not only during inspections. The SLT all thought that they were doing a marvellous job.

I have no doubt that you were not cut from the same cloth.

There were other schools were SLT did what they were supposed to do with regard to looking after their staff. In those schools OFSTED was a more bearable experience.

 I do mostly agree with your summation of the state of education.

So in one hand you are crediting OFSTED for some of your "best days in school" probably due (as Jamie pointed out) to the staff spending a  rediculous amount of time planning these lessons. On the other hand you are critical of SLT for allowing this? 

I’m crediting OFSTED for getting some teachers to do what they were paid to do but usually didn’t e.g. being in work, turning up for yard duty, getting to their lessons on time, not leaving disruptive pupils stood outside their classroom for lengthy periods, etc.

Nothing to do with their actual lessons.

All things that made their colleagues jobs much harder than they needed to be.

And things that should have been addressed by SLT but weren’t - except when OFSTED were in.

I’m no OFSTED fanboy but it’s too easy to see them as the cause of all the problems in schools.

I don't think anyone is suggesting getting rid of OFSTED will solve all problems in schools. Most here seem to think some form of monitoring is a good idea. Your's is not my experience, although I accept things are different on inspection days, but if common, this last post of yours shows how pointless a two day inspection once every few years is, if OFSTED can be fooled by a show put on by those who normally can't be bothered. Perhaps those inspectors would be better employed back as SLT in schools, so their influence was 195 days a year, rather than 2 every few years..

It sounds like you went to a school that may have had problems that needed to be addressed.  What was the outcome of those inspections in terms of a grade?  

I don't for one minute doubt that many teachers care very deeply, but you have to be able to disengage from any job and appreciate that it is just a job.  It can take a long time to learn that, it took almost 30 years for me but life is better when you come to that point.

My concern remains that whilst the focus is on ofsted there must surely be someone that is responsible for the mental health and well-being of head teachers and they seem to have failed very seriously without it being noticed.

Ofsted used to be a whole week with large numbers of inspectors but I don’t think they did a better job of reporting than they do now. 

While some bemoan the passing of HMI inspectors it was too easy for cosy relations to develop so that reports were no more representative of the actual going on in schools than the snapshot reports of today.

What the answer is in such a diverse sector as education I don’t know. 

Special measures for two schools although strangely enough the SLT were graded as good. 

The other schools were satisfactory.

Two years after one such report the Head and Deputy Head of one school were removed for bullying of their staff - possibly proving how poor Ofsted can be?
If it sounds like I’ve got a downer on SLT not doing their job it’s because I have.

One can expect OFSTED to cause discomfort for teachers but for the SLT of those teachers to add to that discomfort is totally unacceptable.

Were you a pupil in these schools or a member of staff?

Based on what? I think I'd tend to agree but my memory of those early inspections is clouded by two outstanding and a good. I do remember a plumber observing one of my lessons and Chris Woodhead another. Were they better/worse I'm not sure, but they were certainly more expensive 

I thought you pointed out that the snap shot of the schools you were in were totally misleading. You say cosy relations, like Andy, I miss the the days of collaboration, support and innovation. The job was certainly less stressful in those days, look at the retention figures now. 

Looking at successful approaches abroad is something we don't to enough of or when we do missing some of the important (usually expensive) points.

I don't see other countries lining up to copy our inspection framework. Good luck with trying to convince them that OFSTED is what they need. 

Staff 

Teaching staff?

Teaching must be one of the few occupations where people doing supposedly the same job can have totally different experiences.

And maybe that’s why coming up with a universally acceptable reporting system is so difficult 

I was always more far nervous on results day as a teacher than as a pupil. You have a point, but in most cases I think if you stop caring deeply the next step is to leave the profession and find a different job. 

Despite disagreeing with your position on OFSTED, I feel where you are coming from.  From my perspective OFSTED is not useful in any way in their current form.  Despite this, I can see your point with regard to the way it makes usually anonymous or absent staff members (with senior responsibilities) come out of the woodwork and fulfil their basic responsibilities.  I have seen this too, 

I feel like you have probably had some really shitty experiences due to poor management.  This isn’t unusual – if it was, we wouldn’t have the recruitment and retention problem we have. Despite this, there are some amazing schools out there with inspirational leaders and decent senior leadership teams.  

However, I agree 100 % that there are a large number of members of SLT and headteachers who, worried about their jobs thanks to the OFSTED framework, their ambition, incompetence, or individual narcissistic traits, become a nightmare for their staff.  In a lot of cases this is because they have been promoted beyond their capabilities for one reason or another (future leaders / teach first/ etc – not that all of these are poor) or that they are genuinely mental. (I doubt Zimbardo would agree with this but...) This is one of the major reasons that the system is in the mess that it is in.  It is also linked to OFSTED and forced academisation.  

The main problem is ideological and financial: OFSTED has been used to facilitate the destruction of state schools; it has been employed as a tool to force schools to join MATs.  This has led to the culture that many teachers are now suffering.  This is the reason many are leaving in droves.

I understand your antipathy toward SLT after the experiences you have had – anyone who has worked in that kind of context will – but there is a bigger picture.  OFSTED has never been a positive force.  They have been weaponised by an ideology that wants to commodify education.  Their role is not to improve educational standards – this is a con.

I've known some, but I'd say it's a relatively small number in the system as a whole. What  percentage do you think are genuine nightmares? 

This does make one wonder if the system is capable of producing enough people to perform the role of the modern head effectively. A system which prioritised mentoring and support would be far more likely to succeed.

Wholly agree. The fact that many individual inspectors are skilfull and compassionate is irrelevant. It is institutionally antagonistic and destructive.

Just so we can contextualise your comments, what, exactly, is your experience in schools? As a pupil? As a parent? As a teacher? As a head? As an OFSTED inspector? 

25 years as a teacher.

Independent school, inner city schools, special needs school.

Fair enough.

Mrs J puts it at 25% up from 10% when we started. I think that's a bit high, but we were reminded of an infamous morning in our careers where the Deputy Head did a year 8 assembly in why the day Chemical Ali was executed was the happiest of her life, threatened to slit my throat as I wouldn't cancel an A level lesson to do a cover lesson for her, told a TA at break to go and fetch her coat because he needed the exercise due to be over weight and rounded it off at lunchtime by dumping a HoY's lunch in the bin as they wanted to finish it before doing what they were asked. 

There is certainly less competition for appointment now. The first promoted  job in Cumbria I applied for had 50 other candidates, the last two HoD interviews I've been involved with both had only two applicants, in each one was unemployable, the other poor. One accepted a temporary contract the other didn't. IMO OFSTED has contributed to this situation. 

For me the current system is resulting in nearly all new heads being surgeons (and often inexperienced) virtually no architects or philosophers. I'll try and find the research if you haven't already read it.

Now an Ofsted inspector?

That research doesn't ring a bell, so yes I'd be very interested to read it. Cheers.

You should see what a modern Primary head has to deal with. 

Maybe you'd do better? 

So what? It doesn't need to be expensive, ineffective and damaging.

Frankly I suspect you think that because you are not clued up on quality systems in Education.

I'm an engineering academic and I know quality systems have transformed quality in manufacture. In my University as someone on the central quality committes I've faced the idiocy of subject inspection in HE: which proved to be a ridiculously expensive failure. My main institution level work was in quality and external validation and I also worked alongside STEM specialists researching systems in schools. My father-in-law was a head who worked in the old LEA system (that was mainly functional when the politicians didn't interfere).

The systems I used were: based on quality enhancement; measured by SMART criteria; integrated to supportive independent expertise;  involved supportive peer observation based on training; verified by regular video conference meetings, regular data, work sampling; all within a supportive revalidation cycle (from near immediate vists in rare cases if there were evidenced major issues, to every 5 years when things were going well); and overall assessed by government quango at institutional level pretty cheaply.

The fundamental problems with inspection is it is adversarial, too opinion based, and if major problems are uncovered it is too late.  It's an expensive and damaging political con that such systems improve quality.

Roy Lilley was good on this idocy today:

https://myemail.constantcontact.com/How-sorry-we-are.html?soid=110266589919...

Have you seen "SLT Newbie" (either on Twitter or Facebook)? It's a bit of a one trick pony of a joke, although it can be very funny (she works for the The Willows Academy Trust), and the comments that are collected under her posts show that lots of teachers seemed to have experienced the trauma of that sort of management for real. It does seem that the big MATs are perhaps the worst for that sort of thing, but I can see the dilemma that all leaders exist under. They know that their school is totally reliant on the teaching staff to operate, but at the same time the only tool they have to make any changes is getting the staff to do things differently. So they have to (and perhaps want to) love-bomb their teachers to show their appreciation of the difficulty of the tasks the teachers are trying to do, whilst at the same time moaning at the teachers for not doing the job better. 

Starting teaching in my early 40s, it does strike me how many of my colleagues including leaders have spent almost all their lives in school environments. I suspect that bringing in people from business or the military or civil service etc. and making them school leaders would be no magic bullet - and could easily be disastrous - but maybe some ideas from outside the sector could be helpful at time.  

One of the teaching unions carried out a survey and reported that 20% of teachers indicated they had been the victim of workplace bullying.  

There was a similar example on the radio:

All teaching was rated as excellent, a caring and supportive environment, parents and kids all loved the school, it was excellent in the previous inspection.
They saw a hole in the fence. From this they deduced safeguarding was an issue. From this they concluded leadership was inadequate. The school was rated inadequate.

This?

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/322356412_The_One_Type_of_Leader_W...

I don't find that very hard to believe. "Bullying" is a pretty fuzzy term but in its widest interpretation, I wouldn't be surprised if it was higher.

My feeling, particularly as an NQT, was that it was easy for you to be the cat in a "kick the cat" situation. Coming from another career, teaching struck me as a surprisingly hierarchical profession, even if it pretends not to be, everybody is under pressure from the person above them, up to OFSTED (and I guess for the them, with the govt. above them), so everyone looks to the people under them to do better. Except for when you are an NQT (or whatever they are now called) because you are the bottom. Expect to take a kicking. The majority of the people I trained with on my PGCE year (8 years ago) aren't still teaching, which is in line with the national statistics I've seen.

Fair point. Although I cannot imagine the sort of system you describe being applied in a primary school.

Uk has big issues with adversarial approaches in all sort of areas such as managing projects. Its inherenet in the legal system. and other areas.

I would prefer more collabaration across everything, but its a bigger change in alot of areas that would eliminate this.

Interesting subject.

Starting with respect for the professionalism of teachers and teaching leaders and a focus on spreading good practice (as opposed to searching for faults ) is possible.

Supportive peer observation is possible.

A focus on data use for supportive improvement is possible

Good quality schools supporting weaker quality schools is possible.

Encouraging community engagement is possible.

LEA or regional support is possible.

National or regional quality bodies that support evidence based quality improvements are possible.

OFSTED is destructive and expensive. You can't fatten a pig by just weighing it, let alone the OFSTED approach of guessing the weight or rejecting the pig for cosmetic reasons.

Thanks for the tip. Just been scrolling through. Very funny - but the numerous comments along the lines of "I thought this was supposed to be a parody" are admittedly rather worrying!

Thanks for the link. That's an interesting read. The tie up between leadership type and subject studied was fascinating. One thing that struck me quite forcibly was that the typical tenure for the heads they studied was two to three years. That strikes me as far too short a time for most ordinary mortal leaders to create anything significant or lasting. It took me twelve years before I felt I'd achieved most of what I could do for my school. The standards we achieved did survive for a good while after I left, along with my two most senior staff over a three year period. Both of them had been there for decades. We'd all have been mortified if the school hadn't continued to do well. If such short tenures are becoming typical for school leaders no wonder we've got problems.

An excellent summary of how it could and should be. As you will be well aware, much of this was in place before the ideological assault on LEAs. That this was perpetrated in the name of higher standards is a cruel irony. For far too long the system has been under attack from those for whom pedagogy is almost a dirty word and teachers' and educational academics' knowledge and expertise things to be belittled and scorned. How sad that your eminently sensible framework now seems like an idealistic dream.

I think that's prevalent everywhere. If you're not being promoted every two or three years you're clearly not a good leader…

Yes

Sorry for the late reply, missed your post.

Did you see the fuss a few week back about the job adverts for the Mercia school in Sheffield looking for a new assistant head who was happy to have the job "dominate" their life, and that who would need to be "wedded to the role"? It made the national news https://www.itv.com/news/calendar/2023-02-20/schools-beyond-parody-job-ad-f...

But there was quite a lot of fun had on the SLT Newbie facebook page discussing it. I don't know if they still do but the school used to have quite long profiles of staff on their website. The staff looked ferociously young and male dominated. Interestingly quite a few who gone through Teach First rather than the PGCE route. The school gave off very definite vibes of wanting to be the next Michela School/Birbalsingh - which isn't to say that Michela hasn't been incredibly successful with students it does teach.

Not sure if its the one I'm thinking of as that was a rural secondary that had an incomplete fence. That was a good example of ofsted at its worst, once they sense a perceived problem the can pursue it ruthlessly. In that case it was asking student panels about feeling safe in school if strangers were on site. I don't think the sixth former who responded that he wasn't bothered as he knew all the local nutters and they were pretty harmless, if it wasn't one of them it would probably be a lost tourist. 

Cheers, that was the one I was thinking of 

I looked them up, Educational Consultant, so not far off. Probably the type who advise a number of schools. The half where the results improve will be down to their input, the half that don't will be because they weren't following their advice. According to their LinkedIn profile they have been on Question Time three times? 

I can only think of one local secondary head who has been in post for more than three years. Four, that I know, of started in September. In the five years since I stopped, one of the schools I worked in is on its fourth different headteacher. 

The ' hole in the fence' scenario reminds me of something that happened when I was teaching.

My classroom looked out onto the school playing field. One morning I went in and saw that the fence had been smashed down. A five foot wide and  two foot deep trench led from this broken fence across the playing field and through a smashed fence at the other side.

 Completely puzzled I asked the kids if any of those who lived around the school knew anything about it. A streetwise 6 year old put his hand up and proudly said that he and his big brother ( just released from a young offenders institute) had stolen a road roller the night before and driven it across the field!

I dread to think what any OFSTED inspector would have made of it.

Mind you, to put it in context......the whole area had been the scene of riots and petrol bombs the night before so the road roller incident was small beer really.

Last school I worked at had no fence of any description (and the one before that), save around the all weather pitch, and that was usually unlocked. (we did have one incident of it being driven on, but not by a road roller).   However outwith the reach of Ofsted.  

My daughter did an internship at Mercia - they did seem to keep quite long hours and had a fairly unbending position on discipline, but my daughter really liked it and felt very supported by the staff. It confirmed her intention to do a PGCE - she's got through two teaching practises on that and still seems keen...

We received a much overdue (last Ofsted was nearly 6 years earlier) inspection just before Christmas last year and were told we were still good. The inspectors loved the school and though gruelling, everyone felt positive after the inspection.  But as someone else said on here,  we were lucky; the inspectors 'got' our school.  It is worth bearing in mind that although my wife and I (we run the school together) had been through 10 inspections between us,  we had never been inspected under the current framework so our Ofsted experience literally counted for nothing. Prior to our inspection we had an inspector who works for our county come and visit us to do a sort of mocksted.  I told her how, for our rivers topic I sent invites to my class through the post inviting the children on an expedition to find the source of the river Monnow.  I then described how excited they were to see a tiny gurgle of water coming out of the mountainside, knowing it would turn into this large river. She was totally unimpressed and said I needed to be careful as the might remember the experience more than facts about rivers. 

Jesus. I'm probably the most cynical, jaded person with no interest in kids or education that you'll ever meet, and even I cringed when I read that. That inspector shouldn't be allowed anywhere near a school.

Yes, the children could've been shown a PowerPoint of the Water Cycle   then been given sheets to label and colour in for homework. A few days later they could've been given a test to assess the quality of their learning; good evidence for Ofsted to look at. 

Don't forget, if you take children into the outdoors they might learn something extra and different from your stated learning objectives. How can you measure that? What will the Minister of State for education be able to use for a statistic?

The last time I was observed by an inspector teaching in class, I thought the lesson went brilliantly. In the lesson I am moving continuously among all the (SEND) students. Every objective achieved, enthusiastic kids. I was buzzing.

In the feedback with the inspector, she said it was excellent, but she downgraded my score because I wasn’t wearing a watch.

I said I’ve never worn a watch in my life. She said you need to be able to keep track of the time to keep to your lesson plan timings.

I said there’s a great big clock on the wall.

She said you may have to look up to see it.

That was the beginning of the end for me.

I admire the results Katharine Birbalsingh has achieved at Michaela, but that is about the only thing I do admire about her. Some of her reported pronouncements on pedagogy strike me as ridiculous. Nor can I take seriously anyone who believes it was a tragedy that  Michael Gove couldn't finish his "reforms" in education. My school got value-added results that were just as good as Michaela, but with a very different and much more progressive ethos - so I won't be taking any lessons from her.

A friend's wife is an ofsted inspector, if half the inspectors are as bad as her the whole lot need sending back to the classroom for a decade (not fair on the kids). Maybe her work life is different, but socially she's up her own ar$e, she infers she's been a deputy/head teacher (she hasn't even been head of year or dept), her personal communication skills are appalling it's all about listening to her and her ego, she taught for a max of 5 years and has been with ofsted for the last 20 plus. The system seems like a shambles. 

The old adage of if you can't do teach, is clearly wrong, but maybe if you can't teach switch to ofsted might be more appropriate. It reminds me of some of the people who drift into h&s, or full time union posts, they were often never the most adept at their chosen profession. 

She did also resign as Social Mobility Tsar (the 5th in a few years?) it's almost as if the current government want to limit social mobility. 

Plenty of other schools in London do without the fanfare or long working hours.

I did have a look at the Mercia school Toby mentioned. I get that they were allowed to grow one year at a time, so the DfE data is probably a year out if date, but even if they currently have 800 students, the number of teaching staff is double what I would expect for a school that size. The school day starts at 7:30 and finishes at 17:30. They are probably getting a lot of extra funding or have a lot of staff who are paid partime but working full time. 

It's only my experience but I'd say a sizeable minority are, for a start what motivates someone to become an inspector? One of the problems is that she will grade the majority of schools good or outstanding and even if the staff at the school think the same as you, they are unlikely to make a complaint. Schools she's grade RI or inadequate can easily be dismissed. Hopefully there now seems a move for more schools graded good/outstanding to complain about the system. 

To some degree I've been guilty in the past, the most incompetent OFSTED team I experience inflicted an incompetent Head and Deputy on students for an extra 18 months as a result of a rediculous judgement. 

The fabulous Mr Brum has just this week been through OFSTED at her school and across the board the report is 'Good' which they expected to achieve. From an outsider point of view however, the whole thing was harrowing. told on a Thursday that the inspection would happen the coming Monday, (Friday was a strike day), in school Friday after hours and all weekend prepping, paperwork all night Sat & Sun, observed Monday & Tuesday. Coached by the SLT on which children not to have in lessons (a day of PE is seems), even so much as with one teacher (who is a liability and on a PIP and would have been let-go in the private sector by now) advising to take a sicky for everyone's sake. Even coached to the extent that they were told to say that the school has a great work life balance with flexibility built in to ways of working - it doesn't, it's pretty brutal by any standard.

The end result - a 'good' inspection, but with teachers who were noted as being nervous when observed, wonder why, and who were utterly exhausted and de-motivated by the end of the last day, and an English department where over half, including my wife, are leaving at the end of this academic year. Is it a good school though? Overall yes, but a two day, selective inspection, isn't really a reflection of the reality. It's a contrived snapshot. Case-in-point, my kids school, last inspected 10 years back, rated Outstanding. It's a church school so there are some 'religion' based benefits that bring other approaches to teaching to the game, but overall it's shit, and I wish I'd sent the kids elsewhere and not followed the OFSTED report and religious catchment easy route. The school is hugely oversubscribed based on the religion + out of date OFSTED report, so much so that we have a friend who has had their kids baptised in to the Catholic Church and taken the Journey of Faith herself just to ensure her kids were able to get in. The reality however is a school that has rested on its laurels for a decade, and is likely to get a hell of a shock when next inspected. 

Listening to the R4 just, OFSTED reports need a narrative relative to the school and its pupil intake and their needs, they need to balance the good and the not so good and give direction, they need to be supportive and not damning, and most of all they need to be a platform for progressive improvement as opposed to being a singularity for parents and estate agents to judge against.

 

This guy gets it.

Exactly, why... 

Perhaps a complete reinvention is needed. Ofsted employs only project managers and report compilers, the inspection team are formed like jury service selected randomly around the country, you don't inspect neighbouring schools but across the county is ok, 10 plus years current teaching experience, you inspect a dept within your skill set, etc.. it doesn't even need to be done in one push dates can be flexed to suit inspectors schedule in their school and dept of Education funds replacement teachers whilst they are absent. 

London Metropolitan University were inspected just before the VC resigned due to terrible governance practice, the worst of several Universities where inspection failed to uncover major issues 

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2010/apr/13/university-governance-ref...

Two years later, as serious quality issues remained unresolved, they had their licence to enrol overseas students removed:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-19419395

The Mid Staffs Hospital debacle happened after an inspection and with multiple bodies that should have acted.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/feb/06/mid-staffs-hospital-scandal...

This is pretty much how the SQA (Scottish Qualifications Authority) run their exams for practical subjects.

Mr S is an examiner for practical music.  He has over 30 years experience teaching his subject and every year has to attend an examiners course and do some mock gradings which are moderated.  He is then allocated a school/schools outwith his local area where he is the music examiner.  This week he is listening to and grading Nat 5, Higher and Advanced Higher students at two schools in a different part of Scotland.  The rest of the year, he continues as a class teacher.

The examiners put themselves forward and are interviewed rather than being selected randomly but other than that, it works as Exiled Scot has suggested inspections could work.

Definitely lots of parents were very supportive when all the stuff kicked off around the job adverts, so it is clearly working for plenty of kids. You just wonder what their staff turnover is like, if you turn out not to really fit their mould of what a teacher should be like? But I'm sure there will be some teachers who like that environment too.

Anyone have any experience of United Learning? I've seen their 'little red book', which is a mix of reasonable stuff, and utter control freakery. 

Yep - generally she is nails down a chalkboard to me in many, many ways, but I did read that their progress 8 scores where the highest in the country last year. That's remarkable. I'd be interested to see how selective they are in their intake - I could imagine that the school's reputation is so well known, that there is a lot of self selection going on from parents. If you know your kid is a bit ADHD-y and can't sit still very well, sending him (and it is disproportionately hims) to a school where you get into trouble for slouching in lessons might not seem attractive. But if you desperately want the best for your kid, think that education is the only way for them to get ahead, and are going push them very very hard, then it might seem like the perfect place regardless of whether you are upper middle class white British or a first generation immigrant working very hard at three different jobs.

I'm liking the sound of that, no system is perfect but you want one that is fair to students, teachers and the assessor who is also only really trying to help improve things too. The goal is to improve education, not to publically chastise or hang individuals out to dry.

Our kids(teens) schools have swung from the top to the bottom and back again several times, but I'd say overall the education quality has remained the same. From the outside looking in it feels like many non education related factors can throw the school assessment grades up or down. I did once consider volunteering to be on the committee but then I had a word with myself, my ex military mentality of just do the bloody job your paid to do might not be appreciated and the frustration could destroy me! I tried the local parish council and couldn't cope, the incompetence within some sectors was mind blowing, generally middle management not those doing hands on work. 

They claim not to be selective. I notice that it is an 840 capacity school, with only around 720 pupils, is this normal? Given the success, would they be massively over subscribed?

I'll admit my school couldn't quite match that - but we were in the top 3% nationally.  And that was without any "world's strictest headteacher" nonsense. I'll settle for that. This was back in the days of the School Achievement Award when - hard to believe looking back - schools got big cash prizes for their value-added performance. We got around £30k three years running. The first year, there was quite a discussion about how best to allocate it. Sadly my suggestion of blowing it all on an executive Jag for the exclusive use of the headteacher was rejected in favour of sharing it out equally among all the staff. Ah well, can't win 'em all.

Worth a look at this film.... https://peterhuby.com/films-1-1

Made in '97 during a school's first Ofsted inspection. Despite all the tinkering with the Ofsted frameworks, the essence of it still holds true. Needless to say, the inspectors did not react well!

Worth a look at this film.... https://peterhuby.com/films-1-1

Made in '97 during a school's first Ofsted inspection. Despite all the tinkering with the Ofsted frameworks, the essence of it still holds true. Needless to say, the inspectors did not react well!

I think it's like lots of free schools, they start with just Y7 entry, so the first kids who joined the school from new might be only Y12s or 13s now. 

Most schools claim to be non selective, but just by being where they are, they are selecting. House prices are higher in catchments of supposedly good schools. 

When I started teaching in Sheffield, there were, i'm pretty certain, no secondaries on the east side of the city with their own sixth forms. All the school sixth forms were on the west side. Guess where the leafy middleclass suburbs of Sheffield are?  

It's certainly interesting but I'm not sure I'd want to visit. I have been in to schools with a P8 of well over 1 and one that was close to 2. They were Intresting, but not really any more useful than going to visit the top attaining selective school would have been. All schools will have some students that get all 8's and 9's at GCSE, if you go to a high attaining school you will just see more of them. It's similar with progress 8, there will be some students who score 2 (or even 3) in your school at Michaela they will nearly all be like that. 

There admissions  policy is non selective at 11, but is for the sixth form, but you go onto explain how it is effectively selective for progress rather than attainment 

The only bit about this I disagree with is the upper middle class white British, they would still rather their kids go to a high achieving selective grammar. I was a bit surprised that only 75% of their students were EAL, they are below national average for the number of exams entered at GCSE, only about 40% of their students are admitted to their sixthform. 

My summary would have been pretty similar. Fortunately geographical isolation and a couple of overly generous  OFSTED judgements meant I could pretty much ignore that latter. Easy for me to say now I've left. However the two heads I worked with in Carlisle both moved to be heads of their "own" school partly due to the interference from above. I now enjoy winding them up about that, as they are now both CEO's of (small) MAT 's

It opened in 2014, so should have had a full admission for a a few years now.

DfE website say 2018? Which fits with this year being their first set of GCSE results.

Edit. Although the DfE have a history of being wrong quite often. 

Fair point - I'm not sure then. As a free school, I'm not sure if they are quite as reliant for funding by the number of students on-roll? So maybe they don't fill up every place if it helps them keep class sizes down? That's just a guess though! 

Wikipedia says 2014, can’t find anything on the school’s website.

Genuinely not sure what's more reliable Wikipedia or the DfE

2018 does fit with their first set of GCSE results being this year and they are advertising for sixthform places starting in September. The local paper said they were the most oversubscribed school in Sheffield for Y7 places (350 apllicants for 180 places) last September, so I'd be surprised if the other years weren't pretty full. 

Ah, a misunderstanding. I’m referring to Michela in London. The school led by Katherine Birbalsingh.

I'm pretty sure sending a child to what sounds like an army training camp c1920 will not result in the "best" for them, even if they get straight As.

Ah, that makes sense now. Not sure about their applications/admissions, but they will have a lot of local competition. The average P8 score for Brent is 0.5 and a number of secondary schools have a P8 score over 1. Putting a bit of perspective on that the four secondary schools in Cumbria that are  currently rated outstanding have P8 scores 0.3, 0.05, 0 and (I think, but that's a whole new thread) - 0.7!! 

More pretty awful findings coming to light on this subject: https://www.theguardian.com/education/2023/mar/25/revealed-stress-of-ofsted...

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

Seems to be about time someone inspected the inspection system.

Theoretically, I think internal quality control is the responsibility of HMIs  - the permanent civil servant inspectors - but they're buried up to their elbows in this mess. From recent research, it seems that if an HMI is in charge you're even more likely to get a right good kicking.

https://blogs.ucl.ac.uk/ioe/2023/02/07/how-do-ofsted-inspection-judgements-...

I remember with fond nostalgia the days when those of us working on innovative curriculum developments respected HMIs as genuine experts.  I can't imagine doing so now.

The last time they did, (about 8 years ago?) nearly half got sacked. Some were found to not even be qualified teachers and have ever worked in a school?

Edit. Sacked is probably a bit harsh, not having their contract renewed is probably a fairer description. 

You probably didn't have the chance to read Rob's clear explanation of this, posted 3 minutes before your post. I'll repeat: "If, say, I had four students in a class who were borderline 6/7 I'd have predicted them all 7's. Is that wrong, when probably two would have got 6's in normal year?" 

This is exactly why the percentage of students achieving higher grades will inevitably rise under teacher assessment (as happened in the COVID years) even no teacher comes under any pressure from management to inflate grades, and performs the ask with complete integrity.

The alternative to predicting 7's for all four students would be to arbitrarily give two of them a predicted 6. Which two? How can the teacher know which of the four otherwise equal students would have performed slightly worse on the examination day? Four predicted 7's is the only conclusion that is fair on these students.

Martin

A teacher could give borderline pupils the lower of the two grades but wanting the best for their pupils understandably would not do so.

But, using that idea as an explanation for grade increases,as seen by the % of grade increases in this article https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-58734418.amp

there must have been a very large number of borderline cases.

I think that article demonstrates that some BBC reporters wouldn't get a grade 7. The 7+ pass rate was 20.8 in 2019 so the rise was closer to 8% not 12% as the article claims. 

Really?  In a class of 30, 6 borderline cases which would result in a 10% increase actually seems a bit low to me. Research where kids do a mock a week before the real exam only accurately predict  85% of grades correctly.

To be honest, for me, it is typical British obsession worrying about grades and not having a debate about what is important, children learning. 

This number was skewed by the higher proportion of private schools who took the piss awarding grades at the top end. 

2020: “Independent school A-level entries with A/A* goes up 4.7 percentage points compared to 1.2pp for grammars and 2pp for comprehensives”

https://www.tes.com/magazine/archive/levels-private-schools-get-far-larger-...

2021: “Teacher-assessed grades, which replaced exams across the UK, disproportionately benefited those at independent schools, where the proportion of top grades rose nine percentage points to 70%, compared with six percentage points elsewhere.”

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2021/aug/10/private-schools-in-englan...

2022: Proportion of A and A* grades for private school pupils fell by 12.4 percentage points, while drop at comprehensive schools was 8.7

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/08/18/private-schools-see-bigger-fall...

edited to add links

A good point, perhaps  the 12% came from 4+ going from 67% to 76% which is about a 12% increase, much less than the 7+ increase which is close to 40% which as you say (and I think I did earlier) due to some parents expecting to get what they paid for.