OFSTED is not ‘Fit for purpose’ yet world class education goal?

What would be the best method to ensure that schools are performing well? Pupils are tested regularly to ensure they understand the subject, performance management in the workplace is useful if there are problems to discuss, but SATs seem to cause such angst in education, and OFSTED so much pressure and anxiety. There has to be a better way.

It’s the pressure of public announcements!
I remember frequent tests at primary school, tables, grammar, composition, mental arithmetic and what was called ‘mechanical arithmetic’, but the results weren’t published in the press and used as a tool to rubbish schools and presumably as a rod to beat staff, though as a pupil, I don't know that.
There has to be some sort of check. Otherwise you are in my DD’s situation when she changed primary school.
In Liverpool she learnt x tables and practised assiduously. When we moved she was told not to worry about them as her new school didn’t do them!
But OFSTED must be capable of not just criticising, but explaining in detail what improvements they think should be made and how they should be achieved.
Most of them feel that is not part of their job, so a simple children’s attendance is not good enough or a you need more English activities with no help is what they dish out.
That sort of help was given by HMIs.

While I think the principle of OFSTED is good

I do not agree with this. The principle of OfSted is not good. It is to make a judgement in a short time on limited information. And that judgement is made public with no opportunity for the school to argue their case (if they think the judgement is inaccurate) or to find ways of improving.

A better principle would be to make a judgement, and work alongside the school to make changes. That would be the way to improve educational standards, which is what OfSted was ostensibly set up to do.

The whole principle behind OfSted was based on the concept of the free market - parents should be able to "shop around" and find the best school and snap one-word judgements were to be the way they would know which were best. But this has backfired on them as most parents could not care less what OfSted says (unless they say the school is about to go bankrupt) - they care about things that OfSted do not measure.

When we last had an OfSted (with a good result) several parents said they were not interested in what OfSted had to say.

I agree with you Luckygirl. Like many on here, I did teacher training before Ofsted, but still wanted the best for my pupils. When all of us were pupils ourselves, there was no Ofsted. I loved my state-funded primary school and thrived and I wonder how any of that was achieved without Ofsted breathing down teachers' necks.

There were good schools and bad schools and many in between. I can't see any great improvement or change in the 30(?) years since Ofsted has been operating. What I have seen is a lot more stress (and real fear) and less humanity in the way schools operate. Some of those who've reached the top in schools are there because they're the best at learning to climb ladders and watching their backs.

Mollygo In my area, 11+ results for every individual pupils were published in the press. When my mother died, we found the pages from the local newspaper, in which mine had been published.

Strangely enough, I don't remember pressure to learn tables, spellings or anything else, but my primary school consistently produced the best 11+ results in town. We didn't have homework.

The principle of OfSted is not good. It is to make a judgement in a short time on limited information

When we were inspected by HMI (Scotland), we had to send reams of paperwork in advance and were quizzed on it.
It wasn't just in one lesson, we were observed, there were quite a few.

I remember one time the Inspector wouldn't leave my room, when the designated slot was finished.
We were studying Granny'sAttic, learning about the Steamie, the Monday in the wash house where all the women in the tenement worked together, the toilet on the landing, shared by three families etc.
I was sharing my own memories and she joined in with hers, saying she felt emotional remembering her childhood. Al I wanted was for her to leave.
The HT was frantic outside the door, trying to figure out what was happening.

Not wanting to boast , we got eleven out of twelve excellent, the highest rating ever at that time.

growstuff

Mollygo In my area, 11+ results for every individual pupils were published in the press. When my mother died, we found the pages from the local newspaper, in which mine had been published.

Strangely enough, I don't remember pressure to learn tables, spellings or anything else, but my primary school consistently produced the best 11+ results in town. We didn't have homework.

It wasn’t pressure to learn tables, or spellings, it was just what we did. It was part of lessons and no, we didn’t have homework, although my mum encouraged us to chant our tables or make up stories on the long walk to school, or home again.

Marydoll

^The principle of OfSted is not good. It is to make a judgement in a short time on limited information^

When we were inspected by HMI (Scotland), we had to send reams of paperwork in advance and were quizzed on it.
It wasn't just in one lesson, we were observed, there were quite a few.

I remember one time the Inspector wouldn't leave my room, when the designated slot was finished.
We were studying Granny'sAttic, learning about the Steamie, the Monday in the wash house where all the women in the tenement worked together, the toilet on the landing, shared by three families etc.
I was sharing my own memories and she joined in with hers, saying she felt emotional remembering her childhood. Al I wanted was for her to leave.
The HT was frantic outside the door, trying to figure out what was happening.

Not wanting to boast , we got eleven out of twelve excellent, the highest rating ever at that time.

When was this?

I remember being inspected by Ofsted during the first few years. We had to send in reams of paperwork and had weeks to prepare.

The latest guidelines only allow a few hours of preparation. Heads are informed after school the day before an inspection is to take place. The inspectors will already have spent days scrutinising results and other available information.

When they arrive, there are very strict guidelines for judging schools. Individual teachers and lessons are no longer given grades.

I had a look at the guidelines for Scotland. A short notice inspection takes place when there has been an identified risk.

However, Education Scotland will give written notification of an inspection visit by email two and a half weeks before the inspection begins.
When I was teaching it was six weeks.

I know by whom I would wish to be inspected!

We were studying Granny'sAttic, learning about the Steamie, the Monday in the wash house where all the women in the tenement worked together, the toilet on the landing, shared by three families etc.
I was sharing my own memories and she joined in with hers, saying she felt emotional remembering her childhood.

That's the sort of lesson that stays with you for life, how wonderful 😊

OfSted do have access to reams of data which they scrutinise before a visit. The obligation for schools to collect all this data is simply one other negative about OfSted - teachers who could be teaching are spending time collecting this data - which is micro-management at its worst.

The data is so detailed and repetitive and takes so much time to prepare and is wholly unnecessary to the advancement of the children's education. Teachers know which children in their class are flying and which are struggling - they do not need to use up time creating reams of data - if it were not for OfSted they would be getting on with their jobs - and be all the happier for it. The current requirement to document every detail of class progress is putting young teachers off education as a career and creating wholly unnecessary stress.

As governors we are presented with copious data and anyone who has not had to wade through this stuff (let alone produce it) can never understand what a dead hand it is.

My DH was an HMI and given early retirement when OFSTED was born. A group of colleagues produced the first draft of inspection procedure and trialled it, and the first inspections were done by retired HMI and local authority advisers. These were experienced and knowledgeable teams with a national perspective and initially this worked quite well, but more and more rigidity crept into the process and my DH stepped down when he was asked to grade individual lessons, something which horrified him.

Some form of inspection which respects local conditions but has some sort of wider view is necessary, but what we have now does not actually lead to improvement. And the amount of paperwork is horrific, as I remember from my time as a chair of primary school governors.

This thread is discussing quite rightly how Ofsted inspections are conducted, but I cannot help thinking about how the Perry family must be feeling now that the inquest is over; it established clearly how Ruth Perry was driven to suicide by an unfair judgement on one aspect of a successful school and exposed the torment she was suffering this time last year. A wicked waste of a life. Four areas out of five were judged 'good' yet the whole school deemed to be inadequate on the basis of the fifth, the prohibition on discussing the judgement with her peers, and the callous treatment at the hands of the lead Inspector Alan Derry.
Amanda Spielman, (who should never have been appointed in the first place) has gone, and one hopes her successor will bring about some rigorous changes in the way Ofsted is delivered. I also hope Alan Derry will be held to account publicly for his conduct and prevented from being involved in any educational matters in future.

I have taught in many different areas, children adults, here and abroad. My favourite was teaching juniors as if you got their imaginations you could do really well with the children wanting to explore and learn. Rigid specific sets of lessons do not give you the best results with this age. Of course you need to cover the curriculum but there are ways and ways and using your experience and catching the moment can be much better. I also taught in a Montessori in Damascus and can definitely say that I found this the best kind of teaching. You get people saying it is lazy as you go by the childs interest. No , you have to be very up in your game to provide what is needed. In this country if you suggested that a 7 year old could be engrossed for the whole day in one thing they would think you were lying. But I have seen and experienced the marvellous situation when a child has become so involved in an experience and learning far more in depth than you would have thought and spent a complete day during which their interest led them into mathematical work, english , looking up books, writing out ideas etc. It was a marvellous experience for me and I never forgot it. Telling a child so deeply engrossed to put it away and go on to the planned timetable would have been totally wrong. As a teacher and a mother I have spent so much of my life involved in this and now I would hate to be a teacher. Of course we worried about the inspectors coming but I have always had the chance to talk in a reasonable way and explain things and listen to what they said. Our joint aim was to do the best for each child and that was the base. Now with this appalling government, they are measured by how much things cost, putting school against school and measuring by exams only. There are many many more things than exams that count in life, and in this dreadful case they even stopped this teacher being able to have the support of her fellow teachers who no doubt would be reminding her what a good teacher she was. The inspectors should be ashamed of themselves in the way they have acted and even now trying to avoid accepting any blame.This appalling behaviour has to be changed or you will not get any caring person want to become a teacher if you are given no autonomy, no help and are given no recognition for all the effort you put in to help each child to learn but to also enjoy learning.

I have come to this thread late, but during the last week have read and heard much about it that has shocked and horrified me. It is totally un acceptable that Ofsted functions in this manner.

I have heard the head of Ofsted speaking on the radio and thought she was totally out of touch. Ruth Perry's sister Professor Waters gave a magnificent interview on Woman's Hour and was so succinct in everything she said, all of it heartfelt and must have been so difficult for her, and said she had taken time off from grieving for her sister in order to fight for justice and improvement. What an amazing lady. Couldn't we have her as an unelected Prime Minister?

We are hearing very little about the main protagonist, Alan Derry, I have Googled him and there is the absolute minimum. He should be sacked and banned from any educational post in the future. h
How could a sentient human being treat a caring human being in this way.

My grandchildren are in secondary education now, but if they were still in primary education I would fear for their development in every respect if the teachers in their schools were so stressed by the Ofsted inspections. This is not what education is about.

Would it not be reasonable to have an independent, non teaching person in these inspections to arbitrate, such as a parent and member of the PTA, after all is it the concern for their children that must be uppermost in their minds.

Probably not a well constructed thread, suffering from Covid and a bit brain foggy.

They are cruel tyrants and have ruined many a good teachers career and life. I’d see them in prison.

Thanks, eazybee for reminding us what these people did to a dedicated head teacher whose school, on the whole, was considered to be achieving good standards apart from one area.
A school governor has stated that Ofsted Inspector Alan Derry told him that he considered the school had a robust safeguarding culture and that no child felt unsafe at school.
Yet then failed the school for safeguarding issues.


The system is flawed and some of those people should be brought to account.

Callistemon21

Thanks, eazybee for reminding us what these people did to a dedicated head teacher whose school, on the whole, was considered to be achieving good standards apart from one area.
A school governor has stated that Ofsted Inspector Alan Derry told him that he considered the school had a robust safeguarding culture and that no child felt unsafe at school.
Yet then failed the school for safeguarding issues.

The system is flawed and some of those people should be brought to account.

I have not seen this (what the school governor said) it makes me wonder whether the recording system was not good - something that can be put right fairly easily.

There has been a suggestion that the safeguarding part of a school should be inspected by safeguarding specialists, because of its very nature. I wonder what teachers on here think?

Schools can have safeguarding policies in place but some children may witness inappropriate things in their own homes which they then may bring into the school playground.

It was reported that the Inspector witnessed a child dancing in a sexual fashion in the playground. He was 'flossing' which was a craze at the time.
Jacob Rees-Mogg's children were seen flossing on social media! It's from a social media game.

I have not seen this (what the school governor said) it makes me wonder whether the recording system was not good - something that can be put right fairly easily.

We had a database, where every teacher could log a concern, no matter how trivial about a pupil. The report went straight to the H.T.
One day I was talking to a colleague and she mentioned something that was worrying her, but hadn't recorded. That day I had already recorded a concern about another child in the same family, because my instinct was that something wasn't quite right. I explained that it is like a jigsaw puzzle, one piece means nothing, it's when you put it all together, that you see things more clearly.
When the HT looked at all the concerns regarding various children in that family, he called their social worker, who visited the home. Those children were consequently removed from the family home, due to safeguarding concerns.
It was awful, what came to light.

Accurate recording is essential.

Inspection an absolute tragedy I wonder what was going on here: Evening Standard

School governor Neil Walne said that lead Ofsted inspector Alan Derry told him during the inspection that the school had a “robust” safeguarding culture and that no child felt unsafe at the school.

Giving evidence to an inquest at Berkshire Coroner’s Office in Reading on Thursday, he said: “He certainly said pupils felt safe and that everyone knew who to turn to if they felt unsafe.”

However, at the end of the inspection, school leaders were told that the school was to receive an “inadequate” rating over safeguarding.

Mr Walne said that he then raised Mr Derry’s earlier comments on safeguarding to him.

“I reminded him of the comments he had made to me about a robust safeguarding culture and that no child was unsafe,” he said.

Mr Walne told the court that Mr Derry told him that he should not have made the comments.

“He said words to the effect of I should not have said that, I was wrong,” he said.

The inquest heard that the local authority and the school’s board of governors later decided not to challenge Ofsted’s rating of “inadequate”.

Mr Walne told the court that they decided not to appeal the decision as they felt they would fail, and were concerned about the amount of work that would have to go into it.

www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/ofsted-reading-reading-council-b1123989.html

Oldbat1 Even NHS is allowed "improvements" on inspections. Absolute disgrace OFSTED system if it can be called a system.

However, at the end of the inspection, school leaders were told that the school was to receive an “inadequate” rating over safeguarding.
Playing devil's advocate here, just to provoke discussion you understand , do we know the context and the timing of the conversation? Was it before they unearthed the shortcomings? The thing with an inspection, as I understand it, is that it isn't over until it's over. The inspector was an idiot to say too much before having the full facts at his fingertips. The governor might have read too much into the preliminary findings? I don't know.
I assume state schools get an informal chat with governors and the headteacher at the end of day 1?

In the Nov 22 report, which was reported on in March 23, it was noted that safeguarding monitoring was not fulfilled well. All categories except safeguarding were assessed as Good. Three months later the safeguarding category is also assessed as Good, which implies that the problem lay in something simply remediable, such as a mistake on a form.

The rumour is that the inspector saw children on the playground "flossing" which he interpreted to be dancing of a "sexual nature." Mention is made in the report of playground supervision, but clearly this was an inspector totally out of touch with young children and what is in vogue with them.

If something more serious on the recording of incidents was wrong it is clear that a few months later it was fine. So why are schools not given time and space to address any concerns before the damning verdict goes public and the school is pounced on by the regional education officer and directed to become an academy and join a MAT?- that is what happens in these circumstances.

Ruth Perry was a very experienced head teacher and definitely would have known that a Safeguarding fail results in an inadequate rating overall. For this reason I find it impossible not to believe that the infringement in the safeguarding paperwork must have been very minor.

The latest Good report says: "Governors do not check other aspects of the school as rigorously as they oversee
the arrangements for safeguarding." [!!].

The whole system needs to be reviewed and the focus needs to move towards a positive approach to give schools time to redress any shortcomings before their school is condemned to a poor rating with all that this implies for the school's future. OfSted could then claim to be at least trying to improve educational standards.

I feel desperate for that poor woman - it is so evident from the reports that overall the school was great and the children were enjoying their education under the leadership of this head. A 2 day visit sees the whole pack of cards come tumbling down and a respected professional losing their life. It must not be allowed to happen again.