For those who work outside of education, it is hard to explain the debilitating affect that Ofsted can have on people, it is hard to appreciate how something allegedly designed to support schools often succeeds in achieving the exact opposite. You might imagine that the worst part of Ofsted is the inspection. In my experience, I believe that this is a fallacy. The worst part for many is the anticipation, which for some schools can, and has gone on for years. For others, the balloon bursting following an inspection and the subsequent fallout creates the most stress or anxiety. The irony being that this fall out can even feel significant if the outcome is okay. Add to that the delay between the inspection and a report being published, and the fact that during this time the Head has the knowledge of an outcome without being able to share or discuss this with anyone, and that can be a lonely place to be. 

I passionately feel that the anticipation is crippling – never more so than when covid meant that the Ofsted window became so vast that it was simpler to say which schools weren’t in it. How unhealthy that an SLT spends each and every week not breathing until Wednesday lunchtime waiting for the call, and then from then onwards worrying about what more they need to do before the following week. A cycle which is relentless and exhausting. How dangerous that schools could easily fall into the trap of putting so much effort into preparing for Ofsted, that once they have been, there is no energy or momentum left? 

The big question we have asked for years is what difference do these inspections make and who for? The longer I spend supporting schools, the less I feel that I have a positive answer to these questions. What I do see is schools getting swamped by Ofsted preparation, SLTs in danger of forgetting what schools should be focused on and Heads trying to keep realistic about what it is genuinely possible to achieve and evidence. I see great Heads struggling because they are genuinely focused on children and making a real difference to communities, and I see leaders flourishing because what they are adept at is putting on an impressive performance. I am not being judgemental here; I am simply pointing out that I am not sure Ofsted achieves what it is intended to. 

The new framework came with some positives, and I have seen some more understanding inspections recently, however it is nowhere near enough. Inspections are still undertaken by individuals who come in with their own knowledge, awareness, experience, and agendas and this can significantly impact on the focus of an inspection. As with anything there are some fantastic people who inspect for Ofsted, however they are limited by the systems they work within, and there are some inspectors who appear to miss the point. Positive reports are rarely as positive as the verbal feedback for example, as the template for the report places limits what can be included. I have supported schools where I have some real concerns about aspects, yet an Ofsted inspection has seemingly stroked a superficial surface and found nothing untoward. Equally at the other end of the spectrum, I work with schools who are fundamentally child-centred, go way above and beyond for their families, and yet spend their entire inspection having to justify academic progress and knowing that there are unspoken limitations to how highly they will ever be rated. This breaks my heart. 

In the current climate, some of our best schools are constantly torn between doing what they feel is right, and doing what they can justify to Ofsted. There are schools who invest hours in just ensuring that children are safe and ready to learn before they can teach anything – there is often little or no recognition for this. There is still that fundamental lack of understanding, that children must be happy and safe first before they can learn and make progress. Schools who focus on this are doing what they need to, however Ofsted inspections do not feel designed and thus rarely recognise the impact and importance of all this work. It is often impact that is hard to evidence, quantify or measure. 

So, what would I do? Do schools need to be inspected? What would actually help and make a real difference to schools and children? I believe that schools do need external eyes, someone objectively looking at what they are doing and why. However, I believe genuine impact and progress is made when the person doing the looking has a level of investment in the next part of the journey. I think there needs to be much greater awareness of what our schools are responding to on a daily basis, and real recognition that phrases such as ‘school readiness’ means a whole plethora of things depending on which school you are referring to. I work with schools where school readiness means that the child can read and write a bit, compared to schools where it means that the child is not wearing nappies and has any speech. It is not that starting points are lower, it is that starting points are almost incomparable.

I work with secondary schools where their list of vulnerable students who need extended transition, just to support their initial attendance at the school in Year 7, is so long that it would be easier to talk about who doesn’t need it, and this might be down the road from a school where they are on a daily basis responding to parents placing unhealthy and unrealistic pressure and expectations of their children to exceed. Our schools are so different, and they must be and need to be for all our children to succeed. This I feel is not adequately reflected in Ofsted judgements.

How frightening is it that a Headteacher can feel so judged in an inspection that lasts a matter of days, that they feel unable to go on? That everything else that they have achieved, any differences that they have made and any children that have benefitted from their existence is worth so little. 

Anyone who works with me appreciates that I have high expectations and I am certainly no pushover. If I visit a school to review their safeguarding or similar, I aim to leave no stone unturned and I will always come from the perspective of what could you do even better. However, I do this because children deserve that, none of what I am passionate about for the purpose of ticking a box or trying to make the school look good. I am all about sustainability not sticking plasters. I always try to acknowledge and respond to the specific circumstances of the school, and I aim to leave people feeling empowered and focused, rather than feeling undervalued or deskilled. Challenge and accountability are not about being ruthless and uncompassionate, in fact I think this does way more harm than good, and often means barriers go up making it harder to see what is actually going on. There are very few people that I come across working in schools who aren’t trying to do their best, so this is always my starting point and only assumption. We can then work together to identify good practice and discuss areas for development. I hope this approach feels very different to schools compared to an inspection, as when reviews are coming from the perspective of a supportive tool, rather than feeling like an opportunity to catch you out or trip you up, which is how Ofsted has sometimes been referred to, the process is entirely different. The former surely creates an openness and transparency that is much more helpful, rather than the game being about how you paint the most positive picture. 

Also, when I visit, the accountability for the process is in many respect two-way. I am clearly holding the school to account whilst I’m there, asking questions, looking at evidence, speaking to children, however this is not one-sided. If I make a recommendation, I always have to be prepared for the “and how do you suggest I do that?” question. I can’t just say something is not good enough and then walk away. Listening to Ruth’s sister saying that her sister’s vocation was summed up in one word perfectly captures this point. Ofsted make a judgement and then leave. They don’t have to deliver the long awaited report to staff who have dedicated their time and effort, they don’t have to see the faces of teachers who feel responsible, they don’t have to respond to angry parents or panic about the impact on future numbers and what this does to the budget. I feel invested in schools that I work with, as I want them to improve, I want them to progress, I want them to invite me back to show me what they have achieved. I have rarely worked with a school where the same inspector has ever gone back, so why would they feel any investment after they leave? 

I wonder if somewhere in these thoughts is a potential start of a solution. Perhaps the idea of an inspection is outdated. For me an inspection suggests something not just objective, it portrays a sense of detachment. I think to truly understand a school you have to take the time to understand the community it sits within, the unique challenges that it faces, and the journey it is on. The ‘snapshot’ that an inspection allows does not give the time or focus for this to be viable. I wonder what it would look like if the people employed to have an objective eye into schools, were local to the school and attached to a school for a period of time. I wonder whether this investment would mean that rather than a school feeling like an inspection was being done to them, it would feel more like a review of their practice was being done with them. I wonder whether this would mean that the process genuinely improved practice for the people that actually matter, and that there would be real benefits for children, and all children not just those best placed to succeed. I wonder whether Ofsted would then make Headteachers feel supported, valued, and empowered, rather than making them feel like Ruth Perry. This has to be the time for change, we cannot continue with a system where an Ofsted Report can feel ‘deeply harmful’ and leave a family mourning a death. My thoughts go out to the family and school community of Ruth Perry.