By Andy Jordan
ASCL Inspection and Accountability Specialist

Two weeks ago, inspections began under the renewed Ofsted inspection framework. 

Initially, these have taken place in volunteer schools with full teams of HMIs working together to evaluate schools.

Next week, routine inspections recommence and, with that in mind, it is pertinent to reflect on what we know so far. 

At ASCL, we have received detailed feedback on several inspections that have taken place under the renewed framework, including pilot inspections and ‘the real thing’.

It is worth noting that the comments summarised in this blog have come from schools which have volunteered to be part of the process. 

This means they are reasonably confident and it may be that their experience of the new inspection system is therefore more positive than proves to be the case as inspections are rolled out more widely. 

With that in mind, it is vital that Ofsted pays heed to what they say, as any concerns they identify are likely to prove even more problematic where inspections are more vexed.

The good
School leaders have welcomed the fact that inspections are being led by permanent Ofsted employees (HMIs) and they feel that this has added consistency to judgements. 

The approach taken by inspectors also feels more collaborative and school leaders have commented on the fact that inspections have felt ‘done with’ rather than ‘done to’.

The increased focus on context has also been well-received and school leaders have felt that they have been able to present the unique features of their school to inspectors who have taken this into consideration when making their grading judgements.

The introduction of the ‘nominee role’ in school inspections – to act as the main point of contact and liaison with the inspection team – has helped to sightly reduce the burden on headteachers across the two days of inspection.

The focus on inclusion is also welcome as school leaders are proud to work with our most vulnerable young people and want to support them in their journey through education. 

The bad
However, there are a range of concerns which leaders have raised with us and that we have passed on to Ofsted so that it can take them into consideration moving forward. 

It is clear that the new framework puts a great deal of burden on inspection teams to reach a variety of judgements across two days. 

This makes planning inspection activity difficult, and one school leader told us that it took nearly three hours to plan the timetable for the second day of inspection to ensure that everything could be covered. 

This is additional workload, and has created greater stress among those who have been involved in inspection so far. 

Indeed, the burden of inspection has fallen heavily on leadership teams to the point that one school leader commented that it had impacted on the day-to-day running of the school. 

Senior staff are needed in meetings, they accompany inspectors on learning walks, and they also have their normal day job to do. In some cases, this has led to staff cover having to be arranged at short notice and has caused disruption. 

This not only affects the normal operation of the school being inspected, but it also adds to the stress of school leadership, which Education Support’s recent Teacher Wellbeing Index suggests is already very high.

The move from a ‘best fit’ model of evaluation to a ‘secure fit’ – in which every standard must be met before a grade can be awarded – has made it challenging to achieve both the ‘expected standard’ and the ‘strong standard’.

This is particularly the case with the achievement and attendance evaluation areas as achieving the ‘expected standard’ entails being broadly in line with national averages.

Leaders of schools in challenging contexts, where it is hardest to achieve these benchmarks, fear they will receive ‘needs attention’ grades which do not reflect the quality of provision and the fabulous work of their schools.

Ofsted must look at this as a matter of urgency as the ‘secure fit’ methodology risks penalising schools doing great work in very difficult circumstances. 

Case sampling – where Ofsted looks at a selection of six pupils with specific needs – is also causing concern.

While the focus on inclusion is welcome, the arbitrary nature of selecting six students – whether the school has a cohort of 25 or 1,500 – seems disproportionate. 

One leader commented that conclusions drawn as a result of the experiences of six pupils may not truly reflect provision across the institution and could lead to skewed assumptions. 

And it has the unintended consequence of placing pressure on these young people as they realise that they are heavily involved in the school’s inspection outcome. This doesn’t seem right.

Finally, inspections have begun with full HMI teams who have undergone extensive training and have been able to test the new methodology in pilot inspections.

But is the wider Ofsted workforce as well prepared? Several OIs have told ASCL privately that they do not feel ready. They have done the training but not yet had the opportunity to shadow an inspection to see how it works in practice. 

In the coming weeks inspections will be HMI-led but if OIs haven’t yet been able to test out the training – which many will have completed over two months previously – then I fear that errors could be made despite everyone’s best intentions. 

The ugly
In Ofsted’s press release in September, we were promised a “new inspection methodology to reduce workload for the education workforce.”

However, it is clear that far from reducing workloads, the renewed framework is increasing the burden on senior staff. One school leader told me that the demands “were massive” and another said that when inspectors left at 5pm on day one, senior leadership team members still had several hours of work to complete.

An ASCL survey of over 1,000 members in September found that 65% of leaders feared the new inspection system will be even more damaging for their wellbeing than the old system while fewer than 5% think it will be better.

From what we have seen so far, certainly in terms of workloads, those fears are not misplaced. 

This is a huge concern, as we know from the Teacher Wellbeing Index that school and college leaders are already at risk of negative health consequences due to their work, and are reporting high levels of “burnout, exhaustion and acute stress.”

Your feedback
ASCL will continue to carefully monitor the roll-out of the new inspection system, gathering evidence of how it is landing in practice and feeding back to Ofsted our concerns.

If your school or college is inspected, we would love to hear from you. Please send your thoughts and comments to tellus@ascl.org.uk. 

We wish you and your teams the very best of luck, and please remember that we’re here to support you if you need our help or advice.