Responding to Ofsted's announcement of its proposals for reform,
which are now going out to consultation, Paul Whiteman, general
secretary of school leaders' union, NAHT said: “The proposals set
out today for consultation suggest an inspectorate determined to
hold on to a model of inspection that is long past its sell-by
date.
“The plan to retain numbered sub-judgements risks replicating the
worst aspects of the current system and will do little to reduce
the enormous pressure school leaders are under.
“Given that Ofsted previously struggled to provide reliable
judgements using a 4-point scale, it is very hard to see how they
will be able to do against a 5-point one. As other inspectorates
have shown, there is another way – a way to provide clearer
information for parents and schools without resorting to grades.
“Avoiding the harm to education professionals caused by an
outdated approach is not going soft on standards. The opposite is
true, the current system is at the root of the teacher and leader
retention crisis which in itself is a threat to the education we
can deliver to children.
“The decision to remove overarching judgements was absolutely the
right one and we welcome the confirmation these will not be
returning, but as school leaders made clear at the time, that
must be a first step towards fundamental reform of a broken
system. School leaders do not want to see evolution of a system
that has caused so much harm over many years.
“We are very concerned about the design of the consultation. By
using open-ended, free-text questions, Ofsted will be able to
avoid gathering data accurately to gauge whether there is genuine
support for the model it appears to have already chosen. Picking
out what parents and professionals really think will be virtually
impossible and the design risks losing sight of the wood for the
trees. Ofsted is refusing to ask simple and straightforward
questions about the extent to which stakeholders support these
proposals.
“As a public body, Ofsted must do better than this – parents and
professionals should be presented with a set of genuine options.
Arbitrary deadlines must not be used to push reforms through if
the support is not there.”
