“Single headline grades are low information for parents and high stakes for schools,” commented education secretary Bridget Phillipson as she announced the long-awaited scrapping of single word Ofsted judgments. Her diagnosis is correct, and she’s administered the correct first aid. Now her team needs to design the right long-term treatment plan.
The steps Phillipson has taken are broadly in line with the blueprint for reform proposed in an IPPR report I authored last year. Inspectors will continue to look at and comment on each area of the inspection framework; schools needing immediate changes of management will be identified; and additional support will be offered to schools that are struggling but capable of improvement. So far so good.
Calls for Ofsted reform tend to fall into one of two camps. There are those who call for a wholesale reboot – perhaps by abolishing the inspectorate – and there are those who want ‘iterative change’.
Those in the ‘iterative change’ group tend to think the inspectorate is broadly a good thing. They believe a robust system of intervention is needed, but that the thumb-screws have been over- tightened, compromising school leaders’ ability to act in their pupils’ interests.
Today’s announcement suggests Labour have aligned themselves with the second camp, and shows an encouraging commitment to releasing the pressure without compromising on standards. The announcement has been widely welcomed and the sector has breathed a collective sigh of relief.
However, some have questioned whether the announcement will make any substantive difference. Schools that are ’cause for concern’ will still be identified and schools that were ‘outstanding’ might just chase an ‘outstanding in every area’ verdict instead.
The flaw in this criticism is that it boils down to criticising an iterative change for being iterative. Which is particularly odd when it comes from those advocating for iterative change.
The current problems with Ofsted are largely linked to the way those at the chalkface perceive it: the pain of the thumbscrews is just too great and that drives panicky behaviour. So long as the new system feels different, then that’s an improvement.
Inspection will still matter – but the thumbscrews have been loosened
Today’s plans have a good chance of achieving that goal. A headteacher running a school that was ‘outstanding’ under the old system will no longer feel like quite as much is at stake when an inspection risks jeopardising that ‘gold star’. For one of four judgments to slip is qualitatively different to experiencing a shift between one of four headline categories.
Meanwhile, teachers working their way through job ads will no longer be presented with a world divided into four starkly contrasting categories and parents will have no choice but to look beyond a single-headline word. That in itself opens the door to nuance and means inspections will less frequently be ‘make or break’.
It’s true that in some cases inspection will still have big consequences. A school at risk of being judged a ‘cause for concern’ will still feel the pressure. But that’s not unreasonable.
Earlier this year I spent a couple of months studying the accountability systems in five different jurisdictions around the world. A frequent complaint was that in some systems there are no real consequences to inspection.
Ultimately, our new interim system softens the public, performative dimension of inspection while retaining the opportunities for action to maintain standards.
There are clearly big questions remaining for Phillipson and her team:
- The model for the widely-trailed ‘school report card’ mustn’t just become a series of reductive and gameable metrics that drive perverse incentives.
- The form and function of the proposed regional improvement teams will need to minimise the triple risk of conflicts of interest, poaching talent or replicating existing provision.
- And the relationship between the inspectorate and the DfE’s regional directors will have to be recalibrated to facilitate intelligent regulation, intervention and support.
This morning’s announcement means schools will still be judged, and inspection will still matter. But the thumbscrews have been loosened, and that’s a good thing. It’s no surprise the news was greeted by a grateful chorus.
However, it will take careful thought over the next few months combined with skilled implementation in the coming years to ensure this doesn’t prove to be a false dawn.
