There are few issues of greater interest in education at present than the planned introduction of report cards to hold schools and colleges to account.
Ofsted briefed an initial version of its plans in confidence to education sector representatives earlier this month - ahead of a formal consultation in the new year - only for the details to be reported in Tes and leaked to the Financial Times.
Cue understandable uproar in the profession about proposals that seem, to many, to be complicated and problematic.
Behind-the-scenes discussions happen all the time with the government and its agencies on a variety of issues. The aim is to share views and iron out major problems before formal plans are launched into the public domain.
It doesn’t always work that way, as governments may press ahead despite objections. The previous administration did that a lot.
Ofsted’s new report cards
At least it establishes a dialogue and a mutual understanding of each other’s positions, though. This is a great deal more productive than an entirely oppositional relationship.
Most of the time, that work goes on unseen. In this case - on a particularly thorny issue - it has burst into the public gaze at a time when the detail is still under discussion.
As one of the organisations involved in that discussion, we are not going to critique the proposals in this column.
But, without betraying any confidences, I do want to set out what we think report cards should look like and how the process of introducing them should work. So here goes.
Our view is that report cards should be based on an agreed set of standards, determined by the government through legislation, in consultation with the sector.
Those standards should not be developed by Ofsted.
This is not a criticism of Ofsted. Our point is that it should be the job of the democratically elected government to say what is expected of schools, and the role of the inspectorate to inspect on that basis.
Ofsted should inspect against some of these standards and feed into certain elements of the report card. But some standards may be better evidenced through means other than inspection, such as nationally collected attainment, progress and attendance data.
New labels
Evaluation of these standards should provide parents with assurance and clarity, while avoiding the damage caused by applying labels such as “inadequate” to a school or college, as happened under the old system.
We think it would suffice to simply state whether or not a school has met the expected standard in each of the areas of evaluation, with schools that don’t meet all standards being supported to do so in future.
Not everyone will agree with this approach and some may feel that this too amounts to a label of sorts.
But it avoids the harsh terminology that has caused so many problems in the past, while providing a more complete picture than a single reductive descriptor, as well as the clarity and assurance needed by parents.
Slow and steady
We believe that getting this right is more important than doing it quickly.
There is a lot of work to do to meet the proposed date for introducing the new system in September 2025 and not much time in which to do it.
A full consultation will take place in the new year, followed by a government response and then final confirmation of the detail of the new system.
This process will take several months - leaving little time for schools and colleges to prepare for this very significant change and communicate it to parents, governors, trustees and other stakeholders.
We would therefore be prepared to see the new approach introduced later than September 2025, if necessary, to ensure it is done well.
Avoiding the pitfalls of the past
None of this was ever going to be easy.
We have always recognised the challenge of replacing graded judgements with a new system that fairly assesses schools and colleges, provides clarity and assurance to parents, and identifies where support is needed.
But avoiding the pitfalls of the past must be paramount. We simply must not end up replacing one flawed system with another flawed system.
If it takes a little longer to achieve then that - in our view - is time well spent.
Pepe Di’Iasio is general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders
For the latest education news and analysis delivered every weekday morning, sign up for the Tes Daily newsletter
