The Commons Education Select Committee published its report this week on Ofsted’s work with schools.

The single-word overall effectiveness judgement came in for heavy criticism, as did the short time inspectors spend in schools. Concerns over the lack of relevant expertise among inspectors and reports of poor behaviour by others were also worrying to read about.

Overall, the report is overwhelming in its view that how Ofsted inspects schools needs to change.

A force for good?

Meanwhile, prior to its publication, Ofsted’s new chief inspector, Sir Martyn Oliver, declared the implementation of a number of immediate changes to inspections, including that headteachers can now request school inspections be paused.

Inspections were also paused for most of January so inspectors could receive better training on the mental health challenges caused by inspections.

However, this narrative of change sits uneasily with the fact documentation on Ofsted’s pause stated that the organisation ”exists to be a force for improvement” in schools - a phrase used by former chief Amanda Spielman in 2017 and something I found concerning then.

It is highly insensitive and clumsy, considering the impact Ofsted’s “force” had on headteacher Ruth Perry’s tragic death.

The fact this phrase remains so central to Ofsted’s view of itself makes me question how much might actually change - and if the inspectorate really understands the situation schools face.

The frontline reality

Headteachers tell me the leadership of schools has become untenable. For example, they work in a pressure-cooker system with their jobs at risk from any drop in examination results or following an inspection report that is lower than “good”.

Gross under-funding results in bare minimum resourcing within a teacher recruitment crisis, which has never been worse, while extreme and unmanageable pupil behaviour and increasing, unnecessary bureaucracy are all taking time and resource away from teaching.

This is a sector that is breaking and yet is operating in a system where the inspectorate blames and judges schools, rather than fully examines and accounts for the context within which they operate.

After all, it is never just the school or its leadership that is fully responsible - it is so often a combination of a school’s provision, social setting, parent body and resourcing, among other factors, that determines how well a school is doing.

Yet, for the last decade, Ofsted has ignored all this and assigned a single-word judgement on a school and its staff with little regard for the wider context.

Political pressures

A lot of this has been driven by political pressure that has seen Ofsted used as a whip by the Department for Education to “force” schools to improve.

Yet this seems to be entirely ignored in current debates. In fact, in many of its recommendations, the Commons Education Select Committee’s report suggests the DfE and Ofsted must work together on solving the criticisms made by the sector.

But the report fails to recognise that if Ofsted is to change, it needs to be given the mandate to wrestle back control from the DfE - after all, it does not actually report to the DfE but directly to Parliament.

However, the alignment of inspection frameworks to DfE policy positions means Ofsted has appeared to move directly in line with the government.

Look no further than DfE’s recent overhaul of initial teacher training (ITT) provision, which coincided with the number of ITT providers who were suddenly downgraded in their inspection judgements, to see this in action.

Asserting independence

To be truly independent of the DfE’s influence, Sir Martyn must position Ofsted above DfE policy, so it can report to Parliament on the whole picture in education, not just schools’ provision.

To further underline this, the DfE itself must not be exempt from accountability - it should be subject to scrutiny and inspected annually on the impact its decisions have on educational provision nationally.

After all, if multi-academy trusts are to be inspected for their role in leading and managing schools, then why not the DfE, too? It’s their policies that schools and trusts have to enact after all.

Education requires systemic change, and part of that change has to be that Ofsted stops being so close with government and takes a more holistic, informed view of the education system.

Don’t get me wrong, if a school is unsafe, then serious action needs to be taken. If its leadership is weak, then changes at the top may be required. But these extreme cases should not dictate Ofsted’s culture in the way it inspects all its schools.

It feels like a now-or-never moment for Ofsted to rid itself of being the oppressive force over schools and instead become an organisation that truly works to help and support them.

Professor Geraint Jones is the executive director and associate pro vice-chancellor of the National Institute of Teaching and Education at Coventry University

For the latest education news and analysis delivered directly to your inbox every weekday morning, sign up to the Tes Daily newsletter