The chief inspector’s recent announcement that we can expect to see a greater focus on behaviour in the new inspection framework worries me. 

I’m not for a second suggesting that behaviour isn’t important, or that there shouldn’t be consequences for poor behaviour. It’s pretty obvious that disruptive behaviour can have a negative impact on the learning that takes place in a classroom and it is right that schools should have the highest expectations of all pupils.

I should also say that I’m a fan of behaviour policies - a whole-school approach that is well supported by senior leaders can make a big difference to the climate of a school. It is no bad thing that Ofsted is talking about supporting schools that have well-thought-through, effective policies in place.

I appreciate that behaviour is an area that parents are particularly interested in and that Ofsted has a duty to write reports that reflect the needs of parents, as well as a range of other interested parties. That being said, I’m not convinced that a current lack of focus in this area is preventing inspectors from flagging up behaviour-related concerns that they see during visits to schools. If an inspector finds that poor behaviour is seriously inhibiting learning, they are perfectly able to write a report that says just that.

If Ofsted is determined to proceed with introducing a specific section and, indeed, grade for behaviour, then I would urge it to take a great deal of care when doing so.

It is absolutely essential that it recognises the very different challenges schools face when it comes to supporting children’s behaviour. This is not about making excuses, it’s about recognising that in some schools pupils arrive at the start of the week emotionally ready to learn. Without trying to stereotype too much, these children have probably spent a weekend with love, care and attention. They likely come from a settled household where there is a sense of routine and adults around them who model positive behaviour and support them with managing their own emotions.

There are other schools where children arrive carrying an enormous weight of emotional baggage. They may be hungry, tired and have spent a weekend witnessing confrontation and possibly even violence.

A simplistic comparison of behaviour between these two hypothetical schools would be unfair and unhelpful. Yes, children might appear more polite, engaged and focused in the first scenario, but that doesn’t necessarily tell us an awful lot about how good the school is at supporting pupils’ behaviour. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to expect that in the second scenario you are more likely to witness more challenging behaviour even if there is excellent provision and support in place.

The danger of more exclusions

Will the new framework take other aspects of the school’s context into account? For example, a school’s access to educational psychologists, behaviour support teams and speech and language therapists has a huge impact on the level of support it is able to offer pupils and families.

I’m also concerned about the unintended consequences that this plan could have if insufficient thought is given to the detail.

Consider the headteacher who is anticipating an inspection and receives a phone call asking if they are prepared to give a child excluded elsewhere a second chance in their school. I know of many brilliant headteachers who, time after time, demonstrate immense professional courage by working with children who have struggled in other settings. It is essential that any new evaluation rewards those leaders, rather than potentially punishing them for doing so.

We already have an issue with an increasing number of exclusions in this country. Could this inadvertently exacerbate that problem? More importantly, do we have the capacity in the system to support the needs of these pupils if it does?

Ofsted should also be wary of appearing to support a certain approach to behaviour management. What might be appropriate in, say, a pupil-referral unit for 11- to 16-year-olds is unlikely to be right for a nursery or infant school catering for children with specific speech and language difficulties. Similarly, a pupil with autism or a diagnosed attachment disorder will need a very different approach to other children. The importance of inspectors approaching each school with an open mind, rather than preconceived ideas about what works, cannot be stressed enough.

During her speech last week, the chief inspector made an interesting point about Ofsted not being there to judge a school’s effort and, to an extent, this is understandable. However, not to acknowledge the context in which schools work when evaluating their approach to behaviour would be perverse. My hope is that great care is taken when drafting this particular section of the new handbook. Supporting and improving children’s behaviour can be a hugely complex task and those writing the new framework need to be acutely aware of that.

James Bowen is director of the NAHT Edge middle leaders’ union and a former head of an ‘outstanding’ primary. He tweets @JamesJkbowen