One of the most pressing issues facing the teaching profession is the amount of workload involved. The excessive workload is not only resulting in reduced retention rates, but also in a profession that’s becoming increasingly demoralised.
I recently attended a debate that asked who was responsible for teacher workload. I had hoped to see some original and actionable solutions for how the workload could be reduced. Instead, I heard speakers almost universally blaming the ‘audit culture’ behind teaching. It seemed that many think that the best way to reduce teaching workload is for the profession to become wholly lacking in accountability.
The good news for teachers is that, actually, there are numerous ways to reduce the workload of the teaching profession without compromising its quality. One of which is to change the way in which Ofsted inspections are organised.
I think, instead of the dreaded phone call the day before, they should give no notice at all and simply turn up.
A couple of years ago, in a school I used to teach at, I witnessed a reaction to that Ofsted call that has really stayed with me.
Once the headteacher received notice of the inspection, an all-staff meeting was hastily assembled. From that point, I witnessed a level of plotting and scheming that made Game of Thrones or Machiavelli look mild.
Staff members were encouraged to hide books away in cupboards that had little marking and to complete retrospective marking of books even in cases where the marking would not be utilised in lessons.
A colleague admitted she was behind on marking, and was told to mark the books closest to the classroom doors as those were the ones an inspector would most likely look at. Sure enough, the trick worked well when an Ofsted inspector came into one of her lessons the next day - the Ofsted inspector only inspected pupil books closest to the classroom door.
After the staff meeting, most class teachers stayed in their classrooms all evening with a singular mission of marking pupil books, not for the benefit of students but to create an effective façade to Ofsted.
Upon speaking to my line manager at the time about my ethical concerns on the matter, I was told that all schools react to Ofsted inspections in this way. I have been reliably informed that one academy chain, upon receiving notice of the inspection, systematically transports their worst behaving pupils, almost like cattle, to another school within the chain for the day.
Ultimately, Ofsted conducts inspections of schools to find out how well schools are performing. If you give schools notice of Ofsted inspections, they will naturally prepare themselves for such inspections - staff members know that the future of their school, and possibly their careers, is on the line.
The great problem herein is that allowing schools to construct an overnight façade, Ofsted struggles to calculate the true performance of schools and indirectly reward duplicitous behaviour. Crucially, it also means that teachers facing an inspection will be pressurised into working long hours, some beyond midnight, on issues that will not benefit the education of their pupils.
Some of the solutions for reducing teacher workload will take time and require additional government funding, but this issue has a simple and easy solution: Ofsted should stop giving schools notice the afternoon before an inspection.
The writer is a teacher in the UK
