I often talk to headteachers and school leaders who have been through an Ofsted inspection who use words like “brutal”, “unfair” and “agenda driven”.

It is always shocking to hear this, not least when it is said with an air of resignation that is simply the default expectation for how accountability and inspection must operate.

Yet earlier this year change was in the air. The tragic death of headteacher Ruth Perry in January sparked significant protests from school leaders against Ofsted.

A head in Newbury banned inspectors from her school for a period of time, while Vic Goddard, co-principal of Passmores Academy in Harlow, removed all mention of Ofsted from his school’s prospectus.

Social media posts from heads were no longer self-congratulatory messages on “good” or better reports, but instead focused on Ofsted’s failings and calls for change.

This seemed to sharpen minds at the inspectorate, with Ofsted revealing plans for a series of changes in response to criticisms raised. That was enough to quell most of the noise and soon posts about successful inspections were back.

Imbuing authority

That, though, underlines a key part of the problem - schools are too willing to imbue Ofsted with a power that gives it excessive influence on education.

While Ofsted’s inspectors are legally entitled to inspect schools, heads often tell me that continually changing inspection frameworks damage educational standards in England, and the pressure of inspection contributes significantly to the teacher retention issue.

So, how can heads take back control of the sector in which they lead? School leaders must first realise they contribute to Ofsted’s power by attributing a school’s success (or failure) to an Ofsted report.

The quest for “good” or “outstanding” judgements leads too many schools to chase the grade, rather than focus on genuinely meeting children’s needs or improving standards.

And this is caused by two things: the head’s fear of being fired if their school is designated as anything but “good”, and/or a desire for a pat on the back for a positive report.

Phrases like, “That’s what Ofsted wants to see”, now dominate justifications for change or action, which simply hands authority to the inspectorate and undermines that of the person saying it.

It cannot then be a surprise that inspection reports on publication carry so much weight within school communities.

Fighting back

If school leaders genuinely want Ofsted reform, they need to stop using the inspectorate in their narrative as a means of getting things done in their schools.

This will happen when governors and school leaders stop putting inspection reports on a pedestal as the pinnacle of success or failure.

That doesn’t mean that inspection reports should be ignored, and certainly not where there are safeguarding concerns in the school.

But highly subjective judgements on whether a school is “good” or not following a few days of inspection should carry far less weight in a school community than it currently does.

I certainly don’t believe that a three-day inspection once every three or four years by people who have never visited the school before can accurately do this.

Internal accountability

School leaders should adopt far more robust and transparent internal systems, which adequately and accurately self-evaluate the school. And these should be regularly published to parents.

This could lead to a reduction of the inspectorate’s role to focus chiefly on whether minimum standards are being met in schools and that children are safe.

Ofsted should not be judging the quality of education beyond those minimum requirements - leave that to the school’s community.

I’m not advocating an education system that is not accountable. Rather, an education system which is more accountable; but that accountability forms part of a process dominated by internal rigour.

Yet, if school leaders continue to justify the direction of travel in their schools by what they think Ofsted inspectors want to see, or if they keep using positive Ofsted reports as a means of praise and validation, then the inspectorate will continue to be overly powerful.

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