Ofsted’s Big Listen has “failed to recognise” the importance of seeking views on single-word judgements, a school leaders’ union has warned today.
The Association of School and College Leaders said that reform of the grading system is “long overdue and cannot come soon enough” in its submission to Ofsted’s Big Listen consultation this morning.
Ofsted’s chief inspector, Sir Martyn Oliver, launched the watchdog’s Big Listen exercise in March aimed at seeking views from school leaders, teachers, parents and pupils on the inspection system.
However, the project has been criticised for not explicitly asking for opinions on controversial single-word judgements, which are used to judge the overall quality of education at a school.
Pepe Di’Iasio, general secretary of ASCL, said: “It is a big miss that the Big Listen failed to recognise the importance of asking a direct question about this issue.”
“Single-word judgements don’t work well for staff, parents or children,” Mr Di’Iasio continued, adding that “they cause sky-high stress and anxiety, damaging staff wellbeing and morale, and driving people out of the profession”.
Lack of single-word judgement question ‘short-sighted’
ASCL’s call to scrap single-word judgements echoes a similar call made by the NAHT school leaders’ union in its consultation submission, which warned that the inspection regime posed a “risk to life”.
Lee Owston, Ofsted’s national director for education, told Tes last month that the watchdog would consider views on single-word judgements in its response to the consultation, which is due to be published in September this year.
However, while the Department for Education said it will continue to look at alternative grading systems, it has insisted that single-word Ofsted grades have “significant benefits”.
Mr Di’Iasio acknowledged that it is not in Ofsted’s remit to enact reform on the grading system, but added that “not to include it as part of the Big Listen was short-sighted and undermines public messages about the inspectorate’s willingness to change”.
The cross-bench Commons Education Select Committee has also urged Ofsted and the DfE to prioritise coming up with an alternative system to replace single-word judgements.
In its Big Listen response, ASCL added that Sir Martyn would have been in “a better position to make a powerful argument to Parliament and to the government for the removal of graded judgements, had this question been explicitly asked”.
“We strongly urge Ofsted to make the case for the removal of graded judgements,” Mr Di’Iasio continued. “It is the single biggest reform that would alleviate anxiety in the system and begin to rebuild trust.”
ASCL is currently exploring how a score-card approach could be used as an alternative form of grading, which has been endorsed by both Labour and the Liberal Democrats as their favoured approach to school inspection reform.
Although this approach has “implications for regulation”, the union said it does not think the “current process of regulatory intervention is fit for purpose…in particular, the coasting definition relying on Ofsted graded judgements”.
The DfE issues academy orders to schools that receive two Ofsted inspection reports judging them to be less than “good”, but the move has been met with backlash from heads and was also opposed by the inspectorate itself.
Ofsted should offer state-of-the-nation education review
ASCL also used its consultation response to warn that Ofsted’s original function - “to provide a state-of-the-nation review of education in England for the government of the day” - has been “superseded by individual, institution-level accountability”.
The union said it favours exploration of a “compliance-based approach, in which schools and colleges would be judged against a set of standards”.
“Ofsted should report on whether a school or college is meeting national expectations, rather than attempting to assess the quality of education through a deep-dive sample of subjects,” the union recommended in its consultation response.
The feedback comes after Tes revealed that Ofsted has scrapped its curriculum unit and reshuffled its subject leads, who were responsible for carrying out deep dives.
At the start of this month, Sir Martyn announced that deep dives would no longer be carried out in ungraded inspections.
ASCL also said that multi-academy trust inspection is “inevitable” at some stage, but “does not think it is a priority for now, nor something Ofsted has enough experience or expertise to implement”.
Complaints process ‘lacks transparency’
Ofsted’s complaints process “lacks transparency”, the union said in its submission, warning that leaders lack evidence behind decisions and multiple concerns are “grouped together in Ofsted’s response, rather than being addressed individually”.
The comments come after Ofsted unveiled a number of changes to its complaints system this year, including allowing leaders to contact inspectors the day after an inspection to address any immediate concerns.
“There is also concern that, although schools can escalate a complaint directly to [the Independent Complaints Adjudications Service for Ofsted (ICASO)], ICASO does not have the authority to overturn a judgement. Therefore, there is still a sense of Ofsted ‘marking its own homework’,” ASCL continued.
Calls for longer and more localised inspections
ASCL said it does “not support the principle around the length of notice period that schools are given”, adding that while the current notification period of half a day is “probably appropriate”, it is applied in the wrong way.
Instead, the union proposes that schools should be clear about the academic year in which they are likely to be inspected.
It also suggests that it should be made clear by lunchtime on Monday if a school will be inspected that week. However, it recognises that this would have “staffing and funding implications for Ofsted”.
The union has added that inspections are “too short, and that inspection activity should take into account local context, “without lowering expectations for disadvantaged pupils”.
However, the inspectorate has previously warned that carrying out more in-depth inspections would cost millions more per year.
ASCL also warned that the quality of inspectors is “too variable...and therefore suggests that Ofsted sets stricter standards on the requirements of Ofsted inspectors”.
Too much emphasis on small groups of pupils
The union also added that it is “concerned that too often, too great an emphasis is placed on the voices of a small group of pupils” during inspections.
Inspectors speak to pupils during school visits as part of their evaluation of provision, both formally in groups and informally during lessons or social times.
“While pupil voice is undeniably an important part of inspection activity, it must always be triangulated with other evidence, especially what inspectors see during their time at the school”.
ASCL further suggested that any future changes to the Education Inspection Framework (EIF) should be approached “extremely cautiously” to avoid putting too much additional workload on teachers.
It added that any reforms undertaken by Ofsted should be accompanied by a full impact assessment, including the impact on staff wellbeing and mental health.
Ofsted said it is not commenting on individual submissions to the Big Listen.
The Department for Education has been approached for comment.
For the latest education news and analysis delivered directly to your inbox every weekday morning, sign up to the Tes Daily newsletter
