Moving primary schools “stuck” with low Ofsted grades into multi-academy trusts has not made a noticeable impact, researchers have found.
In contrast, headteacher turnover negatively impacts on struggling schools, leading to increases in teacher turnover, reductions in pupil progress and further “adverse” Ofsted inspection outcomes, according to the study led by the UCL Institute of Education and think tank the Education Policy Institute (EPI).
The study explored the “underperformance” of 580 schools in England that consistently received less than “good” Ofsted inspection grades between 2005 to 2018.
The report states: ”For primary ‘stuck’ schools, we did not observe any positive or negative effect of joining a MAT.”
The findings come as the government is consulting on plans to move “coasting” schools into MATs if they receive an Ofsted rating of “requires improvement”, having previously been judged to be less than “good”.
Jo Hutchinson, report co-author and director for social mobility and vulnerable Learners at the EPI, said: “While academisation has helped many secondary schools to reduce the challenges they face, having a change of headteacher made things more challenging in the short term, and for primary schools, the same benefits of academisation were not evident in our analysis.”
The study also found that monitoring inspections and full Ofsted inspections received by “stuck” case study schools were arguably “too frequent, variable and, sometimes, inconsistent”.
Supporting schools ‘stuck’ with low Ofsted ratings
Julie McCulloch, director of policy at the Association of School and College Leaders, said: “This report confirms that what is desperately needed to improve the fortunes of schools which are trapped in a cycle of negative Ofsted ratings is more support and less punishment.”
The study found that “stuck schools” often face challenging circumstances, including higher teacher turnover, higher levels of disadvantaged pupils and higher levels of pupils with special educational needs.
The report is based on data analysis as well as interviews and focus groups involving 16 case study schools.
These are the main findings:
Joining a MAT showed no impact for ‘stuck’ primary schools and only a small effect for ‘stuck’ secondaries
Researchers say that for “stuck” primary schools, they did not observe any positive or negative effect of joining a MAT.
The reports adds: ”Yet, we observed negative effects of having a change in headteacher, which was
followed by increases in teacher turnover, reductions in pupil progress and further
adverse inspection outcomes.” The researchers say all these effects were small in size.
The report does, however, say that joining a MAT was associated with small positive effects for secondary schools. These included lower teacher turnover, and a lower chance of remaining “stuck” by receiving negative Ofsted grades in subsequent inspections.
But this might be partly accounted for by the “inspection holidays” given to schools when they make a fresh start as a sponsor-led academy, which would reduce the opportunities to be judged to be less than “good”, say the researchers.
The researchers also found that a negative Ofsted judgement makes a “modest” contribution to the “onset of increasingly challenging circumstances that make it more likely for the school to receive further poor inspection grades in future”.
‘Stuck’ schools face ‘vicious cycle’ of low Ofsted grades and teacher turnover
The report describes “a vicious cycle” connecting low Ofsted grades with increasingly deprived pupil intakes, and also linking low Ofsted grades with increasing levels of teacher turnover.
It says that, after an initial negative Ofsted grade, the intake of a school tends to become more disadvantaged and teacher turnover increases, both of which contribute to the difficulty in reversing the Ofsted judgement.
The longer the school continues to have the less-than-“good” rating, the harder the process of school improvement becomes.
However, the research also found that a poor inspection judgement was only a modest contributing factor towards “stuck” schools’ lack of improvement or decline over time.
Concern over frequency of Ofsted inspections
The research also raises concerns about the frequency and consistency of Ofsted inspections.
It says that Ofsted’s risk-based inspection system allocates more frequent inspections to schools whose overall effectiveness is considered to be at risk of decline.
It adds: “Consequently, ‘stuck’ schools received too frequent Section 5 full inspections and Section 8 monitoring inspections over the period 2005-2021.”
The report says that this frequency varied hugely, from three full inspections to six full inspections and 10 monitoring inspections, among its case study schools.
Researchers said stakeholders described “over-surveillance” by Ofsted, “which did not give time to implement the required changes, and made it more difficult to improve”.
The report makes a series of recommendations for both the Department for Education and Ofsted.
DfE urged to consider increasing funding for ‘stuck’ schools
The report recommends that the DfE should consider whether there is adequate support, including financial support, for “stuck” schools, particularly “stuck” secondary schools whose per-pupil funding was found to be only marginally higher than at other secondary schools.
It also suggests the government could help “stuck” schools to learn lessons from the experience of “un-stuck” schools through creating networks to successfully tackle similar challenging circumstances
And it urges ministers to consider what more can be done to stabilise “stuck” schools’ staff.
Researchers warn that reducing excessively high teacher turnover, including the loss of key staff and governance changes, needs to happen before a school can improve.
And they say the DfE should review the positive and negative impact of academisation on “stuck” schools to gain insights from the experiences in primary compared with secondary schools.
Ofsted urged to consider the detrimental impact of inspection grades
The report recommends that Ofsted should ensure that inspectors are “properly trained to understand the significance and implications of schools working in very challenging circumstances, and the positive role they can play to support schools in their improvement journey”.
The report also suggests Ofsted should revise the cycles of full section 5 inspections and monitoring section 8 inspections to give schools time to implement improvements.
And researchers urge the inspectorate to consider what changes can be implemented to avoid the “detrimental effect” that a series of below “good” Ofsted grades is having on school improvement.
Ms Hutchinson said: “Stuck schools face many challenges such as increasing deprivation, professional isolation and very high teacher turnover.
“While their continuing struggle with poor inspection outcomes was not determined by these challenges, nor by the experience of receiving an adverse grading, there were nevertheless clear signs that these could make recovery more difficult.”
Ms McCulloch said the current inspections system meant that so-called “stuck” schools could become a ”baked-in feature” of disadvantaged communities.
“Unfortunately, we have a system in which negative Ofsted ratings stigmatise schools, ruin careers and damage professional reputations,” she said.
“Fewer children then attend these schools - which puts pressure on funding - and it is more difficult to attract staff. It is very hard to escape this vicious circle and secure the improvement that is needed by pupils, families and communities.
An Ofsted spokesperson said: “Ofsted’s own research has explored why some schools, that have previously delivered a low standard of education for long periods of time, have managed to sustainably improve and others have not.
“We highlighted that we need more joined-up support to improve education for children in these stuck schools, so they get the same opportunities as every other child.
“We maintain that if schools focus on doing all the right things, such as improving behaviour and ensuring high standards of teaching, that they can become unstuck, and we will continue to work with the Department of Education to ensure we work as closely as possible to help support these schools.”
