Ofsted’s lack of power to inspect multi-academy trusts leaves gaps in the knowledge of both parents and policymakers, the watchdog has warned.
The inspectorate has produced a report exploring the views of senior inspectors and MAT leaders about the role of academy trusts in school inspection.
It warns that requiring inspections to be carried out at school level but not at MAT level can leave the role of trusts in inspection unclear, causing frustration for both trust leaders and inspectors.
Trust leaders and inspectors have highlighted that inspection at school level does not hold the trust sufficiently accountable, or attribute enough credit to its work, the report adds.
And it says that, as Ofsted does not and cannot inspect the effectiveness of the trust itself, this leaves “a gap in parents’ and policymakers’ knowledge”.
The report comes after academies minister Baroness Barran told Tes last month that there were no plans to create a system of MAT inspections by Ofsted.
Ofsted currently carries out a small number of summary evaluations of education and leadership in MATs - 12 per year.
This involves visiting a MAT after a group of its schools have been inspected and then pulling together findings about the impact the trust has and making recommendations.
However, this does not result in a grade for the trust and these evaluations are voluntary, so trusts can choose not to take part.
Ofsted has repeatedly called for it to be given the power to inspect multi-academy trusts under both current chief inspector Amanda Spielman and her predecessor, Sir Michael Wilshaw.
Heads call for Ofsted to pilot MAT inspections
Responding to the report, the Association of School and College Leaders (ASCL) has renewed its call for Ofsted to be given funding to run pilot inspections of MATs.
Tom Middlehurst, the union’s curriculum, assessment and inspection specialist, said: ”This research makes clear that, while trusts are involved throughout the inspection process, their exact role varies greatly and is not well defined due to the legal requirement for Ofsted to inspect at school level.
“This is frustrating for trust leaders who are responsible for the education provided in their schools, including providing the necessary support and changes in the case of an ‘inadequate’ or ‘requires improvement’ judgement from Ofsted.”
Mr Middlehurst said the government should be considering whether inspections of MATs can take place, but said it was essential these were led by people with trust leadership experience and did not add to the workload of heads or teachers.
The ASCL wants the Department for Education to fund Ofsted to pilot trust inspections “to help establish whether a single set of standards can work equally well for trusts of different sizes, and how such inspections might sit alongside or replace school inspections”, he said.
This should form part of “a broader review of whether or not Ofsted is fit for purpose, given other concerns about the way in which the inspectorate currently operates”, Mr Middlehurst added.
The new research published by the inspectorate is based on survey responses from more than 100 Ofsted HMI and interviews with 11 MAT leaders. Here are some of its other findings:
MATs’ curriculum role is growing
In 2019 Ofsted research of 41 trusts found that some had “very little involvement in overseeing the quality of education”.
However, the watchdog today said that its new research shows that trusts are increasingly working across schools to develop their curriculum.
The report says that trusts Ofsted spoke to were always involved in designing the curriculum. Trust leaders worked with school leaders to develop a curriculum that worked for the school, regardless of their operating model.
Curriculum has become a central focus of school inspections since September 2019, when the Education Inspection Framework was introduced.
This created a new Quality of Education judgement, which is informed by Ofsted’s assessment of the intention, implementation and impact of the school’s curriculum.
Behaviour is most common area of centralised MAT work
Trust-level behaviour policies were the most common centralised practices seen by inspectors, according to the survey findings.
Ofsted said its inspectors noted that many trusts implemented trust-wide behaviour policies or principles, including rewards and sanctions.
The report adds that, to develop successful approaches to managing behaviour, some trusts used expertise from throughout the trust. Trusts also referred to creating behaviour networks and school improvement groups to share best practice.
Trusts take personal development role
Ofsted also found that MATs often set a strategic vision for pupils’ personal development and used trust resources to provide opportunities for children.
When evaluating a school’s personal development offer, inspectors make a judgement on how “the wider curriculum provides broader development, develops pupils’ characters and prepares learners for future steps and life in modern Britain”.
Inspectors identified that aims and ambitions for the personal development of pupils were often set by the trust, rather than at school level.
