Ofsted’s proposed overhaul of school inspection is incompatible with having a neutral stance on teaching methods and curriculum design, Teach First has warned, in the latest blow to the watchdog’s plans.
The inspectorate is preparing to introduce a new inspection framework next September.
Chief inspector Amanda Spielman has indicated it will penalise “exam factory” schools that teach to the test, and will examine choices they make about their curriculum.
However, Russell Hobby, chief executive of the Teach First teacher-recruitment charity and former general secretary of the NAHT headteachers’ union, raised concerns about the plan at a Conservative Party conference fringe meeting last night.
He said: “I don’t think that Ofsted, as currently funded, has the resources to do a proper evaluation of the quality of the curriculum in a school given that they are spending less than a full day in a good school in many instances.
“Nor do I think that is compatible with a neutral position on methods of teaching and curriculum design.
“You can’t say that ‘this is a good curriculum’ unless you have a view on what a good curriculum is, and I think that is incompatible with Ofsted’s stance on freedom and autonomy for the profession itself to determine these, given that we may have strong beliefs ourselves on what is a good curriculum.”
Mr Hobby said that Ofsted should instead “step back” and concentrate on what it can “properly evaluate given the resources we have”.
He explained that said these would be “much more tick-box elements”, such as exclusions, finances and safeguarding. He added that “some other source in the system” should ask questions about school curriculums.
Dame Alison Peacock, chief executive of the Chartered College of Teaching, raised further concerns about Ofsted’s proposed overhaul of the inspection framework at the same meeting.
She said Ms Spielman was moving in a direction that was “very hopeful”, but added: “Even then, we are going to have school leaders who are going to be in fear and dread of the inspection from next September, thinking ‘Well, do I know enough to be able to talk about the curriculum choices we have made?’”
She said the answer would possibly be “no they don’t” because it would take years to embed that kind of talk about pedagogy.
The warnings from the two senior figures are only the latest blow to Ofsted’s increasingly controversial plans.
Tensions have been rising between the Department for Education and the inspectorate about the inspection framework.
Education secretary Damian Hinds has repeatedly failed to back Ofsted’s plans and raised concerns that they might increase teachers’ workload.
Meanwhile, the NAHT headteachers’ union has urged Ms Spielman to “pause” the changes.
An Ofsted spokesperson said: “Our curriculum research and a vast amount of sector feedback have told us that a focus on performance data is coming at the expense of what is taught in schools.
“A new focus on the curriculum will change that, bringing the inspection conversation back to the substance of young people’s learning and treating teachers like the experts in their field, not simply data managers.
“All our work to date shows that looking at the curriculum does not require a preferred curriculum, and we have already recognised a diversity of successful approaches. What matters is that school leaders and teachers have thought about, and are delivering, the best possible curriculum for their pupils.
“As part of reforming the framework to do that, we are taking a root-and-branch review of our resources, including looking at how we redirect more inspector time back onsite, having those conversations with teachers and leaders.”
