Perhaps the biggest problem Ofsted faces as it develops its new inspection framework is that everyone has a view on what needs to change.

The advent of a new inspection framework inevitably carries with it the hopes of an education system that has felt for some time the weight of overbearing hyperaccountability. However, almost inevitably, the framework will leave some feeling disappointed.

Part of the reason for this is because Ofsted, despite its independence, does not operate in isolation. Independence is something the inspectorate tends to pride itself on, as exemplified by one of its favourite phrases; that it inspects “without fear or favour”. In my experience, this tends to be the case.

This is not to say that inspection does not get things wrong. However, when things do go wrong, it tends to be as a result of the methodology of inspection and human error, rather than because there is an institutional angle or ulterior motive at play. For example, on occasion, school leaders ask me whether Ofsted is working hand-in-glove with regional schools commissioners to bring about a policy of enforced academisation. I really don’t believe it is.

However, being independent is not the same as being isolated and Ofsted, just like most facets of the education system, does not exist in a vacuum. The organisation is subject to many of the same pressures which face schools, not least of which is a significant pressure on its budget. This will inevitably have an impact on the shape and scope of the 2019 framework.

One of the pressures schools have in common with Ofsted is the need to serve a variety of stakeholders, including parents. We can debate whether reports and judgements in their current form are an accurate reflection of school quality, but it is clear that parents do pay attention to inspection outcomes. In Ofsted’s most recent survey, it was revealed that nine out of ten parents know the Ofsted judgement of their child’s school, with an increasing number looking it up via Ofsted’s website.

There have been many blogs and articles in recent months -including one that I wrote - exploring the idea that Ofsted should abandon the whole notion of grading schools. However, as seductive as that idea seems, I think it’s incredibly unlikely - particularly given that parents seem to like having an ‘at a glance’ insight. Ofsted, just like many other public institutions in 21st-century Britain, does not operate in isolation from those who foot the bill - the taxpayers. Whatever our reservations about the reliability and validity of inspection, it is a tall order for Ofsted to completely abandon the idea of giving simple indicators of school quality to parents.

So what of the next best solution that some have called for - the introduction of a binary “good” or “not good” judgement? Well, it may be riskier than abandoning judgements altogether. As tempting as it appears, the flip side of creating a binary judgement is that some will inevitably fall the wrong side of this divide. And what if this is your school?

A binary judgement could actually exacerbate pressure on schools by providing what appears to be a stark contrast of black and white where there are at least shades of grey at present, such as in the new short inspection arrangements. Just as Ofsted is beginning to reduce the cliff edge of inspection, it seems counterproductive to push schools closer to the brink.

So where does that leave us? Probably where we should be - thinking more deeply about what can and can’t be reliably and validly inferred, so that whatever structure the grading system takes, it is meaningful and useful to a range of stakeholders, including schools and parents.

For example, a key issue in the current system is that parents place most weight on the quality of teaching judgement. However, as Dylan Wiliam demonstrates convincingly in his book Creating the Schools Our Children Need, “even the best teacher evaluation systems are unreliable, biased, and capture only a small part of teacher quality.”  

Much better that we think more deeply about ensuring inspection is valid and reliable, not just the grade structure. To Ofsted’s credit, it is engaging in research into the validity and reliability of inspection. I am increasingly of the view that this is the right direction of travel. The research project it carried out last year into the reliability of short inspection conversions was narrow in scope but signalled the inspectorate was concerned with investigating consistency among inspectors. Ofsted now needs to expand and deepen this approach in order to explore and improve its inspection methods.

None of the above is to decry those who call for reform of school inspection. There are very real concerns and problems which must be addressed. However, removing the grading system completely or introducing binary judgements may not be a panacea for school inspection. 

Stephen Rollett is the inspections and accountability specialist at the Association of School and College Leaders.