I mostly stay out of debates carried out in the edu-press and don’t get publicly exercised about educational topics. I prefer instead to use the privileged position of being a large multi-academy trust (MAT) chief executive, and of meeting regularly with the Department for Education, Ofsted and senior civil servants, to quietly influence policy and decision making and help to secure what I think is best for the children and schools in our trust and more widely. As the largest primary-only trust in the country, I feel that it is only right that we are a champion for this phase of schooling.

A number of recent events, however, have stirred me to put pen to paper.

Exclusive: Ofsted vs MATs - DfE to publicly intervene

Background: Ofsted too middle-class, say Harris and Outwood Grange

‘Pause Ofsted’: All heads urged to join anti-Ofsted ‘quiet revolution’

First, a colleague who is a member of the Headteachers’ Roundtable, called me to publicly join the “Pause Ofsted” campaign and instruct those leaders in our trust who inspect schools to stand down.

Second, an inspection in one of our schools took place and the judgement didn’t go exactly as we wanted and, to cut a long story short, didn’t meet the exacting new demands for the curriculum. The upshot? The school got a grade lower than it would have undoubtedly received under the previous framework.

Third, last week I visited one of our smallest, most challenging schools with all the tricky characteristics of a cohort with high levels of eligibility for pupil premium, special educational needs and disabilities (SEND), and English as an additional language (EAL). There, I saw a wonderfully rich and meaningful curriculum under which children were enthralled by their learning, with books and portfolios showing great coverage, depth and progression in every national curriculum subject. This is a school with attainment significantly above the national average.

A world-class curriculum for all

So, what am I to make of these events?

First, the intent of this new framework is spot on. It is driven by a principle that a world-class curriculum should be available to every child and young person irrespective of their background, where they happen to live, or the school or academy they attend. It is about equity and equal opportunity, and it has a strong moral purpose behind it. 

Who am I to say that this isn’t the right expectation for every child, just because it gives me a headache in how to secure it in every one of our schools? To suggest this is a middle-class curriculum for middle-class children makes my blood boil.

The young people in the two non-middle-class schools I have described, above all, have a right to the type of education they are getting in smaller of the two - and it is to my shame that in the first one we haven’t secured it yet. But we will.

And it’s right that Ofsted tells us so, even though a few months earlier it might have said something slightly different. The expectations in the new framework are - finally - the ones we should be judged by. And yes, we can argue about more time to implement a new curriculum and so on, but frankly, the quicker we meet these expectations, the better. Ofsted has listened and flexed this a bit, so let’s stop the whining and the grandstanding and get on with it.

Second, on implementation, some have said that Ofsted’s expectations are near-impossible to implement for small schools. I can’t - and, more to the point, won’t - accept this. It’s our job as education trusts, as teaching schools, as local authorities, as leaders in the education sector, to ensure that no one is left behind.

In what world is it right that because your child goes to a small school they are educationally malnourished by a narrow curriculum? Again, Ofsted is throwing down the right gauntlet and it is for us in the education sector to respond accordingly.

We need to take collective responsibility to ensure that all children have access to this world-class curriculum, and mine is one academy trust that will try to do more to help those primary schools - within or outside of REAch2 - that are struggling to meet these expectations.

Finally, on the politics of it all. I have to confess I am not comfortable with the increasingly insistent pronouncements from a small number of academy leaders about the Ofsted framework and the disproportionate influence this seems to be having.

While I accept it is newsworthy when “big beasts” come together as one to complain about Ofsted’s position, let’s not forget that these leaders represent fewer than 100 schools in all and they don’t speak for all big MAT leaders, nor the 2,000-plus small MAT leaders and the thousands of maintained school leaders. They certainly don’t speak for me and I fundamentally disagree with the DfE intervening in this “row”. I’m no apologist for Ofsted, but it’s time we heard a few more voices in this debate.

Ofsted, under its chief inspector Amanda Spielman, must be able to act without fear or favour, and should be given the opportunity to work this through with the sector. Educational consultant Michael Fullan says that “trust is born of good experiences” - after more than 40 inspections at REAch2, we have disagreed with a judgement just once (and that was under the old framework), so my trust is riding high. Stick to your guns, Amanda.

Sir Steve Lancashire is chief executive of the REAch2 Academy Trust