Ofsted’s pre-Christmas announcement that it will start trialling ‘new approaches’ to inspection this month before its report card consultation opens was not universally welcomed. But if Ofsted can learn from it – and from itself – then there’s good cause to be optimistic about the outcome.
Ofsted has always argued for sharing best practice as a key means of achieving excellence and raising standards for all. The inspectorate has consistently advocated for collaborative approaches, praising instances when individuals share good ideas and practice that benefit the sector, students and teachers alike.
It’s baffling, therefore, that as an organisation it seems unable to apply this principle to its own approach. There is already good practice for improving inspection practice within Ofsted, and the current trials offer the chance to put it to the test in schools.
In the further education (FE) sector, the inspection process has significantly benefited in recent years from the role of a nominee – an individual identified by every organisation delivering government-funded post-16 education and training. Nominees often come from a quality assurance background and are a senior person in the organisation.
The appointed inspection nominee serves as a conduit for Ofsted during inspections. They play a crucial role in ensuring that inspections are conducted collaboratively rather than being imposed on organisations. The nominee is considered part of the inspection team and is able to contribute to debate and challenge inspection findings and emerging judgments during the inspection.
Until recently, there was only one nominee per inspection; however, in the past two years, a shadow nominee has been introduced. This means that further education providers now benefit from having two representatives during inspections.
Although one of them may not speak and may only take notes, having two people present allows for effective communication and negotiation while ensuring comprehensive feedback is captured. The Fellowship of Inspection Nominees (FIN) works across the FE sector and supports these nominees.
There is a compelling case to adopt the FE model
You may think that the nominee would be a college principal or a CEO, but in reality that’s not the case. Why would they necessarily be the best person to undertake this process? The same applies to schools; the head may well be a fantastic school leader but for many reasons may not be the ideal conduit for Ofsted.
While it’s possible for principals or CEOs to serve as nominees, further education and training providers recognise this role is very specific and needs support and training. Sharing the burden of inspection has proven over time to be highly successful in FE settings, and there is no obvious reason why it can’t be replicated in schools.
A new education inspection framework and the feedback from the Big Listen present an opportunity for Ofsted to make some real, impactful changes to practice and methodology. It’s time for Ofsted to seriously consider the benefits of implementing similar practices within schools by allowing schools to appoint nominees alongside heads.
Such arrangements would allow schools to identify individuals familiar with both inspection processes and their specific contexts as supportive figures during evaluations.
Even small primary schools could potentially collaborate with multi-academy trusts (MATs) to find suitable candidates who could accompany headteachers throughout inspections. Given the government’s desire to level the playing field between the maintained and academy sectors, this seems an easy way to achieve evenness in the inspection process and to foster collaboration.
In addition, having designated nominees would provide heads with confidants capable of discussing strategies regarding inspection while addressing any challenges arising during evaluations, ensuring no head feels isolated during meetings with inspectors.
Critics might argue about fairness given smaller school sizes; however, professional collaboration should transcend such concerns since robust inspectors rely on sound evidence regardless of size or participant numbers.
There is a compelling case for school inspection to adopt the model that is already proving effective in FE. Designated inspection nominees and shadow supporters are established practices with sector-wide success over many years.
So here’s hoping someone in Ofsted’s FE division contributed to the Big Listen. And here’s hoping Ofsted’s schools division heard them.
I’m certain the trial would prove highly compelling.
This is an excellent idea and would add to the peer support element of school inspections. This already exists to some degree through existing practitioners being inspectors but nominees would further strengthen it and would help to make inspections less alienating experiences for school leaders. This is, in my view, the root of the problem more than one word judgements.