Proposals for new Ofsted report cards will be too confusing for parents and could spawn a “whole new host of issues”, leaders say, after leaked plans last week caused widespread kickback.
A slide obtained by the Financial Times showed schools could be judged on a sliding, five-point scale from ‘exemplary’ to ‘causing concerns’ across 10 evaluation areas.
But the proposals were widely mocked, being dubbed “Ofsted numberwang” and likened to the Nando’s fast-food outlet’s “peri-ometer” for how spicy its chicken is.
10 judgments, 5 ratings
The proposal was presented to school leaders last week.
Slides showed schools being rated in 10 areas: curriculum, teaching, achievement, leadership, behaviour and values, attendance, preparation for next steps, opportunities to thrive, inclusion and belonging and safeguarding.
They would be rated on a five-point scale from ‘exemplary’, ‘strong practice’, ‘secure’, ‘attention needed’, down to ‘causing concern’.
In the slide, the ratings were depicted with colour codes ranging from red to purple.
There are conflicting reports about whether Ofsted has settled on colour coding for the system.
The plans are still in development and will be subject to a consultation with the sector in January. The proposals are also likely to be refined further before then, particularly after the stinging feedback.
New Ofsted report cards are due to be introduced in September. The government scrapped single-word headline grades at the start of term.
‘Parents need straightforward reports’
Sector bodies expressed concern that the proposals had been leaked, and most refused to comment.
But Pepe Di’Iasio, general secretary of the ASCL leaders’ union, said that while changes were “a work in progress, it is fair to say that we are concerned about the apparent direction of travel, which seems to us to be over-complicated”.
Frank Norris, a former inspector and academy trust boss, said: “The big miss is that it seems more confusing if we’re doing it, as they say, for a parent or carer.”
Having 10 judgments and five ratings means there could theoretically be almost 10 million different combinations of results. In practice, however, it is likely to be far fewer as some Ofsted judgments limit what ratings you can get.
Sarah Finlay-Cobb, CEO of the Landau Forte Charitable Trust, said report cards must be “as straightforward as possible, so that parents are able to clearly establish the benefits of a school.
“In order for the system to have value for parents, the outcome of an inspection needs to highlight whether a given school is the right setting for their child and is somewhere where their child can thrive.”
Questions over reliability
Leaders also questioned the reliability of 10 judgments, particularly coming to conclusions that are not just heavily based on data within two-day inspections.
Adrian Gray, a former inspector, said: “If you’re doing twice as many judgments in the same time, then that raises the question about adequacy of evidence to support that.
“And the problem with previous frameworks was that they had too many judgments and not enough time.”
Jenny Blunden, CEO of the Truro and Penwith Academy Trust, said she was “concerned around the consistency of application across the country – with lots of moving parts and lots of inspectors”.
With the government’s new support teams to split schools into those either getting targeted support or intervention, Norris said you only need two indicators on reports:
“One that says, ‘this school is functioning at a level that you would expect’, and ‘this school is receiving additional support’.”
Wayne Norrie, CEO of Greenwood Academies Trust, said he wants to see fewer, not more, categories on report cards. “School is a holistic place and, once we start to dissect it into segments, it’s not helpful to give the whole picture,” he added.
‘Colour shaming’
Caroline Derbyshire, former chair of the Headteachers’ Roundtable, said the prospect of using colours would be “really damaging” and “utterly unnecessary”.
She added: “This will create colour-shaming. It would shame schools who don’t get the colours considered good. Imagine the dreadful unintended consequences. And there are more ways to fail under this system than before.”
One educator even took to social media to share a mocked-up purple banner affixed to a school gate, emblazoned with “we are Ofsted purple in all areas”.
Privately, some sector leaders have dubbed it the “Nando’s scale report card” because of its resemblance to the fast-food chain’s “peri-ometer”, which rates its sauces from “extra hot” to “extra mild”.
Dame Alison Peacock, chief executive of the Chartered College of Teaching, added: “If we’re not careful, we replace one [problematic] system with another.
“It [the proposal] looked like a Dulux paint chart. I’m sure there’s a lot of putting that out there to sort of see what the response is.”
‘Ofsted shouldn’t be reforming itself’
Leaders have already raised concerns about Ofsted leading on the report card’s design, and the pace of their development.
Kulvarn Atwal, vice chair of the Headteachers’ Roundtable and executive head at two east London primary schools, said: “Ofsted requires fundamental reform, and this is an opportunity to create an accountability system that works with the profession, rather than to judge.
“It’s not appropriate for Ofsted to lead their own reform process… I think the brand is damaged.”
Policy expert Loic Menzies added: “I hope Ofsted remains open-minded and reconsiders – rather than rushing things, given that there is a risk these plans could do little to tackle the old system’s problems while potentially creating a whole host of new issues.”
Speaking this week, Ofsted’s national director of education Lee Owston promised that the inspectorate would find a “sensible middle ground” on the plans.
“You would expect me to be putting every single option available on the table so that I can have a debate with the right individuals, and those elements that sit at the extremes of what we might want to do are dismissed,” he said.
“I’m narrowing down all of the time to get to a sensible middle ground. That will not please everybody, but will be a much better inspection system.”
The proposal to separate out the teaching judgment, first revealed by the Daily Telegraph last month, has led to concern.
But Owston said: “What I can promise you is that we are definitely not returning to the days of lesson observation and individual grades for members of staff – that is not what we mean by ‘teaching’.”
Focus back on statutory outcomes
There are also concerns that producing more judgments will make Ofsted more reliant on data, something the current framework moved away from – with a focus on curriculum as opposed solely to outcomes.
Owston said Ofsted is not returning to a judgment that “purely relies” on statutory outcomes, but he did add: “I think we do need to look more at statutory outcomes than perhaps we do currently under the education inspection framework. Because every child deserves to achieve and thrive.”
He said inspections would “shine a stronger spotlight on context without returning to the soft bigotry of low expectations”.
Ofsted also has an “ambition” for inspectors to inspect their local schools and have experience of the school they are inspecting.
Parents don’t need Ofsted, so get rid. It would save a lot of money and stress. It would also free up schools not to be driven by fleeting agendas. Publish progress 8 figures instead, pure facts not opinion. It would also banish the underhanded agenda to academize every school or force them into a MAT.
A banner saying a school is purple in all areas is no more ridiculous than one saying it is Outstanding. How about you just don’t have banners based on inspection?