Consultations about inspection are in danger of getting a bad name. First, earlier last year was Ofsted’s presumptuous Big Listen. This was followed by its alter ego, our almost equally presumptuous Alternative Big Listen.
Earlier this month Ofsted announced a twelve-week consultation on its latest proposals, including report cards. And today, we are launching… wait for it… the Alternative Big Consultation, hereafter the ABC.
Why the ABC? To avoid any misunderstanding, it’s not our reaction to Ofsted’s and DfE’s preoccupation with phonics.
It’s because Ofsted’s current consultation is much ado about nothing – nothing but the same old, long-established inspection model, which it takes as generally fit for purpose, but which no longer is.
And so the sector is being consulted on a raft of minor changes which are so far from the dreaded ‘revolution’ that they do not even constitute the needed ‘evolution’ the chief inspector claims to champion.
The proposals represent business as usual, albeit with a cosmetic, colour-coded (though admittedly not sugar-coated) veneer.
No wonder the whole thing has landed so badly, not just with teachers’ professional associations but much more widely.
The first part of our ABC deliberately mirrors aspects of Ofsted’s consultation. It focuses on the same twelve main issues about which Ofsted asks for responses, but with a crucial difference.
Ofsted simply asks respondents for their views, but because of the open-ended nature of its questions it cannot gauge or report on their levels of satisfaction.
We remain advocates for inspection, and our aim is to be constructive
So, while offering an opportunity for open-ended responses, the ABC asks about the degree to which Ofsted’s response to each of those twelve issues is fit for purpose.
It also asks a crucial concluding question: How far do Ofsted’s proposals represent an improvement, a continuation or a deterioration compared with the most recent inspection practice?
The second part of the ABC reflects our disappointment that Ofsted has presented a model of inspection very similar to the previous one, and with such a tight deadline that it feels like it’s a matter of ‘take it or leave it’.
In this section, we have identified 11 possible features of a remodelled inspection model. These are different from past inspection practice and from Ofsted ‘s own proposals, but they represent an attempt to produce a more responsive, more acceptable, less heavy-handed and less confrontational system.
Among these proposals, for example, are less intensive, lighter-touch inspections as the norm; many fewer full inspections; simpler reporting arrangements; more thematic inspection surveys; complementing inspection with peer-group quality assurance; and a fully independent complaints process.
The ABC asks which of the eleven features should be given careful consideration in any new inspection model. It asks respondents to rate each on the scale from ‘essential’ through to ‘not worth considering’.
It also invites respondents to suggest what other components might be incorporated in a reconstructed inspection model.
We will be sharing respondents’ views in ABC’s final report, which we will publish by May.
We remain advocates for inspection, and our aim is to be constructive. We believe it is possible to have rigour and robust evaluation of early years settings, schools and colleges while maintaining high levels of respect, appreciation and understanding.
We hope the ABC will show that a more collaborative and less confrontational approach can lead the sector to that system, while redressing a balance of power which currently rests far too heavily with Ofsted.
Ofsted’s consultation is open until 28 April. Complete it here
The Alternative Big Consultation is open until 4 April. Complete it here
Your thoughts