A guest blog by Sarah Hussey.
For a brief time, this morning (2nd September), the news headlines about the immediate changes to OFSTED filled me with optimism. That is until I read some of the comments about this on a range of social media platforms. Particularly, a comment on the Facebook page for ‘This Morning ‘, which alluded to how easy the job of a teacher is and that inspectors should just turn up without giving any notice – blah blah blah – we have heard it all before!
Of course, initially I thought the negativity was not from anyone in the profession and then I saw the headline in The Telegraph – ‘Labour’s Ofsted system puts feelings above facts, says Birbalsingh.’ I know, I know these things are said to antagonise, but I couldn’t stop myself having a look at the X account of said ‘strictest headteacher in Britain’ where she makes her feelings very clear about the steps Labour are taking. She is very clear that the report card, even though we do not know what it will look like, will NOT give more clarity to parents and states that abolishing judgements because of leaders ‘feeling bad’ is a nod in the wrong direction. And that is why I need to explain why it is such a big deal and why the feelings of school leaders, school staff and communities are not to be belittled.
I have worked in the education sector for 30 years, starting as a midday supervisor in the early 1990s and becoming a head teacher in 2010 and now a coach, trainer and consultant. In all of those years OFSTED have worked with many different frameworks but have always used the one-word judgements. In September 2010, I secured the headship of a one form entry primary school, after teaching in a much larger school in various roles for 10 years. It was my first headship and my first headship interview – I genuinely did not believe that I would be appointed when I applied and thought it would be good interview practice. The school had already put the job out to advert twice and not appointed but there I was excited, ambitious and ready to make a difference! The school was rated as outstanding, this happened 3 years before my arrival and in the June before I started OFSTED sent a one page letter to parents saying that it was still outstanding – to this day I have no idea how they arrived at that decision. Inspectors would not cross the threshold of the school again until March 2015 (a wait of 8 years). So, here we are my very first, but not last, experience of how the one-word judgement was not a reliable or realistic picture of how well that school was actually performing. From the first day of my 13-year role, it was abundantly clear that the school was not outstanding – in fact it was far from it. However, if you are told that you are that good for long enough you run the risk of becoming: a) complacent or b) arrogant – or even worse both! In my earlier role, I was used to attending child protection conferences for vulnerable families and working with other professionals, here the safeguarding records were a notebook in an unlocked drawer! This changed overnight, in case you were wondering? If you wanted your child to sing all day, invite their granny for lunch and be able to enjoy lots of fun activities then this was the school for you and it was a very popular school, in fact it was oversubscribed every year. The school of choice in the local area. The reality was outdated teaching methods and learning that just did not happen quickly enough or deeply enough. I don’t know if I managed to hide my shock at the first governors meeting that I attended as it was not very different to the parish council meetings in the Vicar of Dibley! Nobody wanted to change how things were and as long as it had the outstanding badge very few people (apart from that new head teacher) could see any reason why they should. As a new head teacher, I thought that I would get some support from the LA, but of course we weren’t considered to be a high support school, so there was no funding at all.
Now, I know that some of what I have just said sounds very harsh, and I might appear to be a bit like the strictest head in Britain – I really am not! In fact, even quite recently a family moved their child to my school as they had heard that I didn’t really care about year 6 SATS. I admit this may not be the best advert for high standards in a school, but the point they were making, and they were right, is that I have always maintained that the summative assessments primary school pupils have to do are only a very small part of the picture of their success at school.
Let’s fast forward to March 2015 and the return of the inspectors, a 2-day full and rigorous process and the outcome was … requires improvement. My reaction to this report was that I was incredibly proud of what it said about the school I had been leading for 5 years. Did I agree with the one (two) word judgment? We were good in some areas and the word outstanding was used when describing our pastoral care, but that wasn’t the overall ruling – even then, it seemed like a very strange system. Despite the new, not so shiny rating, the report was 10 pages of insightful information, and it described an effective and ambitious school. The community did not fall apart, in fact they supported the changes that needed to be made, and the school thrived.
Example number 2 of how the one-word judgment if taken at face value and not followed up with further investigations was unreliable and unrealistic. Can you see an argument for a better system emerging – one with a report card that gives parents more detail perhaps?
If you had believed the first judgment of outstanding or the second of requires improvement you would have been wrong on both counts!
Over the next few years, the landscape and rhetoric around OFSTED certainly changed dramatically. There were so many changes to the framework that the goal posts were moved right off the pitch! One of these changes was the introduction of the dreaded ‘Deep Dives’ which were unworkable in primary schools, particularly in smaller ones where some members of staff would be responsible for 2 or more subjects across the school. Members of staff on my team were kept awake worrying about the interviews that they would be having with inspectors about how their subjects were taught over 7 year groups, despite having very little leadership time in reality to do their role! A prime example of trying to make a secondary school model fit all schools.
So onward to 2020 and we were ‘in the window’ again and it felt very different to the other occasions. In the Autumn term of 2022, colleague heads of neighbouring schools had their ‘good badges’ removed and replaced with requires improvement and in conversation told me about the attitudes of the inspectors and their lack of empathy and refusal to listen to evidence that school leaders had to share with them. Heads handed their notice in, and governors started to look at joining MATs. The stress levels of anyone working in schools went through the roof and of course local authorities put more pressure on them as they needed school to stay ‘good’. Teachers were under so much pressure to ensure that the OFSTED needed to see ‘good’ in everything that was done – we didn’t stop to wonder whether one word could possibly describe everything that a school does for its community and beyond. There were so many things that were said to happen if you had a requires improvement or inadequate label:
- You could be slapped with an academy conversion order.
- Your school would be out of favour with parents – fewer children means less money.
- You could find it difficult to appoint new staff as they felt the pressure would be too much for them.
- Some providers would not allow you to have student teachers training in the school.
And the list goes on – how on earth were these schools supposed to improve?
Ironically both Ruth Perry and I had our last OFSTED inspections on the 14th and 15th of November 2022. In a fair and open system both schools should have had the same experience and the same outcomes – yet one head teacher lost her life and the other had to leave her role after becoming so ill that they could not continue.
As I said at the beginning, the reactions this week about the plans to remove this one-word judgment have really got me thinking. The changes are not about the government paying too much attention to school leaders feeling a bit bad – but about the utterly devastating damage that constant stress can do to school communities, individual human beings and their loved ones. You should never be seen as collateral damage to the profession! School leaders and their staff often function in a never-ending cycle of stress under a constant fear of not doing or being good enough. It is crippling to the human body and mind to live in a constant state of fight, flight or freeze – the cycle must be closed.
This is why these changes are a big deal – they will make a massive difference to the profession and the humans that work within it. Sometimes commentators like the ones on X and other platforms actually forget that is what we are – human.
I am hoping that this is the first step in a process that starts to support a profession that has a life-changing impact on our future citizens. I know that schools are effective and successful when professionals are treated with respect, trusted to do their jobs and held accountable in a fair and honest way. We can create amazing schools by leading with compassion, integrity and emotional intelligence. Believe it or not, feelings are important, human interaction relies on it and schools are full to bursting with humans – so I say it again – removing the one-word judgements is a big deal!
Thank you to Ruth Perry’s sister Julia, family and friends and all the other people with integrity and passion for fighting so hard for this to happen.