Teach Secondary Issue 14.3

‘Are you hearing this?’ Adrian Lyons explains why Ofsted’s assurances that it’s in ‘listening mode’ ring a little hollow... I n early February, Ofsted published its much-anticipated proposals for the future of inspection (see tiny.cc/ts143-OF1) , including the heavily-trailed ‘report card’. The response from the education sector seemed to be an expression of widespread dismay. Despite the rhetoric of ‘engagement’, it feels as if Ofsted has sidestepped the key messages from its own Big Listen consultation, the damning findings of the Gilbert Learning Review and the Coroner’s report on the tragic impact of Ofsted’s inspection process in the case of Ruth Perry. Layers of confusion Rather thanmeaningful reform, the proposals instead appear to offer little more than an expansion of the number of areas graded, and an increase in the number of grades awarded. Alongside this, the introduction of so-called ‘toolkits’ seems to only add layers of confusion, rather than bringing greater clarity to bear. Since launching the consultation, Ofsted’s response to criticismhas become increasingly defensive. Rather than genuinely engaging with the widespread concerns expressed by school leaders, teachers and unions, senior figures within Ofsted appear to be dismissing, or even outright rejecting feedback that doesn’t align with their existing plans. This closed mentality was on full display when Chief ABOUT THE AUTHOR Adrian Lyons was one of His Majesty’s Inspectors between 2005 and 2021 and now works with MATs, teacher training providers and LAs to support education; find out more at adrianlyonsconsulting.com Inspector Sir Martyn Oliver appeared before the Commons Education Select Committee in January. At a time when Ofsted was striving to present itself as being ‘in listening mode,’ the responses he gave suggested that the organisation was still unwilling to acknowledge the depth of dissatisfaction within the sector. ‘Yetmoremisery’ Regular readers will know that I’m a strong proponent of external accountability and inspection. That’s why it’s been particularly frustrating to hear Sir Martyn fall back on the tired argument that anyone critical of Ofsted’s approach is advocating for a ‘low- accountability system.’ He repeated this assertion when speaking at the Association of School and College Leaders’ conference in March, seemingly unwilling to accept that the real issue isn’t the very existence of accountability, but the way it’s implemented . The concerns of school leaders aren’t isolated grumblings. ASCL general secretary Pepe D’Iasio described the new system as ‘bewildering’ for teachers, leaders, and parents, accusing Ofsted of devising an accountability system that will subject an already beleaguered profession to “ Yet more misery.” National Association of Headteachers general secretary, Paul Whiteman, has meanwhile warned that the framework risks replicating the worst aspects of the current system, while doing very little to alleviate the immense pressures faced by school leaders. Sir Martyn has insisted that the proposed framework will shift inspection from ‘low-quality information and high-stakes judgements’ to a ‘richer, more nuanced’ approach. Yet this fundamentally misses the point. The issue isn’t just the quality of information, but the high-stakes nature of Ofsted’s judgements. Amplified pressure Increasing the number of assessments and adding more gradations doesn’t reduce pressure – it amplifies it. The fundamental problem of high-stakes, highly contestable accountability remains unchanged; it’s merely been multiplied. This disconnect between Ofsted’s rhetoric and reality is further underscored by internal contradictions within the organisation itself. Ofsted’s director of education has suggested they will ‘think again’ if opposition to the report cards is sector-wide. This attempt at conciliation was quickly undermined, however, by Ofsted’s director of strategy and engagement – a former Conservative government special adviser, who asserted via social media that Ofsted had received ‘a lot of positive feedback’, and that changes were firmly set for November, with no further consultation planned. Frommy own experiences within Ofsted, I know how selectively feedback can be heard. When key figures within the inspectorate are already pre-emptively dismissing sector-wide concerns, it’s difficult to see how this consultation can be anything more than a tick-box exercise. Meaningful reform requires real engagement – not just the illusion of listening. If Ofsted really wants to build trust and credibility, then it must do more than simply repackage the same old high-stakes accountability model in a different guise. 41 teachwire.net/secondary O F S T E D