Over the years I’ve been writing this blog I have never minced my words – often harsh ones - about Ofsted. Now it turns out I’m not the only one! Advisers at the Department for Education are apparently hanging their heads in despair about the organisation, as a leaked memo makes clear.
I can’t comment on how accurate Ofsted’s school inspections
are. All I know is that it is hard not to have too low a view of most of
Ofsted’s inspections of child protection and children’s services. And I was
particularly struck by Dominic Cummings’ comment in his memo that Ofsted has “…
missed massive child abuse scandals under their noses, which they are very
lucky not to have been hammered for”.
But my main
preoccupation is Ofsted’s inspection reports and what they reveal about the
organisation and the inspections it conducts. The reports are frequently
formulaic and naïve. Many of the recommendations they make are unrealistic. The
reports invariably lack an analytic approach. On too many occasions they blame
but do not explain. They frequently judge but do not identify routes to
improvement.
And I would love to know what Ofsted’s methodology is based
on. When I wrote to them asking some straightforward questions I was shocked to
find out that there doesn’t seem to be much methodology – rather just a bit of
arbitrary accepted practice.
There is no evidence at all that the whole expensive Ofsted shebang
has had any positive effect in improving standards in children’s services or in
making children and young people any safer.
