NASUWT comments

It is important to recognise that the purpose of inspection should determine what is covered in the inspection report and, critically, how it is covered. Starting with the inspection report could be seen as a case of ‘the tail wagging the dog’.

While all of the points below could be judged to be important or very important, positive responses to some or all of the questions could be seen to imply support for the current approach to inspection. Therefore, we strongly recommend that you use the ‘Comments’ box at the end of the section to explain your response. You might also use examples to illustrate your response.

Question

We know that our inspection reports are important. Below, we have set out the aims that we believe every inspection report should achieve. Some of these are already required by law. We would like to know your views on these.

Options: Very important; Important; Neutral; Not very important; Not at all important.  

• Make it clear what attending the school is like for the pupil, such as whether children or learners are safe and happy there.

• Give a clear judgement on the quality of education at the school. This includes how well children or learners acquire the knowledge and skills that they need and how well the school plans and teaches the curriculum and checks that children/learners have learned it.

• Give a clear judgement on how well school leaders and staff have fostered positive behaviour and attitudes among children, including what they are doing to ensure good or improved attendance levels.

• Give a clear judgement on the quality of personal development for children. This includes the extent to which the curriculum extends beyond the academic, how well children are supported to develop their character, and whether the school prepares children for future success in their next steps.

• Give a clear judgement on the quality of leadership and management at a school, and how this impacts children or learners.

• Make clear how effective the school is at keeping children safe and protected from harm.

• Make clear what the school does to support children with special educational needs (SEN) and/or disabilities.

• Make clear how inspectors have considered pupils’ outcomes (such as educational performance and wider local context) and other data (such as attendance), and how these have affected the overall grade for the school.

• Make it clear how well the most disadvantaged pupils learn, achieve, and are supported in the school.

• Report on the performance of the wider group (such as the multi-academy trust (MAT), diocese, or chain of independent schools) that the school is part of and may share resources, staff and practice with (Ofsted does not have authority to do this currently).

NASUWT comments

It will be important to include comments and examples that illustrate any limitations of the current approach to inspection reporting and which show how inspection might be improved. Things that you might want to address in your response could include:

• the current format for reporting, including the level of detail;

• the accuracy of the report;

• the tone of the report; and

• the usefulness of the report, including for school improvement purposes.

Ofsted does not carry out subject inspections but makes judgements about the whole curriculum.

However, inspection reports may name subjects if the inspection judgement states that what has been observed is not systemic (i.e. they identify variation between subjects in the curriculum). You might want to comment on the impact that this has had on subject teachers and subject leads.

You might want to comment on the use of single word judgements.

NASUWT’s view is that single-word judgements are not helpful and can be misleading.

We would like inspection reports to provide greater support for school improvement and think that the current single word judgements make this more difficult.

You might want to consider how inspection reports could better support school improvement. For example, would an approach that simply says that a school has or has not met the required standard be more appropriate? Would it be helpful for the inspection judgement to be accompanied by an explanation of what the school is doing well and what more the school could do to improve?

Question

Our ambition is that Ofsted education inspections should always do the following. How important are the following to you?

Options: Very important; Important; Neutral; Not very important; Not at all important.  

• Inspections are carried out in a way that is consistent from place to place.

• The way we carry out inspections is consistent across the same phases of education (such as primary or secondary) offered by different types of schools (such as local authority maintained, academy, faith school, grammar school).

• Inspections are long enough to allow inspectors to make accurate judgements.

• The time between notifying a school about a forthcoming inspection and carrying out the inspection is short but appropriate (for school inspections, the notice period is half a day).

• We consider the context of the school’s local area as part of our inspections, and in the judgements that we make.

NASUWT comments

It will be very important to provide comments to support your responses to the questions.

You might want to consider whether Ofsted inspections provide a robust assurance of a school’s effectiveness. If not, why not? Does inspection raise standards and improve lives?

Does ‘robust assurance of school effectiveness’ mean that inspections need to be high stakes? If not, are there other approaches to inspection that would either demonstrate or better support school effectiveness?

Are inspections consistent across schools, phases and types of school?

You might want to consider the emphasis paid in inspection to the different areas and activities undertaken by the school. Is Ofsted inspecting and valuing the things that are important including for different groups of learners? If some areas or activities are not given sufficient attention, is this justified?

You might want to comment on the inspection methodology.

Inspectors use deep dives of curriculum subjects to gather evidence (evaluation of curriculum intent, evaluation on long- and middle-term thinking, visiting a sample of lessons, work scrutiny, discussion with teachers and pupils). Inspectors also use these activities to gather evidence about behaviour, pupils’ personal development, and leadership and management.

Inspectors use information gathered from deep dives of several subjects to make judgements about the curriculum as a whole, for instance, whether strengths or weaknesses are systemic.

Are deep dives of curriculum subjects appropriate for different phases of education? For instance, some primary school teachers and leaders have raised concerns about the use of deep dives of curriculum subjects in relation to the inspection of primary schools.

Ofsted does not undertake deep dives that focus on behaviour, personal development or leadership and management. Would it be appropriate for inspectors to undertake deep dives that focus on these areas?

Inspections are usually carried out by a small number of inspectors and last two days. Is this effective?

Inspections are sometimes carried out by Her Majesty’s Inspectors (HMIs) who are employed by Ofsted, or more often by Ofsted Inspectors (OIs) who are school leaders and undertake a few inspections per year. Currently, classroom teachers are not employed as inspectors. If you think classroom teachers should be employed as OIs, it would be useful to explain why.

Does Ofsted take sufficient account of a school’s context? If not, why not?

NASUWT comments

You might draw on examples from your own experience to explain the impact of inspection. This might include the consequences for and impacts on different groups of staff within a school.

You should think about the impact of inspection outside of the actual inspection. This could cover issues such as workload and management practices as well as issues relating to wider school improvement.

You should think about the impact of inspection for different groups of pupils and children and young people locally. It will be important to think about the impacts on pupils who experience disadvantage, such as those who have special educational needs or disabilities (SEND).

OIs will look for evidence of illegal practices such as off-rolling (explained below). However, some schools may discourage some children from gaining admission, saying, for instance, that they cannot meet the child’s needs and that another school is much better placed to meet the child's needs. You might want to comment on the use and impact of such practice locally, particularly if you work in an inclusive school.

Currently, Ofsted inspects local authorities but does not inspect MATs. MATs fulfil very similar functions to local authorities. MATs also have significant influence over policies and procedures in their schools. Some MATs will have significant influence over the school’s curriculum.

NASUWT’s view is that the current arrangements are inconsistent and MATs should be inspected.

NASUWT comments

You might want to comment on the diversity or lack of diversity of the inspection workforce. This could cover their cultural, religious and ethnic backgrounds. It might also include the professional roles and backgrounds of inspectors (e.g. their experience in a particular phase of education, or in a particular professional role).

You might comment and provide examples of the consequences of inspectors having experience or not having experience in the phase or subject that they are inspecting.

You might reflect on who Ofsted recruits as inspectors and whether it would be appropriate to draw from a broader base of professionals. For instance, NASUWT believes that it would be appropriate for classroom teachers to be employed as inspectors.

You might comment on the current inspection arrangements and their impact on inspection culture. For instance, what impact does a small inspection team have on inspection culture? Also, what impact does the inspection schedule have on the way inspection is conducted?

Ofsted has a limited inspection budget and the current inspection arrangements, including the size of the inspection team and the frequency of inspections, reflect these constraints. You might want to comment on what Ofsted could do differently within its budget envelope.

While the Big Listen focuses on inspection, the wider school accountability system impacts on inspection and the consequences of inspection. For example, following a poor inspection outcome, an employer can choose to dismiss or ‘ease out’ members of senior staff.

The Government also uses inspection outcomes to decide to academise a maintained school or force a school into a new academy trust. Do these practices impact on how your school responds to inspection? Should they be changed?

You may want to explain how wider school accountability impacts on inspection culture and on inspection impact.

If you have experience of other inspection systems, you might draw on this experience to suggest how Ofsted inspections could be amended to make them more effective.

NASUWT comments

NASUWT’s position is that the inspectorate should not inspect safeguarding and as the principle focus on inspection should be on teaching and learning.

Given the high stakes nature of the safeguarding judgement and the fact that a negative judgement will override other judgements about leadership and management, NASUWT recommends that you answer ‘yes’ to this question.

NASUWT comments

You may want to reflect on your responses to previous questions, particularly if you have commented on the frequency of inspection.

NASUWT’s view is that the most important point is that safeguarding should be separated from the wider inspection of schools. We believe that the important task of supporting, monitoring and improving schools’ safeguarding practice should be allocated to external organisations such as local authorities and that they must be adequately funded to undertake the task.

NASUWT comments

NASUWT questions whether Ofsted should inspect safeguarding. We think that it would be more appropriate for another organisation to undertake this role, leaving Ofsted to inspect other aspects of the school.

If you make a similar comment, you might also want to comment on the proposal to delay issuing an inspection report for three months until safeguarding is reinspected.

NASUWT’s view that this would be a sensible option if Ofsted continues to inspect safeguarding as part of a school inspection.

NASUWT comments

NASUWT’s position is that pausing inspection may be important, for instance, to ensure that the headteacher is supported. However, separating the inspection of safeguarding from the wider inspection of the school would help to address this issue. This would be particularly important if there were wider changes to inspection and if inspection was more supportive and developmental.

You might want to comment about making it easy to raise concerns about inspection. You might offer examples of situations where it would be helpful to raise concerns about an inspection, including issues that have arisen in the past.

Question: 

We know that our inspection reports are important. Below, we have set out the aims that we believe every inspection report should cover. Some of these are already required by law.

We would like to know your views on these.  

How important are each of the following to you?

Options: Very important; Important; Neutral; Not very important; Not at all important.  

• Make it clear what attending the provision or service is like for the child or learner, such as whether children and learners are safe and happy there.

• Make it clear how effective the provision or service is, including whether it is meeting children and learners’ individual needs.

• Make it clear how well the provider or service understands the outcomes for children and learners with SEND and/or in AP, and how that understanding informs the provision they offer to support children and learners.

• Explain how well the provider or service is performing in relation to the quality of local SEND or support services (for example, where the health or local authority provision is weak but the school’s provision is strong).

• Explain how effectively a setting or service supports children and learners with SEND and prepares them to move on to a suitable and appropriately challenging next phase of education and/or adulthood.

• Explain how effectively the provider or service works with parents and carers and responds to children’s ambitions.

• Explain how effectively the provider or service works with partners to address the needs of children with SEND in the local area.

NASUWT comments

All of these things are important. However, it is also important for inspectors to take account of context.

It will be particularly important to reflect the challenges that your school or setting is facing in supporting the needs of children with SEND, including the difficulties in accessing specialist support and services.

You might include examples to illustrate your concerns. You might also explain how ‘weak’ provision, including problems accessing provision, impacts on the wider work and life of the school, including how it impacts on other pupils and on staff.

You might want to refer to some of the barriers that make it more difficult to meet the needs of pupils with SEND, e.g. curriculum and qualification requirements for mainstream schools.

Question

Our ambition is that Ofsted inspections should always do the following. 

How important are each of the following to you?  

Options: Very important; Important; Neutral; Not very important; Not at all important.  

• Work with leaders and practitioners during the inspection to understand whether the school, AP, service or wider local area partnership is meeting the needs of children and young people with SEND.

• Work with leaders and practitioners during the inspection to understand whether the school, AP, service or wider local area partnership is offering a positive experience for children and young people with SEND that will improve their future outcomes.

• Use any available data on the outcomes of children and young people to understand whether the school, AP, service or wider local area partnership is offering them a positive experience that will improve their future outcomes.

• Use feedback from parents and carers, and children where appropriate, to understand whether the school, AP, service or wider local area partnership is meeting the needs of children and young people with SEND.

NASUWT comments

This could be understood to mean that inspectors will focus on what leaders and practitioners in the school are doing. However, it could also be understood to make links between inspections (inspections of schools and other providers, and SEND area inspections).

NASUWT believes that it is important for Ofsted to make links between evidence gathered from the inspection of individual providers in order to inform judgements about the effectiveness of SEND areas.

We recommend that you give ‘Very important’ as the response to this question and provide information to support your response in the ‘Comments’ box below.

NASUWT comments

We suggest that you include evidence to highlight the challenges and pressures that schools face as the result of specialist services not being provided. You might want to include reference to services that should be funded and delivered by health.

You might question how much meaningful evidence can be collected during a two-day school inspection.

Question

Do you agree with the following statements? 

Options: Agree; Neither agree nor disagree; Disagree; Don’t know.

• Ofsted holds early years settings to account for the quality of their SEND provision.

• Ofsted holds mainstream schools to account for the quality of their SEND provision.

• Ofsted holds schools, independent providers and PRUs to account for the quality of their AP.

• Ofsted holds special schools (including special academies, independent and non-maintained special schools) to account for the quality of their SEND provision.

• Ofsted holds further education and skills providers to account for the quality of their SEND provision.

• Ofsted holds local areas to account for how well they support children with SEND and other vulnerable children, including the provision and services they commission for children.

• An unintended consequence of Ofsted’s inspection and regulation is that mainstream schools exclude, suspend, off-roll, or place pupils with SEND off-site pupils.

• An unintended consequence of Ofsted’s inspection and regulation is that mainstream schools are less inclusive of pupils with SEND, so they are not offered tailored provision off site or in special schools.

• The number of good and outstanding SEND and/or AP providers and services in England gives a strong indication of the overall quality of the SEND and/or AP system.

• Ofsted should be able to inspect groups of providers as a single entity to understand their overall impact on children and learners. These include MATs and owners of large independent school providers or residential care homes.

• Ofsted should have an oversight role for smaller unregulated settings such as unregistered AP.

NASUWT comments

The comments in this section should reflect the comments in the ‘Culture’ section for schools above. However, you might want to include some specific points about the impact of culture on children and young people with SEND and on provision for children and young people with SEND.

You might want to comment on the diversity or lack of diversity of the inspection workforce. This could cover their cultural, religious and ethnic backgrounds. It might also include the professional roles and backgrounds of inspectors (e.g. their experience in a particular phase of education, or in a particular professional role).

You might comment and provide examples of the consequences of inspectors having experience or not having experience of specialist or AP provision.

You might reflect on who Ofsted recruits as inspectors and whether it would be appropriate to draw from a broader base of professionals. For instance, NASUWT believes that it would be appropriate for classroom teachers to be employed as inspectors. In the case of SEND, this might include SENCOs and SEN teachers.

You might comment on the current inspection arrangements and their impact on inspection culture. For instance, what impact does a small inspection team have on inspection of SEND and AP? Also, what impact does the inspection schedule have on the way inspection is conducted?

Ofsted has a limited inspection budget and the current inspection arrangements, including the size of the inspection team and the frequency of inspections, reflect these constraints. You might want to comment on what Ofsted could do differently within its budget envelope.

While the Big Listen focuses on inspection, the wider school accountability system impacts on inspection and the consequences of inspection. You may want to explain how wider school accountability impacts on inspection culture and on inspection impact for children and young people who have SEND or who are in AP.

If you have experience of other inspection systems, you might draw on this experience to suggest how Ofsted inspections could be amended to make them more effective.