I was intrigued to sit down and hear directly from chief inspector Amanda Spielman yesterday on the BBC as she fronted up to the many issues circling around Ofsted.

Credit to her for facing the scrutiny, and as the interview unfolded I found myself agreeing with many of the points she made about Ofsted simply doing the job it has been tasked to do by government.  

And yet…I became increasingly agitated by the reluctance to accept there was any room for improvement in the way Ofsted goes about its work.

Ofsted’s multiple problems

As leaders, we aim to be reflective, to actively seek opportunities to improve and to value the gift of feedback. The same would not appear to apply to Ofsted, though - throughout the interview, the stock response was essentially: “Nothing to see here...”

In many ways, it should come as no surprise. After all, this mulish obstinacy reflects a culture that we in schools see all too often in the inspection teams: an inability to recognise another perspective, closed-mindedness to debate and a need to shore up the illusion of institutional competence. 

This all contributes to the single biggest problem Ofsted has: consistency among its inspectors.

Some of the claims made in the interview were simply false: the implication that some of the issues raised by colleagues about the system were being taken out of proportion; that most schools are positive about their inspection experience; and that all inspectors are experienced school leaders.

Others would be laughable if the stakes weren’t so high: of particular note was the audacious claim that only a small number of staff are actually involved in an inspection. Show me one inspection in which only a “small number” of staff were involved or affected! 

Another jaw-dropper was the contention that this debate is purely a political one being driven by people who are opposed to accountability.

But the most shocking moment, which perhaps sums it all up, was when the admission came that Ofsted hadn’t attempted to reach out to Ruth Perry’s family. 

The impact of school inspection

All the above conveys an acute deafness to the legitimate challenge made by trade unions, school leaders and, more recently, parents.

It’s certainly true that Ofsted often carries the blame for many things that are wrong in the sector, sometimes unfairly. But we cannot sweep aside the deluge of concerns that have flooded the system. Something has gone badly wrong.

Too many inspectors are out of their depth: secondary specialists are being charged with making judgements about primary schools; maths specialists are judging English; mainstream teachers are judging special schools - the list goes on. 

And when you have a system with a single-word judgement that hangs on the views of these individuals, you can see why the inspectorate’s credibility has begun to disintegrate. And, of course, these ill-formed one-word judgements stick with a school for up to five years.

Our workforce is in the grip of crisis. We cannot get enough good people into our profession. And we continue to lose our best people as a result of the accountability system. Ofsted cannot afford to stick its fingers in its ears for any longer - it needs to front up to its responsibility and work with us to fix this broken approach. 

Tom Campbell is CEO of the E-ACT multi-academy trust