Schools that volunteered to be the first to be inspected under Ofsted’s new report-card system should be allowed to withdraw over concerns about changes to the way inspectors will be using performance data, headteachers’ leaders have said.
Unions and school leaders have criticised the watchdog for publishing an update setting out how its new inspection data summary reports (IDSRs) for school inspections will work just days before the first inspections under its new framework begin.
Ofsted teams will use the IDSR when preparing for, and during, school inspections. A new blog published today sets out how Ofsted will band schools as being below, at or above average on each school performance measure.
The inspectorate has also said its new IDSR will go further in looking at the context of a school’s cohort, but headteachers’ leaders have described the new approach to data as “a major source of concern”.
Ofsted announcement criticised
Andy Jordan, inspection and accountability specialist at the Association of School and College Leaders, said: “It is highly unfortunate that this information has been made available just days before inspections start, and it is the latest example of Ofsted’s rush to implement the new system superseding fairness for school and college leaders.
“Ofsted should have published their proposals around IDSR at the same time that the new framework was released. To have not done so shows a lack of respect to school leaders who have volunteered for inspection in good faith, based on their understanding of previously published data, and this risks adding further stress and anxiety to the process.
“Schools should be allowed to present evidence from previous iterations of IDSR and, given the late publication of IDSR and changes to the toolkit, we think it would be pragmatic to give schools the option to withdraw from being volunteers and revert to their routine inspection date.”
One secondary school headteacher, who asked to remain anonymous, said: “To release a new-style IDSR with amended methods of analysis is valid. To do so with one working day’s notice for leaders being inspected next week and to retrospectively change the picture of the last three years for schools - a picture already published and accepted as accurate - is not.
“Under the new framework leaders are now asked to share their own judgements at the start of inspection. Data underpins that process. The quality of leadership will inevitably come into question if those judgements are different to inspectors’ based on different analysis of historic data.”
The headteacher told Tes that as a result of the changes, schools that previously understood their data to be in line with the average could now be told it is below average.
“It is understood that change is rarely perfectly timed, that the new framework provides an opportunity. Leaders are not unreasonable. However, it seems logical if introducing a new approach that it would start from 2025 data,” they added.
“It seems fair and reasonable that due notice would have been given and clear explanation provided in advance (say at the time the framework was released). None of these things have happened. Are all previous IDSRs, and the conclusions based on them, now invalid?”
What has changed?
Ofsted’s blog says that the “statistical interpretation” of data has changed, with a stronger focus on where a school or provider sits within the national distribution of results.
“Inspectors will be able to explore patterns in pupil and learner outcomes over time, compared to national averages,” the school watchdog says.
For each achievement measure, a school will be placed into one of three bandings depending on where it sits on a national distribution range. Ofsted says the data reports used by inspectors will band schools as being below, at or above average on each school performance measure.
Ofsted says the IDSR will also flag context about pupil cohorts, including cohort stability and levels of disadvantage, as well as the proportion of pupils with special educational needs and disabilities. These context flags are provided for the whole school, as well as the year groups that sat relevant tests or assessments.
The blog also says it “has always been the case that data is only the starting point for inspection. We do not make grading decisions on the basis of data alone - but the data can help suggest areas of focus to be discussed between inspectors and leaders”.
‘Real worry’ of increased monitoring
However, James Bowen, assistant general secretary at the NAHT school leaders’ union, told Tes that “the way school data is presented in the IDSR, combined with the new toolkits, is a major source of concern for us”.
“The real worry is that any school that falls into the ‘below average’ category is at risk of being judged below the ‘expected standard’ [ for achievement] under the new secure-fit approach,” Mr Bowen said.
He warned that this could mean many more schools will become subject to Ofsted monitoring.
Ofsted released its findings from pilot inspections using its new report cards this week.
As a result of these pilots, the watchdog has amended the toolkit that inspectors will use to make grading decisions for the “achievement” category, after concerns were raised.
Ofsted has added the word “typically” to one of the expected standards. It now reads as: “On the whole, pupils achieve well. Typically, this will be reflected in their attainment and progress in national tests and examinations, which are broadly in line with national averages, including for disadvantaged pupils.”
But Mr Bowen said today that this change has done little to allay the union’s fears. Tes previously revealed that headteachers’ leaders were concerned about the watchdog’s plan for grading achievement.
You can now get the UK’s most-trusted source of education news in a mobile app. Get Tes magazine on iOS and on Android
