红桃影视

Scrap the standalone inclusion criteria, merge the teaching and curriculum judgments and rethink the “highly subjective” exemplary grade, Ofsted has been told by academy leaders.

The (CST), which represents almost 80% of academy schools and trusts, has submitted its formal response to Ofsted鈥檚 wide-ranging proposed reforms.

The proposals were drawn up alongside the group鈥檚 membership and elected policy group.

The proposed changes include merging judgments, rethinking the new 鈥榚xemplary鈥� grade and warn that increasing monitoring inspections could clash with government improvement plans and put too much pressure on 鈥榮tuck schools鈥�.

The report added that “simplified grading scale, clearer toolkits, streamlined evaluation areas, and simpler framing of the inclusion evaluation area would help ensure the framework achieves its intended outcomes while minimizing unintended consequences”.

Here are the six key suggestions鈥�

1. Remove standalone 鈥榠nclusion鈥� criteria ...

Ofsted has proposed to introduce a new judgment area for 鈥榠nclusion鈥�. It has also threaded inclusion through all the other evaluation areas, to make it a core feature of inspections rather than an add-on.

But CST argues having a standalone evaluation area for inclusion complicates this.

It recommends removing the additional criteria for the inclusion judgment, and instead use intel gained from the inclusion threads in other judgment areas 鈥渢o reach an aggregated indicator鈥� of a school鈥檚 performance in relation to inclusion.

鈥淭his would maintain the focus of inclusion as something threaded through school and inspection practice, rather than being a bolt-on,鈥� said CST.

2. 鈥� and merge teaching and curriculum judgments

CST also recommends merging the 鈥榯eaching鈥� and 鈥榗urriculum鈥� evaluation areas as inspection toolkits show the criteria for each 鈥渙verlap significantly鈥�.

鈥淢erging these areas into a single category, such as 鈥榯eaching the curriculum鈥� or 鈥楺uality of education鈥� would improve validity鈥�, it said, while addressing CST鈥檚 concerns over an 鈥渆xcessive鈥� number of evaluation areas.

3. Rethink 鈥榟ighly subjective鈥� requirements for 鈥榚xemplary鈥�

Ofsted is proposing to move from its current four-grade inspection system to a new five-grade one. Schools would be rated from ‘causing concern’, to ‘attention needed’, ‘secure’, ‘strong’ and ‘exemplary鈥�.

CST suggests that the grading system should be simplified and made clearer.

It acknowledged Ofsted may not wish to impose a new four-grade system, to 鈥渞educe 鈥榬ead across鈥� from the old system to the new鈥�.

Instead, it suggests removing the additional criteria for 鈥榚xemplary鈥�. Instead, any school that meets all 鈥榮trong鈥� criteria would be judged 鈥榚xemplary鈥� for that evaluation area.

CST says this would 鈥渞emove the ambiguity鈥� of the 鈥榚xemplary鈥� grade, and its 鈥渉ighly subjective鈥� criteria.

Ofsted plans to only award 鈥榚xemplary鈥� if a school is at least 鈥榮ecure鈥� in all other areas. But CST says the requirement 鈥渦ndermines the stated desire for nuance鈥�by disregarding the possibility that a school could be sector leading in one area but might need improvement in another鈥�.

4. Remove 鈥榓ttention needed鈥� criteria

Similarly, CST says Ofsted should simplify grading by removing the 鈥榓ttention needed鈥� criteria.

Instead, it suggests, any school that does not meet the 鈥榮ecure鈥� criteria but does not fall into 鈥榗ausing concern鈥� should be awarded 鈥榓ttention needed鈥�.

It said this 鈥渋s preferable to introducing an additional set of criteria that could introduce ambiguity in the 鈥榓ttention needed鈥� and 鈥榮ecure鈥� boundary鈥�.

CST says there are currently 鈥渢oo many criteria鈥�. It questions whether trying to assess all the proposed areas in a two-day inspection could create 鈥渋ntolerable intensity for those inspecting and being inspected鈥�.

5. Make grade boundaries clearer

For grading to be simplified as above, however, CST says the differences between the 鈥榮ecure鈥� and 鈥榮trong鈥� criteria 鈥渨ould need to be significantly improved鈥�. It said wording for the two grades is currently 鈥渢oo vague to support consistent grading鈥�.

Ofsted chief inspector Sir Martyn Oliver has already confirmed work is being carried out to strengthen and clarify the differences between these two judgments.

6. Reduce monitoring inspection burden

Ofsted is proposing to increase monitoring inspections, carrying them out at all school with 鈥榓ttention needed鈥� judgments, as well as those that need significant improvements. The latter would get five monitoring inspections over just 18 months.

But this is not 鈥渁 proportionate response鈥�, CST says, that risks 鈥渁dding additional burden to schools鈥� without us being convinced of a demonstrable benefit鈥�.

It said schools in need of serious improvement are also likely to receive help under the DfE鈥檚 new regional school improvement teams (RISE).

This creates a 鈥渞isk鈥� such schools getting support 鈥渇rom too many external sources 鈥� especially concerning if the advice differs鈥�.

Responding to CST’s consultation response, an Ofsted spokesperson said:聽鈥淲e want our inspections to raise standards for all children and provide better information for parents. And it鈥檚 vital they are also useful and workable for education leaders, and inspectors.

鈥淲e would encourage everyone to look at our detailed proposals and respond to the consultation.鈥�