Ofsted has claimed its current inspection framework led to curriculum improvements, but is facing criticism for basing the finding on just 20 school visits. The watchdog committed to evaluating its education inspection framework (EIF) after the death of headteacher Ruth Perry. The evaluation, published Thursday, claimed 鈥渙verall, curriculum quality had improved. The schools in our study were more focused on curriculum quality.鈥 But the report was based on visits seven HMIs made to just 20 schools last year. The schools were among 64 visited in 2018 as part of curriculum research by Ofsted before the EIF was introduced. Sample size ‘shocking’ Former senior HMI Frank Norris described the size and nature of the cohort used in the study as 鈥渜uite shocking鈥 and 鈥渄eeply worrying鈥. 鈥淣o empirical study worth its salt would try to draw conclusions from such a small number of schools,鈥 he said. There are more than 24,000 state-funded schools and nurseries across England. Last year alone, Ofsted carried out 6,930 inspections at state-funded schools. Frank Norris Norris also said the evaluation should have focused on more than just the curriculum and quality of education. 鈥淲e know how the various aspects of a framework impact on others so why hasn鈥檛 there been a focus on leadership or safeguarding? Is this an attempt to try and identify some good news at a time when there is little good Ofsted news?鈥 Adrian Gray, another former senior HMI, described Ofsted’s much-awaited evaluation as 鈥渆ntirely inadequate. A major problem to me is that there is no genuine survey data involved.鈥 The report acknowledges the small sample size in a footnote, saying: 鈥淚t is worth noting the limitations of this study, especially its small scale. This must be considered when interpreting our findings. 鈥淭he experiences of the schools in this study are not necessarily representative of schools more broadly.鈥 But Ofsted said 鈥渋n-depth鈥 interviews were carried out with the 20 school leaders who took part in research visits. These combined with the inspectors’ measures of education quality provided 鈥渃ompelling鈥 evidence about the EIF’s impact. The inspectorate says it chose to focus on curriculum and quality of education because the most major changes of the new EIF were putting the curriculum at the heart of Ofsted inspections, and the creation of a new 鈥渜uality of education鈥 judgment. Focus on reading sees maths ‘left behind’ But some leaders said the focus on curriculum quality across all subjects 鈥減ut pressure on staff鈥 who teach multiple subjects or are not subject specialists. Others said the focus on reading has resulted in other areas, such as maths, being 鈥渓eft behind鈥. But Ofsted said school leaders were broadly 鈥減ositive鈥 about the EIF’s greater focus on quality of curriculum, and said inspectors saw 鈥渂roader, more in-depth, ambitious curriculums, in most of the [20] schools we visited鈥. Around one-third of the 20 schools had made 鈥渕ajor changes鈥 as a 鈥渄irect result鈥 of the EIF鈥檚 new focus on curriculum, it said. Many had already been in the process of developing their curricula when the EIF was introduced, but said the new framework had helped them 鈥渟peed up the changes鈥. Ofsted said the EIF 鈥減layed a part鈥 in the improvement to curriculum quality. But they added: 鈥淲hat is included in our inspection frameworks, and what we inspect, have obvious consequences for practice in the sector. Yet we are only one part of the education system.鈥 It acknowledges that there have been myriad reasons for curriculum changes in the six years between the 2018 study and last year’s revisits. These include DfE-led changes, new school leaders, schools joining MATs, and academic-led developments. 鈥淔undamentally, improvements were driven by school leaders and staff who aimed to give children a high-quality education,鈥 the report added. Ofsted is currently consulting on proposals for a new inspection framework, which it hopes to launch in autumn 2025. Visit the consultation website .