Ofsted has shaken up how and when inspectors access school websites after Schools Week exposed a loophole that offered advance notice of visits to those who monitored downloads. But the watchdog this week refused to give more details, apparently fearing doing so would allow schools to identify other ways to predict inspections. Last year, website provider Greenhouse School Websites claimed to have 鈥渄eveloped an algorithm to accurately tell when Ofsted are looking at your school website.鈥 It signed up thousands of its clients, though some opted out when approached about the scheme. Further investigation revealed the use of such practices was widespread and an open secret in schools, with discussions on school IT professionals forum Edugeek about setting up an 鈥淥fsted early warning鈥 system dating back as far as 2015. At the time, inspection teams were understood to look at key information documents from a school鈥檚 website between two and 14 days before inspections. By monitoring who was downloading documents, schools were able to work out if this was an inspector. The inspection system is built on the principle that schools should only be told about inspections at most the day before they happen. Minister says Ofsted has ‘made changes’ When pressed about Schools Week鈥檚 investigations this month, schools minister Damian Hinds It is understood this means documents are downloaded much closer to 鈥渢he call鈥 informing schools they are due to get an inspection. Damian Hinds Ofsted is 鈥渁lso continuing to consider proportionate technical options to hide or disguise its access to school websites prior to an inspection,鈥 Hinds added. Schools Week understands this includes the use of virtual private networks (VPNs). Hinds also urged schools 鈥渘ot to use this kind of service鈥 and said: 鈥淪chools do not need to take any extra steps to prepare for Ofsted inspections.鈥 Ofsted said the changes were 鈥渋ntended to stop schools from monitoring website traffic, we won鈥檛 be putting specific details about them in the public domain.鈥 Professor Colin Richards, a former senior inspector, said Ofsted and DfE 鈥渉ave clearly been embarrassed鈥 by the investigation 鈥渁nd are afraid to give anything away 鈥 even at the cost of a lack of transparency.鈥 ‘A sad reflection of the inspection process’ But Frank Norris, another ex-inspector and senior manager, said he understood why they 鈥渄on’t want to alert schools to how they might be able to avoid website searches undertaken by inspectors being detected.鈥 Norris added: 鈥淚t is, however, a sad reflection of the inspection process that schools feel the need to try and gain an advantage.鈥 The Department for Education also refused to say whether it had carried out a formal investigation into the practice when alerted to it last year. Former schools minister Nick Gibb had warned monitoring could 鈥渃ause unnecessary pressure and add to workload for staff.鈥 Tom Middlehurst, curriculum, assessment and inspection specialist at the ASCL school leaders鈥 union, said it was 鈥渋mportant that the inspection system is consistent and fair for all schools.鈥 But he said 鈥渋t is surely possible to outline this work without creating another loophole.鈥 James Bowen, assistant general secretary at the NAHT, added the use of alerts was 鈥渇urther evidence that the impact and significance of Ofsted inspections has gotten out of hand.鈥
Emanuel Crisp 27 January 2024 It doesn’t take a genius. They could stop this practice overnight by paying an intern to spend their Friday afternoons downloading these documents for a random selection of schools. The rate of false positives would be so high that schools would soon get sick of it. Annual cost of <1% of what their internal investigation will have cost.