Ofsted has admitted its planned approach to report card grading “needs simplifying” and revealed other areas of its proposals that could change.
In an exclusive article for Tes, a senior Ofsted director has responded to some of the sector’s concerns over the inspectorate’s report card plans.
Ofsted is proposing to inspect schools across 11 different areas on a five-point grading scale, starting from November.
The plans have been met with widespread criticism from school leaders and teachers, with education unions warning that the proposals could fuel workload problems and should be delayed until next year.
Today, Steve Rollett, deputy CEO of the Confederation of School Trusts (CST), has summarised his organisation’s concerns in an article for .
And Rory Gribbell, director of strategy and engagement at Ofsted, has written an article in response, setting out the inspectorate’s current thinking ahead of its consultation closing next Monday (28 April).
Grading ‘needs simplifying’
Addressing Mr Rollett’s warning that the proposals are “more bloated and complex” than necessary, Mr Gribbell conceded: “Our proposed approach to grading is too complicated.”
The inspectorate is proposing to judge schools from “causing concern” at the lowest end to the highest rating of “exemplary”, which will be shared nationally as best practice.
“We’re looking hard at how we can more clearly describe how we’ll reach grades, including the new top ‘exemplary’ grade,” Mr Gribbell said today.
His comments stop short of reducing the number of grades, or scrapping the “exemplary” rating.
Ofsted’s comments come after an alternative report card consultation, run by two former inspectors, found that the majority of school staff, governors and parents surveyed rejected the five-point grading scale and the “exemplary” rating.
Mr Gribbell also said Ofsted would look again “at the clarity of drafting between the grades ‘secure’ and ‘strong’”.
CST had called for clearer distinctions between the middle grades of “secure” and “strong” and for a reduction in the volume of criteria overall.
Mr Rollett warned that having too many evaluation areas “risks overlap, incoherence and inconsistent outcomes” - to which Mr Gribbell said there had been positive reactions “to the greater nuance that a larger number of evaluation areas provides”.
But he added: “We recognise there is some simplification to be done.”
Inclusion ‘not a bolt-on’
There has been broad support for Ofsted’s plans to focus more strongly on inclusion, but CST fears that the current plans - with inclusion both as a thread throughout and a separate toolkit - “risks confusion”.
Tes revealed last year how Ofsted has developed toolkits setting out how it will judge schools across the different evaluation areas.
The confederation calls for Ofsted to remove the inclusion toolkit and use the criteria threaded through other inspection areas to generate the inclusion grade.
Mr Gribbell did not directly address this point. He said the watchdog had heard “really positive reactions” to the creation of an “inclusion” evaluation area.
However, it had also “heard from experts about the importance of making sure that support for these children is not treated as a bolt-on”.
Perfection ‘isn’t attainable’
Mr Rollett asked for more clarification over what will replace Ofsted “deep dives”, in which inspectors focused on the curriculum offered in a particular subject and what methodology would be used.
“In a high-stakes system, the rules of the game must be known. We can’t have inspectors ‘sniffing the air’ and forming their own hypotheses,” he said.
In response, Mr Gribbell said test visits had taught Ofsted about “how we can build a rigorous approach to gathering evidence, which involves the lead inspector and school leaders working collaboratively to ensure we see typical practice”.
However, he emphasised that perfection in inspections “isn’t attainable” and that the watchdog has “constraints of time and funding”, as it has previously warned the government.
Ofsted ‘knows’ its plans can be improved
Ofsted is currently testing its inspection toolkits and report card system in volunteer schools. It will carry out further pilots after the consultation concludes next week.
Mr Gribbell said the inspectorate was still waiting to hear all the feedback from the consultation before it makes any final decisions, but added: “We know we can improve what we proposed.”
Ofsted understood the “need to hear the feedback and challenge being offered”, he stressed.
His comments are in contrast to those made last month by Ofsted’s chief inspector Sir Martyn Oliver, who said he was “saddened” that critics of planned inspection reforms had not “managed to understand” them fully.
