ASCL calls for overall graded judgements to be removed

The Association of School and College Leaders has published a discussion paper aiming to fuel a debate that leads to a "fairer, more constructive approach to school and college inspection".

Proposals for immediate change include the removal of the overall graded judgements, to tell schools and colleges in which academic year they will be inspected, and to review the inspection cycle timeframe. It also suggests that the Ofsted inspector training and associated training materials be published and to  undertake an internal review of how pupil voice is used during inspection. The ASCL also calls for the inspection handbook to be updated and for reporting to better reflect the role of trusts in school effectiveness.

The proposals for long-term changes, which should only be introduced following thorough piloting and analysis of impact, include the removal of all graded judgements, to be replaced with a narrative description of a school or college’s strengths and weaknesses in different areas. Currently, as well as getting an overall grade of either outstanding, good, requires improvement or inadequate, schools are given individual grades in four areas: quality of education, behaviour and attitudes, personal development and leadership and management. Removing these has the potential to end the unhelpful and misleading practice of reducing a school or college’s performance in key areas to a single word or phrase, and to instead give parents and other stakeholders a more nuanced understanding of what a school or college is doing well and how it could improve.
 
Geoff Barton, General Secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders, said: “Graded judgements are a woefully blunt tool with which to measure performance, failing to account for the different circumstances under which schools operate. Negative judgements come with huge stigma attached and create a vicious circle that makes improvement more difficult. We know from speaking to members that the punitive inspection system is contributing to the recruitment and retention crisis in education by adding to the pressure school leaders are under, and by making it more difficult to recruit high-quality staff in the schools which most need them.”
 
Tom Middlehurst, Curriculum, Assessment and Inspection Specialist at the Association of School and College Leaders, said: “We appreciate the need for an independent inspectorate, and acknowledge the current Education Inspection Framework has some positive aspects. But many school and college leaders feel the framework is flawed and Ofsted risks losing the trust of the profession. We think that, if implemented, the changes put forward in this paper could help win back that trust and produce an inspection system that is just, reliable and in the best interests of children and young people.”
 
Julie McCulloch, Director of Policy at the Association of School and College Leaders, said: “Although these recommendations do not yet represent formal ASCL policy, the paper has been produced following consultation with ASCL Council – our policymaking body. Our hope is it will be a useful contribution to the dialogue for policymaking now and in the future and we would welcome feedback from across the sector.”