Do the high-pressure stakes of Ofsted overpower any professional benefit within education?

Ofsted inspections will restart today, after a two-week pause to give inspectors mental health awareness training.

The training was introduced by new Ofsted chief inspector, Sir Martyn Oliver, following an inquest into the death of head teacher Ruth Perry. Mrs Perry took her own life while waiting for an inspection report.

The coroner, Heidi Connor, found last month that an inspection had “contributed” to Mrs Perry’s death. She warned of a risk of further deaths “unless action is taken” and wrote a Prevention of Future Deaths notice.

The notice picked up on areas of concern including a lack of training for inspectors in looking for signs of distress in school leaders.?

Ofsted apologised on Friday for the role it played in Mrs Parry’s death.

“Such tragedies should never happen again and no one should feel as Ruth did,” Sir Martyn wrote in the response. “As his majesty’s chief inspector I would like to...apologise sincerely.”

Ofsted has now made some changes, alongside introducing the training for inspectors. Inspections can be paused for up to five days, and head teachers can now complain about an inspection via a hotline without fear of consequences. All school inspectors must have had mental health training before they lead an inspection.?

It’s not a secret that Ofsted inspections cause stress to school staff, and there’s no doubt that the three-day inspection is a big part of this. However, I think it’s important to look at the full process, taking into account the build-up before the call to say the inspection is happening and the impact after the result.

?Ofsted’s introduction of a complaints hotline is welcome, but will this really make a difference to the wellbeing of the staff?

In my role at Fortis Therapy & Training Ltd , I regularly see the physical and emotional signs of stress that an Ofsted inspection has on headteachers.

?“The Ofsted inspection experience begins from the moment you take the job,” said one of my clients, who is a headteacher. “Stories and advice from people who have travelled the road ahead of you - warning you that the inspectors make their mind up about schools before they step foot through the door, reduce leaders to tears.

“Before the inspectors even walk through the door – you’re losing sleep through the worry and the threat to your job, your reputation and your beliefs.” ? Many of my clients talk about entering the next Ofsted window and how they find themselves holding their breath from Sunday lunchtime until Wednesday afternoon, in anticipation of receiving the call.

One of our clients, a head teacher at a legacy school (meaning it has previously ranked as “outstanding”) received the call in May 2023. He had been waiting for this call for the ten-years he had been head, following the school’s outstanding result in 2006. The extended period of waiting put him in fight-or-flight mode, and even though now he says he feels like he has “half of his brain back” and he no longer needs antidepressants, the stress-induced impact on his eyesight remains unchanged.

Another of our clients, who would welcome a change in the process said: “Anticipating the phone call week by week, the intensity of inspection and a final nationally published report outcome affects the wellbeing of school leaders and the wider team.”

The biggest issue around inspections, according to my clients, is the lack of consistency from the very moment they get that call.

It is clear that each inspector is influenced by their background or training, which adds additional concerns for school heads, not only about the inspection itself but also about the inspector's approach. Will the school be assigned an inspector who actively listens and works with the staff, with the aim to support the school's development? Or will they have one with predetermined ideas about how all schools should be run, without considering the many factors that dictate the individual needs of each school?

“The most difficult part of the inspection process for me was ensuring the inspectors understood what our school was about,” said another client.

The inspections themselves are intense. They begin from the call, which is essentially a meeting to discuss how the inspection will run, and what it may or may not be expecting to focus on. Then there are two long days of scrutiny, for everyone, from headteachers, to the teaching assistants, leaving staff feeling the pressure. Because Ofsted takes a deficit-based approach, no matter how supportive a team you come from, there is always an element of not wanting to be the one who lets the side down.

But the real problem when it comes to the wellbeing of the heads, is what happens afterwards. Schools receive a 400-word report and a ranking – which can go from hero to zero thanks to something as simple as a problem with paperwork that doesn’t affect the students, and could potentially have been fixed before the inspection was over. The school is then not allowed to talk about this report for weeks afterwards, until the grading has been officially released.

After a surprise full inspection, where the reason for the inspection was never explained, one Head said: “I felt mortified and ashamed of myself. I spent the weekend crying, and for the first time felt like I couldn’t do this anymore, that I should leave education.”

Another said: ‘The experience felt silencing –I was presented with judgements, and I wasn’t given an opportunity to challenge those thoughts or to put another point of view across. The inspection was done to us and while the outcome for us was good, afterwards we felt misunderstood and jaded by the fight. We felt that it wasn’t safe to challenge and have open discussions with the inspectors. They had already made up their mind and that was soul crushing.’

While an overhaul of Ofsted would be welcome, it seems pretty unlikely. So, what small changes could be made? The biggest, from talking to our clients, is the language that is used in the reports, with many of our clients stating the wording is aggressive and doesn’t help anyone.

Many agree that it would be good to get rid of the overall grading, instead focusing on individual categories.? Along with changing the category grades, instead of inadequate, requires improvement, good and outstanding, why not make it simple? Good and requires support?

Right now, the high-pressure stakes of Ofsted reports overpower any professional benefit to the staff or pupils. However, by working in partnership with the schools, and taking the time to support them developing, rather than a ‘them and us’ situation, would be far more beneficial and progressive.

?And when it comes to wellbeing, many of our clients feel that although they were asked frequently if the team’s conduct was ok, and if they were feeling ok, it felt very much like a box-ticking exercise. Would the process benefit from a neutral third-party being involved, one that the staff feel they can talk to if they are struggling, somebody who can perhaps mediate the situation?

I don’t know for sure what the right step for Ofsted is, or if the changes it is already proposing will make a difference. Many of our clients have said they won’t hold their breath for change.

What I do know though, as I’ve said before, is that we cannot encourage children to learn and develop by frightening them, so why is it appropriate that those teaching our children are assessed and evaluated in this way, throughout their whole career? ?And my question is, what impact does this have in the classroom?