Head teacher kills herself over OFSTED

NotSpaghetti

Growstuff, thanks for the link but ghat doesn't look like the full report to me. They used to be way longer. Maybe I'm really out of touch??

Where is all the data about numbers of pupils, all the tables and so on that is usually at the front of the report?
It looks pretty thin.

That is the full report.

The head would probably have been given more detailed feedback, but that wouldn't be included in the report. Ofsted reports have been like that for years.

From the report, it's not really possible to see what the specific safeguarding issues were. Reading between the lines, it doesn't seem to be about the majority of pupils being in any real danger, but not paying enough attention to the needs of SEND pupils and attendance. It seems some staff weren't following through on concerns.

When people read about "safeguarding" they think that pupils are in some kind of imminent danger from predators or bullying, but I don't think that's the case here. I think it's about the needs of a small group of SEND pupils not being met. I have worked in many schools where that would be the case, but boxes have been ticked and the schools have still been seen as good or outstanding.

If I'm right (and I don't know that I am), it would be a concern and it would be a priority to address it. However, a specific focus on those issues would rectify shortcomings within weeks.

More importantly the report states "Pupils enjoy coming to this welcoming and vibrant school. They respect and
celebrate differences between themselves and others. Pupils can discuss what a healthy and unhealthy relationship looks like and how to be a good friend. They know how to stay safe, including online."

Being pragmatic, I don't believe pupils were in danger from lack of safeguarding.

Luckygirl3

So .... they found inadequacies in certain areas. And what do they do about it? Absolutely zilch. They march in, make a judgement, and march out again. The judgements made can make it hard to recruit good staff - so the result is a deterioration in quality staff and a drop in standards all round.

Constructive support going forward is the key - a key that is lacking. This is the major flaw in the system that people are complaining about.

👏👏👏

So .... they found inadequacies in certain areas. And what do they do about it? Absolutely zilch. They march in, make a judgement, and march out again. The judgements made can make it hard to recruit good staff - so the result is a deterioration in quality staff and a drop in standards all round.

Constructive support going forward is the key - a key that is lacking. This is the major flaw in the system that people are complaining about.

Actually I seem to have a phone issue.
I'm not getting the whole report.
Apologies Growstuff

Growstuff, thanks for the link but ghat doesn't look like the full report to me. They used to be way longer. Maybe I'm really out of touch??

Where is all the data about numbers of pupils, all the tables and so on that is usually at the front of the report?
It looks pretty thin.

The school was judged "good" in most areas, so it wouldn't have been an impossible task.
Not impossible, but how long do the inspectors have to systematically go through every document with a fine tooth comb? Once they find an error in paperwork and recording they would have to dig through every employment contract, DBS check, references, health declarations etc in order to make sure there were no further errors. It takes hours, days even. Then an equal amount of time to get things sorted by drawing up a new plan for the Head to follow. When all the Head had to do was to get it right - and it must have been right at the previous inspection.

Nevertheless, there is much that is positive in the report. Overall, it is more positive than negative.

I'm not sure I agree, growstuff, though the quote you mention does show the school in question as being a good school in terms of actual education. What I would argue is that the safeguarding was inadequate, and that this is of paramount importance, even above the education. Safety of the children is the primary concern here. Maybe I feel so strongly and see it this way because I was a Head under inspection, many times, and the buck ultimately stopped with me. Safety non negotiable, above all else, even though this took up a disproportionate amount of my time and concern. And state or independent, primary or secondary, it amounts to the same thing.

An alternative approach to the single grade "inadequate" system might have been to sit down with the head and go through systematically with the concerns and get them sorted. The school was judged "good" in most areas, so it wouldn't have been an impossible task.

As it is, the problems still exist. I expect the school is in turmoil, which will probably affect the education of pupils for many months. Time will be needed to find a new head, who will need time to settle in and change anything.

Joseanne

It has been interesting to read the different perspectives on here, (with an understanding of the human aspect too). Everyone agrees that an inspection is stressful, but we mustn't lose sight of the fact that, if a school is run efficiently and does everything right in terms of safeguarding, it will NOT be deemed inadequate in these areas. (And if you read the report there was more wrong than DBS paperwork - supervision was found wanting too). There was nothing the Ofsted inspector could have done other than to report it as he did.

The full report is here:

files.ofsted.gov.uk/v1/file/50211729

As ever, the report is written in "code", so it's not immediately evident what the main problem was.

My understanding that it was about some procedures not being in place and SEND pupils' not achieving as well as others, including concerns about school attendance.

Nevertheless, there is much that is positive in the report. Overall, it is more positive than negative.

This is one quote from the report:

"Leaders provide pupils with extensive opportunities for personal development. They are passionate about making sure that every pupil has access to the wide range of
visits, visitors, clubs and events that are available. Personal, social, health and economic education is well sequenced and ensures that pupils are ready for their move to secondary school. Pupils have a strong understanding of democracy and
show respect for other people’s points of view. They learn how to stay healthy both physically and mentally."

The report contradicts itself.

And how much stress is the named inspector under with protests and protesters carrying a photo of this poor woman, all but accusing Ofsted of being soley responsible for this tragedy?

Galaxy

I am not sure how supportive any regime could have been of failing to carry out employment checks. That would be a disciplinary in my sector.

I was thinking about that Galaxy, probably overthinking, but it could be that the governors had already called a disciplinary meeting with the Head after the inadequate report, and that that was what led to her kill herself. But of course, we don't know.

It has been interesting to read the different perspectives on here, (with an understanding of the human aspect too). Everyone agrees that an inspection is stressful, but we mustn't lose sight of the fact that, if a school is run efficiently and does everything right in terms of safeguarding, it will NOT be deemed inadequate in these areas. (And if you read the report there was more wrong than DBS paperwork - supervision was found wanting too). There was nothing the Ofsted inspector could have done other than to report it as he did.

I am not sure how supportive any regime could have been of failing to carry out employment checks. That would be a disciplinary in my sector.

Teachers here in Australia are leaving in droves apparently. Not because of the children, not because of the pay but because of the parents and their rudeness, intolerance and aggression. Especially since our Covid lockdowns. A sad state of affairs.

Quite.

^Soooo, you’re saying that all OFSTED inspectors can’t do their job? Ridiculous.
There’s also tons of rose coloured specs on noses about the far away and long ago school inspectors on this thread.^

Oreo I did not suggest that all OFSTED inspectors can’t do their job. I argued that the system under which they operate is flawed. Also, those of us on this thread who have compared the former HMI / advisory system with the current OFSTED process are simply expressing our professional experience of both systems. Of course, I cannot speak for others but, having taught under both systems, my professional opinion is that the supportive system of HMI was more effective for school improvement than OFSTED. This is not, as you suggest, looking back ‘through rose coloured specs’; it is presenting a considered perspective based on professional experience. Perhaps you have more positive experiences of OFSTED inspections?

The model of OfSted has nothing whatever to do with the primary aim of any government department, which is to serve.

OfSted does nothing to raise standards, to improve the school experience for pupils and staff, nor do the department's interventions and micromanagement of education, which basically OfSted is there to police.

Teachers get worn down by government demands which they, as professionals, know are hindering children's progress and burdening teachers with unnecessary work, taking them away from their primary role where they hope to be able to exercise their professional skills in the interests of the children.

Let us not lose sight of the fact that there is a wider picture here, of which OfSted is just one part.

Teachers need to be free to teach.

But M0nica, no one who applies for a job thinks they will fail, any more that those who marry think they will divorce. If you want a person taking up any sort of post, wife, husband, head etc. to think about how they’ll cope if something goes wrong, you’d need to ask them to think about it in those terms.
Also to consider the fact that the public, even on GN feel they have the right to criticise those who back out of a job.
Think of the criticism of Jacinda Ardernor Nicola Sturgeon and the postulations about their reasons for leaving. Perhaps that’s another question-Will you be able to face the criticism and speculation if you quit your job?

Mollygo Obviously not a question you ask at interview, but if you apply for a pinnacle job, you must consider whether you can cope with the stress.

Labour Education Minister, Estelle Morris resigned from her post because she said she did not have what was necessary to do her job. In the past people in every kind of job just resigned if they were found wanting, Lord Carrington resigned as Foreign Secretary because his department failed to realise that the Argentinians were serious about invading the Falklands.

It is only in recent years that resignation has been considered something no one should ever do.

I think part of the problem is the Head's sister is running a protest campaign referring to Ofsted as "horrible and inaccurate", and the cause of her sister's death. I can understand this lady being distressed, but what she is saying isn’t helpful.
I believe it was also she who told the newspaper the bit about the flossing dance causing the Head such upset that she committed suicide, though the dancing is not mentioned as the main concern in the report.

M0nica said
If you take the senior management role in any organisation, then the buck stops with you, and considering how you would cope in a situation where you were found wanting, should be something you think through before you accept a senior management role.
Taking that statement on board, we are interviewing for a new senior management role in a few weeks time. An additional question should now perhaps be, “If a situation arose where you were found wanting, would you be likely to commit suicide?”
In the interests of the school, the pupils, parents, and the OFSTED team, this would be important to know.

Whilst I don’t approve of the publicity over the lead inspector’s name and background, he and his family will probably feel as under attack as the head.

That above anything else might convince OFSTED that there is a need for change from public castigation, to valuable support and reform. (Which, incidentally, should have been done by the School Advisor or School Improvement Partner).
I don’t understand the ‘rose coloured glasses’ comment about HMIs. They did raise issues, but also dealt with them through support and advice (sometimes unwelcome).
Perhaps whoever posted that would like to elaborate on their own experience.

LizzieDrip

^88%of schools are rated good or outstanding. So to say that the OFSTED inspectors are doing a terrible job is simply untrue.^

That doesn’t really stack up. A system that is unreliable will produce unreliable outcomes across the board - both negative and positive. Many of that 88% perhaps aren’t good or outstanding. Just because a regulatory body demonstrates largely positive outcomes for its own work does not necessarily mean that the body is successful.

Soooo, you’re saying that all OFSTED inspectors can’t do their job? Ridiculous.
There’s also tons of rose coloured specs on noses about the far away and long ago school inspectors on this thread.

I know this is a tangent so switch off now if you don't want to be distracted but as home-educators we were also inspected -by our LEA. One of my daughters education provision is currently "inspected" as she is home-educating.

This comment - made by Joseanne rang true:
Maybe they are too busy box ticking to involve themselves in recording how the setting actually makes things work successfully for itself.

When we had inspections all those years ago we had a visit from the same person each year. The children actually looked forward to seeing him and he learned a lot about how we functioned and how we met the needs of our children - and he gave not only positive feedback but suggestions. It was still a (small) worry that me might be found wanting somewhere but his reports were always fair and balanced.

My daughter has a decidedly tick-box exercise and she spends about a week "gathering evidence " of the various boxes that need ticking. She never has contact with the same person and now, after many years of home education they are moving over to a submission (written by her) with photographs and samples of work which they will be evaluating remotely against the criteria. They do say they may visit in future but there is no nuance, no discussion and no suggestions. It's up to her what to present as "evidence" so she spends a lot of time through the year recording what she's doing in a way that was totally unnecessary years ago.

Our old-style inspection meant that we felt listened to, our philosophy understood and any criticism was easily and honestly discussed (and remedied if need be).

If they present as "the enemy" and a tick-box exercise then the inspection will be "thinner" - they will undoubtedly learn less and help less.
I see the changes home education has seen over the last 40 years as similar to those discussed here regarding Ofsted and the change from HMI.

The difference, of course between Ofsted and my daughter's "inspection" is that Ofsted has a one-word label as to how good or poor a school is which may have very serious implications.

Not really surprised. My neighbour is a teacher and recently her school had an Ofsted inspection.

She was really cross because the inspector, could be the same one as I live near Reading, was brutal in questioning her TA and had her in tears. I asked if the head intended to report it and that is planned, but not until the report comes out as it might affect the rating. Apparently, there was little, if any improvement advice given.