Head teacher kills herself over OFSTED

I was thinking about growstuff's comparison and others' comments on inspections in former times ..... maybe what is lost in current state school inspections is inspectors having an understanding of the ethos of the different schools they are visiting? Maybe they are too busy box ticking to involve themselves in recording how the setting actually makes things work successfully for itself. Perhaps it should be the other way round, and the inspectors should be appreciating what actually makes the school itself "tick".
Back in the day our school often had 2 inspections, Ofsted and ISI, very close together, (due to the separate nursery voucher scheme), and you would think the two reports were about completely different settings and staff! Both gave an "excellent" rating, but you can guess which one still looked to find fault and offered no advice.
Whilst I agree that the one inspection was possibly the more pleasant, I must emphasise that it was neither less stressful nor less thorough than the other.

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.

Lovetopaint037

Pre Ofsted inspections we had HMI inspections. There was also an inspector attached to the school who visited regularly. Their role was supportive and non aggressive. A relationship was formed in order that a true and realistic impression of a school was gained. Then came the box ticking brigade who instilled fear in staff who were working full out and in some cases were more experienced than the tickers. This was especially evident in the inspection of primary schools. The system needs a complete overhaul.

Their role was supportive and non aggressive
That does seem as if it was a far better system.

Pointing out failings and giving the Head a chance to correct these before a re-assessment in a specified time would be a far better system.
Better for the staff, governors and better for the Head Teacher.

Such a punitive system, instilling fear, cannot be good for the staff or for the children.

The pupils must all be very shocked by this tragedy.
The sad thing is that it's not an isolated case.

Pre Ofsted inspections we had HMI inspections. There was also an inspector attached to the school who visited regularly. Their role was supportive and non aggressive. A relationship was formed in order that a true and realistic impression of a school was gained. Then came the box ticking brigade who instilled fear in staff who were working full out and in some cases were more experienced than the tickers. This was especially evident in the inspection of primary schools. The system needs a complete overhaul.

Joseanne

No one has accused you of ignorance growstuff, but I do read irritation.
I'll ask you again, in what way are the inspections different, eg. number of inspectors, duration of the inspection, areas covered, reporting? Are you saying they are easier in the independent sector? I really don’t think so, especially when you factor in that an iffy Ofsted can ruin a school - parents being paying customers who can speak with their feet. Or are you saying the inspectors themselves are different and that the unprofessional ogres are saved up for the state sector?
The two might be different in the provision of the type of education they inspect, but safeguarding issues which we are primarily discussing on this thread are identical. There is no room for a Head getting safeguarding wrong wherever.

Let me say firstly, I don't know the difference between a private school inspection and an Ofsted inspection.

However, the head of the last UK private school I worked in is now head at a prestigious UK state school in London (not an oxymoron!). His state school has recently been Ofsteded. He was horrified at the difference between Ofsted and the private school inspections he'd been through.

growstuff

In my experience, the private school inspection was a more positive experience because it was more constructive. I did not have the impression that the inspectors had preconceived ideas and a tick-box mentality. There was not the them/us atmosphere I experienced in state school inspections. Incidentally, until a few years ago, many Ofsted inspectors didn't have recent classroom experience and even now, there's a clique of people who do inspections, while leaving the running of their own schools to deputies.

The private school where I worked would actually have failed on safe-guarding because it had missed out something minor with pre-employment checks, but it was given a "heads up" by the inspectors and the oversight was rectified very quickly. To me, that seems like common sense. The pupils themselves were never in any danger.

I don't know why this poor headteacher's school received the grade it did, so I can't really comment. However, from what I've read, the school was "good" in all areas except one, so received the lowest grade. That single grade sticks with the school and most parents don't understand it. Nevertheless, the stigma sticks to the school and any conscientious head is bound to take it personally. Ironically, I would say that the more caring heads (and teachers) are likely to be affected more.

thank you for this post growstuff, I meant to acknowledge you/it in my barely coherent or readable post above

I think the open door policies schools have for parents have put more pressure on teachers and heads though, especially in middle class areas where parents have more time to complain. I remember waitinf weeks to speak to the teacher at drop off in a morning but there would be a queue of parents every single mornings with matters that needed discussing. Whe I finally caught her without a queue she almost cried and said, why have you waited weeks when you actually have something important to talk to me about?

I think it is good schools are open but I think 'some parents' like some posters wink wink forget this is also someone's workplace and I guess most people don't have loads of people who don;t work there queing up to complain or worry for an hour before they even start their actual job, which teaching and head teacher role isn;t just a job for a lot of people.

Also what is the point of not giving advice? It is hardly a progressive service

What I don't understand is that funding is per pupil. Schools that do not attract parents will have less pupils and less funding. This means that schools are fighting a losing battle to have enough funding to employ enough staff to tick all the boxes

It is not logical

But M0nica has a point
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.

Yes, that is a fair appraisal growstuff and those who pooh pooh what goes on in the private sector might do well to acknowledge more of its successful practices - but that is for a different discussion.
The words that keep cropping up here are: support and advice, I agree that that is what is needed.

Definitely a more caring sensitive Head will be mortified to let a school down. You would go through the list - children, parents, colleagues - and must wish the ground would swallow you up.

Oreo

I know what you mean Glorianny it was designed to give parents a clear idea about choosing a school, as well as obvs weeding out really poor practices, but maybe it does need to be more nuanced than that.
Schools still need inspecting of course, and certain schools will always be downgraded.

Ofsted was actually supposed to be about improving performance. Its own record suggest that it has been a very expensive way of producing very little.

I remember the pre-Ofsted days, when local authority inspectors came into a school and offered constructive advice as part of the process. These days, Ofsted is not even supposed to give advice.

PS. I'm sure you know this, but state school inspectors have an agenda regarding classroom methodology, which comes from the DfE. Private schools aren't judged in the same way.

In my experience, the private school inspection was a more positive experience because it was more constructive. I did not have the impression that the inspectors had preconceived ideas and a tick-box mentality. There was not the them/us atmosphere I experienced in state school inspections. Incidentally, until a few years ago, many Ofsted inspectors didn't have recent classroom experience and even now, there's a clique of people who do inspections, while leaving the running of their own schools to deputies.

The private school where I worked would actually have failed on safe-guarding because it had missed out something minor with pre-employment checks, but it was given a "heads up" by the inspectors and the oversight was rectified very quickly. To me, that seems like common sense. The pupils themselves were never in any danger.

I don't know why this poor headteacher's school received the grade it did, so I can't really comment. However, from what I've read, the school was "good" in all areas except one, so received the lowest grade. That single grade sticks with the school and most parents don't understand it. Nevertheless, the stigma sticks to the school and any conscientious head is bound to take it personally. Ironically, I would say that the more caring heads (and teachers) are likely to be affected more.

* iffy inspection

No one has accused you of ignorance growstuff, but I do read irritation.
I'll ask you again, in what way are the inspections different, eg. number of inspectors, duration of the inspection, areas covered, reporting? Are you saying they are easier in the independent sector? I really don’t think so, especially when you factor in that an iffy Ofsted can ruin a school - parents being paying customers who can speak with their feet. Or are you saying the inspectors themselves are different and that the unprofessional ogres are saved up for the state sector?
The two might be different in the provision of the type of education they inspect, but safeguarding issues which we are primarily discussing on this thread are identical. There is no room for a Head getting safeguarding wrong wherever.

Joseanne

^I have endured 5 Ofsted inspections across my 30 year teaching career. Not one of them was undertaken with adequate professionalism, expertise or regard for staff well-being.^

As an example, either this teacher on here was very unlucky or maybe they misread things. My DH inspects around 30 schools a year, they are variable in their management and outcomes, but every team I know enters each setting with professionalism, expertise and regard for staff well-being.

I'll say it again. Private school inspections are different from Ofsted ones. I've experienced both, so I'm not speaking from a position of ignorance. Unless I'm very mistaken, your DH is not an Ofsted inspector.

I know what you mean Glorianny it was designed to give parents a clear idea about choosing a school, as well as obvs weeding out really poor practices, but maybe it does need to be more nuanced than that.
Schools still need inspecting of course, and certain schools will always be downgraded.

Oreo

M0nica

I have said it before, and will say it again. 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 somethig you think through before you accept a senior management role.

From what was quoted on the previous page, the school was found wanting - and on serious grounds.

Something similar happened at my DGC's school some years ago. The headmistress bit the bullet, sorted the problem out and the school was given a top or near top grading the following year. Parents are not fools. DS& DDiL knew that their eldest childs school was a good school and sent their second child there during the year it was marked down. Schools have local reputations, and parents work on that.

I have every sympathy for those at the school and the family and friends of the deceased headmistress. But we need to separate the head teacher's tragic over reaction to this problem from the fact that OFSTED inspections have been round for a longtime, that good or bad, teachers will be used to them and headteachers, in particular will have survived many in different circumstances and coping with them is part of their job spec.

These are really such good comments that I’m re quoting them.
All the teachers and ex teachers on here are empathising about OFSTED and how stressful it was.Am sure it was but for good reasons and sometimes stressful situations are part of life.

Oreo the point is that it isn't a good system. It may to an outsider give the impression of providing information about how successful a school is but in actual fact it does no such thing. The grading it gives is dependent on so many factors which really don't give a proper idea of how the school is doing. The people working in schools are not just complaining about stress but about the way the process works and the anomalies it involves.
Whistle blowers in other professions are encouraged to speak out, but when teachers do it they are ignored and told they need to put up with things.

To put things into perspective, 88%of schools are rated good or outstanding. So to say that the OFSTED inspectors are doing a terrible job is simply untrue.
This particular school hadn’t been inspected for 13 years, because at the last check it was rated outstanding.A lot can happen in that time, and in some areas it had obviously had problems.

The trouble is, the Head might have been truly amazing in some areas but was obviously sorely lacking in others, and this is where support should be made available. The poor lady in question fell down on one of the most important requirements - safeguarding, and I don't understand why she hadn't checked and rechecked every document, knowing this is the first thing inspectors look at on morning one. It isn't rocket science.
I am not being flippant; the school Head needs to juggle all the balls at once and multi task, playing a variety of rôles depending on the situation. They need someone to work alongside them in the management of the school, someone who can support and intervene where necessary. It is impossible for a Head to have so many responsibilities I agree, but to be honest checking the paperwork is the simplest of all the tasks and there is no excuse for being inefficient.

Elrel

M0nica posted:
‘While having every sympathy for those involved, the question that really needs asking is why this lady was appointed to a job for which she was clearly unsuited and why more was not done to quietly ease her out before this sad denouement. She was in post for 13 years.’

I see no foundation for her assumptions. If the head was ‘clearly unsuited’ it seems odd that the school was doing well with achieving pupils and contented parents. Or does M0nica have some knowledge of the school which she has not shared?

I don't think it was reported that she was in post for 13 years. It was the first inspection after she was appointed Head Teacher.

All categories at the school were marked Good except for one which meant the whole school was rated Inadequate.

There seems to be something very wrong with a system which can give an overall rating of Inadequate for one failing where the Head and Governors may have needed some guidance on improvements that needed to be made and a chance to put things right before a reassessment.

If the assessment was wrong because of misunderstandings by the Ofsted Inspector there seems to have been no debate or discussion allowed either.

M0nica posted:
‘While having every sympathy for those involved, the question that really needs asking is why this lady was appointed to a job for which she was clearly unsuited and why more was not done to quietly ease her out before this sad denouement. She was in post for 13 years.’

I see no foundation for her assumptions. If the head was ‘clearly unsuited’ it seems odd that the school was doing well with achieving pupils and contented parents. Or does M0nica have some knowledge of the school which she has not shared?

I think one of the issues we had at the very large establishment I worked at previously is that everything became about Ofsted - it wasn’t just a few days. Everything you did was for Ofsted, all training was focussed on Ofsted. You were working for Ofsted not for the young people who really should have been the focus. Ridiculously frustrating. In my current role, the school have just had to spend a fortune on something extra curricular as the staff member who normally does is is temporarily unable to. The Bursar was saying that if they didn’t, Ofsted would pull them up on it. Totally unnecessary.

Yesterday's phone-in on Radio 5 Live with Nicky Campbell is well worth listening to.
The second hour is about Ofsted inspections. Some really interesting insights:

www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m001k796?partner=uk.co.bbc&origin=share-mobile

Glorianny

GagaJo

Mollygo

What a shame there isn’t OFSTED for all MPs and for the government in power.

I would posit 90% of them would be sacked after the inspection if there were.

The inspectors wouldn't go through the door, they'd fail it on safeguarding without even entering the place

Imagine if they found teachers asleep on the job, the way MPs are filmed in Parliament. Or lying down (Rees Mogg) Or drunk, e.g. Michael Gove twitter.com/BrexitBin/status/1467543401851666435?lang=en-GB