Head teacher kills herself over OFSTED

^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?

Quite.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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?

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

👏👏👏

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.

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.

Joseanne

^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.

No, it wasn't necessarily right at the the last inspection, which was 13 years ago. The regime has changed since then and it's about more than pre-employment checks. Without knowing what the specific concerns were, I can't really comment.

What I meant is that it might have been "right" 13 years ago, but the goalposts have changed.

For anybody who is interested, this is what is meant by safeguarding. It isn't just pre-employment checks.

blog.insidegovernment.co.uk/schools/roles-responsibilities-for-safeguarding-in-primary-schools#:~:text=These%20can%20include%20dirty%20clothes,always%20confined%20to%20the%20classroom.

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.
It's all very well being constructive which they actually have been in the full Ofsted report because it includes action points as to what the school must do to improve. However, all these concerned safeguarding.
I don't believe pupils were in danger from lack of safeguarding.
OK so if a school fails to take up a reference very clearly the kids are at risk. Ian Huntley?
It is a regulatory requirement to obtain 2 references containing suitability to work with children for ALL new staff before they start work. The Head did not do this.

For anybody who is interested, this is what is meant by safeguarding. It isn't just pre-employment checks.
No it isn't, but every part of safeguarding is very important. This case specifically references
the pre employment checks which were incomplete. These particular regs were implemented after what we learnt from the Soham murders. We never ever want to see another Holly and Jessica case. There is no excuse case for school leaders not being totally on the ball where this is voncerned

Read: Keeping children safe in education 2022. It is 179 pages on the Dfe website, updated every year. This is how we rightly protect our children - mine and your grandchildren - in schools.
All school leaders are required to read and understand ALL parts.

Thank you Joseanne. I was beginning to think everything I understood about safeguarding (30+ years) was wrong.

^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.^

👏👏👏 Exactly - well said Luckygirl

DBS checks wouldn't have stopped Ian Huntley. He didn't work at the same school. I don't think his girlfriend had any kind of criminal background.