Three years ago with a small group of other parents, I embarked on the long, difficult process of establishing a new community school in north London. Our area had a deficit of comprehensive provision and we wanted to serve the whole community. We opened in September 2013. Welcoming our first cohort of students marked the transition from an idea to a “real school”. We knew that another milestone would be our first Ofsted report.
And so, our school, the Archer academy, duly had its first inspection this summer. We received a “good” judgment and the report made references to the excellent start we had made: “High-quality teaching in the school’s subject curriculum is providing firm academic foundations.” It’s a solid beginning and one we are pleased with, while recognising the areas where we need to develop.
Ofsted has to inspect every mainstream school in the country in the same way – that’s the point of having a single inspection framework. But is it really sensible to look at the growing number of free schools in the same way as established institutions? We are only part way into our school’s development. We educate children from ages 11 to 16 (we aim to establish a sixth form in time for our first students to enter it). We opened in 2013 with 150 year 7 students. We have not yet taught a single GCSE class. Yet here we are, rated “good” by Ofsted and given a grade that is meant to be comparable with every other school. It’s like a student being given a mark for an exam when they’ve completed only the first part of it.
It’s not fair to established schools, or to new schools, for them to be judged by the same criteria. Some things are easier for new schools – behaviour, perhaps, with only younger children attending – but other things will be harder, such as not having exam results with which to demonstrate progress and attainment across all year groups. To assume that by assessing new schools in this way we are able to provide parents with a useful comparison is misleading.
Earlier this month Ofsted announced that inspections of new schools will take place in the third year of operation, rather than midway through their second year. This is just a gesture.
It’s not just the inappropriateness of making a judgment on a job half complete, it’s also that inspections pay no attention to the arduous journey we have been on. We succeeded in getting our school off the ground in spite of, not because of, the government’s free schools policy. It is unrealistic to think that many local communities are going to be willing or able to voluntarily commit to the incredible undertaking required to set up a free school. Most parents, without the infrastructure and resources academy chains and faith organisations have, would either have to be desperate or foolhardy to set up a free school. But the highs and lows – of which there have been many –over the three years so far have fostered a can-do attitude that has helped us overcome challenges.
As a new school we’ve had plenty to do over and above the day-to-day operation of an established school. We’ve overseen the development of a new site, fitted it out and moved into it. There’s been significant staff recruitment, as well as ensuring we have the schemes of work, lesson plans and curriculum resources required. There are advantages to starting with a blank piece of paper, but also extra work. Systems need setting up from scratch and the number of policies to be produced is vast. These important tasks will shape the future success of a school, but are often marginal or even irrelevant to Ofsted. Numerous things that can go wrong during the early stages of operation – as various high-profile cases have shown. The risks are high and the consequences of messing up are profound.
I wonder whether new providers should be subjected to a greater degree of scrutiny than established schools. There could be a stronger focus on assessing new systems and procedures and whether the foundations have been laid for future success.
To say that I have been impressed with the way our teachers and school leaders have maintained high standards on top of everything else is a massive understatement. But Ofsted inspectors are not interested in the “everything else”, nor does its assessment framework take any account of this.
I’m not arguing for special treatment but there are fundamental differences that cannot easily be captured in a single system of inspection. There is already a precedent in pre-registration assessments, with new free schools undergoing an Ofsted inspection before opening. It is quite different from the inspection that all schools have, but something tailored to the challenges and requirements of a new school. The school does not receive a grade, merely pass or fail, reflecting whether the basic requirements of any new school have been met. Fail and you cannot open. Pass and you are given permission to open the doors to your first students.
This approach should be applied to newly opened schools as well. It would allow an inspection on whether strong and effective management systems and procedures – the building blocks for future success – are in place. It could use the Ofsted framework areas of focus to enable new schools to receive an indication of how they are performing, but would be complemented with a more tailored examination of the main developments and difficulties faced by the particular school. These might include setting up new premises, recruiting staff, engaging parents and students, procurement and value for money, or ensuring admission numbers are high. Assessments could be captured in a “direction of travel” judgment that would give parents a more accurate assessment of how a school is performing.
Maybe we are OK with the implications of a universal inspection system that overlooks an increasing proportion of what our schools are doing or where they have come from. If so, perhaps we should be more honest about its limitations – rather than continuing to encourage parents to believe it is a useful system for comparison.
