Ofsted - should schools be judged by one word?
What’s been happening?
In January 2024, a cross-party education select committee report called for an end to the single-word judgments used to rate schools in England. These judgments, which are either one or two words, have long been a point of contention. The committee emphasised that schools should not be automatically graded as “inadequate” for minor safeguarding concerns. However, it also recognised the importance of maintaining strong accountability in schools12.
The report highlighted that relationships between schools and Ofsted (the Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills) had become strained, and trust was worryingly low. The appointment of Sir Martyn Oliver as the new chief inspector in January was seen as a crucial opportunity to reset this. The report came shortly after the inquest into the tragic death of Ruth Perry, a headteacher who took her own life after an Ofsted inspection downgraded her school to “inadequate.” The inspection process and its impact on Mrs. Perry’s well-being prompted calls for changes to Ofsted’s practices1.
While the committee advocated for scrapping the single-word judgments, the Department for Education responded by emphasising the benefits of the existing system. Ultimately, any changes to the judgments would require action by ministers3. Mrs. Perry’s sister, Prof Julia Waters, expressed concern about the dangers of such succinct judgments, emphasising that for her sister, that one word had been catastrophic1.
What are the arguments on both sides?
Advocates for retaining single-word ratings
Accountability: Supporters for one-word ratings argue that these clear judgments provide a clear and straightforward way to hold schools accountable. Simplicity aids transparency and helps (prospective and current) parents and other stakeholders understand school performance.
Consistency: The existing system ensures uniformity across schools, making it easier to compare and evaluate educational institutions. Consistent ratings simplify decision-making for parents and policymakers.
Scrapping single-word ratings
Nuanced Assessment: Critics contend that a single word cannot adequately capture the complexity of a school’s performance. Schools may be unfairly labeled based on minor issues, leading to unintended consequences. This has damaging consequences.
Impact on pupil and teacher wellbeing: The tragic case of headteacher Ruth Perry, who took her own life after her school received an “inadequate” rating, highlights the potential harm caused by such succinct judgments. Those who criticise one-word ratings emphasise the need to consider the well-being of educators and students.
Moreover, the strained relationship between schools and Ofsted has eroded trust. Scrapping single-word ratings could be a step toward rebuilding positive relations and fostering better collaboration.
The Oppidan View
Henry Faber, Co-Founder
My main feeling is that Ofsted (unwittingly) has come across consistently as confrontational with schools and it all starts on the wrong foot. If Ofsted could be more visibly a collaborative and open entity for schools to take advantage of, learn from and develop with, then the one word judgment might not be seen as such a cliff edge.
Walter Kerr, Co-Founder
(taken from an account of a recent talk given by Amanda Spielman, Former Chief Inspector of Schools).
Accountability, and what that means for the social contract between teachers' pupils and parents is vital for allowing teachers to do what they do best. The inspections are popular: EIF influences inspection in other countries she says - and was quick to remark that only 12 in 20,000 schools were graded inadequate based on safeguarding issues.
Does she put the burden too heavily on parents to read the overall report rather than just focus on the overall grade? What sits below that merits greater attention, she says. A suspension of belief I thought when that grade is painted in big letters on the front gate of the school.
Whilst the semantics around relabeling words is up for discussion, summative words do provide clarity, and that is useful, whether in your local school or in your local office.
Adam Goodbody, Senior Founders’ Associate
I’m more minded to keep a simple rating that holds schools accountable. The one-word rating system is very similar to students being given a one-letter rating for exams. If we are going to rid ourselves of one, then what about the other?
For better or worse, we need a standardised system of comparison. I’d be more in favour of changing the assessment process to make it fairer (and more holistic) and give schools the chance to make changes before negative results were published.
Harry Fancy, Junior Sales and Product Manager
Opinion is no [schools shouldn’t have a one word rating] since such a low resolution of rating options doesn't match with the nuances of real-life teaching and it's varying quality.
Annabel Coaker, School Accounts Lead
A more nuanced rating would always be beneficial but would require significant thought on what should be rated (i.e. academic, pastoral, extra-curricular etc) and how (i.e. numbers rating vs one-word rankings).
Nicole Zietkiewicz, Senior Client Manager
Absolutely not. As they say in the BBC article, there is so much nuance and one word can’t be used to describe a school as I’m sure each school has both strengths and weaknesses. One word, like “inadequate” can shine a negative light on a school which I believe is not a true reflection of their standard.