Schools would no longer be rated “satisfactory” instead they would be classed as “required to improve”, the Ofsted Chief Inspector Michael Wilshaw has confirmed. The Prime Minister David Cameron in a speech last year raised concerns about schools “coasting along” and expressed alarm at the wide difference between the best and worst performing schools in England.
Recent reports have suggested that almost a majority of schools rated “satisfactory” often remain in that category for years and often lack the resources and the ability to improve. However, the education watchdog would retain the “good” and “outstanding” ratings. The new Ofsted Chief Inspector appointed to help improve education standards through a rigorous inspection regime.
Mr. Wilshaw has reiterated earlier today that it is his goal to ensure more and more schools are trying to achieve the “good” rating rather than coast along under a satisfactory rating.
‘There are too many coasting schools not providing an acceptable standard of education. Of particular concern are the 3,000 schools educating a million children that have been “satisfactory” two inspections in a row. This is not good enough,” he said. “That is why I am determined to look again at the judgements we award, not only so we are accurately reporting what we see, but so that those schools that most need help are identified and can properly begin the process of improvement.”
According to Ofsted, these schools which “require improvements” would be inspected more regularly so that the problems can be identified early and “begin the process of improvement”. The government and Ofsted believe that by letting these schools carry on the stakeholders who are getting worse affected are the pupils and more often than not they are most vulnerable young people from disadvantaged backgrounds. The Prime Minister who hosted a summit on coasting schools yesterday said: “"To those who say that this will alienate some schools, I say we've got to stop making excuses and start doing what is best for our children: demanding excellence and confronting complacency wherever we find it."
However, the National Union of Teachers are not impressed and said this change in rating would be “derogatory and insulting pupils, teachers, school leaders and governors”.
“The government’s real agenda behind this change is of course inventing yet another category of schools that it will then seek to force into academy status,” she said. “The government’s focus should be on identifying and providing the resources that schools need to provide the best possible education for all children. To be constantly changing the goal posts for measuring a school’s success is destabilising and demoralising for the whole school community.”
The NUT talks about goalposts but most of these schools in the satisfactory rating have been failing miserably at the most important criteria for a school – in preparing and educating young people so that can go on to education or training and become a productive citizen. So why the big argument about changing the rating?
And there are many examples in London where inner city comprehensives with poor results have transformed themselves into high standard academies and it has ultimately benefitted pupils. Unfortunately, on the education reforms debate, the teaching unions seem to be too happy to retain the status quo which is an untenable position.