Opinion

Ofsted: A damning indictment...

Ofsted Inspection updates Staff wellbeing
Ofsted’s proposals for changes to the way schools are inspected will put the health of school leaders and teachers at further risk and continue to serve up unreliable information for parents, says Paul Whiteman
See you in court? The NAHT has initiated legal action against Ofsted over the potential impact of its inspection reforms on the wellbeing of headteachers and school staff - Adobe Stock

“The NAHT states clearly and for the record that these proposals carry significant and unacceptable wellbeing and health risks for leaders and teachers.”

So said our response (NAHT, 2025) to Ofsted’s consultation on its proposals for reform to school inspection, which closed last month (Ofsted, 2025).

It is a point made forcibly throughout. The document is a damning indictment of the inspectorate’s failure to commit to the change needed to address concerns raised by the coroner and Dame Christine Gilbert’s independent review following the death of headteacher Ruth Perry.

Ruth took her own life having learned her school would be judged “inadequate” by Ofsted. The coroner concluded the inspection contributed to her death.

Ruth was far from alone in feeling overwhelmed by the enormous pressure and workload created by high-stakes inspections. They harm the wellbeing and mental health of school leaders and their staff, contributing to decisions by dedicated professionals to quit.

Ofsted’s chief inspector described Ruth’s death and the impact of inspection on staff wellbeing as a catalyst for change. As such, it is beyond disappointing and a real worry that Ofsted’s proposals will only increase the pressure school leaders face.

That is why NAHT has initiated legal action against Ofsted over the potential impact of its proposals on the wellbeing of headteachers and school staff.

 

Beggar’s belief

We welcomed the abolition of crude, often unreliable single-phrase Ofsted judgements. So it beggars belief that the inspectorate wants to more than double the number of thematic areas graded from four to as many as 10. Instead of solving the problems, its proposals risk making them worse.

Our recent poll of more than 3,000 school leaders saw 92% disagree with the proposal to increase graded judgements and colour-code them at one of five ratings from “causing concern” to “exemplary”. Our claim for judicial review contends that Ofsted failed to consult adequately on this plan for a new five-point grading scale. This element was presented as final during its consultation. Alternatives were rejected with no reference to wellbeing.

Labelling schools across more areas will pile further workload onto school leaders, adding tripwires that could trigger intervention. It is extraordinary that there is no assessment of the proposal’s impact upon leaders’ workload, wellbeing, or health.

Increasing the number of potentially insecure sub-grades also heightens the risk of providing unreliable information for parents. Grades have been extended to cover areas like inclusion and attendance, over which schools lack complete control.

The proposed inspection toolkits explaining what is expected of schools between the grading points are clumsily drafted and lack clarity. They perpetuate a discredited one-size-fits-all approach by failing to differentiate between primary, secondary and special schools. All this will compound the inconsistencies inherent in subjective judgements by inspectors who may lack experience of the type of school they are inspecting.

Inspectors already struggle to reach reliable conclusions about schools in under two days. Increasing the scope of inspections will make this even more difficult.

The proposals increase ways for schools to fail. We disagree that a school “causing concern” should receive five monitoring inspections and a re-inspection within 18 months. This will not give leaders space to implement sustainable change and risks prioritisation being given to cosmetic change.

The risks of receiving an “attention needed” judgement are doubled with the introduction of at least eight judgements. It would take just one to trigger monitoring “for as long as is necessary”. This effectively creates an informal category of concern for schools which do not meet this definition under the Education Act 2005 and which are by definition providing an acceptable education.

 

A punitive regime

School leaders do not dispute the need for accountability and fair proportionate inspections. But they object to a punitive regime with career-defining consequences.

A majority of school leaders in England support narrative assessments of schools’ strengths and areas for improvement akin to those operating in Wales and Northern Ireland (NAHT, 2024). 

Narrative assessments offer the clarity Ofsted says parents crave without undermining the reliability of inspection with blunt grades. Such a system could unlock support for schools. Grading is not needed for the minority of instances in which inspectors need to explain why they consider a school to be “causing concern”.

At our annual conference in May, members unanimously supported a motion urging the government to invest in school improvement strategies focusing on CPD, funding and collaboration rather than destabilising high-stakes grading. The motion condemned Ofsted’s proposals and called for all “legal and industrial options” to be explored to protect the mental and physical health of school leaders.

 

Wrong starting point

Ofsted’s proposals begin from the wrong starting point, focusing on inspection outputs and what should be included in report cards as an evolution of a failed system. What is needed is fundamental reconsideration of the entire purpose of inspection – reflecting the findings of Ruth Perry’s inquest.

We stand ready to work with Ofsted and the government, but first they must listen to the profession’s feedback and return to the drawing board. Only by doing so will a safer approach to inspection be possible.

 

Headteacher Update Summer Edition 2025

This article first appeared in Headteacher Update's Summer Edition 2025, which was sent out to primary schools across the country in May 2025. You can access a digital version of this edition of the magazine via www.headteacher-update.com/content/downloads 

Further information & resources