Wed 15 May, 09:57
Tue 14 May, 17:59
Well said Mr Morgan! The Ofsted arm of Government saving them money. It's my understanding there are over seven thousand academies. Nice saving scheme!
Tue 14 May, 14:20
While this is not a good outcome for our school, there is another question to be asked: why does Ofsted have the power to trigger compulsory conversion to academy status on the basis of one adverse report? This is, of course, a central government decision and is, therefore political.
As a former teacher, I remember the days of Her Majesty's Inspectorate (HMI). They came and observed and then sat down and discussed how to make things better. Since Ofsted became an arm of government, the whole agenda has changed: "you fail our inspection, we take away your independence".
This report is not critical of the school's core objectives which is providing good teaching and learning. It criticises procedures and policy delivery which, with the right advice, can be improved. But Ofsted is a critical body; it is not an advisory body. Such is the difference from the past.
How many times was the word "safeguarding" used in the Ofsted report? This was the basis for their judgement of "inadequate". Plainly safeguarding is vital and we can't downplay it but this is a procedural thing and it is solvable.
I would suggest that most of our children, most of the time feel happy and safe at Charlbury Primary School.
It's enough to make you spit!
You must log in before you can post a reply.