The Association of School and College Leaders’ recent motion of no confidence in Ofsted’s leadership, its call upon the government to pause inspections and review the inspection system, and the general disquiet concerning Ofsted’s protracted and controversial response to the death of headteacher Ruth Perry in January 2023 all raise important, and fundamental, questions about the watchdog’s accountability.
Certainly, the Association of School and College Leaders can pass whatever motions it likes, and make as many calls as it wishes. But it has no power to get Ofsted’s leadership changed or inspections paused.
Who, then, has this power? And who can hold the chief inspector and Ofsted chair to account if significant problems remain unresolved either due to inaction or because any action taken was subsequently deemed ineffective, misguided or wrong?
Who inspects the inspectors?
The obvious answer is the secretary of state for education. But this is not the case. Constitutionally, Ofsted is a “” acting “”.
Ofsted is therefore neither accountable to, nor controlled by, the Department for Education. Rather, according to Ofsted’s website, “.”
I wonder if Ofsted is using the word “report” in two rather different ways? Ofsted certainly makes inspection reports available to parents, carers, commissioners and everyone else, too; but is Ofsted also acknowledging that it “reports to Parliament” in a managerial sense?
If so, this would be consistent with its status as non-ministerial department - but perhaps “accountable to Parliament” would be clearer. And if this is accountability, how does it work in practice?
Since it is surely impossible for Ofsted to “report” to the collective of 650 MPs and 800-or-so Lords, does the buck stop with the Commons Education Select Committee?
The role of the education committee
Is this committee the practical realisation of Ofsted’s duty to “perform its functions on behalf of the Crown” (to quote ), with the Crown delegating supervision of the effectiveness of Ofsted in carrying out those functions, through Parliament, to this committee?
If so, does this actually work?
The committee certainly takes an active interest in Ofsted, convening formal meetings and, from time to time, undertaking in-depth studies: for example, following the Ruth Perry tragedy, its of January 2024 contained 28 recommendations, of which, as an example, this is the first:
“In his ‘Big Listen’ with the sector, the new HMCI must ensure that he is listening to a wide range of views, including those of teachers, school and trust leaders, governors, parents and pupils. In doing this, he must ensure that Ofsted is genuinely open to engage and willing to reflect on where it needs to improve.”
Ofsted claims it is ” in implementing the report’s recommendations; . This divergence must surely contribute to the current turmoil.
The education committee, however, has no sanction, should it consider that its instructions have not been met - just as the committee had no sanction when, in July 2020, another non-ministerial department, Ofqual, refused to comply with the committee’s instruction of what later became known as “the mutant algorithm”.
The accountability muddle
The weakness of the committee was also apparent in 2016, when it was “ its support to the proposed appointment of Amanda Spielman (now Baroness Spielman) as chief inspector. Nicky Morgan, the secretary of state at that time, then and the . This is , but .
A confusing situation - after all, wasn’t Ofsted set up, deliberately, as a non-ministerial department with the explicit intention of being independent of the DfE?
To me, that episode was a vivid example of the as to who, precisely, has the last word, and to whom Ofsted is ultimately accountable; a muddle in urgent need of resolution.
Might this be achieved if Ofsted was absorbed within the DfE? Or should it remain as a non-ministerial department, with the select committee formally recognised as the ultimate authority, empowered to veto the appointment of the chief inspector, and acting as the true embodiment of ensuring that Ofsted does indeed “perform its functions on behalf of the Crown”?
And what would it take to have Ofsted working, trustingly and constructively, with schools to design an inspection process in which everyone has confidence, and that truly helps every school to progressively improve?
Dennis Sherwood is the author of
