Ofsted has unveiled what its new report cards, set to replace current inspection reports later this year, could look like.

Consultation documents also explain what providers need to do to achieve a revised set of grades in a refreshed, but perhaps not refreshing, set of inspection categories.

All of the proposals are subject to consultation, with chief inspector Martyn Oliver promising “nothing is set in stone”.

Buckle in for your handy FE Week roundup…

Number of judgments could double

Ofsted’s new regime will see an end to the familiar ‘outstanding’, ‘good’, ‘requires improvement’ and ‘inadequate’ grades for its headline inspection categories (more on those below).

When introduced, FE providers will receive grades along a new five-point scale: ‘exemplary’, ‘strong’, ‘secure’, ‘attention needed’ and ‘causing concern’.

New-style inspections will result in one of these grades for a new suite of categories. As previously announced, there won’t be an overall effectiveness grade for FE and skills providers from September.

Ofsted only provided the press with an example of what a school report card would look like. The number and titles of categories are different for FE and skills.

For FE and skills providers, there will be provider-level grades for leadership and inclusion but up to 16 grades for provision types, depending on what is offered.

Currently, a single grade is awarded per provision type: young people, adults, apprenticeship and high needs learners. 

Ofsted now proposes to inspect and grade the following for each of those provision types: curriculum, developing teaching and training, achievement and participation and development. 

Safeguarding will either be judged ‘met’ or ‘not met’ at provider level, as is current practice. Colleges and designated institutions will continue to be judged for their contribution to meeting skills needs.

So for an FE college offering courses to young people, adults, apprentices and learners with high needs, this would see the number of grades they receive double from ten to 20.

Staff wellbeing is a leadership priority

To achieve at least a ‘secure’ grade for leadership, bosses will need to evidence they have prioritised staff wellbeing and workload, making sure the latter is “sustainable and proportionate.”

Staff wellbeing is one of four themes within the proposed leadership category alongside: strategic leadership and capacity to improve, governance and oversight, and stakeholder engagement. 

A provider’s leadership would be deemed ‘attention needed’ if their decisions are “sometimes burdensome to staff”. Staff workload is found to be “unsustainable” could trigger a ‘causing concern’ judgment. 

Governors will have to show they are “highly effective in holding leaders to account” in order to be considered ‘strong’ including specifically over quality of support and provision for disadvantaged and SEND learners.

Improving education standards will need to be “consistent” and “sustained” across the provider in order for leadership to be considered at least ‘secure’.

The new ‘exemplary’ grade can only be achieved if inspectors find each theme is ‘secure’ across the entire inspection, and ‘strong’ across each leadership theme. Even then, proposals to award this grade will go to a national quality and consistency panel for moderation. 

“Successful submissions will be published as part of a series of best practice reporting,” Ofsted said.

New inclusion judgment

New inspections will examine providers’ inclusive practices and the quality of support it offers to disadvantaged and high needs learners.

The themes here are: inclusive practices, identifying and meeting needs and removing barriers and supporting learners with SEND and/or in receipt of high needs funding.

Learners must feel “welcome and valued and have a strong sense of belonging to the provider” in order for inspectors to award at least a ‘secure’ grade.

However, if support for SEND students is not “precise, sustained or effective”, that would flag as ‘attention needed’.

Full access to curriculum

Themes under the microscope for this category are: leadership of the curriculum, securing knowledge and skills to access learning and for future learning and inclusive curriculum culture and practices.

As a provision-type grade, providers will receive a curriculum judgment for each of the following they offer: programmes for young people, adults, apprenticeship and high needs learners.

An example of a ‘secure’ curriculum is where “leaders make sure the curriculum allows enough time for teaching, practising and revisiting content, and for addressing any gaps in learners’ knowledge as quickly as possible.”

Evidence of curriculums where content and sequencing have not been sufficiently considered by leaders would be deemed ‘causing concern’.

Developing teaching and training

Another provision-type category, this one examines: leadership of teaching and learning, professional development, high quality teaching and learning and inclusive teaching culture and practices.

To be deemed ‘strong’ in this area, leaders will be expected to have an effective professional development programme and have a “nuanced” understanding of the quality of teaching.

Teachers and trainers must be “up to date with their professional practice and with technological developments” in order to score ‘secure’.

To hit ‘strong’, inspectors will be looking for teachers that are “expert at checking learners’ understanding and adapting their teaching to meet learners’ needs.” They’ll also expect provider leaders to own “focussed actions with clear milestones” to drive continuous improvements in teaching and training quality.

Achievement data

For each provision type offered, inspectors will be gathering evidence of: achievement in national tests and examinations, learners developing detailed knowledge and skills, attitudes to learning and work and relevant skills to access training.

Achievement rates feature heavily in this category with Ofsted continuing its focus on disadvantaged, SEND and high needs learners.

Hitting rates “broadly” in line with comparable national rates will be deemed ‘secure’. But inspectors will look at learner achievement scores based on their starting points, the consultation states.

Disadvantaged learners will need to achieve “at least as well as their peers” will also be needed to score ‘secure’.

Learners found to be making slow progress and who do not “always maintain positive attitudes to learning” would flag as ‘attention needed’.

Participation and development

This is the final provision-type grade (you’ll be pleased to read) and includes: strategic leadership, attendance and participation, wider opportunities, learner readiness for next steps and dealing with bullying and harassment.

A ‘secure’ score for each provision type would require leaders to ensure learners “attend well” and have access to activities outside their course to help them progress, such as volunteering, leadership and citizenship programmes.

Quality of careers guidance also features in this category, and must be tailored effectively for each learner in order to be considered ‘strong’.

‘Strong’ practice in this category also includes high staff retention and morale.

If barriers to attendance are not dealt with, or if learners have “little confidence” leaders will deal with concerns or issues, that would be deemed ‘causing concern.’

Contextual healing

Complementing the report card, Ofsted proposes to utilise contextual data in inspections and its published report cards so inspectors “understand the circumstances in which leaders are operating”.

This would include data on learner disadvantage and SEND, trends in performance data, absence and attendance rates and data on the local area, such as quality of other education provision and deprivation.

“We know that many providers operate in challenging contexts. This cannot justify poor outcomes for learners, but inspectors can use this contextual information to help their discussions with leaders,” the consultation document says.

‘We don’t want to add to leaders’ workloads’

Ofsted said it wants to change how inspection looks and feels.

“This is especially important at the point of professional interaction and conversation between inspectors and leaders,” the watchdog added.

This is how the process Ofsted inspections will go, under the new proposal: 

Before the on-site inspection, Ofsted will keep the initial phone or video conversations with leaders.

It has removed the deep-dive methodology, and will instead work with leaders to decide the areas to focus on, typically leaders’ improvement priorities and any actions since the last inspection.

The watchdog added that it doesn’t want to add to leaders’ workloads and will not ask them to produce written evidence to support each standard within each evaluation area of the toolkit.

All inspections will start by discussing and observing the provider’s work against the ‘secure’ column. 

Any dispute on emerging grades for an evaluation area will require leaders to gather a “broad enough” range of evidence. 

“At the end of the inspection visit, inspectors will clearly state the evidence that has led to their provisional conclusions. They will reflect that evidence in the report card,” Ofsted said.

Ofsted’s consultation is now live and closes on April 28.

FE colleges and providers will be judged on a colour-coded five-point grading scale from “exemplary” to “causing concern” across potentially 20 areas under Ofsted’s new report cards – double the number in current reports.

The watchdog has come under early fire for the plan unveiled today, with one union claiming this system will introduce a de facto new league table that “appears to be even worse” than the single-phrase judgments they replace and less “humane”.

Ofsted’s consultation confirms that overall effectiveness judgments will be removed but multiple areas will be cast as either ‘exemplary’, ‘strong’, ‘secure’, ‘attention needed’ and ‘causing concern’. This replaces the current ‘outstanding’, ‘good’, ‘requires improvement’ and ‘inadequate’ grades.

FE providers will be judged on seven headline areas: leadership, inclusion, safeguarding, curriculum, developing teaching and training, achievement, and participation and development.

The latter four areas will also receive one of the judgments for each of the following types of provision offered: education programmes for young people, provision for learners with high needs, apprenticeships and adult learning programmes.

So for an FE college offering courses to young people, adults, apprentices and learners with high needs, this would see the number of grades they receive double from ten to 20.

Colleges will also continue to be judged on whether their contribution to meeting skills needs is ‘limited’, ‘reasonable’, or ‘strong’.

As well as headline grades for each area, Ofsted will publish short descriptions summarising their findings.

New hurdles ‘bewildering for teachers and leaders’

Ofsted said this system will allow inspectors to “highlight success when things are working well, provide reassurance that leaders are taking the right action where improvement is needed, and identify where more urgent action is required to avoid standards declining”.

And, as well as “giving more nuanced information”, this approach will “help reduce pressure on staff – by presenting a balanced picture of practice across more areas, not a single overall grade”, the watchdog claimed.

But whistleblowers from Ofsted contacted FE Week’s sister title last week to warn the consultation is a “sham” and new inspection report cards have been “cobbled together at ridiculous speed” with no underpinning research and concerns by experienced officials ignored.

Pepe Di’Iasio, general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders, said today that Ofsted and the government “appear to have learned nothing” from the death of headteacher Ruth Perry, which is why the changes are being made, and have instead “devised an accountability system which will subject a beleaguered profession to yet more misery”.

He believes that the system of applying five new judgments to a range of performance areas creates a “set of hurdles which will be bewildering for teachers and leaders, never mind the parents whose choices these reports are supposedly intended to guide”.

Di’Iasio added: “We would question whether it is possible to reach with any degree of validity, in the course of an inspection, such a large number of conclusions – all of which are critical to those being inspected and where judgements may be finely balanced between categories. It is certainly a recipe for systemic inconsistency.”

Ofsted said that in parallel with today’s consultation, the Department for Education is consulting on proposed changes to intervention and support in maintained schools and academies.

The watchdog was however unaware of plans for how FE intervention will be impacted by the new-style report cards. Currently, the DfE uses Ofsted judgments to decide whether to terminate apprenticeship provider contracts and whether to place colleges into FE Commissioner intervention.

Ofsted’s consultation suggests a return to a heavy focus on data, with providers warned that they will score the two lowest judgments in the “achievement” category if their achievement rates are “below comparable national rates, based on learners’ starting points”.

Other contextual data to be used in inspections and reports include learner characteristics, performance outcomes, absence and attendance figures, and local area demographics.

‘Worse than single-word judgments’

The consultation will run for 12 weeks until April 28, with more pilot inspections due to be carried out in coming months, before Ofsted publishes its final response in the summer.

A new inspection framework will then be introduced in September, with the return of inspections after the summer break delayed until November to allow for trialling of the new model and inspector training.

Daniele Kebede, general secretary of the National Education Union, said the proposals “will make matters worse, not better”. He said new chief inspector Martyn Oliver “has failed to deliver” the changes needed, and “has ignored the voice of the profession”.

“He has set a course for Ofsted to remain just as out of touch as before, just as crude in its assessments,” Kebede added, saying the proposed grading scale “maintains the current blunt, reductive approach that cannot capture the complexity” of an education provider’s “life nor provide more meaningful information to parents”.

Di’Iasio added: “School and college leaders had high hopes that an approach to inspection based on report cards might be more nuanced and humane. Sadly, the way in which Ofsted and the government are going about this suggests that the opposite will be the case.”

Click here for our speed-read on the new grades and inspection categories