“Nothing is ever good enough, it would appear,” says Ofsted inspector who criticises “frightening” new regime

Janet Downs's picture
Graham Lancaster, Ofsted inspector and Area Improvement Manager for the Essex Primary Heads Association, “hit out” at the new Ofsted regime, reports the TES. The inspector said, “The bar has been raised and it is really focused on pupil achievement as it never has been before. There has been more flexibility for inspectors in the past, I think, to take account of context, to take account of current data.” He expressed concern about the number of Essex schools that had gone from good to inadequate saying, “I don’t believe that schools have got worse since January.”

Mr Lancaster commented that “lack of trust [in teachers]” and “the continuing raising of the bar” triggered damaging headlines and was contributing to plummeting morale of teachers. “Nothing is ever good enough, it would appear.”

Since the new Ofsted framework began the percentage of schools judged inadequate has risen from 6% of schools inspected in 2011 to 13% in the first five months of 2012. Some of these judgements are disputed: Caistor Yarborough Academy, Lincolnshire has formally complained to Ofsted about its inspection and Sinfin Community School, Derby, is considering the same step. Downhills School, Haringey, was judged to be failing only months after a previous Ofsted inspection reported that the school was improving thanks to support from the local authority and a “core of experienced senior staff with high levels of expertise”. Now, thanks to the rushed second inspection, the head of this team of experienced staff has resigned, his career and health ruined. Both the Downhills inspections had the same lead inspector, Kekshan Salaria. Quite how she was able to overturn her previous judgement so quickly is unclear but such rapid reversals bring Ofsted into disrepute.

It is ever more difficult to regard Ofsted as an impartial inspectorate dedicated to supporting school improvement. It is increasingly being viewed as an arm of the Department for Education especially now that Michael Gove’s favourite, Sir Michael Wilshaw, has become Chief Inspector of Schools. Sir Michael is on record as saying that a sign of low staff morale is a sign that he is doing his job well.

The NAHT voiced concerns about Ofsted at its recent conference. So did other teacher unions. But it seems that it’s not only teachers who distrust Ofsted – Graham Lancaster can’t be the only inspector with misgivings. Perhaps it’s time for teachers and concerned inspectors to call time on Ofsted.

Share on Twitter Share on Facebook

Be notified by email of each new post.


Allan Beavis's picture
Thu, 07/06/2012 - 17:26

So, you hide under Ricky Tarr because you work for Gove then?

Rebecca Hanson's picture
Thu, 07/06/2012 - 17:35

What are you going to do Allan, build a Jubilee beacon and burn an effigy of Ricky Tarr on it? :-)

Ricky-Tarr's picture
Thu, 07/06/2012 - 18:27

Gove works for me.

Rebecca Hanson's picture
Thu, 07/06/2012 - 18:30

I wish he worked for the benefit of education.

andy's picture
Thu, 07/06/2012 - 20:51

"Gove works for me"

So the cat it out of the bag, Ricky. That means you are either Gove's mistress, Cleggy boy or the dreaded Cameron chap!? ;D

Rebecca Hanson's picture
Thu, 07/06/2012 - 21:52

You think Gove works for Clegg????

Fascinating though were are I suspect Cameron has been talking to rather more important people than us today.

Must be the mistress then!:-) or Murdoch, or whoever it was who funded Celcius 7/7.:-/

Ricky-Tarr's picture
Fri, 08/06/2012 - 04:43

....Gove’s mistress, Cleggy boy or the dreaded Cameron chap!

No cigar, I'm afraid. I think it was Fiona's partner who coined the phrase:
Gove is a servant of the people.

Rebecca Hanson's picture
Fri, 08/06/2012 - 08:15

!!!! really - well I did a search on that idea and only came up with his blog on this article:
Hurrah. Sacking 90%. Again! Are the 25-year-olds to wise now at 27 and are needing to be dispatched in the sinister anti-partner mechanism to decimation? But how will Gove cope? Surely sacking 90% of the civil servants working on Free Schools will only leave him with a team of about one person per Free School? (Does anyone have a link to clear figures on how many there are at the DFE now working on Free Schools? I remember we discussed it once before).

Allan Beavis's picture
Fri, 08/06/2012 - 15:02

Gove's hand maiden then, cowering under her veil of anonymity. But then transparency has never been the defining quality of this government has it? More backhanders to friends, revolving doors policy with media and police and hiding behind sobriquets and personal emails.

Ricky-Tarr's picture
Thu, 07/06/2012 - 18:56


How do you do emoticons on this site?

Rebecca Hanson's picture
Thu, 07/06/2012 - 19:00

Smile is colon hypen right bracket (probably colon right bracket works as well but that's not what I use). I suspect you can do a grumpy face by replacing the right bracket with a left bracket.

Ricky-Tarr's picture
Thu, 07/06/2012 - 19:04

:-) (if that worked, thanks)

Rebecca Hanson's picture
Thu, 07/06/2012 - 19:09

lol is okay, better than accidentally typing olo :-)

Janet Downs's picture
Fri, 08/06/2012 - 12:13

Ofsted is facing more criticism - this time about "cut and paste" reports used to fail two London schools. The inspections were led by the same lead inspector (an Assistant Inspector, not an HMI) who was employed by Tribal. The head of research at the NAHT, told TES that the problem was partly caused by the formulaic evaluation schedule followed by Ofsted inspectors. This is made worse by moderators (who haven't visited schools) checking that Inspector's descriptions fit the grades as described in the inspection schedule and rewriting descriptions to ensure they tally.


Janet Downs's picture
Fri, 08/06/2012 - 12:36

Ricky - reply to above re Sir Michael Wilshaw's role at the time he compared himself with Clint Eastwood. He was director of education at the charity and academy chain Absolute Return for Kids (ARK) - Dame Sally Morgan, Ofsted head, is an advisor to ARK - and had taken on what TES described at the time of the speech as "a series of advisory roles for the Government". Perhaps these included advising the Government on desirable (from the Government's point of view) traits in heads. It's rather disturbing that such machismo should be admired by some people.



Ricky-Tarr's picture
Fri, 08/06/2012 - 12:49


You earlier linked to the Select Committee's confirmation hearing with Wilshaw, where the Sally Morgan/ARK connection was discussed.

Wilshaw said he worked to someone else (Lucy Heller) and only ran into Morgan a few times - mostly in the lift.

He also said he'd resign his ARK association if he got the Ofsted job.

I'm not sure about whether Morgan still rides both horses???

Ricky-Tarr's picture
Fri, 08/06/2012 - 12:53

Perhaps these included advising the Government on desirable (from the Government’s point of view) traits in heads.

Why? What would she know about it?

She's a New Labour quangocrat and committee woman, isn't she?

Janet Downs's picture
Fri, 08/06/2012 - 13:30

Ricky - the remark about Dame Sally Morgan was meant to be in parenthesis. Unless you're suggesting that Sir Michael has changed sex.

Baroness Morgan is still advisor (remunerated) to ARK. She's also non-executive director at Carphone Warehouse which, like ARK, sponsors academies.

Sir Michael has given up his ARK directorship.


Ricky-Tarr's picture
Fri, 08/06/2012 - 15:02

It’s rather disturbing that such machismo should be admired by some people.

Is it? I've found that Clint Eastwood and some of the macho characters he plays such as Dirty Harry, are almost universally admired. And certainly not just by men. The recurrent theme is how moral integrity triumphs over prissy, pettyfogging bureaucracy. Indeed, Eastwood's films are so widely watched that you could almost guarantee that people would recognize a cultural reference or allusion to one.

Which is probably why Wilshaw chose the Clint reference for what he described as a lighthearted "knockabout" after dinner speech with colleagues.

Janet Downs's picture
Fri, 08/06/2012 - 15:40

I wasn't referring to Clint Eastwood's characters many of which, as you say, have moral integrity - righting wrongs, standing up for the defenceless and so on. I was referring to the machismo which manifests itself in exagerrated masculinity, swaggering toughness and sneering at such woolly concepts as co-operation.

That was the type of machismo I find disturbing - and equally disturbing is that some people actually admire this posturing.

And of course Sir Michael told the select committee it was only a "knockabout" after-dinner speech - he was being questioned about his judgement (and some of the committee members were making comments about "Make my Day" and "punk") and his speech had been heavily criticised at the time not least by the National College of School Leaders who tried to distance themselves from it. Sir Michael tried to excuse himself by saying he didn't realise that a TES journalist was present implying that his speech would have been more palatable if it were for public consumption.

Janet Downs's picture
Fri, 08/06/2012 - 15:48

TES, 8 June 2012, published the comments by the general secretary of the University and College Union (UCU), Sally Hunt, about Ofsted. The article isn't available on-line, so I will quote:

"She [Sally Hunt] rejects claims by Ofsted chief inspector Sir Michael Wilshaw that there is a problem with FE teaching or that colleges are 'hiding' behind the complexity of FE. 'Some of it, I think. is plain insulting to education staff; some of it, I think, is ill-informed in terms of the new regime coming in,' she says. 'What we have in many cases is people who are at the front line of bringing people who otherwise would have no education, no prospects, back into the system, and they're being hammered.'

She was, however, pleased that Ofsted would consider progression as a key measure of teaching success, but had serious concerns about the "frightening regularity" of colleges being downgraded by Ofsted.

Disquiet about Ofsted is growing, and not just in schools.

Janet Downs's picture
Fri, 08/06/2012 - 16:00

Sir Michael Wilshaw writes in today's TES explaining that "good" is actually the new "satisfactory" since "satisfactory" is now "requires improvement". He rightly stresses that all children should receive a good education and schools must raise standards. Ah, there's the rub. Sir Michael's understanding of averages has let him down before (he doesn't make that mistake in this article). But in his interview with the select committee he complained that 200,000 children didn't meet the average. Does Sir Michael really think that all children can reach average? Average means that there will be some above and some below - or does he envisage a time when all children are equally average? No high-fliers, no high-attainers, and no low-attainers either? Just average.

Welcome to the world of Gove and Wilshaw - all must be average. Because if below-average is eradicated, then so must above-average. Or better still, ignore the rules of maths altogether - all children must be above-average, and teachers will be condemned if they're not.


Ricky-Tarr's picture
Fri, 08/06/2012 - 16:24


If you look at my maths exchange with Rebecca earlier, you will see that average doesn't mean average in this context. It's a shorthand... in this case for "the percentage of students nationally achieving....blah blah."

tim bidie's picture
Sat, 09/06/2012 - 06:35

Each child is above average to someone.

Sir Michael Wilshaw is an exceptional individual with a nightmare job.

He deserves every right thinking person's support.

Ricky-Tarr's picture
Fri, 08/06/2012 - 16:26

... or, sorry, to be precise, for 'grade', 'benchmark' or whatever.

Rebecca Hanson's picture
Sat, 09/06/2012 - 09:56

"Sir Michael Wilshaw is an exceptional individual with a nightmare job.
He deserves every right thinking person’s support."

Sir Steve Redgrave is an even more exceptional individual but if he suddenly decided to accept the lead role in the royal ballet and the ratings immediately plummeted, constructive criticism would be offered and this is, in fact, support. To pretend all is well is not intelligent support, it is sycophancy.

tim bidie's picture
Sun, 10/06/2012 - 04:47

Every child is above average at something. One of the roles of education is to identify and develop those personal skills.

Sir Stephen Redgrave is a great dancer.

He deserves every right thinking person's support.


Janet Downs's picture
Fri, 08/06/2012 - 16:05

Today's TES: three articles with criticisms about Ofsted (I haven't finished reading it yet) and one praising it. A sign, perhaps, that enough is enough. A vote of no confidence seems increasingly more likely.

"These inspection parasites bug me":


"The fightback begins":


Ben Taylor's picture
Fri, 08/06/2012 - 20:25

What's the answer to this? Don't want to run teachers like a factory production line under mass observation? But also don't want to be like other professions with more self regulation? What suggestions for an alternative?

If people could just choose schools more freely you could shake most of these monkeys off your back, you'd only have to concentrate on the essentials like safety and you could let parents and children judge your professional offer.

Rebecca Hanson's picture
Fri, 08/06/2012 - 21:38

The suggestion that education shouldn't have the same regulation systems as everyone else seems to have come from you Ben.

Why do you think education shouldn't be allowed to have the same legal framework and principles for regulation as everyone else? Why do you think Ofsted should be unaccountable to all but themselves and politicians?

Also why do you think we don't actually want to educate the challenging kids?
Why would we have chosen teaching in tough schools if we didn't want to do that?

Ben Taylor's picture
Fri, 08/06/2012 - 22:10

My point is most other professions seem to have more control over their regulation. Their regulator isn't just another QUANGO, it is at least part controlled by the professionals. I suppose one thing that goes with that is more ability of the end users to choose whether or not they use them. Do many the contra OFSTED criticisers want that kind of freedom and responsibility in order to be free of OFSTED?

Gove seems to be offering this through reduced inspection criteria and more school autonomy. But here you are battling over OFSTED heavy handedness at the same time as craving a Mark II version with more beefed up local authorities.

I don't get it really, big brother OFSTED goes with the whole caboodle of state central control like mandatory attendance at local comprehensives which is an aim of LSN. I think you need to make up your mind.

Rebecca Hanson's picture
Fri, 08/06/2012 - 23:22

"I think you need to make up your mind."

You're saying we need to choose between Govian style state control and LA control Ben.
Why do you see it that way?

Why can't we just have legally accountable regulator who abides by the established principles of good inspection and regulation like everyone else?

Ben Taylor's picture
Sat, 09/06/2012 - 15:49

You can have such a regulator, you will then have to start organising and accounting like other professions. Your clients must then be free to use or not use you, and to some extent they will be able to do that in a capricious manner as private people who have a right to be like that whether we like it or not. Bear in mind they will generally then stick with a service that meets their expectations but walk away when it does not.

Or you can stick with being government minions and being told what to do by people so uninterested and evasive that they won't even tell you their name on the telephone, whether they are OFSTED, LA or whatever government good squad is order of the day.

Rebecca Hanson's picture
Sat, 09/06/2012 - 15:59

Ben do you actually know anything about inspection and regulation? Or are just spouting whatever happens to come into your head?

Janet Downs's picture
Sat, 09/06/2012 - 08:44

Ricky - re average. So the meaning of "average" changes according to whoever is using the word. That's straight out of Orwell. Does the benchmark = average? Not if ALL children/schools/whatever are expected to reach the benchmark. If the benchmark IS the bottom line then the average would be above the benchmark. If, on the other hand, the benchmark is the average, then it should be expected that the performance of some children/schools/whatever will be below average, about average or above average.

As you rightly say, when politicians start blabbing about benchmarks, averages and so on it's just blah, blah, blah - nothing more than meaningless statements made by
politicians who want to appear "tough" because it'll be good for their political careers. Or because they want the admiration of people who are impressed with this apparent machismo.

Ricky-Tarr's picture
Sat, 09/06/2012 - 12:00

So the meaning of “average” changes according to whoever is using the word. That’s straight out of Orwell.

Not really. I confess that I do it sometimes and so do most people on here. For instance, I'd bet most of us have used the phrase 'the local authority average' when what we really meant was "the percentage of all pupils within the LA achieving 5XGCSEs (or equivalent) including English & Maths GCSEs." Which is quite a mouthful.

Nor is it so daft for people scoring below the average to use getting over the prevailing average mark as an aiming point for improvement. Of course, if they do score higher next time, the average will go up, and yes, you're right, there will always be those who are under the new average. But this process of ever rising averages is precisely what we want. It's called improvement.

Rebecca Hanson's picture
Sat, 09/06/2012 - 12:24

"But this process of ever rising averages is precisely what we want. It’s called improvement."

Some people want to be allowed to focus some of their energy for improvement on the things which matter to their students life opportunities rather than always being forced to focus only on the very narrow targets which matter to Michael Gove.

An appropriate balance could be struck if we have an intelligent system of inspection rather than a brutally ignorant one.

Janet Downs's picture
Sat, 09/06/2012 - 13:32

Whether "ever rising averages" equals improvement is debatable. Grade inflation can result in a rise in the average number of pupils reaching the benchmark 5+ A*-C (including Maths and English); "gaming" also. Exam boards falling over themselves to produce exams which can easily be passed at Grade C (together with helpful hints on how to get pupils through); spoon-feeding and, shock horror, cheating - all these result in apparent "improvement".

And as the average rises, so the rhetoric of politicians must also rise. A few years ago, there was no A* grade at GCSE but when so many pupils reached As then an extra grade had to be added. A few years ago, the benchmark was measured by how many pupils gained 5+ GCSEs A-C. When this number rose, then an extra hurdle was added - the benchmark had to include GCSEs in Maths and English. I expect in a few years time the benchmark will be increased to X number of pupils must gain A or A* (or A double plus platinum star, or whatever).

And so this "improvement" goes on. It's time to call a halt. Either re-calibrate GCSEs to 1987 standards or scrap them altogether before Grade C becomes nothing more than the most basic of school leaving certificates (as GCSE G was meant to be).

Ricky-Tarr's picture
Sat, 09/06/2012 - 14:05

Interesting. Do you have any evidence for this claim of grade inflation?
If you are right, then the situation is even worse than we thought. And the teaching profession even more shockingly incompetent than the politicians hint at already.

Rebecca Hanson's picture
Sat, 09/06/2012 - 14:34

The ways in which we could get past the problems associated with narrow high stakes assessment are blindingly obvious.

Number 1: Ensure academic targets are only an appropriate part of school assessment, (not absolute targets which precipitate the destruction of the school if they are not met) by reforming Ofsted to make it fit for purpose by obligating it to the standards and prinicples to whichother UK inspectorates are legally bound.

Number 2: Move beyond narrow high stakes assessment to far more intelligent and revealing systems of formative and summative assessment by creating the policy environment in which the major education companies will feel confident in investing in and developing they kind of systems described here: http://mathseducationandallthat.blogspot.co.uk/2012/03/assessing-student...

Sadly neither of these things have happened even though they were blindingly obviously what was needed when this government came to power as Gove has instead focused on spinning everyone in education as being incompetent, destroying the infrastructure of education, shutting down and disabling the consultative networks in education which generate intelligent policies and pursuing his own pet projects instead.

Janet Downs's picture
Sat, 09/06/2012 - 15:27

Ricky, re grade inflation - Radio 4's "More or Less" found there had been grade inflation of about two grades at A Level but FullFact's investigation was inconclusive (links are in first post below).

Your statement that grade inflation would prove that "the teaching profession [is] even more shockingly incompetent than the politicians hint at already" is incorrect. In the 2009 OECD PISA tests UK pupils were at the OECD average for Reading and Maths, and above-average for Science.

Stating that UK pupils were average in two out of the three subjects tested by PISA isn't, however, a plea for complacency but neither is it a sign that UK state education is unfit for purpose. In the 2007 Trends in Science and Maths Survey (TIMSS) English pupils topped the European league in both Science and Maths. This was reaffirmed by the Eurydice maths report published in late 2011.

But education is far more that pushing pupils through tests. As OECD warned, there is too much emphasis on raw exam grades in England and this is having a negative effect on education (OECD Economic Survey UK 2011). "Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted. " (attributed Einstein)





andy's picture
Mon, 11/06/2012 - 10:17


When you say, "... teaching profession even more shockingly incompetent than the politicians hint at already." may I suggest that you either temper the thrust of your comment or better still be more precise. I float this to you because the cause of grade inflation is not at the door of schools and teachers, it falls to the examining bodies and the grade boundaries that they set and how they administer these. Even for those elements of GCSE work that contribute to the final grade that are internally marked these are also internally moderated and standardised with exam boards calling for randomly selected papers for external mderation. If the latter meets the scrutiny then all internal marks stand but if they fail then papers are called for and remarked externally. The main examination papers are all marked externally.

It follows then that the 'inflation' aspect rests outside the gift and remit of schools and teachers.


"A Durham University study said grade inflation was a very real phenomenon over the past two decades, particularly at A-level. The 2008 study said: "Candidates of comparable ability are being awarded higher grades each year, both at A-level and at GCSE. From 1988 to 2007, achievement levels at A-level have risen by an average of just over two grades in each subject considered in the research." (25 Aug 11)


"Yesterday's damning data is based on GCSE results awarded this summer, and follows research from Durham University showing a 'U' in maths in 1998 is now equivalent to a B grade." (21 Oct 11)


Janet Downs's picture
Mon, 11/06/2012 - 13:18

Thanks, andy. The Durham study supports the conclusion of Radio 4's statistics programme, "More or Less" (21 August 2009, about 20 mins into the programme, listen again at link below). "More or Less" concluded that there had been grade inflation at A Level of 2 grades.

But don't you just love the Mail's reporting of education which reveals more ignorance that analysis. First the writer mixes up A level with GCSE and applies research about the former to the latter. Then in a sentence which begins with a comment about GCSE, she says that a "U" grade in maths in 1998 is now equivalent to a B. Would that be a "U" grade at GCSE level? In which case, the 3.5 maths grade inflation would be between GCSE E and D. Nonsense, of course, because the Durham research was about A level but the writer's sentence implies it refers to GCSE. And, this being the Mail, the writer spews out the tumbling down the league tables in nine years data (it must be permanently stored on her clip board) despite knowing that the OECD has found the 2000 stats for the UK to be flawed and has warned that they should not be used for comparison. And I know she knows, because I wrote and told her.




Ben Taylor's picture
Sat, 09/06/2012 - 16:20

I have been in professional bodies before, I am probably just about to rejoin RICS since I am going back in to construction.

When I was teaching English we were inspected by the British Council and the Border Agency because at that time they were the parties for regulating English language schools that took visa students. At least the British Council published information so that you could comply with their requirements, and they had a reasonable approach to compliance. The Border Agency were an example of a government black box, coming up with off the cuff requirements and providing such unhelpful intimidation as "we have a file this thick on you" to the owner of the business! We had to use our MP to get some of their unreasonable behaviour noticed. Granted they have a tough job but their conduct is typical of the government and you will continue to get dumped on from a great height whilst you conceive of teaching as a large state business.

If you start to see the role of professionals as contracting with government for delivering services then you are in with a chance of being properly regulated. I would not expect to see a huge number of profit driven schools arising from this, or rather I would see any profits being socialised through charitable structures or similar. But people would be free to use schools run for profit if the alternatives were not good enough.

It seems many teachers are not really comfortable to act this way which says something about how they are conditioned through their institutions. They are almost like the asylum patients of the 1960s described by Erving Goffman. The teacher as child and the state as parent. Start behaving like adults, yes I would be in sympathy with a profession which insisted on OFSTED being rather different but you will also have to change your way of thinking and behaving.

Rebecca Hanson's picture
Sat, 09/06/2012 - 16:29

"If you start to see the role of professionals as contracting with government for delivering services then you are in with a chance of being properly regulated."

Why is it necessary for me to "see the role of professionals as contracting with government for delivering services" for the government to pass an order obliging Ofsted to the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Act(2006) for all its activities and what precisely do you mean by this Ben?

I would have thought that all it would take would be for Michael Gove to propose the order and for the other politicians to agree.

Alison Derwent's picture
Sat, 09/06/2012 - 17:29

Ben. You taught English?? But you are incoherent and your grammar is all over the place! Were you qualified to teach? Have you thought of applying to a free school?

Allan Beavis's picture
Sat, 09/06/2012 - 17:59

Ben -

Ofsted inspects schools to check on standards of teaching. The Border Agency raided "English Language Schools" because there was evidence that enough of them were fronts for illegal immigration. Not the same thing at all. Instead of lumping in the Border Agency with what you consider all government departments, you might want to lump them in with just the law enforcement agencies. You might then appear less confused.

Ben Taylor's picture
Sat, 09/06/2012 - 17:33

If you don't understand "see the role of professionals as contracting with government for delivering services" then that seems like a confirmation of part of my point.

I don't really think OFSTED is the best arrangement for school and teacher inspection. I would expect teachers to emulate people like nurses and surveyors and have bodies which are at least democratic through election to a council which makes decisions (I mean to the professional body, not local government). It would have more consent of its members then and be changeable according to their opinion.

Having said that we at least have reduced, more focused inspections. We also have more freedom for schools. Make your service attractive and effective to the general public, insist on more ability for parents and children to choose, OFSTED can then become less powerful and important.

Ben Taylor's picture
Sat, 09/06/2012 - 17:48

Feel free to offer corrections. For example you only need one question mark at the end of a written interrogative sentence in English....but I also understand this non standard use of two of them to make a point.

Probably there are many mistakes, I am more interested in the incoherence. Maybe you can explain this sentence: role of professionals as contracting with government for delivering services. It is as the heart of teachers' relations with bodies like OFSTED and why it is dysfunctional.

Ben Taylor's picture
Sat, 09/06/2012 - 18:19

ALL private English language schools that want to be able to sponsor students for visas for the purpose of entering the UK to study are regulated by the Border Agency (BA) (or whatever they call themselves these days). The schools have to make routine reports to the BA about attendance and non arrival, the BA will turn up and inspect records from time to time such as copies of passports, visas and attendance.

All the state institutions get the right to sponsor students automatically and in some instances have abused it. The University of Wales was recently abolished in part due to visa problems. In contrast if you a private body you have to pay for and earn this right.

I don't see a big difference between the BA and OFSTED. They are bodies established by statute to enforce law. I think OFSTED should be more like other professional bodies and less like BA. It should indeed be more accountable to teachers who in turn need to be more accountable to parents and children.


Add new comment

Already a member? Click here to log in before you comment. Or register with us.