Todays announced changes to the inspection of our Schools will come as good news to anyone who views their actions as potentially as damaging as they can be useful. The need to inspect and offer guidance to any organisation that is funded by public money and in the case of education, is a service which has a monopoly on our use is vital. However even if every inspection carried out was fair and without mistake, if the data is presented in a manner that reasonably leads people to make potentially damaging decisions about their children’s education, the process of inspection itself deserves a thorough review. The fact that OFSTED has changed its rating systems several times since its creation is concerning, this is how Governments operate. Incoming Ministers need to be seen to be effective and so root and branch reviews are carried out and change is made, even where this was not essential, but the subsequent changes made justify the decision to hold the review in the first place and make us all believe we elected the right party.

One of the important aspects of OFSTED is the extent to which it operates, not just as an inspector of Schools, but also of childminders, PreSchools, Youth Services and whole Local Authority provision for children and young people. It is easy to focus on Schools, but the principle that people carrying out inspections should understand the environment and have participated in the process themselves seems vital. The idea emerging from Michael Wilshaw that one of the changes to be made is a greater emphasis on the use of experienced teachers (assuming we are talking primarily about School Inspections) seems to be a very obvious element of any inspection regime. However unlike some other Government Inspections, the involvement of parents and carers also seems to be vital. The Rail Regulator quite reasonably should be made up of engineers and people who can make sense of the technology, the inclusion of passengers might be helpful, but perhaps it is not essential. However OFSTED reports, especially for Schools and childcare agencies is used extensively by parents and carers to determine who should educate or care for their children. It is vital that parents or carers are included in the inspections of Schools, as well as experienced teachers and administrators, and even Governors. In the same way our PreSchool OFSTED inspectors need to include people with recent experience of such settings as both teachers and parent/carers. Perhaps in the case of teachers we could ask Schools to release experienced teachers on a secondment basis so that these people do not become professional inspectors, unless of course that is what they wish.

I decided to have a look on the OFSTED website to find out what they actually look for in their inspectors. One of the most disturbing elements was what appears to be a major failure either of my ability to navigate the site, or their failure to provide the information needed. The application process clearly states that people applying should pay attention to the “job specification containing a job description and person specification” which is supposed to be one of the documents on the website. Sadly I could not find it anywhere. What they do have is a brief outline of what they are looking for

“As a strong candidate for the role of HMI you will be highly qualified and regarded in your field. You will have a wealth of senior leadership experience and a strong track record of driving improvement where it matters the most. Your incisive intellect will be matched by an ability to build rapport and win trust. Able to make sound judgements based on your analysis of inspection evidence, you will also be an inspirational and credible communicator, ready to report your findings with confidence.

You may view the role of HMI as a valuable part of a longer term career plan or you may be looking to make a national contribution at the end of your career. Our priority is to find the best candidates for the job and we expect this to be from a wide variety of backgrounds.”

This statement makes no reference to an interest in the needs of children and young people, or indeed in experience of such a world as either teacher, administrator or parent. Let us hope that after the speech today they will make some changes to the two paragraphs that do appear on their website, and also provide a job description and person specification, and that these will both refer to children and young people. I can understand that a rail inspector may have had no experience of actually travelling on a train, I cannot agree to the idea of an OFSTED Inspector who has no experience or knowledge of the needs of children and young people.