Why I Dislike Most Ofsted Inspectors...

Ofsted is a beast that has grown beyond comprehension; they now essentially run education under the leadership of Sir Michael Wilshaw (despite claims of independence from the DfE). All the ignorant ministers think he's wonderful, the media love him because he gives them soundbites that slate teachers (the media really like slating teachers, in case you hadn't noticed) which he later tries to claim have been taken out of context. Teachers, in general, however, can't stand the bloke nor his inspectorate.

Few people actually like or agree with those who judge them, other than those who require a wet wipe for the end of their nose, but Ofsted not only take a biscuit, but arguably the whole packet.

What really gets me about Wilshaw (and the same goes for his mob, sorry, inspectors) is that he's quite clearly forgotten what it's like to be a classroom teacher. He makes statements about "moaning teachers" (here's the BBC link). but neglects to consider that perhaps his seemingly continuous gripes in the media about teachers possibly leads to the "moaning". He became a headteacher at the age of 39, and is nearly 70 now, so it's fair to say that he has had little recent classroom experience.

I know that I'm supposed to be talking about Ofsted inspectors and have spent wordage so far on Wilshaw alone, but he is their leader. Let's face it, the minions follow their leader, and the problem is that I wouldn't urinate on the leader if he spontaneously combusted. That aside, he actually has the right idea at heart: he wants all children to have the best opportunity to fulfil their potential, and no-one (not even me) can argue with that. The methods he employs to impose this, however, are questionable.

So if Wilshaw's so great, why do his minions constantly ignore him? He has said for a while now that he doesn't have a particular lesson style in mind as long as the children learn and progress at a fast rate. Fair enough; most teachers know that. Unfortunately, many inspectors don't (see the blog Scenes From The Battleground for more info) and they expect to see the teacher not teach - group work/discovery etc. Wilshaw is quite clearly a poor leader if he can't get his message across; I shall be struck down for besmirching the good Sir Michael's name!

And so onto my main gripe: Ofsted are very keen on data and contain a huge proportion of failed classroom practitioners (don't believe the "we only employ top quality headteachers" rubbish). Please bear in mind that many failed in the classroom in days gone by, when discipline was a whole lot easier. No, I don't mean that you could cane the poo out of a child who misbehaved back then, although Sir Mike did admit to doing so. I mean that parents' views hadn't been tainted by an acidic media, meaning that now loads of them believe teachers are the spawn of Satan (perhaps they're right in some cases, judging by the abuse cases that seem to be mounting up) and fair game for verbal abuse.

Ofsted hold so much power nowadays that a pretty average inspector (one with little or no track record, and there are plenty) can essentially decide the fate of a school on a whim. We live in a time where anything Ofsted say, goes; if Ofsted wanted winter to be summer, then so be it - they would manipulate data to show that it would be beneficial, believe-you-me. So if the headteacher manages to annoy an inspector early on (I have experienced this), then there really is no point in trying because the outcome has already been determined. Inspectors know this, and in some cases, play on it. Professionalism isn't part of the equation; "I'm going to show you who's boss" is.

I also have a problem with the fact that Ofsted only recruit "outstanding" teachers or headteachers. If the people they are recruiting are that good, why the hell are they wasting their time judging sub-standard practitioners (it's all relative) when they could be getting the UK up the Pisa league tables? They clearly either dislike teaching (so shouldn't be involved in education at all) or are rubbish teachers (so shouldn't be inspectors). Either way, neither is desirable or employable.

That's why I can't stand Ofsted inspectors; and that's why I am rude to them at every given opportunity. If you ever wanted to see "poacher turned gamekeeper" personified, just glance at an Ofsted inspector and stifle the urge to vomit over them. It's a waste of good vomit after all.

Sabbaticals For Teachers

There was a letter in this week's Sunday Times to Chris Woodhead (Educational columnist and former Chief Inspector of Schools) asking whether he thought it was a good idea that teachers got sabbatical (a period of time doing something else, often a year) every few years to "recharge the batteries". It is an idea that has been suggested by the new Chief Inspector of Schools, Sir Michael Wilshaw.

In reply Woodhead says how impressed he has been with Wilshaw so far and goes on to state that teaching in inner city schools "can be a very tough job indeed". He then goes on to say that most teachers don't teach in inner city schools and although they have to deal with immature children, the hard work is equalled by the rewards of the job. Presumably this is why the main reason for teacher sickness at the moment is stress, the stress of all those rewarding times teachers have in the classroom. Foolish statement number one.

Woodhead also states that teachers are paid relatively well (no-one ever enters teaching for the money, but it's not bad) and despite cuts in the pension, the pension is far better than the private equivalent, assuming that those teachers actually make it to pension age due to the stresses of the job. These are contentious issues, but understandable from someone who hasn't taught in a school classroom since 1974.

He also mentions the 13 weeks holiday - the familiar dig that teachers have to deal with. As I've said on numerous occasions, no-one would do the job if it weren't for the holidays. I certainly wouldn't.

He also says, astoundingly, that teachers have "cast-iron job security". This is quite unbelievable at a time of budget cuts and many schools being forced to make teachers (as well as support staff) redundant. Not to mention the qualified teachers in subjects such as PE, Art, Drama, History (the list goes on) who can't even get their first job because there are too many qualified teachers for too feew jobs. And that's without a baseless accusation from a vindictive child that hangs over all teachers every day, where the teacher is guilty until proven innocent. The bloke is clearly an idiot. Foolish statement number two.

I'm not saying that teachers deserve a sabbatical to "recharge their batteries", although I believe that some countries do offer them. The cost would be prohibitive as those on sabbatical would need a wage, and their replacement would also need payment. Also the public may not welcome the news, and the disruption to classes may outweigh the benefits.

Chris Woodhead - totally removed from educational reality.