Long-read edition: Ofsted answers how UTCs will be affected by new 'report card' system
Baker Dearing Educational Trust
Supporting University Technical Colleges
The Blueprint speaks to the Deputy Director for Schools and Early Years at Ofsted, Dr Sue Morris-King HMI.
In this edition...
Dr Sue Morris-King, a leading figure in the development of Ofsted's proposed new inspection framework, discusses...
Dear colleague,
Welcome to The Blueprint, the news and insight platform from the Baker Dearing Educational Trust for leaders in industry, education, politics, and the third sector.
Last month, Ofsted revealed its proposed new report card system, to replace the Education Inspection Framework which has been in use since 2019.
This comes after the tragic death of Ruth Perry who took her own life in 2023. A coroner's inquest ruled that an inspection of the Reading school that Perry led “contributed” to her suicide. Ofsted Chief Inspector Sir Martyn Oliver has said this new framework is intended to present a “more balanced, fairer approach."
The key features of the proposed new framework are:
More information on the new framework is available here.
To understand how UTCs specifically could be affected by this new framework, this edition of The Blueprint features a comprehensive interview with the Deputy Director for Schools and Early Years at Ofsted, Sue Morris King HMI.
Morris-King also recently visited WMG Academy for Young Engineers in Coventry to meet with Baker Dearing and UTC personnel to discuss the proposed new framework.
The transcript can be read below and the interview can also be viewed as a video.
Watch the video by clicking the below image
About University Technical Colleges and the Baker Dearing Educational Trust
University Technical Colleges deliver a science, technology, and creative curriculum at a secondary school level. There are now 44 UTCs across England, delivering a curriculum designed by and benefitting local employers to around 21,000 young people between the ages of 11 and 19.
Former education secretary Lord Baker and former Post Office chairman Lord Dearing spearheaded the development of the UTC programme and created the Baker Dearing Educational Trust to support it.
Baker Dearing is now focusing on widening access to technical education nationally, with UTCs and partners and through the:
If you are interested in discussing working with the Baker Dearing Educational Trust, please contact us via director@bakerdearing.org.
How have you found the process of creating this new framework?
Fascinating, I think would be the would be the word that I would use.
I am currently doing lots of work on the framework development, such as drafting the tool kits [which set out the quality that inspectors expect to see for each judgment area] and working up the methodology with my team and senior colleagues.
We're talking about a reformed framework rather than a new framework, because we’re drawing on everything that we know works well in the education inspection framework (EIF) that we've got at the moment. That of course was based on lots of research and we've done curriculum research since.
This is about building on what we know has worked and changing what we know needs to and quite a lot of those things have come out of the Big Listen consultation that we did last year.
We have listened – it's crucial that we did that and we know that there are things that need to change and there are things that we can do better. Part of that is about really taking full account of schools’ contexts and what works in particular situations.
One of the biggest changes – if not the biggest – is the change to grading. Part of that is the exemplary grade. If the awarding of this grade is to be moderated, how will this be moderated fairly? Will this not make Ofsted grades more political because you're opening grading up to external influence?
Really good question and certainly one that we have thought long and hard about and continue to do. So I think one thing I would put into the mix before we go any further is this is a consultation.
So those kind of questions will undoubtedly be things that colleagues in UTCs or any schools will want to comment on. How will this exemplary grade work? Will it work? Is what we've set out something that resonates, something that seems to make sense?
So the consultation is open until 28 April. On this, as on absolutely everything else that we're asking, please do respond. Tell us what you think.
Going back to your question about how it will work, what we're proposing is that it has a really high bar. This is not meant to be replacing or the equivalent of the current ‘outstanding’ grade. What we have set out is something that, when a school is secure in all evaluation areas – so doing all the right things, meeting all the statutory requirements and is providing that quality of education that we would want to see – and then strong across a particular area – for example, curriculum – inspectors might think is there anything here that really, really stands out.
An example of the new report card.
What we’ve put into the draft tool kit as it stands is as follows: Is this something that's embedded and sustained over time – so not something that has just happened? Is it something that's making a really tangible difference to pupils’ learning, their development, their well-being? Could it or is it being used and adapted internally to support other areas of the school's work? And then really importantly, is it something that could be shared externally to support system improvement.
The idea is that then, if we thought that was the case, this wouldn't be something that the inspector would just decide on the day. This is something that would be moderated and inspectors would invite leaders to submit a short case study of their work to the Ofsted Academy, which is where we're putting all of our training and development work.
The intention is we'd then use a panel of experts to review those case studies nationally and then in due course, some of those successful submissions would be published as a part of a series on best practice. So that's how we are proposing that this would work.
Now I think it's clear that this is something people will have views on. And I go back to the earlier point of please do give us those views. We really do want to hear them.
It's also something that we are looking at through the test inspection visits that we are doing at the moment: Could it work? Might it work? How might it work?
What is the rationale behind removing the deep dives from inspection?
Deep dives have been important. They've been important in the EIF and they still are. We're still doing the EIF.
One of the things that we've talked about in the consultation is that those deep dives take up a lot of inspection time.
When we're doing a graded inspection, a good part of that first day for every inspector is taken up by doing the deep dives so we get that curriculum information. But it can make it very difficult to get the flexibility we need in order to find out what is really important in that particular school.
In our proposed methodology that we're trying out now in the test visits, inspectors will start that conversation with leaders by talking about what is it that's really important in your school, what is it that you're working on at the moment, what's improved, what have you put lots of work and thought into since the last inspection, what's currently going really well? Where might you need to do more work, what are your priorities?
From that we can start to really shape some inspection activities that will work in that particular school setting. I think in UTCs that is likely to work really well. We want to try this out in UTCs as we do in every other type of school.
Instead of doing solely subject-based deep dives, we can do some activities that might take into account some of the really important aspects that that UTC is working on. This can make it much more tailored to the school's context. We'll still get to the bottom of what happens in the curriculum. We've still got all the elements of the deep dive at our disposal: lesson visits, looking at people's work, visiting lessons.
We also want to do that with senior leaders and involve them more in inspection. One of the things we've heard from senior leaders through the Big Listen and through the EIF evaluation is sometimes principals, head teachers, deputy heads can feel a little excluded from inspections because a lot of time is spent with curriculum leads.
With that move away from deep dives, is it fair to say that the inspection framework is swinging away from looking at the curriculum?
The curriculum will still continue to be really important because the curriculum as designed, as taught, and its outcomes are absolutely pivotal in terms of giving young people a really good quality education.
What we've done quite deliberately in our proposals, and again, this is something we really welcome views on, is that we've created three sections; curriculum, developing teaching, and achievement. The reason that we've done that is because currently those three parts make up our ‘quality of education’ judgement.
What can sometimes happen is, particularly where schools are on a journey of improvement, you find that perhaps the curriculum is doing really well and it's being taught well in parts, but in others, it's still developing and achievement hasn't quite caught up yet. That's quite common in a school that is on an improvement journey. Currently, in those circumstances, we then have to give one grade.
Whereas what we're proposing is by taking those three aspects apart, we'll be able to recognise the really good work that schools have done, while being able to say where things might need further attention.
Has there been any sort of coordination or discussions with the Curriculum and Assessment Review about this new framework and how it will fit with the newly designed curriculum?
Obviously, it's a consideration for us because of the timing of all of this. We have fed our own curriculum research and reviews into the DfE’s review.
Our proposals build on what we know about curriculum from the EIF and that framework really placed importance on the ambitious, well planned curriculum and where that sits in schools development, making sure that it’s used so people achieve the very best.
That is likely to be very important in the DfE review as it is focusing on pupils having all the skills that they need to make the best possible progress, including in mathematics and in reading – also things that are very important in our inspections.
Recommended by LinkedIn
We don't anticipate any need for any radical change to our inspection approach as part of the review. But once that is published, we'll consider what it says and we'll see if anything needs to be changed.
It would appear that 'preparation for next steps' has been downgraded from its own judgement area to be part of another. Why was that decision made?
You're right. In our original thinking, there was a standalone area called, very provisionally, ‘preparation for next steps’.
When we came to look at the number of different evaluation areas in the toolkit, there did appear to be a lot of them.
The content of that original one hasn't been lost. It's gone into personal development and well-being. But the challenge that has been put to me, quite understandably, by UTC principals is that it has been subsumed too far.
There are the careers element and the Gatsby benchmarks to consider, so is preparation for next steps separate enough? I think that's something we'd very much like people's views on through the consultation.
It may be that we do need to delineate it better.
The existing handbook has certain exemptions for UTCs, so I just want to run through those and see what might happen to them under the new framework.
Progress 8?
There's no reason at all to change that because it’s not the most appropriate indicator for UTCs. We need to make sure we're using indicators that are the most important and any data is only a starting point.
English Baccalaureate?
It's the same answer really. Nothing has changed. The raison d'etre of UTCs in providing that specialist technical education remains.
Thank you. There's also a point in the handbook about the low prior attendance of certain UTC students. Do you expect that to be in the new handbook?
Data on attendance is important. It is only a starting point. So we've done a lot of work with our inspectors over the last year about getting underneath the attendance figures.
What does it actually tell us? Well, by itself, not a huge amount.
A figure of 95 per cent actually might tell us that the vast majority of pupils are in school all of the time and some don't come at all.
The question always in any setting is about what lies beneath and what do you know about your pupil's attendance? What do you know about those whose attendance might be slipping? How do you catch that before it falls? How do you promote that good attendance? How do you analyse it?
If anybody's interested in the work and training that we have done, that now sits on our academy website.
What we need to do in UTCs is have that intelligent conversation about context, and I know that you have lots of young people who join UTCs with low prior attendance. So you might have somebody whose attendance is currently 82 per cent, but who scored 65 per cent in their previous setting or did not attend at all.
The questions are: ‘What are you doing? How effective is it? What are the barriers?’ And then the next question is whether schools are doing all they can to promote that good attendance.
I think our approach that we've developed over the last 18 months is about looking at whether leaders understand the barriers and whether they're doing all they can to help remove those barriers so pupils attend as well as they possibly can.
So you expect that the language in the current handbook will carry over to the new handbook?
I think we just need to consider whether that's necessary for UTCs or whether that's actually something of a more general point, because everything I've just said is pertinent in UTCs as well as other settings. I can go away and double check that.
[Ofsted later told The Blueprint: “We are currently in the process of writing the operating guide, but the principle remains, and we will make sure this is clear to inspectors.”]
Inspectors have in the past received specialist training for inspecting UTCs. Do you know if this will continue under the new framework?
We always make sure that the inspectors coming to UTCs have had a proper briefing before they come out. When I met with UTC principals, we were reflecting on the importance that, when we have a new framework of any kind, we refresh all of our inspectors’ training.
You might have heard Sir Martyn Oliver say there will be an unprecedented amount and depth of training for inspectors and so we're currently setting down what skills we need to refresh with inspectors, but we are also discussing different settings.
So we will make sure that the inspectors who are coming out to a UTC have that refreshed up-to-date training on what they need to know about UTCs in general. But also anything that's changed since the last time that we did any general UTC training. We certainly haven't forgotten UTCs in that whole big tranche of training that we're doing.
Another thing that I've spotted from coverage of the new framework is that Ofsted will highlight trends in performance data. Can you say anything about what the starting point will be for these measurements, bearing in mind the atypical starting age of a lot of UTCs?
I think this goes back to what we just talked about to do with Progress 8.
We are working on the inspection data summary report [which summarises and analyses the available data about a school for an inspector ahead of an inspection] and on what can we give to inspectors that makes it even clearer what that data is saying. How can we support inspectors and schools to have an even better conversation about data as a starting point?
The data is only ever a starting point for conversations in inspection. That's why we come on site to inspect. We can't do anything by data alone. That whole philosophy will continue in our inspections.
There are some descriptors around data that will be supportive and helpful to inspectors in a lot of settings. Part of the training that we'll need to do with inspectors is where that is useful and where it isn't useful.
It's about having that really good conversation with leaders at the start to get underneath what's happening in that setting and of course, leaders in the UTC will have their own grasp on what the data is telling them, and that can also be part of that conversation.
What's next for the framework and also, what’s happening during the autumn term when inspections are cancelled?
We have done the first iteration of our test visits where we've gone into schools, early years, further education, and skills settings to test out some of our thinking and get inspectors thinking about some particular ideas and things that we want to include.
We've then taken what we've learnt from those and are now doing what we're calling ‘end-to-end’ test visits.
These will replicate more of what an inspection might look like. The second set of those going into the summer term will replicate more closely what we think inspection will look like. So we can really properly test what's feasible, what's doable for leaders, and whether we are doing the right things in the right order.
That will all inform our training for inspectors, so it’s really important. One of the things that we will do with the test visits is learn what we need to change, what we need to tweak in the tool kits, we'll learn if there's anything that simply isn't working and we'll set that alongside what we are learning from the consultation, from what stakeholders are suggesting.
We will put all that together and then there'll be a response to the consultation. We will continue to try out what we've learned and will continue to refine.
In the first part of the autumn term, there won't be any routine, Section 5 inspections. We will do any urgent inspections [under the existing framework], as you'd expect us to.
We might also do some monitoring inspections if we've got schools or settings that are in a category of concern.
We'll be doing lots of training with inspectors and preparing them for the next steps. We will also really, really importantly be doing lots and lots of communication with the sector.
So there will be lots of opportunities for school and other stakeholders to hear about the reformed inspection framework and what it looks like. What does it include What do you need to know for people to ask questions? So it's as much about the sector being informed and prepared and understanding as it is inspectors.
Then in November, we will go live with the inspections.
Is there anything else you would like to add?
The only thing I'd like to add is thanks for the opportunity for the conversation. It's been really good to talk and muse and think about this and a big thanks to WMG Coventry for hosting me and for those principals who came down to speak to me because it really did feed a lot into our thinking about the consultation and about the framework. It was very helpful, informative, and supportive. So thank you for that.
Baker Dearing Interim Director of Education Alex Hayes responds to Dr Morris-King's answers
"Firstly, as Sue is an important voice in the development of the new Ofsted framework, we are delighted that we’ve been able to develop our relationship with her to the point where she has given us this interview.
"As you will have read, we were able to get Sue to visit her first UTC - WMG Coventry - and talk to UTC principals earlier this month. This relationship is going to be vital, not just from the get-go. Our previous experiences tell us that the framework often needs tweaking once it's has been put into operation.
"Secondly, it is encouraging that she is proposing to continue the exemption for UTCs on Progress 8 and the EBacc. These clauses in the handbook were hard fought - and won - and we need to retain them.
"Finally, It’s clear from the interview that Sue is in listening mode, so I would encourage colleagues to respond to the Ofsted consultation. You can find the consultation here. It will end on 28 April."
Register for The Blueprint
To receive future editions of The Blueprint each month, register your details using the link below.
Any individuals or organisations that are interested in contributing to The Blueprint should contact Fraser Whieldon via fwhieldon@bakerdearing.org.