If we don’t have some kind of regulatory system in my house then there will be chaos.  My wife and I have three children who are all adults and all live at home.  They are amazing but if we do not have a way of ordering our behaviours and practices then there is just a slight risk that we may descend into a Lord of The Flies scenario or some form of post-apocalyptic situation.  The house is big but there are so many shoes and bags and opinions.  We tried living without a central calendar for a while and I can write a chunky chapter about that one day.  So I get regulation and I understand that we have to hold each other to account in some kind of way.

Therefore, I understand that some kind of entity like Ofsted is necessary.  I do not think that we can simply leave all schools to do what they want.  Schools are great places and those who work in them are almost entirely dedicated and committed people who want fantastic outcomes for kids.  And so many of us have brilliant ideas as teachers and leaders.  We have read as much recent research as we have time for and we have seen what works in classrooms and in school organisational design often over many years, but we know that we make mistakes and that we are accountable for the outcomes of children who only get one chance.  One messed up year can be a massive almost permanent disadvantage for a child.  So we welcome external advice and guidance as well as a clarity of the kinds of things our elected government want us to do for this generation of children and young people.        

But, is it wise that we should allow politicians alone to determine what schools do and how they do it?  Of course, they are democratically elected, so represent the will of the people, and they should set some form of direction for education based on what they have shared with the electorate.  With the big caveat that it should be rooted in sound educational, cognitive science and child development principles. But politicians have only had one educational experience and come from one philosophical stable and cannot be expected to ignore the pressures on them for their own kinds of results in a very limited window of time.

So a quasi-autonomous educational body with a sound structure, permeated by able and acknowledged practitioners feels like a necessity to me.   

We could try and create a regulatory system based completely on peer assessment but my hunch is that it would become more complicated and personal than we current realise and would gradually mutate back into a regulatory body not unlike the current Ofsted one over time.

The real question then is, what should that body regulate and how should they do it?  Just as children get one shot at a decent education, we as school leaders generally only get one or two chances to build a great school.  We are so personally invested that it hurts.  And so, tragically, if we are told bluntly and brutally that we are not doing a good enough job and that we are failing those individuals who we desperately want to help; we cannot always cope. It is encouraging that Ofsted has said it is reflecting deeply on the way it operates.  It is positive that inspectors have had several weeks of mental health training.  But it is imperative that at this significant point in time Ofsted listens and listens and learns and reflects.  It is obvious that we need them to work in a different way.  My encouragement is that we unite as a profession to embrace an opportunity to support a more humane, optimistic and collaborative form of regulation rather than an abolition of regulation in its entirety.

Julian Dutnall,
CEO, LIFE Education Trust