Ofsted School Inspections

Debate between Scott Benton and Philip Hollobone

Tuesday 6th December 2022 Westminster Hall

[Mr Hollobone]

I am grateful for that intervention. The hon. Gentleman is a Christian gentleman. He understands the importance of a Christian ethos in schools, but it seems that some Ofsted inspectors do not share those values. In this case, it seems that they have deliberately set out to downgrade the school, and the hon. Gentleman is right that that is having a devastating impact on the teachers, pupils and parents, who feel that the inspection has gone wrong and that they have all been treated extremely unfairly. It appears that, unable to criticise the school’s educational achievements, inspectors have pursued an agenda against a top-performing school with a Christian ethos by engineering criticisms of the behaviour and attitudes, personal development, and leadership and management criteria.

I thought that this matter was so serious that it should be brought to the immediate attention of the Department for Education, so I wrote to the Minister’s predecessor on 11 October. I am afraid that I do not think that Ofsted can be relied on to judge its own homework. The deficiencies in the inspection of this school are extremely serious. In effect, no one is inspecting the inspectors, and they can basically do what they like.

On the same day, I wrote to Ofsted chief inspector Amanda Spielman, yet all I received was a one-page letter from the assistant regional director of the east midlands on 20 October saying that they noted my concerns but that nothing else would be done and that they would just go along with the complaints process in which the school was engaged. I do not regard that as satisfactory, when a Member of Parliament has raised genuine concerns.

Let us look at the quality of education at the school. On the Department’s latest unvalidated educational attainment data, Bishop Stopford School ranks 106th out of all 6,761 secondary schools in the country and is in the top 1.5%. Let us look at the key headline measures of educational attainment. On the EBacc scores, in the data comparing Bishop Stopford School with schools that Ofsted has rated “outstanding” since September 2021, the school is the highest performing non-selective school. Some 94% of the school’s students entered for the EBacc, which is massive. In Northamptonshire, the second highest school is at 79%. The national average is 39%, and the Government’s ambition is 75%.

On progress 8 scores, which show how much progress pupils at this school made between the end of key stage 2 and the end of key stage 4, out of 3,721 selective and non-selective schools with a progress 8, the school is No. 115, which is in the top 3%. On the attainment 8 scores, which are based on how well pupils have performed in up to eight qualifications, there are 3,768 non-selective schools, and Bishop Stopford School is 110th, which is in the top 3%. On the basic five GCSEs, including English and maths, Bishop Stopford School is at 70%. Of the 126 schools ranked as “requiring improvement”, Bishop Stopford School is fourth, with the range 0% to 96%. Of the 52 schools rated “outstanding”, the school is 27th, with a range of 45% to 100%, and it is fifth for the non-selective mixed schools in this category.

In terms of the number of pupils who stayed in education or went into employment after finishing key stage 4, of all the selective and non-selective schools previously rated as “outstanding”, Bishop Stopford School is ranked 16th in the whole country. Of non-selective mixed-sex schools, it is fourth in the whole country, with 98% staying in education or going into employment. Ofsted partially recognises this educational record:

“Most pupils enjoy attending Bishop Stopford School and value the teaching that they receive. The school is ‘unapologetically academic’ and leaders have high expectations of what pupils should achieve.”

Yet Ofsted only gave the school a “good” rating in this area.

The mantra about making a judgment about the quality of education is explicitly stated as depending on the three Is: intent, implementation and impact. In essence, this assesses whether a school is clear about what it wishes to achieve with its curriculum, how well that intent is implemented and what its impact is. The only way this can be easily measured is through the empirical data: results, destinations and attendance. The impact of the school’s curriculum is, once again, abundantly clear in this validated data.

If the school is enabling its young people to be so successful and to progress to high-quality destinations, there has to be a disconnect somewhere. If the school is performing so poorly, as the report suggests, how could it possibly generate outcomes that can only be described as excellent, even among the schools Ofsted has judged to be “outstanding”?

The school has followed the Ofsted complaints process, and it got a reply dated 9 November from the senior regional inspector. The school complained about the judgment on quality of education. Ofsted said that a common area that needs to be improved is using assessment to adapt teaching so that identified gaps are addressed. It said:

“modern foreign languages and the mathematics curriculum are not as securely embedded as other curriculum areas”,

and the complaint was not upheld.

The school complained about the judgment on behaviour and attitudes. Ofsted acknowledged that

“behaviour was calm and orderly around the school.”

In its report, it said that the school deals with low-level disruption when it occurs, yet in the inspection on the day the Ofsted inspectors said that there was no low-level disruption. The inspection team had a particular concern about bullying and the use of derogatory language. In this case, the grade descriptor that needed to be considered was:

“Leaders, staff and pupils create a positive environment in which bullying is not tolerated.”

The inspection team said that that criterion was not fully met, and the complaint was not upheld. Parents are in disbelief that the inspection team could come to that conclusion.

The school complained about the Ofsted judgment on personal development. Ofsted said:

“inspectors considered how the Christian ethos and wider curriculum supported pupils’ personal development”,

yet the inspection team raised the Christian ethos only twice, both times negatively.

[Scott Benton (Blackpool South) (Con)]

My hon. Friend is making a powerful speech. Surely the aim of the equality, diversity and inclusion statement should be to ensure schools are abiding by the necessary equality regulation in legislation. I am concerned that, in some cases, Ofsted appears to take it beyond its original intention by judging schools against its own ideas about what life in modern Britain should be. Does my hon. Friend share those concerns?

[Mr Hollobone]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for raising those concerns. I do share them, as do pupils at the school. I had the privilege of speaking to some of the pupils who engaged with the inspectors. They were expecting the inspectors to ask about the curriculum and their academic studies, but they were probed particularly about the Christian ethos. One pupil, very maturely, responded: “It is not so much about Christianity as about Christian values.” That was a very mature and sensible response.

Fireworks: Sale and Use

Debate between Scott Benton and Philip Hollobone

Monday 8th November 2021 Westminster Hall

[Mr Philip Hollobone (Kettering) (Con)]

I apologise, Mr Twigg, that I will not be able to stay for the very end of the debate, because I have to chair a Committee upstairs.

I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Carshalton and Wallington (Elliot Colburn) on introducing the debate so well. Things have moved on from the time of my grandfather, who was an orphan in south London in the late 1890s. Just ahead of bonfire night, the superintendent of the orphanage went round with a bucket of fireworks, and each young lad was told to take a firework and to go out and light it. Can anyone imagine that happening today?

Distressingly, however, a very large number of people are injured each year because of the use of fireworks in domestic settings. Over 100 people go to hospital each year as a result of fireworks-related accidents; over 1,000 people are hurt, half of whom are children; there are over 40,000 incidents of antisocial behaviour related to fireworks; and 4,500 animals are injured and require veterinary support as a result of activities related to bonfire night.

I support the wording of the petition. I think there should be a ban—an outright ban—on the retail sale of fireworks, and that we should encourage licensed, organised displays. The point about such displays is that they are the best way to appreciate fireworks, while also raising a lot of money for charity. The thing about fireworks is that they are great if they can be seen and are well organised, but they are universally awful if they can only be heard. That is what happens with domestic firework displays. If the fireworks cannot be seen, they cannot be appreciated. It is animals in particular that suffer. Hundreds of thousands of dogs, cats, horses and other animals every year are quaking in fear because of the loud bangs going off in the vicinity.

[Scott Benton (Blackpool South) (Con)]

My hon. Friend is rightly highlighting the awful impact that fireworks can have on pets and other animals. Will he join me in praising the work of the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals and Dogs Trust—to name but two organisations—which have published their advice to pet owners on what they can do to safeguard their pets against fireworks?

[Mr Hollobone]

I am grateful for that intervention, because the RSPCA calculates that fireworks cause distress in 62% of dogs, 54% of cats and 55% of horses. The RSPCA estimates that 85% of people whom it has surveyed think that firework displays should be licensed and that the retail sale of fireworks should be abolished. The point is this. As human beings, we can all be frightened by noise, but we can rationalise it, understand it, and most of us can overcome it, but very, very few animals can do that, so if we want to stop hundreds of thousands of animals quaking in fear year in, year out, as a result of fireworks, let us ban the wretched things from retail sale and have organised, licensed public displays only.