News and guidance

ASCL Senior Director Julie McCulloch highlights the ongoing fight for a better approach to inspection and accountability.

Looking back at my article in the last edition of Leader (www.ascl.org.uk/LeaderASCLInfluenceOct24), I described a palpable and positive change in how the (still relatively new) government was engaging with ASCL, and with the profession as a whole.

I also recognised, though, that the decisions the new government were making were not being received as positively by all sectors, particularly the independent sector. And I sounded a note of caution that a positive start was not necessarily an indication of plain sailing ahead, as we moved from broad government intentions into the nitty-gritty of detailed policy design.

Well, it’s fair to say that while there is still much to be optimistic about, the waters have, indeed, become choppier. While we’ve continued to have many constructive conversations with both the DfE and – importantly – Ofsted, we’ve also come up against some brick walls.

Disappointingly, we’ve also seen the government’s much vaunted ‘reset’ of its relationship with the profession falter. In a speech announcing the dawn of “a new era on school standards”, the Secretary of State Bridget Phillipson did nothing to dial down the pressure on schools and colleges. Instead, we saw a promise to “raise the bar on what we expect from schools”, and a return to the sort of the language we hoped we’d seen the back of – of schools “coasting” and “drifting along”. Unexpectedly praising Michael Gove’s war on “the soft bigotry of low expectations”, the Secretary of State questioned the “notion” that 90% of our schools are truly good or outstanding, telling us that her government is “never content, never complacent, never satisfied, when it comes to standards in schools”.

I don’t want to read too much into rhetorical flourishes, but unfortunately, we’re also seeing this ratcheting up of pressure play out in more substantive ways. The parallel DfE and Ofsted consultations on Improving the way Ofsted inspects education (tinyurl. com/yc5t9sty) and School accountability reform (tinyurl. com/2w59pu8d), published in January, have caused significant alarm among school and college leaders.

Deep concerns

While we’re pleased to see the move towards a broader approach to how schools and colleges are held to account, and have long advocated for a report card-based model, we’re deeply concerned about some of the detail set out in these consultations. I spent many hours over the autumn term putting the case to colleagues at both the DfE and Ofsted for the approach proposed by ASCL earlier this year. In summary, this would:

• be based on a new, slim set of statutory standards, which all state schools would be expected to meet or exceed
• employ inspection and other regulatory activities intelligently to judge whether or not schools are meeting these standards, based on an appropriate set of proxies
• include an intelligent approach to improvement and intervention, which trusts schools that meet the standards to implement their own approach to continual improvement, and employs appropriate mechanisms to support those that don’t

In fairness, the DfE’s proposals do align with some of this. The department’s proposed approach to support and intervention, while fiendishly and unnecessarily complex in some aspects, does begin to map out a system in which many (most?) schools are trusted to implement their own school improvement, and to propose a more nuanced response to struggling schools.

ASCL is also deeply concerned about the way in which Ofsted is proposing to implement the new school report cards. Far from reducing the pressure of inspection by simplifying and clarifying expectations on schools, in the way that ASCL had proposed, Ofsted’s preferred model has the potential to be even more problematic than the system it would replace. Our main concerns relate to Ofsted’s proposed five-point scale. In particular:

• The inclusion of the two categories above ‘secure’ will do nothing to reduce pressure. Instead, they will perpetuate a sense that nothing that schools and colleges do is good enough.
• This does nothing to recognise the findings of the inquest into headteacher Ruth Perry’s death or the recommendations of the Gilbert report. It will exacerbate the current recruitment and retention crisis and undermine the government’s ambition for high and rising standards.
• We do not believe it will be possible for inspectors to distinguish between performance reliably and validly on a five-point scale. The toolkits project a false sense of rigour, but fall apart on closer inspection. This will lead to inconsistency, compromising the whole approach and destroying confidence in the system.
• The five-point scale will inevitably lead to a granular ranking of schools, as it will enable commentators to add up a school’s ratings across different areas of focus to create an overall score, which can then be compared with other schools. We recognise that this is not the government or Ofsted’s intention, but it is an inevitable outcome.
• The proposed approach to ‘exemplary’ is particularly problematic. Who will sit on the proposed panel to judge whether or not an aspect of a school’s performance is exemplary, how will they make those judgements, and what transparency will there be around this?

We’re also extremely concerned about the timescale on which these proposals are being considered and implemented. There is too little time for Ofsted and the DfE to consider responses to the consultation and adapt their proposals accordingly, or for school and college leaders to prepare for their implementation. Furthermore, the fact that Ofsted is piloting its preferred approach in parallel with the consultation reinforces the view that the sector is being presented with a fait accompli.

We will be expanding on these concerns in our responses to both consultations and asking the government and Ofsted to fundamentally rethink their current proposals, particularly the five-point scale. There is a great deal more going on in education policy at the moment, much of it much more positive. I’ll return to my usual overview in the next edition of Leader. For now, though, we will continue the fight for a better, more intelligent, more proportionate approach to inspection and accountability, to help stem the exodus of teachers and leaders and genuinely deliver the high and rising standards we all want to see.

ASCL has been quoted widely in the media over the recent period on a range of issues.

Late October saw General Secretary Pepe Di’Iasio make an early morning journey to Salford to appear on BBC Breakfast’s iconic red sofa. Alongside Naga Munchetty and Charlie Stayt, he discussed the impact that Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) check delays were having on schools hiring new staff. Recruitment and retention has remained a key topic for the media in recent months. In December, ASCL’s response to the latest initial teacher training census attracted attention in both the national (tinyurl.com/ywu9htec) and specialist (tinyurl.com/28fmr7p7) press.

December also saw the publication of the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill. The Bill has been fiercely debated in Parliament, including at Prime Minister’s Questions, and consequently generated plenty of column inches. ASCL’s comments about the Bill have been reported in publications such as The Times (tinyurl.com/mr44p4yr) and The Independent (tinyurl.com/3jau6xfz). Senior Director of Strategy, Policy and Professional Development, Julie McCulloch, was among the experts invited to give evidence to the Bill Committee in January. Her remarks were picked up in TES (tinyurl.com/54jz959v) and Schools Week (tinyurl.com/2jppdjzz).

February saw a huge amount of media interest in Ofsted’s new report cards. Pepe Di’Iasio discussed these with Sarah Montague on BBC Radio 4’s World at One (vimeo.com/1053087630), while ASCL’s comments also featured in The Guardian (tinyurl.com/3mnss5uf) and Financial Times (tinyurl.com/yjwnfr6u), among others.

ASCL is proud to represent school and college leaders from across the UK – to find out more, visit www.ascl.org.uk/uk

Welsh education is different and I'm not sure we always appreciate how it is. Collaboration is key to our education system in Wales; never once as a school leader did I feel alone or isolated. I always felt part of a bigger reality than just my own. And I also felt the support, the challenge and the kindness of my peers.

The challenges we face at the moment are enormous. We work in a system full of formulae and policy that often completely misses reality. Where historical practice and funding does not meet the needs of our children and change happens constantly for change’s sake.

But we also work in a system where we change the lives of children and young people, where we teach them to dream, to try, and to be the people they want to be. We work in a system full of energy and laughter where, at the end of the day, you know you have made a difference. And we work in a system where together we are worth so much more than alone.

Together we can provide the support, the platforms and the ideas to address what seem impossible problems. Together we can fight for the funding our children deserve and create a school improvement system that focuses on who we are and what we really want to achieve – to enable our children and young people to thrive.

In Wales, our superpower is our collaboration and together we can create a brighter future for all our children and young people.

It’s now been a year since the return of the Stormont Executive, so, has anything changed?

I think it would be fair to say that the now well-established Education Minister Paul Givan has brought forward some significant reforms. First, he awarded a three-year pay settlement equating to 10%, alongside a new starting salary of £30,000 and a commitment to look at teacher workload. He has backed the findings of the Independent Review of Education, which we fully endorse, has introduced proposals in relation to school uniform, and has mandated that learners remain in education to the age of 19.

He’s going to introduce big SEND reforms and has commissioned reviews of both the Northern Ireland Curriculum and statutory key stage assessment. We’ve significantly fed into both projects and will continue to do so. This is not the end of the changes, and he intends to continue to move at pace to bring forward what he sees as necessary policies going forward.

However, it's fair to say that he is working on a restricted time frame in that the current mandate is up in 2027 and two years were lost through the Democratic Unionist Party’s (DUP’s) boycott of Stormont. A cynic might suggest he has one eye on what his legacy as Education Minister might be.

No doubt, he will not want to be remembered for encouraging periods of industrial action, nor has he addressed some of the more challenging recommendations contained within the independent review. So, it looks like he’s hanging his hat on a legacy of curriculum and assessment reform.

That is not an easy task – we have a curriculum that hasn’t been reviewed since 2007 and qualifications that are content-heavy, recall-focused and out of date. Statutory key stage assessment is nowhere to be seen. A considerable task lies ahead, and he needs to move fast.

At School Leaders Scotland (SLS) we are always very keen to know what our members are thinking; after all it is they whom we serve. Our recent membership survey highlighted key strengths of SLS’s support, including effective communication through regular updates, high-quality professional learning opportunities, accessible advice, and national representation.

Members appreciate SLS's role in fostering a sense of community.

Positive suggestions for improvement from members included making our communication more succinct, increasing inclusivity, providing more affordable or free professional development, and advocating for better working conditions, especially for middle leadership roles.

Members feel that our communication with them is clear, regular, and well-organised and helpful in disseminating information, so that they feel connected and up to date on key issues.

Our second survey of members revolved around diversity, as we try to make our association even more inclusive. The results of the survey are still being analysed but our President, Pauline Walker, will lead a new working group to include as many members as possible to provide a programme and strategy for us to widen the active participation of members with protected characteristics (age, sex, sexual orientation, gender reassignment, race, religion of belief, marriage and civil partnership, disability and pregnancy and maternity), so everyone has the opportunity to play a more influential role in SLS.

And, finally, we will shortly be conducting a third survey of members, this time about workload.

We are hoping for a high participation level for this survey, as we will be using the data to help us to pursue our case with local authorities and the Scottish government regarding salaries and working conditions.

Continue to be part of our great community when you retire from a school or college leadership role with ASCL Associate membership.

ASCL Associate membership means that you can continue to receive ASCL publications such as our online Leader magazine and email news updates and have access to website resources.

Plus, you'll find that Associate membership comes with additional benefits and new opportunities through the exclusive magazine Associates News, social activities, the ASCL Associates Committee, volunteering, and chairing our popular planning for retirement events.

• Find out more at www.ascl.org.uk/associates

In addition, a reminder to current Associate members that Quilter Financial Advisers (QFA) – ASCL’s premier partner for financial services – offers an initial free personal telephone appointment for members. Call QFA on 08000 858590 or email QFAinfo@quilter.com to arrange your appointment (for details on how QFA uses your personal information, please view its privacy policy here tinyurl.com/k2mmf9sr).

In the last few months, there has been a number of cases in the High Court relating to permanent exclusions. In each of these cases, the parent challenged the Governors’ Discipline Committee (GDC), after each had upheld the relevant exclusion and following an independent review panel (IRP) quashing their original decision. In each case, the court found in favour of the school concerned, but there are some themes that can be drawn from the cases:

Reconsideration by the GDC: Upon reconsideration, the GDC must review the points raised by the IRP. While they should consider these points carefully, they are not obligated to align their decision with the IRP.

Evidence and risk assessment: The GDC should base its decisions on relevant factual evidence. For risk assessments, reliance on the headteacher’s judgement is acceptable, given his/her intimate knowledge of the school's circumstances.

Exploring alternatives to exclusion: The GDC needs to consider whether a permanent exclusion is a last resort, but there is not necessarily going to be written evidence of this. It is important that the GDC asks questions to the headteacher about whether anything else could have been done to prevent the permanent exclusion, or as an alternative.

Importance of the decision letter: The decision letter from the GDC should clearly articulate the reasons for its decision, especially addressing the points highlighted by the IRP.

With the increase in the number of permanent exclusions, our legal partner Browne Jacobson is seeing a rise too in challenges by parents. Leaders should ensure they get legal advice where needed, given the time and cost that can be involved in High Court action.

The ASCL Benevolent Fund (ABF) is an important element in the association’s policy of providing protection and care for all members, past and present, and their dependants.

While most members, active and in post, are unlikely to need help, a serious accident, redundancy, chronic illness, or disability can change the situation quite traumatically.

Whether it is a short-term financial crisis or a long-term problem, the fund stands ready to help. If you know someone who may benefit from the fund or if you think you would benefit yourself, please call 0116 299 1122 or find out more at www.ascl.org.uk/benevolentfund

ASCL is committed to supporting and promoting equality, diversity and inclusion (EDI) among school, college and trust leaders, and in our own organisation. Our leaders’ networks, focused on ethnic diversity, lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender plus (LGBT+) and women leaders, offer a safe space for members in these groups to support and empower one another, and to raise awareness of issues particularly affecting these groups. Please visit their individual pages via the links below to find out more:

• ASCL Ethnic Diversity Network (www.ascl.org.uk/EDNetwork)
• ASCL LGBT+ Leaders’ Network (www.ascl.org.uk/LGBTLeaders)
• ASCL Women Leaders’ Network (www.ascl.org.uk/womenleaders)

To join any of our leaders’ networks and for an invitation to the next meeting, please email CorporateAdmin@ascl.org.uk indicating the network/s you would like to join.

In January, the government announced that funding had been awarded to a number of ed-tech companies to build AI tools for teachers to improve feedback and marking, and to drive higher education standards (tinyurl.com/5xx74tdy). This latest announcement demonstrates how the role of AI is going to surge in education over the coming years. While the education sector is seen to be at the forefront of this developing area, the use of AI requires governance to ensure objectives are met and risks are managed.

Schools, colleges and trusts should look at implementing an AI governance framework to ensure the responsible, safe and ethical use of AI, tailored to your individual setting. A governance framework will help to manage the use of AI responsibly by:

• defining your ethical AI principles, which will guide your use of AI n promoting transparency and accountability
• creating clear policies and procedures
• facilitating regular risk assessments
• promoting a risk-aware culture across the whole of the school, college or trust, from the top down

A key part of your AI governance will be to train and educate your staff. Browne Jacobson’s specialist team is there to support you and guide you through your legal obligations and provide training and template documents to assist with the implementation of AI.

Find out more at www.brownejacobson.com/sectors/education

FURTHER READING

Turn to page 22 where NFER’s Helen Poet shares the latest research on using ChatGPT to support lesson preparation, and the implications for school and college leaders.

The DfE’s 2024 teacher appraisal guidance recommended using online platforms to reduce workload, target CPD needs, and support staff development. Advanced Learning Partnership (ALP) demonstrates this in practice, transforming teacher appraisal and professional development using BlueSky Education’s powerful People Development platform.

ALP’s Trust Improvement Partner, Catherine Hydon, said, “Using an online platform to support processes across the trust enables us to share information easily. It saves time and ensures consistency across schools. Our process would be impossible to manage at trust level without the platform.”

BlueSky helps ALP to tailor CPD using data-driven insights, ensuring professional learning at the trust is both strategic and personalised.

“We’re focused on providing staff with development that meets their needs. The intelligence from the platform makes this possible,” Catherine says. The platform also fosters ownership and accountability, allowing staff to build professional portfolios, track progress, and maintain ongoing conversations.

“BlueSky is not only a personal portfolio for staff – it creates a dialogue between staff and their line manager and enables our teaching and learning leads to monitor and evaluate the impact of CPD.”

Learn how an online platform can transform people development in your school or college and receive a 10% discount for ASCL members: blueskyeducation.co.uk/bluesky-education-for-ascl-members/

By way of a summary, a ‘significant change’ to an academy requires Secretary of State consent, and often variation of the academy’s Funding Agreement as well.

The trust must comply with the current version of the ESFA’s Academies: Making significant changes or closure by agreement guidance (tinyurl.com/5n8u7uj2), which lists the types of changes that are deemed to be ‘significant changes’ requiring consent, and which ‘tier’ they fall into. This then informs the process that must be followed, involving consultation in all cases before submission of the relevant Tier 1 or Tier 3 application form. Currently, consultation must be for a minimum of three weeks, two of which must be in term time.

Sometimes, schools agree changes (often with funding) with their local authority, but forget to consider whether ‘significant change’ consent is required, so it is worth checking the guidance at an early stage in this respect. Many ‘significant changes’ to an academy will also require variation of the academy’s admission arrangements and, because of the lengthy lead-in time for determining admission arrangements (that is, at least 18 months in advance), this will usually require compliance with Paras. 3.6 and 3.7 of the School Admissions Code 2021 (tinyurl.com/3vhw78fe) (Code).

Para. 3.6 of the Code provides that, unless a change is required for compliance reasons, to correct a mistake or to give effect to a Schools Adjudicator’s decision, a variation of determined admission arrangements will require Secretary of State consent, which will only be given where the academy can demonstrate that there has been a ‘major change in circumstances’ since they were determined. In most cases, the ‘significant change’ will in and of itself be the ‘major change in circumstances’, however it is crucial that schools recognise the need to include the proposed variation of the academy’s admission arrangements in both their consultation on the ‘significant change’ itself (with publication of a full set of the proposed varied admission arrangements throughout), and in the application for consent. Relying on consent being implied in retrospect is not recommended.

‘Significant changes’ to special academies, or to the number of places/designated SEN for a Specialist Resource Provision or SEN Unit within a mainstream academy, will not have a linked variation of admission arrangements because all of the children have Education, Health and Care Plan (EHCPs), and are admitted under separate statutory SEN processes, not under determined admission arrangements for the school.

Make sure you don’t miss out on the latest information and tell us of any change in job title, school/college address, home address, and email. You can change your personal information online by simply logging in to your account (www.ascl.org.uk/login). Ensuring that we have your most up-to-date details will enable us to help you quicker should you need to contact us for support. It will also enable us to ensure that you receive all your member benefits.

The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) has recently published guidance on handling increases in requests for information (tinyurl.com/ypukprxj). The guidance is aimed at local authorities facing financial restrictions, but will equally be applicable to other public authorities, such as schools, colleges and trusts, facing higher than usual volumes of requests.

Institutions in the education sector often face sudden increases in requests for information following a public announcement. This may be an announcement relating to financial pressures, restructuring, or a large-scale data breach such as a cyber-attack, which often attracts publicity. In the wake of such announcements, schools, colleges and trusts may face an increase in Freedom of Information (FOI) Act requests and subject access requests (SARs) made under data protection law.

The ICO guidance has a focus on transparency and recommends proactively publishing information on emerging topics in the public interest. The recommendations in the guidance include the following:

Proactively publish information that is the focus of attention: If the increase in requests relates to a particular matter, consider whether that information can be published online so that you can direct requesters to your website for the information and hopefully reduce the number of future requests.

Clarify requests where possible: Liaise with individuals to make sure you are only searching for relevant information and deploying resources efficiently.

Be open and transparent: Where timescales are affected by the sudden increase, be honest about this and explain what you are doing to mitigate the impact on access to information.

Full details of the recommendations are set out in the ICO guidance. For further advice and assistance, Browne Jacobson’s specialist education team is here to answer any questions you may have about your information law obligations and to guide you through your requirements when responding to requests for information – find out more about the team here: www.brownejacobson.com/sectors/education

We know that school and college leadership can be both immensely fulfilling and immensely challenging, often at the same time, so, here, we just want to remind you of all the great benefits of your ASCL membership:

If you need support and guidance over any employment or professional issue, our exclusive member support hotline (0116 299 1122) is just a phone call away. It is staffed by experienced school and college leaders and supported by our specialist, regional and legal teams.

As an ASCL member you receive our twice-weekly newsletters (www.ascl.org.uk/newsletters). But did you know we also publish newsletters specifically for business leaders, independent sector members, post-16, primary, SEND, and trust leaders, as well as newsletters for our members in Wales and Northern Ireland. See and subscribe to them on the link above.

ASCL Professional Development (www.ascl. org.uk/pd) offers a wealth of online and in-person events, including conferences, courses, programmes and tailor-made services. And if you’re planning to recruit a new member of your senior team, do take a look at our leadership appointment service at www.ascl.org.uk/LAS

We represent members at the highest levels of government and with regulators and other stakeholders. Our teams are working on your behalf on the issues that matter: funding, recruitment and retention, SEND provision and much more. If you have something you’d like us to raise, please do let us know by emailing TellUs@ascl.org.uk

ASCL provides many other services that you can explore on our website: www.ascl.org.uk When times are tough and you need someone on your side, we’re here for you.

The Employment Rights Bill introduces significant reforms to employment law, including the reintroduction of the School Support Staff Negotiating Body (SSSNB), which was abolished by the coalition government in 2010.

At present, academy trusts do not have to follow national terms and conditions or pay rules. However, most school support staff, including those in academy schools, are engaged under terms and conditions established by the National Joint Council (NJC) for local government services. The DfE says that the reintroduction of the body “marks a key milestone” in its commitment to “reset the relationship with the sector”.

The SSSNB will apply to support staff in both local authority-maintained schools and academies and is expected to take effect in 2027. The SSSNB will comprise representatives of employers, unions, a representative of the Secretary of State, and an independent chairperson, and will be tasked with negotiating pay, establishing national terms and conditions and advising on career progression and training.

As the Employment Rights Bill progresses through the legislative process, the government will consult on the detail of the reintroduction of the SSSNB, though the dates for this process have yet to be announced.