Not sure Python would've been the same with Ofsted and Gove in those roles...

I can see the point clearly, but then schools which have biddable pupils and weak teachers are in theory capable of throwing up unremarkable data that remains below the radar, particularly secondary schools, since if in effect enough kids teach themselves or their parents pay for private tuition, school data won't reflect the quality of teaching.

It is the school that is being inspected, not the head teacher. Besides there is nearly always a deputy.

Yes that makes perfect sense but beyond that, we still must face the fact that the headteacher is responsible for the school that's being inspected - why should they be spared the inspection process on a personal level?

so what you're saying is that in the really important public sector jobs, we should make less rigorous inspections, and not reward the highest performers? that's entirely illogical...

oh and also- are you going to argue that air traffic controllers (subject to a variety of inspections and pay levels) and less important than teachers? a profession who can kill 1,000 people with a moment of inattention, compared to a profession where you can not turn up for months on end, and it doesn't really make much difference?

Much as I would like to see much higher standards in education this is not the way to achieve improvements. The employment laws of this country clearly favour malconents in the Public Sector. I have lost count of the early retirement cases, ill health cases and similar cases of premature retirement in public service that have undoubtedly been the easy way to remove troublesome, lazy, idle employees.

If we want to change this, we first need to alter the employment law to level the field. Starting a draconian series of unannounced inspections in Education would simply line the pockets of the lawyers and malcontents.

Education is an emotive subject. Teachers have become very entrenched into widespread unionised activity and regard most proposed changes in Education with deep suspicion. Indeed educationalists in general are deeply resistant to any sort if change. Not an easy profession to make changes to with any harmony and probably never has been.

There is an atmosphere of distrust amongst teachers to top down authority which makes good professional relations difficult, at best. Few career teachers trust the LA or Ofsted or the M of Ed. Or indeed their line mangers or the Head or Deputy Head teachers in their School.

I have set this background out to suggest a flavour of the reasons why unannounced, Ofsted inspections are unlikely to be accepted within teaching. There are also a number of practical inherent difficulties with unannounced inspections.

Firstly, there would be a problem, as other posts have highlighted, of Head Teachers and other key players in the school being unavailable for interview, and that is IMO a legitimate concern.

Secondly the Ofsted visits could seriously affect the run of lessons unless the staff were aware of the events and consulted before hand. That could, in itself, cause real difficulty for both the School and the Inspectors.

Thirdly, the disciplinary procedures required in employment law could be disrupted if any direct actions were taken as a result if those unannounced visits.

The whole question of proper procedure, due process and reasonable opportunity for a fair hearing would probably be fatally flawed in such a process. Unfair dismissal or unfair constructive dismissal claims would very probably abound.

Fourthly there is the question of identification and right of entry to a school. If four men turned up with supposed Ofsted cards, which you have never seen before, and demanded entry unannounced into a school would you let them in? I certainly would not. The Police do not demand entry. They are invited in. The teachers are in Loco Parentis and I question whether this is would be a reasonable act. Entry to schools is very controlled nowadays. With good reason.

I regret that this is the case. But I do think that, it is the case, and I do think the essential trust that must exist between the Ofsted and Schools, that they are working together, in a joint improvement process in Education, requires a structure and an agreement of the timings and suitability of inspections.

To use a not unrelated example of the downside risk of direct interference with local authority staff by an outside body, resulting in a massive successful unfair dismissal case we need only look to the actions of the idiot Ed Balls in the Sharon Shoesmith case at Haringay.

Dismissed as a result of an outside investigation Sharon Shoesmith was sacked and then won over a Million pounds compensation for unfair dismissal. That is the downside risk of such draconian measures. I always predicted that result and I always maintained that a properly constituted investigation offering Ms Shoesmith proper representation and natural justice, could have resulted in her dismissal fairly. But not the draconian unfair process Balls used. I am NOT defending Sharon Shoesmith merely demonstrating the downside risk of crass stupidity as used by Ed Balls.

Unless we want to make millionaires of a lot of teachers I think this policy is best forgotten. Change the rules first, then change the game.

Edited for double post

It does pay according to experience. M1-M6 and then a competence-assessed progression to UPS1-3. TLR payments for responsibilities - paid to competent staff, you'd think - are available as additions.

I think you're confusing it with performance-related pay. Which, with the exception of special circumstances (heads in failing schools, departments in special measures, recruitment and retention allowances, etc.) are not well entrenched in the UK education system. In theory, as a teacher, I have no problem with performance-related pay. Why? Because I'm fairly good at my job. My problem is how that competence is assessed; seeing as the UK education has vested interests/near corruption at every level, grade inflation and falsified baseline data, you cannot accurately assess the ability of teachers using performance indicators alone.

I've just achieved 75% A/A* grades for my top set classes for two years in a row with groups that were predicated a mixture of As and Bs - a pretty good return in anyone's book. But I also teach weak students who were supposedly 'Level 3' when they were 11 years old and, thanks to my experience of seeing them progress through the school since then, can clearly deduce that they were anything but. Net result: it looks like they've only made a level or 2's progress at our school, but in actual fact it's more like at least 3 because they were never that level to begin with. Theory/practice are widely different when it comes to judging performance in education and some people are just too dense to understand the disparity (not an accusation I'm leveling at anyone in particular in this paragraph, I might add).

Inspections are already 2-3 days. And some teachers of key subjects like myself can expect to enjoy more than one visit, whereas teachers of options subjects may not be visited at all.

Hilariously bitter anecdotal hyperbole aside, if you think that such a scenario is possible in anything other than 0.001% of schools in modern day Britain then you're an idiot. There are people in my classroom all the time - training teachers, colleagues looking to borrow ideas from other departments, TAs, LEA representatives, teachers from the local deaf school, my HoD/line manager, plus any official visits/inspections.

More right wing PH drivel. If you had half a clue on the subject, you'd know that one of the biggest opponents of the new style inspections were inspectors themselves. They knew it was unworkable for a great many bureaucratic and logistical reasons - a fact admitted quite openly by one of the leading regional inspectors to our school during a training day session not four weeks ago. It was more foot stomping and froth generation from the rabid Gove office designed to further emphasise the chasm between Government and public sector workers. He knew it was never going to go through. Cynical headline-grabber.

Search for Gove in relation to education articles over the last 18 months or so. Try and some that don't demean the status of the profession, claim to be improving it (whilst actually undermining it or doing nothing practical to back up his claim), reduce pay/rights/entitlements, or worsen working conditions. It'll be a very, very short list. He despises the profession and everyone who works within it.

Just to add a students perspective.

Ofsted don't really want to see a 'typical' lesson. They want to see a lesson that conforms to the suggested structure and layout. The best teachers I had at secondary school and 6th form still hated the inspections. Some of the best, most useful lessons I had would have given an inspector a coronary.

They can also be pretty good box tickers. My Mum is a childminder, and subject to ofsted inspections. They went to 0-notice for a while, and found their inspectors spent more time stood on doorsteps ringing bells, because the childminders were out, than actually inspecting. Or if they got them at home, it would be a time when all the kids were at school/nursery...
In my mum's last inspection she had some colouring in and activity sheets to do, and was criticised for not 'allowing free expression'. No doubt if she had allowed too much 'free expression' she would have been criticised for not offering 'structured creative activities'.

Ho-hum. Systems works well enough as it is. Majority of good schools get good reports, bad schools get bad reports. Therefore, it seems to work just fine.

If it's like any of the places I've worked at, the only reason is to give people time to prepare so it doesn't rock the boat if you have a sudden inspection and see it's not being run as it should be and none of the rule are being followed.
You give them a couple of days to make sure it's all going to run OK for a day following the book, the come, inspect, looks OK with just a few small details needing work, everyone is happy and life rolls on without causing panic.

My Dad was an inspector for a number of years. He gave it up because the system was allowing very very good teachers to be graded as crap. If they didn't conform to the tick boxes they were ticked off / sacked in some cases - no matter how good they were for the kids and results they were getting.