- About us
- About colleges
-
Corporate services
- Corporate services
- Mental health and wellbeing
- Data Protection/GDPR
-
Employment Services - college workforce
- Employment Services - college workforce
- Employment: How we support members
- Introduction & Employment Helpline
- Absence & Sickness Management
- Contracts and T&Cs
- Disciplinary, Capability & Grievance
- Equality, Diversity & Inclusion
- General Employee Relations & HR Issues
- Holiday/annual leave related
- Industrial Relations
- ONS reclassification related guidance
- Pay & Pensions
- Recruitment
- Redundancy, Restructuring & TUPE
- Safeguarding/Prevent
- Workforce Benchmarking, Surveys & Research
-
Governance
- Governance
- Governance: How we support members
- Governance Timeline
- Representation
- AoC National Chairs' Council
- National Governance Professionals' Group
- Code of Good Governance
- External Governance Reviews
- Resources
- Governors Inductions
- Student Governor Inductions
- Student Governor Support Hub
- Guidance
- Hot Topics
- Governance Briefings
- Archive
-
Projects
- Projects
- Get Involved!
- Resources
- Contact the Projects Team
- Apprenticeship Workforce Development (AWD) Programme
- Creating a Greener London – Sustainable Construction Skills
- The 5Rs Approach to GCSE Maths Resits
- Creative Arts in FE 2024 – developing student voice through creativity
- DfE Multiply Capability Support Programme
- Digital Roles Across Non-digital Industries
- GCSE Resits Hub Project
- Pears Foundation Youth Social Action Programme: Phase 2
- T Level and T Level Foundation Year Provider Support Programme
- T Level Professional Development (TLPD) Offer
- The Valuing Enrichment Project
- Resources/Guidance
- Sustainability & Climate Action Hub
- Partnerships
- Honours Nomination
- Brexit
- Ofsted Inspection Support
- Recruitment and consultancy
-
Events and training
- Events and training
- Events
- AoC Annual Conference and Exhibition 2024
- T Level and T Level Foundation Year Events
- Events and training: How we support members
- Network Meetings
- Previous Events and Webinars
- In-House Training
- Senior Leadership Development Programme
- Introducing AoC's Early Career and Experienced Managers' Programme
- Sponsorship and Exhibition Opportunities
- Funding and finance
-
Policy
- Policy
- Meet the Policy Team
- Policy: How we support members
- Policy Areas
- Policy Briefings
- Submissions
- Policy Papers & Reports
- AoC Strategy Groups
-
AoC Reference Groups
- AoC Reference Groups
- 14-16 Reference Group
- 16-18 Reference Group
- Adults (inc. ESOL) Reference Group
- Apprenticeship Reference Group
- EDI Reference Group
- HE Reference Group
- HR Reference Group
- International Reference Group
- Mental Health Reference Group
- SEND Reference Group
- Sustainability & Climate Change Reference Group
- Technology Reference Group
- WorldSkills Reference Group
- Opportunity England
- Research unit
-
News, campaigns and parliament
- News, campaigns and parliament
- Post-election hub
- General and mayoral election resources
-
Comms advice and resources for colleges
- Comms advice and resources for colleges
- Media relations: 10 ways to build effective relationships with the media
- How to choose a PR agency
- Legal considerations for communications and media work
- How to plan for a new build
- Crisis communications: your go-to guide
- How to handle photo consent for media and marketing
- How to evaluate a PR and media campaign
- How to react to regulation, funding and restructuring issues
- How to react quickly and effectively to the media
- Working with the media: a complete guide
- How to write a compelling case study
- How to write for the web
- College communications, marketing and campaigns community
- AoC Newsroom
- AoC Blogs
- Work in Parliament
- AoC Campaigns
- Briefings
- Communications, media, marketing and research: How we support members
-
Equality, diversity and inclusion
- Equality, diversity and inclusion
- Equality, diversity and inclusion blogs
- AoC’s Equity, Diversity and Inclusion Charter
- AoC’s Equity, Diversity and Inclusion Charter for further education sector organisations
- AoC’s Equity, Diversity and Inclusion Charter signatories
- Diversity in Leadership
- Black FE Leadership Group and AoC partnership agreement
- AoC's Equity Exchange
- Equality, diversity and inclusion: how we support members
- Equality, diversity and inclusion case studies
- ETF Inclusive Leadership Coaching Programme
- Equality, diversity and inclusion briefings
- Home
- News, campaigns and parliament
- AoC Blogs
- Why Ofsted’s one-word reviews are so 1970s - Lee Parker
Why Ofsted’s one-word reviews are so 1970s - Lee Parker
By Lee Parker, MK College Group marketing director
The tragedy at Caversham Primary School has brought Ofsted’s methods under the spotlight. The House of Commons Education Select Committee has launched its own investigation, amid widespread calls for reform. The organisation’s insistence that it has made changes have been met with a chorus of disapproval for the decision to steadfastly stick to the one-word judgement that all schools and colleges dread.
The education experts have all had their say, for and against, but from a marketing perspective this stubborn defence of the one-word grade is just outdated.
Ofsted says it gives consumers, prospective parents and students, the clarity they need to make a judgement about an educational institution’s strengths. But it’s not clarity; it’s actually terribly imprecise and vague. Imagine a guide book to the universe, where the entry describing the kind of planet earth was, simply read, “blue.” Today’s consumers are looking for nuance and texture, and more than anything they rely on reviews.
Compare with the travel sector. When people visit a travel agent, they no longer ask for a four star or five-star hotel in the way they once did. What’s the beach like? Is there a spa? Are there kids’ clubs? Do you have a family-run taverna, where a more authentic local experience can be had? And what do other people say about the place?
Trip Advisor or Google Reviews – these are the places people go today to find out if a product or service is right for them. Once upon a time, when buying large white goods, like a fridge or oven, shoppers would use the manufacturer’s marketing materials as their primary source of information. Now these are rarely more than checked for power usage or physical dimensions, whereas the reviews are pored over, because we are more inclined to trust the assessment of other people like us, when deciding whether to part with our money.
So what could this mean for Ofsted? There is undoubtedly a place for the expert to give their view. Just as we might look at a Which? Report to help inform our decision-making, we recognise that people who see a lot of colleges or schools might spot things, and formalise their judgements, in a way people like us might not. However, we also understand that Ofsted inspectors might be looking at different things from us, because they’re not parents whose children might go to the institution, and we’re not immersed in theories of educational good practice.
Depending on our child’s individual personality, we might put more weight on the strength of a particular course, for example. Have other students enjoyed it? Do people taking it go on to good jobs, or to university or to further study of another kind? What are the sports like? How good are the science facilities? What about pastoral care? None of these things are even hinted at by a designation of, “inadequate,” or “good.”
So how can Ofsted learn from a modern marketing approach? The organisation could become a Trip Advisor for education. Briefer, more frequent, perhaps annual, inspections could give the equivalent of a council’s hygiene rating for restaurants. It would include the facts, about student and teacher numbers, quality of facilities, exam results etc. Certainly, it should comment on more specialist components like safeguarding and leadership and management, and it should still retain powers of sanction for areas of concern around these important issues. But the site would also host more comprehensive reviews from parents and students, detailing their experiences and yes, even commenting on how accurate they felt the inspectors’ report was.
After all, Ofsted’s role is to give parents confidence that schools and colleges are fit for purpose, that they are good, safe, reliable educators. Surely the best way to do that is to offer information, based not just on a series of set inquisitorial criteria, boiled down to a single word of judgement, but to provide a platform for the people who’ve already has firsthand experience as users of the services offered.
The reality is, that with so many different forms of review now available to the public, Ofsted could find itself being marginalised if it doesn’t modernise. Currently, colleges and schools are complicit in giving Ofsted reviews significant influence as they choose to use Ofsted as the only way they share customer feedback with parents. If educational institutions got together to agree a common review system, or even if a single college or school decided to embed Feefo or Trip Advisor or another independent review aggregator, it would take power away from Ofsted overnight by offering the greater nuance and insight parents actually want.
We wouldn’t buy a holiday or a fridge, based solely on a single word from one expert assessment, so why should we have pick something so much more important, like a school or college, with such meagre information?
The views expressed in Think Further publications do not necessarily reflect those of AoC or NCFE.