Abstract
Abstract Concern about the quality of inspection voiced in the late 1980s was justifiable. However, the message to Government (for example, from the Audit Commission) was not to marginalise local education authorities (LEAs) and scrap local inspection but to involve itself to improve it. What Government did in setting up OFSTED was to establish a monopoly of one inspection approach under effectively a single inspectorate. This was undesirable, since it not only confuses the purposes of inspection, but also fails to produce the kind of information that parents and others involved with schools really need. The paper argues for a more flexible approach in which comprehensive OFSTED‐style inspections need only be used sparingly. The future role of OFSTED should be as a small regulating body assuring the quality of local inspections, whether carried out by LEA or independent teams
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
