A top school head has rubbished the Ofsted inspection process - even though his own Oxford school received a glowing report.
Martin Roberts, head of Cherwell School, in Marston Ferry Road, Oxford, said inspectors spent a week there in January.
But he says they failed to recognise some of his best teachers and the most effective depart- ments.
The 14-strong team of inspectors found the school's strengths outweighed its weaknesses and reported considerable improvement since the last inspection in 1993.
Among the strengths identified were:* Leadership and management to a high standard
* Academic levels well above the national average
* Strong sixth-form teaching.
But Mr Roberts said the process had contributed hardly anything to the school and the money it cost would have been better spent employing another teacher or buying badly-needed books and equipment.
"They told us very little of which we were unaware," he said. "The inspection took up too much staff time and school paper. I understand that an inspection on the scale of ours will have cost the taxpayer between £20,000 and £30,000 - not money well spent when you consider that sum would have paid the salary of a teacher for a year or have allowed us to increase our spending on books and equipment by 30 per cent."
After the school's previous inspection in 1993, Mr Roberts wrote a chapter in a book arguing that the strengths of the process outweighed its weaknesses.
He was even quoted by Ofsted chief Chris Woodhead as an example of a head who backed the controversial inspection system.
But Mr Roberts said he now planned to write to Mr Woodhead telling him his judgement had changed.
He said: "The process has become more mechanical. The inspectors, who varied in quality, arrived with some inaccurate preconceptions based on inadequate data and worked under too intense time pressure."
He said a better alternative would be more frequent "mini"-inspections which checked that the school was keeping up to standard.
Story date: Tuesday 02 March
Converted for the new archive on 30 June 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article