Ex-Ofsted Chief Warns Labour’s Education Reforms Will Harm Schools and Students

[Social Media]

 

Amanda Spielman, the former head of Ofsted, has launched a scathing critique of Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson’s proposed reforms, accusing her of prioritizing the interests of teaching unions over those of children. Writing in The Telegraph, Spielman urged Phillipson to reconsider her policies “before the damage is done.”

 

Her comments come as the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill returns to Parliament, with critics arguing that the proposed reforms will significantly reduce the autonomy of academies—state-funded schools that set their own curriculum and pay structures. These institutions have long been unpopular with some teaching unions, and Spielman believes Phillipson’s approach is driven by a desire to appease them.

 

“It is hard to understand the motivation, beyond being seen to be different, though the new minister is clearly giving a great deal of time and attention to the desires and demands of unions,” Spielman wrote. “And alas, unions will always defend the interests of the adults in schools over those of children... I do hope she will think again, before the damage is done.”

 

 

She expressed astonishment at the rapid pace at which Phillipson is overhauling key elements of the current education system, describing it as an unnecessary dismantling of progress made over the past 25 years under various governments. She argued that England has seen a steady improvement in international student achievement rankings and is now regarded as a high-performing country compared to Scotland and Wales.

 

Spielman also highlighted England’s relatively strong record in supporting disadvantaged children, though she noted that more attention could be given to higher-achieving students.

 

“There is much interest from other countries in what has been achieved in England, and in learning from us,” she said. “Just in the past year I have been working in Flanders and in the UAE, visited Australia, and talked to people in Poland and the USA. They are as astonished as I am by the speed and thoroughness with which Bridget Phillipson has moved to dismantle every main pillar of the system.”

 

Spielman warned that reducing school autonomy would be detrimental to educational outcomes, arguing that a better approach would be to conduct a proper evaluation before making sweeping changes. “Most obviously, the schools bill will cut the autonomy of schools and school groups right back, even though this has clearly been a contributor to system success,” she said. “A better first step would have been a proper evaluation to see which dimensions of autonomy should be protected and which need adjusting.”

 

She also criticized changes to Ofsted inspections, asserting that unions have long resented the existence of inspections and their consequences. “The unions’ real beef about inspection is that it exists at all, and that government uses inspection information to apply consequences,” she said. “No matter how well Ofsted does its job, the union narrative will always be negative. Yet to please unions, both inspection processes and outcome reporting are being watered down to make it much less likely that inspection will detect weaknesses or convey a negative message.”

 

Spielman expressed concerns over potential changes to the national curriculum, arguing that while it is not perfect, it has played a key role in improving the education system. She suggested that the ongoing Curriculum and Assessment Review may lead to a lowering of academic expectations in an attempt to motivate lower-attaining students. “It may propose leaning more heavily on the distorted ‘equivalences’ used in school performance tables, whose main purpose is to make it look as though lower-attaining children taking non-GCSEs are doing better than they really are. Levelling down, in other words.”

 

She also raised concerns about teacher training, warning that current high standards could be jeopardized. “We have a strong suite of training standards grounded in the best available evidence of what constitutes good teaching and wider good practice in schools. These have been placed under review, casting the future of all teacher training and development into uncertainty.”

 

Additionally, Spielman criticized the increased centralization of education, arguing that greater government control over school improvement efforts is unlikely to be effective. “The Department for Education will have bigger budgets, bigger teams of officials and more powers to manage all interventions and improvement work in schools, despite little evidence that micro-managing individual school improvement from the centre of government is effective.”

 

She blamed education union leaders and activists for driving these changes, claiming that they do not represent the majority of teachers. Despite this, she noted a lack of widespread concern from parents, warning that they may not yet fully grasp the implications of the reforms. “It will probably take a while for parents to see through the polished verbiage and jazz hands that accompany every announcement. But unless they do see through it, and exert enough pressure to counteract union dominance, it is current and future generations of children—the people who were most harmed by lockdowns—who will bear the brunt of these changes.”

 

Spielman urged Phillipson to avoid following the example of countries such as Portugal and Spain, where she claims that effective education reforms were reversed by left-wing governments with “predictable consequences.”

 

“Does Bridget Phillipson really want to align herself with Portugal and Spain, where effective education reforms were reversed when Left-wing governments came in, with predictable consequences? I do hope she will think again, before the damage is done.”

 

Based on a report by The Telegraph  2025-03-19