That elephant aside, two things struck me; the requirement for Ofsted to take a holistic view of leadership in assessing a college, and the need for the agency to take an equally holistic and supportive approach to assessment. Now, maybe it’s my faded memory but I seem to remember that those were normal practice in the olden times. I remember attending reviews as a new principal where all aspects of the college's performance and our future plans were discussed with our local team of what would now be ESFA officers.
It was tough, we often resented the intrusion in our autonomy, and it wasn't 100% effective. Yet it was useful - but required more people than they now have, and expertise in-depth that I wonder if they have enough of despite the many good people that I know work there.
The process also demands sufficient time and trust to be effective. If we are to return to that model then we should make sure that those on the other side of the table have the time to do their job, and the longevity in role, to develop the relationships that are essential if that nurturing model is to be effective. I would also say that it would be impossible to build this trust in an environment where the Commissioner continues to be required to make public reports on individual college failures. I have no desire to protect those who are genuinely bad but there are many unintended and negative consequences of a name-and-shame approach. By all means, share the lessons learned for the good of the sector - but can we put the stocks away?