Ofsted experiences: performing inspection and suicidal ideations

Rachel Harding & Andrew Clapham

Journal of Education Policy2026https://doi.org/10.1080/02680939.2026.2622958article
AJG 2
Weight
0.50

What the paper says

In this paper, we examine people’s experiences of Ofsted, the state school inspectorate in England. From thematic analysis of the 233 written submissions published by the Education Committee Parliamentary Inquiry into Ofsted, we argue that the inspectorate can lead to teachers experiencing suicidal ideation (suicidal thoughts and feelings). Our analysis suggests 229 submissions (98%) contained negative comments about Ofsted, including accounts of teacher suicidal ideation. Whilst attempting to perform for Ofsted, teachers experience a ‘disturbed’ working environment leading to, for some, suicidal ideation. Consequently, rather than inspections and the inspectorate being simply performative, we contend they are performatively harmful, potentially putting children at risk. Drawing on Durkheim’s theory of anomic and fatalistic suicide, we argue teacher suicidal ideation is an urgent issue, for which Ofsted and the Department for Education have responsibility. We conclude Ofsted and the government’s responses to the concerns of the submissions to be far from adequate since the substantive criticisms about how the inspectorate operates and inspections are conducted remain unresolved.

Open paper page →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/02680939.2026.2622958

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{rachel2026,
  title        = {{Ofsted experiences: performing inspection and suicidal ideations}},
  author       = {Rachel Harding & Andrew Clapham},
  journal      = {Journal of Education Policy},
  year         = {2026},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/02680939.2026.2622958},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Ofsted experiences: performing inspection and suicidal ideations

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.


Evidence weight

0.50

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20
M · momentum0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.