First - I am no fan of Ofsted. Second, apologies if these issues have already been posted. https://www.tes.com/news/exclusive-ofsted-made-3rs-success-stick-beat-us However, I am genuinely divided on this story: On the one hand, I know the new framework is creating a 'tsunami' of work for primary teachers because of the 'deep dives' into subject areas. In general, the remit to extend inspections is not what schools want to hear in a severely demoralised, over-worked and under-appreciated workforce. (Good article here: https://www.tes.com/news/have-ofsteds-problems-only-just-begun) On the other, as a Head of English in secondary with several feeder schools, a large percentage of our intake were coming from a school with excellent SATs results but the Y6 were being hot-housed at the expense of all other subjects: which, on the whole, created weak, needy students who weren't actually that impressive even in literacy and numeracy (unless defined by the narrow constraints of the SATs papers). Y6s from feeder schools that have a full, balanced curriculum had the same levels of achievement in SATs but were much more robust, happier and productive students. Our feeder schools all have similar intakes in terms of socio-economic measures. I am lucky to be able to work closely with my KS2 colleagues and literacy leaders so I have been in these schools and worked with the classes so I speak from first-hand experience. As a GCSE teacher, I totally understand the impulse to teach to the test (particularly when our PM targets and therefore pay are factored in) but it's quite corrosive for education as a whole. Too often I see Y7s being taught GCSE questions in other subjects in other schools - I have Y11 students who aren't motivated by GCSE questions so why expect Y7 to be? Such a narrowing of the curriculum does need to be tackled.