Well, here's the latest status update from Ampleforth College to parents. It has some interesting turns of phrase.

For instance they are working "to understand and address" the concerns of DfE, Ofsted and the local authority. Remember this is something that 20,000 other schools in England seem to manage on an entirely routine and continuous basis.

Apparently they "have been briefing targeted politicians and other influencers." I suspect that politicians and influencers trying to get at @educationgovuk on the school's behalf will go down like a lead balloon.

Apparently they "remain certain that criticising the regulators or DfE is not the right approach to achieve a sustainable resolution."

I think that word "remain" shows the most incredible cheek given the head's interview on Times Radio last month.

In that interview he said he thought Ofsted needed to re-inspect having rid themselves of their current mindset, and that their report had used "overblown language". He also suggested "political action" was needed to sort this out.

So to say they "remain" certain that it's not right to criticise DfE does rather invite the question of precisely how long that has "remained" the case.

As it happens, I think that the approach described is correct, it just hasn't been consistently followed by the school.

They say "we are a changed school and we would like Ofsted to come back and see this as soon as possible".

Four very obvious questions arise from this.

1. From when does this change date?

2. Will what they believe to be Ofsted's "mindset" towards them have changed by then?

3. How many times has the school claimed to have changed in recent years?

For instance the school's changed status was expounded at length in the school's closing statement to IICSA in 2017. Changes over the last 18 months have been referred to in recent letters to parents.

4. Why should DfE believe the school this time if previous changes appear to have delivered so much less than was promised at the time?

The school has apparently "commissioned an independent review of our safeguarding regime from experts with a great deal of experience of Ofsted" which "has been very helpful and we have learnt some things we can do better".

Well, better late than never I suppose, but it does contrast rather with a previous letter to parents, in which they quoted a report from an organisation which which I rather suspect lacked this "experience of Ofsted" or even any expertise in safeguarding at all.

DfE's problem is that the school's erratic communications give DfE very little confidence that any promised changes will last longer than it takes for the Ofsted inspectors' cars to traverse the length of the driveway at the end of their next visit.

DfE is rather short of sanctions. Remember that there is no personal legal obligation on anyone to report suspected or even known abuse, so the head or individual staff can't be prosecuted for failing to do this right. The worst DfE can do is close the a school.

The head himself effectively can't be touched. He has come out of retirement and is on a temporary contract anyway. He can return to retirement any time he chooses with no personal sanction against him.

Even so, I think that DfE probably will lift the enforcement notice if the next Ofsted inspection is passed

DfE's nightmare scenario is that they lift the notice and then there is another major safeguarding failure. They will be keen to avoid this, or at least avoid the blame.

So in DfE's shoes I would be looking to conduct twice-yearly safeguarding inspections for a while afterwards (carried out by Ofsted, not ISI).

I would also warn the school in writing that it is "on probation" for a time and that any significant lapse will result in immediate deregistration and closure.

Bu that's my own view in light of the present inadequate legal framework. DfE may decide differently.