Recent Ofsted inspections reveal a persistent pattern of underperformance among independent faith schools in England, with safety, curriculum, and management concerns prompting calls for urgent government action.
New data from Ofsted reveals that a significant proportion of independent faith schools in England continue to underperform compared to their non-religious counterparts, raising ongoing concerns about the prioritisation of religious doctrine at the expense of children’s education and welfare. According to Ofsted inspections conducted between September 2024 and August 2025, a third of independent faith schools failed to meet the independent school standards. This contrasts sharply with just 7% of independent special schools and 19% of other independent schools falling short of these benchmarks.
Independent faith schools remain significantly more likely to be rated below the expected standards, with 27% currently judged as not meeting them, whereas only 6% of independent special schools and 15% of other independent schools fall into this category. Furthermore, only 67% of independent faith schools received an overall rating of “good” or “outstanding,” compared to 90% of special schools and 79% of other independent schools, highlighting a persistent gap in quality. These findings replicate trends observed in previous years, indicating very little improvement in the sector’s overall performance.
Specific inspection reports reveal worrying practices within some faith schools. For instance, Ahavas Torah Boys Academy in Manchester was found to focus predominantly on teaching only English and maths within the secular curriculum, sidelining other subjects. Another Jewish faith school in London, Beth Jacob Grammar School, faced criticism for withdrawing all pupils from relationships and sex education, including refusing to teach about same-sex relationships. Similarly, Darul Uloom London, an Islamic school in Chislehurst, was reported to be delivering secular subjects poorly. These individual cases underscore a broader pattern where religious beliefs appear to conflict with statutory educational requirements.
Research by the National Secular Society (NSS) earlier in 2025 found that independent faith schools were three times more likely to receive warning notices from the Department for Education compared to non-religious independent schools. In 2024, 8% of independent faith schools received such formal warnings, contrasted with just 2.6% of non-religious schools, indicating a greater frequency of regulatory breaches within the faith sector. The NSS has consistently argued that many independent faith schools “put religious dogma ahead of children’s educational and welfare needs,” contributing to their lower inspection outcomes.
Ofsted’s 2025 reports also highlight issues beyond curriculum content and teaching quality. Leadership and management, including safeguarding practices, were frequently cited weaknesses in faith schools judged inadequate. Some reports expressed concerns about pupils having “little understanding” of British institutions or democratic processes and noted the presence of “inappropriate” books in school libraries, raising questions about how fundamental British values are promoted in these settings.
This persistent underperformance of independent faith schools is not a new phenomenon. Historical Ofsted reports and annual inspection summaries have repeatedly documented that a substantial proportion of independent faith schools are rated less than good, with a notable percentage judged inadequate. Factors identified include small and poorly resourced schools, a limited curriculum driven by religious restrictions, and communities that restrict exposure to broader societal knowledge. This suggests systemic challenges that short-term improvements have failed to resolve.
The National Secular Society has called for urgent government intervention, emphasising that the continual failure of many faith schools to meet basic educational and welfare standards cannot be overlooked. Megan Manson, NSS head of campaigns, stated that the findings “should prompt urgent action from the Department for Education” to ensure that no child is deprived of their rights under the guise of religious provision.
Overall, the latest Ofsted data and supporting analyses illustrate that independent faith schools in England face enduring challenges in meeting regulatory standards. The sector’s difficulties in reconciling religious ethos with comprehensive educational and welfare obligations continue to draw scrutiny, demanding sustained attention from policymakers and educational authorities to safeguard children’s rights and quality of education.
📌 Reference Map:
- [1] (National Secular Society) – Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8
- [2] (gov.uk / Ofsted) – Paragraphs 1, 2
- [3] (National Secular Society) – Paragraph 4
- [4] (The Independent) – Paragraph 5
- [5] (Ofsted Annual Report 2020-21) – Paragraph 7
- [6] (Ofsted Annual Report 2022-23) – Paragraph 6
- [7] (TES) – Paragraph 5
Source: Noah Wire Services
Noah Fact Check Pro
The draft above was created using the information available at the time the story first
emerged. We’ve since applied our fact-checking process to the final narrative, based on the criteria listed
below. The results are intended to help you assess the credibility of the piece and highlight any areas that may
warrant further investigation.
Freshness check
Score:
9
Notes:
The narrative is based on a recent press release from the National Secular Society (NSS) dated November 2025, referencing Ofsted’s inspection data up to August 2025. ([gov.uk](https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/non-association-independent-schools-inspections-and-outcomes-in-england-august-2025/main-findings-non-association-independent-schools-inspections-and-outcomes-in-england-august-2025?utm_source=openai)) This indicates high freshness. The NSS has previously reported similar findings in March 2025, highlighting ongoing concerns about independent faith schools’ performance. ([secularism.org.uk](https://www.secularism.org.uk/news/2025/03/independent-faith-schools-three-times-more-likely-to-receive-warning?utm_source=openai))
Quotes check
Score:
8
Notes:
The report includes direct quotes from NSS spokesperson Jack Rivington, such as: “These serious failures at independent faith schools are not unrelated cases, but part of a clear pattern.” ([secularism.org.uk](https://www.secularism.org.uk/news/2025/03/independent-faith-schools-three-times-more-likely-to-receive-warning?utm_source=openai)) This quote appears to be original to this report, with no earlier matches found.
Source reliability
Score:
7
Notes:
The narrative originates from the National Secular Society, a reputable organisation known for its advocacy on secularism and education. However, the NSS’s focus on secularism may influence its perspective, potentially introducing bias. The report also references Ofsted’s official statistics, enhancing its credibility. ([gov.uk](https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/non-association-independent-schools-inspections-and-outcomes-in-england-august-2025/main-findings-non-association-independent-schools-inspections-and-outcomes-in-england-august-2025?utm_source=openai))
Plausability check
Score:
8
Notes:
The claims align with previous findings from Ofsted and other reputable sources. For instance, a 2018 report highlighted that nearly a quarter of independent faith schools were judged inadequate. The specific examples of schools mentioned, such as Ahavas Torah Boys Academy and Beth Jacob Grammar School, are consistent with known issues in the sector. The language and tone are appropriate for the topic and region, with no inconsistencies noted.
Overall assessment
Verdict (FAIL, OPEN, PASS): PASS
Confidence (LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH): HIGH
Summary:
The narrative presents recent findings from the National Secular Society, supported by Ofsted’s official statistics, regarding the underperformance of independent faith schools. The information is current, with direct quotes appearing original to this report. While the NSS’s perspective may introduce some bias, the claims are plausible and consistent with previous reports. No significant credibility risks were identified.
