A “good” Ofsted judgment for any school is a cause for celebration and congratulation. So why would a leading headteacher say she was “sick” when she heard of a local school being given a good report by the inspectorate?

That is a question that will be of intense interest to those following the fate of the Hewett school in Norwich, a comprehensive currently in a maelstrom of controversy over its likely takeover by a local academy chain.

Email correspondence seen by us shows the head of Inspiration Trust, a chain highly regarded by the Department for Education, admitting she was less than pleased in 2013 when the Hewett got its “good” Ofsted report.

In an email to Sir Theodore Agnew, chairman of the trust, who at the time was also a DfE director, Dame Rachel de Souza, the trust’s CEO, says: “Hewett on 42% [provisional figures for the proportion of pupils achieving five good GCSEs in August 2013] – is it vulnerable again? That good they got [from Ofsted] made me sick!”

Why would a head feel 'sick' about a positive Ofsted inspection for a nearby school?

News of the correspondence will interest campaigners fighting to stop the transfer of the Hewett to Inspiration Trust. The school sits on a 54-acre site worth a reported £60m. A 4:1 majority of those who replied to a consultation [pdf] were against the transfer and hundreds of people marched through Norwich city centre in protest.

The email exchange between De Souza and Agnew includes a discussion of the Hewett’s GCSE results for that year, which were disappointing.

Why would a head feel “sick” about a positive Ofsted inspection for a nearby school? The answer may be that it could scupper her chances of taking over the Hewett, as academy takeovers are usually triggered by schools faring poorly in inspections.

In his response, Agnew – who refers to De Souza’s “cunning ways” – urges her not to worry about the Hewett at that time as “you’ve got plenty to keep you busy”. In the event, the school failed a return Ofsted in 2014, opening the way to the DfE to suggest, in March 2015, its transfer to Inspiration Trust.

De Souza maintains that all the trust wants is the best for pupils. But parents have concerns. The local authority has asked for the land around the school not to be given to the trust.

The dispute may go to the heart of a debate about the future of education in England: is the public interest best served by a spirit of collaboration between schools, or by intense competition between academy chains? As Education Guardian went to press, ministers were poised to make their final decision about the future of the Hewett.

De Souza says: “Like most people, I don’t write emails to colleagues expecting them to be pulled apart word by word in public long after, or remember the full context.

“Back in 2012, the [foundation trust running the Hewett] asked us about sponsoring the Hewett. They chose to go with a different sponsor. That faltered in May 2013, but obviously we would still have wanted to see if we could help get the school back on track.

“Given the difficult GCSE results in 2013, it would have been obvious that school would be vulnerable to additional scrutiny. I can only think it would have seemed strange to me that after a good inspection earlier in 2013, that the 5 A*-C results at the Hewett fell by 9%, which doesn’t sound like a school on the up. Then, as now, our only interest is in helping children at the Hewett reach their full potential.”

Leaked ‘levels’ report reveals testing concerns

A significant report advising primary schools on how to assess pupils’ progress has been delayed, to the dismay of many teachers. Could it be that it contains awkward messages for the government? A draft copy of the report – on “assessment without levels” – has been leaked to us.

The report is the product of a commission of experts, appointed by ministers to advise schools how to measure pupils’ progress now that the 25-year-old system of national assessment “levels” has been scrapped. From September, schools are not supposed to be using levels and ministers had promised [pdf] to publish the report by this month.

The draft was circulating six weeks ago but publication has been delayed to September, with no explanation. Its foreword, by the committee’s chair, John McIntosh, seems to criticise test-based accountability, which is the basis for much of the government’s education policy. It says: “While few would dispute the need for a robust [school] accountability framework, there is no doubt that the measurement of the performance of schools and of the system as a whole has exerted undue influence on the assessment of individual pupils.”

It also warns that there is “considerable challenge” in moving away from the levels system, expressing concern that some schools are trying to “re‑create levels based on the new national curriculum”. This is clearly not what the commission, or the Department for Education, intends.

So were these messages unpalatable for the government? It is not saying. A spokeswoman said: “The commission has finished its report and we are now considering our response, to be published in September when schools return from the summer break.”

Whatever the hold-up, some teachers are furious about being forced to go into the new term without the guidance they had been promised.