160 likes | 277 Views
London Colleges Inspection findings Sep 2012 – March 2014 Janet Mercer HMI . Birkbeck, University of London 4 June 2014. College inspection – the overall picture. 35 inspections of post 16 institutions 20 GFE; 8 SFC; 1 specialist FE college 2 ISC; 2 HEI (FE in HE)
E N D
London Colleges Inspection findings Sep 2012 – March 2014 Janet Mercer HMI Birkbeck, University of London 4 June 2014
College inspection – the overall picture • 35 inspections of post 16 institutions • 20 GFE; 8 SFC; 1 specialist FE college • 2 ISC; 2 HEI (FE in HE) • 2 16-19 academy/free school
Patterns of improvement • OE grade improved in 15 colleges • OE grade declined in 9 colleges • OE grade stayed the same in 8 colleges
Characteristics of good/outstanding providersOutcomes • Consistently high or rapidly improving success rates • Little variation in the achievement of different groups of learners • Good progress from starting points • Learners developing good vocational skills • Strong progression to higher level study or employment • Good development of English & maths skills and achievement of qualifications
Characteristics of good/outstanding providersTeaching, learning and assessment • Teachers have consistently high expectations of all learners, and plan well for different abilities • Planning that focuses on learning, not only activities or task completion • Strong tutorial/pastoral support – very close monitoring of progress with good individual target setting • Regular checks on learning and assessment with detailed feedback on improvement points and good use of assessment to plan further learning
Characteristics of good/outstanding providersTeaching, learning and assessment • Some excellent use of teachers’ vocational experience/ live projects/ work placements • Imaginative use of ILT, inc. mobile technology, to enhance learning in and outside lessons, for assessment and feedback and critical reflection
Characteristics of good/outstanding providersLeadership and management • College wide culture of high expectations and challenge • Self-critical evaluation of all provision at all levels • Review of the quality of TLA strongly focused on learning and progress and includes a broad range of evidence • Strong performance management systems which support improvement • Responsive to stakeholders’ needs and views
Frequently recurring areas for improvementOutcomes • Outcomes remain too variable across the college • Poor development of English and maths skills and poor results FS and/or GCSE • Too much poor attendance and/or punctuality which disrupts learning and hinders progress • Learners not developing appropriate vocational/ employment skills • Progression between levels and to further study/employment not always good
Frequently recurring areas for improvementTeaching, learning and assessment • Quality of teaching varies too much within and between different subject areas • Planning not meeting different needs/abilities • Initial assessment/student profiles not used well to inform planning • Teachers not sharing learning objectives with learners, so they are not clear of the purpose of the lesson or activity • Planning and lessons focused on completing tasks/meeting assessment criteria rather than developing and extending learning
Frequently recurring areas for improvementTeaching, learning and assessment • Over-reliance on a limited range of TLA strategies • Too much poor marking and assessment feedback • Too little checking of learning, and questioning not used effectively • English and maths not well-integrated into vocational sessions • ILT not used well to engage learners
Frequently recurring areas for improvementTeaching, learning and assessment • Prior attainment and assessment data not used well to set challenging targets and monitor progress • Tutorials not effective in monitoring progress and not valued by students • Equality and diversity not always well promoted within the curriculum/in lessons
Frequently recurring areas for improvementLeadership and management • Variable quality in curriculum management and rigour of curriculum-level self-assessment and QIPs leading to inconsistent rates of improvement across college • Some overgenerous judgements on quality of TLA and insufficient consideration of impact on learning/progress • Lack of critical challenge from governors on quality and improvement • Strategies to improve English and maths not yet having enough impact
Work with the London AoCAoC/Ofsted action learning projects • Urban Colleges: critical factors and good practice in teaching, learning and assessment in Urban Colleges March 2013 • Improving attendance and punctuality: strategies, approaches and lessons learned from London colleges: an AoC/Ofsted action learning project October 2013 • Supporting young people to participate in education and training: reviewing factors that help or hinder young people aged 16 to 18 living in London to participate in education, employment or training February 2014