Agenda item

SBC’s apprenticeship scheme remained at a high level of performance, whilst qualifications at entry level and levels 1 and 2 were above national averages. In addition, several candidates who did not achieve qualifications left to undertake employment or attend college (therefore received good outcomes).

However, problems with the service had been identified. 60 sessional tutors were used by SBC; this was a number which SBC was committed to reducing. In addition, the changing emphases of the service (e.g. ‘British values’) had caused issues. The tutors employed by SBC had lacked the confidence to embed these into curricula.

To mitigate this, SBC was introducing innovations. Previously, annual observations had been used to evaluate tutors. Now, more regular walkthroughs were used and targeted at staff who were seen as needing support. Managers were also receiving more attention, with the Shared Management Committee to be strengthened (including membership for an education expert to provide challenge to SBC).

Ofsted were due to return for another inspection in the summer of 2018.

The Panel raised the following points in discussion:

·  Learning was recorded through learning plans, which were evaluated at the halfway point. SBC intended to raise the aspirations of students and ensure that they had SMART objectives to clarify their goals.

·  Tutors were supported through staff meetings, the sharing of summaries of the lesson walk throughs and workshops (e.g. 2 had been held on the subject of ‘Prevent’). Monthly drop in sessions had also been held but received limited attendance.

·  Performance management was being used to enforce higher standards for tutors. The Ofsted inspection had served notice to the service as to the problems it faced; there had been too great a reliance on external observation, in future internal systems would increase in their influence. In addition, experts from local colleges were involved to shadow managers and improve support for the team.

·  The closer contact between managers and staff had helped improve motivation. A shared Management Committee was offering challenge to the management team on the issues of the quality of teaching and learning.

·  The qualifications held by tutors was currently being audited. However, members of the Panel expressed concern that this was not previously the case.

·  The service was exploring options for co-operation, including peer reviews.

·  Attendance records needed to tally more accurately with real life classroom attendance. Whilst authorised absences were one factor in this discrepancy, more was required on this issue (although it is widespread in the sector).

·  Tutors teaching English and mathematics had teaching qualifications; however, this was weaker in other areas. Those who requested support would receive appropriate training.

·  Tutors were also receiving help with identifying dyslexia amongst students and training on support for mental health issues. This would be revisited by the management team.

·  Students were becoming more likely to declare matters such as Asperger’s Syndrome. In such cases, they would be referred to Berkshire Autism or similar support groups.

·  Courses were also designed on the basis of identified needs of the student population. This would often take the form of life skills (e.g. emailing, cooking on a budget, interview preparation).

·  As well as walk throughs, achievement rates and retention rates were used to appraise staff. Action plans would be constructed to support improvement, as well as an annual review with targets and offers of additional support and training. The service recognised the need to have higher expectations of staff.

Resolved: that the report be noted.