Progression Post 16 Ofsted Survey 2010 / 2011 Key Findings Joyce Deere HMI

Download Progression Post 16 Ofsted Survey 2010 / 2011 Key Findings Joyce Deere HMI

Post on 30-Jan-2016

38 views

Category:

Documents

0 download

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

Progression Post 16 Ofsted Survey 2010 / 2011 Key Findings Joyce Deere HMI. PROGRESSION POST 16. BACKGROUND 1995 DDA (and subsequent Equalities Acts) 1996 Tomlinson Report 2006 LSC funding strategy 14-19 partnerships - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TRANSCRIPT

  • Progression Post 16Ofsted Survey 2010 / 2011Key Findings

    Joyce Deere HMI

  • PROGRESSION POST 16BACKGROUND1995 DDA (and subsequent Equalities Acts)1996 Tomlinson Report2006 LSC funding strategy14-19 partnerships2009: 30% of NEET young people with disabilities compared with 18% of their peers2010 DCSF said it would not fund provision that did not lead to some kind of employmentDH: Valuing People initiatives; Getting a Life Project

  • PROGRESSION POST 16BACKGROUND TO SURVEY2003 select committee asked for review of SEND provision2007 Ofsted acquired early years and learning and skills2009/10 Ofsted survey of provision from early years to leaving school2010/11 Ofsted survey to look at post compulsory provision SCOPETo evaluate the effectiveness of the transition arrangements from school to post 16 provision up to age 25To look at the extent to which the arrangements enabled young people to articulate and achieve their main goals

  • PROGRESSION POST 16EVIDENCE BASE 11 independent learning providers (E2E and / or apps)5 ACL providers (1 WBL, 16-18 as well as trad ACL)2 specialist agricultural colleges2 independent specialist colleges (1 day, 1 res.)12 general FE or tertiary colleges 111 Case Studies:41 on mainstream programmes with ASL49 on foundation learning programmes21 apprentices

  • PROGRESSION POST 16MAIN FINDINGS:4 sections

    Effectiveness of government arrangementsQuality of provision for learners in receipt of Additional Learning Support on Mainstream programmes at level 2 and above, including apprenticeshipsQuality of provision for those on foundation learning programmes, mainly discrete/segregated provisionOther issues, including barriers to progression

  • PROGRESSION POST 16

    GOVERNMENT ARRANGEMENTS:

    Since 2008 Government had required LAs to:carry out multi-agency learning difficulty assessments (LDAs) for those with statements S139s replacing 140s and moving ondevelop a planned approach to post school education and training up to the age of 25avoid the need for further assessments at each stage of progression post school

  • PROGRESSION POST 16MAIN FINDINGS Government arrangements not working effectively:

    Significant inequities in post schools placements Significantly lower levels of funding for WBL and ACLLDAs poorly completed and not always availableWBL rarely mentioned or discussed in LDAVery little local provision for those with the highest level of support needs/adjustmentsSignificant local variations in specialist support availableVery little planned provision available post 20 years

  • PROGRESSION POST 16MAIN FINDINGS Reasons for failures:

    Post 16 providers not told of new arrangementsSignificant reductions in numbers of specialist personal advisers (previously Connexions)Lack of expertise of personal advisers and insufficient information from schoolsNo continuity of advice post school: no mentor or key worker to look at transition points.No centrally held information about destinations/outcomes

  • PROGRESSION POST 16MAIN FINDINGS:Quality of Additional Learning Support goodTransition from school works well for the great majorityLearners achieve as well as their peers (exc. Apprenticeships)Learners develop strategies to become more independent, as providers see their role as enabling & reducing dependenceIncreasing use of technologies such as digital recorders and apps for lap-tops rather than 1-1 supportPost-16 provision offers effective second chance opportunitiesVariations in availability and quality of specialist support

  • PROGRESSION POST 16MAIN FINDINGSFoundation Learning: not effectiveLearners gain in confidence and enjoy their programmes

    BUT FL on it own does not enable staff to prepare learners adequately for employment or other outcomes such as greater independence or community engagement Too much emphasis on low level, competence-based units and qualifications (cf Wolf Review). Increase in costs of accreditation.QCF not developmental.

  • PROGRESSION POST 16MAIN FINDINGSFoundation Learning:

    Insufficient realistic, practical activities availableFunding, complex and only sufficient for 3 days a week.Teachers have to be creative to provide suitable programmesMost effective provision reliant on external sources of funding: Rose Project, Project Search and third sector funding. Some very effective external partnershipsQuestionable use of accreditation at entry and pre-entry level

  • PROGRESSION POST 16OTHER ISSUES

    Good examples of partnership working to provide additionality: ISCs and other providers to assist with specialisms ISCs and social services to assist with travel training LAs providing opportunities for independent living Parents/carers need further guidance about the transition arrangements for transition from childrens to adult services, particularly around personalised budgets, benefits and different criteria for funding

  • PROGRESSION POST 16OTHER ISSUES

    Availability of transport Very little and varied funding post 19. Even less post 25. What happens when leaving ISC? Mixed picture.Benefits and funding: active benefits still an issue at time of survey. Cuts in other parts of social services impact on adult provision. At least 30% reductions in available budget. No-one looking at overall outcomes or effectiveness of different funding streams.

  • PROGRESSION POST 16

    FINALLY

    KEY QUESTIONS FOR THE SECTOR

    What constitutes outcomes and how should they be measured?

    What is the purpose of qualifications below level1? Are they required? Meaningful? Who benefits?

    **** 17 distinct questions.For each of the questions, respondents were asked to record whether they strongly agreed; agreed; neither agreed nor disagreed; disagreed; or strongly disagreed. They were also given the opportunity to add free text comments if they wished.* 17 distinct questions.For each of the questions, respondents were asked to record whether they strongly agreed; agreed; neither agreed nor disagreed; disagreed; or strongly disagreed. They were also given the opportunity to add free text comments if they wished.* 17 distinct questions.For each of the questions, respondents were asked to record whether they strongly agreed; agreed; neither agreed nor disagreed; disagreed; or strongly disagreed. They were also given the opportunity to add free text comments if they wished.* 17 distinct questions.For each of the questions, respondents were asked to record whether they strongly agreed; agreed; neither agreed nor disagreed; disagreed; or strongly disagreed. They were also given the opportunity to add free text comments if they wished.* 17 distinct questions.For each of the questions, respondents were asked to record whether they strongly agreed; agreed; neither agreed nor disagreed; disagreed; or strongly disagreed. They were also given the opportunity to add free text comments if they wished.* 17 distinct questions.For each of the questions, respondents were asked to record whether they strongly agreed; agreed; neither agreed nor disagreed; disagreed; or strongly disagreed. They were also given the opportunity to add free text comments if they wished.* 17 distinct questions.For each of the questions, respondents were asked to record whether they strongly agreed; agreed; neither agreed nor disagreed; disagreed; or strongly disagreed. They were also given the opportunity to add free text comments if they wished.* 17 distinct questions.For each of the questions, respondents were asked to record whether they strongly agreed; agreed; neither agreed nor disagreed; disagreed; or strongly disagreed. They were also given the opportunity to add free text comments if they wished.***

Recommended

View more >