the city literary institute - ucl institute of...

REPORT FROM THE INSPECTORATE

1999-00

The City Literary

Institute

THEFURTHEREDUCATIONFUNDINGCOUNCIL

THE FURTHER EDUCATION FUNDING COUNCIL

The Further Education Funding Council (FEFC) has a legal duty to makesure further education in England is properly assessed. The FEFC’sinspectorate inspects and reports on each college of further educationaccording to a four-year cycle. It also inspects other further educationprovision funded by the FEFC. In fulfilling its work programme, theinspectorate assesses and reports nationally on the curriculum,disseminates good practice and advises the FEFC’s quality assessmentcommittee.

College inspections are carried out in accordance with the framework andguidelines described in Council Circulars 97/12, 97/13 and 97/22.Inspections seek to validate the data and judgements provided by collegesin self-assessment reports. They involve full-time inspectors andregistered part-time inspectors who have knowledge of, and experience in,the work they inspect. A member of the Council’s audit service works withinspectors in assessing aspects of governance and management. Allcolleges are invited to nominate a senior member of their staff toparticipate in the inspection as a team member.

Cheylesmore HouseQuinton RoadCoventry CV1 2WTTelephone 024 7686 3000Fax 024 7686 3100Website www.fefc.ac.uk

© FEFC 2000 You may photocopy this report and use extracts inpromotional or other material provided quotes areaccurate, and the findings are not misrepresented.

Paragraph

Summary

Context

The institute and its mission 1

The inspection 5

Curriculum areas

Visual arts 9

Drama, dance and speech 14

Foreign languages 19

Humanities 24

Provision for deaf people, others with specific communication needs and professional trainers in these areas 29

Cross-college provision

Support for students 34

General resources 40

Quality assurance 45

Governance 51

Management 56

Conclusions 61

Institute statistics

The City Literary Institute

Contents

Grade DescriptorsInspectors assess the strengths and weaknessesof each aspect of provision they inspect. Theirassessments are set out in the report. They usea five-point scale to summarise the balancebetween strengths and weaknesses.

The descriptors for the grades are:

• grade 1 – outstanding provision which hasmany strengths and few weaknesses

• grade 2 – good provision in which thestrengths clearly outweigh the weaknesses

• grade 3 – satisfactory provision withstrengths but also some weaknesses

• grade 4 – less than satisfactory provisionin which the weaknesses clearly outweighthe strengths

• grade 5 – poor provision which has fewstrengths and many weaknesses.

Audit conclusions are expressed as good,adequate or weak.

Aggregated grades for aspects of cross-collegeprovision and curriculum areas, for collegesinspected during 1998-99, are shown in thefollowing table.

Grade

1 2 3 4 5% % % % %

Curriculumareas 10 53 30 7 –

Cross-college provision 14 54 23 7 2

Source: Quality and Standards in Further Educationin England 1998-99: Chief inspector’s annual reportSample size: 104 college inspections

Student AchievementsWhere data on student achievements appear intables, levels of achievement are shown in threeways:

• as number of starters, which is the numberof enrolments on qualifications where thestudent was expecting to complete thequalification that college year. Forexample, a student on a two-yearprogramme who began their programme in October 1995, would appear in theresults for 1996-97 because this is theyear in which they expected to completetheir qualification

• as a retention rate, which is thepercentage of qualifications which studentshave completed as expected or where theyare continuing their studies beyond theexpected end date of the qualification. Forprogrammes of study of two years or more,retention is calculated across the wholeprogramme, that is, from the start to theend of the qualification

• as an achievement rate, which is thenumber of qualifications students havefully achieved as a percentage ofcompleted qualifications with a knownoutcome. Partial achievements are notincluded.

The City Literary Institute

Greater London Region

Inspected October 1999

The City Literary Institute is an adult educationinstitution, designated under the Further andHigher Education Act 1992 (the Act), as eligibleto receive funding from the FEFC. The instituteis funded for provision described in schedule 2of the Act, together with non-schedule 2provision. Non-schedule 2 provision accountsfor most of its work. The institute is situated incentral London and aims to provide accessiblelearning opportunities for adults who live orwork in the heart of London and beyond, andwho want to fulfil their potential in theexpressive arts, languages and humanities.Almost all the students are part time and aged19 or over. The institute carried out its second self-assessment in preparation for theinspection. The report was comprehensive.Inspectors agreed with many of the judgementsin the report, but concluded that some strengthswere overstated and some weaknesses wereoverlooked or given insufficient significance.

The institute provides courses in seven of theFEFC's 10 programme areas. The inspectionincluded a sample drawn from three of theseareas that represented more than half of theinstitute's provision. The institute is asuccessful provider of a wide range of adulteducation courses. Much of the teaching isgood. Students produce good-quality work and many progress to further study.

Many teachers are highly qualifiedprofessionally. Part-time teachers receive goodsupport from managers. Students are providedwith good advice about courses. There is a widerange of support for students with learningdifficulties and/or disabilities. IT facilities aremuch improved since the last inspection andhave been successfully integrated with libraryand other learning resources. There is aneffective system for responding to students'complaints and comments. Staff have goodtraining and development opportunities.Communication within the institute is good.There are well-developed arrangements forstrategic planning and effective partnershipswith other organisations. The governors makean effective contribution on financial matters.The institute should improve: some aspects ofteaching, particularly teaching that lacksattention to individual learning needs;procedures for assessing and recordingstudents’ achievements, especially on non-schedule 2 courses; arrangements forensuring that students receiving learningsupport have appropriate personal learningplans; some poor facilities and unsatisfactorybuildings; procedures for quality assurance andperformance review; the extent to whichgovernors are involved in the monitoring andreview of the curriculum and students’achievements; the quality of financial reporting;the reliability and accuracy of managementinformation; the use of management targets.

The grades awarded as a result of the inspectionare given below.

The City Literary Institute1

Summary

Curriculum area Grade

Visual arts 2

Drama, dance and speech 2

Foreign languages 2

Humanities 2

Provision for deaf people, others with specific communication needs and professional trainers in these areas 3

Cross-college provision Grade

Support for students 2

General resources 3

Quality assurance 3

Governance 3

Management 3

The Institute and its Mission

1 The City Literary Institute was one of fiveliterary institutes set up by the London CountyCouncil in 1919. Its original brief was to createdemand amongst office workers for eveningstudy, mainly in the arts and humanities. Theinstitute grew rapidly. In 1928, it enrolled morethan 5,000 students and in 1929, it moved to itscurrent main building in central London, offDrury Lane. The City Literary Institute wasestablished as a charitable company limited byguarantee in 1990. Following the Further andHigher Education Act 1992 (the Act), theinstitute was designated under section 28 of theAct as eligible for funding from the FurtherEducation Funding Council (FEFC) for provisiondefined within schedule 2 of the Act, and fornon-schedule 2 provision. Most of the provisionis non-schedule 2, amounting to 95% ofenrolments and 75% of funding units. In 1998-99, FEFC income represented approximately57% of total income, with student feesaccounting for a further 30%.

2 The institute reports that, in 1998-99, itachieved 43,801 enrolments representing22,919 students. Almost half the students livein inner London. Another third come fromouter London boroughs. Students from ethnicminorities comprise 15% of the total; 61% areaged 25 to 50, 85% are aged 25 or over; 69%are women. A large proportion of students,32% in 1998-99, is in receipt of fee concessions.The FEFC has identified the institute as one of agroup of colleges which typically recruits a highpercentage of students from disadvantagedareas. Some 64% of the students come fromdisadvantaged areas. Almost all the studentsare part time. They spend little time in theinstitute except to attend their courses. Coursesare offered in the day, evening and onSaturdays. The institute provides programmesmainly in humanities, languages, visual arts,drama and music. Other programmes include:computing; counselling and personaldevelopment; professional development and

training; health and fitness; community andparent education; and provision for deaf people.More than 800 part-time, hourly-paid teachersare managed by a small number of full-timeacademic staff. Since the last inspection, theinstitute has achieved the Investor in Peoplestandard and the Charter Mark.

3 The institute is the largest provider ofadult education in London. It is located in anarea of London that includes local authorityprovision, many further education colleges andother specialist adult education providers.Managers have developed productive externallinks, including parent education with CamdenLocal Education Authority (LEA), collaborativeprojects with Kensington and Chelsea College,Morley College, The Mary Ward Centre andKingsway College. The institute has educationcontracts with the City of London Corporation.

4 The mission of the institute is to 'provideaccessible learning opportunities for adults wholive or work in the heart of London and beyond,and who want to fulfil their potential in theexpressive arts, languages and humanities'. Ten corporate and strategic objectives guide theinstitute's activities. These are: the developmentof high-quality teaching and learning for adults;the development of programmes which meet theneeds of a wider student population; theenhancement of the institute's long-termviability and solvency; the maintenance andenhancement of quality; the effective use ofinformation technology (IT); the development ofstudent support; the effective and efficient use ofstaff; the progressive removal of barriers tolearning and employment; the fostering ofpartnerships with other organisations andagencies; and the provision of opportunities toacquire skills and knowledge in art forms.


Context

The Inspection

5 The institute was inspected in October1999. Inspectors had previously evaluated theinstitute's self-assessment report and reviewedinformation about the institute held by theFEFC. The institute was notified of the sampleof its provision to be inspected approximatelythree months before the inspection. Theinspection was carried out by 13 inspectors andan auditor working in the institute for a total of44 days. Inspectors observed 69 lessons. Theyexamined students' work and documentationrelating to the institute and its courses.Meetings were held with governors, managers,teachers, support staff, students andrepresentatives from partner organisations.

6 Inspectors identified several problems withthe institute's data for students' retention andachievements. The institute is required tosubmit data for the individualised studentrecord (ISR) for schedule 2 retention andachievement rates in the usual way, but it is notrequired to submit non-schedule 2 data forachievement rates; non-schedule 2 retentiondata were submitted for the first time for 1997-98. The institute acknowledges that therehave been difficulties with data collection,recording and analysis over a period of years.Inspectors visited the institute before theinspection to check for anomalies in theinstitute's ISR data for 1997 and 1998, and toexamine the institute's own data for 1999. The data for 1998 were those resubmitted bythe institute following the identification, byinstitute managers, of inaccuracies in the firstdata submission. In checking these data,inspectors identified many anomalies.Inspectors, unusually, also checked a sample ofISR data against other available primaryevidence including registers, documentationfrom awarding bodies and the institute's ownrecords. The numbers of students starting manyschedule 2 courses and retention rates andachievement rates for these courses could not be

reconciled with the primary sources of evidence.ISR data were generally unreliable and oftengave a misleading picture of performance.Curriculum managers had not seen the ISR dataand some doubted their accuracy. Theinstitute's own data for 1999 had not beencollated centrally nor analysed by the time of thepre-inspection visits. The information held byprogramme areas was not in a consistentformat. Where sampled, however, it was foundto be generally reliable to the extent that itmatched other evidence held by the institute.The information was used by inspectors toinform their judgements about students'retention and achievements. The inadequacy ofdata made it impossible to form a view oftrends. For this reason, tables of retention andachievement rates have not been included in thecurriculum sections of the report, nor in thestatistical annexes. Weaknesses in themanagement information necessary to monitorperformance were acknowledged in theinstitute's self-assessment report.

7 The following table shows the grades givento the lessons inspected and the national profilefor all colleges inspected in 1998-99. Of the 69 lessons inspected, 71% were good oroutstanding. Only 4% were less thansatisfactory. This profile is better than thesector profile for colleges inspected during 1998-99.


Context

Context

8 The following table shows the attendancerates in the lessons observed and the nationalaverage for all colleges inspected in 1998-99.


Average number Average attendanceof students (%)

The City Literary Institute 13.2 80

National average, all inspected colleges 1998-99 11.2 78

Attendance rates in lessons observed

Source for national average: Quality and Standards in Further Education in England 1998-99: Chief inspector’s annual report

Programme Grade Totals1 2 3 4 5

Schedule 2 3 5 7 0 0 15

Non-schedule 2 13 28 10 3 0 54

Total (No.) 16 33 17 3 0 69

Total (%) 23 48 25 4 0 100

National average,all inspected colleges1998-99 (%) 20 45 29 6 0 100

Source for national average: Quality and Standards in Further Education in England 1998-99: Chief inspector's annual report

Lessons: inspection grades by programme of study

Curriculum Areas


Visual Arts

Grade 29 Inspectors observed 14 lessons in art,design and crafts. Inspectors agreed withmost of the judgements in the self-assessmentreport and identified a few additionalstrengths and weaknesses.

Key strengths

• a wide range of subjects

• much effective, thoughtfully planned and varied teaching

• valuable contributions from part-timeteachers who are practising artists anddesigners

• good video and computer facilities for pre-degree students

• students’ lively and creative work

• successful progression to further study

Weaknesses

• insufficient assessment and recording ofachievement on non-schedule 2 courses

• few opportunities for students to gainnational awards

• some inadequate accommodation andageing equipment

10 Inspectors agreed with the institute’s self-assessment that it provides a comprehensiverange of courses in art, design and crafts, someof which are offered at a number of levels.Some opportunities are missed for students togain national awards. Schedule 2 coursescomprise the pre-degree foundation diploma inart and design, City and Guilds of LondonInstitute (C&G) certificates in basketry, ceramicrestoration, and pottery, the higher diploma inceramics, and certificates in art and design,computing and multimedia. The wide andvaried non-schedule 2 provision ranges fromtraditional crafts such as stone carving, mosaics,

book restoration, calligraphy, picture framemaking and gilding, to digital photography,video making, Internet design and authoring,and animation. Demand for courses oftenexceeds supply. Students report that they areattracted to these courses because of their goodreputation.

11 Inspectors agreed with the judgement inthe self-assessment report that courses areefficiently managed. Programme managementrecently underwent changes which are provingbeneficial. Teaching is often varied andimaginative. Schemes of work provide studentswith a wide range of experiences. There is anemphasis on good professional practice.Students are encouraged to develop technicalskills and individual creativity side by side.Learning activities include group work and one-to-one teaching in the studios andworkshops. Frequent visits are made togalleries and exhibitions as a means ofsustaining students’ knowledge and interest intheir chosen specialism. Group critiquesencourage students to develop evaluation andcommunication skills and to express judgementswith confidence. Much group work involveslively debate and comment. Students usetechnical terms well. Most learning is basedaround practical assignments which have clearobjectives. A few lessons were less successfulbecause some of the students were not beingdrawn to play a full part in the relevant learningactivities or because teachers were makinginadequate demands of those with well-developed skills.

12 Much of students’ practical and writtenwork is good. Students make good use of visualresearch to support their assignments. Theyexplore processes and imagery in a systematicway, and develop individual styles of work. Onmost courses, pass rates and retention rates aregood. The institute reports that the overallretention rate in 1998-99 was 84% and that theaverage retention rate on the pre-degreefoundation course over the past three years has

Curriculum Areas

been 97%. There are poorer retention rates onsome courses, and a few had rates below 50% in1998-99. This weakness was not recognised inthe self-assessment report. Achievement ratesfor students who complete their schedule 2courses are high. Attendance at the lessonsinspected was good, at 85%. Most schedule 2students progress to further study or highereducation. Students regularly enter forcompetitions and commissions. A student, on anon-schedule 2 course, recently won secondprize in the National Architectural GlassCompetition for students and young designers.Teachers assess students’ progress throughregular tutorials though assessment practice isinconsistent. Arrangements for assessing andrecording students’ achievements on non-schedule 2 courses are underdeveloped.Action is being taken to address this.

13 The small team of full-time staff are wellsupported by practising artists, designers andcraftspeople who bring an extensive range ofup-to-date expertise and experience into thestudios and workshops. Students’ benefit fromregular contact with external professionals. The equipment in most workshops and studiosis ageing, and some replacement is overdue.Since the last inspection, the institute hasestablished high-quality video and digitalimaging facilities to assist students’ learning. As the self-assessment report acknowledges,accommodation is a significant issue. There arenot enough workspaces and it is difficult forstudents to carry out work effectively inovercrowded accommodation. Some teachingrooms are too small; others are not always usedeffectively. Subject areas as diverse as history ofart and physical education share some rooms.Many rooms are untidy. In most areas of work,there are acute problems over the storage ofstudents’ work in progress.


Curriculum Areas


Drama, Dance and Speech

Grade 214 Inspectors observed 13 lessons indrama, dance and speech. Inspectors agreedwith many of the judgements in the self-assessment report.

Key strengths

• good teaching

• good work by students in lessons

• successful destinations from the accesscourse

• a wide range of courses providing goodopportunities for progression

• teachers with high standards ofprofessional expertise

Weaknesses

• underdeveloped assessment methods on non-schedule 2 courses

• inadequate theatre facilities

15 An unusually wide range of courses isprovided in drama, dance and speech. Demandexceeds supply for some of the 66 courses;acting and English pronunciation courses areparticularly popular. Inspectors agreed with theinstitute’s self-assessment that there are well-established links with the arts andentertainment industry which are usedproductively. On the theatre technicians’ course,students visited a London drama school towatch a production and use its theatre’stechnical facilities. Courses aim to teachpractical skills and develop a professionalapproach to drama work. The three full-timeteachers have professional backgrounds and,with their administrative staff, provide anefficient focus for the work of the programmearea. Full-time staff maintain communicationwith the 57 part-time teachers through regularletters, as well as through personal contact at

the programme area office. There is a standardformat for describing courses. New students,therefore, receive accurate and helpfulinformation. Inspectors agreed with theinstitute’s judgement about the good standardsof the drama access course. The coursesuccessfully prepares students for drama schoolor professional employment. There is a highlevel of student satisfaction, as the responses tosurveys indicate.

16 In the best lessons, teachers provideindividual attention to students withoutcompromising the range of work to be covered.In a drama access lesson, the teacher askedpairs of students involved in a movement projectto present their work-in-progress. This gavethem a chance to perform before an audienceand to share their ideas on the project. A student in a speech lesson, who wished toimprove her standard English pronunciation,was delighted that her initial anxiety at readingaloud was dispelled by the relaxed atmospherecreated by the teacher. The inspectionconfirmed the judgements in the self-assessmentreport about the good standard of teachingacross all courses. Teachers plan their lessonswell. An introduction to acting, taught by aprofessional actor, enabled students to breakdown imaginary physical barriers by engagingin a carefully guided sequence of movementexercises. The teacher dealt sensitively with thediscomfort of some students by buildingconfidence and trust within the group. Theteacher of a tap dance lesson was able to giveindividual attention to a wide range of ages andabilities whilst maintaining a demanding pace ofwork for the whole class.

17 Students speak highly of the quality ofcourses and are enthusiastic about their studies.Their work in the lessons observed was of ahigh standard as stated in the self-assessmentreport. Students in a beginners’ magic lessonquickly accomplished a disappearing coin trick,performing their work in front of the group andaccepting helpful criticism from the other

Curriculum Areas

students. In a voice lesson, students quicklyovercame their reluctance to read a poem aloud.All were pleased with the progress they hadmade during their course. There are some goodachievements on schedule 2 courses. Of the 53students completing the second year of theLondon Open College Network drama accesscourse in 1998-99, 45 gained their certificate.Students completing the course progress toaccredited drama schools, or to a range ofemployment including solo performance, stand-up comedy and voiceovers. Alternatively,they return to take further specialist courses atthe institute. The assessment of students’progress on non-schedule 2 courses isinconsistent. Assessment methods on thesecourses are not sufficiently developed. Thisweakness was not identified in the institute’sself-assessment report.

18 Teachers are highly experienced. Manyhave current professional expertise. Some areworking actors and dancers. The magician is amember of the Magic Circle. Some teachingrooms are too small for the planned activities.The previous inspection drew attention to thepoor quality of the theatre and its technicalfacilities. Inspectors confirmed the institute’sassessment that these facilities remaininadequate. These courses also lack a theatretechnician and a soundproofed studio.


Curriculum Areas


Foreign Languages

Grade 219 Inspectors observed 15 lessons in 11modern and classical languages. They agreedwith most of the strengths and weaknesses inthe self-assessment report but identified someadditional weaknesses.

Key strengths

• the extensive range of languages

• good teaching

• the high standard of students’ coursework

• very well-qualified teachers

Weaknesses

• poor retention on schedule 2 courses

• insufficient assessment of students’achievements on non-schedule 2 courses

• some unsuitable classrooms

20 Language programmes form one of theinstitute’s largest curriculum areas, with 8,778 enrolments, all part time, in 1998-99.Twenty foreign languages are taught, includingsome, such as Cornish and medieval Latin,which are rarely available in the furthereducation sector. Inspectors agreed with theself-assessment report that languages provisionforms a cohesive programme with flexible entrypoints and good progression routes. There are,for example, 61 different Spanish courses onoffer, at locations, times and levels to suitstudents’ requirements. There are one-daycourses such as classics days and Celtic daysand intensive courses in the main Europeanlanguages. Specific courses for employers arearranged by the business language co-ordinator.Courses are coherently structured at fivedifferent levels. Teachers help students tochoose the appropriate level by assessing theirlinguistic competence before enrolment andallowing students to sample lessons beforeenrolling.

The range of courses is kept under review. Thewaiting list for some courses demonstrates thepopularity of this provision.

21 In most lessons, the teaching is of highquality. Teachers consistently use the foreignlanguage as the main means of communication.Lessons are well planned and contain a suitablevariety of activities, designed to encourage useof the language. Students of Italian werelearning the conditional tense in the context of aphone-in ‘agony aunt’ radio programme; thelesson contained role-play, use of video,discussion and grammar, and was conductedentirely in Italian. In some lessons, teachers donot make the aims of the lesson sufficientlyexplicit, and spend too much time talking to theclass rather than allowing students to do thingsfor themselves. In other lessons, insufficientaccount is taken of the varying levels of abilitywithin the group. Some of the written feedbackon students’ work is inadequate. Responses toquestionnaires, 1998-99, show that 91% ofstudents rated the teaching outstanding or good.

22 Most students demonstrate a high level ofconfidence and fluency. In advanced levellessons, for example, they are able to expresstheir views about literature, current affairs andsocial issues, and to debate with others. In a few lessons, students lacked confidence,displayed low levels of accuracy and struggledwith activities. Some work is outstanding,displaying linguistic skill, flair and imagination.Each year, the advanced French class publishesa collection of creative writing, entitled‘Mélanges’, which includes love poems, shortstories, news items and cartoons. AdvancedGreek students translate competently; a recenttranslation was of a text from Archilochus’account of the eclipse of the sun in the seventhcentury BC. Most students on non-schedule 2courses state that they achieve their intendedlearning outcomes, based on self-assessment.The evaluation of students’ achievements,however, is not rigorous enough. Students whosit examinations perform well: in 1998-99, 94%

Curriculum Areas

of general certificate of education advanced level(GCE A level) and general certificate ofsecondary education (GCSE) candidates passed,and 90% gained higher grades. However, only66% of the 205 students who started anexamination course completed it, a figure whichis below the national average for comparablecourses. The overall retention rate forlanguages in 1998-99 was 76%, lower than formost other curriculum areas in the institute.Inspectors did not agree with the judgement inthe self-assessment report that retention was astrength.

23 Five permanent staff effectively managethe work of 72 part-time teachers. They ensurethat a consistent standard of teaching ismaintained, providing extensive andconstructive written feedback to the part-timeteachers. Communication with part-time staff isgood. All teachers receive a thorough inductionand are provided with good opportunities forstaff development. Part-time teachers are wellqualified and 84% are native speakers. Carefulrecruitment of part-time teachers also ensuresthat they all have a qualification in languageteaching. The administrative staff, who arethemselves qualified linguists, provide effectivesupport. Technician support is not available inthe evenings, when most of the teaching takesplace. Library resources for language learning,including computer software and satellitetelevision, are good. Classrooms are wellequipped with audiovisual equipment, but somerooms are of unsuitable shape or size,restricting the teaching methods that can beused.


Curriculum Areas


Humanities

Grade 224 Inspectors observed 12 lessons across arange of non-schedule 2 courses inphilosophy, history and politics. History andanthropology components of the access tohigher education course were also inspected.Inspectors agreed with many of the strengthsand weaknesses in the self-assessment report.

Key strengths

• much good teaching

• the high standard of students’ work inlessons

• good retention rates on most non-schedule 2 courses

• the breadth, flexibility and variety of provision

Weaknesses

• some teaching that lacks attention toindividual learning needs

• some inadequate schemes of work andlesson plans

• underdeveloped assessment and recordingof achievements on non-schedule 2 courses

25 The programme area offers almost 400non-schedule 2 courses. Many are organised astwo hours a week for 10 weeks. There are alsoweekend and one-day courses. Inspectorsagreed with the strength identified in the self-assessment report that the programme isrich and varied. Many students travelconsiderable distances to attend the courses.Since the last inspection, the coherence of theprogramme has improved and new courses havebeen added in African studies, Russian studiesand access to anthropology. Some subjects,such as anthropology, are seldom offered infurther education colleges. Four full-time staff

are responsible for organising 184 part-timelecturers. The programme is well managed andthere are clear lines of responsibility. Full-timeteachers work well as a team. They alsocommunicate effectively with the part-timeteachers; for example, through tutor reviews,lesson observations, informal visits toclassrooms and the institute newsletter. Someschemes of work and lesson plans areinadequate. Some opportunities are missed toprovide opportunities for students to gainqualifications.

26 Much teaching is good. Philosophyteaching is outstanding. In most lessons, livelytalks by teachers are accompanied by thought-provoking questions. Teachers useeffective activities to enhance students’understanding of abstract concepts. In onelesson, students were asked to identify theessential characteristics of God as perceived invarious societies. From this they generated arange of definitions and questions which theteacher linked to explanations put forward bysome philosophers. The students wereinterested and were developing confidence inthe thinking skills required for philosophy. Onaccess courses, there is an emphasis on theacquisition of subject-specific and study skillswhich boosts the confidence of studentsreturning to education. In many subjects,students are encouraged to explorecontemporary issues set in a broader culturalcontext. Inspectors agreed with the weaknessesidentified in the institute’s self-assessment inrespect of teachers’ lack of attention toindividual learning needs in some lessons.Some teachers work too slowly and do notmanage time effectively, occasionally as theresult of open-ended questions which areallowed to become too expansive. Teachersprovide good support to students attendingcourses for short periods of time. The self-assessment report recognises that there isinsufficient use of IT applications in thecurriculum.

Curriculum Areas

27 The institute is addressing concerns, notedin the self-assessment report, about retentionrates on some courses. It reports that theretention rate for non-schedule 2 courses in1998-99 was 94%; on schedule 2 courses,however, it was much lower, at 60%. In mostlessons, students’ contributions are outstandingand levels of interest and enthusiasm are high.Questions and comments are well informed andare often based on good personal research andwriting. On the non-schedule 2 courses,students are given the option of producingwritten work but only a minority choose to doso. Where produced, the work is often of a highstandard. Few teachers keep an assessmentrecord for each student. Assessment andrecording of learning are underdeveloped, aweakness not fully identified in the institute’sself-assessment report. Students are asked toassess their own learning and progress. More than 90% state that most of their learningobjectives have been met. Teachers do notevaluate these statements, however.

28 Most accommodation is adequate for itspurpose. Where rooms are used for a variety ofdifferent subjects they often lack the visual walldisplays which encourage learning. With somany lessons taking place at flexible times, staffneed access to photocopiers at short notice. At times, the equipment breaks down and thelack of photocopied material has an adverseeffect on the quality of teaching and learning.Staff are very well qualified, many having higherdegrees.


Curriculum Areas


Provision for Deaf People,others with SpecificCommunication Needs andProfessional Trainers in these Areas

Grade 329 Inspectors observed 15 lessons. They agreed with some of the judgements inthe self-assessment report, but identifiedseveral different strengths and weaknesses.Inspectors agreed with the institute’s overalljudgement of the quality of provision.Inspectors worked with a sign languageinterpreter during part of the inspection. In addition to the provision at the institute,they also inspected some off-site provision.

Key strengths

• outstanding work with stammerers

• good professional training courses

• successful programmes in lip reading

• effective specialist therapies and technicalsupport services for deaf students

• some good support for deaf students inother colleges

Weaknesses

• inadequate recording and monitoring of students’ achievements

• lack of individual learning programmes

• the narrow range of courses for deafstudents

• insufficient support for deaf students in the institute’s other curriculum areas

• some ineffective teaching of deaf students

• some poor use of resources to enhancelearning

30 The work of the centre for deaf peoplecomprises four parts. The continuing educationservice for deaf adults provides basic educationand lip reading courses. A further and highereducation support team provides communicationand tutorial support in over 30 universities andcolleges in the London area. The sign languagetraining and professional development serviceprovides a range of training courses for thosewho wish to work with deaf people. Thecommunication development and professionaltraining team is responsible for specialisttherapies and technical support. The centre fordeaf people is located in the Keeley Streetbuilding. Deaf students value the site as ameeting place, especially the canteen andadjacent seating area. Many deaf students areapprehensive about using facilities, or joiningcourses, at the main site. Staff from the centresupport few of their students on other courseswithin the institute, although other deaf studentsenrol individually on courses of their choice.The range of specific courses for deaf students isnarrow and classroom based, with too fewopportunities for learning in practical settings.The self-assessment report acknowledges thatthe institute does not run practical courses fordeaf students. Other areas of the institute arenot used as a context for teaching deaf students.These students have little awareness of theinstitute’s wider programme, a weakness notidentified in the self-assessment report.

31 Teaching and learning are most effectivefor students who are hearing or who havebecome deafened. Teaching on courses forstammerers is outstanding. It enables studentsto devise effective strategies for minimising theimpact of stammering on their lives. Teachersof British Sign Language, for whom British SignLanguage is their first language, make skilfuluse of the target language in their teaching.They use well-tried methods that enable manystudents to learn the language and becomefamiliar with deaf culture but there is littlevariety in the teaching methods used. Whole-group teaching results in some students

Curriculum Areas

working at too high or too low a level. Someteaching of deaf students is less successful thanit might be because students with differentabilities and skills are taught together as awhole group. Lip reading is taught effectively.Teaching on training courses for those wishingto work with deaf people is of a good standardand there are appropriate contributions fromoutside agencies. None of these strengths andweaknesses were fully recognised in the self-assessment report. Inspectors agreed that thespecialist therapies and technical supportservices for deaf students are a strength in thecentre’s work. Staff provide good support fordeaf students in other colleges, but do notalways have enough say in the teaching andlearning methods being used. The content ofsome lessons, the methods of presentation andthe layout of rooms are not always suitable fordeaf students.

32 Many students are satisfied with theirprogress and value their courses. In manylessons, the standard of work they produce isgood. The institute reports that the retentionrate for 1998-99 in this area of provision was77%. However, as the self-assessment reportacknowledges, there is a lack of reliable data onhow many students complete their courses, gainqualifications and progress to higher levelcourses or to work. As students do not haveindividual learning programmes with clearcriteria for success, inspectors could not judgethe extent to which they were achieving theirlearning goals.

33 Teachers are well qualified and have thecommunication skills necessary to workeffectively with their students. Communicationsupport workers offer a high-quality service tostudents. Teaching accommodation is generallyappropriate. However, many lessons are held inrooms which contain few learning materials andwhere little use is made of displays to enhancelearning. In lessons, there are few resources toenable students to work at their own pace.Some resources, such as cardboard money andcounting frames, are inappropriate for adults.


Cross-college Provision


Support for Students

Grade 234 Inspectors agreed with many of thestrengths and weaknesses identified in theself-assessment report, but judged that someweaknesses had been overlooked. Action toaddress some weaknesses had been taken bythe time of the inspection.

Key strengths

• the high standard of pre-courseinformation and advice for students

• a well-considered statement of learnerentitlement and students’ handbook

• the wide range of arrangements to support students with learning difficulties and/or disabilities

• the accessibility and range of learnerservices

• good advice for students interested inemployment or career development

Weaknesses

• underdeveloped support for students on non-schedule 2 courses

• inadequate personal learning plans forstudents needing support

• resources for learning support that do not reflect the diversity of provision

35 Inspectors agreed with the institute’sjudgement of the good standard of pre-courseinformation and advice. Courses are publicisedin a prospectus and in directories of adultlearning opportunities in London. Many newstudents are recruited by personalrecommendation. Staff have access to acomputerised database of course outlines andprovide information and advice throughtelephone helplines. The institute recognised inits self-assessment report that the switchboardcannot cope with the demand for this service at

peak times. Students joining most schedule 2courses receive advice and, where appropriate,assessment. Students are able to sample non-schedule 2 courses before joining them.The arrangements for enrolment have beenstandardised. Enrolments can be made inperson, by post, by fax or by telephone,although enrolment by telephone is availableonly on weekday afternoons. Programmemanagers organise waiting lists for courses.Arrangements for transferring between coursesare clear. Teachers follow standard proceduresfor inducting students to non-schedule 2courses. Students on most schedule 2 coursesreceive more extensive induction. Learnerservices staff may be invited to contribute tothis, but practice is not yet consistent.

36 The institute has established a learnerservices division. A number of initiatives withinthis division are in the early stages ofdevelopment. There is a comprehensivestatement of learner entitlement based on thenumber of hours students study. Awareness onthe part of staff and students of the range of theinstitute’s learner services is growing togetherwith increased take-up of some services. Adviceon dyslexia is available to all students and thoseon schedule 2 courses can access dyslexiaassessment and support. Some of the materialsused for this assessment are inappropriate foradults, but a number of students have found thisservice helpful in enabling them to continuetheir studies. The institute has produced anoutstanding students’ handbook and acomprehensive disabilities statement.Inspectors agreed with this strength identified inthe self-assessment report. The handbook andcharter are issued to students on most schedule2 courses, and are available throughout theinstitute. Even so, many students remainunaware of the institute’s support services.

37 Students who identify themselves, or arereferred by their teacher, as needing additionallearning support are interviewed andappropriate help is agreed. Course tutors are



advised about suitable support strategies. The institute has a wide range of facilities andresources that can be drawn upon to aidlearning. Inspectors agreed with the institute’sassessment that its arrangements for supportingstudents with learning difficulties and/ordisabilities are a strength. The institute has nomethod of checking the outcomes fromadditional learning support, or of evaluating itseffectiveness. At present, there is insufficienttraining for staff working with students withlearning difficulties. Student services areaccessible at times convenient to students. This includes the small, contracted-outbookshop at the Stukeley Street site and thecafeterias.

38 Study skills support is available in thelearning centre. Students may refer themselves,or be referred by their course tutor. However,initial assessment of the needs of studentsattending the learning centre, especially in thearea of basic skills, is inadequate. There is nota developed strategy for ensuring that studentsreceiving support have effective personallearning plans. The resources available in thelearning centre do not adequately reflect thedemands made on students following a widerange of courses. These weaknesses were notacknowledged in the institute’s self-assessmentreport. Tutorial arrangements for students onmost schedule 2 courses are well established.They consist of both group and individualsessions. Staff provide guidance and organisesome tutorials for students on non-schedule 2courses. Practice in conducting and recordingthese activities is inconsistent and, sometimes,inadequate. Students are appreciative of thelevel of personal and academic support theyreceive.

39 Staff provide impartial guidance that iseffective in enabling students to make informedtraining and career choices. The instituteprovides courses for students who are aiming tomove to employment or to change career.Inspectors agreed that the range of this support

is a strength. Advice is also provided onfinancial matters and on the allocation of accessand hardship funds. There is a counsellingservice that is run to professional standards.The institute has recently discontinued itsunderused crèche provision, and replaced itwith a voucher system. This is intended towiden access to childcare but it is too early toassess the effectiveness of this scheme.

General Resources

Grade 340 Inspectors agreed with most of thestrengths and weaknesses identified in theinstitute’s self-assessment report.

Key strengths

• successful integration of library facilities with other learning resources

• much improved IT provision

• well-equipped classrooms

Weaknesses

• the poor condition of institute buildings

• the many teaching areas which are notaccessible to students with restrictedmobility

• inadequate facilities for students on some sites

41 The institute is situated on three mainsites in central London. The buildings are allmore than 60 years old and were designed forpurposes generally different from those forwhich they are now being used. The instituteacknowledges that this results in some areasbeing unsuitable for current purposes. In itsaccommodation strategy it proposes aredevelopment of the institute on a single site atKeeley Street as a Public and PrivatePartnership, for which an application to theFEFC is imminent. A range of appropriate



consultants is assisting the institute. Planningconsent has been secured for a part of theproposed development. The fabric of thebuildings is currently in poor condition. Only essential maintenance and minor worksare being carried out to the general areas ofbuildings pending the outcome of the decision torelocate. There are serious access problems onall three sites for students with restrictedmobility; large areas of the institute remaininaccessible. The institute recognises all ofthese shortcomings in its self-assessment report.

42 The institute has prioritised improvementsin classroom accommodation, and hasrefurbished and updated some areas during thelast two years. Some rooms have beenredecorated and furniture renewed. All teaching rooms have been fitted withwhiteboards, overhead projectors andaudiovisual teaching units. Inspectors agreedwith this strength, as stated in the institute’sself-assessment report. Entrance foyers of thethree buildings have been refurbished to providebetter reception areas. The standard of officeaccommodation for full-time staff has improvedsince the last inspection. Students now haveaccess to networked computers and the Internetcan be accessed on all sites. Facilities forstudents differ in standards across the threesites. Catering facilities are good on two sitesbut are restricted to a vending machine serviceon the third. Toilet facilities are inadequate insome areas. A room utilisation survey carriedout by the institute shows that much of theaccommodation is underused in the morningswith usage increasing through the day. Itreaches a peak in the evenings. The demand forcertain evening courses cannot be met and theself-assessment report acknowledges thedifficulties in matching demand to the availablespace.

43 The learning centre on the Stukeley Streetsite has been combined with the library. Theremoval of the physical barriers between thelibrary, the learning resource centre and the

studies skills provision has led to the successfulintegration of learning services and resources.Inspectors agreed with this strength, asidentified by the institute. The new learningcentre combines the resources of the librarywith new computer-aided learning facilities, andthis strengthens opportunities for learning. Theallocation of learning resource funds is based onthe size of enrolments in the various curriculumareas. There is close co-operation between thelearning resource manager and the curricularmanagers over the selection and purchase oflearning materials. A new library managementsystem has been installed and this will be madeavailable in the libraries on the other two sites.

44 Induction sessions are held in the learningcentre to support students who wish to use ITequipment for a particular task. Students valuethese sessions. There is a series of help sheetsto indicate the computer software and CD-ROMsavailable to students. Services offered by thelearning centre include a satellite recordingservice and a foreign news service. Theinstitute has an IT policy. The development ofaccess to, and use of, IT by students across theinstitute has been piecemeal. An audit ofcurrent access and use is being carried out andthis information will inform the strategicplanning process. The institute has 122personal computers available to students. Mostof them are networked and can be accessed indedicated computer rooms, in the learningcentre or the libraries. There is a wide range ofsoftware available which reflects the varied useof IT across the institute. A staff developmentproject, in collaboration with three othercolleges, is promoting the use of IT to enhancelearning. Inspectors agreed with the judgementin the self-assessment report that these facilitieswere much improved since the last inspection.



Quality Assurance

Grade 345 The institute has made progress indeveloping its quality assurancearrangements. Inspectors agreed with someof the institute’s judgements on qualityassurance but some strengths wereoverstated and some weaknesses omitted.

Key strengths

• improved arrangements for the review and evaluation of provision

• good staff development opportunities forfull-time and part-time staff

• an effective system for responding tocomplaints and comments

• a well-established appraisal scheme

Weaknesses

• an over-complex quality assurance system

• lack of systematic reporting on students’achievements

• lack of evidence about improvement inperformance

• some unsatisfactory quality assurancereports

46 Managers have made progress inaddressing some of the weaknesses in qualityassurance identified at the last inspection.Inspectors agreed with this strength, as statedin the self-assessment report. There has beenan emphasis on quality development and this isnow evident across the organisation. A qualityassurance framework and cycle have beenestablished. The approach has beendevelopmental, focusing on the understandingand skills required for effective qualityassurance. One of the vice-principals hasoverall responsibility for quality assurance. A quality committee, reporting to the academicboard and the executive, oversees quality

matters. Self-assessment is now wellestablished and involves both staff andgovernors.

47 The institute completed its second self-assessment report in preparation forinspection. Inspectors agreed with many of thejudgements in the self-assessment report,though some strengths were overstated andsome weaknesses were omitted. The evidencesubmitted in support of a number of judgementswas inadequate. The quality assuranceframework consists of a three phase reportingcycle, lasting 12 months, based on guidance inCouncil Circular 97/12, Validating Self-assessment. Managers of programmes andsupport areas complete a self-assessment andaction plan. Institute action-planning andperformance review documents are alsoproduced. The cycle of reporting and action-planning, however, is over-complex, a matternot acknowledged in the self-assessment report.Judgements made early in the cycle are out ofdate by the time the self-assessment report isproduced in October each year. Theperformance review document sets new targetswithout reference to changes in strategic planobjectives. The quality assurance manual iswidely available but does not describe all of theprocedures. Some reports contain clearjudgements; others are largely descriptive. The institute acknowledges these weaknesses. It is establishing an internal audit team tomoderate judgements.

48 Quality reports are informed by evidencecollected from course evaluations completed bystudents and teachers. The completion of theseevaluations is inconsistent and some areinadequate. Most students on non-schedule 2courses are asked to complete a personalstatement of learning which invites them toassess their own progress against the intendedlearning outcomes listed in the course outline.Where it is effective, this procedure providesuseful information about the quality of thecourse and students’ progress. In most cases,



statements lack evaluative comment fromteachers. The student charter is clear andsimple and it includes standards for keyactivities, such as responses to complaints. The charter is supported by a widely availableproforma for students to communicatecomplaints, comments and compliments.Complaints are fully documented and responseletters are invariably courteous and constructive.Of the responses, 87% are within the 10-daytarget. Inspectors agreed that this was astrength.

49 The self-assessment report lacks sufficientanalysis of data on students’ achievements andretention. This is partly because of the difficultyof assessing students’ achievements on non-schedule 2 courses. It is also becausecentrally held data has not been sufficientlyreliable to provide accurate information ontrends. The evaluation reports for schedule 2courses are in a format largely determined byawarding bodies. They lack precision andconsistency. The institute is unable todemonstrate evidence of the impact of qualityassurance on student performance, or that therehas been continuous improvement. Target-setting for retention and achievement isnot systematic. Managers are aware of theseweaknesses although they were notacknowledged in the self-assessment report.

50 Staff development is good and has beensuccessfully linked to quality development.Inspectors agreed with the institute that this wasa strength. The staff handbook describesentitlements including an allowance for part-time teachers to attend training events.There is a detailed staff development plan,linked to the strategic plan, and training eventsare well publicised. Over a three-year period allteachers were observed working in theclassroom. New teachers are observed in theirfirst six months. Lessons are graded but thegrades are not collated, so that the overallprofile cannot be tested against nationalbenchmarks. The institute has placed a high

priority on inclusive learning. As part of itswork on the inclusive learning quality initiative,a learning policy and guidelines for planninginclusive learning have been produced. Theappraisal scheme is well established. All full-time staff are appraised each year. For mostteachers, this includes observation of teachingbefore the appraisal interview. Individualtargets are set and these enable line managersto monitor performance and appraisees to workto clear objectives. Part-time staff are offered aless structured appraisal which includesfeedback on their performance.

Governance

Grade 351 Inspectors agreed with many of thejudgements in the self-assessment report butfound that the strengths were overstated.

Key strengths

• good clerking arrangements

• governors’ effective contribution onfinancial matters

Weaknesses

• insufficient attention to curriculum matters and students’ achievements

• delays in filling governor vacancies

52 The institute has a legal framework for itsoperation, set by its memorandum and articlesof association. The FEFC’s audit serviceconcludes that, within the scope of itsassessment, the governance of the institute isadequate. The governing body substantiallyconducts its business in accordance with itsmemorandum and articles of association. It alsosubstantially fulfils its responsibilities under thefinancial memorandum with the FEFC. Theinstitute’s articles of association provide for agoverning body membership of 21, including theprincipal. There are currently three external

vacancies. The governing body has establisheda search committee to assist with theidentification and recruitment of externalgovernors. It has identified gaps within itscurrent membership, including a lack ofrepresentation from minority ethnic groups.The search committee has sought to recruitgovernors to meet particular needs, primarilythrough informal links. This approach has ledto some vacancies not being filled promptly.Advertising has not been used to recruit newgovernors.

53 The self-assessment report states thatinduction of governors was not fully developed.Inspectors judged this weakness to beoverstated. There is an induction pack andgovernors are made aware of opportunities toattend courses. The needs of individualgovernors are met informally throughdiscussions with the chair. Governor reviewdays are used to share information andexpertise. The self-assessment process has beenused as a tool to identify areas for furtherdevelopment. The governors are well involvedin the strategic planning process. They havemade effective contributions to identifying keyobjectives and issues for the institute. Inaddition to discussion at meetings, they holdreview days twice a year, at which progressagainst the plan is reviewed and future directionis discussed. They recognise, however, that theyare not effectively monitoring the curriculumand students’ achievements. They do notreceive reports which enable them to judgeadequately the performance of students in termsof retention and achievement. They have askedfor more information, in particular to help thembenchmark achievement on non-schedule 2courses. The lack of robust managementinformation has also hindered the monitoring ofschedule 2 work. A recent report to governorsfocused on the destinations of students attendingsome of the institute’s courses, but this has notbeen addressed systematically.

54 Clerking arrangements are effective. The clerk to the governing body, who is also thecompany secretary, is directly accountable to thegoverning body and acts as clerk to all thegoverning body’s committees. There is timelyproduction and distribution of agendas,supporting papers and minutes. Papers arecomprehensive and provide a good basis fordiscussion and action. The minutes clearlyidentify decisions made. They also provide goodevidence of governors’ deliberations. There is agood level of attendance at meetings of thegoverning body and its committees. However,the level of vacancies has contributed to a fewmeetings being postponed or closed due toquoracy difficulties. The governing body has anappropriate committee structure, including:finance and general purposes, staffing, auditand remuneration. Governors have adopted arobust approach to financial matters. Theydiscuss the institute’s financial position at eachmeeting of the finance and general purposescommittee and the governing body, and havetaken prompt action where appropriate toaddress any operating losses that are forecast.Governors have been sufficiently informed andinvolved on key issues, such as theaccommodation strategy, whilst making surethat they maintain the distinction betweengovernance and management. The auditcommittee has not fulfilled some of itsresponsibilities effectively. It made slowprogress in appointing internal auditors in1998-99.

55 The memorandum and articles ofassociation include procedures for the conductof governing body business. However, they arenot supported by a comprehensive set ofstanding orders or policy statements. Thegoverning body has a code of conduct but thishas not been updated to reflect the Nolancommittee’s recommendations. The governingbody has established a register of interests,which includes declarations by all governors andsenior managers of the institute. The articles of





association state the governors’ duty to appraiseand determine the remuneration of seniorpostholders. In the last year, the governingbody has redetermined the number of seniorpostholders. There are now two vice-principalsin addition to the principal and the companysecretary. The governors have not yetestablished formal criteria for the appraisal andremuneration of these new postholders.

Management

Grade 356 Inspectors agreed with many of thejudgements in the self-assessment report, butfound that several strengths were overstated.The institute recognised the mainweaknesses, but accorded them lesssignificance than inspectors did.

Key strengths

• good communication within theorganisation

• effective management of programmes

• well-developed arrangements for strategic planning

• effective partnership arrangements with local organisations

Weaknesses

• slow progress in addressing some keyissues

• a lack of reliable management information

• underdeveloped use of targets

• inadequate financial reporting

57 Management of the institute has improvedsince the last inspection, but progress on somekey issues, including managementreorganisation and management information,has been slower than planned. There have beena number of changes to the managementstructure. The principal was appointed in 1996.The current executive team, comprising theprincipal and two vice-principals, has been

operating since January 1999. They have clearroles and responsibilities and are working welltogether as a team. Since September 1999, sixheads of programme have had responsibility formanaging the curriculum. A new personnelmanager is in post. The self-assessment reportacknowledges some staffing difficulties over thepast two years, and action has been taken toaddress these. The report identifies as aweakness the lack of reliable information toinform monitoring and planning by managers.Progress has been slow to identify andimplement systems that will meet theinstitution’s needs. This has caused difficultiesin returning accurate and timely data to theFEFC. A new management information systemwas installed in October 1999, but it is too earlyto judge its effectiveness. The institute hasexperienced problems across a number of itscomputer functions. Managers have conducteda lengthy and extensive review of arrangementsfor information systems support, and governorshave recently decided to contract this serviceexternally.

58 Communication has improved significantlysince the last inspection, as evidenced in theself-assessment report. Roles andresponsibilities have been clarified across theorganisation and the meetings structure hasbeen reviewed. Decisions and actions areclearly published in minutes, which areappropriately circulated. Staff are consulted asa part of the decision-making process and arepositive about the changes. They understandtheir responsibilities and they welcome the openstyle of management. The self-assessmentreport recognises the need to review the role ofthe academic board. The institute has an equalopportunities policy and committee. Theminutes of the latter identify areas of work thatneed further attention. There is a separatedisability advisory group, which is workingeffectively, and an inclusive learning manager.The links between these areas of work areunderdeveloped.

59 The institute has developed effectiverelationships with a wide range of externalpartners. Regular meetings are held with othercolleges to consider joint planning and sharingof resources. Managers have made goodprogress in strategic planning processes sincethe last inspection. Staff and governors are wellinvolved. The institute recognises that the linksbetween the annual operating statement andaction plans are not yet fully effective. There isinconsistency in the way institute targets aretranslated into targets for programmes andservices across the organisation. Programmesare well managed and the links between seniorand middle managers are effective. A curriculum review system was put in place in1998 in which senior managers reviewedperformance and future plans with programmemanagers. The review of performance indicatesactions that have been taken but it does notprovide a systematic check against the targetsset out in the annual operating plan. Someobjectives have not been met, such as a reviewof timetabling and room utilisation. The self-assessment report recognises the needto develop further the institute’s marketingactivities. A publicity officer has beenappointed, and external expertise is being usedto conduct a marketing audit. Inspectorsidentified deficiencies in market research. The institute is aware that it does not carry outa needs analysis which adequately addresses itsobjective of further widening participation.

60 The FEFC’s audit service concludes that,within the scope of its review, the institute’sfinancial management is weak. The institute’sfinancial accounting system does not meet itsfinancial management needs. The production offinancial reports is laborious. The finance teamhas to use a combination of three computersystems, with significant manual transfer ofdata, to produce financial reports. Thisadversely affects their prompt productionmonthly and is an inefficient use of resources.Budget holders operate their own local systems

to monitor their budgets. Income andexpenditure reports do not include profiledbudget information, which makes monitoringdifficult, particularly in the first half of the year.Financial reports to governors do not include arolling cashflow forecast for 12 months ahead.The institute has recognised in its self-assessment report that its finance system isa weakness and is working towards replacing itfor 2000-01. The institute is in strong financialhealth. It has developed a sophisticated budgetplanning process, which involves extensivedelegation of income and expenditure toprogramme manager level. Clear guidance andtraining is given to budget holders. The financeteam has monitoring sessions with budgetholders.

Conclusions

61 The institute produced its second self-assessment report in preparation forinspection. The report was comprehensive buttoo long. Some judgements were clearly statedbut parts of the report contained too manynarrative statements. Action to addressweaknesses and further improve provision wasdescribed, but the intended outcomes were notalways clear. The institute has been slow toachieve action in some areas. Inspectors agreedwith many of the judgements in the report, butconcluded that some strengths were overstatedand some weaknesses were overlooked. Someweaknesses in management and qualityassurance were given more significance byinspectors. In one curriculum area, inspectorsagreed with the self-assessment grade, butfound different strengths and weaknesses.Inspectors agreed with six of the self-assessmentgrades; four grades awarded by inspectors werelower than those in the institute’s report.

62 Strengths and weaknesses identifiedduring the inspection are listed under eachsection of this report. The main strengths andweaknesses are identified in the summary.




Institute Statistics

Student enrolments by age (July 1999)

Age %

Under 16 0

16-18 years 1

19-24 years 7

25+ years 85

Not known 7

Total 100

Source: college data

Student enrolments by level of study (July 1999)

Level of study %

Level 1 (foundation) 2

Level 2 (intermediate) 1

Level 3 (advanced) 2

Level 4/5 (higher) 0

Non-schedule 2 95

Total 100


Student enrolments by mode of attendanceand curriculum area (July 1999)

Programme Full Part Total area time time provision

%

Science 0 117 0

Business 0 1,930 5

Hotel and catering 0 120 0

Health andcommunity care 0 3,646 8

Art and design 56 18,400 42

Humanities 24 19,205 44

Basic education 0 303 1

Total 80 43,721 100


Widening participation

Based on a postcode analysis of 1995-96 ISRdata, the college recruited 64% of students fromdisadvantaged areas defined in relation to theDepartment of the Environment Index of LocalConditions.

Staff expressed as full-time equivalents(July 1999)

Perm- Fixed Casual Totalanent term

Direct learning contact 59 0 70 129

Supporting direct learning contact 19 0 14 33

Other support 63 0 11 74

Total 141 0 95 236

Source: college data, rounded to nearest full-time equivalent

Institute Statistics


Three-year Trends

Financial data

1997 1998 1999

Income £7,816,000 £7,817,000 £8,206,000

Average level of funding (ALF)* £18.17 £17.93 £17.32

Payroll as a proportion of income 76% 74% 74%

Achievement of funding target 117% 134% 114%

Diversity of income 42% 43% 43%

Operating surplus -£41,000 £175,000 £42,000

Sources: Income – Council Circular 98/43 (1997), college (1998 and 1999)ALF – college (1997, 1998 and 1999)Payroll – Council Circular 98/43 (1997), college (1998 and 1999)Achievement of funding target – Performance Indicators 1997-98 (1997 and 1998), college (1999)Diversity of income – Council Circular 98/43 (1997), college (1998 and 1999)Operating surplus – Council Circular 98/43 (1997), college (1998 and 1999)*including non-schedule 2 provision

Students’ achievements data

Level Retention Students aged 16 to 18 Students aged 19 or overand pass 1996 1997 1998 1996 1997 1998

1 Number of starters - 998 - - - -

Retention (%) - 50 - - - -

Achievement (%) - 32 - -- - -

2 Number of starters 525 590 609 - - -

Retention (%) 85 74 80 - - -

Achievement (%) 82 96 83 - - -

3 Number of starters 1,540 2,144 1,938 - - -

Retention (%) 85 68 77 - - -

Achievement (%) 80 88 74 - - -

4 or 5 Number of starters - - - - - -

Retention (%) - - - - - -

Achievement (%) - - - - - -

Short Number of starters 1 16 163 177 123 13

courses Retention (%) 100 100 100 100 100 100

Achievement (%) 0 0 96 99 100 96

Unknown/ Number of starters 1,014 0 1,051 - - -

unclassified Retention (%) 93 n/a 83 - - -

Achievement (%) 32 n/a 37 - - -

Source: ISR-ISR data not collectedn/a not applicable

Published by theFurther Education Funding Council

Website www.fefc.ac.uk© FEFC January 2000

FEFC Inspection Report 20/00

the city literary institute - ucl institute of...

Documents