Memorandum submitted by Newcastle College
Group
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In responding to the points included in the inquiry
into the role and performance of OFSTED, Newcastle College Group
(NCG) concludes that the inspection system as designed is no longer
fit for purpose.
The purpose of inspection should be to improve the
quality of education and training and raise levels of achievement
where appropriate standards are not delivered. Inspection in
successful organisations is a process which disrupts business
continuity and adds little value.
For the many providers in the sector inspection is
a costly and time consuming exercise which serves only to validate
the providers own judgement of performance.
Other, more credible, approaches can be shown to
have greater impact on underperforming providers than an overly-bureaucratic
data driven inspection regime.
The quality and standard of team membership is not
consistent and therefore the robustness of the inspection process
in the future cannot be assured. OFSTED has expanded its remit
to include other inspectorates, and in some matters have become
enforcers in areas where it lacks confidence and credibility.
Many providers would benefit from having the burden
of inspection removed, to operate with greater autonomy and to
work within a defined accountability mechanism. The production
of the annual self-assessment report is an unnecessary bureaucratic
burden. Providers should be released from this to focus on running
successful educational, training and employability organisations
OFSTED has a role, with other agencies, to review
and reduce the complex accountability arrangements operating across
the sector and to replace them with an appropriate accountability
mechanism which will support the move towards greater autonomy
and self-regulation.
INTRODUCTION
Newcastle College Group
Following a successful merger and acquisitions strategy
which began in 2007, Newcastle College Group (NCG) has grown
out of Newcastle College to become a £170 million organisation
which serves 75,000 learners and customers annually at over 100
delivery locations; it is now one of the largest educational,
training and employability organisations in the UK.
NCG comprises three Divisions: Newcastle College,
Skelmersdale & Ormskirk College and Intraining. Its head
office and Group/Shared Services Division is based in Newcastle
upon Tyne.
Newcastle College is one of the most successful colleges
in the country, offering a diverse range of academic, vocational,
work based and employer training courses ranging from entry level
to post-graduate qualifications. It is one of the largest providers
of Higher Education in the FE sector. Newcastle College was graded
Outstanding by OFSTED in May 2004 and June 2008.
Skelmersdale & Ormskirk College merged with Newcastle
College in 2007. In 2006 Skelmersdale & Ormskirk College
was graded Inadequate by OFSTED. Newcastle College and Skelmersdale
& Ormskirk College were graded Outstanding by OFSTED, in every
category and every sub category, in June 2008.
Intraining was formed in March 2008, following the
rebranding of the business acquired from Carter & Carter Group
plc and the integration of TWL Training Ltd. Focusing upon delivering
Work Based Learning and Welfare to Work contracts nationwide.
It was graded Outstanding by OFSTED in June 2009.
Mission
NCG's mission is to develop people through learning
and achievement for the benefit of themselves, society and the
economy.
Our objectives are to:
— put
the needs of the learner and customer first;
— innovate
and support excellence in learning and employability;
— promote
diversity and social mobility;
— value,
involve and invest in our staff;
— foster
strong partnerships with stakeholders and communities; and
— secure
our future through strategic investment and profitability.
Our focus is on meeting national and regional education,
skills and employability needs for individuals and the skills
priorities of employers in line with Government agendas.
THE ROLE
AND PERFORMANCE
OF OFSTED
What the Purpose of Inspection should be
1. The inspection system is designed to provide objective
and dispassionate reports that include judgements and recommendations
which providers should use to improve their provision and achievement.
Many providers have demonstrated that they are more than capable
of making sound judgements on their own performance and, where
this is the case, inspection has become no more than a costly
self validation exercise. The process of inspection should establish
where providers have the systems and processes in place to maintain
appropriate standards over time and the capacity and capability
to self-regulate to release them from further inspection.
2. The purpose of inspection should be to improve
the quality of education and training and raise levels of achievement
where appropriate standards are not delivered.
The Impact of the Inspection Process on School/College
Improvement
3. Inspection for some providers can be a catalyst
for improvement. However, for many failing providers inspection
fails to drive the transformational change which is required to
address underperformance. Failing providers would fair better
by being "shown the way" by successful providers who
know the challenges, are current and credible and can provide
the type of meaningful support which can help to drive up standards.
Other, more credible, approaches can be shown to have greater
impact on underperforming providers than an overly-bureaucratic
data driven inspection regime. NCG has provided coaching, mentoring
support and work shadowing opportunities to management teams from
providers across the sector with much success. The acquisition
of Skelmersdale and Ormskirk College demonstrated NCGs ability
to transform a failing provider in a very short time frame where
interventions and inspection regimes had previously failed.
4. Outstanding providers do not need OFSTED inspection.
They know they are good and what they need to do to stay that
way. Providers with proven track records are capable of monitoring
and maintaining high standards of performance and self regulation.
For the many providers in the sector inspection is a costly and
time consuming exercise which serves only to validate the providers
own judgement of performance.
5. The commitment in time and resources to produce
a robust set of judgements for the annual self assessment report
to inform inspection activity is considerable. For many annual
self-assessment is a compliance process which fails to drive significant
and timely improvements. For all providers the self-assessment
report presents a year end snapshot, which needs regular updating
throughout the year to maintain currency. Across NCG sophisticated
processes and reporting tools drive business performance using
real time information to drive performance to deliver required
levels of performance. Successful providers are clear about the
measures which need to be monitored to deliver success; they should
not be hampered by unnecessarily bureaucratic contractual requirements.
The production of the self-assessment report is an unnecessary
bureaucratic burden. Providers should be released from this to
focus on running successful educational, training and employability
organisations.
6. Newcastle College was inspected in 2004 and graded
Outstanding by OFSTED. Whilst the annual self assessment judgements
and performance data confirmed a strengthening of this position
Newcastle College was subjected to a lengthy and highly resourced
inspection in 2008. Similarly under the stewardship of NCG, Intraining
was inspected in 2009 and graded Outstanding. At this time five
inspections were conducted over a two week time period. One inspection
alone involved 4,500 miles travelled, 640 observed or interviewed
sessions, 16 inspectors. The other four inspections involved 16
inspectors, 320 observed or interviewed sessions, 4,000 miles
travelled. In total, 8,500 miles travelled, 240 inspection days,
almost 1000 observed or interviewed sessions. Inspection of successful
providers on this size and scale is a process which is hugely
disruptive to business continuity and adds little value. Whilst
the national recognition of outstanding performance is welcomed
the impact of inspection on the core business is significant.
7. Similar bodies carry out the same function as
OFSTED elsewhere in the UK; ESTYN in Wales, Education and Training
Inspectorate (ETI) in Northern Ireland. An organisation such as
Intraining is subjected to monitoring and inspection at least
every month, each time having to update a range of documents including
SARs, QAQs, PDPs. In the period June to July 2010 Intraining was
involved in 14 inspections.
The Performance of OFSTED in Carrying out its
Work
8. Over time tensions between OFSTED and other
agencies relating to methodologies and measurements have become
apparent. The introduction of the LSC Framework for Excellence
introduced sets of key performance indicators similar to measures
embedded in the Common Inspection Framework. Whilst the vision
was a fully integrated approach to measuring performance the reality
is duplication of measurement in a number of areas.
9. In areas where OFSTED is subcontracted by funding
bodies, for example DWP, conflicting methodologies add to the
inspection burden placed on the provider. The DWP QAQ and the
Merlin Standard duplicate much that is measured by OFSTED.
The Consistency and Quality of Inspection Teams
in the OFSTED Inspection Process
10. As OFSTED's remit has expanded, so has its
reliance on commissioned private contractors whose inconsistencies
risk undermining quality assurance and destroying a reputation
for excellence synonymous with HMI. The quality and standard of
team membership is not consistent and therefore the robustness
of the inspection process in the future cannot be assured.
The Weight Given to Different Factors within the
Inspection Process
11. Numerical data carries the heaviest weighting
and drives the inspection process and outcomes. Less weighting
applies to other central themes including teaching, training and
learning. The increased focus on data and the declining interest
in what is happening in the core functions does not support failing
providers to improve their practice.
Whether Inspection of all Organisations, Settings
and Services to Support Children's/Young People and Adult Learning
and Welfare is Best Conducted by a Single Inspectorate
12. OFSTED has expanded its remit to include
other inspectorates, and in some matters have become enforcers
in areas where it lacks confidence and credibility. For example
the interpretation of safeguarding requirements by teams with
limited training has resulted in unreasonable and unrealistic
recommendations being made. As the remit has widened OFSTED's
ability to respond appropriately suggests that a single inspectorate
is not the solution.
The Role of OFSTED in Providing an Accountability
Mechanism for Schools and Colleges Operating with Greater Autonomy
13. Many providers would benefit from having
the burden of inspection removed, to operate with greater autonomy
and to work within a defined accountability mechanism. However
in order to reduce the burden on providers the multiple levels
of oversight, monitoring and inspection across the sector need
to be reviewed, rationalised and co-ordinated. OFSTED has a role,
with other agencies, to review and reduce the complex accountability
arrangements operating across the sector and to replace them with
an appropriate accountability mechanism which will support the
move towards greater autonomy and self-regulation.
October 2010
| 
