Agenda item

The Community Learning and Skills Manager introduced a report that informed the Panel of the development that had taken place within the service and of the progress made during 2019/2020.

At the conclusion of a PowerPoint presentation, comments and questions were invited from the Panel.

During the discussion, the following points and questions were raised:

Referring to the Service Enrolments 2019/20 (cumulative) table, set out on paragraph 5.9 of the report, a member requested further breakdown of the age groups of the 3,000 enrolled learners. Details of how grant funding of the service was split between Slough Borough Council (SBC) and Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead (RBWM). The Community and Skills Manager advised that details of the breakdown were required to be provided in a report to the Education and Skills Funding Agency (ESFA.). These would be provided to the Panel.

A member asked whether work was undertaken with community groups to establish local needs and whether established needs were being met. It was explained that approximately 18 months to 2 years prior, many students had been repeat students. However, since then, learners’ wellbeing and employment and skills were being reviewed holistically. Clients were initially referred from Job Centre Plus and the service would initially establish the areas of interest and aspirations of the learners.

A member asked about the achievement rate. It was explained that the achievement rate was measured by the number of people on accredited provisions and whether the learners had successfully completed their course. This was measured by retention and pass rates. In terms of the providers, standard KPIs were used by Ofsted to assess the quality of providers, where an 80% KPI would be rated as ‘good’. Eighteen months prior, the quality of providers had been rated as Grade 3 ‘requires improvement’. This rating was moved to ‘good’ during the last Ofsted inspection which included looking at the outcomes of annual self assessment, and key statistics.

In response to a question about the number of learners on a course, it was explained that the aim was to have a minimum of 12 with an optimum of 14 on a course, depending on where the course was being offered.

A member asked whether staff had been provided with training to run online courses as a result of the Covid- 19 pandemic. It was explained that tutors had been provided with intensive training via the Zoom and Bluejeans platforms. Tutors had also been trained on the flipped learning method, which they used to deliver some sessions. The outcome of a survey on online learning returned positive responses from both the experiences of tutors and learners.

A member questioned the likelihood of the Education Funding Agency (EFA) seeking a clawback of grant funding. It was explained that this was possible but EFA had not yet finalised how the process of clawback would work. Meanwhile, an analysis of last year’s grant had been completed and calculated at £73,000 which would be mitigated in the Community Learning budget for the current year.

The Chair invited Cllr Strutton to address the Panel under Rule 30. Cllr Strutton referred to paragraph 5.9 and asked for further clarification on the following:

-  Outline of the changes made in teaching structures. How tutors had been affected by the disruption of Covid -19 and how this had impacted on the level of reduction in learners.

-  Requested a breakdown of figures by ward, to ascertain where priorities should be focused.

-  A breakdown of the 3000 learners enrolled in 2019/20 that had been successful and unsuccessful in completing their courses.

The Assistant Director, Place Regulation advised that the information would be provided.

Members were advised that the previous Ofsted inspection which raised issues about the quality of teaching had now been addressed and had improved to ‘good’ rating. With regard to staffing, historically, many tutors worked on an as-and-when needed basis, which did not therefore allow time to provide quality teaching. The required standard of teaching had now been established and staff worked under contacted hours which had led to a significant improvement in the quality of teaching. However, learner numbers up to the end of March 2020 had been lower than planned for in a normal year. Repeat learners had not been progressing and moving on or achieving. Since then, a progress and progression form was introduced for tutors to complete each time, and where a learner had made no progress; they were encouraged to move on. Inevitably, this process resulted in the loss of learner numbers. A fresh start was subsequently made with a new flow of learners to ensure that priorities were being met. In addition, procurement commissioning was late and the provision of intensive courses resulted in less courses and inevitably, reduced learners.

It was explained that outcomes had improved as learners were moving into work. It had been planned for learner target to be met by 31 July 2020, however, due to Covid-19, many of the proposed work had to be reduced and moved online. Theory work for some courses had been completed but the practical part had yet to follow. This would be the information that would be submitted to the ESFA, should the service be found to be in breach, as would be the case with many other providers.

Cllr Strutton queried that the issue of repeat learners may have been due to poor teaching and asserted that there may be a high demand in learners wanting to do E-learning courses during Covid-19. Requested figures on the percentage of success rate of people moving into work.

 It was explained that six new teachers of excellent standards had recently been recruited who would be useful in sharing good practice with the rest of the team. The recommendation of the ESFA had been to focus on current learners, particularly those going through accreditation. Additional courses including health and wellbeing were being offered with a hierarchy of accessibility. Support was being provided to many learners who were finding it difficult, via email and telephone. A pilot of intensive courses had commenced in September 2019 and commissioners would be undertaking a follow-up progression from Slough learners. Although these were early stages, the indication was that learners were moving into work and developing their career paths, whilst not that detailed due to Covid-19.

Resolved:

i)  That the report be noted.

ii)  That the Community, Learning and Skills Manager be requested to provide the following to the Panel and Cllr Strutton:

·  Further breakdown of the age groups of the 3,000 enrolled learners.

·  Details of how grant funding of the service was split between Slough Borough Council (SBC) and Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead (RBWM).

iii)  That further clarification as set out above be provided for Councillor Strutton and the Panel.