Curriculum Strategy and Quality Improvement Minutes 24 January 2022
Curriculum Strategy and Quality Improvement Minutes 24 January 2022
Corporation and Committee Minutes- Curriculum Strategy and Quality Improvement Minutes 24 January 2022
Minutes of a Meeting of the Board of Leicester College Corporation:
Meeting of the Curriculum Strategy and Quality Improvement Committee Held on 24 January 2022 Via Teams
Present: John Allen (Chair), Verity Hancock, Zoe Allman, Harmeet Kaur, Lisa Armitage, Akith Maluge, Anne Frost, Jai Sharda, Danielle Gillett
In Attendance: Louise Hazel- Director of Governance and Policy, Debi Donnarumma- Vice Principal Study Programmes and Apprenticeships, Kully Sandhu- Vice Principal Adult and HE, Rebecca Purple- Programme Area Manager MECC, Jayen Sharma- Programme Area Manager MECC
Declaration of Interest
1.1 There were no declarations of interest.
Apologies for Absence
2.1 Apologies for absence were received from Shaun Curtis
Functional Skills
3.1 The Vice Principal Adult and HE introduced the discussion by explaining that the College’s 16-18 Functional Skills (FS) achievement had declined by 6.8% in 2021 compared to the previous year and was 16.2% below the 2018/19 National Achievement Rates (NAR). This was the last available published dataset. For many students, the FS exams would have been the first exams they had sat because GCSEs had been assessed using the teacher assessed grades process for the past two years.
3.2 The Director of MECC supported by the Programme Area Managers (PAMs) gave a presentation on 16-18 FS. The following points were highlighted.
3.2.1 Fewer students joined the College with both maths and English GCSE grades 9-4 than in other colleges and so the College had high numbers of students taking both GCSE and FS English and maths.
3.2.2 For FS English, the College performed better in terms of pass rates when compared to the rest of the sector. Entry level rates were high at 3 83% although these were not exam-based assessments.
3.2.3 For FS maths, the College again performed better than the sector although results particularly at Level 1 and 2 were low and the lowest ever for the sector.
3.2.4 Although the College outperformed other colleges for 16-18 FS, it was acknowledged that rates for English and maths were too low.
3.2.5 Female students performed better in English FS than males; the opposite was true for Maths. This might be due to vocational subjects such as construction and engineering which tended to recruit more male students having more maths content and therefore more opportunities to practice maths in a vocational context. There was a similar picture for English in subjects which had higher numbers of female students. Further work was needed to address these differentials.
3.2.6 Comparison of pass rates by the different awarding bodies was given which suggested that City and Guilds rates were slightly higher than Pearson.
3.2.7 The main challenges which were included in the Curriculum Area’s Quality Improvement Plan were highlighted.
3.2.8 Curriculum intent was considered including whether the right qualifications were offered to support students’ intended destinations. There were some advantages to the College in enrolling students on GCSEs but these would not necessarily be right for the students. The first six weeks of students’ courses were an opportunity to make sure that students were on the right programmes.
3.2.9 Attendance at English and maths had been an issue for several years but had been exacerbated by the pandemic. Attendance Coaches worked with students to encourage attendance. Vocational managers could now see English and maths attendance and reviewed that as part of students’ whole study programme.
3.2.10 Writing skills was an issue for FS and GCSE and was preventing some achievement
3.2.11 Many students were experiencing exam anxiety particularly because they had not sat formal exams; exam preparation was a focus.
3.3 The PAM for FS Maths described a range of strategies being used to improve FS maths including:
3.3.1 A teaching model focusing on underpinning skills, classroom delivery and independent learning.
3.3.2 Additional support through Tuition classes and block delivery.
3.3.3 Early exams through block delivery, followed by paper and online exams.
3.3.4 Additional strategies to be implemented included the use of intense block revision classes with selected learners; focusing on past papers; exam techniques; looking at gaps in learning with exams at the end of the block; bridging the levels and encouraging those who had passed Level 1 passes to start working on level 2 material; using online tools, and piloting the use of a different awarding body.
3.4 The PAM for FS English described a range of strategies being used to improve FS English including:
3.4.1 Delivery through weekly two-hour face to face sessions and one weekly one hour directed study/homework session using Teams and workbooks which allowed for additional assessment and feedback.
3.4.2 Exams with block style intense delivery in place prior to December exams and block delivery prior to February and April exams.
3.4.3 Adapted Schemes of Work to allow for more input prior to reading and writing exams.
3.4.4 Additional English tuition sessions.
3.4.5 Updated workbooks closely linked to the latest IDEAS programme with a focus on improving cognition/repetition and a focus on writing skills. This was proving particularly successful for learners with SEND.
3.4.6 Looking at a different awarding body with a pilot of block week delivery being used with APCO learners. Learner responsive tutors were using an exam paper as a formative assessment to gather feedback on success from learners and tutors.
3.4.7 Preparing learners for the next level once they completed entry or level 1 qualifications.
3.5 Governors asked the following questions.
3.5.1 If the College’s results were above the national average, would all other colleges’ achievement rates be depressed by FS results? NARs would not be available for the current year and so it would be difficult to know what the national picture would be, but it was a fair assumption that lower FS rates would impact.
3.5.2 Who decided which awarding body the College used? The College had been with Pearson for a few years but a pilot was running to look at using City and Guilds. Teachers were involved in the decision-making process for choosing awarding bodies.
3.5.3 For clarification, was the College doing better than other colleges in maths and English? The College was performing better for both English and maths but the pass rates for FS maths Level 1 and 2 for the College and the whole sector were very low.
3.5.4 What strategies were being employed to improve attendance? A range of strategies were being used and these were included in the QIP. Links between the MECC team and vocational areas had not been as strong during the pandemic because of remote working but these were being improved and the QA process was helping with that. English catch up sessions were being arranged at FPC which had noticeable lower attendance. Attendance for English and maths was usually around 5% below attendance for vocational provision.
3.5.5 Whether there was a link between the achievement of English and maths and the achievement of the vocational programme. No, although English and maths was part of the overall study programme, it was not necessary to pass these in order to achieve the main qualification.
3.5.6 Whether failure to achieve FS was impacting on students’ ability to progress. It would depend on the entry criteria for progressing students. If students had not achieved their FS but wanted to progress, this would not act as a barrier and alternative English and maths would be provided.
3.5.7 What data was available on progression outside the College? A 5 report on this would be brought to the next meeting.
3.5.8 What would Ofsted expect in terms of FS? Ofsted would be likely to take the view that even if the College’s rates were above national, if the national rates were low, that would not be much of a defence. For GCSEs, high achievement of low grades would not be looked on positively.
3.5.9 How confident was the VP that strategies would have an impact on the current year? Progress in implementing the strategies was being monitored regularly and there was confidence that they would have an impact. Retention was good and so would also affect achievement rates. The current rates were not good enough but it was likely that it would take a couple of years to get up to national rates.
3.5.10 Would the Committee see progress with the QIP? It would.
3.6 Governors thanked staff for their presentation
Date of Next Meetings
2 February 2022
27 April 2022
15 June 2022
Any Other Business
5.1 There was no other business.