THE WKCIC GROUP

CURRICULUM AND PERFORMANCE COMMITTEE

Minutes of a meeting held on6th February 2017

MEMBERS PRESENT / David Gilbertson (Chair), Shane Chowen, Amelia Sussman, Anthony Tomei, Heather James, Andy Wilson, Vinny Edirimanasinghe
IN ATTENDANCE / Graham Drummond (Clerk), Anna Douglas, Kim Caplin, Caireen Mitchell, Raj Kakaiya, Julie Ellis
APOLOGIES / Alex Booth

Part I Agenda items for Discussion and Recommendation

  1. PREVIOUS MEETINGS
  2. MINUTES OF THE MEETING HELD ON 4TH OCTOBER 2016

  • On page 2 (item 3) it was noted that the Apprenticeship Levy will apply to all organisations with a payroll of over £3m, not just public sector employers;
  • On page 3 (item 4 – English and Maths Results) the committee had stressed the importance of predicting outcomes accurately.
Subject to these amendments the minutes were agreedand signed by the Chair as a correct record.
1.2.MINUTES OF THE MEETING HELD ON 5TH DECEMBER 2016
  • On page 3, regarding the action point for CM/AW, the pilot for how the Group plans to meet the requirements of the Sainsbury’s report is not due to begin until 2019/20.
Subject to this amendment the minutes were agreed and signed by the Chair as a correct record.
1.3.MATTERS ARISING
1.3.1 The following matters from the 4th October 2016 minutes were noted:
  • The main point about the apprenticeship levy made in the presentation on 4th October was that it provided a strong incentive for employers to take on apprentices with sanctions in the form of tax if they did not.

2. STUDENT SURVEY
The Committee received and considered the Student Survey November 2016 Summary Report from the Director of Planning and Performance. Attached were individual responses from the two colleges and a table showing the overall performance against the benchmarks, and other tables showing any divergence according to learner type, ethnicity, religion and provision type. The surveys are conducted biannually; in November and at Easter. It was noted that:
  • The biannual reporting meant that action could be taken within an academic year on issues arising from the survey;
  • The survey is a Quality Data Processing (“QPD”) survey and, as such, enabled the Group to compare against the benchmarks generated by all other colleges that engage QPD. In this case, the Group measured how it compares against 101 colleges in terms of teaching and learning, assessment, support and safeguarding;
  • The Training Arm and WKC were more familiar with the QPD format than CIC and this may explain some of CIC’s unexpectedly depressed results. WKC also performed below expectation but had improved satisfaction with maths and English and general satisfaction remains good;
  • The response rate was 60%;
  • The colleges performed strongly on safeguarding, but, particularly CIC, not so strongly on student satisfaction, assessment and support, which was of concern to the Committee;
  • The Training Company performed above the benchmark. Coaches working with the teams and 6-8 weekly progress reviews were among the factors attributed to this positive outcome;
  • The methodology for assessment may affect the yield of results depending on the type of course undertaken. For example, the A level student who likes two out of three A levels is unlikely to “strongly agree” overall that they are satisfied, even though satisfaction may be very high with individual subjects. However, the view was expressed that methodology alone should not affect results so adversely;
  • CIC has a high proportion of 16-18 year olds, who, historically, appear to be less likely to vote positively;
  • It was observed that there is usually more notable variation in the first of the biannual surveys and this is closer in time to induction periods. Newer students may not be used to the greater independence expected of them;
  • This particular survey does not show “distance travelled”, but future surveys will; the Committee was keen to ensure that the Group could show what had been done to address concerns raised previously; and
  • Mitigating actions to be taken include the Learner Voice week and a moderation in feedback. The Committee was assured that the centre directors elicit intelligence that can be acted upon to improve student satisfaction.
3. ENGLISH AND MATHS UPDATE
An English and Maths Progress Report 2016/7 was received and considered, with both colleges providing updates. It was noted that:
  • There are 3750 students studying English and maths, including a significant number who have had to re-sit many times;
  • CIC had entered 329 borderline English and maths students for their GCSE re-sits in November of whom 89 achieved a grade C or above;
  • Attendance is an area for development particularly at CBAT and CHSSC;
  • Mitigating actions include: joint collaboration of good practice across the Group, interviewing non-attendees and their parents, additional maths classes for students; consideration of the creation of Maths and English hubs, the use of advanced maths practitioners to embed maths in the wider curriculum, and the engagement of Action Tutoring specialist tutors;
  • There are 40-50 English and maths teachers across the Group, of whom a significant proportion areagency staff. Staff turnover is generallyhigh and it is acknowledged that salaries are lower than would be paid in equivalent posts in schools. The committee recognised these issues, which are common to nearly all schools and tertiary institutions and further noted that the Group’s leadership team were adopting a number of strategies to attract good English and maths teaching staff to work within the Group such as enhanced pay and a continual recruitment programme;
  • GCSEs are to be reformed, with alphabetical grades being replaced by numerical grades from 1-9, with 9 being the highest attainable. While Level 4 will be regarded as an A-C equivalent pass, it is expected that universities will generally aim to admit students who have achieved at Level 5.
4. ANNUAL SAFEGUARDING REPORT AND PRIORITIES FOR 16/17
The Committee received and considered the Safeguarding Reports for each of the colleges pre-merger. The reports also set out priorities in the coming year. The Committee noted that:
  • Safeguarding is an established strength of the colleges, as verified by Ofsted and exemplified by the use of e-safety and Cyberwise; there is an annual refresh of reporting, record-keeping and good practice;
  • There are 150 students enrolled at the Group who are classified as ‘looked-after children’. This is acknowledged by Local Authorities as being a notably large number;
  • An area that requires more attention is that of mental health. The use of mental health workers and their services has increased over the last three years;
  • Mental health is more of a pressing issue than Prevent even though the latter has received a higher profile within the FE sector and education as a whole;
  • The issue of whether the designated governor for safeguarding should be present for the consideration of this report was raised and also it was queried whether mental health merited attention as an area in its own right. It was agreed that the Clerk would consider the best way forward with respect to the proper consideration of the Group’s annual safeguarding report/s and whether a separate annual meeting might be a better way of ensuring that the associated issues are considered and monitored in a sufficiently robust manner.
5. CHANGES TO QUALIFICATIONS
The Committee received and considered a paper on qualification changes 2016-2018. The Committee noted:
  • Vocational qualifications are transferring from the Qualifications Credit Framework (“QCF”) to the National Qualifications Framework (“NQF”). QCF qualifications have a higher proportion of internal assessment where those that sit within the NCF use a far higher proportion of external assessment, in many cases accounting for 100% of the overall grade;
  • Some students have already transferred to the NQF, such as BTEC and Pearson students.
  • Students aged between 16 and 18 can stay under the QCF, but QCF qualifications will not attract 19-23 entitlement funding or performance measures in 2017/8, only the new NQF will;
  • AS levels will cease to count towards the final A level grade. Accordingly, their relevance is likely to decline. There are nine subjects left at AS level offered by the Group;
  • Advantages of the “loss” of AS level time include more teaching time freed up above the guided learning hours, allowing time for workshops, extra maths and work experience;
  • Disadvantages include the loss of an indicator of progress. The use of ProMonitor and markbook electronic assessment are seen as potentially mitigating this disadvantage;
  • It was the view of the committee that the Group should use empirical evidence as best it can to predict expected final grades, whilst recognising that this was an iterative process which would improve over time;
  • A level grades will be, for most subjects, entirely based on the result of final examinations, rather than coursework; the Committee was assured that the research aspects of the coursework-based assessments could be retained in teaching and there would be periodic testing.
6. STRATEGIC PLAN
The Committee received and considered a report on strategic planning from the Chief Executive for the proposed Capital City College Group (CCCG). Annexed to the report were two papers entitled “Capital City College Group Emerging Strategic Priorities” and “Designing the FE College for 21st Century London”. The Committee noted:
  • While slightly behind the presented schedule, it is proposed that the final plan be presented to the Governors at their meeting on 8th March 2017;
  • The Colleges and the Training Arm in consultation with their respective advisory boards are in the process of developing strategic plans to meet the objectives set within the Group’s strategic plan. The Group Director of Human Resources and Operational Development is also currently developing in consultation with staff, a set of core values which will be added to the Group’s strategic plan;
  • The Government has recently published an Industrial Strategy Green Paper, of which many of the priorities coincide with those stated within the Group’s draft strategy. Within this green paper the Government made reference to the proposed use of Institutes of Technology to deliver its strategy. Details of what form Institutes of Technology will take have yet to be confirmed, however the Group Leadership Team has been considering and will be considering ways in which it can place the Group in the best position to take advantage of any opportunities that may arise once the prospectus for their establishment is announced;
  • The Group has applied to the Department for Education to change its name to Capital City College Group. If this application is unsuccessful, ways in which the name can be used through a trading license arrangement will be explored;
  • The “Designing the FE College” paperis jointly written by The WKCIC Chief Executive and Group Principal and Andy Forbes, the Principal of the Collegeof Haringey, Enfield and North East London is the vision for the CCCG. Its objective is to be large enough to offer variety but be agile enough to address student needs, with the bullet points at the top of page 7 distilling the methods to achieve this;
  • The paper concludes that presently, there is little incentive for universities to collaborate with HE colleges, as a result, FE colleges have increasingly offered intermediate HE qualifications such as HNDs, regardless of whether they are suited to the needs of learners or the needs of the labour market. However, the Group continues to find ways of developing its partnership with universities, for example there is a close relationship with an academy sponsored by University College London;
  • The Group has made some progress vis-à-vis bullet points one and three and is looking at £6m worth of capital bids next year.
Part II Agenda items for Information
7. ANNUAL OFSTED CHIEF INSPECTOR’S REPORT
The Committee received this report for information.
8. WKCIC 16/18 PERFORMANCE TABLES FOR 2015/16
Whilst listed on the agenda for information, this item was considered to merit discussion. A report and annexed tables covering A levels, academic performance, applied general qualifications, technical performance, maths and English and destinations were received and considered. The Committee noted that:
  • The data relates to WKC only because of the closure of the CIC provider number. It was further noted that the achievement of those students over the age of 19 during their courses were also not included;
  • On general qualifications, the college has moved from merit to merit plus;
  • Although the number of minus progress scores may appear to be of concern, very few institutions have positive figures, with the best-performing only just exceeding zero;
  • The results of the tables are volatile; under previously used methodology, the WKCIC group would have figured mid-table and it is the application of value added that has yielded these particular results; and
  • It appears unlikely that the addition of CIC’s sixth-form results would have made a significant difference to the figures.
9.KEEPING CHILDREN SAFE IN EDUCATION – STATUTORY GUIDANCE FORSCHOOLS AND COLLEGES
The Committee received this report for information, in conjunction with point 4 above.

Signed as a correct record: ______

David Gilbertson, Chair of the Committee

1