Two colleges in the FE sector are considering appeals after receiving ‘inadequate’ or ‘satisfactory’ inspection grades from Ofsted.

Stafford College, which received a grade four at the end of last month, has confirmed it will be submitting an appeal because of “crucial factual errors” in its inspection report.

Steve Willis, principal of the college, has also said the informal feedback from inspectors gave a “misleading picture of the quality of work that takes place at this college”.

A statement issued by the college said the poor inspection grade can be attributed to a measure of student performance called ‘Outcomes for Learners’ that, under new weighting, has forced its teaching, management and value for money to be downgraded.

The inspection report, which follows a “good” grade two rating in 2009, said lessons at Stafford College are “uninspiring” and fail to challenge learners.

“Teachers know their subjects well but the quality of lessons across the college varies too much,” the report said.

We decided to be entirely rigorous and transparent in our data collection, adhering to national guidelines. Once that happened, a poor inspection outcome was inevitable.”

“Inspectors found good teaching and learning in over half the lessons observed but too much (of) that was satisfactory and did not challenge learners enough to reach their full potential.”

It later said the college’s success rates have declined and are particularly low for learners on advanced courses.

The statement from the college, however, refers to a report by Tenon Education Training and Skills Limited, which was written on behalf of a secret group of colleges.

The report, seen by FE Week, suggests “widespread” methods artificially inflate success rate data and inspection grades.

Mr Willis says: “There are many ways in which we could have reported entirely different levels of student success.

“We decided to be entirely rigorous and transparent in our data collection, adhering to national guidelines.

“Colleges are under enormous pressure to find creative ways to measure their success rates and we knew that our own approach could lead to us falling below the national average.

“Once that happened, a poor inspection outcome was inevitable.”

Franklin College, which also received an ‘inadequate’ grade from Ofsted in May, said it too is considering an appeal.

The sixth form college in Grimsby, which received a ‘good’ rating in 2008, has been criticised for “not driving improvements with urgency”.

Inspectors said that the leadership and management of the college requires improvement, and that strategic priorities need to be communicated more effectively to staff.

They also say that the success rates for students on AS level courses is “consistently and significantly” below the national average.

“Since the last inspection there has been no trend of improvement in poor success rates in AS level and on intermediate courses.”

Using new pilot inspection guidelines, Ofsted said that too many courses at the college have poor retention rates, although they admit that in the current year “retention rates have improved”.

Barnfield College, which has fallen from “outstanding” to “satisfactory”, said it had decided not to appeal an Ofsted report that said a significant number of lessons did not challenge students and were unclear about what they should be learning.

It later said the college is “over-generous” when judging its own performance, and also has declining success rates for students on long courses.

Pete Birkett, chief executive of the Barnfield Federation said: “The college takes all audits very seriously and uses them to raise our game, which we are now doing.”

An Ofsted spokesperson told FE Week it did not comment on individual inspections “over and above the published reports”.

When questioned about the appeals, the spokesperson added: “Ofsted does not comment on whether a complaint or concerns have been received about individual providers.”

The Association of Employment and Learning Providers (AELP) has questioned the way learners are employed by Apprenticeship Training Agencies (ATAs).

An article in the association’s weekly briefing, written by Graham Hoyle, chief executive of AELP, said there had been “simmering disquiet” from members about the legitimacy of the ATA model.

“For many the capacity allowing the ATA to employ the apprentice is seen simply as a device to get round the dictat, supported by AELP, that all apprentices must be employed.

“It is perceived as a concession to a few to circumvent what is otherwise seen as a rigid stipulation, one which merely legitimises the continuation of the now outlawed programme led apprenticeships,” he said.

Mr Hoyle suggested in his article, which was sent to David Way, chief executive of the National Apprenticeship Service (NAS), that ATAs be forced to deliver pre-apprenticeship or access to apprenticeship programmes until the learner was hired full-time by the employer.

He said providers would then be encouraged to develop a mixture of programmes aimed at progressing learners on a full apprenticeship “at the earliest opportunity”.

However, in a written response Mr Way said these concerns had been addressed with the introduction of the ATA Recognition Process.

The process, managed in partnership with the Confederation of Apprenticeship Training Agencies (COATA), meant colleges and training providers could only work with ATAs approved by NAS from 2012/13.

“All ATA apprentices are employed from day one of their apprenticeship by the ATA and undertake their apprenticeship programme with a host employer in real sustainable employment where they are able to complete their apprenticeship,” Mr Way said.

Peter Pledger, chairman of COATA said: “Graham Hoyle, he’s thrown in all the ATA manifestations all into one pot and damned the lot of them.

“It seems to me to be a fundamental misunderstanding about what an ATA actually is.

“An ATA is not a training provider, an ATA is an employer and it seems to me that he has missed that point.”

Mr Pledger said COATA would meet with NAS, AELP and the Association of Colleges later this month to discuss any issues.

The chair of the information authority was knighted at Buckingham Palace last week.

Geoff Hall – principal of New College Nottingham until July 2011 – was one of 27 people to receive the order in the New Year’s Honours List 2012.

Sir Hall received the knighthood with his wife, Lady Hall, daughter, son and older brother.

“I enjoyed the ceremony at Buckingham Palace and sharing that very special day with my family,” he said.

“The fact that I have received a Knighthood for services to further education and skills is a real indication of the growing importance of the sector, as well as a huge honour for me.”

Geoff started his career in FE as a lecturer at South Trafford College, later becoming an officer for FE at Birmingham City Council.

He later became the director of education for the London borough of Bexley, as well as director of education programmes at the Further Education Funding Council for England (FEFC).

Franklin College has been judged as “inadequate” by Ofsted under new pilot inspection guidelines.

The sixth form college in Grimsby, which received a grade 2 in 2008, has been criticised for “not driving improvements with urgency”.

An inspection report published by Ofsted yesterday says the leadership and management of the college requires improvement, and that strategic priorities need to be communicated more effectively to staff.

The inspection also found that the success rates for students on AS level courses is “consistently and significantly” below the national average.

“Since the last inspection there has been no trend of improvement in poor success rates in AS level and on intermediate courses,” the report reads.

Under the new framework Ofsted say too many courses at the college have poor retention rates, although it admits that in the current year “retention rates have improved.”

The report says “too much teaching remains satisfactory” at Franklin College, and also criticises “inconsistencies” in the assessment of students’ work.

“Pace and challenge are not sufficient to enhance learning and promote better and ambitious outcomes,” the report reads.

“While there is good and better teaching practice, mechanisms to disseminate this and enhance the skills of all teachers are underdeveloped.”

It later says teachers at the college are not providing enough “stimulating work” for students to complete outside of class.

However, the inspection report also praises the college for improving the range of courses which they offer.

“The college has begun to diversify its curriculum and has improved how students are placed on appropriate programmes,” the report reads.

“The number of vocational qualifications is beginning to increase (and) the drive to improve collaborations with local schools and the local general further education college is helping to shape the new curriculum to the benefit of students.”

Stafford College has been rated “inadequate” in a recent Ofsted inspection.

The college, which received a grade 2 in 2009, is said to have “uninspiring” lessons which are not planned properly and fail to challenge learners.

“Teachers know their subjects well but the quality of lessons across the college varies too much,” the report reads.

“Inspectors found good teaching and learning in over half the lessons observed but too much (of) that was satisfactory and did not challenge learners enough to reach their full potential.”

The inspection report by Ofsted, published last week, says the college’s success rates have been in decline and are particularly low for learners on advanced courses.

“Learners on AS-level courses have very low success rates and only half of those who complete progress to A levels,” the report reads.

“Nearly a third of those starting two-year advanced vocational courses do not complete the programme.”

However, the report later says the success rates for apprentices are “at a satisfactory level.”

Ofsted has admitted the college is starting to tackle low levels of retention, with in-year data showing “some improvement”.

“Most learners make satisfactory progress and their progression within the college is good,” it reads.

The inspection report blames the leadership and management at the college for the decline in success rates.

“They have not applied quality assurance arrangements consistently across all provision to ensure improvement,” the report reads.

“This is particularly so for AS and A-level provision where the college’s quality improvement arrangements within the collegiate have not halted the decline in AS-level success rates.”

It also says the college’s development plan is “insufficiently rigorous”, despite including appropriate targets for recruitment and financial performance.

The report states: “It does not have targets for success for the college as a whole and does not include an action plan to manage and measure progress towards meeting targets.”

However, Ofsted has also praised the college’s delivery of hairdressing and beauty therapy.

The report says the success rate on intermediate hairdressing is “well above (the) national average”, and the retention rate on intermediate beauty therapy has increased “markedly.”

“Learners develop good vocational and employability skills including teamwork, communication and client care,” the report reads.

“Most foundation learners develop very good creative skills in nail art.”