A training provider has been downgraded to ‘inadequate’ by Ofsted after inspectors found that teachers “coach” some students to answer assessment questions.
Free2Learn offers short, publicly funded vocational courses for adults seeking work, across the country.
Following an inspection in May, the education watchdog moved Free2Learn’s overall grade from ‘requires improvement’ to ‘inadequate’ for quality of education, leadership and management, and adult learning programmes.
However, the provider – which recorded a turnover of more than £11 million in 2022-23 – retained a ‘good’ rating for behaviour and attitude and ‘requires improvement’ in personal development.
The education watchdog said that although students are awarded their qualifications, “too often” they learned to pass the assessments rather than gaining an understanding of the course content.
‘Teachers coach all learners’
Inspectors wrote: “On the level 2 customer service course, for example, activities are limited to the completion of workbooks, and teachers coach all learners to write answers to the assessment questions, with little teaching input.
“Consequently, many students pass the assessments despite having not gained the knowledge needed.”
At the time of the inspection, Free2Learn had 235 adult learners enrolled, most attending the company’s Doncaster site. It appears to also have centres in London, Slough and Birmingham.
The ‘inadequate’ rating may jeopardise contracts the company has with combined authorities such as South Yorkshire, which expects providers to “cease recruitment of new learners” from the date of Ofsted’s feedback.
According to the Ofsted report, published today, students have “insufficient opportunity” to develop the skills needed for their desired career.
Courses ‘not appropriate’ for needs
Some students are also placed on courses that are “not appropriate” for their needs, such as their English language abilities, the report said.
Many found their course was “not sufficiently demanding” while others found it was “too challenging”.
Too few students gain jobs or further training from their courses “despite the fact that this is the main purpose of the course,” inspectors found.
This was due to a lack of careers guidance, work experience, or qualifications by the time they have completed, they added.
Management and senior staff who visit lessons also failed to “identify accurately the many weaknesses in teaching and assessment,” inspectors wrote.
Board members responsible for quality oversight did not receive “accurate information” about standards of teaching, meaning they were “unable to challenge leaders to improve it”.
However, students benefit from learning in diverse groups, feel safe, have high attendance levels and “feel optimistic”.
The report noted that “despite their poor experience,” learners are positive about their studies.
A ‘comprehensive action plan’
When contacted for comment, a spokesperson for the company said that while they were “disappointed” with the overall rating, they view it as a “critical opportunity for growth and improvement”.
The company has begun implementing a “comprehensive action plan” to improve teaching and learner support.
“Free2Learn is confident that the steps taken will lead to significant positive changes in our educational standards and learner outcomes,” they added.
According to Companies House, Free2Learn is run by chief executive officer Gabriel Ghersovic but is ultimately owned by Damian Gerscovic through a parent company.
South Yorkshire Mayoral Combined Authority has been approached for comment.
Another mindless, selective and biased discrimination by Ofsted.
I have heard several similar tales of institutions simply walking ‘students’ through tests, with the main goal just being to make money from the system.
Proper exams needed all round and independently invigilated
Would you care to provide some evidence or justification for that statement?
This is a typical waste of tax payers money. When the providers are questioned about the delivery or the employability success rates, these are backed by unbelievable statistics. However, the people who dish out these contracts sit on their laurels. Many honest smaller providers never get a chance of proving themselves due to these big sharks who are easily trusted and pull wool over the eyes of others. Stop wasting public money on such devious providers and go directly to community based providers who understand their vulerable residents.
The reporter should have taken a look at the previous monitoring visit 10 months previously. Two significant progress judgements on areas that are now being held up as inadequate? The managers and governors must have felt that they were doing the right thing to be on course for a good. Those judgements should only be given out where there is certainty as they equate to outstanding.
I’m not sure what you mean by “equate to outstanding”. Also, I don’t think “The managers and governors must have felt that they were doing the right thing to be on course for a good” is a logically defensible statement: there are other available scenarios, e.g. they did what was needed to have a reasonable monitoring visit, then focused on profitability rather than quality. It’s a limited company, so I don’t imagine they have “governors”.
Board members equate to governors in this case. Governors are not only found in colleges. For example I am chair of governors at an outstanding ITP whose practice in quality is far better than any college that I ever inspected. Try reading the highly positive MV prior to the inspection. Inspectors should have spotted any inadequate practice then as it doesn’t suddenly happen. Your view appears to be it is easy to pull the wool over inspectors eyes.