Barry Lewis

1
Barry Lewis

• Inspection Manager
• Adult Learning Inspectorate

2
Our Remit

• ALI
• At least 5 million learners

3
Our Inspectors

• Around 140 full-time
• recruited from senior posts in the education and
  training sector
• bringing occupational expertise to the
  inspectorate
• trained as inspectors over six months
• highly paid and making judgements that count
• Around 600 associates
• All senior practitioners in their field

4
Approaches to Inspection

• Regulatory
• contractual compliance
• adherence to awarding body regulations
• observance of external requirements
• such as equal opportunities, health and safety,
  financial audit etc.
• Public accountability
• value for money
• fitness for purpose

5
ALIs Approach to Inspection

• Done with, not to
• Continuous quality improvement
• Key measure is the learners experience
• Evidence derived from primary research
• Use of vocational/occupational experts
• Examining inputs but judging outcomes
• Open and transparent
• Honest, but supportive

6
Done with, not To

• Our independence is vital
• Partnerships are essential
• (Including representatives from awarding bodies,
  funding bodies, QCA, DfES, employers, colleges
  and other key players.)
• The role of nominee is key to our process
• Self-assessment
• Post-inspection quality improvement support

7
Evolution of the Inspection Process

• Immature Sector with little regard to quality
• Introduction of self-assessment process
• Full inspection against Common Inspection
  Framework (CIF)
• All government-funded providers inspected, 4
  yearly
• Snap-shot view
• Emphasis on observation of teaching

8
Evolution of Inspection (2)

• Maturing self-assessment process
• Greater provider self-awareness
• Contextualising the CIF
• Inspection over time, where appropriate
• Inspection resourced on risk
• Less burden on good providers
• Emphasis on learning

9
Raising Standards

• Teaching
• Professionally qualified staff
• Observation of teaching
• environment, resources, level, delivery style,
  inclusiveness
• Attendance and retention
• Learning
• Interaction, involvement, understanding
• Level of attainment and progression
• Achievements

10
Raising Standards (2)

• Assessment
• Timely
• Access to fair assessment
• Constructive
• Formative and summative
• Meeting the standards
• Leadership Management
• Curriculum development
• At programme/course level
• right place, right time, right people
• quality assurance and equality of opportunity
• Report publication on the World Wide Web

11
How do we do it

• Train the nominees
• One day to explore the details of the role
• Planning meeting
• To scope the inspection and agree the samples for
  observation, interview etc.
• Select the correct inspectors for the team
• Fit the right expertise to the provision
• Inspect against the CIF

12
The Common Inspection Framework (CIF)

• In its simplest form we need to know
• How do people get onto the programme?
• What is the likelihood of their achieving
• What will they achieve and at what standard?
• What is the quality of their whole experience on
  the programme?
• Is that quality properly assured
• The CIF addresses all these and, given guidance,
  can be applied to any context

13
The inspection

• The team will gather evidence during the
  inspection from sources including
• Lesson observation, interviews with learners
• Interviews with staff, managers, employers and
  sub-contractors
• Examination of data relating to retention and
  achievement
• Review of related documentation
• The providers self assessment report

14
Daily Feedback

• At the end of each day the team (including the
  nominee) meets for feedback
• To hear emerging thoughts on strengths and
  weaknesses
• To identify further sources of evidence required
• To ensure the nominee is fully briefed
• At the end of the penultimate day
• Strengths and weaknesses are finalised
• On the last day the team grades and formally
  feeds back

15
The grading meeting

• Using the strengths and weaknesses that have been
  formulated throughout the inspection the team
• Debates and agrees a grade for each area of
  learning, leadership and management, equality of
  opportunity and quality assurance
• The nominee contributes to the debate, but not
  the grade
• Grade determine by professional judgement

16
Feedback

• The team formally feeds back
• Usually to the senior management of the provider.
  E.g. college principal and their team or company
  chief executive and their team.
• Each member of the team writes a report on the
  area of the inspection for which they were
  responsible, but the lead inspector is
  responsible for writing the final report
• The report is then moderated by an inspection
  manager
• After editing the report is published on the Web

17
Following Inspection

• The provider produces a post-inspection action
  plan
• If provision was found to be less than
  satisfactory there is a reinspection
• Even for satisfactory provision the ALI helps
  drive continuous improvement through quality
  monitoring visits
• Quality improvement support is on-going

18
Is it Popular?

• Not with those who are not seeking improvement
• The most common comment is
• this was the best free consultancy we could have
  had
• Even when the grade profile is poor
• we are not happy about the outcome, but we
  recognise the weaknesses identified by the
  inspectors and will now improve things

19
Does it Work?

• Fraudulent providers gone
• 1998 over 50 per cent of work-based provision
  unsatisfactory
• 2006 less than 10 per cent of work-based
  provision unsatisfactory
• Recognition of good practice
• About 11,000 hits a month on Excalibur good
  practice web site