Increased Flexibility programmes in partnership with LandBased Colleges

1

• Increased Flexibility programmes in partnership
  with Land-Based Colleges

2
History

• Why so important?
• Labour Market Challenges
• Educational Duty
• School Visits
• Predominantly primary
• Relatively small numbers
• Specialist programmes (e.g. Maths workshop)
• Norfolk Farm Education Link

3
History

• Curriculum Box scheme
• 6th Form Student Day
• Spring Fling
• Norfolk Show-Schools Trail
• Easton Developments
• Funded by Clan Trust and Chadacre Agricultural
  Trust
• Schools Liaison Officer
• Schools Barn

4
(No Transcript)
5
(No Transcript)
6
14-16 Increased Flexibility (1)

• Started in October 2002
• Delivered through the Greater Norwich
  Partnership EC,CCN now 35 schools
• 280 participants over the two current cohorts
• Last year 95 of leavers went on to further
  courses, training or employment
• 35 progressed to courses at Easton

7
14-16 Increased Flexibility (2)

• LSC Funding used for
• Contribution to cost of delivering courses
• Contribution to cost of teaching materials and
  protective clothing
• Contribution to transport costs
• Arrangements
• All students complete application forms, visit
  college and have brief interviews
• College staff attend year 9 option events

8
14-16 Increased Flexibility (3)

• Arrangements (continued)
• Students retained on school role throughout
• School retains duty of care
• Schools arrange transport to college and college
  reimburses cost.
• Qualifications
• Level 1 Land Based Industries, Sport Leisure,
  Public Services, Land Based vehicle maintenance,
  Floristry

9
Increased Flexibility (4)

• Qualifications Level 2
• Edexcel 1st Cert
• Countryside Environment
• Animal Care
• Public Services
• Sport
• Attendance One day per week for Year 10-11.
  Sept-late May. 252 hours

10
Increased Flexibility (5)

• Taught within college by college staff- not a
  separate schools unit.
• Students are treated as part of college when on
  college site
• Programme consists of practical work and
  portfolio building
• College staff training programme

11
Positives

• IFP has been an effective replacement for school
  farms and rural study programmes
• Offering a unique experience to students
• Assisting recruitment to rural industries
• Offers level of industry relevant teaching and
  facilities not available in schools
• Many students not successful school performers
  and this has given them a new chance

12
Hurdles

• No increase in funding to reflect large volume
  increases
• Transport costs and complexity
• No security of funding
• Achieving ownership of the IFP by college staff
• Coping with demand
• Geographical challenges
• Health and safety

13
Key lessons

• Integrate delivery so that it becomes core
  college work
• Provide staff development
• Interview prospective students
• Most successful where the school offers work
  related learning to all students
• Deliver as equal partners and be clear about who
  does what
• College learning environment

14
Challenges for the future

• Coping with further growth
• Geographical access
• Holkham Hall/Alderman Peel Wells
• Use of ILT approaches
• Partnership delivery

15
(No Transcript)