Skip to content

Help us get it right

Sign in (free) to send feedback, so we can tell you when it's fixed.

Other · Ofsted report

Setting

Inspected — · published 10 Dec 2010

Help us get it right

Sign in (free) to send feedback, so we can tell you when it's fixed.

Original PDF ↗

Summary

No overall grade in this framework

Anne Taylor

What we read, and from where

Click a reading to see it highlighted in the report.

  • Inspectorssingle source

    Anne Taylor

  • Postcode verified

    GL6 0PL

Page 1 of 2
Page 1 of the report

Deep dive

What this report says

In plain English

Join free to get a short, plain-English summary of any report.

Tone of the report

How positive or critical the inspectors' language is, from the words they chose. No AI involved.

+20Mostly positivemore positive than 35% of reports of this type

In line with other reports of this type.

Praisesafe

How the report reads, start to finish

Every paragraph in order, sized by length. Tap one to see it on the page.

FindingsAbout the inspectionWhat needs to improve positive critical
  • Findings30w0
  • What needs to improve114w+20

Strengths

Quoted from the report. Tap to see it on the page.

No standout praise found.

Concerns

Quoted from the report. Tap to see it on the page.

No strong criticism found.

Next steps

Quoted from the report. Tap to see it on the page.

Anatomy of the report

How the report is built, against others of the same type and grade.

Pages
2
Words of findings
142
shorter than usual (typical 1049)
Reading level
Hard
Flesch 42, typical 45
Average sentence
20 words
Next steps
3
typical 5
Hedged sentences
0%
“some”, “not always”, “most”…

Where the words go

Findings 8%What needs to improve 30%About the inspection 62%

Full report text

Aviation House 125 Kingsway London WC2B 6SE T 0300 123 1231 F 020 7421 6855 enquiries@ofsted.gov.uk www.ofsted.gov.uk

p.1

Ms E Johnson Principal Ruskin Mill College The Fisheries Horsley Stroud GL6 0PL

p.1

Ofsted 2010 11 best practice survey: safeguarding in colleges

Thank you for your hospitality and cooperation, and that of your staff, during my visit on 27 September 2010 to look at your provision for safeguarding students.

p.1

Ofsted 2010 11 best practice survey: safeguarding in colleges

The visit provided valuable information which will contribute to our publication about best practice in safeguarding in colleges. The publication will include case studies about individual providers. If Ruskin Mill is included as a case study, you will have an opportunity to comment before publication. Individual institutions will not be identified in the main text without their consent.

p.1

Features of good practice:

 a strong commitment to safeguarding shown by senior leaders and by all staff throughout the college  the students, their safety and personal development at the heart of Ruskin Mill’s culture, understood well by all staff  the exceptionally well-managed risks associated with activities within the practical curriculum and the students’ living and working environment  students valued individually and given high levels of personal support to develop their self-confidence and independence so that they learn to manage the risks in their daily lives and make informed choices about healthy and safe living  strong team work which ensures high levels of communication between staff and ensures comprehensive support to students to safeguard them  the careful attention to safeguarding requirements within the thorough staff recruitment and selection processes  all staff’s, managers’ and students’ good training in health and safety, and

p.1

Features of good practice:

understanding in and implementing safeguarding requirements.

p.2

Areas for development:

 continuing to make full use of all opportunities to communicate with students to help them recognise the many actions that are being taken to manage challenging behaviour  the need to keep the promotion of internet safety needs under constant review and strengthening its advice and guidance to students on how to keep themselves safe while using the internet outside the college as already recognised by the college.

p.2

Areas for development:

I hope that these observations are useful as you continue to develop safeguarding provision within the college.

p.2

Areas for development:

As explained previously, a copy of this letter will be published on the Ofsted website. It will also be available to the team for your next college inspection.

p.2

Discuss this inspection

Members compare notes on inspectors and inspections here. Join free to read and post.

Join the discussion