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 18 Apr 2012

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

Janet Rodgers

What we read, and from where

Click a reading to see it highlighted in the report.

  • Inspectorssingle source

    Janet Rodgers

  • Postcode verified

    IG2 6TD

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.

+43Positivemore positive than 46% of reports of this type

In line with other reports of this type.

Praisehighly effectiveexcellentclear
Criticisminsufficientunclearlow

How the report reads, start to finish

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

FindingsWhat needs to improve positive critical
  • Findings457w+43
  • What needs to improve80w0

Strengths

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

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.

What the report dwells on

Topics by how often they come up, coloured by how they are described. Open one for an example.

Anatomy of the report

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

Pages
2
Words of findings
530
shorter than usual (typical 1049)
Reading level
Very hard
Flesch 30, typical 45
Average sentence
18 words
Next steps
4
typical 5
Hedged sentences
10%
“some”, “not always”, “most”…

Where the words go

Findings 85%What needs to improve 15%

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 J Cunningham Principal Redbridge Institute of Adult Education Adult and Community Learning Gaysham Avenue Gants Hill Ilford IG2 6TD

p.1

employment

This survey evaluates providers’ response to initiatives launched on 1 August 2011 to use Skills Funding Agency funds flexibly to support people on benefits.

p.1

employment

Thank you for your hospitality and cooperation, and that of your staff and participants, during my visit on 19 and 20 March 2012 to look at your work in employability provision.

p.1

employment

The visit provided valuable information which will contribute to our national evaluation and reporting. Published reports are likely to list the names of the contributing institutions but individual institutions will not be identified in the main text without their consent.

p.1

employment

The evidence used to inform the judgements included: interviews with staff, participants and Jobcentre Plus representatives; scrutiny of relevant documents; analysis of participants’ work; and observation of three learning sessions.

p.1

Key findings

 Redbridge Institute of Adult Education (RIAE) has a clear strategic focus on developing employability programmes that meet the labour market needs of the borough. Since August 2011, senior managers have worked extensively with partners to develop intensive short courses and programmes for specific identified groups and to introduce new subjects. They have appropriately recognised key areas for development in the employability strategy but it is too early for this to have had a full impact.  Participants have suitable targets to help them achieve their qualifications, which they review regularly with their tutors. They receive very useful feedback which motivates them and helps improve their skills. However, few participants have clear development goals for employment and some are unclear about what they need to do next to gain a job.  The learning sessions observed were highly effective in developing

p.1

Key findings

participants’ confidence and skills. Tutors used excellent learning activities to facilitate participants’ progress. They made very sound links between the subject and participants’ identified desired job roles, for those that had clear goals. Participants were encouraged to share recent experiences in looking for work, for example of job interviews, which provided particularly relevant opportunities for self-reflection and peer discussion.  Tutors promote volunteering opportunities well with participants and for some subjects voluntary work is an integral part of the course. Although participants complete good and frequent activities where they can practice their skills, some have insufficient opportunities to do so in a real work environment.  Many participants have very low levels of language and literacy and are significantly increasing their vocabulary, speaking and listening skills which they view as key barriers to employment. Participants have clear advice

p.2

Key findings

about future courses and a high proportion have progressed on to further training courses with RIAE.

p.2

Areas for improvement, which we discussed, include:

 ensuring that participants have suitable, individual employment goals  implementing the identified priorities within the employability strategy, including developing volunteering and work experience.

p.2

Areas for improvement, which we discussed, include:

I hope that these observations are useful as you continue to develop employability provision at RIAE.

p.2

Areas for improvement, which we discussed, include:

As explained previously, a copy of this letter will be published on the Ofsted website. It may be used to inform decisions about any future inspection. A copy of this letter is also being sent to the Skills Funding Agency.

p.2

Discuss this inspection

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

Join the discussion