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 14 Jan 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

Charles Hooper

What we read, and from where

Click a reading to see it highlighted in the report.

  • Inspectorssingle source

    Charles Hooper

  • Postcode verified

    NE8 3BE

Page 1 of 3
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.

+71Very positivemore positive than 70% of reports of this type

In line with other reports of this type.

Praisevery highsuccessfulconsistentlytimelypromptly
Criticismbelow

How the report reads, start to finish

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

Findings positive critical

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.

No next steps set out.

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
3
Words of findings
691
shorter than usual (typical 1049)
Reading level
Hard
Flesch 36, typical 45
Average sentence
18 words
Next steps
0
typical 5
Hedged sentences
0%
“some”, “not always”, “most”…

Where the words go

Findings 100%

Full report text

Aviation House 125 Kingsway London WC2B 6SE T 08456 404040 F 020 7421 6855 enquiries@ofsted.gov.uk www.ofsted.gov.uk

p.1

Ms J Doyle Deputy Principal Gateshead College Baltic Campus Quarryfield Road Gateshead NE8 3BE

p.1

employers in work-related education and training

Thank you for your hospitality and cooperation during my visit on 2 December 2009. I am particularly grateful to you and all your staff for the hard work involved in preparing for the visit and for giving up a great deal of time during the visit to meet me. Please pass on my thanks to all those concerned.

p.1

employers in work-related education and training

The visit provided valuable information that will contribute to our national survey of good practice in the role that employers play in work-related education and training. The published report will list the names of contributing organisations but individual contributors will not be identified in the main text.

p.1

employers in work-related education and training

The evidence used to help form the judgements included interviews with staff, employers and learners and scrutiny of the examples of good practice provided.

p.1

employers in work-related education and training

I agreed to provide a summary of the good practice seen and outline the main findings below.

p.1

The main strengths

 The development and delivery of bespoke courses relevant to industry have benefited staff and learners greatly. Staff knowledge has been extended by working very closely with employers to identify the exacting standards required by modern manufacturing and motor-vehicle servicing. Programmes have been developed promptly to meet industry needs. College-based learners work to industrial expectations of discipline, attendance and housekeeping standards. Practical skills development is monitored closely and in detail. Learners in manufacturing companies develop more confidence, improve problem-solving and team-building skills and are more receptive to change following their training.  The Jobcentre Plus programme, run jointly with Nissan, is highly successful. The programme develops the hand skills and literacy and numeracy skills of registered unemployed learners appropriately to improve their chances of obtaining employment with Nissan. Around 100

p.1

The main strengths

learners start the five-week course every five weeks. Approximately 70% of the learners completing the course obtain employment with Nissan or other associated manufacturing companies.  The modern learning environment in the skills academy for automotive, manufacturing, engineering and logistics is of a very high quality. Situated on an industrial estate, the academy was designed in conjunction with local employers to provide a learning environment similar to that seen in modern manufacturing, retail motor-vehicle and body repair companies. The learning resources are of a very high standard and include the latest information learning technology and modern motor-vehicle and manufacturing equipment, including much donated by major companies.  The very close strategic involvement with local major manufacturers further develops staff knowledge. College staff are involved in new developments at an early stage to identify training needs. Visits to the new

p.2

The main strengths

Nissan plant in Russia and the new electric battery plant in Japan enable college staff to be at the forefront of new technological developments and to develop associated training programmes. For example, the close involvement with Nissan and Smiths Electric Vehicles is supporting the development of training programmes relating to the service and maintenance of battery-powered vehicles. This is an important nationwide development, supported by recent Government funding for the Nissan battery manufacturing plant.  The success rates on engineering and manufacturing technology courses are consistently very high. For example, in 2008/09 the overall success rate for apprenticeships and advanced apprenticeships was 93.6% and the corresponding timely success rate was 85.9%. In 2007/08, the overall success rate for Train to Gain courses was 98% with a corresponding timely success rate of 96%. In 2007/08, the overall success rate for

p.2

The main strengths

learners aged 16 to18 on long courses was 81% and for learners aged 19 and over, was 85%.

p.2

The main areas for further development

 No areas for further development were identified.

p.2

The main areas for further development

I hope these observations are useful as you continue to develop provision. If there are any points you wish to discuss, please contact me. We gather information on the impact of our visits. To this end, you may be contacted by telephone or sent a questionnaire to complete six to 12 months after the visit. I hope you will contribute to this evaluation. As I explained in my previous letter, a copy of this letter will be published on the Ofsted website and will be available to the team for your next inspection.

p.2

Discuss this inspection

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

Join the discussion