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 3 Dec 2009

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

Kathleen Tyler

What we read, and from where

Click a reading to see it highlighted in the report.

  • Inspectorssingle source

    Kathleen Tyler

  • Postcode verified

    CV8 1HY

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.

0Mixedmore positive than 24% of reports of this type

In line with other reports of this type.

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
  • Findings29w0
  • What needs to improve133w0

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
160
shorter than usual (typical 1049)
Reading level
Hard
Flesch 44, typical 45
Average sentence
20 words
Next steps
6
typical 5
Hedged sentences
13%
“some”, “not always”, “most”…

Where the words go

Findings 6%What needs to improve 28%About the inspection 66%

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

Mr B Harknett Director Aurelia Training 131 Warwick Road Kenilworth Warwickshire CV8 1HY

p.1

Ofsted survey inspection programme – good practice in literacy

Thank you for your hospitality and cooperation, and that of your staff and learners, during my visit on 19 October 2009 to look at work in literacy.

p.1

Ofsted survey inspection programme – good practice in literacy

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. All feedback letters will be published on the Ofsted website at the end of each half term.

p.1

Ofsted survey inspection programme – good practice in literacy

The evidence used to inform the judgements included: two lesson observations; discussions with you and members of your management team; discussions with two tutors; discussions with two learners and examination of some of your literacy documentation.

p.1

Features of good practice observed

 Aurelia Training provides a highly flexible approach to the development of learners’ literacy skills and to their achievement of literacy qualifications. Tutors routinely deliver sessions in learners’ workplaces and at times to fit around learners’ working patterns. Training also covers a very wide geographical area, including the Midlands, Oxfordshire, Nottinghamshire and Northamptonshire, with tutors travelling to where learners are based. This provides learners with ready access to literacy support.

p.1

Features of good practice observed

 Tutors provide very effective literacy support to individuals and small groups. They develop good working relationships with learners, who greatly value their patience and understanding. Learners I spoke with are very positive about their learning experiences. They reported that they have made greater progress in the development of their literacy skills with Aurelia Training than they had in many previous years of study. They describe how they have successfully overcome significant fears about returning to learning.

p.1

Features of good practice observed

 Tutors make good use of a wide range of practical exercises to develop learners’ literacy skills, which learners I spoke with enjoy and which supports their learning very well. Tutors and learners use resources which relate well to learners’ work and home lives. Two tutors also usefully provide specialist dyslexia support.

p.2

Areas for development

 We discussed the need for further development in the use of information technology to support teaching and learning in the workplace, to provide more visual resources for learners and to add greater variety to the repertoire of teaching and learning strategies tutors use with learners.

p.2

Areas for development

 In addition, we discussed the need for tutors to plan for greater learner involvement in sessions, which can, at times, be rather too tutor- dominated. Tutors should encourage learners to do and say more in sessions and step back a little themselves.

p.2

Areas for development

I hope these observations are useful as you continue to develop literacy learning in the workplace.

p.2

Areas for development

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

p.2

Discuss this inspection

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

Join the discussion