I’ve recently heard of a provider who signs off the Programme Aim when a learner moves from Entry Level to Level One qualifcations – to be clear the learner is on the 16-18 Foundation Learning Programme but at the point where the Entry Level qualifcations are completed, the ZPROG001 aim is signed off and a progression of “training at below level two” is recorded against the ZPROG001 episode. A new ZPROG001 is then added with new aims at Level One.
This would seem to permit multiple progressions to be recorded against, what in my mind at least, is a single episode of learning on Foundation Learning.
Surely not???? But then it kind of makes sense and I would dearly love to update our data to show progression in this way – a high percentage of our learners will move from entry to level one provision whilst on Foundation Learning but at present we keep a single ZPROG001 aim and record where they progress to only after they have completed their Foundation Learning programme in its entirety and the fact that they may have progressed during the programme is ignored in this respect.
I think we need some real clarity on this, particularly with Ofsted giving as much weight to progression as they do to success rates. At present our data doesn’t show this kind of in programme progression and I think either we are being short changed or others are counting something in a way that wasn’t intended?October 5, 2012 at 2:43 pm #239
You mean ‘Learner progressing to further education or training below level 2’ well the learner has then progressed from one Foundation learning programme to yet another.
Ofsted do give weight to progression but this is not progression from Foundation learning, even they will see this.
The provider in question may have a different approach to how they plan and deliver this provision this may be an issue that Ofsted looks at if it benefits the learner, but I do not think that you are being are being short changed by only using one programme aim and adding higher level aims if required.October 5, 2012 at 5:08 pm #240
Given that the Information Authority have not published any method for calculating progression and, at present, have no intention of doing so, this would seem to give providers free reign on what statistics they present to Ofsted with regards to progression – and Ofsted have no means to challenge these statistics by way of official calculations approved by the Information Authority. You may then argue that any judgements that Ofsted make on progression levels are at best flawed, there is no level playing field when providers can record progression as they choose by way of dissecting an episode on Foundation Learning – yet the fact remains that Ofsted will judge a Foundation Learning provider on progression and give that data equal importance to success rates.
It’s a simple question… are we counting progression from Foundation Learning or progression within Foundation Learning?October 8, 2012 at 8:29 am #241
I could really do with some official response on this – ideally before hard close of 11/12 this Friday.November 12, 2012 at 2:19 pm #242
In light of no official response does this help?
Actual progression route is set to be not included in the 2013/14 ILR so this may answer your query.
RegardsNovember 13, 2012 at 9:56 am #243
Thanks Martin – and I think you’re right that Ofsted should not see that this is as progression from Foundation Learning – it is simply distance travelled within the programme. But the pre inspection Foundation Learning data report that Ofsted ask providers to complete requires providers to state their own progression rates and it seems that providers are at liberty to call it how they want.November 13, 2012 at 10:33 am #244
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.