08.07.18 FINAL Peer Evaluation Report

5/19/2018 08.07.18 FINAL Peer Evaluation Report

1/24

Lifelong Learning Network Peer Evaluation report

Higher York, Kent & Medway LLN, Susse Learning Network

!eport "o#piled $anuary % May ''(


2/24

Executive summary 3

Context 7

A comment about structure and process 7

Background and observations 8

Overview of approaches adopted !

"eeting of ##$ Chairs 7

%mpact !&

Eva'uating the Eva'uation !&

)ppendi"es

Appendix A "eeting preparation (staff) !

Appendix B "eeting preparation (*uestions) !!

+or supp'ementary information p'ease see the fo''owing, %ndividua' business cases for #ife'ong #earning $etwork funding

%ndividua' ##$ annua' reports to -E+CE

##$ ./ey facts0 %nterim Eva'uation of #ife'ong #earning $etworks (C-E1%)2 anuary !&&8

C$4E,4-546eer Eva'46eer Eva'uation 1eport 1A+ 8 !

*ontents


3/24

Ee"utive Su##ary

+rganisation & overnan"e

Indicator of success 1: All 3 LLNs have demonstrated the flexibility toaccommodate key personnel (core team and Board!xec level" chan#es$%overnance structures have not necessarily follo&ed business plan$

'omment: 9tructures have demonstrated capabi'ity to manage pro:ects (and a'so

f'exibi'ity of agenda) but it is too soon to te'' if these structures wi'' beappropriate for sustainabi'ity;

eam autonomy was agreed to be important factor;


4/24

'omment he brand has been important to ##$s in different ways (eg; 'earner

facing2 staff deve'opment2 engagement with 'oca' authority);

Progression

Indicator of success : All 3 LLNs have a lar#e number of pro#ressiona#reements0 the concept of &hich has been a useful tool for chan#e$

'omment: 6rogression agreements are not ends in themse'ves but a very usefu' too'

to cha''enge thinking and introduce process (actua' number of progressionagreements does not necessari'y e*uate to 'eve' of changes withininfrastructure as referred to above);

6rogression accords and agreements shou'd be seen as one part of

progression2 as with curricu'um;

#ooking forward2 the further deve'opment of the 6A as a vehiclewi'' need

managing2 as wi'' the maintenance of the re'ationships bui't;

##$s have 'itt'e experience of working across borders with different mode's

so this may be a cha''enge for the future;

Indicator of success 2: he focus of activity has been on the development of a

,pro#ression infrastructure. as opposed to documentation$

'omment: Credit and progression services are centra' to the .cu'ture change0 driven by

##$s;

*urri"ulu#

Indicator of success 4: Ne& opportunities have been brou#ht to LLNpartners$

'omment:

emonstrating .cause and effect0 with regards to ne& provision has been

difficu't for ##$s2 given the timesca'es invo'ved in deve'oping newprovision;

##$s have been invo'ved in gap ana'ysis and opportunity spotting

(particu'ar'y in the area of work based 'earning and the deve'opment ofexisting provision);

C$4E,4-546eer Eva'46eer Eva'uation 1eport 1A+ 8 >


5/24

##$s were responsib'e for setting their own priorities inc'uding sectors;

9ectors have been a usefu' starting focus for ##$s but can a'so be 'imiting

Indicator of success 5: LLNs have a#reement on use of credit &hich isbein# seen as central to en#a#in# &ork based learners$

'omment he issue of credit has genera''y taken second p'ace behind the

deve'opment of progression agreements; ##$s are now pushing thisagenda in 'ine with nationa' deve'opments;

An exp'icit mechanism for monitoring credit recognition cou'd be bui't in as

##$s go forward;

1nfor#ation, )dvi"e & uidan"e 21)3

Indicator of success 6: 9taff deve'opment for existing practitioners is high onthe agenda and needs to remain so; Capacity bui'ding is centra' to thedeve'opment of %A? services;

'omment: ##$s are not on'y about c'arifying the existing 'andscape2 but a'so they are

creating new things (such as progression agreements) which need%A? tosit a'ongside them;

here are different views across the 3 ##$s about offered a , service;

1e'ationships with Aim-igher tend to work we'' a'though ! out of the 3##$s fe't they were increasing'y over'apping when consideringprogression from ip'omas;

Student Engage#ent

Indicator of success 17: +tudents are en#a#ed at varyin# levels across all 3LLNs$ he &ork &ith students is very labour intensive but is #enerally veryvaluable to partners$

'omment: 'apturin# the student voice maybe problematic as LLNs move for&ard to a

stron#er focus on employer lead provision$ !n#a#ement has been &ith avariety of ,types. of student so &ork based learners have not beenne#lected as such (8ust not the focus"$

4ra"king

Indicator of success 11: rackin# is re#arded as successful &here the data

has been useful$ he main areas are therefore monitorin# cause and effect

C$4E,4-546eer Eva'46eer Eva'uation 1eport 1A+ 8 @


6/24

(LLN teamsfeed into development process"0 measurement of impact of LLN(partners"0 and measurement of achievements (*!)'!"$

'omment:

here have been difficu'ties in demonstrating 'inkages within the shorttimesca'e (especia''y effect on retention and achievement);

racking A9$ 'earners is not enough; +urther in=depth work is most

va'uab'e (such as samp'es studies conducted by 9ussex #earning$etwork);

!e"o##endations0

Continue to demonstrate f'exibi'ity in response to new po'icy initiatives promote to

partners and externa' stakeho'ders; Encourage ro'e of staff deve'opment2 specifica''y within the area of %A?2 within ##$

and increase activity if capacity is avai'ab'e; Exp'ore ways in which to make use of existing data for tracking purposes; his

may inc'ude 'inking with #9C (#3 'earners); Consider a'ternate ways to measureeffectiveness of progression agreements2 possib'y in co''aboration with other ##$s(regiona''y of nationa''y);

9hare resources and approaches with other ##$s2 to avoid dup'ication2 deve'op

consistency where appropriate2 and to maximise the impact of the resourceinvested in ##$s nationa''y;

he further deve'opment of the progression agreement as a vehiclewi'' need

managing2 as wi'' the maintenance of the re'ationships bui't; An exp'icitmechanism for monitoring credit recognition cou'd be bui't in to any p'ans forsustainabi'ity;

#earn from the various student engagement pro:ects but 'ook to inc'ude those not

a'ready in the system2 particu'ar'y peop'e who are in the workp'ace;

C$4E,4-546eer Eva'46eer Eva'uation 1eport 1A+ 8


7/24

Context

As part of the -E+CE eva'uation strategy for #ife'ong #earning $etworks (##$s)2individua' ##$s have been asked to take part in an eva'uation exercise withco''eagues from other ##$s; %t was the intention of the ##$s invo'ved to adopt a.critica' friend0 approach in order to eva'uate each individua' network2 and high'ightareas of strength and weakness2 areas of good practice2 issues that have arisen and'essons 'earnt;

Other ##$s were undertaking two=way eva'uations and the tripartite exercise in thiscase was unusua'; %t brought together three ##$s of varying sies2 'ocations andstages of deve'opment = -igher 5ork ##$2 /ent and "edway ##$ and 9ussex#earning $etwork; he uni*ue opportunity provided by invo'ving three networks hasprovided an interesting p'atform for review and in some part has enab'ed a more

ob:ective out'ook for the who'e exercise;

9tructure and process

%t was fe't that an approach which did not attempt to encompass a'' aspects of ##$activity was favourab'e in order to focus effort and maximise the 'ike'ihood of resu'tswhich wou'd be both meaningfu' and usefu' to a'' participants; he ##$s invo'vedagreed to spend two days on the exercise and put together a 'ist of areas that wou'dbe covered and the individua's that wou'd be invo'ved (App ); %t was agreed thatinterviews4meetings with the key individua's wou'd take p'ace and in order to focusdiscussion2 a series of *uestions were drawn up under each heading (App !); his

wou'd then be fo''owed by a meeting of the three Chairs of the ##$Board4"anagement groups; 9ubse*uent discussion high'ighted a need for a furthermeeting where peers met to agree on the main indicators of success high'ighted inthe Executive 9ummary;

uring pre'iminary discussion2 the three teams decided on which key areas theywou'd focus on2 these were made up of the 7 areas recommended through the$ationa' +orum (Organisation and ?overnance 6artnership %nformation2 Advice and?uidance (%A?) 9tudent Doice 6rogression Curricu'um racking4re=engaging withthe addition of two other areas, 9ustainabi'ity and Emp'oyer Engagement; -oweverdiscussions did not a''ow for the 'atter two areas to be commented on separate'y andreference to these is made throughout;

his paper attempts to tease out some of the core themes across the 3 networks2comparing some of the approaches fo''owed2 the impacts of activity2 and high'ightingareas of :oint concern; 1ecommendations set out be'ow are primari'y for the threenetworks invo'ved but cou'd a'so app'y to other ##$s depending upon their stage ofdeve'opment;

As this document is primari'y for use within the three networks invo'ved2 there is anassumption of some background know'edge; +urther information on the three ##$scan be found in the documents 'isted on page !;

C$4E,4-546eer Eva'46eer Eva'uation 1eport 1A+ 8

Peer Evaluation0 5ull !eport

7


8/24

"ain findings and observations

67 +rganisation and overnan"e

he initia' focus of the three networks name'y the city (5ork) /ent and "edway

and the county of 9ussex are important factors in shaping their respectiveapproaches their ear'y activity and shou'd be one measure of their impact; A'' three ##$s had high='eve' ownership form the outset2 with DCs and e*uiva'ents

being invo'ved in the deve'opment of the business case; %n each of the three ##$s the core teams have been identified as the main change

agents but each has adopted a different approach2 inf'uenced by the pre=existingpartnership context for their work;

%t is difficu't to identify one particu'ar organisationa' mode' as the most effective as

the three ##$s have adopted different mode's which are working in different ways each one having advantages and disadvantages;

o Centra'ised mode' no staff at partner institutions so +-E% invo'vement is

therefore essentia' and re*uires a 'ot of ground work by core team (time

consuming); Aims to embed ##$ activity from beginning;o istributed mode'4s possib'y more difficu't to manage but goes some

way in ensuring partner buy=in; 9ome prob'ems with ba'ance between.'ead0 institution as emp'oyer as teams can then be thought of asbe'onging to sing'e institution rather than ##$; Can resu't in differing'eve's of de'ivery between groups as there is reduced input from coreteam;

?overnance is about ba'ancing accountabi'ity and contro' with the need to ensure

that ways are found to engage a'' stakeho'ders in decision making; he core teamsare the main change agents and have been a''owed to get on and de'iver;

Engagement means finding ways of working to meet the different needs and

ambitions of partners; he motivation and ambition of stakeho'ders inevitab'y 'eadsto them va'uing different aspects of what the ##$ can de'iver;

he ro'e of the F'ead institutionG is different'y interpreted by the various ##$s; %t is a

-E+CE used device for ensuring accountabi'ity and not one that need determinethe way ##$s are governed or managed;

"anaging the transition from the approva' of a business case to the stage of

becoming fu''y operationa' has 'ed to under spends that in turn 'ead to de'iverybeing a two year rather than three year exercise;

wo ##$s have moved to a position of commissioning work rather than inviting

partners to go through a bidding process as this was seen as a barrier for partners; Co''aboration between


9/24

"ost ##$s are .'ed0 by -E%s2 however this is not the case for -igher 5ork which

contains two -E and two +E partners and so the ba'ance of power is sharede*ua''y which produces an interesting dynamic;


10/24

Each ##$ had c'ear'y defined .sectors0 which were named in their business cases;

his has a''owed ##$s to focus their activity and has been beneficia' in that it hasbeen manageab'e as it has enab'ed prioritisation2 but has a'so meant that theirapproach to some areas has been 'imited; he need to c'ear'y define boundarieshas been essentia';

Curricu'um teams have been invo'ved in different areas of activity ranging formthe deve'opment of 6As2 to curricu'um deve'opment and contributing to %A?materia's;

Engagement with emp'oyers has been at the sector 'eve' and this appears to be

the preferred method (as opposed to a b'anket approach from the ##$); his hasa'so enab'ed 'inks with 99Cs;

Curricu'um deve'opment has been encouraged by ##$s which have provided a

p'atform for :oint p'anning2 background information and statistics and in somecases additiona' student numbers;

9ome ##$s have deve'oped new courses4modu'es specifica''y for .types0 of

'earners rather than being 'inked to specific curricu'um areas; he three ##$s had used different mode's to distribute A9$s to partners and there

was evidence that mode' two had more potentia' to inf'uence curricu'umdeve'opment as it was a more f'exib'e approach;

Evidence of a direct 'ink between ##$ sponsored curricu'um p'anning4

deve'opment A9$s and recruitment of 'earners from target audiences attributab'eto %A? activity wi'' be difficu't to find in the three year period;

$etworks have experienced some prob'ems with marketing of courses seen to be

.##$ programmes0 and there is debate about the institution or the ##$ shou'd beresponsib'e for this;


11/24

Da'ue attached to supporting student achievement either via specific initiatives or

awards; here is a desire to capture voice of non=traditiona' students and work has been

done with vocationa' 'earners2 mature 'earners and those embarking on C6programmes a'so 'ooking at those not current'y in the system in order to identify

and high'ight possib'e barriers to institutions;

>7 4ra"king-re/engaging

A'' three ##$s have received a 'arge number of A9$s but view this as on'y one

measurement of success; he issue of tracking ##$ students 'inked to A9$s isthat working within the timesca'es2 and with existing data co''ection points that-E%s and +ECs adhere to2 as we'' as the differences in reporting re*uirements for-E%s and direct'y funded +ECs2 there are 'imits to the effectiveness of tracking

processes; here is a'so a need to be aware of the 'imits of tracking Kf'aggedK 'earners as a

means of measuring and evidencing impact, these methods do not pick up'earners who have been positive'y affected by any of the range of ##$ activities(e;g; broader %A? provision) that cannot be tracked in this way; he extent to which'earners f'agged as ##$ 'earners have come to -E as a resu't of ##$ activity wi''a'so vary = in some cases these wi'' be 'earners on a course supported via ##$A9$s = there may be no other connection between the course and ##$ activity;he 'earners may not be 'oca'2 and it is impossib'e to say whether they wou'd havecome to -E without the ##$Ks activity;

Additiona' student numbers have had a very different impact on the formative

deve'opment of ##$s; here is no c'ear evidence about which mode' works best; he unanticipated conse*uences of monitoring and tracking ##$ students do p'ace

additiona' burdens on institutions; One ##$ has approached the #9C for he'p with data and by matching %#1s with

enro'ment data from -E%s it0s possib'e to get a va'uab'e insight into 'oca'progression patterns of #eve' 3 'earners;

(7 eneral +?servations

here was a 'ack of a sharp or we'' defined focus on widening participation; ##$s

were not 'inked to institutiona' targets or strategies;


12/24

Approaches

A summary of the main approaches within each area is shown in the tab'es be'ow;

C$4E,4-546eer Eva'46eer Eva'uation 1eport 1A+ 8 !


13/24

4a?le 67 LLN Peer Evaluation0 +verview of approa"hes adopted

)pproa"h .enefits of approa"h@- Have any"hanges ?een ne"essary@

Ea#ples of oodPra"ti"e

*o##ent

!lement revie&ed: 9r#anisation

*i#her ork 9tructure, Board (+E2 -E H citycounci')2 Executive group2curricu'um L working groups;

-aving .midd'e 'eve'0 group (Executive)has been key both in terms of drivingagenda and de'ivering ob:ectives;

9hared post funded byneighbouring ##$ recent'yappointed

1etention of staff withincore team has been poor;

;ent

08.07.18 FINAL Peer Evaluation Report

Documents

Transcript of 08.07.18 FINAL Peer Evaluation Report