The Scottish Government

REVIEW OF SCOTLAND'S COLLEGES [SLEWG - SG -M02]

WORKING GROUP: STAFFING, LEARNERS & LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS

SUB GROUP: PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT OF STAFF

This paper is also available for download as a PDF File

Minutes of Meeting

16 February 2006

South Lanarkshire College ,

Attendees:

Marian Healey, EIS (Chair)

James Alexander, NUS Scotland

Stewart McKillop, South Lanarkshire College

Susan Bird, Stevenson College Edinburgh

Douglas Black, UNISON

Bill Harvey, Scottish Funding Council

Peter Beaumont, Scottish Executive

Victoria Beattie, Scottish Executive

John Bowditch, HMIE

1. Chair's Introduction, Apologise etc.

· Members welcomed Bill Harvey, Scottish Funding Council, to the Sub Group, Bill will be replacing David Lott.

2. Note of Meeting of 12 January 2006, inc update on Action Points

· The minutes were agreed to be accurate.

· An update of the action points was provided as shown below:

3. Conceptual Framework

· Peter Beaumont presented paper SLEWG-SG-P02 - circulated in advance. He explained to members that at the last sub group meeting it was suggested that it would be beneficial to develop a conceptual framework to help focus the work of the sub group.

· Members agreed that it was not necessary to ask Colleges or HMIE to provide examples of explicit links between staff development and the student experience.

· Members appreciated the analysis, contained in paragraphs 3 and 4, of the links between the contribution staff make and the learning environments make in terms of both student experience and the overall effective operation of colleges.

· It was agreed that "high quality student learning experiences" should be included in the list of value base bull points contained in paragraph 6.

· Members agreed that the additional high level challenge issues contained in paragraph 10 should be considered by the sub group in their discussions but that they should not form part of the sub group's and working group's final recommendations.

· Members agreed that there was no further pieces of research/information required.

ACTION POINT

Ø Executive to insert "high quality student learning experiences" into the list of value base bull points contained in paragraph 6 of paper SLEWG-SG-P02 .

4. Funded 'Professional Updating' Programme.

· Bill Harvey presented paper SLEWG-SG-P03 - circulated in advance. The paper informed the sub group about a programme of pilot projects, funded by the Scottish Funding Council, which were designed to help colleges develop their approach to the technical/subject updating aspect of continuing professional development (CPD) for staff. It was noted that there had been positive responses so far from those who had participated in the pilot programmes.

· Members welcomed the paper and were particularly pleased to see partnership working.

· It was agreed that these pilots should be taken into account in the group's final recommendations.

· A suggestion was made that Scottish Enterprise should have a locus in helping to engage with employers, particularly Small/Medium Enterprises, and that this could also help colleges to develop their approach to the technical/subject updating aspect of CPD.

· There was some general discussion regarding CPD entitlement and possible funding for such activity.

· Members were informed that the money for the pilots did not pay for staff time.

· It was noted that CPD logs are one source of evidencing and that colleges should be encouraged to make full use of the CPD toolkit.

· It was further noted that an evaluation of these pilots is still to be undertaken.

· There was agreement that the group would return to the issue of CPD at a future meeting and that it would be useful if the Funding Council could provide further information about the pilots at a future meeting.

ACTION POINT

Ø The Funding Council to could provide further information about the 'Professional Updating' Programme at a future meeting.

5. Teacher Training - Numbers Trained.

· Peter Beaumont presented paper SLEWG-SG-P04 - circulated in advance and explained the Executive's intention to write out to individual colleges seeking their comments on the figures contained in the paper. Once all the data and comments have been taken into account the next step will be to estimate costs of initial teacher training and initial teacher education.

· Members agreed that colleges should be sent the whole of paper SLEWG-SG-P04 and that comments on the figures contained in the paper should be fed back to the sub group at the next meeting on 23 March.

· Members thought that the paper was easy to read and commented that the statistics painted a good picture of the sector as a whole however there was recognition that amongst some individual colleges there was scope for improvement.

· It was noted that some caution should be exercised when comparing the Scottish statistics with the English statistics, as the main teaching qualifications are not directly comparable, although it is clear that the trend in England is one of significantly increasing qualification rates among lecturers.

· One member commented that it might be useful to obtain future trends of staffing returns as some colleges have a mature workforce and that their current staffing statistics could be significantly altered over the next few years by a high staff turnover. Members agreed that it would be useful in the letter to therefore ask colleges about their predicted future staffing trends.

· There was a suggestion that the data should also contain information about the numbers of staff with the Introductory and Advanced Certificates in Teaching in Further Education. Members were informed that the statistics did take these qualifications into account under the heading of Other Qualifications.

· One member queried what the term 'unqualified' meant, the Executive stated it would provide some clarification.

ACTION POINTS

Ø Executive to send a letter to all Scottish Colleges, with paper SLEWG-SG-P04 attached, seeking their comments about their staffing return statistics and asking for an indication of future trends .

Ø The draft letter to be circulated around the Sub Group for clearance.

Ø The Executive to report the comments back to the sub group by 23 March.

Ø The Executive to clarify the term 'unqualified'.

6. Continuous Professional Development (CPD) - Next Steps

· Bill Harvey presented paper SLEWG-SG-P05 - circulated in advance. The paper set out the Funding Council's initial thinking about how it could collect evidence on CPD in the further education sector.

· It was noted that the Executive and the Funding Council had met informally to discuss the collection of evidence, but that the Funding Council had not yet received a formal request from Executive to undertake this piece of work.

· Clarification was sought from one member about whether the evidence should take into account the CPD requirements of all staff. There was consensus reached that the collection of evidence should take account of all staff.

· Members thought that most Human Resource departments in colleges would be able to provide the Funding Council with the necessary information.

· The CPD toolkit, developed by SFEU with SFC support, was highlighted as a useful resource for colleges and that they should be encouraged to make full use of it.

· It was suggested by one member that college staff who assess SVQs should be able to regard this activity as CPD.

· There was unanimous agreement that the Funding Council should pilot the proposed methodology with a few colleges and they should also take the time to build a common understanding of what is meant by CPD, costs and benefits.

· There was some discussion about the length of time the pilot and the main evidence gathering activity will take. It was suggested that through rapid engagement with the sector the pilot process might take a couple of weeks.

· It was also suggested that when gathering the evidence it might be useful to distinguish between 'legislative' (i.e. Health & Safety etc.) and 'career' CPD.

· One member informed the group about a college which has a complete staff away day which is a useful method of undertaking CPD activity for all the college staff.

· It was suggested that the Funding Council may wish to contact the HR Strategy Unit.

· It was agreed that the Funding Council should take forward the task of collecting evidence on CPD and should report the findings back to the sub group who would then take them to the main group for consideration.

ACTION POINTS

Ø Executive to formally ask the Funding Council to collect evidence of CPD activity in Scotland 's colleges .

Ø Susan Bird to provide the contact details for the HR Strategy Group.

Ø Funding Council should take forward the task of collecting evidence on CPD and should report the initial findings back to the sub group at the next meeting.

7. AOB

· Members discussed agenda items for the next meeting. It was agreed that the agenda items should include:

• the numbers of staff who are teacher trained, the comments back from the colleges and the projected costs - and how consequent recommendations to the Minister should be shaped; and
• modernisation and improvement of learning and teaching methods.

· It was also agreed that all Associate Members should be invited to attend the next sub group meeting on 23 March, to seek in particular their input on proposed agenda item 2 above.

ACTION POINT

Ø Executive to invite Associate Members to attend the next sub group meeting on 23 March.

List of Action Points

(1) Executive to insert "high quality student learning experiences" into the list of value base bull points contained in paragraph 6 of paper SLEWG-SG-P02 .

(2) The Funding Council to could provide further information about the Professional Updating' Programme at a future meeting.

(3) Executive to send a letter, with paper SLEWG-SG-P04 attached, seeking their comments about their staffing return statistics and asking for an indication of future trends .

(4) The draft letter to be circulated around the Sub Group for clearance.

(5) The Executive to report the comments back to the sub group by 23 March.

(6) The Executive to clarify the term unqualified.

(7) Executive to formally ask the Funding Council to collect evidence of CPD activity in Scotland 's colleges .

(8) Susan Bird to provide the contact details for the HR Strategy Unit.

(9) Funding Council should take forward the task of collecting evidence on CPD and should report the initial findings back to the sub group at the next meeting.

(10) Executive to invite Associate Members to attend the next sub group meeting on 23 March.

Review Team

Scotland 's Col leges

20 February 2006