The Adult ESOL Strategy for Scotland

The National Panel

Learn English

Professional Development

Databank of Resources

Funding for Learners

CLD Partnership Area

College Area

ESOL Practitioners' Network

Research

Events

ESOL and Citizenship

Useful Links

Feedback and Enquiries

 

 

 

NATIONAL ESOL PANEL

Meeting on Tuesday 9 September 2008 at 11am
Scottish Funding Council
Donaldson House, 97 Haymarket Terrace.
Edinburgh EH12 5HD

MINUTES

Attendees

.
Euan Reid (ER)	Chair
Peter Beaumont (PB)	SG/LLD
Clare El Azebbi (CE)	SG/LLD
Martin Smith (MS)	SFC
Robin Ashton (RA)	ASC (Langside College)
Robert Quinn (RQ)	SQA
Mhoraig Green (MG)	COSLA
Jayne Stuart (JS)	Learning Link Scotland
Douglas Guest (DG)	EHRC
Anne McGachey (AMcG)	HMIE
Philippa Clark (PC)	UNISON
John McKnight (JMcK)	CLDMS
Isabel Russell (IR)	SG/LLD (Secretariat)
Jackie Borge (JB)	SG/LLD
Leena Alnaib (LA)	SG/LLD

1. Welcome and Introductions
ER welcomed:
Anne McGachey HMIE who is deputising for Anne Pia;
John McKnight from CLDMS who is deputising for Anne Simpson;
Martin Smith SFC who is deputising for Morag Campbell;
New member Philippa Clark from Unison (ER also advised that STUC would also be joining the Panel);
Jackie Borge Scottish Government;
and Leena Alnaib who is on 6 weeks placement with Scottish Government and has been an ESOL learner.

2. Apologies
Apologies were received from:
Iain Ferguson CBI Scotland;
Anne Pia HMIE;
Andy Willox FSB;
Anne Simpson, CLDMS;
and
Luta Mawusa and Nina Ivashinenko learners.  

3. Minutes of meeting on 12 May 2008
There were no Amendments to the minutes.

Action: Secretariat to put final minutes on website.

4. Matters arising
Action Points from Minutes -
1. Euan to pass on thanks and comments to Working Parties from Panel and request a work plan - completed
2. Euan and SG to consider priorities for national development funding – CE will report outcome at item 6.
3. Clare to lead a short focus group on how to improve and publicise the website and enewsletter – meeting held on Friday 29 August CE will update at item 6a.
4. Morag to ascertain whether draft information/statistics for 2007/08 could be available by November, and to check the wording of para 9 re colleges delivering up to Access 2 and 3 levels – stats may be available in November but they will be raw, top line figures and will not be authoritative; and wording in para 9 re levels is correct. (John Wheatley College reported this).
5. Robert to find out if learning and teaching resources for ESOL could be made available on main SQA website and to liaise with Isabel re link to ESOL website –completed, link on ESOL and SQA websites. (RA thanked RQ for doing this).
6. Members to e-mail Isabel re nominations for Funding Principles WP by Friday 16 May – Mary Rhind, Highland CLD Partnership and Elaine Proudfoot from Langside College joined convenor Morag Campbell on group.

At this point in the meeting, ER invited LA to give her experience as an ESOL learner. LA advised that she had 2 contrasting experiences with 2 different colleges. The first college she went to in 2004, she felt had too many students in the classroom and the tutor did not offer any individual help which she said was needed to assist with the learning. LA did not find this a good experience. However, the second college she attended in 2007 was very good as the class was smaller and the tutor was very supportive, helpful and willing to answer any queries from students. As a result LA said her vocabulary improved immensely and she was motivated to apply to university where she gained a place on an HR course which starts this month. LA said it was very important for an ESOL learner to have good resources and a tutor who has the time to help learners at an individual level.

5 Updates from Working Parties (WP)

5a Curriculum Framework (CF)
Members had received update.

ER commented that it was important to remember that it was a framework that was expected as this was all that was possible in the life time of the WP.

Comments from the Panel:

• RA felt the remit was back on course and liked the link to the Curriculum for Excellence;
• It was noted that para 5 of report, bullet 1 should read "these principles should be linked to the principles underlying Curriculum for Excellence";
• CE suggested that "guidance advice & progression" should be included in the list of topics in para 2 of the report;
• IR had spoken to Joanna and had advised she meet with Katherine Ashe from SG who had led in the development of the literacies curriculum wheel. IR also confirmed that specific funding requests for assistance with the CF development would be positively received;
• With reference to the proposed consultation process, JS asked if there was an opportunity to consult on both the CF and PD at the same time;
• It was suggested that all 3 WPs could consult at a single event in Spring 2009;
• DG asked if the audience would be the same for all events and ER confirmed that the majority of the audience was likely to be the main providers, colleges, CLD and voluntary sector;
• RQ suggested electronic consultation would also be helpful and offered SQA to help with this; and
• CE said that Helen Sutherland (LLU+, London South Bank University) had developed an ESOL curriculum for England and was usually happy to share her knowledge.

Action: ER to pass on thanks and comments to WP and to request an informal report for next Panel meeting on 10 November; and CE to send contact details of LLU+ to CFWP.

5b Professional Development (PD)
Members had received update.

In introducing the Report from this WP, ER suggested the choice emerging seemed to be between either introducing additional units to existing teaching qualifications widely recognised in Scotland or developing a new qualification, which might incorporate the recognition of already held qualifications. The report seemed to be leaning towards the latter option.

Comments from the Panel:

• CE, who had been at the WP meeting commented that both recommendations were to be explored and that the WP was asking for a steer from the Panel;
• JS said she was not aware of the current position regarding qualifications for providers and whether CELTA could be adapted for local need;
• RA advised that feedback from students who have recently taken these qualifications is that Trinity/ CELTA can be successfully contextualised;
• ER asked what evidence there was, or could be found, on what the take up might be for a new qualification;
• RQ suggested that SQA could look at establishing whether there was a need for a new qualification and offer guidance on this, looking at both options. He agreed on behalf of SQA to put forward a proposal for investigating demand for new and adapted existing qualifications and offering guidance to the WP and Panel;
• CE asked that SQA also looked at blended learning for qualifications to accommodate the delivery of different teaching awards outside the Central belt;
• RA commented that in colleges tutors were not considered fully qualified unless they had TQFE. He further stated that Dundee University was offering recognition of prior learning for the Diploma TESOL, making the achievement of TQFE status quicker and easier;
• PB commented that whilst TQFE was the main teaching qualification in Scottish colleges, it was not the only one;
• In response to a question about what course presently led to recognition of tutors as "fully qualified", AMcG commented that outside the school sector there is no such thing as a "full" qualification;
• RA said that the remit of the WP was to present existing route for qualifications, identify gaps and make recommendations;
• PB said he understood that the WP had mapped the PD route but that this was not presented in their paper. Qualifications should be mapped against SCQF, but this could be done in Appendices to the Final Report;
• Panel stated that they would like to see the PD route mapping
• ER suggested that recommendation 3 in the paper (to commission a scoping study) should in fact be recommendation 1;
• There was general agreement that the WP should, as part of its final report, provide a paper mapping what qualifications are currently available – building on existing work undertaken by Jennifer McDougall and colleagues;
• It was agreed that convenor of this WP should be invited to speak at the next Panel meeting in November;
• JS asked if any sector skills bodies were looking at ESOL; and
• JB undertook to investigate this.

Action: ER to pass on thanks and comments to WP and to invite John Landon from CFWP to attend next Panel meeting to give an update; RQ on behalf of SQA to put forward a proposal for establishing whether there was a need for a new qualification and offer guidance; and JB to investigate which Sector Skills Council is responsible for ESOL practitioners; IR to contact PDWP for the PD route mapping for the Panel

5c Funding Principles (FP)
Members had received update.

ER commented that WP had met again yesterday (8 Sept).

Comments from Panel:

• MS advised that the WP would like SG and other panel members to provide any information that they have about delivery, funding and types of ESOL courses;
• Last years reports from colleges and CLDPs had been presented at the May Panel meeting;
• MG commented that although the report acknowledged waiting lists, there was no reference to possible action covering this point;
• DG thought that a scoping exercise covering who uses ESOL services e.g. migrants, asylum seekers etc, what type of learning and where are the learners, might be beneficial;
• CE suggested that the WP should more fully consider providers other than colleges;
• JS was disappointed that the voluntary sector was not represented on the WP, and ER said he would encourage the WP to speak to JS for voluntary sector input on funding problems experienced there;
• PB confirmed that the GHK and Abertay research reports were the latest available, and could usefully be updated;
• CE pointed out that we would get a better understanding of the spread of learners and types of learning when End Year Reports are submitted by the main providers next year; and
• CE asked that the 3rd action point in report should include CLD and voluntary sector.

Action: ER to pass on thanks and comments to WP and ask WP to speak to JS for voluntary sector input.

6 Current and Future National Developments
Members had received update.

CE spoke to the report commenting that the ESOL network meeting on 1 October would cover family ESOL learning and that the item on "Scotland has its own qualification in teaching" would be put on hold pending research by SQA into the need for this. CE also commended the excellent work of SQA in developing the PDA: Introduction to Tutoring ESOL.

Comments from the Panel:

• RA asked about the proposed "train the trainers" events in CLD and whether those involved in training required a minimum qualification; and whether these events were intended for those with teacher training experiece or those without; and
• CE said that a CELTA + couple of years teacher training experience was desirable but not mandatory.

6a Website update from focus group
CE advised that a small focus group had met on 29 August and discussed the layout, content and ease of access of the website with suggestions from the group and feedback from others taken into account.
 
Comments from the Panel:

• IR advised there had been 2,646 unique visitors to the website in the 3 months from June to August; the top page visited is course details; top countries from which website was visited are UK, USA, France, Israel, Japan, Spain, China and Czech Republic;
• RA said it was not a site he would visit on a weekly basis and has received some informal negative feedback and felt links could be improved. He would also like to have seen a forum for practitioners and use of the website to enable peer support and mentoring of providers but realises this would require a different set up, involving greater resource allocation and a will from the Scottish Government to bring about these developments. RA said a databank of people, to include their ESOL interests could be built up from those signing up for the enewsletter and used for events, networks etc.;
• CE advised that the SFEU had set up a practitioners' forum on their COPAL site but after 3 years, meetings were being held to discuss its future as it is not used very often;
• JB suggested that the enewsletter, due to be distributed in October could include a request to share local ESOL events;
• ER said he would encourage WPs to use the site;
• RQ advised that SQA have an ESOL database and would be happy to share data with JB to ensure no overlap of people;
• DG suggested that after the ESOL conference due to take place next year, it would be good to have quarterly meetings of ESOL stakeholders as he felt face to face meetings were often useful; and
• ER said that we had to remember that remote areas may benefit from "virtual" meetings due to the time and cost involved in attending meetings.

Action: IR and web designer to take forward agreed changes; and JB and RQ to liaise on contact databases.

7 An analysis of uptake of SQA ESOL qualifications during academic year 2007/08
Members had received paper.

RQ spoke to the paper which showed the significant increase in take up of SQA ESOL qualifications since 2006. He advised that the GTC has recommended that Higher ESOL is accepted by Universities as an alternative to Higher English and SQA were awaiting a decision on this. He said that although colleges were by far the main providers, 8 CLDPs were seeking accreditation and embracing qualifications. He said that Ann Morgan-Thomas from Stevenson College was working with centres to keep up standards.

Comments from the Panel:

• PB said that the stats show a positive picture and asked why many more colleges had entered candidates for units than for courses;
• RA advised that Intermediate 2 and Higher courses are considered more desirable and useful by students and that also, some colleges are unaware that Access 3 has a course therefore they use unit entries; and
• RQ advised that the unit framework was more flexible than the course.

8 ESOL waiting lists in Glasgow
Members had received paper.
RA spoke to the paper and advised that his role of overseeing enrolment of ESOL learners and managing the waiting list at Langside College (he is still working through 2006 list) had motivated him to consider what could be done to help ESOL learners access provision quicker. Currently they are assessed and put on a waiting list at that college; there is no meaningful collaboration with other providers. RA called for a Glasgow ESOL Panel backed by the National Panel to include FE/CLD sectors with an aim of improving communication, collaboration and coordination across the city.

Comments from the Panel:

• ER said the waiting lists in Glasgow could well include the same person on several lists and that pooling Initial Assessment with other providers could help;
• RA advised that after 1 year 80% of learners called in had still not succeeded in accessing ESOL learning;
• JS queried whether this was a matter for Community Planning partners based around the SQA ;
• MG advised that she was aware that Jobcentre Plus had described ESOL provision in the city for their clients as "dire". She would support a new panel to include CLDPs and establish a centralized waiting list for
  Glasgow;
• JMcK agreed that pooling resources of all the providers in Glasgow would help in tackling the waiting lists;
• DG asked if there could be a shared assessment database for learners, perhaps with hand held records retained by the learner. He also said that the problem was not just in Glasgow and that other groups e.g. refugee forum, race equality groups had a role to play;
• MG suggested that a forum/panel should be formed in each of the local authority areas to help ESOL learners source provision;
• MS said that funding is already concentrated towards the "big" providers who are also outwith Glasgow and asked if SFC put more funding into colleges, do they have the resources to deliver more ESOL learning?;
• Everyone was in agreement that the way forward may be a pilot in Glasgow with key players meeting to discuss this partnership approach which is entirely consistent with the Strategy; and
• RA, JS and MG expressed an interest in being involved with this pilot.

Action: Scottish Government to organise an initial meeting of interested parties to discuss way forward for "waiting list" pilot project.

9 Any other business

• PC thanked ER for inviting Unison to be a member of the Panel;
• ER advised that the next Panel meeting in November would have an employer/work related theme;
• RQ expressed concerns about the continuing confusion over SQA ESOL qualifications applicable for citizenship with students holding relevant qualification being refused;
• PB advised that unfortunately the legislation was inconsistent with current good practice, agreed with Home Office officials and pursued on several occasions, but that he would continue his efforts to resolve; and
• MG advised that COSLA was hosting a Managing Migration Workshop on 14 November and invited Panel members to attend, she will circulate details.

Action: PB to contact Home Office officials, again, to resolve issues relating to equivalence of SQA ESOL qualifications for citizenship applications; and MG to circulate details of the Managing Migration Workshop to Panel members

ER closed the meeting.

Return to the National Panel minutes page.