National Education Inspectorate, August 2013 1
SUMMARY REPORT
INSPECTION OF JUVENILE CORRECTIONAL CENTRES
The context of t...
National Education Inspectorate, August 2013 2
Table 1
Focus questions
Name of Institution
Rio Cobre Juvenile
Correctional...
National Education Inspectorate, August 2013 3
Recommendation:
Based on the assessment of the inspectors we strongly recom...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

NEI Jamaica - Final Report on Inspection of Juvenile Correctional Centres August 2013

182

Published on

Jamaica - National Education Inspectorate (NEI) - Final Report on Inspection of Juvenile Correctional Centres August 2013

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
182
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
4
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Transcript of "NEI Jamaica - Final Report on Inspection of Juvenile Correctional Centres August 2013"

  1. 1. National Education Inspectorate, August 2013 1 SUMMARY REPORT INSPECTION OF JUVENILE CORRECTIONAL CENTRES The context of the Assessment: In March, 2013, the National Education Inspectorate (NEI) partnered with the Ministry of National Security to serve as part of a multi-disciplinary team that would inspect four Juvenile Correctional Centres across the island. The inspection teams assessed the quality of the educational provisions, made recommendations for improvement and the reports are now presented for your perusal. Six areas were assessed: 1. The quality of Leadership and management 2. Teaching support for students’ learning 3. Progress of the students in their lessons 4. The students’ behaviours and levels of awareness 5. The provision and use of the human and material resources 6. The curriculum and enhancement programmes Summary of findings In three of the Juvenile Correctional Centres, the quality of instructional leadership and management was rated unsatisfactory. The quality of teaching and learning as well as the curricular offerings were also deemed unsatisfactory. As a result, the wards/students made limited progress during lessons and in their learning overall. Nevertheless, many of the wards/students displayed satisfactory levels of behaviours and economic, civic, environmental and spiritual (esteem) awareness which may or may not be due to the rigid system of monitoring in the institutions.The results are summarised in Table 1, below. See Reports attached.
  2. 2. National Education Inspectorate, August 2013 2 Table 1 Focus questions Name of Institution Rio Cobre Juvenile Correctional Centre Diamond Crest Juvenile Correctional Centre Hill Top Juvenile Correctional Centre Metcalfe Street Secured Juvenile Centre How effectively is the school led and managed? Unsatisfactory 1 Unsatisfactory Satisfactory Unsatisfactory How effectively does the teaching support the ward's learning? Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory How much progress do wards make in relation to their starting points? Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory How good is the wards behaviour and level of awareness? Unsatisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory How effectively does the school use the human and material resources at its disposal to achieve as well as they can? Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory Satisfactory How well do the curriculum and any enhancement programmes meet the needs of the wards? Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory OVERALL EFFECTIVENESS OF INSTITUTIONS UNSATISFACTORY UNSATISFACTORY UNSATISFACTORY UNSATISFACTORY 1 See five-point scale below
  3. 3. National Education Inspectorate, August 2013 3 Recommendation: Based on the assessment of the inspectors we strongly recommend that, within the shortest time possible,the Ministry of Education should partner with the Ministry of National Security, and the Ministry of Youth and Culture, to ensure that the educational provisions for wards of the state are aligned to those that are in place for students in the general education setting in public educational institutions. In such areas as: i. The provision of curricular materials ii. Teachers and instructors iii. Instructional support and guidance iv. Extra-curricular and co-curricular programmes v. Regular monitoring and evaluation of the schools’ provisions and students’ progress Five-point Scale – Exceptionally high quality of performance or provision Good: the expected level for every school. Achieving this level in all aspects of its performance and provision should be a realistic goal for every school Satisfactory: the minimum level of acceptability required. All key aspects of performance and provision in every school should reach or exceed this level Unsatisfactory: quality not yet at the level acceptable for schools. Schools are expected to take urgent measures to improve the quality of any aspect of their performance or provision that is judged at this level. Action on the inspectors’ recommendations for improvement is mandatory Needs Immediate Support: quality is very low. Schools are expected to take immediate action to improve the quality of any aspect of their performance or provision that is judged at this level. Action on the inspectors’ recommendations for improvement is mandatory. These schools are also at risk of direct interventions for improvement by the Honourable Minister of Education. Level 5 Level 4 Level 3 Level 2 Level 1

×