Reference no: EM132115343

Pearmount College is a medium-sized further education college in the town of Hetherleigh (population 75,000). In many ways it is a typical FE college. In its Ofsted inspections, most aspects are rated as satisfactory (grade 3, the middle of the five grades available). A third of its courses are rated as above average, a third as below average. However, Pearmount is not typical in that it is a tertiary college. Unlike most FE colleges, it is responsible for all post-16 education in Hetherleigh. This gives the college a particular social responsibility. As the only post-16 provider, it cannot be selective in its recruitment policy. It is expected to provide educational opportunities for all of the post-16 population in the town. There are four main types of post-16 providers, all of which compete to score highly in government league tables. These are school sixth forms, which are often selective, sixth form colleges, which are almost always selective, tertiary colleges, which are normally non-selective, and ordinary FE colleges, which tend to offer mainly vocational courses rather than A levels. The main league table competition is between sixth forms, sixth form colleges and tertiary colleges, and concentrates on A level results. Sixth form colleges tend to score more highly than school sixth firms and tertiary colleges. A recent Ofsted inspection of Pearmount noted that its A level results were at the FE college average, but below the average for sixth form colleges. It also criticised teaching as unimaginative, although it said that some vocational provision was excellent. Post-16 education is funded by the Learning and Skills Council, under government guidance. Government funding policy is to concentrate on three main target areas – full time 16–19 education, adult basic literacy and numeracy skills, and adult level 2 qualifications (broadly GCSE grade A-C level). FE and tertiary colleges have responded to this by withdrawing from adult education, unless it fits into the funding priorities, or is fully funded by employers. Pearmount is typical in this. Over the last decade it has withdrawn from many advanced vocational and professional part time programmes, and concentrated much more on full-time 16–19 programmes. The other continuing pressure from the LSC is to drive up the quality of further education provision, with the threat of withdrawing funding from courses within the priority areas which are deemed to be of low quality. Jim Merryweather was appointed as the new principal of Pearmount College in September 2006, following the retirement of his predecessor, who had taken an active role in the town. Within a month of taking up his post, he produced a new teaching and learning strategy for the College. This stressed individual daily targets for students, with daily assessment and measurement of achievement; all assignment work to be completed in college; and fortnightly reports to parents on progress and attendance. His aim was to make the College one of the best sixth forms in the country. Although there was some concern that the new strategy seemed to focus solely on full-time 16–19 students, it was broadly welcomed by teaching staff, and rapid progress was made in its implementation. However, Jim also faced the problem that many of his staff were ageing, while others, who mainly taught vocational programmes for adults, were seeing much of their workload disappearing. Clearly the college staffing needed to be restructured. One way to do this could have been an early retirement programme, but what often happens in these programmes is that the people opting to take early retirement are the very people who you do not want to lose. Another option could have been a programme of retraining and redeployment. Jim’s solution was to propose a radical restructuring, which was announced just before the Easter holidays in April 2007. A new staffing structure was proposed, with more higher-paid posts, but also some low-level posts with a salary ceiling well below that previously available to lecturers. All members of staff were expected to reapply for posts under the new structure, with the clear expectation that some would be unsuccessful. In addition, holidays were reduced, and the normal working week was increased to 37 hours, all of which could in theory be spent teaching. The working week was also extended to five and a half days, and staff could be requested to work on Saturdays. Staff would no longer be entitled to overtime or time off in lieu. The reaction of staff was one of horror, particularly as the new posts were advertised internally immediately, although the proposals came under the 90-day consultation period for major redundancies. Teaching staff held a number of one-day strikes, were fully supported by their union and the students union, and also attracted a lot of support within the town. By the end of the summer term in 2007, half the teaching staff had been made redundant, had found new posts, or had taken early retirement. There was severe concern that College staffing would be inadequate to meet demand in 2007–8, and also that the adverse publicity would dissuade many potential students from attending the College. Critically evaluate Jim’s strategy for implementing change at Pearmount College and explain what techniques can be used to overcome resistance to change?