Derwentside College

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Derwentside College We provide high quality education and training which focuses on developing knowledge, skills and qualities needed by our learners to progress into sustained employment and build successful careers. A range of vocational courses, traineeships and apprenticeships are available. When is it on? Time of day Morning Afternoon Evening Who to contact Contact name Lindsey Dart or Julie Eddy Contact Head of faculty - Foundation Learning / position Learning Support Leader Telephone 01207 585 900 E-mail [email protected] Website www.derwentside.ac.uk Where to go Address Derwentside College Front Street Consett County Durham Postcode DH8 5EE Other details Referral and Learners do not need to be referred to availability Derwentside College, but we work with notes parents and other support agencies to provide the appropriate support for learners. Disclaimer Durham County Council's Families Information Service does not promote nor endorse the services advertised on this website. Anyone seeking to use/access such services does so at their own risk and may make all appropriate enquiries about fitness for purpose and suitability to meet their needs. Call the Families Information Service: 03000 269 995 or email: [email protected] Disclaimer: Durham County Council's Families Information Service encourages and promotes the use of plain English. We therefore reserve the right to amend any information supplied as necessary. Durham County Council's Families Information Service does not promote nor endorse the services advertised on this website. Anyone seeking to use/access such services does so at their own risk and may make all appropriate enquiries about fitness for purpose and suitability to meet their needs..

Copy Link

Recommended publications

Local Government Review in the Derwentside District Council Area, County Durham
Local Government Review in the Derwentside District Council Area, County Durham Research Study Conducted for The Boundary Committee for England April 2004 Contents Introduction 3 Summary of Key Findings 5 Methodology 7 Definitions of Social Grade and Area 11 Topline Findings (Marked-up Questionnaire) 13 Introduction This summary report presents the key findings of research conducted by the MORI Social Research Institute on behalf of The Boundary Committee for England in the Derwentside District Council area, County Durham. The aim of the research was to establish residents’ views about alternative patterns of unitary local government. Background to the Research In May 2003, the Government announced that a referendum would take place in autumn 2004 in the North East, North West and Yorkshire and the Humber regions on whether there should be elected regional assemblies. The Government indicated that, where a regional assembly is set up, the current two-tier structure of local government - district, borough or city councils (called in this report ‘districts’) and county councils - should be replaced by a single tier of ‘unitary’ local authorities. In June 2003, the Government directed The Boundary Committee for England (‘the Committee’) to undertake an independent review of local government in two-tier areas in the three regions, with a view to recommending possible unitary structures to be put before affected local people in a referendum at a later date. MORI was commissioned by COI Communications, on behalf of the Committee, to help it gauge local opinion. The research was in two stages. First, in summer 2003, MORI researched local residents’ views about local government and how they identify with their local community.
[Show full text]
Derwentside College
REPORT FROM THE INSPECTORATE Derwentside College August 1997 THE FURTHER EDUCATION FUNDING COUNCIL THE FURTHER EDUCATION FUNDING COUNCIL The Further Education Funding Council has a legal duty to make sure further education in England is properly assessed. The FEFC’s inspectorate inspects and reports on each college of further education every four years. The inspectorate also assesses and reports nationally on the curriculum and gives advice to the FEFC’s quality assessment committee. College inspections are carried out in accordance with the framework and guidelines described in Council Circular 93/28. They involve full-time inspectors and registered part-time inspectors who have knowledge and experience in the work they inspect. Inspection teams normally include at least one member who does not work in education and a member of staff from the college being inspected. Cheylesmore House Quinton Road Coventry CV1 2WT Telephone 01203 863000 Fax 01203 863100 © FEFC 1997 You may photocopy this report. CONTENTS Paragraph Summary Introduction 1 The college and its aims 2 Responsiveness and range of provision 10 Governance and management 19 Students’ recruitment, guidance and support 30 Teaching and the promotion of learning 40 Students’ achievements 50 Quality assurance 61 Resources 70 Conclusions and issues 80 Figures GRADE DESCRIPTORS The procedures for assessing quality are set out in the Council Circular 93/28. During their inspection, inspectors assess the strengths and weaknesses of each aspect of provision they inspect. Their assessments are set out in the reports. They also use a five-point grading scale to summarise the balance between strengths and weaknesses. The descriptors for the grades are: • grade 1 – provision which has many strengths and very few weaknesses • grade 2 – provision in which the strengths clearly outweigh the weaknesses • grade 3 – provision with a balance of strengths and weaknesses • grade 4 – provision in which the weaknesses clearly outweigh the strengths • grade 5 – provision which has many weaknesses and very few strengths.
[Show full text]
THE RURAL ECONOMY of NORTH EAST of ENGLAND M Whitby Et Al
THE RURAL ECONOMY OF NORTH EAST OF ENGLAND M Whitby et al Centre for Rural Economy Research Report THE RURAL ECONOMY OF NORTH EAST ENGLAND Martin Whitby, Alan Townsend1 Matthew Gorton and David Parsisson With additional contributions by Mike Coombes2, David Charles2 and Paul Benneworth2 Edited by Philip Lowe December 1999 1 Department of Geography, University of Durham 2 Centre for Urban and Regional Development Studies, University of Newcastle upon Tyne Contents 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Scope of the Study 1 1.2 The Regional Context 3 1.3 The Shape of the Report 8 2. THE NATURAL RESOURCES OF THE REGION 2.1 Land 9 2.2 Water Resources 11 2.3 Environment and Heritage 11 3. THE RURAL WORKFORCE 3.1 Long Term Trends in Employment 13 3.2 Recent Employment Trends 15 3.3 The Pattern of Labour Supply 18 3.4 Aggregate Output per Head 23 4 SOCIAL AND GEOGRAPHICAL DYNAMICS 4.1 Distribution of Employment by Gender and Employment Status 25 4.2 Differential Trends in the Remoter Areas and the Coalfield Districts 28 4.3 Commuting Patterns in the North East 29 5 BUSINESS PERFORMANCE AND INFRASTRUCTURE 5.1 Formation and Turnover of Firms 39 5.2 Inward investment 44 5.3 Business Development and Support 46 5.4 Developing infrastructure 49 5.5 Skills Gaps 53 6. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 55 References Appendices 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 The scope of the study This report is on the rural economy of the North East of England1. It seeks to establish the major trends in rural employment and the pattern of labour supply.
[Show full text]
PDF (Volume 2)
Durham E-Theses Local governance, governmental practices, and the production of policy: local strategic partnerships and area-based 'multiple deprivation' in County Durham Scott, David John How to cite: Scott, David John (2008) Local governance, governmental practices, and the production of policy: local strategic partnerships and area-based 'multiple deprivation' in County Durham, Durham theses, Durham University. Available at Durham E-Theses Online: http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/2229/ Use policy The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that: • a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in Durham E-Theses • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders. Please consult the full Durham E-Theses policy for further details. Academic Support Oce, Durham University, University Oce, Old Elvet, Durham DH1 3HP e-mail: [email protected] Tel: +44 0191 334 6107 http://etheses.dur.ac.uk 2 Local Governance, Governmental Practices, and the Production of Policy: Local Strategic Partnerships and Area-Based 'Multiple Deprivation' in County Durham Volume 2 of 2 David John Scott Ph.D. thesis The copyright of this thesis rests with the author or the university to which it was submitted. No quotation from it, or information derived from it may be published without the prior written consent of the author or university, and any information derived from it should be acknowledged.
[Show full text]
N No of Establishments Ot Yet Rated Fo Intervent
Authority Total No of No of Total % of Total % of Total % of Total % of Total % of Total % of Total % of Total % of Total % of Total % of Total % of Total % of Total Total No of Total No Total No Total No of Total No of Total No of Total No of Total No of Total No of Establishments Establishments Broadly Broadly Broadly Broadly Broadly Broadly Interventions Interventions Interventions Interventions Interventions Interventions number of formal of formal of formal formal formal formal formal formal formal (inc unrated) not yet rated for compliant compliant compliant compliant compliant compliant achieved achieved - achieved - achieved - achieved - achieved - samples enforcement enforcem enforceme enforcement enforcement enforcemen enforceme enforcement enforcement intervention premises premises - A premises - B premises - C premises - D premises - E Premises Rated A Premises Rated B Premises Rated C Premises Rated D Premises Rated E taken actions taken ent nt actions actions taken actions taken t actions nt actions actions taken - actions taken - - actions taken - - Seizure, - taken - taken - Improvement Remedial Prosecutions taken - Voluntary dentention Suspension/r Emergency Prohibtion Notices Action & Simple closures and evocation of Prohibition Orders Detention Cautions surrender of approval Notices Notices food DISTRICT COUNCILS Adur 446 39 82.3% 0.0% 29.4% 81.9% 100.0% 100.0% 99.7% 100.0% 100.0% 99.4% 100.0% 100.0% 101 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 0 Allerdale 1332 77 92.0% 0.0% 46.7% 88.2% 97.1% 99.8% 90.4% 100.0% 97.6% 96.2% 93.9% 70.4% 59 0
[Show full text]
Community Research in Castle Morpeth Borough Council Area 2003
Community Research in Castle Morpeth Borough Council Area 2003 Research Study Conducted for The Boundary Committee for England October 2003 Contents Introduction 1 Executive Summary 4 Local Communities 6 Defining Communities 6 Identifying Communities 6 Identity with the Local Community in the Castle Morpeth Borough Council Area 7 Overall Identity 7 Effective Communities 9 Involvement 13 Affective Communities 16 Bringing Effective and Affective Communities Together 17 Local Authority Communities 19 Belonging to Castle Morpeth Borough Council Area 19 Belonging to Northumberland County Council Area 22 Knowledge and Attitudes towards Local Governance 25 Knowledge of Local Governance 25 Involvement with Local Governance 26 Administrative Boundary Issues 26 Appendices 1. Methodology – Quantitative 2. Methodology - Qualitative 3. Sub-Group Definitions 4. Place Name Gazetteer 5. Qualitative Topic Guide 6. Marked-up Questionnaire Community Research in Castle Morpeth Borough Council Area 2003 for The Boundary Committee for England Introduction Research Aims This report presents the findings of research conducted by the MORI Social Research Institute on behalf of The Boundary Committee for England (referred to in this report as "The Committee") in the Castle Morpeth Borough Council area. The aim of this research is to establish the patterns of community identity in the area. Survey Coverage MORI has undertaken research in all 44 two-tier district or borough council areas in the North East, North West and Yorkshire and the Humber regions. The research covers two-tier local authority areas only; the results may however identify issues which overlap with adjacent areas. Reports and data for other two-tier areas are provided under separately.
[Show full text]
Conservation Bulletin 32.Rtf
Conservation Bulletin, Issue 32, July 1997 Planning change in London 1 Editorial: a new Government 3 Grant aid offered in 1996/7 4 The future for archaeology 8 Roofs of England 10 Planning and listing directions issued 11 Post-war and thematic listing 12 Long-term planning for Ironbridge Gorge 14 New Chief Executive for EH 16 Perspectives on sustainability 16 The Shimizu case 17 Books and Notes 18,20 Defining archaeological finds 22 Appraising conservation areas 24 (NB: page numbers are those of the original publication) London: planning change in a world city Antoine Grumbach’s design for an inhabited bridge across the Thames was joint winner of the recent ‘Living Bridges’ exhibition at the Royal Academy Tall buildings. New Thames bridges. Better architecture. A new planning policy for London. These four topics were the focus of an English Heritage debate held on 29 May before an invited audience of developers, architects, journalists and policy makers at the Royal College of Physicians. Philip Davies reports ‘London – planning change in a world city’, chaired by the broadcaster and journalist Kirsty Wark, provided a rare opportunity for some of London’s key figures to discuss the future of London and to set out their vision for the capital. The Challenge London faces serious challenges to its distinctive character. Plans for towers of an unprecedented scale and height, and for new and enlarged bridges across the Thames, could change forever the way the city looks and functions. Successive surveys have confirmed that people and businesses are attracted to London not only as the centre of government, communications and financial expertise, but also because it has retained its sense of history and the diversity of its built heritage.
[Show full text]
Directory Derwentside
DERWENTSIDE Business 06 07 & / Community DIRECTORY Background Information con t en t s Premise, by Right Honorable Hilary Armstrong 3 Derwentside the District 5 “If we do what Introduction, by LSP Chair, Alex Watson 7 we’ve always Business & Economy done then we’ll A great place for business 9 only get what Derwentside economic profile 11 we’ve always Business support and partnerships 3 got” Flagship projects (Emerge, Beacon, Agility, Enterprise Place) 15 Tom Baker Your business matters 17 Education Lifelong Learning and education 19 Community Safety Safety in the community 19 E d it or Miles Crofton In the Best of Health 0191 586 6010 [email protected] Healthy living for a healthy lifestyle 19 Exxecu t ivve Eddit oor Housing & Environment Sarah J Lee An environment for success 19 [email protected] Childcare counts 19 Ed it oria l Paul Seales You and your Council 19 [email protected] Transport and communication 19 A dv ertisin g & Sponsorship Time out with tourism, leisure and shopping 19 Andrew White 0191 5866 040 Miscellaneous Case Studies 19 Bank Holidays 19 Derwentside Business & Community Directory is published by informnorth creative services, Calendar 2006 19 a County Durham based community interest company. We have taken all reasonable care to Conversions 19 ensure that material is accurate at the time of going to press, but accept no responsibility for Dialling Codes 19 errors or omissions and no liability is accepted for omission or failure from any cause. Travelling distances to UK centres 19 The publisher has welcomed contributions in production of this directory, all opinions UK& Ireland airports list 19 expressed are those of individual contributors and not necessarily our own.
[Show full text]
Local Government Boundary Commission for England
LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOUNDARY COMMISSION FOR ENGLAND REVIEW OF TYNE AND WEAR THE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH OF GATESHEAD Boundaries with: CASTLE MORPETH and TYNEDALE in NORTHUMBERLAND DERWENTSIDE and CHESTER-LE-STREET in COUNTY DURHAM CASTLE MORPETH NEWCASTLE UPON TYNE SOUTH TYNESIDE TYNEDALE GATESHEAD DERWENTSIDE CHESTER -LE-STREET REPORT NO. 640 LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOUNDARY COMMISSION FOR ENGLAND REPORT NO 640 SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE ENVIRONMENT REVIEW OF TYNE AND WEAR THE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH OF GATESHEAD AND ITS BOUNDARIES WITH THE DISTRICTS OF CASTLE MORPETH AND TYNEDALE IN NORTHUMBERLAND, AND WITH THE DISTRICTS OF DERWENTSIDE AND CHESTER-LE-STREET IN COUNTY DURHAM COMMISSION'S FINAL REPORT INTRODUCTION 1. This is one of a series of five reports dealing with the metropolitan districts of Tyne and Wear. In each of these reports we firstly set out our analysis of those proposals put to us for radical change to the County as a whole, and then our consideration of the boundaries of the particular metropolitan district under review. 2. The five reports are as follows:- (i) Gateshead, and its boundaries with Castle Morpeth and Tynedale in Northumberland and Derwentside and Chester-le- Street in County Durham. (ii) Newcastle upon Tyne. and its boundaries with Gateshead and with Castle Morpeth in Northumberland. (iii) North Tvneside. and its boundaries with Newcastle upon Tyne and with Blyth Valley and Castle Morpeth in Northumberland. (iv) South Tyneside. and its boundaries with Gateshead, Newcastle upon Tyne, North Tyneside and Sunderland. (v) Sunderland, and its boundaries with Gateshead, with the City of Durham, Chester-le-Street and Easington in County Durham.
[Show full text]
Authority No. Dppos Alnwick District Council 2 Alnwick - 10/08/2007, Amble - 10/08/2007
The following table outlines those authorities that have published Designation Orders as at 1st November 2010. Please note that if you require full name of roads in an area, you should contact the relevant council office. Authority No. DPPOs Alnwick District Council 2 Alnwick - 10/08/2007, Amble - 10/08/2007. Amber Valley Borough 13 Belper - 24/05/2004, Oakerthorpe - 24/05/2004, Ripley and Heanor - 16/07/2004, Belper Railway Station - 24/01/2005, Council Church St Recreation Ground, Danesby Rise Recreation Ground, Denby Institute Recreation Ground, Denby - 05/12/2005, Festival Gardens, Belper - 22/06/2006, Kilburn - 08/09/2006, John Flamstead Memorial Park, Denby - 06/08/2007, Somercotes and Leabrooks - 06/08/2007, Belper Park - 06/12/2007, Heanor, various - 29/08/2008, Swanwick - 18/09/2009, Aldercar Rec Ground, Queen Street Rec Ground, Footpath between Queen Street and Acorn Centre - 16/07/2010. Isle of Anglesey County 3 Holyhead Town - 01/02/2005, Town of Llangefni - 15/12/2005, Menai Bridge Town - 01/08/2007. Council Arun District Council 1 Bognor Regis and Littlehampton, various - 01/06/2006. Aylesbury Vale District 2 Aylesbury various - 31/07/2008, Winslow and Steeple Claydon - 29/05/2009 Council Barking & Dagenham 2 Barking Town centre - 20/12/2004, Rainham Road South - 24/11/2008. Borough Council, London Borough of Barnet Borough Council, 3 North Finchley Town Centre - 01/03/2004, Hendon Central - 01/03/2004, Finchley Church End Town Centre - 01/03/2004. London Borough of Barnsley Metropolitan 15 Wombwell Town Centre - 03/04/2004,
[Show full text]
Stanley Town Council (Durham)
Case study on the experience of newly established local (parish and town) councils STANLEY TOWN COUNCIL (DURHAM) Background Stanley Town Council was created through statutory instrument on 11th April 2007. It set its first precept during the later stages of 2008/09 and became officially operational on 1st April 2009. Stanley is a former colliery town in County Durham, centred on a hilltop between Chester- le-Street and Consett. The town now stretches into what were formerly neighbouring villages and towns, such as Annfield Plain to the west, Tanfield and Tantobie to the North, and Beamish and Pelton to the east. The local council area comprises, what is called, the ider Staley area eyod the to ad has a populatio of ore tha 3, hih makes it the largest local council in the county. The creation of the council came about as a result of a public petition. For many years there was a strongly expressed local view that Stanley had a separate geographic and historical identity from the other settlements which comprised the former Derwentside District Council. The public campaign for a local Stanley town council grew, based on a desire for represetatio loser to the tos populatio ad greater loal aoutaility. However, this was not supported by the District Council. As the campaign gathered momentum, the support of a local MP became important. This was seen as crucial when the case for the new council was finally approved by the Secretary of State. National policy also played a key role at that point. The Government had put into effect a process to create a number of unitary councils in certain parts of the country.
[Show full text]
The Statistical Bias Against Unitary Counties
THE STATISTICAL BIAS AGAINST UNITARY COUNTIES How local government reorganisation has hidden deprivation and threatens to strip authorities of funding Steve Fothergill and Tony Gore Centre for Regional Economic and Social Research Sheffield Hallam University Final report October 2011 This report has been funded by Durham County Council. An additional input of Prof Fothergill’s time was provided by the Industrial Communities Alliance, the all-party association of local authorities in Britain’s industrial areas. 1 Contents Summary 1. PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF THE REPORT The nature of the problem The report 2. THE AVAILABILITY OF STATISTICS The authorities affected by reorganisation Review of published data Data availability: some conclusions 3. THE IMPACT ON THE MEASUREMENT OF DISADVANTAGE A working method Indices of Deprivation DWP benefits data The impact: an assessment 4. A SPECIAL CASE? The counter-argument The scale of the new unitary counties Why size matters Special case: an assessment 5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS An unintended by-product of reorganisation Recommendations 2 Summary The reorganisation of local government in parts of England in 2009 has created a statistical anomaly. Whereas data for 36 former district councils is now being discontinued, figures continue to be produced for 201 districts within the surviving two-tier counties. This threatens to hide deprivation in the new unitary counties and, in turn, to erode the likelihood that some of these unitary counties will benefit from funding streams that target areas of disadvantage. This could develop into a major, on-going problem. It would be astonishing if, in the long run, statistics for local disadvantage did not continue to guide policy and funding even though current area-based initiatives are being run down.
[Show full text]