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

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. 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. 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