WorldSkills UK national finals 2023

Welcome to this special souvenir supplement bringing you the full results and insights from the 2023 WorldSkills UK national finals in Greater Manchester.

The finals showcase the pinnacle of technical skills among UK students and apprentices, but there’s a lot more to skills competitions than winning medals.

Find out why Greater Manchester was the perfect host city region for this year’s finals, how learning from abroad is raising technical training standards at home, and get the very latest on how WorldSkills UK’s Centre of Excellence programme is transforming teacher CPD.

AoC 16-18 recruitment survey ‘reveals major concerns among college leaders’

Half of colleges have seen a drop in enrolment figures, with the blame partly placed on the loss of the Education Maintenance Allowance (EMA).

A survey by the Association of Colleges (AoC) of 182 colleges shows 49 per cent are reporting falling numbers of 16-19-year-olds, compared to last year.

It also shows a national drop of 0.1 per cent, the first time in 15 to 20 years the figure has fallen, with 46 colleges reporting a dip between five to 15 per cent.

Colleges believe unaffordable transport, combined with the abolition of the EMA and increased competition for student numbers among school and college sixth forms, have been the main causes for a decline.

The survey is further evidence supporting the findings from two surveys – conducted by Lsect – and published in FE Week. The first showed that 105 colleges forecast an initial total shortfall of 20,319 students for this academic year.

Key AoC survey findings:

  • Half of the 182 colleges that responded are seeing a drop in 16-19 students, with 46 colleges reporting a significant dip of between five per cent to 15 per cent
  • Of those reporting a decline, colleges say the end of EMAs for students in the first year of the course, competition from other providers, lack of affordable transport and cuts in funding per student were the main factors
  • A decline in Level 1 courses (pre-GSCE and basic skills) was reported by 41 per cent of respondents
  • 51 per cent of colleges said that their student numbers have increased or remained stable
  • 60 per cent of colleges reported a drop in transport spending by their local authority
  • Over half of all colleges are ‘topping up’ Government bursary funding with their own contributions and the same proportion are spending more on subsidising transport this year than last
  • 79 per cent of colleges agreeing that free meals in colleges for 16-18 year olds (currently not available, unlike in schools) would encourage participation.

Fiona McMillan, president of the AoC and principal of Bridgwater College in Somerset, said that at her own college EMA provided students with about £1,000 per year. Now, there is only £152 per year available for students.

She said: “We are all aware that funding is tight. But these young people are our future and we must consider our investment in them.

“We would all regret a situation where young people miss out and then become the so-called lost generation.”

Ms McMillan said the new 16-19 bursary, which replaced the EMA, is “better than nothing” but in terms of what it provides, “there is a big gap”. To cope, her college – like many others – has subsidised the cost.

She is also concerned colleges will miss out on vital funding, adding: “We are paid by our student numbers. So it’s an important issue for us.”

Martin Doel, chief executive of the AoC, said some of the changes could be due to demographics – with a drop of 40,000 in the 16-18 age group. He added: “It is a complex picture. The decline in college enrolment by students on Level 1 courses may be partially explained by improvements in school teaching.

“What is clear is a significant number of member colleges are concerned that financial constraints are preventing students from pursuing preferred courses at their institution of choice and there is a risk of vulnerable groups becoming disengaged from education.”

Andy Forbes, principal at Hertford Regional College, said they are “about five per cent down” on 16-18 enrolment from last year.

He said: “We’re now projecting a figure of just under 2,600 against our target of 2,719.

“We have experienced a particular decline in Level 2 enrolments and at the furthest reaches of our catchment area, which stretches quite a long way.”

Mr Forbes believes there are two factors to blame, adding: “The withdrawal of EMA and the cost of transport from the two ends of our catchment.

“We were not helped by late arrival of concrete information on what funding we had to compensate for loss of EMA and how we could use that funding, which made it difficult to put financial support in place for students and publicise them effectively.”

He also said colleges need to work harder to get the message across about the “exceptional quality of provision” they offer, in the face of “growing competition from schools” expanding sixth forms by offering vocational courses.

He added: “The decline of independent careers advice isn’t helping young people make good choices at 16 and we in FE are going to have to be a lot more active in ensuring school pupils and parents are made positively aware of the alternatives to staying on at school.”

However, the Department for Education spokesman (DfE) said there are “record numbers of 16 and 17-year-olds” in education or training.

He said: “There has been a massive increase in apprenticeships for anyone over 16 to learn a specific trade – 360,000 places in all available in more than 200 careers.

“And we are strengthening vocational education so young people will have high-quality courses open to them which are valued by employers.”

The spokesman also said: “We are targeting financial support at students who need it most to get through their studies – through the new £180m a year bursary fund, with further transitional support available for those students who were already drawing the EMA.”

Gordon Marsden, Shadow FE and Skills Minister, said the “alarming figures” show the impact of the government’s policy to scrap EMA. He said: “The government has left FE colleges facing a double whammy at a time of real economic uncertainty.

“Not only are college finances jeopardised by falling enrolment numbers, but they face the strain of having to try and address the post EMA funding gap, putting extra administrative burdens on them at a time where they claim to be setting them free.

“The government needs to get a grip urgently with a strategy that will help, rather than hinder, FE colleges in addressing young people’s employment and skills needs.”

AoC said they will repeat the enrolment survey in September 2012.

Click here to download the study and here to download the AoC press release.

Exit interview: Why Robert Halfon quit ‘the best job in government’

The sector was rocked on Tuesday by the sudden resignation of skills, apprenticeships, and higher education minister Robert Halfon.

The lifelong Tolkien fan signed off on fourteen years championing further education, particularly apprenticeships, in parliament invoking the wizard Gandalf: “My time is over: it is no longer my task to set things to rights, nor to help folk to do so. And as for you, my dear friends, you will need no help … among the great you are, and I have no longer any fear at all for any of you.”

Unlike Gandalf though, Halfon has no intention of disappearing across the sea, never to be seen again.

“My first political speech in 2010 was about apprenticeships, and my last political speech – whatever day that may be – will be on apprenticeships and skills. I’m actually determined that’s the case,” Halfon told FE Week the day after resigning.

Politicians often go to great lengths to avoid answering questions about their future career ambitions. But Halfon is clear: “I want to work in education and skills when I leave. I don’t know what that will be, but it’s been my great passion in life.”

Tributes from national FE leaders were uniform in their praise and gratitude when the news broke.

Sue Pember, policy director at Holex, who Halfon described as “a difficult woman to defy”, said his departure from government “will leave a void that will be keenly felt”.

Pember is not alone in attributing the increased political profile of skills and apprenticeships to Halfon’s unapologetic and relentless advocacy from the back and front benches. 

But, for him, his time was up.

“I’ve been thinking about leaving parliament for a few months. I had early discussions with the chief whip earlier in the year, but nothing had been finalised. I also wanted the government and the prime minister to know. But it’s not an easy decision.”

Between now and whenever the general election takes place, he will dedicate his time to his beloved Harlow constituency free from the pressures of ministerial office.

‘I did everything I could’

He won the seat in 2010 from the Labour Party’s Bill Rammell, a former further education minister, on his third attempt, increasing his majority since then from 4,925 to 14,063 in 2019.

In his 14-year stint in the House of Commons, he’s almost always had a parliamentary, party or government job on top of his responsibilities as an MP. He appears enthused about being able to speak his mind without having to conform to government collective responsibility.

“I’ve done this job now for 18 months, and it’s something I’m very proud of. I did everything I could do in the run-up to an election. As a minister, you obviously do work hard in your constituency. You’re not able to do as much as you can, particularly publicly, and there are things I want to do for the people of Harlow before I leave office.

“That’s why I had to make the very tough decision to step down from a job that I love and wanted to do and felt that I was able to hopefully do some good while I was there.”

The 2010 maiden speech in the House of Commons had him call for “root-and-branch cultural change” so apprenticeships are “held in the same regard as higher education by secondary teachers”.

Reforms to the Baker clause, requiring schools to host employers, colleges, and training providers to promote technical education and apprenticeships for “encounters” to their pupils, were led through parliament by Halfon.

Robert Halfon

“One of the reasons why I thought it was okay to go at this time was because a lot of the work that we were doing is on its way,” he said.

The frontbencher has become well-known for his “ladder of opportunity” catchphrase and has been influential over policies including the apprenticeship levy, T Levels, adult education budget devolution, the lifelong learning entitlement and level 3 qualification reforms.

Despite being on the same page as leaders on the importance of FE and training, rifts have emerged over the years on funding. Reviews of apprenticeship funding bands have been “too slow,” some standards are chronically underfunded, teachers are underpaid, and inflation has chipped away at already stretched budgets.

“I did everything I could to get more funding for FE,” he said, highlighting: “To get any penny out of the Treasury is very hard nowadays.”

But he considers funding wins on degree apprenticeships, care leaver bursaries and more recently on SME apprenticeships as some of “the big things” he wanted to see done before stepping down.

Earlier this month, the prime minister announced the government will fully fund the training of younger apprentices in small and medium-sized businesses, adding £60 million to the apprenticeships budget.

“I was over the moon about the £60 million, as you can imagine, for apprenticeships. New money in a very difficult climate. That was on top of £50 million that came last year in the autumn statement for specialised STEM apprenticeships.

“Money is not easy to come by. But I think given what we’ve received from the chancellor, and the removing of the cap on small businesses. I think we’re doing okay. Believe me, I’d love more. But where every single government department wants more spending, I think in my area, at least while I’ve been there, I’ve been proud that we’ve had extra money.”

Halfon said defending adult education, particularly community learning, is another of his achievements.

“I love community learning. The department knew I loved it. I had five priorities for adult education, the first was community learning and to at least keep the budget for that. And we’ve done so. I’ve done everything I can to support it because I really, really believe in it.”

But with economists warning of harsh cuts to come for non-protected department budgets following the government’s recent tax cuts, should the community learning sector be worried now that Halfon won’t be at the negotiating table?

“I think the sector’s got an incredible case to make,” he said.

“What I would do is not just focus on how brilliant it is, but what makes the case is focusing on the outcomes. What is the next step these people take, or how has it improved their mental health and wellbeing? I think that helps when you’re making the case to the Treasury. It really does.”

Political trade-offs

One of the quirks of Halfon’s career is his five-year stint as chair of the education select committee in between spells as the skills minister.

He made a name for himself for interrogating ministers and officials from the chair – which he said suited his personality as a “campaigner at heart”. He was critical of government policy that he would once again find himself responsible for, like the rollout of T Levels and the effectiveness of the Careers and Enterprise Company.

“One thing I did learn is it’s a lot easier to ask the questions than answer them.”

For Halfon trading the ability to freely speak his mind as committee chair with towing the party line as minister was worth it. Returning to the DfE as minister was “a chance to do stuff and really make things happen”.

Funding widening participation projects for degree apprenticeships, increasing the care leaver bursary, and laying the groundwork for the “revolutionary” lifelong learning entitlement wouldn’t have been possible as a committee chair, he asserts.

He spent his last day at DfE with his civil service directors, who he described as “literally outstanding”.

“It was quite emotional for me. I realised I was sitting in a room with great, great people. I’m very grateful to them.”

Mayoral authorities can’t afford new national adult ed funding rates

A large mayoral authority has spurned new national adult education funding rates due to be rolled out next academic year over concerns they will lead to a drop in thousands of learners.

From 2024/25, the government will bring in bumper adult education funding rates through the “adult skills fund” for non-devolved areas of England that will see five new priority bands for subject areas.

However, Greater Manchester Combined Authority (GMCA) estimates that if introduced locally next year, the new national funding rates would result in a 22 per cent drop in the volume of residents accessing courses – equivalent to about 12,000 residents.

Other combined authorities, which have devolved control over their adult education budget, have flagged affordability concerns but expect to use underspends from previous years to cover their costs.

Instead of mirroring the government’s new national funding rates from August 1, GMCA will “continue with an interim methodology for supporting the increasing cost of delivery” through a flat rate increase to individual adult skills funding rates (costs per course) of 6.5 per cent.

The combined authority will also increase grant-funded allocations by 2.2 per cent in 2024/25 to “take into account stagnant levels of funding since the start of devolution”.

For independent providers funded through procured contracts, the funding rate uplifts were “already taken into consideration as part of the procurement process and within their awarded allocation”.

What is GMCA saying?

An update on adult education spending in 2024/25, approved by the Andy Burnham-run authority last week, highlighted the “complex” new rates and “stagnant” levels of funding for GMCA since it took control of its budget in 2019.

The report added: “In recent years GMCA recognised that the cost of delivering adults skills has increased and that in particular the level of funding per course that adult skills providers drawdown, has not increased for ten years.”

Under the government’s new national funding rates, distributed by the Education and Skills Funding Agency (ESFA) to providers in non-devolved areas, high priority subjects such as engineering will see their rates increase by 33 per cent to £3,456.

In contrast, GMCA’s 6.5 per cent increase would bring the local rate for the same course to £2,750 – £700 lower than the national rate.

However, despite suggesting that the government should increase the adult education budget pot – which has remained at about £96 million since 2020/21 – GMCA says it can “absorb” the cost increase using unspent funds from previous years.

In 2022, GMCA had £9 million in “unallocated” adult education funds, reportedly due to falling enrolments during the pandemic. It is also forecasting £98.9 million in financial reserves this year,
although how much of this comes from unspent FE cash is not specified.

A spokesperson for GMCA declined to comment on the differences in local and national funding rates, or the amount of reserves it has available to cover its costs.

The authority – which has the third largest adult education budget – says an across-the-board funding increase for courses is an “interim” approach ahead of gaining increased control over its budget under ongoing “trailblazer” devolution negotiations.

It is hoped that under the future devolution deal, the government will give devolved authorities even more flexibility to spend adult education funding that is currently ringfenced, such as skills bootcamps and free courses for jobs.

Concerns at other combined authorities

Combined authorities that have published adult education spending plans for next year show diverging approaches in different parts of the country, with some following ESFA rates and others offering additional targeted uplifts for specific courses or learners with legal entitlements.

In previous years, some of the ten devolved authorities have avoided across-the-board increases and instead chosen to target funding uplifts at essential skills, English as a second language, or priority subjects such as engineering and manufacturing.

Three authorities that have published their 2024/25 spending plans are following national ESFA rates, but anticipate using unspent funds from previous years to cover cost increases.

In its adult education budget for 2024/25 published this month, Liverpool City Region Combined Authority said it will follow the “welcomed” ESFA rate increases, but warned that they will “in all probability” mean fewer enrolments due to increased costs.

South Yorkshire Mayoral Combined Authority has decided to follow the ESFA’s new rates using £5 million “carried forward” from previous years.

Cambridge and Peterborough Combined Authority claims it is “required” to follow the national rate because it uses the ESFA’s individualised learner record system.

However, it also voiced concerns that although the new rates will increase funding per learner, the number of people able to access courses “will reduce”. To mitigate this, CPCA warned it will need to “potentially draw down” from reserves to cover the costs.

The Greater London Authority, which had a £322 million share of the adult education budget last year – by far the largest share of devolved authorities – is yet to publish detailed funding plans for 2024/25. But earlier this month, its senior adult education team warned that the authority may not have enough funding to meet “increasing demand” in the capital.

As a result, it is likely to reduce the uplifts of previous years “in line with the available budget” and instead target funding towards “essential skills priorities”.

What does the sector think?

LTE Group, which runs several training providers including The Manchester College, has previously warned that devolved skills policy has created “multiple overlapping layers” for providers to negotiate.

Chief executive officer John Thornhill pointed out that in 2022/23, GMCA’s uplift of five per cent was “significantly lower” than to authorities such as the GLA and West Midlands Combined Authority, who increased rates by 13.5 per cent and 10 per cent, respectively.

This risks creating a “postcode lottery” of funding for providers working in different parts of England, Thornhill added.

Alex Stevenson, head of essential and life skills at the Learning and Work Institute, told FE Week that an “inherent problem” in managing adult education spending is the “pot that’s fixed”.

He added: “You’ve got the choice of having more learners on shorter, smaller or less well-resourced courses, or fewer learners doing more substantial programmes with more resources.

“Everyone has got to make decisions somewhere about those trade-offs.”

IfATE slated for apprenticeship assessment reform confusion

The Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education has been slated for sneaking out multiple reforms to apprenticeship assessment rules without consultation.

IfATE’s ‘developing an end-point assessment plan’ guidance was quietly updated last week and appeared to remove the requirement for end-point assessment to assess every knowledge, skill and behaviour (KSB) involved in an assessment plan.

It also suggested that officials have moved from requiring a “minimum” of two assessment methods to a maximum of two.

EPAOs were left frustrated with what appeared to be sudden and significant changes especially after then-skills minister Robert Halfon told the sector that officials will “improve the assessment model”, in his letter about this year’s national apprenticeship achievement rates. 

But there was radio silence from IfATE on the reasons behind the changes, which experts say would have “significant” financial and resourcing implications, or in-depth detail on how the institute expects them to be delivered.

The institute updated the guidance yet again this Thursday after angry EPAOs and the Federation of Awarding Bodies flagged their concern. 

IfATE has now claimed that it is “not moving from a minimum of two assessment methods to a maximum of two assessment methods”. Instead, the institute is “making it clear that trailblazers should justify the requirement for more than two methods for new standards and standards under review”.

The institute also confusingly said it was “not changing our direction on which KSBs should be assessed at this time” and is “committed to working with stakeholders on whether the system should be optimised in this regard.”

Terry Fennell, chief executive of food specialist awarding body and end-point assessment organisation FDQ, said: “It is incredibly frustrating when policymakers change the rules for EPAs without prior consultation with the delivery sector. 

“This tinkering with methodologies and KSB principles has significant financial and resourcing implications for EPAOs working in a now regulated market where consistency, validity and compliance are critical for public confidence in the EPA product.

“Whilst I do appreciate the time is probably right to review certain aspects of EPA, surely it would be better to work with the EPAO market and seek our expertise as part of an improvement exercise. 

“I would also ask for any consultation to be conducted in an open and transparent way ensuring employers and apprentices have their say as in our experience satisfaction is actually very high.”

EPA specialist and consultant Jacqui Molkenthin added: “The confusion is expounded by IfATE’s failure to highlight what the changes are, it simply overwrites its existing web text. It should adopt the DfE approach of issuing a ‘summary of changes’ document when it updates key policies.”

IfATE admitted to FE Week that it “felt the guidance we provided last week was not clear enough”, which led to a further update on Thursday.

A spokesperson said: “We are looking at our approach to the number of assessment methods used in plans and whether the sampling of KSBs would maintain validity whilst improving proportionality.

“We intend to explore these issues with stakeholders, including EPAOs. The primary motivation is to improve the performance and experience of EPA for the benefit of employers and apprentices.”

Any changes are expected to only apply to new standards or those going through a revision process.

Charlotte Bosworth, chief executive of large EPAO Innovate Awarding, said looking at the amount of assessment methods used and the way KSBs are assessed, whether in full or in part via sampling, are “all areas that should be looked at and reviewed as the EPA market matures”.

But she added the government needs to ensure any changes to assessment plans are applied consistently across all EPAOs and different approaches are not being taken that are “damaging to the quality of apprenticeships, risk regulatory compliance, and are damaging to end point assessment outcomes”.

Kion Ahadi, chief executive of the Federation of Awarding Bodies, said: “It is unfortunate that guidance was updated without it being clear on the rationale for changing the guidance on the number of assessment methods and moving to a sampling approach for some KSBs.

“We all welcome positive change to make independent EPA as efficient and as high quality as possible, but we need to ensure this is communicated appropriately and that the EPAO sector is consulted and inputs into any future proposals.”

Apprentice minimum wage should be linked to age, says Low Pay Commission

The apprentice minimum wage should be raised for over 18s to narrow the pay gap between apprentices and other workers, an independent advisory body has suggested.

The Low Pay Commission (LPC) began considering abolishing the apprentice minimum wage in November after hearing “widespread” concern that the “low” rate was discouraging people from taking apprenticeships.

In new advice published on Wednesday, the commission said the wage should be kept but that the government should link the rate to the national minimum wage for over 18s during the first year of their apprenticeship.

That means that the gap between the national minimum wage for adult apprentices and non-apprentices would be reduced (see table).

LPC’s ‘National Minimum Wage beyond 2024’ report said: “Government should consider the case for reforming the apprentice rate to a simple discount of the minimum wage that applies for that age group during their first year and ask us to take this forward in a future remit. For apprentices aged 16 and 17, the rate should remain aligned with the 16- to 17-year-old rate.”

The commission has not concluded what the discount should be exactly but a “reasonable” starting point would be to set the apprentice rate at 75 to 90 per cent of the adult national minimum wage.

From April 1, 18 to 20-year-old workers will earn at least £8.60 per hour and 18 to 20-year-old apprentices will earn £6.40 per hour – a 21 per cent rise from last year.

The commission is suggesting that with a 25 per cent discount of the new 18 to 20-year-old rate, apprentices over 18 could earn £7.74 per hour.

The body explained that it was not advising to remove the rate entirely because it “would remove alternative ‘shelter’ for young people’s employment.” 

“Large changes to the youth and apprentice rates at the same time could be a significant shock to the youth labour market,” the report said.

The Low Pay Commission also proposed lowering the age of eligibility for the national living wage “one age group at a time and to reduce the gap between the youth rates and the adult rate where the evidence allows”.

One small business owner in Manchester told the body of the large jumps in rates when employees turned 21 and came off the apprentice rate, which “could be a significant cost shock”.

“If the government agrees to our recommendation to, over time, lower the gap between the youth and adult rates and lower the age of eligibility to the national living wage further, then we think the current structure of the apprentice rate should also change,” the commission said.

“We would propose that, for apprentices aged 18 and over, the apprentice rate changes to a simple discount of the national minimum wage age rate during the apprentice’s first year.

“This, combined with the lowering of the age for national living wage eligibility, will result in substantial increases in the wage floor for apprentices, but continue to recognise the additional costs relating to the substantial training they receive.”

Baroness Philippa Stroud, chair of the Low Pay Commission, said: “There are real opportunities in the next phase of minimum wage policy, to make advances for workers young and old. Whatever decisions are made will always need to be backed by careful attention to the economic context and a keen sense of the risks faced by employers. The Low Pay Commission’s model remains the best one for delivering these changes.”

The government usually announces minimum wage rates in November for the following April.

‘Consultation not referendum’: Oliver defends Ofsted’s ‘Big Listen’

Ofsted’s “Big Listen” is a “consultation” not a “referendum”, chief inspector Sir Martyn Oliver has said, as he defended the exercise following criticism from unions.

In a letter to National Association of Head Teachers general secretary Paul Whiteman, seen by FE Week, Oliver said he wanted to “dispel” the concern that data from the consultation “will be interpreted by Ofsted as a mandate to avoid change”.

Ofsted launched the “Big Listen” – a 12-week consultation on further inspection changes following the death of headteacher Ruth Perry – earlier this month.

Whiteman wrote to Oliver today to express “significant concerns”. 

The primary issue is “many of the aspects of the current approach to inspection that our members are most concerned about are not addressed through the sections of the survey that will produce quantitative data”, he said.

The “most obvious example” is the lack of a “direct or clear question” about the use of single-phrase judgments to describe school and college performance.

“Whilst there are free text boxes provided, our concern is this will only provide qualitative information, which could get easily lost or overlooked in comparison with the far easier to present results derived from the multiple-choice questions.”

‘Significant challenge’ over single-phrase judgments

Oliver acknowledged Ofsted had received “significant challenge on whether we were right or not to have a question on single-word judgments”. 

In a letter that again shows the watchdog has moved on from its previous closed shop approach, he added: “The absence of a specific question in the consultation does not mean we are not listening to feedback from your members – and others – on the issue of single-word judgments. 

“One respondent is so determined to use the available text boxes to ensure we hear the message that they have included ‘GET RID OF THE ONE WORD JUDGMENTS’ as their gender, sexuality and religion, for example.”

Oliver also aadded that he interpreted “that there is a concern that data from the consultation, for example general support for giving a clear judgment on the quality of education, will be interpreted by Ofsted as a mandate to avoid change”.

But he added: “I want to categorically dispel that view. The consultation, alongside the independent research and the wider engagement we are conducting as part of the Big Listen, is a starting point for real action and improvement at Ofsted. 

“We will use the full range of feedback and research to inform how we improve, which we will set out in our response to the Big Listen.”

‘Missed opportunities’

In his letter, Whiteman also described other “missed opportunities to really understand what respondents think about key issues relating to inspection”.

For example, the questions on notice periods “have been drafted in an extremely vague manner, whereas there was an opportunity to directly ask something far more precise such as ‘how much notice should a school / setting be given before an inspection is carried out?’.”

The NAHT also has “significant concerns about the way some questions have been designed and framed”, and feels questions are “leading”.

“More importantly, respondents are not being asked how effective the current approach to inspection is at measuring these things, or about the very different forms a ‘clear judgment’ could take.”

But Oliver insisted that the Big Listen is “first and foremost a listening exercise”. 

“I don’t want to give the impression that we are conducting a referendum instead of a consultation. We are not naïve about the likely sample of respondents to our consultation. 

“We know any ‘vote’ would not be representative of the views of all those we want to hear from. That said, we genuinely want to gather views on all matters relating to our work, from a broad church of respondents, which is why having an open consultation is so important.”

Labour’s ‘securonomics’ is a golden opportunity for our sector

Rachel Reeves gave a speech last week that could be hugely significant for the work-based skills sector. It opened the door to showing her and the Labour team just what we can contribute to their plan for the nation.

Securonomics: joining the dots

In delivering the 36th annual Mais Lecture at Bayes Business School, Reeves laid out Labour’s burgeoning economic strategy under the title of ‘Securonomics’. The approach applies to everything from the tax framework to investment strategy and from planning reform to employment rights. 

The name signals that growth comes from giving people, companies and the country the security they need to achieve more (and more sustainable) growth.

Tantalisingly for the work-based skills sector, skills got a lot of attention during the speech. As well as restating known policies like the Growth and Skills Levy, devolution of adult education budgets and the creation of Skills England, she also laid out many of the dots that will need to be joined up to create the unified skills strategy we seek.

Sector-led input on how to join up these dots represents a golden opportunity to drive home our key asks.

An essential sector

Securonomics, we learned, has three key imperatives: stability, investment and “reform to unlock the contribution of working people and the untapped potential throughout our economy”. In case that last one is too vague, Reeves later added that “addressing the skills gap is a necessary but not sufficient requirement for economic success”.

So she ‘gets’ skills as a high-level issue, one that is as much about equality and happiness as it is about GDP and productivity.  She talked about breaking free from “a vicious cycle in which inequality widens while growth stutters.”

We must reinforce this message at every turn: Skills means growth!

The everyday economy

Refreshingly, while Reeves name-checked the usual suspects of political rhetoric on skills (“creative industries, professional and financial services, AI and other digital technologies, life sciences, and renewable energy”), she also celebrated “the everyday economy”. Here, she listed often overlooked sectors in skills discourse: “retail, care, transport, delivery, utilities, and more.” 

Nuclear engineers and AI programmers can’t do their best work if there is no one to care for their parents, look after their children, service their vehicles or brew their coffee. Pressing home this point creates an opening for us to make the case for increased funding and qualification reform for these vital “everyday economy” sectors. 

Exporting our expertise

Reeves’s securonomics acknowledges that post-Brexit Britain must export as much as it can in those sectors where we have a unique advantage. Correct! And FE is one of those sectors.

Whether that’s in the form of awarding and qualifications, software, advisory services or training providers, government should treasure the skills sector’s global reach. Imagine how much more we could do if we were feted, funded and regulated as well as , say, the life sciences, AI or offshore technology.

Beware mini-Whitehalls

While there is broad recognition that devolving to localities and regions can be valuable, there is real fear that it will lead to a proliferation of mini-Whitehalls. One is plenty!

Reeves argues that devolution works because it means decisions are made at the best level for information and insight. That’s a quarter of the story; there’s also the power of local passion, the resilience that comes from strong relationships and the determination of focused action.

Devolution that’s all about “analysis” and “decisions” is a poorer vision than one centred on action and results.

Beyond sticking plasters

Finally and crucially, Reeves argues that if you lack resilience, you can only respond to shocks by applying sticking plasters. She sees  ‘securonomics’ as the way for the country to be strong enough to respond to such shocks strategically and effectively. 

The same applies to the work-based skills sector: insufficient funding, disproportionate regulation and ever-changing schemes have undermined our resilience. Witness the number of providers who have been forced out of business.

If the likely next Chancellor wants securonomics to work, she will do well to start with the security and resilience of the skills sector.  Given the attention, support and funding it needs, it can be a key part of the foundation for our whole country’s future success.

Revealed: The 8 trainers that will pilot teacher degree apprenticeship

The government has named eight teacher trainers that will pilot the new teacher degree apprenticeship from next year.

Six universities, plus two partnerships between universities and other providers, will be funded to pilot the route for would-be maths teachers who do not hold an existing degree.

Gillian Keegan

The government announced last month that a long-awaited degree apprenticeship will launch next year.

The four-year course, which would see apprentices achieve both a degree and qualified teacher status, will be piloted with “up to” 150 trainee maths teachers from September 2025, before a wider rollout.

Apprentices will spend around 40 per cent of their time studying and the rest of the time in the classroom. Ministers particularly want to see teaching assistants trained up via the route.

Education secretary Gillian Keegan said the pilot was a “vital step and will help to recruit and develop great teachers, and I’m delighted that these providers have been selected to help us to deliver this”.

Off-the-job salary costs covered

Under the pilot, the government will provide grants to cover the training. In the wider rollout, training costs will be covered by the apprenticeship levy.

Schools that employ trainees as part of the funding pilot will also receive “financial incentives to support with trainee salary costs to cover the proportion of time trainees will spend off-the-job, studying towards their qualifications”, the DfE said.

Schools and teacher trainers are also free to “design and deliver” teacher degree apprenticeships across all primary and secondary subjects “within the same timeframes as the funding pilot and in future years”.

However, those doing so would not receive grant funding or financial incentives to cover part of the apprentices’ salary.

The DfE said evidence from the funding pilot “will be used to inform considerations on any future expansions of funding grants for the teacher degree apprenticeship”.

It comes after Schools Week reported last week how proponents of the route believe it presents a “glorious” opportunity for those without a degree to train to teach, will help bring under-represented groups into the profession and give schools a much-needed option to spend levy funding.

But they face an uphill battle to convince sceptics about the quality of the route, as unions warn it must not erode teachers’ pay and conditions.

The providers

  • Nottingham Trent University
  • Staffordshire University, in partnership with Stoke-on-Trent and Staffordshire Teacher Education Collective (SSTEC)
  • University College London (UCL)
  • University of Brighton
  • University of Huddersfield
  • University of Nottingham
  • University of Wolverhampton
  • Xavier Teach Southeast, in partnership with the University of Sussex

Unions demand 10% FE staff pay rise in 2024/25

Unions have called for a 10 per cent pay rise for FE staff next year, or a £3,000 salary increase, to keep up with the pace of inflation.

The demand comes from the five trade unions representing FE workers, who submitted the 2024/25 pay claim yesterday.

It calls on college bosses to address the 40 per cent real terms pay decline for FE staff since 2009/10 and the “steep” rises in the cost of living.

The demand is above the 3.4 per cent consumer price index and 4.5 per cent retail price index inflation rate in the year to February 2024.

It is also above the 6.5 per cent AoC pay recommendation to colleges last year.

The pay demand claimed that colleges can pay for this using the £470 million 16 to 19 funding awarded for 2022/23 and 2024/25.

Unions have also called for a £30,000 minimum starting salary for FE lecturers, matching schools.

“FE needs sustained investment to tackle the recruitment and retention challenges. The starting salary for a teacher in FE 2023/24 on the AoC pay scale is £27,789. Following the implementation of the school teacher’s pay review body this year, the starting salary for a new school teacher in England is £30,000.”

Unions also maintained some demands from last year such as colleges having class size recommendations, a “national policy on the delivery of guided learning hours” and to have a binding national pay agreement.

New claims include a demand for staff to have two mental health days per year and a commitment to close gender, ethnic and disability pay gaps.

“Despite women being the majority of staff, there is a substantial gender imbalance across the lecturers’ pay scale. Women are overrepresented at all four points in the lower half of the pay scale and underrepresented at all of four points at the top of the scale,” the unions stated.

“Our demand is that joint work takes place to analyse the current FE gender pay gap and that this work should also include ethnic and disability data.”

David Hughes, chief executive of the Association of Colleges, said college funding rates have not kept up with inflation and encouraged unions to “focus their energies” on demanding the government raise the funding rates.

He said: “We thank the unions for their pay claim and look forward to meeting with them in May to discuss it. AoC and its members share the same aim as the unions, to improve college pay. That’s why we work so hard to persuade the government to invest more and to increase the funding rates per student. 

“Unfortunately, college funding rates for next academic year have, once again, not kept up with the rate of inflation. Our concern is that the already unacceptable pay gaps between college lecturers and school teachers and with industry will widen further unless the government invests more to raise funding rates for colleges. 

“We will do everything we can to secure that extra investment and would encourage the unions to focus their energies on that as well.”

Apprenticeship funding rules 2024/25: Changes you need to know

Additional learning support funding is set for reform and functional skills requirements for SEND apprentices will be relaxed next year, according to new proposed apprenticeship funding rules.

The Department for Education is also introducing a new subcontracting threshold and plans to review “more flexible approaches” to active learning.

Draft apprenticeship funding rules for 2024/25 were published today and revealed a series of proposed changes.

Here’s what you need to know:

Funding claims for learning support made easier

From the next academic year, the government will move reviews for additional learning support from monthly to every three months.

Officials will also allow an assessment for learning support to happen at any time during the apprenticeship instead of just at the start.

Providers can claim learning support funding to make “reasonable adjustments”, such as specialist equipment and extra staff, to support an apprentice who has learning difficulties or disabilities so that they can complete their apprenticeship.

It is a fixed amount of £150 per month which can only be claimed by the provider for each month where reasonable adjustments are delivered, evidenced and result in a monetary cost.

ALS funding claims can, however, be a difficult area for providers which has led to several cases of large clawback.

The DfE said its 2024/25 reforms will “reduce bureaucracy associated with claiming learning support”.

Importantly, the ALS changes will apply to existing apprentices not just new starters.

SEND pilot flexibilities rolled out

The government will allow all providers to use a flexibility that allows apprentices with learning difficulties but without a pre-existing education health and care plan (EHCP) or statement of learning difficulties assessment (LDA) to work towards a lower level of functional skills.

Under current rules, apprentices must achieve level 1 English and maths functional skills qualifications if they’re on a level 2 apprenticeship and did not pass the qualifications at GCSE. And if a similar learner is on a level 3 or higher apprenticeship, they must achieve functional skills at level 2.

Those with an EHCP or LDA can, however, work towards and pass the lower level of functional skills English and maths at entry level 3.

Over the past year around 20 providers trialled a change to the rules that allows special educational needs and/or disabilities coordinators (SENDCOs) to conduct additional assessments and judge whether a learner without an EHCP or LDA – but with equivalent needs – can be approved for this flexibility.

Pilot providers previously told FE Week how this “game-changing” reform was allowing hundreds of people who found themselves blocked from apprenticeship opportunities to enrol on programmes thanks to the exemption.

The DfE said today that following this “positive” pilot, “we are extending English and maths flexibilities for apprentices who have learning difficulties or disabilities but no Education, Health and Care Plan, to study a more suitable level of English and maths”.

£30k subcontracting threshold

DfE will also introduce a new £30,000 threshold for subcontracting from August, today’s rules state.

A provider will be allowed to use a subcontractor that is not on the published apprenticeship provider and assessment register (APAR) but who will deliver “less than £30,000 of apprenticeship training and on-programme assessment under contract across all main providers and employer-providers between 1 April and 31 March each year”.

The DfE said this will make it “easier for providers to bring in industry specialists to deliver training by introducing greater flexibility in subcontracting arrangements”.

Onboarding and progress monitoring admin reduced

Initial assessment will be integrated with development of an apprentice’s training plan, the DfE said, which will “reduce the number of documents employers and providers need to review and sign”.

Providers will also “no longer need to ask employers to sign off each progress review”. 

5% co-investment payment lag

Prime minister Rishi Sunak announced this month that the 5 per cent co-investment for non-levy paying employers taking on apprentices aged 16 to 21 will be scrapped for new starts from April 1.

DfE has however warned that the associated changes to its payment systems will take “several weeks” to introduce.

This means that providers will continue to receive monthly payments representing 95 per cent of the agreed price for training and assessment until June when backdated payments for April and May for the 5 per cent balance of funding will be made.

Active learning review

The DfE is reviewing the “minimum requirement” for active learning, which refers to off-the-job and English and maths training.

Today’s draft rules said the department will begin seeking views in April about potential changes, as it is “keen to explore changes which support more flexible approaches to the delivery of training, such as front-loaded or block release training, as well as providing more flexibility for employers”.