‘Exceptional’ standards should be an achievable goal for providers

This week Ofsted has published an inspection report on Kleek Apprenticeships which finds that the national provider in hairdressing, barbering and beauty therapy has ‘strong’ standards across the board. 

Are Kleek ecstatic? Far from it. The previously ‘outstanding’ provider believes that the new findings are a demotion and its leader feels demotivated. 

The reason is a deeply held conviction that at least two of the judgements should have been ‘exceptional’ standards.   

 FIN believes that this latest development in the Ofsted reform process is definitely not a moan that the provider will ‘get over’ in a month or so but of real significance when the Milburn review is calling for a major reset of the skills system to provide more young people with a meaningful start to their lives. Ofsted is part of that system and needs to listen up. 

Last year FIN sounded the alarm that exceptional standards would be out of reach to apprenticeship and other work-based learning providers. We feared that only schools and sixth-form colleges could achieve them and six months later, only one adult learning provider in the FE and skills sector has a single exceptional standard despite nine other independent and employer providers each achieving five strong standards.  

Hard-working providers are entitled to ask why as we have other examples of FIN members who have found this grade unachievable for aspects of learning that are transformational. They find this very demotivating.  

Perhaps Ofsted believes their achievement rates aren’t high enough. Half of Kleek’s apprentices need additional support and yet the inspectorate finds that they achieve as highly as their peers. Many had high levels of truancy at school, in fact they hated school or came from alternative provision. Even with so many requiring additional support, its apprentices have an 80 per cent achievement rate, up from 70.6 per cent last year.  

At FIN we support over 200 providers and have supported many through inspection under the revised education inspection framework. Inclusion matters until it doesn’t. A work-based learning provider is not going to achieve a 90 per cent-plus achievement rate if half its intake needs extra support. 

Ofsted might be tempted to award ‘exceptional’ if they see something ‘transformational’ for learners. In the absence of specific criteria, inspectors will apparently know it when they see it – an extremely frustrating situation, given our members can point out obvious examples without success.    

In Kleek’s case, apprentices are sent to the Paris and London fashion weeks while 96 per cent achieve sustained employment. If going to Paris to work with the world’s top designers and models is not transformational, then I don’t know what is.  

As the report acknowledges, other apprentices have been nominated and performed very well in prestigious national competitions, such as the Hair and Beauty Rising Star awards and WorldSkills. But in the ‘next steps’ section, Ofsted wants to see more of a transformational impact. FIN feels that the inspectorate should offer providers something much more tangible in defining exceptional and transformational and we can provide the inspectorate with many examples from our members of what is.  

Despite providers facing challenging circumstances, Kleek’s commitment to and investment in quality stands out in the report. Have you ever read in another Ofsted report, “Leaders swiftly cease working with employers who do not provide apprentices with on-the-job training that is of a consistently high quality”? At the same time, the provider wants learners to have positive experiences of education and Ofsted observes in its report, “During Pride month apprentices demonstrated support for the LGBTQIA+ community by creating hidden rainbow hair colouring techniques symbolising hidden protected characteristics”.   

As FIN members demonstrate constantly and Alan Milburn says in his interim report, becoming NEET does not have to be inevitable. Two changes are required as part of the system reset that Milburn demands. Firstly and unlike for other provider types, Ofsted doesn’t judge independent training providers on meeting local skills needs, so these providers are prevented from demonstrating to local young people and employers that they do this very well. 

Secondly, when a provider achieves strong in all areas, lead inspectors should be mandated to look for examples of exceptional practice. 

Milburn writes that his review unashamedly extols the virtues of good work. Ofsted’s reports on Kleek and other providers such as National Grid Electricity Distribution (South West) and Corndel show that helping young people secure this work is not an aspiration but an achievable reality. If the system is to be reset, Ofsted must be part of it.