Latest news from FE Week | FE Week

Dear minister, it’s time to come clean on apprenticeships cuts

With the government attempting to hide or downplay the scale of their funding cuts, there is a huge gulf between rhetoric and reality on apprenticeships, says David Lammy.

During the course of the parliamentary debate on apprenticeship funding cuts on November 1, I mentioned cuts 30 times. I brought up local figures and evidence from the College of North East London in my own constituency of Tottenham and I quoted national averages and presented figures for worst- and best-case scenarios.

I even referred to calculations that had been presented to the Department for Education a few days previously, showing how nine out of the 10 most popular apprenticeships still face cuts ranging from 14 to 51 per cent – despite the government’s U-turn.

I will not stand by as the government presses ahead with cuts on this scale

But answer came there none. I was stonewalled. The apprenticeships and skills minister did not see fit even to mention “cuts” once in his speech. I accused him of hoodwinking the House – and this is not an accusation I make lightly – but given the nature of what is at stake, I repeat again that the minister is misleading us and the young people of this country deserve better.

The minister told us that “we are moving into a new world”. The fact of the matter is that – according to his government’s own latest statistics – less than one per cent of all apprenticeship starts are on the new standards, with 99 per cent still on the existing apprenticeship frameworks that are being cut. The government has a target of three million apprenticeships starts by 2020, but in 2015/16 only 3,800 of 503,700 starts are on the standards. The new world we are promised is a long way off.

Mr Halfon told us that “huge amounts of money are going into support for disadvantaged apprentices”, yet back in August the government quietly scrapped the “disadvantage uplift” in its entirety. The recent U-turn guaranteed support for only 12 months, and during the minister’s remarks in parliament no guarantees were made about what the government plans to do after this initial grace period has passed.

My message is clear: the fight goes on

I do not doubt the minister’s commitment to apprenticeships, but if we are to believe the government’s rhetoric about “transforming the country into an apprenticeship nation”, why was parliament not given the opportunity to debate and vote on these cuts?

Why did it take a determined backbench campaign by 55 members of parliament for this issue even to be discussed in parliament in the first place?

I acknowledge that the recent U-turn goes some way to mitigating the worst effects of the reductions, but I will not stand by as the government presses ahead with cuts on this scale without even having the guts to come to parliament and come clean about their magnitude.

Across nine out of the 10 most popular apprenticeships, we are now staring down the barrel of average cuts of between 27 per cent and 43 per cent. These cuts won’t affect young people lucky enough to have been born into wealthy families, or those who are lucky enough to be educated at our best schools.

They will hit young people in constituencies like mine, where youth unemployment is high, skilled jobs are hard to come by and buzzwords like “life chances” and “social mobility” couldn’t be further removed from the reality of everyday life.

The government publishes statements saying that “apprenticeships transform lives and are vital in making this a country that works for everyone” while simultaneously dismantling apprenticeships funding.

There is a huge gulf between rhetoric and reality, and it is always working class young people who lose out. My message is clear: the fight goes on.

David Lammy is Labour MP for Tottenham

It’s all about apprenticeships: what are colleges waiting for?

Colleges are sadly still proving themselves to be out of step with the seismic shift in funding priorities towards apprenticeships.

Nick Boles asked a year ago at AoC Conference why they were still letting independent training providers steal their lunch.

Little has changed since. In fact, the situation has worsened.

I get it that colleges should offer broader training opportunities than just apprenticeships.

There’s little doubt also that it takes more than 12 months to transform priorities and working practices at what are often huge institutions.

But the truth is, colleges have form on this.

We recalled in our front page story this week that then economic secretary to the treasury, John Healey, urged them at AoC conference in 2003 to be “more active” in forging training links with business.

It isn’t good enough that many are still not listening.

There’s a huge amount of extra money available to colleges that are able to evolve quickly.

The stark reality could, I fear, be economic oblivion for those that aren’t.

K College rescuer East Kent College in merger talks with neighbour

A college that leapt to the rescue during one of the most disastrous mergers of recent years now plans to join forces with its neighbour.

East Kent College, which took on two of K College’s campuses following the latter’s meltdown in 2014, has announced plans “in principle” to join forces with Canterbury College (pictured above), having combined their leadership teams on August 1.

This is the latest merger to be announced after Sir David Collins, the outgoing FE commissioner, told MPs on the education select committee last month that there were 88 colleges engaged in merger discussions, following the first three waves of the area reviews of post-16 education and training.

Both East Kent and Canterbury are involved in the Kent review, which is due to start December 8.

No date has yet been set for when the merger will go ahead, although both said in a statement it was “unlikely” to be before next summer.

Beverley Aitken, East Kent’s chair, said: “We have seen a wide range of benefits since forming the partnership with Canterbury College, and our governors were minded to recommend we examine a full merger.”

Colin Carmichael, Canterbury’s chair, said that the college had already seen “significant efficiencies” through the shared leadership team.

“At this stage, it feels like the time is right to move forward with our planning, and look to bring the two together,” he added.

K College, which was formed through a merger between South Kent College and West Kent College in 2010, fell apart in 2014 after racking up huge debts.

It split into two, with East Kent taking over campuses in Dover and Folkestone.

East Kent, which has around 6,000 learners, was rated ‘good’ during its latest Ofsted inspection in March 2013, while Canterbury, which has around 9,000 learners, was given a ‘requires improvement’ grade following its last inspection in May 2015.

In a separate move, four colleges in Devon have come together to form the Devon Colleges Group – but they’re not merging.

The link-up between Petroc, Exeter College, City College Plymouth and South Devon College will see them working in collaboration rather than merging.

In a joint statement, the four said the group was a “partnership with a shared vision focussed on enhancing skills, raising aspirations and driving regional economic growth and productivity”.

All four were rated either ‘outstanding’ or ‘good’ at their most recent Ofsted inspections.

John Laramy, Exeter’s principal, said he welcomed the opportunity to “work together in collaboration with our neighbouring colleges”.

City College Plymouth’s principal Phil Davies said the college was “fully committed to the collective and strong collaborative working that the Devon Colleges Group will provide”.

Diane Dimond, principal at Petroc, said “effective collaboration is key to delivering the skills our regional economy needs, both now and for the future”.

Stephen Criddle, South Devon College’s principal, added the group would “provide a coordinated approach and greater focus on identifying good-practice areas of strength and specialism”.

The announcement came ahead of the Somerset, Devon, Cornwall and Isles of Scilly area review, in which all four colleges are involved and which held its first steering group meeting on November 9.

Last month the College of Haringey, Enfield and North East London pulled out of a planned three-way merger with Barnet and Southgate College and Waltham Forest College, citing different approaches to governance and management as a sticking point.

Meanwhile, the remaining two colleges announced that they would soon be consulting on proposals for a two-way merger, with a planned merge date of August 1, 2017.

Consultation on a proposed link-up between City College Brighton and Hove and Northbrook College Sussex also opened last month.

Mining apprenticeship standards delay leaves ‘recruitment time bomb’

The mining and processing sector has been left without the means to deliver apprenticeships even though it faces a “recruitment time bomb”, sector representatives told FE Week.

A trailblazer group has been working on new apprenticeship standards for over two years, but faced repeated rejections from the government – including having one plan turned down seven times.

The old framework for the industry, meanwhile, which is commonly referred to as ‘extractives and mineral processing’, has been inoperative since 2014. And with less than five months before the apprenticeship levy kicks in, employers are concerned.

Karen Wright, learning and development manager at British-based international building materials company Hanson, is chair of the Mineral Products Qualifications Council and the trailblazer group that has worked to get new apprenticeship standards passed.

She said employers initially saw the levy as “a big opportunity” to “attract new blood into the industry” with an aging workforce.

Employers initially saw the levy as a big opportunity to attract new blood into the industry

Her team has been working for “at least two years” on a range of new apprenticeship standards, and now has five in development.

However, she added: “We have had hurdles at every single stage.”

None of the new standards have been approved for delivery yet, and Ms Wright said “constant changing of requirements” had been a barrier.

“The government hasn’t made this easy at all,” she said, explaining that when their first standard was submitted for approval it was “returned seven times”.

“Even rewriting it in the exact wording we had been given by the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, it was rejected.”

Anthony Elgey, general manager at standard setting organisation MP-Futures, warned employers faced a “recruitment time bomb”, adding just 14 per cent of the workforce was aged below 35.

Mr Elgey explained that while the trailblazers had been fighting to get standards approved, employers had “no useable framework to offer”. An application had been made by employers to update the ‘Extractives and Mineral Processing Occupations’ framework, but this was rejected.

Then in January this year, Mr Elgey said he was informed by issuing authority Proskills that the framework would be taken down altogether by April or August.

This was delayed until December, but, he said, the extension was irrelevant because only three of the 33 qualifications embedded in the framework are still operational.

The DfE declined to explain why there had been so many problems with the new standards, or the old framework had not been renewed in the meantime.

A spokesperson said:“We are working constructively with the mineral processing industry – and currently developing five apprenticeship standards with them – to ensure they have high quality apprenticeships in place.”

Government is overseeing the managed decline of further education

Rather than creating a regime that makes it easier for colleges to become insolvent, government should be investing more in further education, says Angela Rayner.

More than four million people in Britain are learning in the further education sector every year.

The sector plays a crucial role in supporting our young people. Those who are seeking qualifications to move on to university. Those learners who, later in life, are retraining and gaining new skills to get better jobs.

Also, as I know from my own personal experience, it’s helping those people who didn’t get what they needed from the education system the first time around to go further in life.

Going into further education after leaving school at 16 was life-changing for me. It enabled me to gain new skills and qualifications so that I could get work and start to fend for myself and my baby son.

Going into further education after leaving school at 16 was life-changing for me

Most of all, perhaps, further education helped me to understand that I was far more suited to a vocational approach than an academic one.

The vocational skills I gained are invaluable to me even more today when I try to help my constituents as a member of parliament.

That’s why I am passionate about further education and the route it can offer for people from every walk of life to go further and reach their full potential.

So I was hugely disappointed when the government missed a great opportunity to get behind the sector when it recently announced, to as little fanfare as seems possible, a new Technical and Further Education Bill.

Because it is clear to anyone who has read the bill that this Conservative government has no plans to develop a system of technical and further education fit for the 21st century.

Over 20 clauses in the government’s bill are committed to developing an insolvency regime for further education providers. Only under a government that has continually starved the further education sector of the investment it needs would this be necessary.

Last year, a report by the National Audit Office said that the FE college sector was in deficit for the first time in 2013/14; 110 colleges had an operating deficit, more than double the number from 2010/11.

In the same period, the number of colleges assessed by the Skills Funding Agency to have ‘inadequate’ financial health rose from five per cent to 12 per cent. All of this from the party of so-called fiscal responsibility!

Education is the best investment we can make in Britain

Everyone who works in the further education sector will have witnessed the dangerous levels of deficit denial coming from the Tories.

Anyone truly committed to an education system that works for everyone could see the dire warnings in that report and take immediate action to invest in our colleges.

Education is the best investment we can make in Britain, to support young people at every stage of their lives to get the skills which they need to live well and to contribute to Britain’s economic prosperity.

So when I see a government that, looking at the millions of people who rely on the FE sector and how it can change lives, decides that the priority is not investment but to create a regime that makes it easier for colleges to become insolvent, I see a government that is failing in its duty.

As shadow secretary of state for education, I have been urging the government to invest in our young people, to help them get the skills they need to go further. It’s an investment that we know will pay off down the line.

That’s why Labour has pledged to bring back the Education Maintenance Allowance, which would support hundreds of thousands of young people from low- and middle-income backgrounds.

I want to make it clear that Labour will never accept second best for our young people. Everyone deserves the opportunity to succeed. And instead of turning their backs on a generation, government has a moral, economic and social duty to help make their dreams come true.

This is a government that, instead of investing to build a better future for all, has instead chosen the path of managed decline.

And I for one, will not rest until we see every young person go further.

Angela Rayner is shadow secretary of state for education

Institute for Apprenticeships questions dodged, says Gordon Marsden

The government’s handling of the new Institute for Apprenticeships has been “shambolic” according to shadow skills minister Gordon Marsden, after it evaded a series of parliamentary enquiries about its capacity.

He says that questions he asked about staffing, resources and appointments in a letter posted on November 1 were dodged.

His queries were prompted by the government’s plans to expand the remit of the Institute, which is set to launch next April, to cover technical education as well as apprenticeships, which were first set out in the Technical and Further Education Bill announced October 27.

But despite the tight timeframe and its new responsibility, he was told only that the “detailed structure” of the IfA was still in development and that the government was “therefore not yet able to set out initial staff numbers”.

It is now “absolutely pressing” that the plans are finalised, Mr Marsden (pictured) told FE Week.

Peter Lauener cannot be expected to be carrying this job until the middle of next year, as if it was another bauble on his Christmas tree

“The questions I put down were based on a very real concern about the fairly shambolic history of the government’s handling of the IfA – and as important, what they’re going to do about it imminently,” he said.

He also urged the government to speed up the recruitment process for a permanent IfA boss.

“Peter Lauener, for all his skills and experience as a senior civil servant, cannot be expected to be carrying this job until the middle of next year, as if it was another bauble on his Christmas tree,” he said.

Mr Lauener, who is also the boss of the Skills Funding Agency and the Education Funding Agency, was named in September as shadow chief executive for two days a week.

So far, only shadow appointments have been made for senior IfA posts, and official information about its scope and capacity is not widely available.

At a recent select committee grilling, the apprenticeships and skills minister Robert Halfon and Department for Education mandarin David Hill were asked whether the role should be full time “given the importance of making sure the institute is up to speed as quickly as possible”.

Mr Halfon assured MPs that the chief executive, chair and board would in post by next April, while Mr Hill said recruitment was underway for many of the key roles, with the board expected to be in place before Christmas.

The latest questions about capacity at the IfA come after former skills minister Nick Boles told senior FE figures at a Policy Exchange event in January that he had “no idea — or if I had an idea I’m not going to share it” about how big the IfA should be.

FE Week later discovered in May that the apprenticeship body was only planning to have 40 members of staff until 2019/20.

A leaked document called ‘BIS2020 — Finance and Headcount outline’, seen by FE Week, indicated that the IfA would take on 40 employees in 2016/17 — and the number would not increase over the next three years.

And a job advert for the permanent chair, posted by the Cabinet Office in early October, said the institute would have an estimated annual budget of £8 million until 2020.

The role itself would be part-time for two days a week, and would pay £56,000 a year.

The government advertised for eight board members during the summer, with a salary of up to £15,000 available for each position.

The Skills Show is back and it’s bigger than ever

Strictly Come Dancing stars and the apprenticeships minister will be among more than 90,000 people heading to NEC Birmingham for the fifth annual Skills Show next week.

Visitors will be taking part in over 50 hands-on activities, taking careers advice, and watching the country’s most talented apprentices and learners compete in finals of the national skills competitions, from November 17 to 19.

Employers including Jaguar Land Rover, NHS Careers, IBM and the BBC will be there throughout offering careers advice.

The BBC stand will feature professional dancers from this year’s Strictly Come Dancing, who will talk to young visitors about how they made it to the big time, and will perform on the main stage before lunchtime on Thursday.

skills-show-strictly — Strictly Come Dancing professionals at launch of 2016 show

This year’s Skills Show will also for the first time offer “accelerated learning” – a continuing professional development offer for colleges to learn how competition activities can be used in their curriculum.

Neil Bentley, chief executive of WorldSkills UK – the organisation that runs the Skills Show – explained: “There will be three 45-minute taster sessions available throughout the show to demonstrate how competition activity can be used both to increase or improve teaching practice and to raise standards through teaching and learning.”

Visitors can also take advantage of the show’s new “sign-up Saturday”, where people can sign up to college courses, training, apprenticeships and even apply for live job vacancies.

Also new to 2016 will be the Skills Show “pre-show”. Young people have been encouraged to take part in a Careers Cloud before attending the show – a test where visitors answer questions and it comes up with their “perfect career choice”.

Mr Bentley said: “It is all about getting visitors prepared and thinking about what specific events they want to take part in and see during their time at the Skills Show.”

The finals of the national skills competitions will as ever be at the heart of the show.

Daryl Head competing in automotive engineering at the 2015 show

They will run across the three days and will involve 530 apprentices and learners taking part in 61 different skill areas ranging from floristry to forensic science.

Each category will have its own hub, with have-a-gos, spotlight stages, featured exhibitors and careers advice.

Top-scoring competitors will be recognised during a glitzy awards ceremony on the Saturday evening, hoping their efforts get them talent-spotted as a potential competitor at WorldSkills 2019 in Kazan, Russia.

With an estimated 90,000 visitors expected over the three days, competitors will “certainly feel the pressure”

With an estimated 90,000 visitors expected over the three days, Mr Bentley said the competitors will “certainly feel the pressure”.

“The audience size is part of the learning from the competition cycle,” Mr Bentley told FE Week. “It is not just about being technically excellent, it is about being able to work under pressure, being able to work in a team, in a specific environment where you are observed.

“Those are the key employability skills that will stand any competitor in great stead with any employer.”

There are also five inclusive skill competitions for students with physical and learning difficulties.

These will include a total of 33 competitors taking part in carpentry, catering, ICT, health and social care, and media competitions on the Saturday.

Robert Halfon will also attend the show for the first time on Thusday, as part of his new role as the UK’s apprenticeships and skills minister.

He might be tempted to have a go at one of the more than 50 hands-on activities available to try, including furniture design, electric installation, car bodywork, nail art,and media make-up among others.

With the NEC Birmingham scaled to the size of 10 football pitches, Mr Bentley recommends visitors “bring some comfortable shoes”.

Bolton college principal appeals to SFA over new apprenticeship rules

A desperate principal has pleaded with the Skills Funding Agency to relax rules that would prevent Bolton College from recruiting new apprentices from May next year.

On October 25 the SFA launched an application process for the new register of apprenticeship training providers, but those with the lowest Ofsted rating for the apprenticeships are barred from applying.

Ofsted rated the college as grade three overall, but declared it ‘inadequate’ (grade four) for its apprenticeships in March last year.

Bolton College’s principal Marie Gilluley (pictured) has now sent a six-page letter setting out her case to Kirsty Evans, deputy director of funding and policy for the Skills Funding Agency.

FE Week understands that the agency has subsequently engaged in “positive dialogue” with Bolton College – although neither body officially confirmed this – relating to her request to be allowed to carry on running the training.

Ms Gilluley warned in her letter that “the use of the Ofsted grade alone, rather than more recent available data as an indicator of quality” of providers allowed to run the training will have “serious consequences” preventing Bolton from running apprenticeships.

The use of the Ofsted grade alone as an indicator of quality of providers allowed to run the training will have “serious consequences”

“In our case the historic grade does not reflect the considerable improvement which has recently taken place,” she claimed.

“For some providers, there may be the opposite effect. For new providers there will be no Oftsed grade.”

This approach was “unfair and inconsistent”, she added, with other measures “encouraged by SFA to be used by providers, such as success rates, and employer and learner satisfaction scores, all of which show us to be performing very highly”.

She elaborated, explaining: “Our most recent data shows the college three per cent above the national average for overall outcomes and seven per cent above for timely outcomes.”

The government wants the new register to work alongside the existing register of training organisations.

Its rules state that providers are ineligible if they were rated ‘inadequate’ for apprenticeships within the last three years.

They can still apply if they were ranked ‘inadequate’ overall, but grade (‘requires improvement’) three or better for apprenticeships.

Ms Gilluley said: “The three-year window that has been specified can result in provision from as far back as 2013/14 being used to form the judgement – this is the case for Bolton.”

This year Bolton College has been allocated just under £2 million for apprenticeship provision.

“Between 2014/15 and 2015/16 academic years, we have increased our apprenticeship starts by 40 per cent and had an in-year request of over £100,000 granted for our 16-to-18 learners,” she said.

She pointed out that the college is due for an Ofsted reinspection, which it understands could happen within the next four months, and expects a better apprenticeships grade.

“We are confident that all the improvement points in the previous inspection have been addressed,” she added.

“Our outcomes for learners on both apprenticeships and class-based provision have increased significantly.”

An SFA spokesperson told FE Week that “we do not comment on individual cases”, adding: “The SFA will be responding directly to Bolton College in due course.”

We have a once-in-a generation chance to reform FE

Reforms will inevitably cause upheaval, but the problems with our current system are too pressing to ignore, says Lord Sainsbury.

No area of public life has suffered so much from poor government policy-making, constant change and under-funding as technical education.

The first report which said that our technical education was not as good as that of Germany was in 1870 and since that time, there have been endless attempts to improve it.

Having started my business career in the personnel department of the family firm, I have followed this unhappy saga over the last 50 years, starting with industrial training boards. To illustrate the rate of ill-thought-out change, in the last 35 years alone, there have been 28 major acts of parliament relating to vocational education and skills training.

If one looks at other countries, it quickly becomes clear that if we are going to have good technical education provision, we need three things: a national system of qualifications that is well understood and works in the marketplace; an effective system of funding students while they are learning; and finally, well-funded facilities and teachers to provide the education and training.

So how do we make this happen? I am not going to go through all the recommendations of the independent panel report on technical education. I encourage you to read it if you have not already done so. But I will describe a few key points.

We recommend that a new set of 15 technical education routes should be introduced. For 16-18 year olds studying full-time, each route will typically begin with a two-year study programme. Each programme will start with a common core of knowledge and skills, after which individuals will specialise towards an occupation or cluster of aligned occupations.

So, for example, in the ‘construction’ route, after a common core, an individual might choose to specialise as an electrician or a carpenter.

Technical education is not a catch-all term for everything that isn’t GCSEs, A-levels and degrees

For each of these specialisations there will be just one publicly-funded ‘tech level’ qualification available. The content of these tech levels will cover the knowledge and skills that industry experts have identified as being essential for the relevant occupations.

The clear organising framework we are proposing will cover all occupations where there is a substantial requirement for technical knowledge and practical skills. Technical education is not a catch-all term for everything that isn’t GCSEs, A-levels and degrees. So, falling outside of technical education are many skilled occupations, such as retail assistant, which do not require a significant amount of technical knowledge.

This is not for one moment to suggest that these jobs are not important in the labour market – they offer large numbers of demanding jobs – simply that to perform well in these occupations does not require a substantial technical training. Instead, shorter, job-specific training while in employment is more appropriate.

By focusing technical education in this way, there will inevitably be some young people who are not ready to access either the 15 routes or the academic option at the age of 16.

Those with low prior attainment, including some with special educational needs and/or disabilities, will need additional support. This group of young people should be offered an additional, fully-funded ‘transition year’ to help them prepare for further study or employment, and this transition year should be flexible and tailored to a student’s prior attainment and aspirations.

Any reforms to the technical education system, especially those as significant as the ones we are proposing, will inevitably cause upheaval for colleges. Some people will say that the last thing the sector needs is more reform, and I do understand this view. But the problems with our current system are simply too pressing for us not to act. I know it is all too easy for me to say that this is about ‘opportunities’ rather than ‘challenges’, but I genuinely think these reforms present a once-in-a-generation opportunity for the FE sector.

Further education is the only sector with the expertise to deliver world-class technical education and there is no more vital area of public endeavour. This country faces huge challenges to meet the skills needs of a modern advanced industrial economy, and it is only a strong, appropriately-resourced FE sector that can deliver the technical education we desperately need.

Lord Sainsbury is chair of the independent panel on improving technical education