Latest news from FE Week

How World Youth Skills Day can help with social mobility

Inequality is a major problem for many 18- to 24-year-olds, but Neil Bentley believes WorldSkills UK can play a part in helping the disadvantaged move up in society

“Young people losing hope over life chances,” was the damning conclusion of the recent Social Mobility Barometer, which looked at public attitudes to social mobility in the UK. The report certainly makes for challenging reading for all of us interested in seeing young people succeed in work and life.

A poll of nearly 5,000 people across the UK, it revealed that nearly 48 per cent believe that where you end up in society today is mainly determined by your background and who your parents are. This is compared with only 32 per cent who believe everyone has a fair chance to get on regardless of their background.

In addition, the poll also reveals a geographical divide, with 71 per cent claiming that they feel that there are ‘fairly or very’ large differences in opportunity depending where you live in the UK.

Clearly, we have a problem with social mobility in this country

However, what struck me most about the report was the feelings of social pessimism among young people. The barometer found that half of young people think the situation is getting worse, and only 30 per cent of 18- to 24-year-olds believe it is becoming easier to move up in society.

Clearly, we have got a problem with social mobility in this country, but I don’t want to lament the barometer’s findings because I’m not sure it takes us very far. The more interesting question, and the one we should all be focusing on, is how we can address the challenge.

Among the troubling data, there is more than just a glimmer of hope. While 18- to 24-year-olds are clearly very concerned about social mobility, the findings showed that they are actually the most optimistic that those from less advantaged backgrounds can get on in life.

I think that this greater sense of optimism is rooted in our younger generation’s innate ability to tackle a challenge and make the most of it. This was certainly shown at the recent turnout for the general election. The best estimates indicate that over 20 per cent more 18- to 24-year-olds voted than in 2015. This showed what those of us who have the privilege of working with young people already know to be true: they believe in and want to help shape a better future for all.

I certainly see this optimism when I meet members of Team UK and also young apprentices from around the world who are in training to represent their countries at WorldSkills Abu Dhabi 2017. Background is irrelevant when it comes to world-class competition and there really is a positive message when it comes to social mobility from these competitors.

Past and present members of Team UK are products of their local FE colleges, training providers and businesses across all industries. That in itself is a real statement about the ability of the UK’s education and training system to give our young people the start in life they deserve. But it is only half the story.

After they have finished their competition journey, members of Team UK continue to work with us visiting schools and businesses in their local communities. They are now hugely successful in their own right. Our skills champions include numerous entrepreneurs, key employees at well-known organisations and inspirational mentors. They have an important message to share: by investing in young people’s skills and building their confidence we can accelerate their progress in work and life.

That is also why, as a member of WorldSkills, WorldSkills UK, together with the 75 countries and regions that make up the international skills body, promoted ‘Skills for All’ on World Youth Skills Day on 15 July. This United Nations-designated day seeks to generate greater awareness of the importance of technical education and training in transforming the lives of young people around the world.

The members of Team UK are living proof of this.

Dr Neil Bentley is chief executive of WorldSkills UK

Exclusive: T-Level crisis exposed as DfE fail to appoint any advisory panel members

More trouble has erupted in T-Level planning, after it emerged that no-one has yet been appointed to the advisory development panels that should have met for the first time four months ago.

FE Week made a Freedom of Information request for the names of all the appointments made to these technical education panels, after the Department for Education repeatedly refused to say whether or not they had recruited to the paid positions.

In the response to the FoI request, a spokesperson said: “Following a search of the department’s paper and electronic records, I have established that we have yet to make appointments to the panels of professionals, so do not yet hold this information.

“We are currently reviewing proposals and expect to make appointments to the panels shortly.”

The DfE posted job adverts seeking industry professionals to serve as panel members or chairs back in January.

These were to serve on “panels of professionals” that would “develop occupational standards for new technical qualifications, as part of flagship reforms to England’s post-16-skills system”.

Panellists’ employers would be paid £1,000 a quarter, and the chairs’ employers would receive £2,000 a quarter.

According to the adverts, the DfE had been aiming to notify successful applicants “in the spring” of this year – and the first panels were expected to start work in March.

But when FE Week asked for an update on the panels in June, as part of an investigation into whether T-level plans were in trouble, we were told that an announcement would be made “in due course”.

And when we asked again the following week – after education secretary Justine Greening urged businesses to get behind T-levels during a speech to the British Chambers of Commerce – we were told that further details were still unavailable.

Several major awarding bodies including City and Guilds have recently pleaded with the government to rethink the “impossible” T-level timetable, amid growing evidence that plans are already running behind schedule.

According to the skills plan published July 2016, and based on the recommendations from the Sainsbury review of technical education, the first two pathfinder routes are meant to be ready for teaching from September 2019.

But this depends on reaching a number of milestones on time, including setting up these panels of industry experts to help with the development of the new qualifications.

At the same time, the Institute for Apprenticeships is also establishing “prestigious employer-led groups” to help shape the future of the apprenticeship programme.

The names of the 15 chairs for the IfA panels were announced in April, while adverts for the panel members were posted in June.

Mark Dawe, the chief executive of the Association of Employment and Learning Providers, last month branded the two separate sets of panels “a recipe for a lack of joined up decisions and inconsistent outcomes”.

Global STEM challenge exhibits at Formula 1 Live in London event

An international STEM competition for apprentices and young people, F1 in Schools, exhibited at the first-ever Formula 1 Live in London event last week.

The event brought together Formula 1 drivers, musicians and supercar fans, and was hosted in London’s Trafalgar Square.

Positioned in the ‘innovation showcase’ area of the event, F1 in Schools – which challenges young people to make their own Formula 1 cars – had former winners of the competition talking to interested youngsters about their experiences taking part.

The innovation showcase area aimed to promote opportunities available to children and young people interested in pursuing a future career in Formula 1, with engineering competition Formula Student and female engineer community, Dare to Be Different, also promoting their work.

Part of the F1 in Schools showcase also extended to the event’s ‘design and make’ area, where visitors were shown demonstrations of how the miniature cars used in the competition are designed, manufactured and wind tunnel tested.

The challenge, which is open to 11 to 18-year-olds, recently opened an apprentice category for UK competitors for 2017.

With regional, national and global heats, rewards for successful teams include tickets to the British Grand Prix, tours of the McClaren factory and scholarships and bursaries to some of the UKs top engineering universities.

Founder and chairman of F1 in Schools, Andrew Denford, said: “We never expected so many people to attend. There has been so much interest in what we do, how we’re involved with the sport and the opportunities that our students have to forge a career in Formula 1.

“The concept of F1 Live London was very ambitious, but it has been so well organised and given so many people the chance to experience Formula 1 and what goes on around it.”

Mystery surrounds late Learndirect performance breach

The nation’s largest FE provider has finally been hit with a serious performance breach notice, a month after its apprenticeship achievement rates plummeted below minimum standards.

But some in the sector are wondering why the notice did not appear earlier – or why it was only eventually included in the government’s notices of concern list on Friday.

The omission is particularly confusing because the issue date listed on the notice is March 14.

The provider giant’s apprenticeship achievement rate tumbled from 65.1 per cent in 2014/15 to just 57.8 per cent for the last academic year, according to national data released last month by the Education and Skills Funding Agency. This brought it below the minimum standards threshold of 62 per cent.

Commenting on this unusual delay, a spokesperson for the company said: “It is not appropriate for Learndirect to comment on a government publication.”

The DfE also declined to provide any comment.

The consequences of being issued a notice of serious breach can include a ban on recruiting new learners or applying for additional funding, according to the agency’s approach to intervention.

Learndirect was one of a number of providers to have fallen foul of recent changes in the way achievement rates are calculated, which led to a slew of notices of concern or serious breach sent to providers.

As previously reported by FE Week, 35 providers were hit with such notices in March for failing to meet minimum standards, according to an ESFA list published in April.

But Learndirect wasn’t among them – nor was it on the list when we reported on its falling achievement rates in June.

The reason for this delay is still unclear, although it could have been connected to firm’s reference number.

FE Week heard rumours back in June that the ESFA had formally informed Learndirect that it would be permitted to switch a new UK Provider Reference Number – which is now its only one on the Register of Apprenticeship Training Providers.

Such a move would have allowed the provider, which had almost 200,000 learners at its most recent Ofsted report in 2013, in which it was rated ‘good’, to wipe the slate clean concerning low achievement rates.

However, both Learndirect and the ESFA have denied this had been allowed, just days before the backdated notice finally appeared on the list.

Two months before this, FE Week reported that Learndirect employees had been informed they were to be placed in a month-long consultancy period, facing potential job cuts.

A spokesperson told us at the time that this was because it was no longer going to offer GCSEs as part of its early-years courses.

But in June it emerged that up to one in 10 Learndirect staff could face redundancy as a result of a restructuring programme, initiated in response to “uncertainty relating to the outcome of the adult education budget procurement process, and a business decision to focus on levy-only apprenticeship delivery”, according to group chief executive Andy Palmer.

First degree apprentices in UK graduate

The first group of degree apprentices in the UK have graduated today, with seven out of the 11 gaining first class honours.

The Aston University learners were awarded bachelors of science degrees in digital and technology solutions, following three years of combined study and work with the global consulting, technology and outsourcing company Capgemini.

The other four all achieved second-class degrees.

Professor Ian Nabney, executive dean of the university’s School of Engineering and Applied Science, said: “Degree apprenticeships are a valuable option to applicants whose learning style is less suited to a traditional on-campus study route.

“The difference in delivery allows them to apply their learning in the workplace rather than the classroom. This offers those with the right skills and aptitudes a challenging but rewarding route to graduate-level jobs, while their academic achievement is recognised as being at the same high level as a traditionally earned degree.”

the skills and apprenticeships minister Anne Milton offered her own words of congratulation for the graduates’ graft.

“I am delighted,” she said. “The hard work and commitment involved is truly admirable and highlights the opportunities apprenticeships can bring.

“I hope this will encourage more people to consider a degree apprenticeship.”

Also recognised today at the ceremony was Sue Husband, director of the National Apprenticeship Service, who collected an honorary doctorate in science.

“I am absolutely delighted to attend the graduation of the first cohort of degree apprentices in the country, for what is a momentous occasion,” she said.

“Degree apprenticeships are a significant step forward, providing the opportunity to develop and nurture talented individuals, and are a key part of our apprenticeships reform programme.”

This good news will be welcomed by many involved with degree apprenticeships, which have endured a difficult time of late.

FE Week reported in June that many higher education leaders are issuing dire warnings about their very future.

The FE sector reacted in horror after the Education and Skills Funding Agency announced in April that it would pause the procurement process for providers delivering apprenticeships to smaller non-levy-paying employers, and would extend existing contracts instead.

It then emerged that many universities had been ruled out of delivering new degree-level apprenticeships to small employers from September, as they cannot be funded through the extended contracts.

It’s a situation that will risk the future growth of degree apprenticeships, according to Nicola Dandridge, the chief executive of Universities UK, the representative body for higher education leaders.

“Employers want degree apprentices to address key skills needs and to drive growth,” she said, adding that “any region that has many non-levy-paying employers, such as the south-west, will see very few degree apprenticeships supported from this procurement, regardless of employer demand or local enterprise partnership strategy”.

The problem arose because non-levy allocations for providers’ existing contracts were worked out on the basis of their previous delivery, a situation which will apply for the eight months between May to December this year.

As most degree apprenticeships are new programmes starting in September, they cannot be funded by existing contracts.

The pause has therefore meant that these new degree apprenticeships can only be funded through levy-paying large employers until December at least.

Five HE institutions – many of them modern universities, those that won their status after 1992 – and 20 FE colleges received funding through phase one of the Higher Education Funding Council for England’s degree apprenticeship development fund.

The cash, which totalled £4.5 million across 18 projects, was awarded in November with the specific aim of developing “new provision to support up to 5,200 new degree apprenticeships” from this autumn.

But Alan Palmer, head of policy and research at Million Plus, which represents modern universities, said the procurement pause puts this commitment “at risk”.

Main image caption: James Gee, one of the Gapgemini degree apprentices

Almost 400 staff face uncertain summer through post-merger job cuts plan

Nearly 400 staff at one of the largest colleges in the country face an uncertain future while post-merger restructuring gets underway, a union has claimed.

Nottingham College, a new body formed formed between New College Nottingham and Central College Nottingham, which finally merged on June 8 after a 10-month delay, is currently consulting on a restructure over the summer while staff are on holiday.

The college’s chief executive, John van de Laarschot, admitted that merging two organisations is “never easy and rarely painless” but insisted the restructure was an “important and necessary step”.

“Staff have been aware for a while about the need for the college to merge structures, systems and processes in order to drive efficiency, remove duplication and respond to changing market forces,” he told FE Week.

“We have worked hard to propose a well thought-through structure for Nottingham College that meets the needs and expectations of our staff, our students, our partners and our employer community, and which, where possible, provides new opportunities for staff.”

As part of the plans, the college has admitted that at least 153 jobs will be lost in its bid to remove “duplicate posts” that are currently in place as a result of the merger.

The University and College Union has claimed that this commitment will leave 378 staff in the running to lose their jobs and facing an uncertain summer.

In turn, the college said that the new structure would create 122 new jobs, but it is not yet known what types of posts these will be.

Some existing staff might be redeployed into the newly created roles, but voluntary redundancy will be offered to those who wish to leave the organisation.

UCU argues that many of the new posts could see staff downgraded and left with worse terms and conditions.

Nottingham College has told FE Week that compulsory redundancies could also play a part in the restructure.

Sue Davis, a regional official for the union, has accused the college of leaving staff in the dark by failing to publish full details of the proposed new structure.

“The whole restructure process is being rushed through without proper time for consultation,” she said.

“We are deeply concerned that the job cuts will lead to fewer opportunities and less support for local people to get the skills they need.”

UCU said that while its own consultation on voluntary redundancy closes on July 24, many of the job descriptions for new posts are still unavailable for staff to consider.

The timing of the college’s consultation, over the holiday period just weeks after the official merger which formed it, has also been criticised.

The union has now called on the college to halt the restructure process.

Ms Davis said: “Many staff are now being asked to make decisions about their future without appropriate information, while others face the choice of losing their job or accepting a new contract which leaves them with lower pay, and worse terms and conditions.

“Trying to rush through a consultation over the summer period makes meaningful engagement extremely difficult and is leaving hundreds of staff in limbo about their future.”

FE Week reported in May last year that Mr van de Laarschot, a former chief executive of Stoke-on-Trent city council, who had reportedly received a £230,000 pay-off for his own voluntary redundancy from the local authority just six months previously, had been appointed to lead the two merging colleges.

New College Nottingham was rated ‘good’ by Ofsted in January, and Central College Nottingham also received a grade two during the previous January.

With an estimated annual turnover of over £80 million, Nottingham College expects to employ 1,500 staff after the restructure and support up to 40,000 full- and part-time students into employment, higher-level apprenticeships or degree courses.

Statistics regulator pressured DfE into achievement rate U-turn

The government was pressured into its major U-turn on the publication of hidden achievement rate data in the wake of FE Week reporting, the national statistics regulation boss has revealed.

The Department for Education last month released 2015/16 National Achievement Rate Tables for individual providers, a few months after it closed several significant “loopholes”, causing significant achievement-rate drops.

However, it refused at first to provide comparable figures for previous years, prompting many in the sector to accuse it of a cover-up.

Now, a letter written by Ed Humpherson, the director-general for regulation at the UK Statistics Authority, has revealed that his team effectively leaned on the DfE, apparently after reading FE Week’s reports on the scandal, before it finally agreed to publish the figures on July 27.

His letter, which refers to our first story from last month, explains that the UKSA decided that “not providing comparable data for individual providers means that users cannot make comparisons to previous years”.

“We have contacted DfE and discussed the provision of this data,” he wrote. “DfE recognised the need to provide historic individual provider-level data using the new methods.”

The letter, written to FE Week, then recognised that “since that discussion, DfE has published advice on its website on the appropriate use of historic data when making comparisons over time”.

“It has also made a commitment to publish the back series under the new method.”

NARTs, which cover apprenticeships, education and training, are published annually, though in recent years releases have been subject to delays.

Figures for courses ending no later than July 31 the previous year are typically published in March, but were delayed several times this year, for example by the general election purdah period.

Despite failing to publish the revised figures for 2014/15 back in June, DfE statisticians did admit that when the data was recalculated to remove the loopholes, some providers saw their achievement rates for that year fall by over 20 percentage points.

This prompted Jonathan Portes, an independent expert in government statistics and a professor of economics and public policy at Kings College London, to call for an investigation into this failure to be forthcoming with the necessary data, a situation he described as “incomprehensible”.

FE Week eventually requested the missing data via a Freedom of Information request submitted to the DfE.

A week later, the Department caved and announced it would now be assessing how how to publish extra information that “allows for some comparability at provider level” for earlier years based on 2015 to 2016 methodology.

We received our response to the FoI 20 working days after the request – and though it did not provide the requested data, it said it would be made public on July 27, as exclusively revealed by FE Week.

“The department intends to publish the information as additional information to the ‘national achievement rates tables transparency data 2013 to 2014 and 2014 to 2015’ publication on July 27, 2017,” explained the statement.

DfE confirms £267m underspend of 16-19 budget in last two years

A whopping £130 million per year has gone unspent in 16 to 19 funding for each of the past two years.

The budgetary underspend – attributed to low student numbers – was revealed in a parliamentary question, answered by skills minister Anne Milton, from former shadow schools minister Nic Dakin.

Mr Dakin asked how much of the Department for Education’s “budget allocated to 16 to 19-year old education was reallocated to other budgets in the financial years (a) 2014-15, (b) 2015-16 and (c) 2016-17”.

In response Ms Milton said that 16 to 19 budgets were set using “estimates of student numbers”:

“In 2014-15 and 2015-16 student numbers and associated costs were lower than these estimates, which resulted in lower spending than the forecast, by £135m and £132m respectively, representing 2.2% of the budget. This was available for reallocation,” she said.

But Ms Milton stressed that this underspend “did not affect funding per student”.

She was unable to say if there was a similar shortfall in spending for 2016/17 as “final expenditure is not yet available”.

The news has prompted angry responses from the sector.

James Kewin, deputy chief executive of the Sixth Form Colleges’ Association, said that any underspend was “difficult to defend” in light of “funding cuts and cost increases” in 16 to 19 education that have led to courses being cut, class sizes increasing and support services being reduced.

“This money was intended for sixth form students and it should be spent on the education of sixth form students – every last penny should reach the front line,” he urged.

Julian Gravatt, deputy chief executive of the Association of Colleges, said that Ms Milton’s answer was “the first acknowledgement that there’s a sizeable underspend” in the 16 to 19 budget.

He argued that the unspent cash should have been used to “increase funding rates in line with inflation”.

“Instead colleges have been forced to cut back on courses and restrict teaching hours. The losers have been the current cohort of students,” he said.

Both the AoC and the SFCA, along with the Association of School and College Leaders, will be working to ensure the cash gets redirected back to schools and colleges, Mr Kewin and Mr Gravatt said.

Teaching is at the heart of the skills plan

In order to deliver the skilled workers our economy needs, education and industry need to forge closer links, says Paul Kessell-Holland

The rapid pace of change in technical education shows no signs of slowing. There has been an endless succession of commissions, reports, recommendations and plans, with the over-arching theme being ‘we need more engineers/scientists/technicians but where will these people come from?’

New technical workers are a fairly straightforward economic need, but there are a range of challenges inherent in fulfilling it. We clearly require a greater number of skilled staff in a range of industrial and technical disciplines, but this means we need to get more young people interested in following a career in these fields, and to retrain people established in other areas of employment. And this means we need to provide them with a robust, relevant and comprehensive technical education.

Education providers are, in the main, reporting that recruitment to science engineering and technology courses is growing – the lure of well-paid jobs with a career path as well as a resurgence of interest in industry and manufacturing is persuading more young people to train. Unfortunately this is only exacerbating a separate problem – where do the teachers come from?

Professionalising teaching is an important aim

Traditionally many of the teaching staff at colleges have come from industry, and this is one of the great powers of the technical and vocational training sector: it means relevant and up-to-date knowledge in the classroom, and a real understanding of the world of work. However, this steady stream of career changers is not enough to meet demand any longer, and we need to begin to grow wider and deeper recruitment plans if we are to meet demand. The Education and Training Foundation is working with a range of organisations on a number of pilot programmes to see how best to establish a larger pool of technical teaching talent and source new staff.

Crucially, these programmes need to do more than simply supporting the recruitment of individuals. For example, professional engineers are experts in their field; they understand only too well the need to remain up to date in their chosen discipline. Education is no different, and without a strong understanding of educational practice many new entrants to the profession struggle to get across their depth of knowledge in their subject.

Others may have substantial academic and theoretical knowledge but lack the key industrial experience that makes their teaching come alive and feel relevant for learners. This is why in all our teacher recruitment programmes we combine initial teacher training to an appropriate level with a wider experience of industrial updating or work shadowing, to ensure everything in the classroom reflects the world of work wherever possible. By building and maintaining local partnerships with industry the ETF is working to ensure every young person studying technical disciplines does so with teachers who know their subject, and know how to teach it in equal measure.

Professionalising teaching is an important aim. The professional standards for teachers and trainers underpin all our work, providing a common language for education professionals to discuss what they do in the classroom. The Society for Education and Training is a constantly growing professional body which supports this agenda on a whole career basis. Qualified Teacher Learning and Skills provide a real pinnacle achievement for technical teaching staff wanting to demonstrate real professional skill.

Behind all this activity lies a simple equation: the more professional the teaching workforce, the better the teaching. The better the teaching, the better the outcomes for learners. The more success our learners experience, the more will remain in education and the higher their achievements. The economy needs these young people, and the economy needs their teachers to be ready and well equipped for the challenges to come.

Paul Kessell-Holland is head of partnerships at the Education and Training Foundation