The shadow education secretary Angela Rayner has reaffirmed her support for FE Week’s #SaveOurApprenticeships campaign at a Labour Party Conference rally this evening.

Speaking at the rally in the Pullman Hotel in Liverpool, Rayner described it as a “really important campaign”, and one which is very close to her heart.

The campaign aims to send out a message to the government that cuts of between 30 and 50 per cent to apprenticeships funding, which are planned for 16- to 18-year-olds in some of the most deprived areas of the country, are simply not acceptable.

“I came up through the FE route with a national vocational qualification in care, and let’s face it, it’s a lifeline for learners like me, to do well in our work, and people who maybe failed in their GCSEs but actually have some really good solid vocational skills,” Rayner told FE Week.

She said apprenticeships offered young people a “really good career” in whatever they wanted to do, but said they needed to be “proper quality apprenticeships” and warned that the government would damage the economy if it failed to listen to the campaign.

The stark drop in funding recently exposed by our exclusive analysis has prompted a furious backlash – more than 600 people have already written messages pledging support for FE Week’s first official campaign.

Our damning findings on the impact of apprenticeship funding reform plans have already provoked shadow skills minister Gordon Marsden and more than 50 other MPs led by Tottenham’s David Lammy to write a letter to the government begging for a change of heart.

Marsden told the event tonight that the government needed to be “very clear” that they were being “watched very carefully”, and warned they had form when it came to “disappointing 16 to 18-year-olds over apprenticeships”.

Senior politicians from across the political divide, including skills minister Robert Halfon, who defended the cuts, spoke at the launch of the campaign earlier this month.

It took place on the same day that Theresa May was asked about the issue during Prime Minister’s Questions, when she told the Commons that she “does not recognise” that there will be cuts of 30 to 50 per cent – even though the numbers come from her own government.

Mr Lammy insisted during his campaign launch speech that “it’s an absolute scandal for the PM to say she doesn’t recognise the figures. It’s her funding agency, they’re her figures.”

However, he insisted: “We will force a U-turn.”

Mr Marsden warned that the cuts were “an elephant trap in his [Mr Halfon’s] in-tray”.

Education secretary Justine Greening was also asked that morning about how proposed cuts might affect social mobility during an education select committee hearing.

Controversial plans for a post-16 academic and vocational divide have been rejected by key backer of under-fire university technical colleges Lord Baker.

The Tory peer, who founded the Baker Dearing Educational Trust to promote UTCs for 14 to 19 year-olds, took his stand in a new Edge Foundation report called ‘14 – 19 education – a new baccalaureate’.

The government’s ‘Post-16 Skills Plan’, which followed-up on from Lord Sainsbury’s recommendations also unveiled two months ago, involves replacing 20,000 post-16 vocational courses with just 15 “high-quality routes”.

It said that 16 year-olds would be “presented with two choices: the academic or the technical option” in the form of these 15 routes covering “college-based and employment based (apprenticeship) education”.

But Lord Baker said in an Edge Foundation report out this morning that while he backed Lord Sainsbury’s “ideas for simplifying technical education for young people aged 16 to 19”, he has “concerns about reinforcing an artificial divide at 16 between the academic and technical routes”.

He added: “I am convinced that many young people would benefit from taking a mixture of technical and academic programmes, in varying proportions according to their talents and ambitions, throughout the period from 14 to 18/19.”

Lord Baker’s opposition to the conservative government’s plans come as little surprise – as he was the principal architect behind the UTC model of technical-based education starting from 14 instead of 16.

Yet in July Ofsted’s former chief inspector Sir Michael Wilshaw slammed UTCs, telling them that they need to make “radical improvement” if the model is to survive.

It followed FE Week research in February, which found that forty per cent of UTCs opened between 2010 and 2013 saw student numbers fall for the last academic year.

Many have now been forced to close, such as UTC Lancashire which said in a statement on May 3 that it would close for good just three years after it opened — due to difficulties in enrolling enough students “to secure future financial viability”.

Lord Baker also spoke out in the Edge report against the government’s “narrow” English Baccalaureate.

The EBacc is a new performance measure, brought in by the coalition government, which is achieved when school pupils get a grade C or above in a “core” group of seven subjects: English (x2), maths, science (x2), a modern foreign language (MFL), or history and geography.

Lord Baker called on the government to expand it to take on technical qualification from age 16 – with programmes delivered in “cities and large towns by clusters of mainstream schools and colleges and specialist institutions modelled on UTCs, career colleges and studio schools”.

In rural areas, he called for “dual enrolment” with students spending the bulk of their time in their local school, and travelling “one or two days a week to a college or specialist institution to learn from people with first-hand industrial, creative and commercial experience”.

He added: “In my vision for 2025, all students would follow a single, coherent 14-19 framework leading to a leaving diploma recognising the full range of academic and technical achievement including GCSEs, A-levels and technical qualifications.”

A Department for Education spokesperson said: “The EBacc is studied as part of a broad curriculum and provides a strong academic foundation, while allowing students to study additional subjects that reflect their individual strengths and interests. We agree that subjects like technology are important and have worked closely with employers to review the curriculum to make sure young people have the skills they need to succeed in the 21st century.”

Lord Baker slams government over ‘narrow’ EBacc | FE Week

The principal of a troubled college is stepping down just six weeks after he was given the “full backing” of his governing body, following a damning grade four Ofsted verdict.

Stuart Wesselby’s resignation from Tresham College of Further and Higher Education will take effect from September 30, the college has confirmed.

It comes after the college was rated inadequate overall in a report published by the education watchdog published on August 10. It was previously rated ‘good’ in 2009.

A Tresham spokesperson said at the time that Mr Wesselby, who has been in the post since 2012, had the “full backing of the college’s governing body to remain as principal” despite the verdict.

But Simon Evans, Tresham chair of governors, told FE Week today: “It is with regret that I must confirm that Stuart [Wesselby] has decided to step down as principal of Tresham College.

“I would like to thank him for the contribution he has made to the development of the college and its students during his time as principal.

“Stuart has always been a passionate advocate of Tresham, its students and staff and I wish him well in all his future plans.”

He added Corrie Harris, vice principal for curriculum and quality, will be interim principal “pending the recruitment of a longer term appointment”.

According to his LinkedIn profile Mr Wesselby took over as principal at Tresham in January 2012, having previously led East Durham College from 2010 to 2012. Prior to that he was vice principal at Tresham from 2008 to 2010.

FE Week understands that the Ofsted report took longer to be published than the usual six weeks for a grade four, as the college tried and failed to challenge the verdict.

The college, which had an Education Funding Agency allocation of £13.3m and a Skill Funding Agency allocation of £5.7m in 2015/16, was heavily criticised by inspectors for poor achievement rates.

The report said that learners on study programmes, who made up the majority of the college’s 4,700 students, “make inadequate progress towards their learning outcomes” with the proportion “who achieve the grades expected of them” also inadequate.

Apprenticeship achievement rates, particularly for 19- to 23-year-olds, were also “too low”.

At the time, a spokesperson for Tresham told FE Week that Mr Wesselby was “extremely disappointed” with the verdict, particularly on outcomes, which was based on results from 2014/15.

The college had already put in place a number of improvements which were predicted to lead to better outcomes in 2015/16, but these had not been taken into account by Ofsted, the spokesperson said.

And even though obscure policy guidance which has been in place since the year 2000 clearly states that “we do not issue a good logo”, many providers graded “good” over the years have been using modified versions of the logo in their materials.

Suddenly, however, some of them have now been told that they are breaking crown copyright law – and threatened in a letters seen by FE Week.

This new policy will come as a shock to the sector; numerous schools and colleges using the logo to advertise “good” ratings, while Mark Dawe, the boss of the Association of Employment and Learning Providers, even told FE Week that he’d never before heard of the policy, describing it as “the best kept secret in education”.

In one letter recently received by an unnamed training provider, which had deployed a version of the logo on its website, the education watchdog said it would bring legal action to bear if the logo was not removed from its materials within 14 days.

The letter said: “It has been brought to our attention that you are displaying a logo identical with or similar to the Ofsted logo which is protected and also registered by Ofsted.

“This logo appears at the foot of every page of your website without our express permission.

“The Ofsted logo is covered by Crown Copyright. In addition, the Ofsted name is a registered trademark with the Intellectual Property Office. Therefore, the logo cannot be used without Ofsted’s express permission.

“You should be aware that the unauthorised use of our logo may give rise to a civil action against you. To avoid this, please remove the Ofsted logo from your website and any other offending materials with immediate effect.”

Mary Bousted, general secretary of the Association of Teachers and Lecturers union also told FE week: “I had no inclination that this was a rule. Every day you go past schools with signs and logos saying they are graded as good. These letters are monumental waste of time and resources.

“It would seem that if you are outstanding you can use the logo. Surely Ofsted should be interested in the reliability and viability of their judgment rather than kite marking outstanding?”

Ofsted has said it is clamping down on misuse like this and has promised to take action against schools, colleges and other training providers found to be inappropriately using its logo.

A spokesperson for the education watchdog said: “The policy around the use of our logo has been in place since 2000.

“We have clear guidelines published on our website governing its use which are applied consistently across all remits. We believe it is right that permission to use the logo should be limited to those who have achieved the highest Ofsted grade of outstanding.

“When we find the Ofsted logo has been used inappropriately we approach the provider and request that they remove it.”

AELP’s Mr Dawe told FE Week that the existence of Ofsted’s policy was news to him.

He said: “I’ve been a college principal, and I am a primary and secondary governor and represent FE providers and yet I didn’t know this restriction existed.

“Surely a publicly funded regulator inspecting publicly funding institutions should be allowing their logo to be used to inform the public about the quality of education and training provision. I hope common sense prevails.”

The role of the FE commissioner will be split in two following Sir David Collins’ concern over his workload covering both intervention and area reviews. 

Two candidates were shortlisted to take over from Sir David, and FE Week understands that Richard Atkins will become the FE commissioner.

Mr Atkins was principal of Exeter College from 2002 until March 2016, and retired on a high after the college received an Ofsted grade one in 2014.

He was president of the Association of Colleges in 2014/15, appointed a CBE in the most recent New Year’s Honours list for this services to FE and became an Ofsted board member in July.

However, Mr Atkins will mainly focus on the original FE commissioner role of overseeing a programme of college intervention and support, first established in November 2013.

Responsibility for area reviews, an 18 month programme which started in September 2015, will fall to Marilyn Hawkins, currently one of five Deputy FE Commissioners.

Ms Hawkins was principal of Barnet and Southgate College from 2003 to 2012, when she retired and undertook various consultancy roles.

It was reported by FE Week in 2013 that Ms Hawkins had received just under half of the £409,000 pay-off pot shared by six departing senior managers.

Sir David, the departing commissioner, is responsible for both the intervention and area review programme.

He described during his presentation at FE Week’s Festival of Skills in June, that initially the treasury thought area reviews could be done and dusted in three months.

He said this “gives you a very good indication of the knowledge of the FE sector by the treasury, in that three months we would do something that involves 243 FE colleges, 96 SFCs, local authorities and local enterprise partnerships right across the country”.

“But actually in the 18 month period up to March 2017 it is doable. It does mean that myself and my colleagues are doing more mileage than the average Eddie Stobart driver,” he added.

Sir David then described his punishing workload, including “15 steering group meetings in different parts of the country in 15 working days, which doesn’t make me very popular at home”.

Sir David has overseen interventions with 42 failing colleges and local authority providers since his appointment as FE commissioner in November 2013.

He was principal of South Cheshire College Group for 16 years from 1993, before serving the same post in an interim capacity at Guildford College Group for 2011/12.

The Department for Education, which following the machinery of government changes now oversee and funds the FE Commissioner’s office, declined to comment on the splitting of the role or the appointments.