A-level results 2024: 8 key trends in England’s data

A-level results are out this morning – here’s your handy FE Week round up of the key trends. 

All findings are for students in England, unless stated. Here’s what we know…

1. Overall performance in England

The proportion of A* and A grades has risen slightly to 27.6 per cent up, from 26.5 per cent last year, a rise of 4.2 per cent. 

This remains above the 25.2 per cent of top grades in pre-pandemic 2019. 

This year, 76 per cent of grades were C or above, up on 75.4 per cent last year and 75.5 per cent in 2019. 

2. Big rise in students getting 3 A*s

The number of students achieving 3 A* grades has risen from last year – from 3,820 to 4,135. 

It’s nearly 50 per cent up on pre-pandemic 2019 – when 2,785 pupils achieved it. This is despite just an 11 per cent rise in entries. 

However it is still way down on the 12,975 pupils achieving 3 A*s in 2021, when teacher grades were awarded. 

4. Regional attainment gap persists

A regional attainment gap persists, but the picture is mixed.

The proportion of A and above grades in London was 31.3 per cent and 30.8 per cent in the south east. This is compared to 22.5 per cent in the east Midlands and 23.9 per cent in the north east.

London’s top grades grew by 1.3 percentage points compared to just 0.2 percentage points in the East Midlands. 

However, the largest rises were in the north east and West Midlands, both 1.9 percentage points. 

5. Further maths adds up, and French reverses slide

Once again, there has been no change to the UK’s top five most popular subjects. 

Further maths saw the largest rise in entries of any A-level subject. The number entries grew by 20 per cent, from 15,080 in 2023 to 18,082. 

Physics, computing – which grew the most last year – and maths also recorded increases of more than 10 per cent. 

Following years of decline, with entries tumbling 16 per cent between 2021 and 2023, the numbers taking French rose by 6.8 per cent over the last 12 months. English literature also grew for the second year running. 

6. But sociology, drama and geography suffer

At the other end, sociology witnessed the largest drop (6.5 per cent), as entries shrunk from 47,436 to 44,359 in 2024. 

Drama and geography were the only other subjects that decreased by more than 5 per cent. Psychology and history also had falls of 2.4 per cent and 2.2 per cent respectively.

7. Which subjects have the biggest gender gaps in entries?

Computing continues to have many more boys than girls, who account for less than one in five of those taking the subject across the UK. 

Physics, design and technology, further maths and economics also remain male-dominated.

Meanwhile, health and social care, performing arts, English literature and sociology are heavily favoured by girls. 

8. Free schools see largest rise in top grades 

According to data published by Ofqual today, all centre types apart from “other” – which covers small centres like hospital schools – have seen rises in top grades. 

The largest rises were at free schools (9.8 per cent) and secondary modern (9.6 per cent) since last year. The smallest rises were for secondary comprehensives (1.4 per cent) and sixth form colleges (3.9 per cent).

Independent schools and secondary selective schools had the highest proportion of top grades – 49.4 per cent and 41 per cent respectively. 

This compares to just 14.8 per cent in FE colleges and 17.2 in secondary moderns,  which are non-selective schools in areas with grammar schools. 

A-level results 2024: A* grades rise by 8%

The proportion of A*s achieved by England’s students has risen by eight per cent as the post-Covid grading standard emerges.

This year, 27.6 per cent of grades were A or above, up from 26.5 per cent in 2023 – a rise of 4 per cent. It’s also nearly 10 per cent higher than the 25.2 per cent in pre-pandemic 2019.

But the proportion of A* grades has increased 8 per cent on last year – equating to a 20 per cent rise since pre-pandemic 2019.

Meanwhile, there’s been a huge 50 per cent rise in students getting three A*s since the pandemic.

Last year was the first that grades were pulled back to pre-pandemic standards after a rise when exams were cancelled during Covid.

This year’s A-level students were in year 9 when the pandemic hit. They were the first cohort to take GCSEs after they were brought back.

Ofqual explained the rise by saying they asked exam boards to “maintain standards” from 2023, essentially meaning that is now the new grading benchmark.

It means the “standard of work required to get any particular grade” is the same as last year, chief regulator Sir Ian Bauckham said. Any changes in grade are down to “how strong the cohort is as a whole”, he added.

Huge leap in kids getting three A*s

Looking at A* grades only, these have risen from 8.6 per cent in 2023, to 9.3 per cent this year, an 8 per cent rise. It’s also 20 per cent more than the 7.7 per cent of A*s achieved in pre-pandemic 2019.

The number of students getting 3 A*s has soared by nearly 50 per cent since the pandemic, up from 2,785 in 2019, to 4,135 this year. The number of entries has increased since 2019, but only by 11 per cent.

Of those getting three A*s this year, 57 per cent were girls and 43 per cent boys.

In 2019, top grades slumped to their lowest since 2007. 

Bauckham added: “Congratulations to all students receiving their results today. This is the culmination of a lot of hard work for them and everyone who supported them on the way.

“A-levels are highly trusted qualifications. Students can be confident their results will be valued and understood by employers and universities for years to come.”

Overall, the proportion of C grades and above this year was 76 per cent, slightly up on 75.4 per cent last year and 75.5 per cent in 2019.

Regional attainment gap widens

The regional attainment gap has increased slightly this year. London had the highest proportion of A* and A grades (31.8 per cent), compared to 22.5 per cent in the East Midlands, the lowest. 

This is a gap of 8.8 percentage points, slightly wider than the gap between the highest and lowest attaining regions in 2023. In 2019, the gap was 7.3 percentage points.

Thirty per cent of grades in London were A or above this year, a 3.1 percentage point rise on 2019. Meanwhile, the north east had just 22 per cent of top grades, a 1 percentage point fall since 2019.

Pepe Di’Iasio, general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders, said: “While the dark days of the pandemic are in the past, its legacy continues to haunt us, as many of these students experienced severe disruption to their education. 

“In particular, this impacted upon young people from disadvantaged backgrounds whose families were also adversely affected by the subsequent cost-of-living crisis”.

The “wide gaps” in attainment between English regions are a “sign of the deep inequalities in our society, and we welcome the new government’s focus on tackling child poverty and disadvantage. This work will need to produce tangible results sooner rather than later.”

More poorer pupils land uni spot

Despite this, UCAS data shows the proportion of students from the poorest backgrounds securing a university place has risen to 19.6 per cent, up from 18.7 per cent last year but slightly down from 19.9 per cent in 2022.

Margaret Farragher, chief executive of JCQ, which represents exam boards, said: “While the pandemic is now behind us, we must acknowledge that this group of students faced disruption during their education and pay tribute to their resilience.

“I would also like to recognise and thank exams officers and teachers for supporting students with their assessments. They have once again helped to deliver a smooth and successful exam series, evident from today’s results.”

There were a total of 816,948 A-level entries this year, up from 797,352 last year (a 2.5 per cent rise) and 736,746 in 2019.

T Level results 2024: Fewer dropouts but pass rate dips below 90%

The T Level dropout rate has slightly improved this year, but the proportion of students passing the qualifications has dipped below 90 per cent for the first time.

A total of 7,262 learners from the third wave of T Levels have results this morning compared to the 10,253 who started the 2022 cohort.

It means that 29 per cent left the course early, which is better than the 34 per cent drop out rate recorded for the 2021 cohort. The finance and accounting route had the worst retention rate while digital had the best (see table below).

Retention rates on A-levels and other vocational and technical qualifications consistently stay above 90 per cent.

Today’s results cover 16 individual T Levels, six of which are being awarded for the first time, compared to 10 pathways last year. The number of students receiving results this year is almost double last year, and the number of schools and colleges offering T Levels has gone up from 101 in 2023 to 162 in 2024.

The Joint Council for Qualifications said the data “gives us confidence that retention on T Levels can improve as providers become more familiar in delivering them”.

However, the overall pass rate has suffered slightly as it fell from 92.2 per cent in 2022, to 90.5 per cent in 2023, and now sits at 88.7 per cent.

The proportion of students included in today’s results that achieved the top two grades of distinction* or distinction is 15.9 per cent, compared to 22.2 per cent in 2023.

Meanwhile, 46.8 per cent received a merit and 25.9 per cent received a pass in 2024. This compares to 47.1 per cent and 21.2 per cent the year before, respectively.

And 11.1 per cent of students received a “partial achievement” this year – which is where a learner attempts all elements of the T Levels but does not achieve all of them – while 0.3 per cent were graded “unclassified” as they failed to achieve any element.

Despite highlighting the improved retention rate, JCQ claimed elsewhere in its press briefing that “increases in pathways, providers and student numbers during T Level roll out means there is limited value in directly comparing results year on year”.

A T Level has three parts – the core component involving a core exam and employer set project, the occupational specialism and the minimum 315-hour industry placement.

Jennifer Coupland, chief executive of the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education – the body responsible for the technical qualification in T Levels, said: “I want to say huge congratulations to all the pioneering students who are getting their T Level results. They are a credit to their schools and colleges, along with the thousands of employers who have provided them with extended work placements.

“The class of 2024 will now be really well placed to progress directly into jobs, university, apprenticeships, and other skills training.”  

JCQ only releases partial T Level data to journalists before 9.30am on results day, unlike A-levels which benefit from a full analysis.

The Department for Education will publish full T Level data later this morning, which includes breakdown by gender and more granular data including industry placement completions.

* Note on the figures: Our overall starts number is slightly higher than the sum of the individual routes. This is because an overall total across all routes was published this morning but per-route enrolments were not. Route starts figures quoted have come from DfE’s 2022 T Level action plan.

Our overall results number is slightly lower than the sum of the individual routes. This is because the data provided states 7,252 learners were retained and assessed from the 2022 cohort. FE Week understands an additional 118 learners that started their T Level in an earlier cohort have received results today, taking the total to 7,380 results awarded.

First T Level relicensing winners and huge contract boosts revealed 

Four T Level contracts have changed hands following the government’s first relicensing procurement – and the winning awarding bodies will receive up to double the amount of funding originally touted.

The Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education (IfATE) today announced the successful bidders of the first “generation 2” T Level contracts following a competitive tender.

Seven contracts, first rolled out in 2020 and 2021, were up for grabs to develop and deliver T Levels in early years, construction and digital.

Just three of the contracts in scope will stay with the same awarding organisation that held the initial contract.

Awarding giant City & Guilds decided to not even bid for the two contracts it previously held – building services engineering for construction and onsite construction. These contracts have now been taken over by WJEC Eduqas. 

Elsewhere, NCFE’s two digital T Level contracts have been switched to Pearson after the former decided to only re-tender for its education and early years contract. It means Pearson now delivers all digital-related T Level contracts (see table below).

A City & Guilds spokesperson told FE Week: “Earlier this year, after careful consideration, we chose not to re-tender for these construction pathways as it allows us to concentrate our efforts on other areas.”

The awarding body will continue to deliver several other existing T Level contracts, including in engineering & manufacturing, management & administration, and agriculture.  

An NCFE spokesperson said the decision to step back from digital pathways was made to “allow us to focus on our core sector specialisms and ensure the highest quality of T Level qualifications and assessments for our learners in fewer sectors”.

“We’d like to reassure our digital T Level providers that we will continue to support all current learners to success and will ensure a smooth transition to Pearson as the new awarding organisation, minimising disruption and unnecessary administrative burden,” the spokesperson added.

It comes amid sector concern that awarding bodies have been operating T Level contracts at a loss. In February, FE Week reported that NCFE has written off over £2.5 million because of low student recruitment on the flagship qualifications.

The government appears to have reacted by substantially increasing the contract values for each T Level.

NCFE’s education and childcare T Level, for example, was originally advertised at a value of £5.5 million in the gen 2 tender. Today’s announcement shows this has increased by 65 per cent to £9.12 million.

One of the construction T Levels taken over by WJEC Eduqas from City & Guilds has almost doubled. 

The onsite construction contract value has risen from £3.9 million to £7.64 million. And the building services engineering for construction is now worth £6.25 million compared to £3.96 million first advertised.

Addressing the contract increases, an IfATE spokesperson told FE Week: “As the programme has matured, IfATE and awarding organisations have understood more in terms of the cost of delivery and reflected this through pricing decisions. Where values have increased, it recognises the cost of delivering a complex and long-term contract to achieve provision of a high-quality set of T Levels.”

‘The growing importance of T Levels’

IfATE revealed other steps to make T Levels more “commercially attractive” to awarding organisations in its gen 2 contracts tender, through a funding model that would guarantee a certain level of profit.

The new contracts will feature a “demand-sensitive” adaptive pricing model which will mean awarding organisations can charge providers higher fees if student numbers are lower than expected. Fees could also be reduced if student numbers are higher.

Awarding organisations with gen 2 T Level licenses will be allowed to make a “one-off adjustment” to the entry fee it charges providers if the projected number of students increases or decreases over the contract term.

The move was slated by college leaders when FE Week broke the news earlier this year for forcing providers to pick up the risk for low T Level recruitment at a time when students and parents are questioning the value of the qualifications in light of the previous government’s plans to replace them with the Advanced British Standard. The new Labour government has however confirmed it will not take forward the ABS proposal.

In April the government announced it is also undertaking a “route-by-route” review of T Level content and assessment in a bid to boost recruitment and retention and to ensure the courses are “manageable at scale”, amid high dropout rates.

These gen 2 contracts will run from August 2024 to 31 July 2033. A separate procurement round has taken place for the T Levels in health and science, though the results have not yet been released.

Chris Morgan, IfATE’s deputy director for commercial, said the quango was “really pleased” to welcome WJEC to T Levels, because the “involvement of a new awarding organisation shows the growing importance and influence of the T Level programme, given renewed commitment and impetus under the new government”.

WJEC Eduqas chief executive Ian Morgan, said the “achievement reflects our strong knowledge base, extensive experience and broad expertise in the development, delivery and awarding of qualifications”.

He added that his awarding body will work “in partnership” with EAL to develop and deliver its T Level contracts.

Suzanne Hall, strategic lead for product (technical and professional) at Pearson, said: “We are pleased to have won these four contracts, and for the first time to be running all of the digital T Levels. We look forward to using our expertise in developing rigorous and high-quality qualifications and to continue to play our part in developing talent for these important sectors.”

Philip Le Feuvre, NCFE’s chief operating officer, added: “NCFE is delighted to have been selected by IfATE as its education and early years T Level delivery partner. 

“This T Level helps to equip students with the skills and knowledge to enter the workplace or higher education and make a difference to tens of thousands of children in their critically important early years.”

The success of Skills England is in all our interests

As a new government agency is birthed, there are two ways of looking at it.

The first is: here we go again. The same civil servants, same resource constraints, same ambitions limited by practicalities – just a different name above the door. A press release creating the impression of change.

When it comes to Skills England, this cynicism feels reasonable. Its new responsibilities are remarkably like those of the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education (IfATE): joining up the skills system, employer engagement and approving high-quality provision that qualifies for public money. Having spent nearly four years on the board of IfATE, it was these things that occupied nearly all our time and efforts.

Or should we be more charitable? 

A new agency can galvanise activity. It can coordinate action across the government. Provide the opportunity for innovation. Inject new expertise. And it can offer a very clear signal of ministerial priorities.

I think we should be charitable. After all, given the importance of skills, the success of Skills England is in all our interests. So here are three suggestions for making that happen.

Welcome to the (crowded) neighbourhood

The Department for Education (DfE) is not short of acronyms and agencies. Skills England will inherit the same overlaps that IfATE experienced: the Office for Students (OfS) and Ofqual, in particular. 

But DfE overlaps are not the only issue. Skills England will need to exercise power across government.

One thing that has always struck me when visiting government departments over the last decade is the volume of people working on skills policy outside the DfE, often in unwitting isolation.

The Department for Work & Pensions has scores of people developing skills policy, given they run Job Centre Plus (which just absorbed the National Careers Service). 

The Treasury has some of the most powerful skills officials, given their grip on the money (never forgets it’s the Treasury that rules the roost on the apprenticeship levy). The Department for Transport has a large team given the importance to the sector. And the Digital Skills Council is hosted by the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology. This is repeated across government. And more recently, elected mayors and combined authorities are building armies of skills policy people too.

As a result, I think an opportunity has been missed. Rather than being siloed as an education agency, Skills England should have been set up as a cross-government agency with the necessary clout. This would mean making it a Treasury or perhaps a business department agency.

Failing this, Skills England must swiftly bring together the many hundreds of civil servants working on skills and harness their collective strength and expertise. And while ‘England’ is in its name, joining up with the devolved nations will be just as important: it drives many UK employers mad that they must deal with four distinct skills systems.

The new Skills and de-Growth of the Apprenticeships Levy

The creation of Skills England also confirmed Labour’s commitment to release apprenticeship levy cash (originally 50 per cent, now ‘a proportion’) for non-apprenticeship training.

While many will celebrate flexibility, I think this is a mistake. Not because all training should be done via an apprenticeship (it shouldn’t be, and isn’t) or flexibility isn’t needed, but because of two issues: demand for apprenticeships is massively outstripping supply; and delivering apprenticeships in many universities, colleges, and independent training providers is already only borderline viable.

To put it into context, when I was (until recently) an executive director at UCAS integrating apprenticeships, we built demand to the point where 400,000+ people were interested in doing an apprenticeship, but live vacancies were only around 4,000 – 6,000. We’ve barely scratched the surface on the potential for apprenticeships. So more money is needed, not 50 per cent less. Indeed, less than 1 per cent of the levy is now unspent.

Employers need to be the life and soul of Skills England

Skills England will also have the tricky job of deciding what the non-ring–fenced money can be used for. The easier option would be taking products off the shelf, e.g. qualifications from City & Guilds, or perhaps modular courses from the Open University. The more effective approach would be to copy IfATE’s tried and tested trailblazer groups where employers designed and shaped content directly.

The result was employers giving up their time to shape each of the 800+ apprenticeship standards approved over the last few years, covering about 70 per cent of occupations. This made sure aspiring apprentices were genuinely prepared for the workplace.

Sixth form students studying narrower range of A-level subjects, report finds

Post-16 students are studying a narrower range of A-level subjects than 20 years ago, a report has found, sparking calls for ministers to address this through the government’s curriculum review.

The National Foundation for Educational Research (NFER) reports on a fall in the take-up across the main subject groups since 2015-16 when AS a A-levels were “decoupled”.

But take-up for humanities and arts courses plunged compared to STEM and social sciences over the past two decades, the study warns on the eve of level 3 results day.

NFER found a “sharp reduction” in the range of subjects chosen by students and are instead choosing their A-levels from a single subject group.

Subject choices available to students have also diminished over this period, with modern languages badly hit.

The government has committed to a curriculum and assessment review, led by Professor Becky Francis, chief executive of the Education Endowment Foundation.

Dr Molly Morgan Jones, director of policy at the British Academy, which commissioned the report, said: “Breadth and balance should be at the heart of any future post-16 curriculum and should not be negatively impacted by any future reforms.”

Here are six key findings from the report…

1. More students taking AS/A-levels from single subject group

There has been a fall in take-up across all major subject groups at AS and A-level since 2015-16, “probably” due to them being separated that year, the report states.

The 2015 change meant AS results no longer counted towards A-level qualifications. As a result, students now take fewer qualifications than before, NFER noted.

The analysis found rising proportions of students are choosing to only study subjects from within the same subject group, such as by just taking STEM courses.

Between 2003-4 and 2021-22, the proportion taking AS/A-levels from a single subject group nearly doubled from 18 per cent to 35 per cent, most of this rise was post-2015.

2. Drop in three subject group combinations

There has also been a sharp decline in the proportion of AS and A-level students taking a “three-way combination of subject groups”, NFER found.

Just five per cent of students in the 2021-22 cohort were mixing subjects from a STEM, social science and humanities subject, for instance.

This was down by nearly two-thirds from 2015-16, when 14 per cent of each cohort combined a subject from each of these three groups, it added.

3. Diminished subject choice

At subject level, “choices for students have diminished” since 2007-08 with providers “generally reducing the range of subjects being offered”, the report states.

NFER found almost all arts AS/A-level subjects have seen a “dramatic decline” in availability across providers, while art and design studies seen a “moderate” dip. 

Most humanities subjects also saw a slump in availability from 2007-08 to 2021-22.

French, German and religious studies were offered by “significantly fewer” providers than in 2007-08. The proportion offering French AS or A-level has fallen most years since 2009-10, down from 78 per cent of providers to 53 per cent in 2021-22.

A young person’s background, environment and gender also plays a key role in influencing their subject choices, the report found.

4. Humanities hit hard

Humanities and arts subjects have been particularly affected.

Falls in the proportions of students taking English, history, religious studies and modern foreign languages post-2015 look to have driven the decline for humanities, NFER notes.

While 56 per cent of students studied a humanities subject in 2015-16, only 38 per cent took one in 2021-22, the research shows.

But the decline across arts subjects started in the early 2010s and has been “more gradual”, falling from a high of 42 per cent in 2006-07 to 24 per cent in 2021-22.

The likelihood of a student studying a humanities and arts subject was, respectively, about 21 and 15 percentage points lower in 2021-22 compared to 2003-04, NFER adds.

“The decoupling of AS- and A-level qualifications has likely played a key role in the reduction in the range of subjects taken up by students,” the report states.

“These changes have particularly affected the take-up of humanities and arts subjects – and risk having a profound impact on the future shape of these disciplines.”

5. But social science and STEM ‘relatively stable’

But the proportion of students studying STEM and social science subjects over the past two decades has remained “relatively stable”.

But the proportion of students studying STEM and social science subjects over the past two decades has remained “relatively stable”.

In 2003-04, 62 per cent of students took a social science subject – such as psychology – compared to 63 per cent in 2021-22.

For STEM subjects, the proportion has hovered at around half of all students in each cohort since 2003-04, ranging from 48 per cent to 54 per cent.

Participation in maths peaked at 36 per cent of the 2017-18 cohort but since the decoupling of maths AS in 2017, this has dropped to 30 per cent by 2021-22.

6. Renewed union calls for EBacc to be axed

Pepe Di’lasio, general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders, said “we have to get the balance right between specialisation at post-16 and maintaining a reasonable breadth of study and options for the future, and that balance isn’t quite right at present.

“The new government’s curriculum and assessment review will need to consider how to address that.”

Di’lasio renewed the union’s call for the English Baccalaureate to be scrapped as it was “favouring a particular set of academic subjects at GCSE” and “has led to a decline in entries to other subjects which has a knock-on effect in post-16”.

A Department for Education spokesperson said the curriculum and assessment review will “transform the outdated curriculum and assessment system.

“The renewed curriculum will ensure young people get the opportunity to access a broad and balanced curriculum, as well as crucial work and life skills, providing the foundation to succeed in both the workplace and throughout their lives.”

Government defends college teacher pay snub

The government has blamed the “very challenging fiscal context” and the fact that FE does not have a pay review body for its decision to exclude college teachers from public sector pay awards.

On July 29th chancellor Rachel Reeves (pictured) accepted the School Teachers’ Review Body’s recommendation of a 5.5 per cent pay rise for teachers.

To help fund this the government will hand out £1.2 billion in additional cash to schools, starting from September 1, and is equivalent to an increase of over £2,500 for the average teacher.

Despite positive signs from Department for Education insiders that ministers would also find extra cash to help fund pay rises for teachers in colleges, like the previous government did last year, officials confirmed that this announcement would not be extended to FE.

College leaders are especially angry because the government reclassified their institutions as public sector bodies in November 2022, imposing a series of strict controls around borrowing, governance and several other areas, similar to what schools have to abide by.

But, like the government’s refusal to exempt colleges from paying VAT despite now being classified as public sector bodies, officials have opted to also ignore colleges when it comes to public sector pay awards.

Association of Colleges deputy chief executive Julian Gravatt said the membership body had conversations with people in the DfE in the build-up to the pay decision that gave them “optimism”, but added it “looks like Treasury kyboshed any action on FE pay and funding”.

Analysis by the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) last year found college teachers have seen pay fall by 19 per cent in real terms over the last decade, compared to 14 per cent for their school counterparts. On top of being paid less, teachers in colleges were more likely to leave their jobs than other public sector professionals, with more experienced college teacher the most likely to quit. 

The DfE has now offered a justification for snubbing colleges from the school teacher pay award.

Wait for spending review for funding decisions

In response to enquiries from FE Week, the DfE explained that unlike in maintained schools, government does not set or recommend pay in further education and the sector does not have pay review body – independent panels that evidence and provide the government with advice each year on public sector pay. 

Instead, college leaders in England have autonomy to set the pay level of their staff, but their decisions are anchored on annual recommendations made by the AoC following negotiations with FE’s five trade unions.

However, this arrangement didn’t stop the previous government from pumping an extra £500 million into colleges in part to help fund teacher pay rises, as announced in July 2023.

The DfE told FE Week the department recognises there is a disparity in pay between schools and colleges – currently a gap of more than £9,000 – but “as the chancellor has set out, the fiscal context is very challenging”.

A spokesperson said decisions on “funding for further education, as with other workforces which do not have a pay review body, will be taken as part of the forthcoming multi-year spending review which will set out funding for 2025-26 and beyond”.

The DfE spokesperson added: “We recognise the vital role that FE teachers and providers play in equipping learners with the opportunities and skills they need to succeed in their education, and to drive growth in our economy.”

Another kick in the teeth from last month’s announcement was that the £1.2 billion package includes an additional £97 million for school sixth forms delivering post-16 education (£63 million) and early years (£34 million) provision.

Gravatt, who has questioned why DfE used a pay review body to make cost-informed decisions on school funding but not colleges, said this extra funding for sixth forms was the point that “really niggles”.

In a message to AoC members he said: “In 2005, when Labour came into power, we secured a common 16 to 19 funding formula and a promise to close the funding gap, but two decades later and we’re still grappling with policies, processes and systems that privilege those who cater for just 38 per cent of the 16 to 18 age group. This is a deep-rooted issue that needs discussion.”

The AoC will recommence discussions with FE’s five trade unions in September over their pay recommendation for 2024/25.

But college leaders have warned they will not be able to reach a 5.5 per cent bump without more funding. Pay award proposals among several colleges FE Week spoke to range from 1.5 per cent to 3 per cent. 

‘A decline in FE educators will continue’

Writing for FE Week this month, Gravatt pointed out that when taken into context with the increase of 1.9 per cent in 16 to 18 funding for this coming academic year and competing pressures on budgets, there is a “real prospect of a lower pay award for college staff and a further widening of the pay gap between FE colleges with schools”.

A petition was launched last week by David Birnie, a lecturer at South Essex College, which calls for “collective action to urge the government to extend the 5.5 per cent pay increase awarded to teachers of further education staff”.

Birnie said: “Without action on pay and conditions, without respect for the FE sector, without understanding of the job we do, a decline in FE educators will continue. Many electricians, bricklayers, plumbers, plasterers, and IT technicians (to name but a few) can earn vastly more in the private sector than in FE and without those trades taught by competent FE teachers this country will struggle to grow.”

At the time of going to press, his petition on change.org had reached almost 4,000 signatories. 

However, unlike the parliament website which requires the government to respond to petitions that reach 10,000 signatures and leads to a potential debate in parliament if 100,000 are achieved, no such requirements are placed on petitions on change.org. 

The petition can be viewed here.

Leading a strong college response to riots and disorder

I have much to thank the NHS for. In my first career as a critical care nurse, I learned to expect the unexpected. Urgent care is, by its very nature, uncertain and multifaceted. It requires emotional resilience, decisiveness under pressure, and leadership through uncertainty; learning that has served me well into my second career.

As a further education leader, I see daily how the sector’s work is deeply rooted in advancing social justice. With this comes complexity and this is why adaptability and responsiveness are skills many further education leaders – including myself – hone over time.

In recent days, Sunderland city centre was targeted, at short notice, with a pre-orchestrated influx of rioters and opportunists intent on public disorder.

For Sunderland College, and EPNE overall, actions were grounded in risk management and business continuity.  Mobilising an engagement plan, and mindful of escalating tensions, our actions were informed by principles of timing, perspective, and balance.  

Our objective was to lead with head and heart – caring for our people and partners, protecting our assets and united leadership across the city’s ecosystem.   

The lived experiences of our people are deeply important to leadership and planning

Leaders across the college group were provided with clear direction, triggering consistent internal communications.

Despite the holidays, contact was made with our colleagues from a wide range of ethnicities. It felt important as chief executive to make individualised contact to check on the safety and well-being of our staff and their families, reiterate there is no place for hate and racism in our college, and offer my support.   

This has been welcomed and provided authentic insights to help shape our approach moving forward. The lived experiences of our people are deeply important to leadership and planning. 

All staff were updated on our response, tone of voice, and progress. With the potential for ‘heat of the moment’ errors of judgment, we reminded anyone opting to comment, particularly on social media, to remain considerate and mindful within the context of our values.

With an overwhelming surge of vitriol across global social media, external communications were carefully crafted, pre-approved and focused on messages of unity, support, and simple acts of kindness.

Leading our engagement, swift contact was made with local authorities, business leaders, charities, partners, and friends from our multifaith and ethnic minorities community. This included an offer to relocate Sunderland’s Citizen Advice Bureau after it was senselessly targeted.

Whilst our insurance comprehensively covers our assets for civil unrest and riots, with risk of further incitement, we reviewed and bolstered our security technology.

City leaders from differing sectors including the police have convened and together we will play an active role in the city’s response – anchored by a deep understanding of the place and people we serve.

Leading with learning

Pivoting upcoming enrolment events, parent letters, our gold standard induction and student presentations have been enhanced. Specific interventions for SEND, ESOL and ethnic minorities students are being planned, such as tailored activities through creative expression, mixing and engaging, advocacy and debate. 

Active bystander training has started, and we are unequivocally communicating our standards and expectations for belonging and inclusion, with zero tolerance for harassment, hate, racism, and discrimination, including in digital spaces. 

Understanding online hate versus free speech matters more than ever

Equality, diversity, inclusion and belonging, and self, society and skills frameworks inform an already robust curriculum, yet we will go deeper. 

For students to understand what has happened and why, safely explore curiosity and difference, know how to critically consume information, and understand online hate versus free speech, matters more than ever. Our creative arts, sports and English curricula are being positioned to lead from the front too. 

Afsina Begum, alumna of our college, is clear: “Fear remains, yet I am glad to see the city I love respond as one community where Muslims and all ethnicities are coming together in support. Going forward social cohesion and inclusion in all forms, if not already, must sit firmly at the heart of school and college strategy.”

Colleges are critical to our nation’s future. To respond, we have developed a ‘cohesion and integration plan’, underpinned by a comprehensive ‘3-step social cohesion framework’ to be implemented in the days and months ahead.

I, along with my leadership team, are fully committed to ensuring our approach is not just short-medium term but one that is long-term and action-focused.

Leading through a crisis is different to business as usual. Nevertheless, college leaders are well-positioned to respond to the challenges ahead. I am liaising with the Further Education Commissioner’s team to explore the best way to achieve this with a collaborative and united approach.

Why do governments keep letting colleges down?

Why do governments have a blind spot on colleges? The last government banged on endlessly about a skills revolution. At one point, several education secretaries ago, I recall Gavin Williamson promising to “super-charge” further education with the aim of overtaking Germany. Whatever that means.

And yet what they actually did from 2010 was allocate such a miserably low funding rate to colleges that the pay of college teachers fell further behind that of school teachers and an insolvency regime was introduced for colleges that went bust. 

It is hard to imagine a less effective way of bringing about a skills revolution. The lack of investment in the college sector is one of the reasons why it has been so difficult to secure economic growth over the past 15 years. Things could and should have been different had we invested in developing the nation’s skills base.

Now we have a new government which is looking to set a different tone with the launch of … a new quango. Called Skills England it will bring together government, businesses, colleges etc to provide “strategic oversight of the post-16 skills system.”

Unfortunately, at the same time, the government has made two decisions which have left colleges feeling that they continue to be the poor relations.

First, was the fudge over the supposed “pause and review” of the previous government’s controversial plans to defund applied general qualifications, such as BTECs. This should have given colleges assurance that they could offer these qualifications in their prospectuses for next year while the review takes place.

However, Bridget Phillipson, apparently under pressure from former prime minister Gordon Brown and Lord Sainsbury, decided the “pause” would only apply to qualifications being defunded this year and not next year – leaving colleges and students with no idea whether or not these qualifications will still be available.

Bridget Phillipson

These are the self-same students who have been through the Covid pandemic and the cost-of-living crisis and now face the uncertainty of not knowing whether the course they may want to take will still exist in a year’s time. 

This was then compounded by the school teachers’ pay announcement being soured by the lack of a funding allocation to colleges to enable them to match the award for their staff. This, of course, means that college teacher pay is likely to fall even further behind that of school teachers, making recruitment and retention yet more difficult, and rendering the goals of the new skills agency a great deal harder to achieve.

It might be that the government addresses this issue in the autumn budget and that in a few months’ time we’ll be applauding the sort of investment in skills education that is so clearly required as part of any plan for sustainable economic growth, as well as improving the life chances of students who are often from disadvantaged backgrounds.

However, it isn’t a great start, and feels like a failure on the part of the government to understand the extent to which the FE sector feels bruised, battered and undervalued.

I can’t help feeling that governments – of whatever hue – have a blind spot about colleges because, by and large, the people who make up governments don’t go to them. They tend instead to have gone down a glittering academic route, often products of Oxbridge, which is about as far away from life in a FE college as it is possible to imagine.

That’s the way that our country works. Academic superstars are the elite, progressing to the top jobs and top salaries, gracing our television screens and standing up in the House of Commons making important speeches. It was ever thus.

But it cannot continue to be like this if we are to make this a fairer and more equitable society in which skills are genuinely valued in the same way as A-level grades and university degrees, and it is only the government that can bring about that change.

Colleges need to be treated as a jewel in the crown of the education system, rather than as some sort of after-thought. This is the only way that a skills revolution will happen.