Joe Baldwin points out failings with new arrangements for SEND learners.

While the Children and Families Act and the SEND code of practice both came into force in September 2014, the full impact for FE was not truly realised until September 2015.

This was when the first cohort of learners with education health and care plans (EHCPs) — documents which set out the special needs of a young person and the support they require — transitioned from school into colleges across England.

The code of practice devolved critical guidance from the Department for Education to local authorities.

This included freedom around the design and template of the plans and thresholds for assessment, along with the process for transforming the old special education needs statements and learning difficulties assessments into EHCPs.

In my experience this has led to a lack of consistency and clarity, which was vital in ensuring a sound framework for improving provision and outcomes within a new system.

The devolution of funding has meant that nearly all FE colleges find themselves claiming high needs top-up funding from multiple local authorities, as a result of their cross-county campus locations.

The different procedures for each local authority mean that college special needs managers have become adept at plate-spinning, to ensure each authority receives responses in their preferred method (post, email, attachments).

These must also be in line with their confidentiality and encryption protocols and use their required EHCP templates.

The SEND code of practice places significant responsibility on the role of special educational needs co-ordinator (SENCO).

But the required qualification for such co-ordinators appointed after September 1, 2008, remains wholly focused on compulsory education.

In reality, the scale of many FE colleges means that their population of students with special needs is likely to be higher than in any one school.

The management and oversight of special needs learners within a school setting can also be more transparent, but this is problematic when scaled-up in FE across multiple vocational areas and potentially across campuses too.

The learners are not receiving the quality of support or provision to meet their needs

Supporting and up-skilling staff to better plan for and meet the needs of learners with SEND is challenging.

Since the reforms gathered momentum, the new changes and requirements for the FE sector have been significant.

I am confident in saying that no one within the sector could have been fully prepared for the scale, demand and resource requirements the reforms would have — even with the greatest foresight.

The few requirements which were outlined by the DfE have caused some of the biggest challenges to both local authorities and education providers.

Such requirements include a 20-week assessment timeline for delivering an EHCP.

The consultation process to request a college placement for an individual with such a plan, the subsequent response timeline, and the statutory annual review of each EHCP have generated an unprecedented amount of work.

Meanwhile, colleges are still trying to stay focused on improved outcomes and opportunities for the learner.

Ofsted’s March report on FE provision for learners with high needs, ‘Moving Forward?’, suggested that so far the Children and Families Act and the SEND code of practice have not met expectations.

The learners are not receiving the quality of support or provision to meet their needs and the postcode lottery still rife.

Putting the bureaucracy and lack of parity to one side, you have to have a learner with real needs, ambitious and aspirations.

We want to be best placed to provide them with an inclusive and supported environment in which they can thrive.

I am determined to create a culture within my own organisation which empowers all staff with the tools to understand individual needs and enables learners to progress towards leading fulfilled adult lives.

Andrew Beel reflects on his happy memories of WorldSkills and provides some good advice for the latest national team for EuroSkills.

After reading the announcement that WorldSkills UK had selected the team to compete at EuroSkills Gothenburg 2016, I admit I felt a little jealous.

As a former competitor, I am always pleased to hear about the next team going forwards to compete, but I wish it was my turn again.

Of course preparing to represent your country on the international stage is not easy.

It was four years of hard work. I spent every spare minute I had training for the international competitions.

Your social life disappears, and for a 20-year-old that is hard to accept, but I wouldn’t change the experience for anything.

Yes, my name wasn’t on the team sheet this week, but I still feel very much part of this team.

As a WorldSkills UK champion, I am working alongside Barry Skea from New College Lanarkshire, who is the UK expert for mechanical engineering CAD (computer aided design), to support the training for Betsy Crosbie.

Betsy, who also attends New College Lanarkshire, is carrying on the college’s tradition of producing Team UK members.

Involving past competitors in the training of Team UK is a key part of the WorldSkills UK comprehensive development programme.

No one understands the demands of competing like we do.

We know how frustrating it is to miss a night out with your mates because you have training the next day.

We know how it feels when a task goes horribly wrong during the competition and most importantly how you can get yourself back on track.

For me, having the support of Ryan Sheridan, who competed with me at WorldSkills London 2011, was invaluable. I hope I can offer the same support.

The majority of Team UK will be under 21 when they compete and many are still in the early stages of their apprenticeship.

It can be daunting telling your new employer that you will need time off to train and compete. That is why I always tell competitors to make sure you take the time to explain to your employers that they will also benefit from the competitions.

I first started competing when I was studying an HNC in computer-aided drafting and design at New College Lanarkshire.

I was told that taking part in skills competitions would be a great addition to my CV and would help me get a job. My lecturer wasn’t wrong.

When I went for an interview at Pacson Valves, where I have now been promoted to mechanical designer, it was my involvement in competitions which led me to develop my skills as a trainee draughtsman that helped me stand out.

Most importantly, Pacson Valves realised the value I could offer the company if I stayed involved.

It can be daunting telling your new employer that you will need time off to train and compete

The new skills I learned as part of my competition training allowed me to develop standard computer-aided design practises for the engineering team at work, improving the efficiency and accuracy of the department.

My last bit of advice to Team UK is to treasure every moment.

For me, standing on the podium clutching my gold medal is a moment I will never forget.

Not only had I beaten competitors from France and the Netherlands, who had been tough competition over the four-day event, to first place, but I had also achieved the highest score of any UK competitor.

Competing opened so many doors for me and that is why I want to stay involved with WorldSkills UK.

As a skills champion, I recently supported the skills pledge campaign encouraging MPs to show their support for apprenticeships, and I hope to visit schools in my local area of Dundee sharing my career experiences with the students.

Who knows whether there might be a future gold medallist amongst them?

Clare Howard explains the best way to get those with learning disabilities into work.

The Government’s manifesto pledge to create 3m apprentices has pushed them to the top of the national skills agenda.

This focus has encouraged the expansion of apprenticeship programmes, but this still doesn’t mean access for all.

If you are a young person with learning difficulties or disabilities, then you face significant barriers. Your chances of accessing apprenticeships and other work-based training are much reduced.

The new taskforce on apprenticeships for people with learning difficulties to examine the issue is welcomed, as it will highlight the challenges faced by both training providers and employers. Hopefully it will start to tackle those barriers.

There is a lot of work to do. Currently the employment rate for working-age people with a disability is only 40 per cent.

The situation is even bleaker for those with a learning disability, with only seven per cent achieving employment. Only eight per cent of the 870,000 apprentices in 2014-15 declared a learning or physical disability.

The Association of Colleges recently noted that colleges and employers need to work together – which applies both to specialist and mainstream colleges who work with students with high needs.

There is some progress being made. Some colleges are supporting individuals into work. A survey of 356 employers linked to specialist colleges in 2015 found that 95 per cent of employers rated their college relationship as outstanding or good.

National Star College’s supported internship programme, Steps In Work, was highlighted as outstanding practice in the recent Ofsted report into provision for high needs students.

Larger employers are also making a difference. More than 6,000 people completed the Marks & Start programme with Marks & Spencer.

This project shows how small adjustments and understanding of principles such as flexibility of approach and a focus on ability rather than disability can make a real difference to equality in the workplace.

The economic benefits are significant. A Social Market Foundation report in 2007 reported that improving the employment rate of people with disabilities would boost the UK economy by £13 billion.

Apprenticeships still face a big gap in terms of initiatives to help more young people with learning difficulties or disabilities into work.

If the new taskforce is to succeed, it needs to address the barriers in the current model. The most significant barrier is the lack of apprenticeship standards for learners working at or below level one, and the requirement for English and maths qualifications that may not be accessible to all learners.

A young person with learning difficulties or disabilities faces significant barriers

Young adults at level one or below are employable and have an important contribution to make. What they may need is support on an ongoing basis.

New standards need to be created to provide apprenticeships that can either be adapted or created for jobs at all levels. Apprenticeships also need to be more flexible, by reducing the number of hours or increasing the support given to learners both by the provider and the employer.

The jump from full-time education to an apprenticeship is daunting, and although many who have learning difficulties might have the skills to do the job, they may need more support in terms of life skills, whether that means communication, travelling to work, mentoring, or other forms of everyday support.

Some specialist colleges and GFE colleges prefer the supported internship route due to the lack of flexibility and support that can be given to apprentices.

Employers also need support — a 2013 survey found that 42 per cent of people with disabilities said that the attitude of employers was the biggest barrier to work.

There is still much work to do to educate employers about the value of people with learning difficulties. If we are going to truly knock down those barriers – and not just chip at the edges – we need to build on those productive employer-college partnerships.

And that can only be done with a much more flexible national framework.

Graham Taylor explains why he is not a fan of government plans for new technical professional education (TPE) routes.

George Osborne recently joked (he apparently has a sense of humour) that he’s on a 5:2 diet because “in two out of five budgets I eat my words”.

Well, number one of these for education should, in my opinion, be ditching the planned new apprenticeship system. We can meet the three million target without changing everything.

Number two should be dropping the introduction of these new TPE routes. I can’t see what problem they are trying to solve.

FE Week reported on May 6 that the government plans to create 15 new ‘professional and technical’ routes with apprenticeships or substantial work experience.

The idea, it appears, is to bring an end to mixed provision and make 16-year-olds choose between academic courses leading to university or a new TPE route into work.

We’ve been here before. Remember Ed Balls’ 14-19 diplomas? That was 14 distinct vocational tracks offered to 14-and 16-year-olds.

Few took them up. They were too complex, had poor outcomes, and were dropped by the coalition government.

The tried-and-tested vocational qualifications won through.

And as for Labour’s plan to make education compulsory up to 18 years old — NEETS as criminals anyone?

Is this the end of mixed provision, making 16-year-olds choose between academic courses leading to university, or new technical professional education routes into work?

The academic route will continue to be primus inter pares in a two-tier system.

This is more to do with standards and methods of assessment rather than content.

The academic/vocational divide is an artificial construct. Let’s champion choice.

A two-tier system could perpetuate the myth that vocational means second-class qualifications for ‘problem’ learners.

Skills minister Nick Boles says schools could be fined if students on “inappropriate” A-level courses abandon them (LOL).

Publishing success rates and a return to payment by results, which the coalition scrapped, would sort this out.

The white paper could strip away many popular post-16 qualifications to make way for the 15 new routes.

Is this the end of mixed provision

The number of eligible qualifications can be cut by dropping dormant ones and rethinking the work-based market.

There are hundreds of apprenticeship frameworks and over 200 new apprenticeship standards, with many more to come in a Wild-West-style unregulated market. And many standards don’t even include qualifications.

Why divide into academic sheep and vocational goats when colleges like mine have developed hybrid personalised learning programmes — say three A-levels plus a vocational award, or a BTEC with one A-level to meet learner career and/or higher education intentions.

And many learners in FE who are struggling with low-level qualifications, including English and Maths, are a long way from vocational routes. More work is needed here. Heaven is some distance away.

Carving up the skills labour market into 15 parallel pathways is arbitrary and tramlines youngsters when they should be developing cross-sector skills.

The government has also said there will be substantial work experience within each TPE “pathway” within its relevant industry.

But hang on, most of our young learners haven’t decided what they want to do.

Most have part-time paid jobs.

They are picking up employability skills — punctuality, customer care, willingness to learn, team working, problem-solving — good to go in all walks of business.

Instead of getting hung up on sector-based vertical skills, let’s work on horizontal digital skills — those you need in all businesses to equip youngsters for work and career changes.

The government says the new vocational routes will be as easy to understand as current academic routes.

I suspect this is the crux of the matter. Civil servants want to simplify because they don’t understand vocational training, having taken the traditional A-level and university pathway themselves.

But think about it, the A-level system allows freedom of curriculum choice (despite the facilitating subjects), so why can’t so-called vocational learners pick and choose?

On the one hand, apprenticeships are employer-led — but on the other, there will be 15 prescribed routes.

Will these really be what employers and professional bodies (which set standards) want? The consultation will be interesting.