Construction industry bodies have announced plans for 32 “new skills hubs” in a bid to fill housebuilding skills gaps with “fast-track” training for up to 5,000 apprentices each year.
Joint investment of £140 million from the Construction Industry Training Board (CITB) and the National House-Building Council (NHBC), will see the hubs developed in areas with the greatest homebuilding need, according to a government press release.
NHBC, a new-build home warranty provider and training provider, says it will expand its network of training centres with up to 12 new “multi-skills training hubs” worth £100 million.
Roger Morton, NHBC’s director of change and training hubs said the non-profit company, which has been a registered apprenticeship provider since 2020, already has four hubs where it delivers intensive bricklaying training in realistic conditions.
He told FE Week: “The existing ones are basically a slab of concrete covered by canopy with cabins around.
“It enables us to give the training a realism – they’re similar to sites you see all around the country.”
Fast track training
NHBC said its realistic training centres and intensive apprenticeship training regime means learners can complete in “14 to 18 months” – faster than the 24 to 30 months for typical construction apprenticeships.
The non-profit company plans to eventually train up to 3,000 apprentices each year in groundworks, bricklaying and carpentry.
The CITB and NHBC believe the hubs could train apprentices in as little as 12 months, while the DfE says it is working on ways to make apprenticeship rules more flexible to “solve skills shortages and support growth”.
The industry bodies will also work “hand in hand” with new DfE agency Skills England to identify locations that need construction workers the most, the department said.
Industry training body the CITB will reportedly invest £40 million in new homebuilding skills hubs to bring the total to 32.
‘Truly collaborative approach’
A spokesperson said it is already working with NHBC on two new hubs and is seeking a “wider group of providers” to work with, such as further education colleges and employers.
Tim Balcon, chief executive of CITB, said: “It is clear that we need to rethink how we train our workforce and be much more agile in our approach.
“We have worked closely with the homebuilding industry and government to develop a programme that is focussed on equipping individuals with the skills they need to be productive on site, in the most efficient way.
“This is truly a collaborative approach and one we are very excited about.”
The CITB coordinates training grants for the construction industry funded from an income of about £170 million in levy charges each year.
The government has committed to building 1.5 million homes in this Parliament and fix England’s “broken skills system”.
Around 250,000 construction workers are needed by 2028 to meet existing demand for new homes, the CITB estimates.
The DfE said the hubs are expected to be training 5,000 apprentices a year when they are all up and running by 2028.
Skills Minister Jacqui Smith said she is “pleased” the initiative will give apprentices “skills to seize opportunity”.
Minister Jacqui Smith with construction students at WorldSkills UK finals at Oldham College
Former forces commander chief Rob Nitsch reveals how his commitment to public service took him from warzones to vocational qualifications via a stint developing apprenticeships at IfATE.
Right now, around 750,000 people are doing apprenticeships based on standards Rob Nitsch personally approved when he was the de facto number two at the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education.
He does not claim those standards are perfect, but says he feels “massively privileged” to have played a role in building the apprenticeship system – even though the new government is poised to overhaul it.
Now, as new chief executive of the Federation of Awarding Bodies (FAB), he is focused on a new mission: to change its “bumper sticker” mandate from being the “voice of awarding and assessment” to “improving qualifications and assessment”.
Nitsch left his position as IfATE’s delivery director during a wave of redundancies this summer to lead FAB. His new employer was also facing turbulence. Nitsch is FAB’s third chief in under a year, with his predecessor, Kion Ahadi, lasting just two months.
But Nitsch is used to steering organisations through choppy waters, both literally and metaphorically. He once led the UK’s response to major national flooding and was tasked with axing 7,000 jobs as the British Army’s chief employment officer.
Giving more than taking
And yet, Nitsch feels he has lived a “privileged life”.
His strong sense of civic responsibility, nurtured during a 43-year career in public service, means he always tries to “give more than I take”.
It is why he hesitantly took on the role of chair of governors at City of Portsmouth College (which he can see from his bedroom window) last year. He joined the board in 2020, shortly after “serious leadership and governance issues” placed the college in government intervention.
He was asked three times to take the role before “caving in”. The college has just emerged from financial intervention and Nitsch is now feeling optimistic it will progress from ‘requires improvement’ to ‘good’ after its latest Ofsted assessment this month.
He tells me the role helps him see the FE sector “from front to back” and “understand the pressures on delivery”.
T Level trouble
That delivery includes rolling out T Levels, which Nitsch was intimately involved in developing at IfATE.
He believes challenges with T Levels and apprenticeship standards emerged due to a mismatch of supply and demand.
And he fears IfATE’s successor, Skills England, will face similar problems if it fails to consider that training providers, end-point assessment organisations and awarding organisations “all need to turn up to make this work”.
He says: “You can create the most glorious demand signal in the world. But if you’re not also helping the market meet it, it’s not a system and it ain’t gonna work.”
While the English skills system is sometimes criticised for its complexity, Nitsch argues the specialist nature of its component parts is an asset if they join up cohesively.
He learned in his former career as an army commander that “it’s not so much about where you line up units, it’s on the margins and overlaps that it becomes tricky. That’s where you need to focus attention”.
Family history
The thread of public service runs deep in Nitsch’s family; three generations have 70 years of continuous army service between them, with him, his father and one of his sons all serving as army engineers.
Although Nitsch followed an academic route, he responds best to vocational types of learning, as have all four of his children; one son is a cruise ship deck officer, another a policeman, and his daughter is training to be a dancer.
Nitsch was sponsored by the army for his last two years at boarding school and for a mechanical engineering degree at Southampton University, before becoming an engineer specialising in repairing armoured vehicles. He admits that tanks excite him.
Causing a strike
He was, therefore, happy to take on a chartered engineer work placement at a tank factory in Leeds after stints in Cold War-era Germany and Cyprus.
At first, Nitsch’s fellow workers considered him a “military southern Jessie”; he admits he’s “a bit posh”.
But he gained a hard reputation after being spotted drinking in a notorious local pub, where alcohol was served “through grilles” with “wooden tables and sawdust on the floor”. He was amused when gossip spread that he was a regular there.
Seeing the funny side
Nitsch appreciates the humour in life’s mishaps.
During the first Iraq War, upon being sent into the desert to lead work repairing air defence systems, he mistakenly camped in an old desert quarry. After a night of pouring rain he woke to the laughter of his men who had spotted he was under water.
Later in his career he led a team of engineers who drove Green Goddess fire engines in Lancashire during the 2002 national fire service strikes.
When Nitsch was asked to attend a police station he assumed it was to congratulate him on the “great job” they were doing. Instead, he was shown a video of one of his unit’s fire engines driving 83mph down the M6. Nitsch’s engineers had removed the speed limiters.
Brave moments
His army career also featured nerve-wracking moments of bravery. When his unit in Iraq had to cross minefields to reach Kuwait, Nitsch made it his job to “find a route through” for others to follow.
Another scary ordeal, in Afghanistan, was being dropped off alone by an American helicopter at night in what he believed to be Sangin (then a deadly battlefield). Nitsch had his gun out, ready for action, but fortunately found himself on the edge of the army air base Camp Bastion.
He was initially sent to Afghanistan as lead logistician and was then tasked with joining an US investigation into the death of British aid worker Linda Norgrove. They concluded she was killed by American special forces sent to rescue her.
During the investigation, a Daily Mail report, which now hangs in Nitsch’s toilet, questioned what the “blanket stacker” (a derogatory term for an army logistician) Nitsch would know about special forces.
Nitsch encountered further press criticism in 2012 when, as the army’s director of manning, he was tasked with making 7,000 military personnel redundant. The Telegraph said he “infuriated troops” by suggesting they apply for specialist RAF and Royal Navy jobs.
But he is proud 88 per cent of those redundancies were voluntary. He was later awarded a CBE for ‘services to the Army Redundancy programme”, which he found “bizarre”.
Opening combat to women
Another proud moment was “reversing 300 years of history” by allowing women to join the infantry when he was the army’s HR director. This paved the way for women to join combat roles in other military services.
Upon leaving the army in 2018, Nitsch served just 18 hours – “the shortest time ever” – as a member of Ofqual’s board. He was interviewed by schools minister Nick Gibb and appointed while also applying for the then-Institute for Apprenticeships (IfA) job. Nitsch says “the roof fell in” when he told Ofqual’s then chair Roger Taylor about his IfATE role, due to the conflict of interest.
Culture shock
Having had the grim task of axing military staff, he welcomed the opportunity to grow an organisation for the first time in his career.
Nitsch was the 86th person to join IfA. It later took on technical education, became IfATE and grew to 300 staff.
His biggest regret (he says with humour”) is “not solving the level-two business admin problem” which people often mention to him.
A big challenge IfATE faced that now faces Skills England is ensuring skills keep pace with rapid industry advancements. Nitsch initially advocated tackling the problem by predicting the future and then training people to be ready for it.
He now believes “we need to focus on how we condition people to respond to change”.
This means “educating people to self-learn and “embrace” change by “hunting out new things in their sector” and to “see lifelong learning as a really positive thing”.
He questions whether enough investment is going into the “soft skills that allow people to self-learn”, rather than telling them what to learn.
Nitsch’s FAB life
Nitsch saw joining FAB as the “logical next step” in his “journey of contributing to the development of technical education”.
He believes the awarding and assessment sector is “not as well understood or regarded as they could be” and wants to “grow the organisation, raise the profile of the sector and boost the training offer for members”.
Nitsch also wants FAB to do more research and develop data to explain which assessment methods work best or “why independent end-point assessment is better.”
He says while there is lots of research in the sector, “it’s not well joined up or communicated”. FAB recently appointed a policy director to lead this work.
This will be “the rubber on the road” in driving FAB forward. Yet his mission remains the same: to “improve the development of technical education”.
He adds: “That’s mobilised me hugely, and I’ve found it intensely rewarding. I wouldn’t have it any other way.”
Docking benefits and subsidising wages are among ideas being considered by ministers to get jobless young people into work, reports suggest.
According to The Sunday Times, the government is considering “major reforms” such as benefit sanctions if people reject education or training under Labour’s promised “youth guarantee”.
And Sky News this week reported claims that wage subsidy programmes are being mooted following concerns that tax rises introduced in last month’s Budget will dent job creation.
Getting Britain working
Labour is expected to publish a white paper entitled ‘Get Britain Working’ next month that sets out how the Work and Pensions, Education and Health and Social Care departments will raise the country’s employment rate from 74.8 to 80 per cent.
Quarterly statistics released yesterday reveal the number of young people who are not in education, employment or training (NEET) hit 946,000, up 8 per cent on the previous quarter.
This accounts for an estimated 13.2 per cent of 16 to 24 year olds in the UK from July to September.
Ahead of the white paper, the only policy announcement designed to address NEET rates has been a £240 million package for metro mayors and several unidentified English ‘trailblazer’ areas.
That cash will reportedly “streamline” local skills, work and health services and test “early interventions” that target specific barriers to work faced by the long-term unemployed of all ages – such as the estimated 2.8 million out of work due to long-term sickness.
NEETs soar by a fifth
Stephen Evans, chief executive of the Learning and Work Institute, said: “The number of NEETs has risen by 150,000 since the pandemic, a 20 per cent rise.
“The government’s upcoming ‘youth guarantee’ needs to include a step change in apprenticeships, education and help to find work.”
Barriers to economic activity are understood to be a combination of economic challenges, mental health struggles, lack of regional opportunities and access to education.
Disabilities and ill health are some of the “longest-running” factors, alongside being a lone parent and from a minority ethnic group, according to Naomi Clayton, director of policy and research at the Learning and Work Institute.
She told FE Week: “We know that rates of inactivity are far higher in some areas compared to others.”
A survey by Youth Employment UK said NEET rates are driven by a range of “interlinked factors” including high levels of anxiety when people leave education, a lack of belonging in communities, disruption from events such as the pandemic and regional inequalities.
There is also concern chancellor Rachel Reeves’ decision to hike national insurance contributions from April will worsen the NEET problem as it could hinder employers’ ability to recruit more staff.
Been here before?
Previous governments have already tried benefits sanctions and subsidised work programmes to boost youth employment rates.
For a couple of years during the pandemic the government ran the Kickstart scheme, which offered six-month paid work placements to those aged 16 to 24 who were on universal credit and deemed to be at risk of long-term unemployment – with the government picking up their wage bill.
Several other schemes are ongoing, including Restart and the Work and Health Programme, while others, such as Job Entry Targeted Support – aimed at the recently unemployed – ended last year.
Clayton said: “The system itself has been affected by the amount of policy churn, the different funding streams, and the short-termism.”
The evidence
Ben Gadsby, head of policy and research at Impetus, which funds organisations that support employment and education for disadvantaged groups, said there was already evidence about what works.
He revealed subsidised job programmes were ideal for young people who needed an employer to take a risk on them.
But he added: “Success will depend on how many non-subsidised jobs there are – one of the reasons there were fewer Kickstart places than planned is there were lots of non-subsidised jobs available.”
Gadsby said young people responded positively to supportive environments such as youth hubs, while benefit sanctions could “get in the way” of support on offer.
Minister for Employment Alison McGovern said the latest NEET figures were“yet more evidence of the significant challenges facing young people, particularly the pandemic generation who have not received the support they need to reach their full potential”.
She added: “Bold measures in our Get Britain Working white paper will turn this around. We will introduce a Youth Guarantee so every 18-21 year old in England is earning or learning while we transform job centres and introduce new health, work and skill plans to give everyone – including our young people – the support they need to build a better life.”
Plans to test alternative ways of assessing apprentices have been kicked into the long grass.
Officials put forward multiple options to modify the current end-point assessment (EPA) model earlier this year, including one that would allow training providers and employers to assess their own apprentices rather than use an external organisation.
But FE Week understands the Department for Education decided the proposals didn’t have legs after exploring them with awarding bodies and providers. Any potential pilot has now been grounded.
End-point assessment organisations (EPAOs) are hopeful a wider review of EPAs could be launched next year as officials continue to seek to reduce admin and costs.
Trial adjourned
Since 2017, apprentices have had to pass an EPA to fully achieve their apprenticeship.
EPAs are carried out by regulated EPAOs with reference to the assessment plans for each apprenticeship designed by employers and approved by the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education.
FE Week understands officials are concerned the cost, complexity and limited capacity of EPAOs is hampering apprenticeship completion and achievement rates.
Alternative proposals included allowing training providers to carry out part of the EPA themselves, rather than the whole process being done by an independent EPAO.
It was hoped this would relieve some of the assessor shortages reported by EPAOs. But there was concern about providers’ own assessment capacity, and that losing fully independent assessments would compromise standards.
Other suggestions involved transferring the assessment of “behaviours” from EPAOs to employers, and cutting the size of EPAs by removing the need for all knowledge, skills and behaviours to be assessed.
FE Week understands officials quickly found the proposals wouldn’t save any time or money and would just add confusion to the system.
The DfE declined to comment, but did confirm that officials “reviewed the apprenticeship assessment system over summer 2024, gathering evidence and suggestions for change from across a wide range of stakeholders including regulators, assessment organisations, training providers and external quality assurance providers”.
Rob Nitsch, chief executive of the Federation of Awarding Bodies, said his organisation was “pleased to contribute to discussions about the future of the EPA pilots and the optimisation of EPA”, adding that his team had “advocated for a wider review and are hopeful that this will come to fruition when resources allow”.
‘Expert’ apprenticeship pilot a damp squib?
The DfE caused controversy last year when it outlined plans to recruit a team of “expert” apprenticeship providers.
According to government guidance, those selected would receive a “mark of excellence” on the Find Apprenticeship Training website in a bid to drive up starts, especially with small and medium-sized employers, young people, and improve resource efficiencies and quality of delivery.
The providers would also be given “more access” to DfE systems to reduce the time and resources they commit to coaching non-levy paying employers through the apprenticeship system.
Entry criteria was strict and eliminated many of the largest apprenticeship providers from participating. Thirteen providers were selected in October 2023 and began the pilot at the end of that month.
But a year later the DfE has refused to say exactly what flexibilities, if any, the expert group had been testing. The promised quality mark also does not appear on Find Apprenticeship Training for the 13 expert providers.
The providers appear to have been used instead as a trusted group for suggesting potential policy developments.
DfE told FE Week the providers did, however, contribute to a new tool called One Login, which brings the digital apprenticeship service into one system.
Launched last week, One Login is said to remove the need for multiple logins to different elements of the apprenticeship service. It means apprentices can now track their progress, view available apprenticeships and apply for opportunities within one secure system without the hassle of multiple accounts.
Employers can also manage recruitment, track the progress of apprentices and ensure that all documentation and compliance requirements are met.
The service’s integration with training providers allows for “seamless access” to final assessments, ensuring apprentices meet all necessary standards in a simple, joined-up process.
The DfE declined to comment on the outcomes or future of the expert apprenticeship provider pilot, other than to say it will “update the sector in due course”.
Simon Ashworth, deputy chief executive and director of policy at the Association of Employment and Learning Providers, said: “AELP did have some concerns that the wider rollout of an expert provider kitemark scheme could lead to a two-tier system.
“Employers can already be confident that any provider directly accessing funding needs to be on the government’s approved apprenticeship register, with Ofsted passing judgement on the quality of provision each provider delivers.”
He added that AELP was “pleased” the new government had made improving flexibility of the apprenticeship programme a key priority, and believes a more “streamlined, less burdensome but still independent EPA needs to be part of this”.
Degree apprenticeships have been transformative for the UK, yet the misconceptions around them continue to circulate. People repeat received wisdom of ‘fat-cat executives on apprenticeships’ or warnings of a ‘middle-class land grab’.
But this perception couldn’t be further from the truth. At Manchester Metropolitan University, a leading provider of degree apprenticeships in partnership with over 600 employers, the reality is starkly different.
Our newest report, Force for Impact, highlights the role degree apprenticeships play in tackling social inequity, closing skills gaps and boosting productivity, particularly in critical areas such as nursing, social work, science, digital and technology.
Social mobility impact
A key myth we need to dispel is the idea that degree apprenticeships are exclusive to the privileged. In fact, degree apprenticeships are powerful tools for social mobility.
Twenty-three per cent of our apprentices were eligible for free school meals (FSM) when growing up. Today, these same individuals are earning an average of just over £53,000 per year.
This is remarkable when considered alongside national data which reports that only half of former FSM pupils earn more than £17,000 by the age of 30. What other pathways in education provide levelling up opportunities and hope for the future like this?
What employers say
The value of degree apprenticeships extends beyond the apprentices themselves. Our employer partners, from global giants like AstraZeneca, Barclays, and IBM to local SMEs and public-sector organisations, report significant benefits.
In a recent survey, over 90 per cent of employers said that degree apprentices bring essential expertise to their teams, boost productivity and contribute to closing skills gaps.
This feedback underscores the importance of investing in degree apprenticeships as a strategic workforce solution that delivers real impact for companies in need of skilled talent, especially in high-demand sectors.
The rapid progression of our alumni is also a testament to the success of these programmes. We found that within one to four years after completing their programme, our undergraduate degree apprentices earn an average of £49,784, and postgraduate alumni £60,028. These figures significantly outstrip national averages.
Policy decisions
With the recent policy shifts under the new government, there is a focus on foundation apprenticeships and shorter programmes. While these have a place, we must not lose sight of the vital role that higher-level apprenticeships play, especially in key areas such as nursing and digital.
Higher-level apprenticeships equip people with advanced skills that make a lasting impact, particularly in industries facing critical shortages.
Now more than ever, we must champion these programmes to ensure that individuals, employers, and the economy continue to benefit from this higher-level skills development.
Driving diversity
One area where degree apprenticeships are making a particularly notable impact is in the representation of women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). At Manchester Met, 42 per cent of our degree apprentices in STEM fields are women, compared to the national average of just 27 per cent.
Through a combination of tailored support, flexible learning and industry collaboration, degree apprenticeships create opportunities for people from diverse backgrounds to enter sectors that have historically been difficult to access.
Pathway to lifelong learning
One of the greatest strengths of degree apprenticeships is their ability to cater for learners at various stages of their careers. While more than half of our apprentices are under 24, a significant portion are adults pivoting to new roles or upskilling mid-career.
This flexibility makes degree apprenticeships uniquely positioned to support lifelong learning, providing both early career starts and career transitions.
The commitment required by apprentices—balancing work, study and a clear career focus—makes the success of these programmes even more impressive. Approximately 38 per cent of our apprentices come from disadvantaged backgrounds, and their success stories illustrate how apprenticeships can transform lives, creating economic stability and personal empowerment.
With the right support and collaboration between educators, industry and government, degree apprenticeships can continue to be a driving force for positive change.
By debunking the myths and recognising the true potential of these programmes, we can unlock opportunities for individuals, employers, and the broader economy.
In today’s rapidly evolving economic landscape, education and workforce development are pivotal drivers of social and economic growth. Yet, as governments and organisations invest in skills and training, it is crucial to understand the broader impact of these initiatives.
Social Return on Investment (SROI) offers a holistic approach to measuring not only the financial returns of skills investment but also the wider benefits to communities, individuals and the environment.
SROI reporting has the potential to transform public policy and investment decisions, ensuring that funding in education and skills generates meaningful social impact across the country.
The future of workforce development
SROI goes beyond traditional metrics of success by capturing the wider societal benefits of apprenticeships. From addressing regional inequalities to empowering underrepresented groups, this holistic framework reveals how skills training delivers returns far beyond what is captured by financial metrics alone.
The broader impact, including improved employment outcomes, increased productivity and enhanced community cohesion, is not just a bonus but the foundation for a more resilient economy.
The value of such reports lies in their ability to provide clear, data-driven insights to guide policy.
Historically, discussions around apprenticeship programmes have often been limited to completion rates and direct financial outcomes. But as recent industry reports demonstrate, apprenticeships contribute meaningfully to a range of broader strategic objectives, including closing the digital skills gap, fostering social mobility and enhancing local economies.
Data-driven foundations
The accuracy and credibility of SROI reporting hinge on a robust and transparent methodology. Using models like GIST Impact’s Skills Drivers and Outcome Impact (DOI), organisations can establish a reliable framework to quantify social value.
By using insights from people directly participating in programmes, as well as incorporating reliable sources, such as government statistics, organisations can ensure calculations are grounded in comprehensive, real-world information.
Additionally, SROI filters account for key factors such as attribution (the likelihood that benefits would occur without the programme) and deadweight (the probability that the investment would yield benefits even without the programme), which help avoid inflated valuations.
This rigorous data-backed approach ensures that SROI calculations accurately reflect both immediate and long-term impacts, from productivity gains to improved social equity.
The inclusion of data on regional, gender and ethnic diversity allows organisations to understand the specific benefits for diverse groups within society, further reinforcing the alignment of workforce programmes with national priorities.
A tool for policy transformation
Employer investment in training has declined sharply, with Skills England’s recent report noting that training expenditure is now at its lowest since 2011, and investment per employee down 19 per cent in real terms.
This trend risks undermining workforce readiness for a shifting economy, highlighting the need for targeted government intervention.
SROI offers a strategic solution by helping the treasury identify skills programmes that yield the greatest social impact, avoiding inefficiencies like deadweight loss. Using SROI metrics, the treasury could optimise the apprenticeship levy and other funding initiatives, transforming apprenticeship schemes into engines of equitable, sustainable growth.
Shifting to an SROI-focused approach would allow policymakers to align funding decisions with initiatives that support levelling up, net-zero goals and regional equality, ensuring maximum returns for both the workforce and society.
This would encourage both public and private sectors to prioritise initiatives that contribute to levelling up, achieving net-zero targets and reducing inequalities across regions, genders and ethnicities.
Call to action
With the recent budget and an upcoming multi-year spending review in the spring, there is a timely opportunity for the treasury to adopt SROI metrics more broadly. This shift could ensure a more balanced approach to public funding, recognising the social dividends generated by skills programmes and positioning apprenticeships as critical investments for social cohesion and regional development.
SROI has already gained traction through the Public Services (Social Value) Act 2012, which requires public bodies to consider social value in service contracts. Extending this principle to skills funding would help maximise the social impact of public investments.
Embedding SROI into education and skills policies could build a future-ready workforce and provide strategic direction for reversing declines in private training investment, supporting growth and resilience across the UK.
Benjamin Franklin thought there were two certainties in this world: death and taxes. GCSE English language resit teachers can add a third. In every class, we know we will have at least one student who will beg not to have to do poetry.
All of our learners in these classes have achieved a grade 3 or lower in GCSE English, so it’s perhaps unsurprising that the idea of studying literature again is a challenge to them. This is especially true if they have a learning difference like dyslexia.
But in my experience, poetry is one of the keys that can not only unlock a greater appreciation of English and language arts, but also help students become more effective communicators. In turn, this leads to greater academic success far beyond the English syllabus.
Sadly, having worked in FE for four years, I see very little promotion of English and language arts. Courses are generally vocational and the GCSE English language course has to be covered in under a year, instead of twice that when studied at secondary school.
For all that, some of my students tell me they are writing – poetry, short stories, song lyrics, and even comic strips. Some do it for personal pleasure, and many do it because it gives a voice to the anxieties which so many of us, students and staff, find hard to express in other ways.
Yet their talents and explorations in language are going unnoticed because they are not being expressed within the context of a more creative English class. Furthermore, opportunities for public expression and celebration are few and far between.
I left school with a distinct dislike of formal education. It was poetry and the performing arts that led me back to college and eventually even to becoming a teacher.
So this year at Reading College, I am determined that we are going to increase awareness of English as a language art. For the first time, we are going to enter the national Poetry by Heart competition, where participants choose and learn a poem by heart and perform it out loud.
Those who have been put off poetry will see it in a new way
Participation is free and the Poetry By Heart website is also a superb resource for teaching poetry. It features hundreds of poems, grouped by theme and interest level, including all the poems studied for GCSE. In addition, there’s lots of support and guidance for teachers to help students memorise their poems.
And it’s fun. They encourage you to run internal competitions to celebrate the best performances, and there’s even a staff category.
I got involved last year and was invited to perform a favourite Shakespeare sonnet at the launch event, live on stage at the Sam Wanamaker Playhouse, Shakespeare’s Globe. The experience was unforgettable and I will certainly be encouraging my colleagues to give it a go.
Taking part in the competition is additionally exciting for us as the college has students from many cultures with their own poetic traditions. The competition will enable them to share these and means we can open them up for all our students to experience.
I’m pleased too that there is also the opportunity for students to perform their own poetry within a special ‘freestyle’ category that values creativity, diversity and inclusivity.
The most important thing is, however, that poetry will be learned, read and above all celebrated and respected. Those who have been put off poetry will see and hear it in a way they haven’t before, and others will have the opportunity to find their voices, taking their ability to express themselves to a new level.
When our learners see English again as a language art – not just an exam skill – I’m betting they will fall in love with the subject again, just like I did!
Going back to Benjamin Franklin, he implored us all to “write something worth reading, or do something worth writing”. Here’s to our learners doing both!
To find out more about free participation in Poetry by Heart, click here
Since the general election, debates on the future of post-16 education have focused on the growth and skills levy, the review of level 3 qualifications and the creation of Skills England.
But there’s another issue, big on the horizon: a population bulge in those reaching the age of 16.
The number of 16- and 17-year-olds in England will grow by 110,000 by 2028. Without action, AELP’s Local and Regional Partner Networks are already warning us that more young people will head into a clogged and under-funded system at a time when we already have 900,000 NEETs.
A negative experience at a young and formative age has a profoundly damaging impact that is hard to fix. Making sure there is provision for this cohort now will pay dividends for the next 60 years.
But how this money is spent is as important as how much, particularly as this is a temporary five-year bulge, not a permanent increase.
The risk is that building new premises to serve the population bulge will create expensive white elephants (once that bulge recedes) while diverting resources from delivery for tens of thousands of young people.
But there is another way. A model is emerging that proves that you do not need to build additional physical capacity to deliver additional quality provision.
Independent training providers such as SCL, Access, Learning Curve and Juniper Training are stepping into these rapidly emerging gaps in provision by utilising existing space and responding rapidly to local need.
As they don’t need to build, they can do this quickly and without access to capital funding. Scarce funding goes on learning and engagement rather than bricks and mortar.
It appears government is aware of the problem
For example, in Leeds, an extra £3.5 million has been allocated to support specific, targeted hot-spots where colleges have run out of room and where more flexible provision is needed. Juniper Training, one of the ITPs helping to fill the gap, took just two months to go from initial exploration with Leeds City Council to starting their first cohort.
“We are not tied to a campus-first way of thinking,” explains Juniper MD, Lesley Holland. “We are used to taking on and managing commercial leases of premises from which we deliver.”
Stuart Allen Chief Education Officer of SCL adds: “We think differently and integrate ‘hooks’ in our programmes such as sport, creative arts and other enrichment activities that enthuse and engage young people where traditional ways of learning sometimes do not work.”
Colleges point out that there is a financial logic that pushes them to build provision around a settled status of full classrooms, on-campus and for learners on longer study programmes where there is a good chance of completion.
ITPs, on the other hand, with access to immediate working capital, expertise in commercial property and rapid decision-making cycles (together with the longer-term incentives to develop and prove new models of provision) are better-equipped to respond to the bulge.
In addition, this flexibility means they can address the needs of the most disadvantaged students on shorter, more intensive programmes.
There is a quadruple win here: the Department for Education avoids funding capital projects that take time to come to fruition and could quickly become obsolete; tens of thousands of 16-19 year olds, often the most vulnerable, get the provision they need; local business premises are used; and colleges can focus on their existing provision.
And when the bulge is over, it is ITPs who will be responsible for scaling back their provision, not government.
To make this happen, government needs to make some rapid administrative changes to the rules, especially around the way growth caps are applied. At the moment, that restriction alone is directly stopping thousands of disadvantaged learners getting vital support – ironic given the incoming youth guarantee.
The 16-19 bulge is a looming, major challenge. But we have a proven way of meeting it, as the Leeds example shows. We now need government to remove the barriers that prevent ITPs from spinning up the provision the country so desperately needs.
AELP and our members stand ready to help make this happen.
Like many trainee teachers in the latter 2000s, I was forced to watch Sir Ken Robinson’s ‘Do Schools Kill Creativity?’ clickbait TED Talk.
“Of course schools kill creativity,” we are expected to chorus with gleeful anti-intellectualism. “Aren’t maths and English dreadful?”
He tells the story of choreographer Gillian Lynne, who in the 1930s was taken to a doctor due to fidgeting at school. The doctor observed this little girl dancing to the radio and declared: “She is a dancer! Take her to a dance school.”
When I hear that now, I am horrified. The doctor figure, and Sir Ken, and all of us who credulously bought into that story, are complicit in limiting children to one thing: the thing they can already do.
There are clear echoes in attitudes that disadvantaged students aren’t worth supporting with GCSE resits. As though a sixteen year old’s fate is sealed.
In my youth, nobody ever declared that I was a dancer. Teachers looked at the bespectacled asthmatic with the weird hair, reading about dragons and said, “He is a nerd!”
Uncoordinated, clumsy and weak, it wasn’t worth teaching me to be better at PE. But all these years later I am making time for dance almost every day, and I’m very slowly improving.
How that happened is completely applicable to those we might otherwise write off from ever enjoying or being good at English and maths.
When I traded the 20,000 steps per day of teaching for the vegetative existence of a civil servant, I invested in Just Dance – a video game that tracks your movement, awarding points for matching the routine on screen.
Even though I was very, very bad at it, it was still fun. I kept at it.
GCSE resits can learn a lot from Just Dance.
When I first loaded it up, Just Dance didn’t force me into an initial assessment and then limit me to ‘Baby Shark’, it encouraged ambition.
The game is a master of modelling and aspiration. As you play, you mimic the professional dancer on screen, and imagine that your skill, rhythm and athleticism are a mirror of what you’re seeing, which they almost certainly are not.
It is exactly how students should see resit teachers: exemplifying confident, joyful expertise in English and maths and inspiring them to follow.
The game is a master of modelling and aspiration
Just Dance uses praise at every opportunity and refines marginal gains into an addictive motivator. Every day I find myself chasing new high scores on tracks I’ve been dancing to for years. There’s always something to celebrate.
We need to capture that unrelenting focus on praise and progress in resits classrooms. It might not be practical to set off actual pyrotechnics every time a student stretches themselves, but authentic praise from an enthusiastic teacher will feel like fireworks to them.
Over time in Just Dance, you progress through something approximating attainment grades for each song, from ‘one star’ through to ‘Megastar’. I didn’t see the glittery pink of Megastar in my whole first year with the game. Now I’m disappointed when I don’t see it.
Which isn’t to say it’s suddenly easy. I’ve still only scored a grade 3 (stars) on C’mon by Ke$ha, despite probably sweating more than the pro in the panda suit on screen. What’s worse is that in my absolute favourite, I wanna dance with somebody, I fail one of the special moves every single time.
Let me admit something else. At a work social not long ago, that song came on. I did not leap onto the empty dance floor. This is not a movie.
We don’t need to expect that of resits either. Getting a student to boogie their way from a grade U to a 1 and have a good time is sometimes what resits is. So too is the student two-stepping their way from a low 3 to a high 3 with an attitude that says “I’ll get ’em next time”.
So I’ll keep returning to Whitney Houston, day after day. I don’t see it as “torture”, or even as “demoralising”.
It keeps me engaged, it builds my confidence, and I’ll keep making progress until I smash it. That is what resits should be.
