Government may need to try again with Prevent definition

Legal expert Smita Jamdar reflects on legal issues with the implementation of the new Prevent duty, and how this could affect the FE sector.

In parliament last week, the prime minister described the reported decision of an unnamed college to ban Christian Union meetings because of the Prevent framework as “clearly ludicrous”.

People, he went on to say, needed to exercise common sense in making these judgments.

This will be cold comfort for management teams up and down the country trying to navigate the government’s guidance.

This doesn’t list the types of extremism to which it should apply (although it does give examples, including Islamic radicalisation and far-right groups), but instead is based on the idea of views that are contrary to “British values”.

The guidance is based on the much broader definition of extremism as vocal or active opposition to fundamental British values

Hence, the government has chosen a very flexible definition of extremism — so flexible in fact that attempting to enshrine it in statute through the Counter-Extremism Bill is now foundering on the grounds that it is not sufficiently legally robust.

It was chosen deliberately because it can then be adapted to differing environments and changing trends.

While such a broad definition may be a laudably pragmatic attempt at “future-proofing” the legislation, it does leave it open for such vastly different judgments to be reached that even identifying what a “common” sense response looks like may be tricky.

It is important to remember that the statutory duty is to have due regard to the need to prevent people from being drawn into terrorism, while having particular regard to colleges’ statutory duty to ensure so far as is reasonably practicable for staff, students and visitors.

Terrorism is defined as particular action or the threat of particular action (such as serious violence and damage to property) designed to influence the government or intimidate the public in order to advance a political, religious or ideological cause.

This, most people would agree, is a relatively clear threshold to identify.

The guidance however is based on the much broader definition of extremism as vocal or active opposition to fundamental British values, including democracy, the rule of law, individual liberty and a mutual respect and tolerance of different faiths and beliefs.

So much broader is this definition that some legal commentators have questioned whether it is close to being an unlawfully broad exercise of the power to issue guidance conferred by the Counter-Terrorism and Security Act 2015.

Whether or not that is correct, colleges have to apply the definition as it stands.

If there is a religious group (or indeed any other group not necessarily aligned to a religion) expressing views that were contrary to this broad definition of British values, then technically they fall within the Prevent guidance.

Consideration needs to be given, therefore, as to whether or not those exposed to these views could be drawn into taking or threatening action to intimidate the public or a section of the public as a result.

Some religions promote beliefs that raise questions about, for example, individual liberty: sexuality and abortion are issues in relation to which elsewhere in the world terrorist acts have been carried out by religious groups.

If there is a risk that the group’s views could lead to that result, then intervention by an institution is not only justified, but also arguably required in order to discharge the statutory duty.

Having identified a risk, colleges are expected to eliminate it.

In the case of open events, such as visiting speakers, that may be achieved by making sure contrary views are expressed at the event.

But what can be done about private gatherings, other than perhaps ban them?

This may not have been what the government had in mind when it introduced the latest version of the Prevent duty.

But it is perfectly predictable response to a duty drawn so widely that it will capture views that are regarded as mainstream by some groups.

If that is not what the David Cameron wants, then he should ensure his government revisits its definition, not berate colleges for reaching decisions he personally disagrees with.

Proud to be England’s first learning city

The recently elected mayor of Bristol explains the key role he hopes FE can play in his plans to drive down inequality through better co-ordinated education and training

Earlier this month, Bristol took to an international stage to showcase how the city became England’s first learning city, joining a network of other places across the globe.

The recent Pascal conference in Glasgow brought together cities from as far away as China and Pakistan to discuss the value of working in partnership to improve learning opportunities – something that is absolutely essential to the success of a place and its people.

Bristol is an affluent city with a reputation as a good place to live, but it’s a city of two halves, and prosperity is not shared by all.

Improving social mobility is one of the core issues that we can overcome through being a learning city, and the FE sector has a vital role to play with making this a reality.

Improving social mobility is one of the core issues that we can overcome through being a learning city, and the FE sector has a vital role to play with making this a reality

This is not a problem that the council or any one organisation can solve on its own.

With more young people under the age of 16 than of pensionable age in Bristol, we need to make changes now for future generations.

Being a learning city shows, however, that things are changing and our college, City of Bristol, has been involved from the start.

Senior leaders, including the new principal, have shown great enthusiasm for the approach and embraced the chance to work in partnership to develop new initiatives which inspire young people.

The idea of working together to improve outcomes is not a new one, but in an increasingly fragmented landscape for learning and skills, the notion of joining together behind a shared vision is an essential one.

Future learning activity will be
governed by a partnership board, made up of city leaders from a cross section of organisations including City of Bristol College, both of our universities, primary and secondary heads associations, as well as businesses and the council.

This ensures a genuine partnership approach as all key decisions affecting education and skills in Bristol come to this board.

The task ahead is huge and work has already begun by bringing the right people together to focus on education, lifelong learning and skills.

Influential individuals are working in targeted groups to tackle some of the core issues Bristol faces – including how to get people into work.

Over the coming year, I am looking forward to working with our city partners and our college to deliver an experience of work for all young people in Bristol and develop and implement a city wide CV.

These are both projects that the college’s senior management are helping to shape, ensuring the skills young people gain are the ones employers need.

Tackling the education achievement gap is also being addressed by a separate group, with a core goal of improving results for young people in school and FE.

With a growing population of nearly half a million, the challenges facing Bristol are the same as those playing out in many major cities in the UK.

We are not unique in that respect, but having grown up locally the importance of levelling the playing field through education is abundantly clear to me.

Becoming a Learning City is one way to improve life for citizens. We will pay a high social, economic and moral cost if we don’t act.

My Brexit fears for apprenticeships

Shadow Skills Minister Gordon Marsden reflects on his fears for the future of apprenticeships if Britain pulls out of the European Union (EU).

I am firmly in favour of Britain staying in the EU, not least because of all the uncertainty and instability that leaving would cause FE.

I haven’t seen the financial forecasts that government ministers have access to.

However, it’s quite clear – and indeed our former chancellor Alistair Darling has expressed this view, along with [current chancellor] George Osborne when they appeared together recently — that funding would be seriously undermined.

The effect and prolonged period of dislocation if we were to vote to leave the EU would throw all sorts of things up into the air.

This is not least because if we’re going to get the smaller economy that both Mr Darling and Mr Osborne are talking about, that will obviously undo many of the calculations of government.

I think leaving would create huge problem for this government – any government infact – trying to meet the long-stated 3m target by 2020

I am actually just as worried about the overall effect on apprenticeships of a Brexit as the specifics of how it would affect the apprenticeship levy — which was of course the concern raised recently by Skills Minister Nick Boles.

This is because I think leaving would create huge problem for this government – any government infact – trying to meet the long-stated 3m target by 2020.

The reasons for that are very simple.

Large employers, especially those who are either internationally based or linked, in the profound uncertainties whatever the ultimate outcome would review very carefully their recruitment and expansion policies.

I think it’s fairly certain that many of these companies would be very wary of expanding their apprenticeship programme amid all the confusion and economic problems that pulling our country out of Europe would cause.

The ability of employers to parcel the apprenticeships out with their supply chain, or to support their supply chain could be badly undermined.

I would be particularly concerned that small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) would be substantially affected by the period of uncertainty, and they should be a key driver with increasing apprenticeship starts.

I’ve been consulting widely over the levy and apprenticeships — going round and speaking to many people from a variety of background, and asking for their views on how achievable the government’s plans are.

There’s no doubt that they’re ambitious and civil servants are already struggling with planning and implementation.

This is largely because of cost cutting across the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills and Skills Funding Agency.

And having spoken to people, representing everything from large companies to SMEs and sector skills councils, the general impression I have had is one of extreme concern that leaving the EU could hold back the apprenticeship programme even more.

They see the potential for our relationships with Europe and indeed the rest of the outside world to be undermined, as far as skills and apprenticeships were concerned, if we pull out.

I would also like to add that this concern is shared among the apprentices themselves.

I’ve talked to many in the last six months in the service sector, from Airbus, from BAE for example, and they have all raised concern with me that the potential for them to either work in the EU or have collaboration with EU companies would be undermined.

Our current close links across the continent is very much something that they view as a positive in terms of what they could get out of their apprenticeship.

So I would say that the Skills Minister wasn’t scaremongering when he raised concern about the prospects of the levy if the public votes to leave in the referendum. He wasn’t going far enough.

All agreed in Somerset college merger – except for the name

Merger-on-the-grapevineTwo colleges in Somerset have completed a merger — but still appear to be struggling to agree on a new name.

Somerset College and Bridgwater College officially became a single body on Tuesday (June 14).

But a joint statement indicated that co-operation between them could still be improved upon – as no new name had been agreed.

A spokesperson for the colleges did not say why the newly merged institution had no name, or whether it had submitted any options to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) for approval.

The two colleges would continue under their existing names “for the next few months”, the spokesperson confirmed.

A BIS spokesperson would only say that the department had “no update at this stage”.

Mike Robbins, principal-designate of the new institution and the current Bridgwater College principal, said: “This merger is an important step for further and higher education in Somerset.”

Somerset College had already been developing plans to merge with nearby Bridgwater College when the FE Commissioner, Dr David Collins, was called into the college over financial concerns last July.

His only recommendation was that the merger plans should be supported.

Confirmation of the formal merger comes ahead of the Somerset, Devon, Cornwall and Isles of Scilly area review, which is due to start in November.

Three more college link-ups have also emerged, in Lancashire, Yorkshire, and Kent.

One of these is between Accrington and Rossendale College, and Burnley College – both in Lancashire.

The region is part of the fourth wave of area reviews, with a proposed start date of September.

Accrington and Rossendale College saw its Ofsted rating drop this week from ‘outstanding’ to ‘requires improvement’, following its first inspection since 2009.

Burnley College was rated ‘outstanding’ at its most recent inspection in 2009.

A representative of Accrington and Rossendale confirmed the two colleges were in talks.

“In line with many colleges in Lancashire, Burnley College and Accrington and Rossendale College are discussing the possibility of collaboration,” he said.

“This is aligned with government strategic direction and the national area review process for further education colleges.”

Canterbury College and East Kent College have also announced a partnership that would see the two colleges led by a single principal.

Graham Razey, East Kent’s principal, will take over the reins in Canterbury following the retirement of current principal Alison Clarke at the end of July.

Both colleges are in Kent, which is part of an area review due to start in November.

Beverley Aitken, East Kent’s chair, described her college’s relationship with Canterbury as “productive”.

She added: “We are confident that we will demonstrate that by working more closely together, we can deliver the most effective education for the benefit of our students.”

Colin Carmichael, the chair of Canterbury College, said: “This closer partnership with East Kent is an obvious decision for us to make.”

Meanwhile, it has been reported in local media that Barnsley College has approved a merger proposal with Doncaster College.

Both colleges are part of the ongoing Sheffield area review.

Paul Pascoe, Doncaster College’s chair, said no decision had yet been made by the college.

A spokesperson for Barnsley College said it would not be issuing a statement until after the next area review steering group meeting, due on June 16.

It’s time to create national digital skills colleges, MPs say

The government should work with the FE sector to create a network of digital skills colleges across the country, a group of MPs has said.

This is one of a number of recommendations made by the Commons science and technology select committee in its Digital Skills Crisis report, published on Monday (June 13), based on the findings of a recent inquiry into what needs to be done to overcome the digital skills gap in the workplace, education and apprenticeships.

The proposed new digital colleges should “replicate the National College for Digital Skills model across the country”, the report said.

The National College for Digital Skills is one of five new employer-led colleges to receive government funding to boost specialist skills for certain industries. It is due to launch in September.

The report also called for digital skills to be made one of the core components of all apprenticeships – not just digital apprenticeships.

The MPs cited evidence from the Tech Partnership — which has developed a number of new Trailblazer standards in digital skills — that the number of starts on digital degree apprenticeships had increased by 21 per cent in 2014/15, to 17,000.

But they said the government should “emphasise the need for more digital skills components in all apprenticeships, not just ‘digital apprenticeships’, to gear them to the needs for jobs across the economy” and “make digital skills the focus of its three million apprenticeship target”.

Nicola Blackwood MP, the chair of the science and technology select committee, urged the government to take “concerted action” to ensure “tomorrow’s workforce” has “the digital skills that employers need”.

She said: “The government deserves credit for action taken so far but it needs to go much further and faster.

“We need action on visas, vocational training and putting digital skills at the heart of modern apprenticeships.”

The new report came on the same day that the House of Lords debated its digital skills select committee report, Make or Break: The UK’s Digital Future, which was published in February last year.

During the debate, a number of peers reiterated a recommendation from the report, that vocational qualifications must to be made more responsive to the needs of business.

Lord Knight of Weymouth, who is also chair of digital inclusion charity the Tinder Foundation, called for “much more agility in the skills system”.

He said: “Increasingly we will need employers to credential skills because we cannot wait for our cumbersome qualification system to keep up.”

And Lady Morgan (pictured), chair of the digital skills committee, said that current vocational qualifications “are not necessarily what business wants, nor are they fully understood by business”.

She urged the government to publish its digital skills strategy, which was due out earlier this year but which has not yet appeared.

Such a strategy should “include full details of soft infrastructure — education and skills — as well as hard infrastructure”, she said.

SFA boss scrambles to avert industrial action over pay band changes

The boss of the Skills Funding Agency, Peter Lauener, has met with union officials amid concern that staff anger over pay grade changes could lead to strike action.

FE Week understands recent moves to transfer SFA employees — who had previously been paid according to the agency’s own gradings — over to general civil service salary bands have stirred up a huge amount of resentment.

A Public and Commercial Services Union (PCS) spokesperson said it had left “many people feeling their role has been downgraded”, and raised concern about what affect this would have on future pay rises.

The union has already started consulting on industrial action, which could include possible strikes, and Mr Lauener met with officials on June 9 in an attempt to rebuild bridges.

A spokesperson for the agency said: “The SFA currently has a unique job grading structure.

“As we are now an executive agency of the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, we are aligning with civil service grades used across government, a process which has been done in consultation with the PCS union and our staff.”

She added: “This process is not a cost-saving operation.

“PCS and staff have been engaged throughout the restructuring process, and as part of the process, Mr Lauener and senior managers have met PCS officials regularly.”

It is understood that many of the unhappy staff at the SFA had been expecting to be transferred onto a senior, grade seven pay-band, through changes introduced since April, but have ended up on a lower level.

The union spokesperson told FE Week after the meeting: “Mr Lauener listened to our concerns and we are now waiting for him to come back to us with a response.

“There is a lot of strong feeling about this among staff and we could be looking at industrial action, including a possible strike.”

Top two at Amersham and Wycombe College quit

The chair and vice-chair of troubled Amersham and Wycombe College have both stepped down – but the college is refusing to say why.

Jenese-Joseph-web
Jenese Joseph

Jenese Joseph (pictured) was appointed chair of the college’s governing body in May 2014, but her name is now no longer listed on the college’s website, and nor is that of the former vice-chair Andrew Walker.

A spokesperson for the college confirmed that the pair had resigned, but was tight-lipped on the reason for their departure.

Ms Joseph confirmed to FE Week that she had resigned from her position, but also declined to give a reason for her decision.

She did claim, however, that the college’s interim principal, Felix Adenaike (pictured below), had been put on “extended leave”.

The college would not be drawn on the fate of Mr Adenaike, telling FE Week: “We are unable to comment on internal staffing matters.”

Mr Adenaike was deputy principal at the college until he was appointed to the post of interim principal following the departure of Mark Sellis in March last year.

Felix-Adenaike-web
Felix Adenaike

Ms Joseph and Mr Walker’s resignations come while the college remains stuck in administered status, following a visit from the FE Commissioner last September.

The college was issued a financial notice of concern in March 2013, but Dr David Collins’ intervention was prompted after the Skills Funding Agency said it had additional concerns over the college’s financial controls.

Dr Collins’ report highlighted a series of problems including falling student numbers, as well as “pressures on its main funding streams, weak leadership and management and poor financial management”.

He found that “relationships between the interim executive team and the governing body are not strong, and could still be considered to be in a development phase”.

He continued: “For this reason it is felt that the college should not be left to manage its own future, and should be put into administered status.”

Dr Collins also advised that the college’s “longer term prospects” would be best served by merging with another college.

When Dr Collins’ report was published in December, Mr Adenaike told FE Week that the college was “working actively with the funding agencies and the FE Commissioner to secure the improvements we need in the quality of our provision and finances; and the structural change that will lead to a stronger local provision for our stakeholders”.

“The governors and staff of the college are very much focussed on achieving these aims,” he added.

The college received a grade three overall – ‘requires improvement’ – rating in its most recent Ofsted report, published December 2014.

FE Week understands that Ofsted inspectors have recently revisited the college.

Amersham and Wycombe College is involved in the Thames Valley area review, part of wave two of the area review process, which had its first steering group meeting on January 21.

BIS advertises eight Institute for Apprenticeships board seats – at £15,000 per annum

The Department for Business, Innovation & Skills is recruiting eight board members for the new Institute for Apprenticeships, with a salary of up to £15,000 available for each position.

The advert has been posted on the cabinet office’s public appointment’ site, with a closing date of July 20. Interviews scheduled for September.

The jobs will be based in London, and successful applicants will be required to commit two days per month to “contribute across a range of the Institute’s strategic and governance issues”.

It calls for applications from “senior figures with expertise in business, employer representatives, academics, and other senior representatives with expertise in particular aspects of apprenticeships and skills”.

The IfA’s responsibilities will include approving standards and assessment plans, and determining the level of government funding available for the standards.

Board members will act as the Institute’s governing body.

FE Week asked the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills how the roles at IfA would compare to the work of board members do for the UK Commission for Employment and Skills (UKCES), which, according to the Treasury, will cease its work from 2016/17 when the Institute is fully functional.

A spokesperson said that, in terms of remuneration for their roles, the UKCES board members are “eligible to claim an allowance of £4,000 plus travel and subsistence costs incurred on UKCES business” – raising questions over the £15,000 salary offered by the Institute.

FE Week also why the advert stresses that “this post is NOT regulated by The Commissioner for Public Appointments”.

The spokesperson said: “We will be following an Office for the Commissioner of Public Appointments compliant process for the board.

“This is the process followed for all public appointments to ensure that they are based on principles of merit, openness and fairness.”

The spokesperson also confirmed that the position of permanent chair for the IfA this would be advertised “in due course”, following the appointment of former Barclays chief executive Anthony Jenkins as the shadow chair on June 9.

She declined to say what the chair would be paid, but confirmed that the post will be regulated by the CPA.

FE Week put these points to Mark A’Bear, an expert who holds an MBE for school governance.

He said: “Today in schools and colleges, governors are completely voluntary and I would say that they already commit probably more than two days per month to their role.

“To pay somebody to undertake a role like this could well attract the wrong type of people and drive the wrong behaviour.”

He added: “It’s the softer aspects of a skillset that determine whether a governing body is successful and effective; if you just pluck people out of industry without the right motivation or any understanding of the education sector they could actually do more harm than good.”

Leadership praised as college’s Oftsed rating improves following double inadequate blow

Lewisham Southwark College has seen its Ofsted rating go up a grade from its previous inadequate rating, with inspectors praising the “highly capable” new leadership team for turning around its fortunes.

The education watchdog’s overall verdict of ‘requires improvement’ comes after the college had the dubious honour of being the first FE and skills provider to be rated ‘inadequate’ twice in a row.

Today’s report rates the college as ‘good’ for its provision for learners with high needs, and ‘requires improvement’ in a further seven headline fields.

Principal Carole Kitching – who took over in July last year, four months after the college’s previous inspection – said she was “absolutely delighted” by the verdict.

She continued: “I would like to thank all staff who have worked so hard to help turn the college around.”

“Everyone is determined that we will continue to work hard to make further improvements for our students and our communities.”

Inspectors singled out the “positive impact” of college leaders “on raising the standards of teaching and the expectations teachers have of their learners” as one of the college’s key strengths – but warned that there was still a long way to go.

The 6,500-learner Lewisham Southwark College received its first inadequate rating following a visit by inspectors in November 2013.

Its second inadequate came after an inspection in February last year.

Since then college has had three monitoring visits by Ofsted – the most recent of which, in January, identified reasonable progress in all areas assessed.

Today’s report found that the “highly capable” senior leadership team had “secured the college’s capacity to improve further”.

It continued: “They have improved the quality of provision, outcomes for learners and the college’s financial health, but, as leaders readily understand, and as confirmed by inspectors, they still have much to do to achieve their objective of providing outstanding education and training for learners.”

The “personal support for learners who need help to overcome personal and social barriers to learning” was also found to be one of the college’s key strengths.

“Highly skilled” teachers have “high expectations” of learners with high needs and “place a very strong emphasis on students becoming as independent as they are able”, the report found.

Inspectors found that managers had “responded well” to the challenge of improving standards in teaching, learning and assessment, and that teaching staff were willing to “embrace change” and had “commitment and enthusiasm for improvement”.

As a result, “fewer students endure low-quality teaching, learning and assessment” and the “teaching of English and mathematics has improved”.

But inspectors also found that “too few students and apprentices achieve their qualifications”, and “not enough” learners progress on to higher level courses.

It said: “Outcomes for learners and teaching, learning and assessment are not yet good and key aspects for the improvement of teaching and learning identified at the previous inspection, such as suitable challenge in lessons for all learners, continue to require attention.”

Teaching, learning and assessment – particularly in English and maths – are among the key areas highlighted by inspectors as needing further improvement.

The college’s chair of governors Chris Bilsland OBE said: “Governors are proud of the significant progress the college has made over the last year.

“Further education really does change lives and we want to be sure that the college in Lewisham and Southwark is offering the very best training and teaching to residents.”