Politicians and media would ‘draw own conclusions’ if Ofsted grades scrapped – DfE

Scrapping single-phrase Ofsted judgments would lead to civil servants, politicians and the media “drawing their own conclusions” about education providers from the narrative in reports, the government has warned.

The Department for Education this week rejected calls from the Parliamentary education committee for the four overall effectiveness judgments to be scrapped.

MPs said in January that a more “nuanced” alternative to the “totemic” judgments should be developed as a “priority”, following the death of headteacher Ruth perry.

A coroner ruled in December that an Ofsted inspection at Caversham Primary School contributed to her suicide.

In its formal response to the committee, the DfE said that “the government will continue to listen to views and look at alternative systems, including the various approaches taken internationally”.

But they added “the government’s view is that there are significant benefits from having an Ofsted overall effectiveness grade”.

“In our view the priority is to look for ways to improve the current system rather than developing an alternative to it. This includes considering with Ofsted the presentation of its findings and grades, and opportunities to highlight some of the detail sitting under the summary.”

‘Consider the risks’ of scrapping grades

The DfE added that it was “important to consider the risks of a system without an overall effectiveness grade”.

Views and decisions about education providers and their performance “would continue to be made, and there would continue to be consequences to inspection”.

“The government’s view is that it is preferable to have those views, decisions and consequences linked directly to the independent inspectorate’s overall findings rather than the interpretations by civil servants, politicians and the media looking through the narrative of reports and drawing their own conclusions.”

Robin Walker MP
Robin Walker MP

The department said the overall effectiveness judgment was an “important feature” of reports, with “strong parental awareness”.

It also “enables us to look across inspection outcomes around the country and observe overall changes in the national position”.

“For example, we are able to say that 9 in 10 schools in England have been assessed by Ofsted to be providing a good or outstanding education for their pupils. We are able to recognise the hard work and professionalism of leaders, teachers and staff, and to celebrate that achievement.”

Committee chair Robin Walker said it was “welcome to hear from DfE that it is open to ideas about how the single-word judgements system could be improved upon”. 

Association of School and College Leaders general secretary Pepe Di’Iasio called the response “deeply disappointing”.

“Its [DfE’s] solution is to ‘consider’ the presentation of Ofsted reports rather than the system itself. This is despite all the evidence that these single-phrase judgements are the source of sky-high stress and anxiety, damaging the wellbeing of leaders and teachers, sapping morale and causing many people to leave the profession.”

Ofsted to explore how AI can help it make ‘better decisions’

Ofsted will train inspectors on artificial intelligence use and explore how the technology can help the watchdog to make “better decisions”.

The government requested regulators and agencies set out their strategic approach to AI by the end of April. 

In its response, published today, Ofsted said it already used AI, including in its risk assessment of ‘good’ education providers, to help decide whether to carry out full graded inspections or short ungraded visits.

But Ofsted is also “also exploring how AI can help us to make better decisions based on the information we hold”, to work “more efficiently” and “further improve” how it inspects and regulates. 

The biggest benefits from AI could include assessing risk, working more efficiently through automation and making best use of the data – particularly text. 

It will also “develop inspectors’ knowledge” about the technology so they “have the knowledge and skills to consider AI and its different uses”.

Ofsted won’t inspect AI tool quality

Ofsted said it supported the use of AI by education providers where it improves the care and education of learners. 

When inspecting, it will “consider a provider’s use” of AI “by the effect it has on the criteria set out” in its existing inspection frameworks. 

 But “importantly” it will not directly inspect the quality of AI tools. 

“It is through their application that they affect areas of provision and outcomes such as safeguarding and the quality of education,” Ofsted said. 

“Leaders, therefore, are responsible for ensuring that the use of AI does not have a detrimental effect on those outcomes, the quality of their provision or decisions they take.”

Ofsted warned the effect of the new technology on children is still “poorly understood” so it will try to better understand the use of AI by providers and research on the impact. 

“By better understanding the effect of AI in these settings, we can consider providers’ decisions more effectively as part of our inspection and regulatory activity.”

‘Modest number’ of AI malpractice cases

Exams regulator Ofqual said there had been “modest numbers” of AI malpractice cases in coursework, with some leading to sanctions against students. 

In its evidence, also published today, the regulator said it would add AI-specific categories for exam boards to report malpractice. 

It has also requested “detailed information” from boards on how they are managing AI-related malpractice risks. 

The regulator has adopted a “precautionary principle” to AI use, but remains open to new, compliant innovations. 

But Ofqual told exam boards last year that AI as a sole marker of work does not comply with regulations, and using the technology as a sole form of remote invigilation is also “unlikely” to be compliant. 

It has launched an “innovation service” to help exam boards understand how their innovations meet regulatory requirements. 

Publish performance data for university franchise providers, MPs tell OfS

The Office for Students should publish performance data for private providers of “franchised” university courses to improve transparency amid fears of fraud and abuse, MPs have said.

A report published by MPs on the Public Accounts Committee today has raised concerns about a “lack of transparency” around university courses that have been subcontracted to private providers and further education colleges.

According to the committee, course completion rates can be as low as 60 per cent at some franchised providers, compared to an average of 90 per cent across the higher education sector.

Students should have the information they need to make “well-informed decisions” such as outcome data, which the Office for Students already has access to but doesn’t currently publish.

The committee’s recommendations – which calls on the government to strengthen “direct and indirect oversight” of franchised providers – follow a damning a National Audit Office report in January which warned of increasing “fraud and suspicious patterns of activity” involving organised crime. 

The committee’s deputy chair, Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown said: “These issues must be addressed with some urgency, as the use of franchised providers only looks set to grow. 

“Indeed, concerningly the franchising out of education seems to be viewed by some providers as a way of underpinning their finances.

“The risk to the taxpayer from unchecked fraud is clear, but the systemic risks to the quality of education provided to students must also be taken in hand.”

In addition to concerns about transparency, the committee urged the government to close a “back door into the student loans system” through improved oversight.

This includes agreeing “clearly articulated” roles for The Department for Education (DfE), the Office for Students and the SLC to ensure that gaps in the “complex regulatory system” are not exploited by fraudsters and organised crime groups.

Other recommendations by the committee include requiring providers to publish summaries of their agreements with universities, to clearly state which of the university’s services students can access directly and details such as what proportion of the tuition fees providers retain.

In some cases, providers keep up to 30 per cent of their students’ tuition fees, a margin the committee called “extraordinary”.

Growing numbers of students are accessing university courses taught by “franchised” private provider companies or colleges, with this group borrowing £1.2 billion through the Student Loans Company (SLC) in 2022/23.

The number of students studying franchised university courses at private providers or further education colleges more than doubled to 108,600 in the four years up to 2021/22.

Despite making up only 6.5 per cent of the student population in 2022/23, about half of the £4.2 million in fraud detected by the SLC was by students at franchised providers.

An SLC investigation in 2022 found weaknesses in oversight of student admission and engagement with franchised providers at four universities and higher education institutions.

The company placed extra requirements for paperwork on ten franchised providers, resulting in a total of £15.2 million in loans being withheld permanently, with suspicions indicating links to organised crime groups.

Potentially criminal activity included students who appeared eligible for grant funding but lacked qualifications that met a provider’s course admission criteria, applications made through suspicious agents or loan requests that contained inconsistent personal details.

In February, the Office for Students launched an investigation into “potential concerns” over Leeds Trinity University’s subcontracting arrangements several private training providers and a college.

A DfE spokesperson said: “All higher education providers in receipt of government funding must provide value for money for the taxpayer and we will not hesitate to act if we see malpractice of any kind.   

“We’re already taking action to crack down on poor-quality providers, and we’re making clear that those that use franchising understand their responsibilities and have strengthened our data sharing rules.

“We are working closely with the Office for Students and the Student Loans Company to identify and prevent any abuses of public funds.”

‘Grossly unfair’: DfE excludes ITP teachers from £6k bonus scheme

FE teachers will be eligible for a “levelling up premium” payment of up to £6,000 from this autumn – but staff in independent training providers have controversially been excluded.

Ministers are extending the scheme, launched before the pandemic for school teachers, to those in further education as part of their efforts to improve teacher recruitment and retention in the sector.

It targets seven subjects linked to “critical skills priorities” and with the highest unfilled vacancy rates in the “statutory” FE sector, including maths, engineering and construction as well as early years.

However, teachers in independent training providers won’t receive the payments. It will only be open to workers in general FE colleges, sixth-form colleges, designated institutions, and 16-to-19-only academies and free schools.

The Association of Employment and Learning Providers (AELP) labelled the move as “grossly unfair and a kick in the teeth for those learning outside the college or school system”.

Defending the decision, the DfE told FE Week it is “necessary to focus the levelling up premium where it has the most impact on 16 to 19 teaching for key STEM and technical shortage subjects”, adding that the “majority” of this provision “takes place in statutory settings”.

Workforce data published last year by the DfE showed the median average annual salary for teachers in general FE colleges is already over £5,000 more than in independent training providers.

Ben Rowland, AELP chief executive, warned that introducing incentives for people working at some types of providers but not others “will make recruitment for ITPs even harder, hitting their learners disproportionately”.

He said: “Staff at independent training providers carry out crucial work in delivering training in many of the specific subjects eligible for payments under the levelling up premium. Despite this, they are being blocked from accessing funding purely because of the type of institution they work for.

“This is grossly unfair and there will be a lot of staff at ITPs upset at losing out; quite frankly, it’s a kick in the teeth for those working outside the college or school system.”

Announcing that eligible FE teachers will be able to apply for the payments from this September, education secretary Gillian Keegan said: “Teachers are the heart of our education system, inspiring young people and shaping future generations.

“By offering incentives of up to £6,000, we’re ensuring schools and colleges can support the recruitment and retention of dedicated teachers in high-priority subjects and in the areas that need them most.”

Who can claim?

The seven eligible subject areas are: 

·         Building and construction

·         Chemistry

·         Computing, including digital and ICT

·         Early years

·         Engineering and manufacturing, including transport engineering and electronics

·         Maths

·         Physics

See below for the full list of eligible FE courses. 

Only teachers in the first five years of their teaching will be eligible. So, anybody employed as a teacher in FE in the 2019/20 academic year or before cannot apply.

Teachers can apply for payments if they are contracted to teach more than 2.5 hours a week and spend at least half of their hours teaching 16- to 19-year-olds (including people up to the age of 25 with an EHCP).

But they must not be currently subject to “any formal performance measures as a result of continuous poor teaching standards” or subject to disciplinary action.

Teachers must also either already hold a teaching qualification, be working towards a teaching qualification, or have plans to start to work towards one within the next 12 months.

Levelling up premium payments, which will be tax-free, will range from £2,000 to £6,000, depending on the type of provider and number of hours taught.

For example, a teacher at an FE provider who has “higher levels of disadvantage” will receive a higher payment. DfE said it will publish a list of eligible FE providers and the matching value of payment by summer 2024.

But the department said it “expects” eligible teachers at most general FE colleges will be eligible for the top payment of £6,000 if they teach at least 12 hours a week.

Those on a “break in teaching” such as for sickness, maternity or paternity leave will still be eligible. 

David Hughes, chief executive of the Association of Colleges, said: “This extra funding will help attract and retain key staff in colleges, so I welcome the expansion of the Levelling Up premium.

“The issue of teacher recruitment is one of the most pressing challenges facing the sector, particularly in these key areas where experts working in industry are likely to earn salaries significantly beyond those of teachers.”

Applications open in September 2024 and claims must be made by March 31, 2025.

Full list of eligible courses

SubjectCourse
Building and constructionESFA-funded qualifications at level 3 and below in the building and construction sector subject area
 T Level in building services engineering for construction
 T Level in on-site construction
 T Level in design, surveying and planning for construction
 level 2 or level 3 apprenticeships in the construction and the built environment occupational route
ChemistryA or AS level in chemistry
 GCSE in chemistry
 International Baccalaureate middle years programme or certificate in chemistry
ComputingESFA-funded qualifications at level 3 and below in the ICT practitioners sector subject area
 ESFA-funded qualifications at level 3 and below in the ICT for users sector subject area
 digital functional skills qualifications and essential digital skills qualifications
 T Level in digital support services
 T Level in digital business services
 T Level in digital production, design and development
 International Baccalaureate certificate in computer science
 level 2 or level 3 apprenticeships in the digital occupational route
Early yearsearly years practitioner (level 2) apprenticeship
 early years educator (level 3) apprenticeship
 T Level in education and early years (early years educator)
 a course that leads to an early years qualification which enables providers to count the recipient in staff:child ratios
Engineering and manufacturingESFA-funded qualifications at level 3 and below in the engineering sector subject area
 ESFA-funded qualifications at level 3 and below in the manufacturing technologies sector subject area
 ESFA-funded qualifications at level 3 and below in the transportation operations and maintenance sector subject area
 T Level in design and development for engineering and manufacturing
 T Level in maintenance, installation and repair for engineering and manufacturing
 T Level in engineering, manufacturing, processing and control
 level 2 or level 3 apprenticeships in the engineering and manufacturing occupational route
MathsESFA-funded qualifications at level 3 and below in the mathematics and statistics sector subject area
 GCSE in maths, functional skills qualifications and other maths qualifications approved for teaching to 16- to 19-year-olds who meet the condition of funding
PhysicsA or AS level in physics
 GCSE in physics
 International Baccalaureate middle years programme or certificate in physics
Source: DfE

DfE: ‘No plans’ to change single-phrase Ofsted judgments

The government has said it has “no plans” to change single-phrase Ofsted judgments, following reports they could be scrapped following Ruth Perry’s death.

The Department for Education’s response to the education committee’s report on Ofsted, which was due at the end of March, is set to be published on Thursday.

In their report in January, MPs said a more “nuanced” alternative to “totemic” Ofsted single-phrase judgments should be developed as a “priority”.

But the department today denied plans were afoot to change one-word judgments after the Sunday Times reported they were likely to be scrapped.

The DfE said “while we are not looking to change one word judgements, the secretary of state has been clear that we will look at ways to improve the current system”.

The department said the single-phrase judgments, used across all education providers including further education, “give parents the confidence in choosing the right school for their child and provide a clear basis for taking action to improve underperforming schools”.

In January, committee chair Robin Walker, a former schools minister, said “on the now totemic issue of single-word judgements, Ofsted and ministers should heed the widespread calls for change”.

Robin Walker MP
Robin Walker MP

He urged Sir Martyn Oliver, Ofsted’s chief inspector, and the government to “consider a more nuanced system”.

A coroner ruled in December that an Ofsted inspection of Caversham Primary School in Reading contributed to Perry’s suicide.

Education secretary Gillian Keegan defended single-phrase judgments in the wake of Perry’s death, saying there were “clear” and “simple to understand”.

In April last year, she told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme: “I think one-word assessments are there to make sure it’s easy for parents to navigate them.”

College told to consider merger after pricey subcontracting fiasco

A merger is on the cards for a small Somerset college that faces a threat to its sustainability following a case of dodgy subcontracting.

The FE Commissioner published an intervention report today for Strode College after a government audit found young adults on security and rail traineeships were made to work illegal hours by the college’s delivery partners.

A “significant” but undisclosed clawback is now being demanded by the Education and Skills Funding Agency, which has deteriorated the college’s financial health to ‘inadequate’. The college hasn’t published accounts for the past two years, but it serves around 4,000 learners and had an income of less than £17 million in 2021.

The college, which has launched legal action against the subcontractors involved, cannot repay the traineeship clawback in the short to medium term.

The FE Commissioner’s report said the “sustainability of the college, given its current size and the liabilities it faces, is of concern and points to the need to consider the various strategic options available to it”.

Strode College is now embarking on a structure and prospects appraisal (SPA) that will “consider the various strategic options open to the college, to include the stand-alone option”.

‘No current solvency risk’

Principal John Revill joined the college in June 2022 and discovered the subcontracting problem on his first day. He told FE Week that “at the moment” there is “no risk to the solvency of the college”, but the long-term sustainability does need to be secured.

“The college is solvent and financially sound, our issue is around how sustainable the college’s finances are in four or five years’ time considering it is a small college.

“We have cash in the bank and there are no concerns in the short to medium term. The SPA will look at the viability of the college in the future.”

He said that while a merger will be explored, other options are on the table including a federation model, shared services and other “closer partnerships”.

Revill said the college expects to finalise the total clawback through the SPA process and hopes to be able to publish the college’s 2022 and 2023 accounts over the summer.

The FE Commissioner’s report doesn’t go into detail about the subcontracting investigation, but it did confirm the ESFA did not identify any instances of fraudulent activity.

Revill previously told FE Week the subcontracting issue, which spanned the years from 2019 to 2022, was a “technical breach” of traineeship funding rules including by exceeding the maximum allowance for work placement of 35 hours.

Traineeship learners on rail placements were also working on “unofficial” railway lines, which again breached funding rules.

In recent months Revill instructed lawyers to write to the six subcontractors involved to request the money back.

He told FE Week that one subcontractor has been “proactive” so far and while he is “hopeful” of getting some funding back, he’s not sure if it will be enough to “make a difference”.

As Strode College was the prime contract holder, the college will need to repay the government the full clawback no matter how much it is able to retrieve from subcontractors.

The FE Commissioner’s report describes how the income from Strode College’s subcontracted traineeships represented a “significant proportion” of the college’s overall income. Of the total income in 2021/22, circa 21.5 per cent was for subcontracted traineeships.

Revill has put a stop to subcontracting of ESFA-funded provision and is instead attempting to grow its own taught apprenticeships and adult courses to create sustainable income.

He is also seeking to grow income through a new subcontracting arrangement for higher education students. 

The FE Commissioner’s report said the college is forecasting improvements in its financial health, but warned this is “heavily reliant on significant growth in subcontracted HE student numbers, and growth in college taught apprenticeships and adult courses”.

“Even in the absence of the traineeship clawback, the college is small, and the growth may not materialise and hence its financial health may not improve,” the report added.

New leaders and governors praised

The FE Commissioner’s report was full of praise for Revill’s “positive leadership and open approach” since coming into post, and recognises improvements in communication and staff morale.

Improvements in governance were also highlighted in the FE Commissioner report, with the board acknowledging it had previously “not provided appropriate challenge to the leadership team”.

The college has since appointed Fiona Wheeler as chair and brought in other “experienced” board members which was strengthened recently with the recruitment of a qualified accountant.

Strode College was judged ‘good’ by Ofsted in October 2022. The FE Commissioner found a positive culture at the college, with students enjoying their studies and feeling they are “listened to and well supported by their teachers”.

Revill said: “Whilst the past couple of years have been challenging for our leadership team, our priority has always been, and continues to be, ensuring the highest standards for our learners.

“We are very positive and focused on moving forward – with the aim to further improve our provision for learners, meet the needs of employers and secure our future.”

Chair Fiona Wheeler added: “Together with college leaders, we will continue to work with the FE Commissioner’s team, implementing its recommendations to ensure financial resilience and sustainability over the coming years.”

Is the ABS what the British public want next for education reform?

We know an election’s getting closer when the political parties start getting all reflective. In the chamber, MPs’ claims about their parties’ records on education – raising standards, closing gaps, their love for apprenticeships – are amping up.

In our new poll of more than 2,000 adults up and down the country, conducted with Public First, we got a bit pensive too. (It is our twentieth anniversary this year, after all.) So we sought to explore just how far attitudes on education – specifically technical and vocational – have come, and whether policy has caught up.

So, how do these claims really square up?

As our report – Advancing British Standards? – reveals today, more than one-third of the public believe that those leaving education today are no better prepared for life or work than they were twenty years ago.

Edge have been calling for change to make education relevant to the realities of life and the world of work for some time now. And large majorities of the public agree: 88 per cent think education should focus more on teaching young people skills that will be useful for the workplace and 90 per cent want a curriculum that better prepares them for everyday life.

This proves promising for Labour, with their commitment to a more applied curriculum – as our Deeper Learning Network of schools and colleges already deliver to a high standard. But the public go a step further: 82 per cent want schools to encourage more young people to explore technical or vocational options as the means to equipping students with those all-important essential skills.

Choice for young people over what they study is absolutely paramount to voters. This would indicate that Labour’s pledge to pause and review the defunding of BTECs might win out over the Conservatives’ efforts to simplify the complicated post-16 landscape to A Levels and T Levels.

Having said that, we also find significant appetite among all voters for policymakers to undertake substantial 16-18 reform, resembling something of a broader baccalaureate, which we have been exploring at Edge through our ‘Bacc to the drawing board’ series. The Prime Minister clearly heard us, announcing the Advanced British Standard (ABS) in December.

Choice for young people over what they study is absolutely paramount to voters

In the poll, we took care to explain the ABS proposals in detail. What we find is that the policy is popular in principle and in practice. More than three-quarters (78 per cent) say they would support a reform in line with the ABS, compared to just 10 per cent who oppose it.

In fact, a massive 61 per cent said they thought the ABS would represent an improvement on the current system of 16-18 education. Even maths to 18 proves highly popular (as long as this is about numeracy skills), though there’s a lot of work needed to bring younger voters on board.

Crucially, however, what drives respondents’ support for the ABS is the opportunity for young people to study a true blend of academic, technical and vocational subjects at 16. Nearly three-quarters think young people should be able to mix and match. That’s because 61 per cent see this would prepare young people better for the workforce, and 58 per cent believe the economy would benefit from having more people with a mix of technical and academic skills.

At Edge, we aren’t satisfied that the current proposal to offer ‘the ABS’ and ‘the ABS occupational’ sufficiently does away with the twin-track approach of academic and vocational pathways. Evidently, there is a strong public opinion case to revise this – something a Labour administration would do well to build on.

There are plenty of education polls, but what was quite remarkable in these findings was the consensus among different voter and demographic groups with regards to the current state and future of 16-19 education.

The public want all students to have the opportunity to study a blend of general, technical and vocational subjects, with an underpinning of applied numeracy and literacy skills, greater emphasis on life skills and work placements or projects with employers.

So voters’ appetite is there. It’s up to the parties now to catch on.

Is your organisation prepared for a major incident?

Helping you provide a safe and secure environment

All colleges, regardless of size, face the risk of disruption preventing their ability to meet the needs of their students and provide a safe and secure environment. Whilst many colleges may already have a Business Continuity Plan (BCP), it’s essential to regularly test, exercise and review the plan to understand and maximise its value. By testing the plan, you can identify any potential weaknesses and ensure it is effective and fit for purpose.

A robust BCP could ease some of the pressures and decisions you and your people may face and ensure you have developed effective strategies to help protect them. Having a resilient and comprehensive continuity plan will help ensure staff are prepared and trained in advance and help you to safeguard your college community. Effective continuity planning builds confidence and reassurance and helps ensure you are providing the necessary duty of care. It can also help improve response and recovery times, so that if an incident does occur your people are better prepared.

In difficult times, you need to be able to turn to robust business continuity management policies and procedures that will help protect you and your organisation.

Business continuity management process

In order to develop a BCP arrangement consistent with good practices, organisations should develop, implement and embed an effective process. Your organisation may benefit from working with an external provider who can help you to achieve this.

Business continuity lifecycle

Policy and Programme Management

  • Establish the organisation’s BCP policy.
  • Ensure it aligns with the organisation’s strategic objectives.
  • Define how the BCP system will be implemented.

Analysis

  • Business impact analysis.
  • Risk assessment.

Design

  • Identification and selection of business continuity strategies and solutions.

Implementation

  • Development of business continuity plans (BCPs).
  • Includes response framework and structure.

Validation

  • Testing and exercising BCP arrangements.
  • Maintenance and updating.
  • Management reviews and audits.

Embedding

  • Integration of BCP into the ‘business as usual’ culture of the organisation.
  • Inclusion of BCP consideration in any organisational change
How can Gallagher help?

Gallagher is a specialist in the Further Education sector, working with over 75% of Further Education colleges in the UK to create tailored insurance and risk management solutions.

The Gallagher team has also created a consistent method for running tabletop exercises with college senior leadership teams. These exercises focus on various realistic scenarios that might disrupt normal college operations.

The aims and benefits of conducting such exercises include:

  • Identify Gaps and Weaknesses: This process helps uncover areas that may not have been adequately addressed or potential vulnerabilities that need to be rectified before an actual crisis occurs.
  • Validate Effectiveness: It allows colleges to assess whether the BCP can effectively mitigate risks, minimise downtime, and ensure the continuity of time-critical activities.
  • Train Employees: Testing and exercising the plan helps train employees on their roles and responsibilities during a crisis, ensuring they understand their tasks and can execute them effectively when needed.
  • Build Confidence: Testing and exercising builds confidence in the BCP and the college’s ability to handle crises.
  • Improve response and recovery time: By testing the plan, colleges can identify areas where response and recovery time can be improved.
  • Governance and Compliance Requirements: Testing and exercising are often required by regulatory bodies or industry standards. Colleges need to demonstrate that they have tested their BCP to comply with these requirements and avoid potential penalties or legal issues.
  • Enhance Communication and Coordination: It helps identify any communication gaps or breakdowns and allows colleges to improve their communication strategies during a crisis.
  • Continuous Improvement: It provides valuable insights and feedback that can be used to refine and enhance the BCP over time, ensuring it remains effective and up-to-date.
Face your future with confidence

While insurance provides a foundation for recovery that keeps the wheels turning in the short term and recoups your losses over the long, it’s only one part of the equation. Our qualified professionals take the time to understand your organisation, determine a suitable business continuity strategy, implement the responses and then maintain and review the plan over time.

It is not uncommon for FE colleges to fail the audit requirements for an effective BCP. The Gallagher team is able to assist your college by conducting a Business Continuity Test Workshop, which involves reviewing the existing BCP and running a test with an agreed scenario. The BCP is then assessed and feedback provided so any required improvements can be made.

To find out more about how Gallagher can support your college by developing an effective Business Continuity Plan or conducting a BCP workshop please call Karen Banks on 07804 042 951. Visit https://www.ajg.com/uk/education/education-insurance/ for more information on our insurance and risk management solutions for further education colleges.

Arthur J. Gallagher Insurance Brokers Limited is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority. Registered Office: Spectrum Building, 55 Blythswood Street, Glasgow, G2 7AT. Registered in Scotland. Company Number: SC108909.

Why we’re developing micro-credentials – and you should too

In recent years, we’ve seen collaboration between FE colleges and employers intensify as we attempt to tackle the widening skills gaps affecting major sectors. While this is a brilliant response from the sector, we need to be really honest with ourselves and ask: are we approaching this in the best way? 

Instead of just consulting with employers to help inform our existing offering, shouldn’t we actually be working with them and each other to design entirely new qualifications, ones that are able to address specific needs, and that make FE a lot more accessible?

As a group of eight FE colleges across north and south east London (along with partner sixth form colleges, HE providers and adult education centres), we’re doing just that. After being awarded £6.5 million as part of the Government’s Local Skills Improvement Fund, we’re using a chunk of that to consult closely with employers and design new courses and qualifications. Specifically, we’re focusing on micro-credentials in green and digital skills.

These mini courses are based around a particular learning outcome an employer has told us they need. They can be a stand-alone qualification or can be stacked to form part of a larger qualification which could be equivalent to a HNC or HND.

Currently, we’re developing 50 externally accredited micro-credentials in areas including building information modelling, retrofit and power BI. These range from 10 to 120 hours of learning and can be delivered in bite-sized ‘modules’ of 15 to 20 minutes, making learning more flexible for those in work. We believe this approach throws the doors open to making FE infinitely more accessible and financially viable.

Imagine you’re an employer and you want a plumber with 20+ years of experience to upskill in retrofitting. You don’t want to put them through a 40-week training course, which may require attending a local college one day a week. Huge chunks of the course would be telling them what they already know. Instead, putting them through a tailored 20-hour online course would be far more appealing and cost-effective. 

If it doesn’t already exist, build it!

It means that a broader range of employers would be able to engage with FE at volume. It even means that they could design a bigger national qualification (if it meets the study hours requirement) that’s bespoke to a specific role, by taking a pick-and-mix approach to micro-credentials. In turn, this would boost the extent to which employers are using the apprenticeship levy to fund skills training, assuming the qualification met the levy criteria. 

We’re also working hard to ensure that micro-credentials are financially viable for smaller employers, where possible. For example, we’re looking to align all appropriate micro-credentials with the Construction Industry Training Board (CITB) to make them eligible for CITB grant funding, where unused levy gets reallocated to smaller construction firms.

For a sector where 95 per cent of employers are SMEs, this is an integral step. Without this access to funding, there’s a danger that we leave huge sections of industry with technical skills gaps that are too difficult to overcome.

For individuals too, micro-credentials can open new routes to funded learning. From 2025, individuals will be able to use their Lifelong Learning Entitlement for micro-credentials if, like ours, they’re externally CPD-accredited.

Currently, many individuals pay for CPD out of their own pocket, which can be a significant barrier to upskilling. Again, we’re working with sector-specialist training providers such as the BIM Academy to offer learners a direct route. 

Ultimately, micro-credentials offer FE providers a means of being much more agile and responsive to emerging skills challenges. Instead of tinkering with the existing curriculum, if it’s not feasible as a programme offering, we need to evolve.

Micro-credentials give us a brilliant opportunity to do that. This is a key strategy in responding to Local Skills Improvement Plan policy, as well as demonstrating a responsive approach to meeting ‘local need’ in ESFA local accountability agreements.

If it doesn’t already exist as an off-the-shelf programme, build it! We encourage other FE colleges and groups to consider taking a similar approach, and look at how they can better align provision with employer needs.