Martin Doel has revealed plans to become the inaugural Further Education Trust for Leadership (Fetl) Professor of FE and Skills in the University College London (UCL) Institute of Education (IoE). He outlines the kind of issues he wants to be looking at.

The first task of leadership is to impart direction and define purpose — what then is the distinctive purpose and direction of institutions delivering FE? What does the term FE mean? Should skills follow FE like a horse and carriage in the phrase ‘FE and skills’?

As the Fetl Professor of FE and Skills in the UCL Institute of Education, these are some of the questions that I’m hoping to have the opportunity to explore and discuss. They’re the type of questions that, against the litany of day-to-day challenges, are often neglected.

Colleges, independent learning providers, adult learning providers and employer providers have proven themselves remarkably adept at surviving whatever is thrown their way

Further questions might be — how do autonomous institutions make themselves properly accountable to those they serve? If improved skills are a necessary, but not sufficient, condition to improve productivity, what are the other elements required and how do these elements interact with skills provision? What should be the balance between broad education and focused training, especially for young people? How do leaders of FE institutions contribute to leadership of ‘place’ with other agencies and local partners? How can collaboration co-exist with competition in the world of FE and skills as it does in other areas of business? How do we sustain and build further an entrepreneurial spirit in FE colleges and providers that is reconciled with the requirement for accountability for public funds?

But do those questions, and those being addressed by the Fetl fellows that I’m looking forward to working with, actually matter? After all, colleges, independent learning providers, adult learning providers and employer providers have proven themselves remarkably adept at surviving whatever is thrown their way.

In my opinion, they do matter. Unreflective action might achieve temporary respite, but it’s not the behaviour of a mature and autonomous sector. A sign of maturity is a secure sense of ‘self’ and a wish to be self-determining. These are indicators of underlying confidence that in turn inspire confidence in staff, students and in those that fund education and training, whether employers or in government.

Working with colleagues at the Institute of Education, Fetl fellows and friends and colleagues across the sector, I hope to find answers to the questions or at least form better questions — as you can see I’m already beginning to make the transition to being an academic. I think also that we should have the humility to learn from others who are engaged in addressing the same type of questions — providers in other educational sectors, in commerce, in other countries both near (we have our own experiment ongoing in the UK as the FE and skills systems in each of the nations diverge but retain very similar cultural roots) and far, in local government and in the voluntary sector.

In the meantime, there’s a day job to do at AoC until September when I will take up my full responsibilities at the IoE.

While beginning to think about more and even better questions and while working with Fetl fellows, there will more than enough to do in supporting colleges through area reviews, in making full sense of the spending review, in contributing to policy that enables colleges to deliver their full share of 3m high quality apprenticeships, in ensuring that colleges are at the centre of the rejuvenation of higher technical and professional education and in making sure that the achievements of colleges and their students are properly acknowledged and recognised. In fact, it’s business as usual.

Within the next couple of weeks, we expect the Skills Funding Agency to finally begin the process of European Social Fund procurement, advised by European Structural Investment Funds (ESIF) committees within Local Enterprise Partnerships (Leps).

This will be the first time Leps will have influence over where and how public money is spent on learning and skills programmes.

Yet, with devolution all the rage, this is just the beginning of stronger local oversight over economic growth and public service reform. Since Lord Heseltine’s ‘No Stone Unturned’ report just over three years ago, devolution agreements have been made between central government and nine local areas.

From Cornwall to West Yorkshire, Liverpool to Tees Valley, more and more city regions and combined authority will be afforded devolved budgets and decision making powers over health, social care, transport, employment and skills.

The strengths, opportunities and potential benefits of devolved education and skills systems are persuasive. Skills is a good example of how England stands out as the European Capital of centralised skills policy.

As a democracy, we are facing up to the realisation that central government can’t solve all of the problems. Programmes from Whitehall can’t close skills gaps, they can’t eliminate lifetime low pay and they are not making progress in getting those furthest away from the labour market into work.

That’s why it is welcome that local areas have been promised co-commissioning roles for new employment support programmes.

Yet, I remain restless about a couple of things in particular when it comes to devolution of skills.

My first one is about political leadership. In return for powers, local areas have to commit to electing a ‘metro-mayor’. Working with the mayor will be a combined authority with its own cabinet of local authority leaders and its own executive. Combined authorities are networks of local authorities, each of which will have its own executive and cabinet of elected councillors.

The quality of local outcome agreements, skills and employment strategies etc rest on the quality of leadership, policy and oversight from councillors.

My real worry here is how much freedom local political leaders will actually be given to direct policy in their area. It’s all well and good devolving power and responsibility, but if it’s in HM Treasury wrapping paper with a massive un-Christmassy list of government policy requirements, then its not really devolution at all. So I think the quality, and freedom, of local political leaders are really important.

Following any discussion about political leadership usually comes accountability.

While the government’s consultation on outcome based success measures only closed last week, I know that many are concerned about this idea of a trade-off between accredited and employment outcomes verses non-accredited and other types of outcomes.

There’s potential for an ‘accountability paradox’ here for local political leaders in that if devolution only provides proportioned central government budgets, rather then actual power, local political leaders could find themselves satisfying their devolution conditions at the expense their constituents.

My hope though, is that in areas like Greater Manchester, local people feel a genuine sense of ownership over learning and skills and local politicians have the ability to prioritise those in most need in their communities.

Clearly, the devolution agenda at the moment throws up as many questions as it does theoretical benefits.

We know that it’s most likely at this stage that adult skills and community learning budgets are likely to be devolved under a combined umbrella package.

With that would also come learner support funding, but we don’t know the extent to which local areas will have powers of learner support policy or just the PIN number for the central government budget.

Now that learning loans are to be extended, it’ll be interesting to see what ideas local areas have in flexing local learning markets to boost demand for advanced-higher level learning and, again, whether localities will have powers over eligibility policy.

Chancellor George Osborne’s Budget last month was widely expected to be disastrous for FE. But while many are still awaiting the finer details, the sector appeared at least safe for now. Neil Carmichael outlines his view of the sector settlement.

The mood of the Association of Colleges conference when I attended on the closing day could be best summarised by the headline in the conference edition of FE Week — ‘Staring into the funding abyss’, following warnings from Skills Minister Nick Boles that “FE will not be insulated from further spending cuts”.

The reaction therefore when the spending review announced that the core adult skills budget would be protected in cash terms at £1.5bn was one of relief at a better than expected settlement.

Coupled with the announcement of the apprenticeship levy and increased availability of loans for students who wish to pursue higher levels of vocational education, the overall settlement in my view represents a clear recognition by this government that the FE sector will have an increasingly important role to play in delivering its policy outcomes around apprenticeships, workforce skills and productivity.

I am very alert to the challenges that still exist for the FE sector

The government wants strong local areas and for employers to take a leading role in establishing a post-16 skills system. The series of area-based reviews is already being carried out to establish how local areas can set up institutions that do this.

Colleges will be invited to specialise according to local economic priorities, and to provide better targeted basic skills alongside professional and technical education. Some of these will be invited to become Institutes of Technology which will be sponsored by employers, registered with professional bodies and aligned with apprenticeship standards.

In my own constituency the South Gloucestershire and Stroud College (SGS) has already made itself well poised to develop even more exciting opportunities for young people, building a new training centre at the now decommissioned Berkley Green power station focussing on energy renewables, advanced manufacturing and cyber security which is already proving to be highly popular, judging by the success of the recent open day.

The FE sector is not just in need of reform. For too long, it has been seen as Cinderella in contrast to higher education so parity between technical and professional training with academic outcomes is long overdue.

One way to achieve this is to introduce a properly valued and recognised National Apprenticeship Award — guaranteeing the quality of the training and saluting the achievement of recipients, which should be part of the government’s early proposals for an Institute for Apprenticeships.

Another useful change made in the Spending Review was to allow sixth form colleges to become academies. This will simplify the post-16 arena and, by extension, help to define more clearly the role of the FE sector.

The FE sector is currently charged with the task of dealing with the huge number of GCSE maths retakes — and I congratulate the way many colleges have risen to this challenge — but this policy needs to be reviewed.

While it is absolutely right for young people — wherever possible — to have a qualification in maths (and English), a numeracy qualification could suffice. Furthermore, maths should, in my view, be part of a post-16 curriculum through learning for a National Baccalaureate, formed through maths and English components plus traditional A-levels or technical qualifications.

I am very alert to the challenges that still exist for the FE sector — for example, between them the Department for Education and Department for Business, Innovation and Skills both still need to secure potentially £500m of savings outside the adult skills budget, and managing this will create challenges.

But both myself and the Labour chair of the Business and Skills Select Committee have long recognised the importance of the FE sector in addressing UK skills and this will be a focus of our joint inquiry into UK productivity over 2016.

The challenges of the spending review now present a real opportunity to create more resilient colleges taking the opportunities now available to them through greater employer engagement and an ability to embrace new innovative structures to meet students, and employer demands.

 

Among the many proud principals watching learners take part in last month’s WorldSkills UK competitions at the Skills Show was Graham Razey. But despite no mention for his college among the medal winners, he views taking part as an opportunity to challenge and improve [click here for the FE Week 2015 Skills Show supplement].

I’m a very competitive individual. That trait is one which comes from my longstanding passion for team sports. I’ve seen first-hand the difference that competing can make for people, as they practise repeatedly to hone their skillset which is eventually tested in the arena of competition.

I make no bones about my competitive nature and drive. So it would be understandable, therefore, for you to think a skills competition — for me, as principal of East Kent College — would be all about winning and the haul of medals our students could bring home.

So when the college’s competitors returned from the recent WorldSkills UK Skills Competition finals held at the NEC without any glittering awards, you’d think I would be upset.

Not achieving podium finishes this year has not deterred us from going back and striving for yet higher standards

You’d be right. In fact, I was utterly inconsolable, but not for the reason you’re thinking.

At East Kent College, we took the decision to get involved in skills competitions about two years ago, so we’re fairly fresh to them on the national stage. We made the decision to start taking part because we, as a college, wanted to begin showcasing the high standards which our students were achieving.

We wanted to put our students up against the best of their peers. There was a reason for that — confidence. We, as a college, were confident that we were teaching our students at the highest standards, and they too were pushing themselves to achieve the best possible results.

The crucible of skills competitions would also, in our view, ensure that our tutors and all staff continued to not only provide the highest standard of education, but would keep innovating, keep pushing forward to help students fulfil their potential. Our students would also benefit from taking part in skills competitions.

Being tested in the tough competitive environment, we felt, would help to not only get the best from them, but also to inspire them. Being surrounded by the cream of the crop would motivate our students to push themselves.

And it seems to be working at East Kent College. Our students are achieving ever higher standards, and our staff have continued to drive forward, always working to ensure that they are the top of their game.

So as a competitive man, and someone who believes in our students and staff, when the results for the WorldSkills were announced I was heartbroken. But it was not because of the lack of medals.

It was because over the three-day competition I’d seen the passion, determination and drive of all of the college’s students and tutors, and in truth, I was gutted for them. By the time the competition had finished all of our students looked shattered. I have never seen nine individuals give so much to a competition, they were all utterly drained.

And that is the heart and soul of what skills competitions are about. It isn’t about getting a medal, it’s about building our students up — shaping them and helping them to be the best they can be. When I saw how much my students had achieved, with such high standards, I desperately wanted them to be rewarded for their efforts. That was the real reason I was inconsolable, not the lack of medals.

The journey East Kent College is taking is one of progression. Not achieving podium finishes this year has not deterred us from going back and striving for yet higher standards. In fact, it has only served to make us more determined to come back stronger.

And when our students win gold in the future — and I have no doubt they will — it won’t just show an individual with talent, it’ll show a college which has worked hard to continue improving its skills standards, and showed commitment to helping everyone achieve their full potential.

It will show that the college is further down the road in its journey to being the best educational establishment it can be, for students, for staff, for the local community and for the businesses our young people will go on to work for.