Public Accounts Committee chair Margaret Hodge has called for government action to boost traineeships after official figures showed take-up among eligible providers failed to pick up on last academic year.

A total of 812 providers could run the programme for 16 to 18-year-olds this year, but 22.7 per cent said no, while 722 could run it for 19-plus but 25.1 per cent said no.

And they numbers could even top 40 per cent with a further 19 per cent of possible 16 to 18 traineeship providers and 11 per cent at 19-plus not revealing their intentions to the funding agencies.

Last year, there were 713 eligible providers at 16 to 18, with 19.1 per cent declining, while for the older age group’s 650 possible providers 29 per cent said no. A further 19.6 per cent and 0.8 per cent, respectively, did not say.

The latest figures failed to impress Ms Hodge, who five months ago said the Department for Education (DfE) had “failed” to manage providers operating traineeships based on a National Audit Office report that showed just 200 of 459 eligible providers who said they would deliver traineeships had recorded starts as of June last year.

Ms Hodge said: “The Government still has a long way to go to get more employers involved in traineeships.

“The National Audit Office (NAO) report last September showed that only a minority of eligible training providers were actually delivering the traineeships they promised and in 2014/15 up to 40 per cent of providers who could deliver traineeships may choose not to do so. More needs to be done.”

Stewart Segal, chief executive of the Association of Employment and Learning Providers (AELP), said the latest figures showed a review was needed of restrictions limiting delivery of traineeships to mainly grade one and two providers.

“We know there are a number of providers who are not eligible that would like to start delivery and we hope the government will look at this issue as a matter of urgency,” he said.

Teresa Frith, senior skills policy manager at the Association of Colleges, said: “Traineeships are designed for a very specific young person in terms of age and ‘work readiness’ and this is why 70 per cent of colleges have reported to us it is difficult to convince employers to take on a trainee.”

However, last month’s statistical first release showed 5,000 starts on the traineeships programme in the first quarter of this academic year, up from 3,300 in the first six months of 2013/14.

By the end of last academic year — the programme’s first — there had been 10,400 starts.

A spokesperson for the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills and DfE said: “We are working with both funding agencies, the Education and Training Foundation and the National Institute of Adult Continuing Education to help providers to expand and improve their traineeships and support those that want to start offering traineeships to learn from the experience of other providers.”

Visit www.traineeship-staff-support.co.uk to register for the ETF and AELP consultancy service for providers interested in or already delivering traineeships.

Main pic: from left Margaret Hodge, Teresa Frith

 

Leaders of the new National College for Onshore Oil and Gas have played down the possibility of a local council vote against a fracking proposal affecting their plans.

Bosses at United Kingdom Onshore Oil and Gas (UKoog), whose National College will be based at Blackpool and the Fylde College, saw a cross-party group of MPs fail in their bid to ban fracking a fortnight ago.

But they now face a wait of almost two months to find whether Lancashire County Council members follow the advice of their planning officer and throw out proposals from shale gas explorer Cuadrilla for new wells in the Fylde.

A Blackpool and the Fylde College spokesperson said it would not be commenting until a decision on the application had been made, but UKoog said the ruling — deferred by councillors on January 28 — would have no impact on plans to develop the National College in the area.

The council planning officer’s report on Cuadrilla’s proposals read: “It has not been satisfactorily demonstrated that noise impacts would be reduced to acceptable levels and would therefore unnecessarily and unacceptably result in harm to the amenity of neighbouring properties by way of noise pollution.”

A Cuadrilla spokesperson said it had developed “mitigation measures” to deal with the noise while a consultation on the new proposals was being carried out.

The local general FE college was designated as the National College “hub” in November, with other colleges, including Portsmouth’s Highbury College operating as “spoke” sites.

The college is expected to provide qualifications from A-level equivalent up to postgraduate degree level, and train teachers and regulators. It will also accredit training and academic courses run by other institutions.

And Corin Taylor, senior adviser at UKoog, said the MPs’ vote against a fracking ban highlighted the need for the National College.

“MPs overwhelmingly rejected proposals for a moratorium on shale gas development, which means that the industry can proceed with the process of finding out how much gas we can recover from the shale deposits beneath our feet,” she said.

“This underlines the need for the National College, headquartered in Blackpool, which will be an exciting development for the UK and Lancashire in particular.”

The ban proposal was rejected by 308 votes to 52, but the government accepted a second amendment to the government’s infrastructure bill by Labour imposing 13 extra controls on when fracking can be carried out.

If the bill is approved by the House of Lords and passes, the restrictions on fracking in the future will include a range of new checks of the structural integrity of gas wells and their potential impact on the surrounding environment.

 

An FE college in Suffolk has been ordered to hand over its 11 to 16 academy to new sponsors after the school was placed in special measures following an inadequate Ofsted rating.

Suffolk New College, which runs the New Academies Trust (NAT), was told by the Department for Education (DfE) to transfer Suffolk New Academy after inspectors gave it grade four results in every area following a visit in early December.

It was the first inspection of the school — the only one in NAT — since it converted to academy status in 2012.

But a consultation on the future of the school is now under way after the DfE stepped in and demanded a new sponsor, naming the Active Learning Trust (ALT) — a local organisation with no links to the FE sector — as a suitable sponsor.

Suffolk New College principal and NAT chief executive Dave Muller said: “I believe it is a positive move for the academy to move over to ALT at this time.

“NAT was established as a sponsor of multiple academies and it was never our intention to have only one. At this time of change for the academy it makes sense for us to look at who is best placed to take them forward. The college will continue to work in partnership with ALT.”

He said the grade three college had been “disappointed” by the Ofsted judgement on the school, but added that it had “confirmed what we had identified following the results last year”.

Poor performance had already prompted a pre-warning notice from Education Secretary Nicky Morgan two months earlier, before school principal Andrew Fell stood down in November after a decade in the post. He was replaced last month by Craig D’Cunha.

The report described student progress as inadequate, especially in maths, and said standards among year 11 pupils were low. It also said that leaders including governors, did not have a “clear and accurate view of the academy’s strengths and weaknesses” and had not taken action to “improve teaching or raise achievement.

It said: “The academy does not communicate effectively with parents. Parents have lost confidence in the academy, particularly in its leadership and management and the quality of the teaching.”

Mr Muller said a “robust action plan as agreed with the regional schools commissioner” was in place and “we have taken a number of actions to ensure that the pupils are receiving an improved educational experience”.

“Having an Ofsted inspection at this time validates the actions already taken and keeps us focussed on moving forward and not letting standards drop back.”

It comes after FE Week revealed last month that three FE colleges had stepped in to take on schools run by E-Act (formerly EduTrust Academies Charitable Trust), which has been hit with two financial notices to improve by the Education Funding Agency since 2013.

E-Act controlled more than 30 schools before the DfE asked it to scale down last year after Ofsted inspectors raised concerns about the performance of a number of the chain’s academies

South Gloucestershire and Stroud College will run Forest Academy in the Forest of Dean from March, while academy trusts associated with Leeds City College and Lincoln College have already taken on E-Act schools.

The Suffolk academy consultation on the new sponsorship arrangements closes on February 12 and, pending the outcome, the transfer will be made on March 1.

Main pic: from left Dave Muller, Nicky Morgan

 

 

Around 50 colleges could be in serious financial difficulty due to a “perfect storm” of capital debt and 16 to 19 funding cuts, it has been claimed.

Lynne Sedgmore (pictured), executive director of the 157 Group, said the figure was “sector rumour” — but just last week FE Week reported how West Cheshire College was looking to shut one of two campuses built with £47.9m from the Learning and Skills Council (LSC) with long-term borrowing to top up funding for the builds having left it £14.5m in the red.

The SFA declined to comment on the rumoured figure, but Dr Sedgmore said: “If it were five colleges the responsibility would, in all probability, lie at the door of local management — for 50 colleges to experience serious problems at the same time, however, suggests a systemic problem.”

Part of the problem, she added, was that SFA predecessor body the LSC had “encouraged” colleges to “take on ambitious capital redevelopment programmes”.

“Since colleges have to finance a major part of their capital development themselves many have high borrowings and now face a ‘perfect storm’ as funding rates have been repeatedly cut for 16 to 19-year-olds in recent years and funding numbers slashed for adult provision,” said Dr Sedgmore.

Of the FE Commissioner’s 15 college visits so far, 11 — including West Cheshire College — were triggered by financial concerns from the Skills Funding Agency (SFA). Meanwhile, the Sixth Form College Commissioner has made one visit so far this academic year over finances.

Sixth Form Colleges’ Association (SFCA) chief executive David Igoe said the 50 figure was “probably right” and said he knew of a dozen members experiencing financial difficulties “short of an official Notice To Improve and they are all on the Education Funding Agency’s radar”. “Much of the problem has to be the relentless cuts, which have seen sixth form colleges lose more cash than any other sector — around 20 per cent since 2010,” he said.

But, he added, it was “right to suggest that legacy debt arising from the aborted College Capital programme has also contributed”.

“Small sixth form colleges are particularly vulnerable and are often in areas of high demographic downturn with correspondingly little opportunity to grow,” he said.

An Association of Colleges spokesperson said: “Following significant funding reductions from government, some colleges are inevitably experiencing financial difficulties. This level of funding cuts has to stop. Colleges need more stability in their funding if they are to plan for the future.”

A Department for Business Innovation and Skills (BIS) spokesperson pointed to the emergency loans available to colleges through the exceptional financial support measures, which he said offered “tailored” support for colleges, depending on their level of financial difficulty. But he warned the measures, introduced two months ago, could be followed by intervention from the FE Commissioner.

“There are measures in place to support colleges facing financial difficulties including issues with making repayments on capital redevelopment funding,” he added.

For more on this, see Lynne Sedgmore’s expert piece

Police are hunting fraudsters who tried to rip off an Essex college by pretending be behind work on its £5.8m campus build, FE Week can reveal.

Colchester Institute got a letter purporting to be from the construction outfit behind its new South Wing — but the request for payment via new banking details was checked and found to be bogus.

“It would have been big money,” said Colchester Institute’s financial controller, Tanya Ellingham, who was part of the team that outwitted the fraudsters.

“They obviously target colleges who they see are having building work done and of course you can see who’s doing the building work because it’s on the signs on campus.”

The foiled attempt to misdirect funds bears a striking resemblance to the scam that cost St Aldhelm’s Academy, in Poole, Dorset, £1.2m in July 2013. The school, just like Colchester Institute, had contracted a building firm for work, but was asked for payment via alternative banking details by fraudsters posing as the contractors.

St Aldhelm’s principal at the time Cheryl Heron said it hadn’t affected the running of the school, but the Education Funding Agency’s annual accounts for 2013-14, out last month, revealed the loss had still not been recovered and that “the incident is currently the subject of an on-going police investigation”.

The Colchester incident also comes a month after FE Week revealed how a fraudster, calling himself Brian Hall, posed as a bailiff and targeted finance directors in at least eight colleges, including the College of Haringey, Enfield and North East London and City of Southampton College. It is understood that no college fell for the scam, which centred on Northampton County Court, to which a non-existent debt running into thousands of pounds was meant to be owed.

Michael Johnson, vice principal for finance at City of Southampton College, which was contacted on January 6, said: “He bombarded us with calls suggesting he was getting closer and closer to the college — but he was very pleasant. He tells you he’s giving you a direct number that’s not on the website to help you avoid getting stuck in a queue.”

The incidents were reported to Action Fraud, as was the attempted fraud at Colchester Institute, where the construction outfit confirmed it had not been behind the request for payment.

“We followed our usual checks and procedures — which included ringing the company on the number we have on file, not the number on the letter,” said Ms Ellingham.

She added: “It’s nice when something like this does happen when you catch it — you can see what these processes are for and that they work.”

An Association of Colleges spokesperson said: “Colleges always need to be alert for scams. If colleges suspect an attempted scam or fraud they should report the matter to the police.”

A spokesperson for Action Fraud said the incident was being investigated. She also said last month’s bailiff scam had been passed to Greater Manchester Police, where no one was available for comment.

 

The Further Education Trust for Leadership (Fetl) has handed fellowship grants, worth up to £40,000 each, to four senior figures from the world of FE. Reporter Paul Offord spoke to Tim Ward (pictured) in the third of four FE Week articles to focus on the chosen fellows.

Concern over the declining role of the third sector in training provision inspired Tim Ward’s application for a Fetl fellowship grant.

Mr Ward has been chief executive of The Learning Curve since 1999. The organisation is a charity focused on education and skills for the most disadvantaged and excluded, and Mr Ward has also been chair of the Third Sector Learning Alliance, which supports voluntary, community and social enterprise learning providers, for the last five years.

He said he felt passionately about the role that the third sector plays in delivering learning and skills provision, particularly for the most vulnerable and disengaged.

It is why he plans to use his fellowship to explore the challenges of leadership among third sector providers and how to meet them.

He said: “The position of third sector providers in the publicly-funded learning and skills system has been increasingly under threat. As little as eight years ago, more than 400 third-sector organisations held direct contracts with the Learning and Skills Council. Now there is barely 10 per cent of that number holding [direct] contracts with the Skills Funding Agency and the Education Funding Agency.”

He added third sector organisations involved with FE were at a disadvantage compared to general FE colleges and independent learning providers (ILPs).

“ILPs can generate money through equity investment, while colleges receive capital grants and are able to borrow large sums to improve their provision and help guarantee their survival,” he said.

“It’s much harder for charities to secure loans and taking on contracts in the constantly changing world of training can be a risky business for us.

“We are a small but perfectly formed part of FE, but I do worry about the future of third sector training.

“I hope my research will highlight the good work that it does and perhaps throw up some ideas for how we can be more successful in FE.”

Jill Westerman CBE, chair of Fetl, said: “Tim is a nationally respected leader in third sector learning and skills. His Fetl fellowship will investigate the particular challenges faced by third sector leaders of learning and how they contribute to the complex ‘ecology’ that is FE and skills.”

 

Ofsted has been warned that the “devil will be in the detail” when it applies a new common inspection framework (CIF) across FE, early years and schools from September.

It was exclusively revealed in FE Week in August that the education watchdog planned for inspections to be “harmonised” under one CIF.

And Ofsted said on Tuesday (February 3) that it was pushing ahead with the proposals it claimed would bring “consistency and fair comparison” to inspection results.

The proposals included more frequent but shorter inspections of good FE and skills providers and schools, and uniform headline fields of effectiveness of leadership and management; quality of teaching, learning and assessment; personal development, behaviour and welfare; and, outcomes for children and learners.

But with different sector inspection handbooks due to be issued in June, James Kewin, deputy chief executive of the Sixth Form Colleges’ Association, warned comparison may not be as easy as Ofsted hoped.

“The devil will be in the detail. Maintaining different ‘remits’ under a single inspection framework will mean that school/academy sixth forms will not be inspected in the same way as sixth form colleges,” he said.

“For meaningful comparisons to be made between school/academy sixth forms and sixth form colleges, the same handbook and crucially — the same data and benchmarks — must be used.”

Joy Mercer, senior policy manager for quality and accountability at the Association of Colleges, said: “We strongly agree that school and academy sixth forms should be inspected in the same way as college provision for this age group.

“We are unconvinced that a new CIF will meet the needs of students aged 19 or over, including those whose training is being funded by their employer, apprentices or those taking courses to help them back into employment.”

Ofsted said sixth form colleges would be covered by the FE and skills handbook and school/academy sixth forms would fall under the maintained schools and academies remit.

It spokesperson said: “We are introducing the new CIF as it is important that settings that offer similar provision are inspected under the same framework (for example sixth form colleges and school/ academy sixth forms) to ensure consistency and fair comparison between similar provision.

“As part of this we, will move towards aligning inspection criteria between different, similar settings as far as it is appropriate.”

Ofsted’s eight-week consultation on the unified CIF plans, entitled Better inspection for all, closed before Christmas and its subsequent report on almost 5,000 responses, indicated broad support.

In addition to the new headline fields, FE and skills providers will have the following areas of provision graded “where appropriate” — 16 to 19 study programmes, 19+ learning programmes, apprenticeships, traineeships, employability, learners in receipt of high needs funding, community learning, 14–16 provision in colleges full-time and part-time.

Stewart Segal, chief executive of the Association of Employment and Learning Providers (AELP), said: “We support the creation of a common approach to inspection. The detail of how those common principles are interpreted need to be set out clearly in the guidelines.

“The timescales for making those changes [before the handbooks are published] is very tight and we hope Ofsted will work with providers to ensure the new framework is clear.”

Dr Lynne Sedgmore CBE, executive director of the 157 Group, said, “The move by Ofsted towards a CIF for all educational provision is a move towards greater equality.

“The critical thing now will be to ensure sector engagement with how these overarching changes will be implemented in practice.”

A Department for Education spokesperson said: “A robust and effective school inspection framework is a key part of our plan for education and we are pleased Ofsted is bringing in these changes that will drive further improvements.”

The Department for Business, Innovation and Skills declined to comment.

Main pic: Clockwise from bottom left: how feweek.co.uk broke news of Ofsted’s unified CIF plans in August, a two-page FE Week analysis of the consultation in December, the Better inspection for all consultation report released on February 3 and Ofsted director of FE and skills Lorna Fitzjohn in an exclusive FE Week interview on the new CIF plans in November

 

FE Week vote backed by report

An FE Week poll that uncovered almost 91 per cent support for outstanding providers to be inspected within a definite time period was borne out by the Ofsted consultation on a unified common inspection framework (CIF).

The education watchdog’s report on its consultation revealed that “many respondents” wanted outstanding providers to face regular inspections under the new CIF.

The feweek.co.uk poll late last month saw 131 votes cast, with 90.8 per cent making the same call. The issue was raised after FE Week reported how two formerly outstanding providers fell straight to inadequate having gone uninspected for a total of more than 12 years.

But Ofsted has said that outstanding providers would still, under the new CIF, “usually only have a full inspection if their performance drops or there are other compelling reasons”.

A spokesperson for the education watchdog said that any change to the inspection regime for outstanding providers would require a change in legislation.

A spokesperson for the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills said there were “no plans” for such legislation.

However, she said: “All colleges, including those rated outstanding, are regularly risk assessed through a number of means including financial updates and course successes.

“Ofsted is committed to inspecting at least 5 per of outstanding providers each year and prioritise those where there are indications that performance has dipped.”

More practitioners in on inspections

Plans to boost the number of Ofsted inspection teams with at least one serving practitioner have been welcomed across the FE and skills sector.

The education watchdog revealed the drive in its report on the new unified common inspection framework (CIF) consultation, saying it was “encouraging more serving practitioners to join” its inspection teams.

An Ofsted spokesperson told FE Week: “Currently, 54 per cent of FE and skills inspection teams contain a current practitioner. The longer term aim is to have a serving practitioner on every inspection team.”

He added: “In terms of practitioners’ backgrounds, we have sought expressions of interest particularly from serving education professionals within schools, children’s centres and post-16 provision.”

Stewart Segal, chief executive of the Association of Employment and Learning Providers (AELP), said: “As we said in our response to the consultation, it’s important to have inspectors with knowledge of the sector and the type of provider being judged and we’re delighted that Ofsted shares that view.

“AELP looks forward to working with Ofsted on taking these plans forward.”

James Kewin, deputy chief executive of the Sixth Form Colleges’ Association, said: “This is a welcome announcement.

“Inspection teams will benefit from the inclusion of individuals with up to date and relevant experience of delivery on the ground.”

Pressure for such a move has been growing and was a subject raised by the FE Week Secret Principal columnist last month.

It was also covered by Barry Lord-Gambles, contracts director for Greater Manchester- based Venture Learning, which fell straight to an ‘inadequate’ Oftsed rating last month from its previous outstanding inspection six years ago. He said there should be more inspectors with contemporary sector experience.

Dr Lynne Sedgmore CBE, executive director of the 157 Group, said: “We wholeheartedly support the inclusion of more serving practitioners. Quite aside from the richness and expertise practitioners undoubtedly bring to individual inspections, this is an important acknowledgement that the long-term key to a self-improving system lies with serving practitioners.”

The planned introduction of the new CIF comes just over two years after the current FE and skills inspection regime was introduced.

There were 4,390 responses to the online consultation questionnaire on the new CIF plans, as well as qualitative data gathered through consultative events including more than 40 short inspection pilots with FE and skills providers and schools.

Almost 80 per cent of respondents backed the introduction of a new unified CIF.

No one from the Association of Colleges was available for comment on the practitioner plans.

 

 

 

 

Association of Colleges (AoC) president Richard Atkins has told of his concern at in depth research by FE Week that uncovered how the sector’s Ofsted inspection performance was plummeting.

The results of research, which featured in last week’s newspaper, showed the proportion of general FE and tertiary colleges inspected so far in 2014/15 and graded inadequate or told to improve was up 27 percentage points on last academic year to 69 per cent.

It was a similar story for sixth form colleges and independent learning providers as 66 per cent of inspections across the sector resulted in providers being rated as inadequate or requires improvement so far this year— it stood at 36 per cent last year.

“I’m disappointed and concerned because we’d had two years where it was creeping up,” said Mr Atkins, principal of outstanding-rated Exeter College.

“There’s an element of course where they’re not doing inspections randomly, they’re picking the colleges that are grade three and grade four.

“But I think we are assessed in a very tough way on the English and maths. That was a brand new policy 18 months ago — colleges didn’t have to implement it until last summer and yet every inspection report has had quite a bit to say on English and maths, so I think that’s quite tough.”

Mr Atkins is the seventh AoC president and counts Bournville College principal Michele Sutton CBE and City College Coventry governors’ chair Maggie Galliers CBE among his predecessors. They were principals at Bradford College and Leicester College, respectively, at the time of their appointments.

“I was nervous about starting the job and about balancing it with my college,” said Mr Atkins.

“I thought it would be hard work but I may have underestimated it. Having said that, I’ve enjoyed it more than I thought I would — it’s actually been fun.”

Nomination papers were sent out last week for the AoC president’s role. An election will be held from March 9 until April 1 and two days later the new president will be announced.

A president’s top five tips for presidency

– Your college needs to be relatively stable in terms of quality and finance and so on — no college is totally stable, but relatively. You should also have a recent Ofsted visit behind you, not looming in the next year

– You have one or two people within the senior team you can genuinely delegate significantly more to and have trust and confidence in them that they can take on some of your roles

– You have a genuine appetite and really want to be in policy development, influencing and meeting politicians, stakeholders and civil servants

– You should be accessible to London as a lot of work is based there — I’m two and half hours away, which is fine, but I’d have thought four hours would be a killer although it depends on personal toleration. But you also have the happy with travelling around the country as well as trying and visit the regions.

– You need some experience as a principal — I’d say it’s not for someone in their first three, four or five years

Exclusive online content

As nominations open for the next Association of Colleges (AoC) president, FE Week caught up with current president for a Q&A on what he’s made of the role so far.

What is the role of the AoC president?

I’m the seventh president. We feel as an organisation it’s worked well, it brings into this building a working, practicing college principal and that’s a good thing in lots of ways.

I think the job is partly ceremonial and partly going to award ceremonies and things like that, but it’s also giving the policy team here the voice of a working principal who’s in college two or three days a week and regularly feeding into that. It feels to me that I’m one of the team.

I get pretty regular contact with senior civil servants, with policy makers, with ministers and with Ofsted, which I think if you’re a working principal is interesting and good for my professional development and hopefully I can add something to those meetings.

We try and get me out to the regions to regional meetings of principals and chairs as well. It’s about listening, as well as updating them on policy and development and all the rest because we’re a membership organisation. I also attend an AoC board meeting once a week.

What made you stand for election?

I’d been on the AoC board, so I’d seen from a distance the role of president. And I think my first reaction was one of ‘that isn’t for me’ — because I haven’t sought out national roles particularly in the past and I’m quite happy with a low profile really.

What appealed particularly to me was I thought I could bring something to the role given my length of experience — 20 years and principal — and the broad curriculum my college has.

What have you enjoyed about the role?

The benefits are considerable. I’ve had an insight into policy making as it happens that I wouldn’t normally have got and hopefully my college benefits as a result — and its stretched me in a while range of positive ways.

It’s a fantastic opportunity and a privilege to represent your peers and speak on behalf of student and staff in all of the 330 colleges.

It’s also a really friendly, helpful place to work, and I enjoy working in central London.

I also really enjoy travelling, and this isn’t really a job you can do if you don’t.

One thing you don’t do as a principal is visit other colleges much — within your locality it’s not the done thing, so I think I visited more colleges this year than I’ve visited in the rest of the time I was a principal. And people are very open and that’s been a real insight.

I’ve also been learning about public affairs and lobbying, all of which is helpful to my college.

What has surprised you about the role?

The complexity of the lobbying has surprised me. When I first became a principal I thought ‘why don’t people should louder? If we shouted louder, they’d all know FE was here’. But it’s much more complicated than that. It’s about building relationships with Ministers and policy makers and political advisers. It’s about making sure your agenda become their agenda and trying to create solutions for them.

A lot of the work is long term. In college you work on an annual cycle, there’s a rhythm to it. Here, you don’t see the results of your work often over long periods of time — some things being discussed won’t come to anything until three presidents down the line or five years or the next government.

And there is a long termism here which you don’t get in college. You have to play the long game.

I was also nervous about starting the job but I’ve enjoyed it more than I thought I would — I’ve enjoyed doing something different three days a week. It has stretched me and stimulated me in different ways. It’s like when people take sabbaticals to recharge their batteries — that’s what it’s done for me, given me a big battery charge. It’s been very stimulating, very interesting.

I thought it would be hard work but I may have underestimated it.

What’s the one thing you would like to change about the sector?

The national standing of the sector. Individual colleges have great recognition in their local area and are valued but that’s just not true on a national level.

What’s the thing you’re proudest of in the role?

I am proud of the manifesto and the way we’ launched it. We had positive feedback.

We did capture the key issues on principals’ and governors’ minds, and we’ve developed it in a way that is flexible — what we couldn’t do was write down a whole long list of very specific things we wanted, so we had to address a series of issues so that we could have a dialogue with politicians on.

And it does serve as a stimulus for conversation when we meet with politicians and policy makers.

What’s the achievement you’ve seen that you’ve been most impressed by?

It’s difficult to pick just one. Without naming them, I’ve been to two colleges, one in Yorkshire and Humberside and one in the West Midlands, which have gone from inadequate to good outstanding within about four or five years, and that’s really impressive, the focus on students and the journey they’ve been through, it’s fantastic.

I was just really impressed by the calibre of principals and senior staff I met and the feedback from the students.

Coming into the election, what would you like to see parties prioritising?

If I was going to do it again, this is the year I’d want to do it because there’s a general election.

It’s extremely lively at the moment, policies developing quickly and we’re having to respond to that fast and gauge views of members.

The bit that hasn’t surprised me is its challenging getting the college agenda to the top of the list.

We’re inching up the list of priorities — in terms of awareness of the sector we’re doing as well or better that we have in any previous election since incorporation.

If I had to pick out the top thing I want politicians to commit to, it would be this fundamental review of funding we called for in our manifesto — they need to look at why 16 to 18 keeps getting squeezed in this way.

I cannot really think of rational reason why a country should require everyone to be in learning until 18 but stop the ringfence of funding at 16.

What do you make of the sector’s decline in Ofsted grades this year?

I think if you’re going to get a good or outstanding Ofsted these days you have to be very focussed on learner success – the leadership and governors have to have a very strong focus on teaching and learning and student experience and in some cases from what I read, that’s not there.

At the moment the Ofsted grade is key — it’s just the most important external measure, because yes you’ve got league tables, but Ofsted is the only one the public recognise.

Colleges should take all the support they can get and focus on that.

What’s been the most nerve wracking moment of the role for you?

The most nerve wracking moment of the year was talking at the AoC conference.

It’s one thing talking to a staff meeting, or a public meeting in my part of the world as a college principal, but it’s much more always difficult talking to your peers — you do feel the spotlight.

What’s next for you?

I’m nearer the end of my career as a principal than the beginning, but what this job has taught me is that I’m unlikely to simply retire and stop doing anything.

As long as there are interesting things to keep doing in our sector I’ll keep doing them for a while.

At the moment my plan is to go back to my college, I don’t think I’ll go back for that long because I will have been there 14 years and I think that’s probably enough for the college and I.

So I will look and see what interesting opportunities exist that are less than full-time.

What are your top five tips for someone thinking of running for president?

Your college needs to be relatively stable in terms of quality and finance and so on — no college is totally stable, but relatively. You should also have a recent Ofsted visit behind you, not looming in the next year.

You have one or two people within the senior team you can genuinely delegate significantly more to and have trust and confidence in them that they can take on some of your roles.

You have a genuine appetite and really want to be in policy development, influencing and meeting politicians, stakeholders and civil servants.

You should be accessible to London as a lot of work is based there — I’m two and half hours away, which is fine, but I’d have thought four hours would be a killer although it depends on personal toleration. But you also have the happy with travelling around the country as well as trying and visit the regions.

You need some experience as a principal — I’d say it’s not for someone in their first three, four or five years.

Anything else?

Just that I would unreservedly recommend this role. My advice would be to be brave and stand and if you have a genuine appetite to get involved in this work and represent the sector you’ll really enjoy it.