When Reform UK say they want migrants to integrate, but at the same time propose slashing English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL) funding, they undermine their own stated goal. You cannot have integration without communication.
Integration is more than assimilation. It is a two-way process – a relationship between newcomers and the communities they join. It is about language, yes, but also about building trust, participating in civic life and contributing to the economy.
If we remove the single most important tool for this – language education – we risk creating isolated communities, mistrust, and greater division, exactly the opposite of what Reform say they want.
The Home Office’s own 2019 Indicators of Integration Framework identifies language and communication as key facilitators of integration. People who learn English are more likely to find work, volunteer, and build relationships outside their immediate community.
The 2011 Census shows that 89 per cent of the UK’s foreign-born population already speak English well or very well – proof that most migrants are willing and able to learn. The real barrier is access.
Integration is not about one group changing while the other stands still – it is a mutual process. When we provide language education, we equip migrants to participate and at the same time strengthen communities by enabling real dialogue, reducing tensions, and fostering shared understanding.
And yet, ESOL provision in England is already stretched thin. Funding dropped from £247 million in 2010/11 to £186 million in 2023/24 – a 25 per cent reduction in real terms – despite sustained demand.
In 2022/23, 150,000 places were funded, the highest in a decade, but concentrated in just a few large cities and nowhere near enough to meet need. Cutting further will simply lock more people out of the system.
Further cuts would mean classes shut down at colleges such as WM College, waiting lists getting longer, and people who desperately want to learn English being told there is no space for them.
It would mean skilled professionals – nurses, engineers, care workers – being unable to retrain and fill labour market shortages because their English is not strong enough. It would mean parents being unable to support their children’s education because they cannot read school letters or talk to teachers.
It would mean neighbours who cannot talk to one another, breeding misunderstanding and fear.
The economic cost would also be significant. ESOL is not just a social good – it is an economic investment. People who speak English are more likely to work, earn more, and pay more tax. They are less likely to rely on benefits. Cutting ESOL may save money on paper, but it will create greater demand for welfare, health services and housing support down the line.
Research from the Learning and Work Institute shows that every£1 invested in ESOL returns multiple pounds to the economy through higher productivity and tax contributions. Cutting ESOL is therefore a false economy that undermines growth at a time when the UK needs skilled, work-ready people more than ever.
Reform’s proposals also assume local authorities could simply “opt out” of providing ESOL. In reality, ESOL funding comes largely through the adult education budget, commissioned nationally by the government (or by combined authorities where powers are devolved).
Councils can influence provision, but removing it altogether would create huge service gaps and put them in breach of statutory duties to support community cohesion. It would also risk tension with employers who depend on skilled migrant labour but need workers who can speak English.
Integration policy in England is already patchy compared with Scotland, which has had a national ESOL strategy since 2007. The current fragmented approach is failing to deliver for learners or for society.
The European Commission has long emphasised that language programmes are central to successful integration, and countries like Sweden offer comprehensive packages including language, civic education, and job preparation as standard. England should be looking to strengthen its offer – not dismantle it.
Language learning is not a luxury.It is not something people can simply pick up on an app like Duolingo. It is a human right, a civic necessity, and a key to unlocking social mobility. As the author Khaled Hosseini wrote, “If culture was a house, then language was the key to the front door, [and] to all the rooms inside.”
The message is simple: integration cannot happen without language. And language cannot be learned without access to culturally supported education. Integration done well benefits all.
My college went paperless years ago. I’ve lost count how many photocopies I’ve done since then.
Thankfully, my laptop screen provides me with a little personalised counter of how much my printing has cost. It was accumulating, un-reset for years, so the figure was astronomical. House deposit levels of finance seemed to be involved.
I felt like a monster when I clicked on the little green numbers, only to be warned of how many trees have been felled for me, and how much carbon I’ve frittered away on my mindless papery rush towards photocopier-driven armageddon.
When we’re all struggling to survive the coming climate catastrophe and dystopian wasteland which follows, I’m scared my little counter might then count as evidence against me. It may be the testimony of those judgemental green digits that leads to me being buried alive in an eco-pod from which a tree will one day grow. A fitting revenge for Mother Nature, who is plainly tired of being pulped up and printed on.
Honestly, I don’t know how a college can become paperless. I’ve seen the figures about the energy it would save. But none has yet included the money saved on photocopiers, paper and ink. No doubt the ink savings alone would run into millions of pounds per student if my home printer is anything to go by.
I would love to work in a truly environmentally-friendly college. When our new campus was built years ago, its smaller carbon footprint was heralded. The dream was good and the hopes were high, but they somewhat died, running aground on the rocks of reality, institutional busyness and plain human apathy. Nobody talked about sustainability after the first few years in the new-build. Then we became paperless. After a fashion, at least.
Of course, the purpose of paperlessness was to embrace online access. It was a brave new world. If we were not working with paper, we could live the dream of surfing the world on the web and save work in the intangible ever-accessible, albeit securely locked cloud. A lot simpler than unblocking scrumpled-up jams, being delayed by empty ink tanks, and restocking vacant paper trays.
But I haven’t yet seen the comparative calculations on the carbon usage of cloud storage and the enormous energy consumption of AI per student. I fear it might be dizzying. Hungary is currently constructing two nuclear power stations to support its drive to become a data-centre hub. So our college’s banks of ever-recharging laptops, the cloud storage we provide, the increasing use of AI, the emails flying around, and every other electronic communication we’ve adopted to replace paper have no doubt given us enormous carbon footprints.
If being paperless was just to save money, that was one thing. But if it was for sincere ecological reasons, we may have merely displaced the problem, much as large economies export their carbon costs to smaller countries. I suspect our overall carbon use has risen since seeking to forego paper. So we may have saved money, but have we saved the world? What of e-waste, the hardware junk we all discard, and the energy used on storing thousands of redundant files online?
I don’t really know how to go paperless – or full-on cloudily stored and artificially intelligent, either. I’m stranded, one foot planted on wood-pulp and the other immersed in the cotton-wool insubstantiality of the cloud.
In my classes, students need to annotate and analyse with paper and pens. But we obviously use online storage too. We could just be a little less papery, but it surprises me how much paper digital-native students want and need. Their folders are bursting by the end of the year. When I send them documents, they just print them out because the online version will only otherwise get lost in the undergrowth of the virtual forest.
Papered or wholly electronic, we face a difficult choice. There’s enormous environmental cost in using paper, and another in going paper-free. Whichever way, I will still need to think through my practice for the sake of the trees – unless AI can work out an answer for me.
ASDAN is preparing to launch two new project-based qualifications that will give learners more opportunities to build confidence, develop transferable skills and progress in ways that feel meaningful to them.
From September 2026, ASDAN members will be able to register learners for the Foundation Project Qualification (FPQ, Level 1) and Higher Project Qualification (HPQ, Level 2) (pending Ofqual approval). They will sit alongside the existing Extended Project Qualification (EPQ, Level 3), creating a complete progression pathway.
For ASDAN, this development is much more than a portfolio expansion. It’s a natural continuation of its learner-centred ethos.
“Project qualifications are so closely aligned to our DNA as an organisation,” says Cath Moss, ASDAN’s Qualifications Manager. “They allow learners to demonstrate their skills in a context that’s meaningful to them – whether that’s through an academic dissertation, an artefact, or a project linked to work experience. That freedom is incredibly powerful for engagement.”
Building on firm foundations
Project qualifications were introduced nationally in response to concerns that too many young learners lacked the skills needed to succeed beyond school. Independent research, including the Wolf Report review of vocational education, highlighted the need for qualifications that could strengthen independence, critical thinking, and applied learning.
All awarding organisations that deliver project qualifications do this against the same regulator-defined objectives. The difference lies in how they are supported and contextualised.
Where some awarding bodies focus mainly on written dissertations, ASDAN embraces a wider range of evidence – including artefacts and work experience projects. This aligns directly with ASDAN’s tradition of flexible, skills-based learning and ensures that learners from diverse backgrounds and pathways can participate fully.
Why project qualifications matter
The benefits of FPQ, HPQ and EPQ are broad and significant:
choice and autonomy – learners select their own project topic, giving them ownership and motivation
transferable skills – planning, research, evaluation and communication are embedded throughout
recognition – EPQ carries up to 16 UCAS points; FPQ and HPQ provide stepping stones with GCSE equivalence
engagement – learners who may struggle in traditional settings can thrive when learning is contextualised
Cath highlights the impact:
“Being able to choose the context for their study is transformative. It allows learners to demonstrate what they can do through a topic of personal interest, rather than being limited to what a syllabus dictates.”
This means providers have options at every stage. Learners not ready for Level 2 can start with the FPQ, while those building towards higher education can aim for the EPQ with the confidence and skills developed along the way.
“Wherever your learner is at now, we can take them from where they are and support them towards achieving a project qualification at the right level,” Cath explains.
Relevant and recognised
For employers, parents and higher education institutions, project qualifications are easy to recognise and understand. They carry the same weight and kudos as general qualifications such as GCSEs, while offering learners greater flexibility in subject matter and an alternative way of being assessed.
This dual value of credibility in the system and relevance to the learner, makes them particularly powerful in today’s education landscape, where engagement and progression remain key challenges.
Looking ahead
First teaching of the FPQ and HPQ is planned for September 2026, but ASDAN is already working with their members to prepare for delivery. Their arrival will give providers new tools to keep learners engaged, build core skills and offer credible routes to further study or employment.
For ASDAN, they represent more than new qualifications. They reaffirm the organisation’s mission: enabling learners to flourish by connecting learning to their interests, aspirations and real-world experiences.
Find out more
ASDAN’s new project qualifications will offer a powerful way to motivate learners, strengthen progression, and deliver results that matter.
Ofsted has begun looking for a new deputy director for post-16 education, training and skills, just weeks before it rolls out sweeping changes to inspections.
The watchdog is advertising the senior post after the departure of Paul Joyce earlier this year. Joyce, who joined Ofsted in 2005, left to take up a deputy principal role at North Warwickshire and South Leicestershire College.
His replacement, senior FE and skills inspector Denise Olander, was appointed on an interim basis in March.
A job advert for a permanent replacement to Joyce, published today, describes the role as leading Ofsted’s post-16 strategy and overseeing how FE and skills inspections are carried out.
The person appointed will earn a £108,574 salary and report directly to Ofsted national director of education, Lee Owston.
The move comes as Ofsted prepares to implement a shake-up of inspections. From November 10, the single “overall effectiveness” grade will be scrapped and replaced with a new colour-coded report card.
FE providers will instead be rated across up to 16 areas, including curriculum, achievement, leadership and inclusion. The familiar ‘outstanding’ to ‘inadequate’ judgments will be dropped in favour of a five-point scale running from ‘urgent improvement’ to ‘exceptional’.
Sector leaders have warned that the reforms will not reduce the pressure felt by colleges and training providers. An independent review of the reforms earlier this month found the high-stakes nature of inspection is likely to remain.
Ofsted’s job advert said it is “desirable” but not “essential” for the new post-16 education, training and skills deputy director to have “experience and understanding of inspection within the education sector, as it relates to post-16 education, training and skills remits”.
Applications for the role close on October 14. Final interviews will be held in late November.
An influential committee of MPs has joined calls for a statutory pay review body for colleges amid an ongoing teacher recruitment and retention crisis in the sector.
Concluding their future of FE and skills inquiry today, the education select committee has issued its wide-ranging report of over 40 recommendations, including devolution of 16-19 education to strategic authorities, reinstatement of funding for some level 7 apprenticeships and modular T Levels.
MPs warned the government not to lose sight of the “diverse motivations of adult learners” including “social inclusion and lifelong learning” as policy responsibility for adult education transfers from the Department for Education (DfE) to the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP).
The committee’s 124-page report also casts doubt on the independence of Skills England, which was transferred from the Department for Education (DfE) to the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) last week and threw its weight behind calls for a targeted 16-19 student premium, mirroring the extra pupil premium that goes to disadvantaged pupils in schools.
Education committee chair Helen Hayes MP said: “Successive governments have rightly talked up the FE and skills sector as an engine for economic growth across the whole country, but it’s an engine that’s been left to run on fumes.
Helen Hayes
“Fifteen years of real terms funding cuts and stagnant pay have left colleges struggling to recruit and retain teachers who earn far less than their peers in schools. Far from receiving the parity of esteem it’s been promised in the past, FE continues to be treated like the Cinderella of the education system.”
Phil Smith, chair of Skills England, said: “We will continue to be an active voice across government in our new home as part of the Department for Work and Pensions. Bringing together skills development and employment support under one roof makes this an exciting time for the world of skills training.”
Pay review body
One headline recommendation was for the DfE to set up a statutory pay review body for colleges, comparable to the School Teachers’ Review Body. Without one, college teacher pay decisions are “fragmented” and “inadequate”, the report said.
An FE Week investigation last year found that there was some appetite for a pay review body among unions, but college leaders were “nervous” about losing the freedom to set their own teachers’ salaries. The DfE did not indicate that they had any plans for a pay review body for colleges at the time, and did not respond to requests for comment at the time of going to press.
This comes as the University and College Union (UCU) put nearly 80 colleges on notice of trade disputes following the Association of Colleges’ 4 per cent pay recommendation last week. One of UCU’s key demands is for binding, national pay agreements for FE college teachers that are commonplace in schools and sixth form colleges.
The report stated: “There is a growing pay disparity between school and college teachers in England, with college staff earning significantly less—on average college teachers earn 15 per cent less. This issue has contributed to the recruitment and retention crisis.”
Bill Watkin, chief executive of the Sixth Form Colleges Association said: “Sixth form colleges have managed to close the gap in pay between college teachers and their school counterparts through our current collective bargaining arrangements.
“The best way to ensure it remains closed, and all staff in sixth form colleges get a fair deal, is to ensure that 16 to 19 funding keeps pace with school funding.”
Devolve “appropriate” 16-19 funding
The vast majority of adult education funding is now controlled by mayors, but ministers have resisted calls to devolve 16 to 19 education funding.
Skills minister Jacqui Smith admitted to “tensions” between DfE and the mayors over this issue, arguing that 16 to 19 education was “a national system” and said she “could not envisage that we would devolve all of that 16 to 19 funding to mayors.”
The committee called for the government to amend its English devolution and community empowerment bill to “make provisions” allowing “appropriate” 16 to 19 education funding to be devolved to strategic authorities. The report did not define “appropriate”.
David Hughes, chief executive of the Association of Colleges, said devolving 16 to 19 education would risk “upsetting” the system.
“We support the idea of locally elected mayors overseeing the 16-19 capacity to meet all leaner needs, perhaps with capital to support it, backed up by a national funding formula which followed every learner,” he said.
“Going further than that is not necessary,” he added.
However, on adult education, the committee found a “disparate and uneven adult skills landscape” and recommended a new “skills co-ordination board” to check that mayors were delivering on national priorities.
SEND neglect
Specialist colleges should receive a one-off capital grant to repair their estates and receive ringfenced funding in the future. These recommendations follow evidence from Natspec, the specialist colleges body, which also convinced the committee to recommend that the post-16 SEND policy brief be switched from the schools minister to the skills minister.
The committee said: “This split in ministerial responsibility has led to the neglect of FE SEND policy, as well as inefficiencies, limited accountability and policy fragmentation.”
Hayes’ committee published its ‘solving the SEND crisis’ report last week, which described post-16 students as “overlooked” and “rarely seen” as a funding priority.
In addition to dedicated capital funds, today’s report repeats last week’s report’s call for an extension of local authorities’ statutory duty to provide home-to-college transport to 16 to 25 year olds.
Clare Howard, chief executive of Natspec, said: “Too often SEND in general, and specialist colleges in particular, have been an afterthought in FE policy or completely overlooked, but in this report the committee has truly listened to concerns and embedded SEND provision within their thinking on FE and skills reform.
“It is now vital that the Department for Education takes these recommendations on board to deliver the fundamental change that is needed to build a genuinely inclusive and effective skills system for all.”
Clare Howard (left)
Small T, please
Committee MPs were also troubled by the “concerningly” high dropout rate of T Level students and “persistent” problems of employer involvement.
T Levels are the government’s flagship two-year technical and vocational qualification for 16-18-year-olds, which are equivalent to three A Levels.
“If T Levels are to become the ‘gold-standard technical qualification’, the government must urgently address a number of challenges,” the report said.
DfE should consider establishing smaller “modular” T Levels, equivalent to one A Level, which would allow students to mix and match academic and technical subjects.
The report also called for a “national awareness campaign” to promote T Levels, despite an FE Week investigation revealing more than £12 million had already been spent on PR and marketing campaigns since the qualifications launched.
A further FE Week investigation last week found underspending on an ambassador scheme meant to boost awareness of the qualification.
The committee also said applied general qualifications should be retained for the long term, and schools should be properly measured on their compliance with the Baker clause.
Resit options
Today’s report comes ahead of a long-awaited curriculum and assessment review, led by Becky Francis, which ministers are relying on to determine the future of the controversial GCSE English and maths resit policy.
The report laid out long-standing challenges with the government’s condition of funding requirement that students aged 16 to 18 who have not attained a grade 4 in GCSE maths and/or English must resit the exams.
The policy is “not serving its purpose”, the committee said, after hearing that “over 80 per cent of those who did not achieve grade 4 at 16 still are not achieving that grade by 19.”
The committee recommended introducing three options for those students.
Route A would direct students who have a “realistic” prospect of passing, based on their GCSE results and prior attainment, should be supported to resit their exams.
Route B would involve embedding maths and English content in FE courses that have been “rigorously quality assured”. This would allow those students to be considered exempt from resits.
Route C would direct students who are considered unlikely to pass despite multiple resits should be offered a chance to instead take on a functional skills qualification in maths or English.
Education committee recommendations in full
To note: Since the report was written, responsibility for skills policy, apprenticeships, adult education, and the agency Skills England has moved from the Department for Education to the Department for Work and Pensions. None of the proposals below were costed.
Skills England
Hold the agency to account through annual accountability sessions (although Skills England ownership has now passed to the Department for Work and Pensions)
By June 2026, the government should review whether the CEO’s have been graded at the right level of seniority in the civil service to have the right level of cross-government clout
Data and information on skills gaps and training outcomes should be available through a centralised platform, available by June 2026
An independent review of Skills England should report by June 2027, and, if required, new laws should give the agency full independence
Devolution
“Appropriate” 16-19 education and training programmes should be devolved to strategic authorities through the government’s current English devolution and community employment bill
A “more comprehensive skills devolution” programme should be trialled
Local skills improvement plans (LSIPs) should be audited and reviewed to see if they can more easily link to other skills initiatives, and complex networks of relationships between providers, employers, local government and Skills England can be rationalised
The government’s youth guarantee should be extended from 18-21-year-olds to 16-24-year-olds
A new skills co-ordination board should be established by Skills England to monitor devolved authorities to check they are delivering national priorities and “consistency of effectiveness”
Post-16 qualifications and pathways
DfE should publish an annual report detailing levels of Baker clause compliance in schools and consider whether the threshold for intervening on schools that don’t comply should be lowered
Regional “portals” should link to UCAS to create information and application options for vocational courses, including apprenticeships. This should mean standardising apprenticeship applications and give learners more information about their options
There should be a national awareness campaign to promote T Levels
DfE should consider “overhauling” the T Level transition programme
Smaller, modular T Levels should be introduced so students have the option of blending academic and technical education
Applied general qualifications should be retained for the long term
Communications and planning for future qualifications reform should be improved “to avoid uncertainty and disruption” for providers and students
The level 3 qualifications reform programme should be evaluated
English and maths
DfE should “take action” to improve English and maths attainment in schools
Three options should be available to students and apprentices who don’t achieve a grade 4 pass in GCSE English and maths at age 16:
Students with “a realistic prospect” of achieving a grade 4 should be supported to do so
Certain “vocational” courses should be exempt from the resit rule by building in relevant English and maths content
Those “very unlikely” to secure the grade 4 despite multiple resits should be taught functional skills qualifications
Apprenticeships
SMEs should have access to a dedicated support service with “streamlined” application and reporting systems by April 2026
By June 2027, the levy should be simplified for SMEs
Foundation apprenticeships should be expanded to hospitality, retail and care (health and social care is already an option)
Levy funding for level 7 apprenticeships should be reinstated for the eight industrial strategy growth sectors
Student support services
DfE’s target of 100 per cent coverage of mental health support teams by 2029 must include all post-16 students
Children and adolescent mental health services “must improve”
DfE should fund a 16-19 student premium for those in receipt of the pupil premium
“Local authority-level data” should be used to identify areas where attainment is below national averages
SEND
Post-16 SEND policy should be moved from the schools minister to the skills minister
DfE should “consider” extending the statutory duties on local authorities to provide home-to-college transport to 16-25 year-olds
Under-22s should receive free bus travel and all 16-25 SEND students should have access to a local authority travel training programme
Care-experienced students
Specialised support should be available for care-experienced students transitioning from secondary school to further education or training settings
Data covering care-experienced students’ pathways and attainment through education and employment should be monitored
Teachers
DfE should create a statutory pay review body for colleges with a commitment to closing the pay gap with schools by 2029
Recruitment and retention challenges should be addressed by incentives covering mainstream and specialist colleges
There should be a trades-to-teaching strategy
Funding
Per-student funding for all post-16 education should be increased based on “a detailed assessment of need
Colleges should be exempt from paying VAT
Skills England should work out the resources needed to meet demand for adult education and accordingly “advocate within government for increased funding”
Adult education must remain “a vital tool for social inclusion, personal fulfilment and lifelong learning” at the DWP
Capital funding should also be increased, with options for temporary expansions to cover the demographic bulge
College capital programmes should be extended to include specialist colleges and sixth form colleges
Specialist colleges should receive a one-off grant for urgent repairs, and should have access to a ring-fenced high needs fund
Principals of 76 colleges have been warned they face formal trade disputes with their teachers unless they agree to pay and workload demands by the end of next week.
The University and College Union (UCU) wrote to the principals of 76 colleges on Friday demanding a 10 per cent or £3,000 pay rise for their members, a statement in support of binding national bargaining and actions to tackle high workload.
The letter, seen by FE Week, gives colleges until 10am on Friday, October 3, to agree or face a formal declaration of a trade dispute.
The threat follows the Association of Colleges’ (AoC) recommendation last week that colleges offer their staff a 4 per cent pay award in 2025/26. But AoC admitted “many” colleges would struggle to afford it.
Recent funding increases for colleges have been routed through 16-19 funding streams, so colleges that focus on adult education and/or apprenticeships will see little, if any, extra cash.
Unlike in schools, colleges set their own pay awards, and the AoC’s annual recommendation is non-binding. The 4 per cent recommendation matches the agreed pay award for school teachers, therefore maintaining the pay gap between the sectors rather than closing it.
In its letter, UCU said: “It is unacceptable that, following years of pay restraint, UCU members should be expected to continue to see falls in the real value of their pay, must manage excessive workloads and suffer the consequences of failed national bargaining arrangements.”
The union restated its pay claim from April, demanding the 76 colleges agree to a 10 per cent pay award, or £3,000, whichever is greater.
Colleges should also commit to “meaningful action on workload,” including nationally agreed limits on teaching hours, class sizes, and evening and weekend work, alongside commitments to recruit more support staff and set boundaries around when staff can be contacted outside of working hours.
The union warned that unless colleges also commit publicly to binding national pay bargaining, “the dispute will commence and continue until resolved to UCU’s satisfaction”.
Autumn of discontent
UCU general secretary Jo Grady said last week: “College leaders now have a clear choice; make a serious offer or the sector will be hit hard with industrial action this autumn.”
When announcing its 4 per cent recommendation, the AoC urged unions to join a “united” campaign for “sustained investment” in adult education.
Gerry McDonald, AoC employment policy group chair and CEO of New City College, said: “We understand that many colleges will find it challenging to meet our recommendation, particularly where they have large numbers of adult learners and apprentices. Sustained investment is essential if we are to meet our aspiration for an appropriately rewarded workforce.”
[Update 25.09.25: This article was updated to reflect 76 colleges were at risk of dispute as UCU included The Heart of Yorkshire Education Group on the list in an “internal error”.]
Every year, the United Nations’ International Day of Peace invites us to pause, reflect, and recommit to building a more harmonious world. This year, that invitation feels especially relevant.
We are living in what many call a VUCA world, marked by volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity. From global conflicts to economic instability, from the polarisation of politics to the rise of culture wars, young people are growing up in a context that can feel fragmented and divisive. As educators, we cannot shield them from this reality but as we can give them the tools to navigate it with hope, resilience, and purpose.
At Kirklees College, our response has been to place our values at the heart of our work. When I spoke to students and staff across our seven centres to mark World Peace Day, my message was simple: peace begins here, with us. It does not live only in international treaties or speeches at the UN. It lives in the everyday acts of kindness, respect, and understanding that we choose to show one another.
Our three values of kindness, unity, and excellence are a framework for meeting VUCA with courage. Kindness helps us deal with volatility by grounding us in empathy. Unity gives us strength in the face of uncertainty, reminding us that we are stronger together. And excellence enables us to thrive amid complexity and ambiguity, by striving to do and be our best even when the path forward is unclear.
To bring these values to life, our student experience department launched our KC Campaigning for Kindness, a social action challenge.This initiative encourages students and staff to take small but meaningful actions: fundraising, supporting local projects, donating, or simply showing everyday kindness. These acts may be modest, but together they form a counterbalance to the forces of division.
We have also invited students to capture images of what peace means in their classrooms.
These photographs will be displayed across our centres as a visual reminder that even in uncertain times, peace is something we can create and sustain in our daily lives.
Further education is uniquely placed to go beyond preparing students for employment. We can prepare them to be citizens who can withstand uncertainty, embrace diversity, and build bridges where others build walls.
As the late MP Jo Cox so memorably said, “We have far more in common than that which divides us.”
In an age defined by volatility and division, that belief has never been more vital.
Peace, ultimately, is not the absence of conflict but the presence of connection.
Pat McFadden will seek to use his new powers over skills policy to curb “wasted potential” from youth unemployment and cut the government’s growing benefits bill.
Details of the major shift in ministerial control over skills policy were confirmed earlier this week when prime minister Sir Keir Starmer revealed that training, adult further education, careers, apprenticeships and Skills England have all moved to the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP).
Writing in this week’s edition of FE Week, the work and pensions secretary said adding skills to his department’s responsibilities would give it a “renewed energy and focus”.
He argued skills and employment are “natural partners” – so DWP-run jobcentres should be able to go beyond “just support or help” with job searches, and also offer skills assessments and “clear routes” to training and employment.
McFadden said his “first priority” would be getting more young people into work or training, to prevent “lost opportunity, unused talent and wasted potential”.
Skills England
Sector leaders have welcomed the skills shift as an example of “more cohesive policymaking” but warned the upheaval risked distracting ministers and officials.
Skills England, a new executive agency set up by education secretary Bridget Phillipson and launched in June, was the latest component to be confirmed as moving departments after FE Week revealed apprenticeships would be shifted last Friday.
Speaking as the Skills England news broke during a business and trade committee inquiry, co-chief executive Sarah Maclean said the move “really makes sense”.
It took the government 11 months to officially launch the body – which was a manifesto pledge – after its general election win last year.
Association of Employment and Learning Providers CEO Ben Rowland said: “Bringing Skills England under DWP creates a real opportunity to join up the support that gets people into work with the skills that help them move up through the labour market.”
Potential complications
The prime minister’s statement earlier this week came with confirmation that higher education and pre-19 further education and careers policy would remain at the Department for Education.
When asked whether the anticipated post-16 education white paper would be delayed by the governmental change, a DfE spokesperson directed FE Week to Jacqui Smith’s interview last week in which she said publication is “forthcoming”.
Other skills policy areas which could present complications for the two departments include careers advice, degree apprenticeships and occupational standards, which are the DWP’s responsibility but inform technical qualifications run by the DfE.
Ben Houchen, Conservative mayor of Tees Valley, said moving the skills brief to the DWP appears logical “in principle” as it should “make it easier to support people into work”.
However, he added: “What ultimately matters is how the DWP approaches this and whether they are prepared to have a more positive mindset towards devolution than the DfE ever has done.”
What’s the plan?
The work and pensions secretary is leading the government’s Get Britain Working strategy to increase employment, reduce the number of people out of work due to poor health or low skills, and lower the number of young people classed as not in education, employment or training (NEET).
The stakes are high, with more than 900,000 young people estimated to be NEET and Universal Credit spending forecast to rise 10 per cent to £99 billion in the next five years, according to the Office for Budget Responsibility.
In media interviews since his appointment, McFadden has said he would “expand” access to skills training, ask DWP officials “tough questions” about their youth NEET strategy, and be “more ambitious” in helping the young people into jobs – including those with mental health issues.
He believes better links to skills and training will turn jobcentres into a “springboard to better futures” in sustainable jobs – but has yet to confirm how it will be done.
During a visit to Waltham Forest College, McFadden praised its sector-based work academy programme (SWAP), a jobcentre-coordinated scheme running across England that offers unemployed people a short programme of work coaching, DfE-funded training and work experience.
However, questions remain about the success of SWAP programmes, used by around 200,000 jobseekers during the last two financial years.
HMRC data suggests only about 40 per cent of participants begin to earn money after completing a SWAP, and a DWP evaluation found that individual earnings averaged at about £1,400 more per year than if they had remained on Universal Credit.
So far, the government’s Get Britain Working strategy has involved a £240 million programme to launch a series of pilot “trailblazer” initiatives, funded by the DWP and managed by regional mayors, to test new approaches to curb youth NEET rates through a local “youth guarantee” and offering unemployed adults extra health support and training.
Moving skills to the DWP is an opportunity to ensure that adults accessing publicly funded education are those who face the “largest barriers” to employment, experts told FE Week.
The department’s control over apprenticeships is also another opportunity to reverse declining start numbers among young people, in line with Labour’s election pledge to guarantee training, an apprenticeship, or help to find work for all 18 to 21-year-olds.
Naomi Clayton, chief executive of the Institute for Employment Studies, said jobseekers have not historically had access to free training, particularly essential skills which are “so important and valued by employers”.
She added that programmes that combine personalised support and training for specific sectors have been “really effective” at helping both the unemployed and employed people who want to progress.
Ben Willmott, head of public policy at the CIPD, said bringing skills and employment together under the DWP was a “positive step” towards more cohesive policymaking that could “address skills shortages, tackle economic inactivity and boost UK growth”.
He added: “A more ambitious approach is needed to genuinely expand opportunities and rebalance the system in favour of young people, including an apprenticeship guarantee for all 16 to 24-year-olds.”
The SoS for Skills
Pat McFadden has been at the heart of national Labour politics since the 1990s, starting out as a speechwriter and adviser to party leader John Smith before joining the team shaping Labour’s 1997 general election manifesto alongside the likes of Alastair Campbell and Peter Mandelson.
He was a Downing Street adviser to Tony Blair before getting elected himself in 2005 as MP for Wolverhampton South East, a seat he’s held continuously since.
He pledged to be a “champion of learning and opportunity” in his maiden speech in the House of Commons.
McFadden quickly rose through the ranks in the final years of the last Labour government. He was made a junior minister in the Cabinet Office in 2006, then promoted to minister of state in the then Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform in 2007.
That department became the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) in 2009 where McFadden helped to steer the ‘skills for growth’ white paper.
He advocated expanding apprenticeships, measuring skills policy by employment outcomes rather than qualifications, backed skills accounts and credited Train to Gain as helping “more than one million employees get on in work”.
By October 2010 McFadden had returned to the backbenches and served on the parliamentary treasury committee until 2014 when he rejoined the front bench as shadow foreign office minister.
McFadden has been a close ally of Keir Starmer and chancellor Rachel Reeves, serving as Reeves’ shadow chief secretary between 2021 and 2023 before leading Labour’s preparations for government.
After last year’s election win, Starmer made McFadden his chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster before appointing him to run an expanded DWP this month.
Though Team UK did the country proud in Herning with its haul of six medals, its 15th place in the medal table was its lowest in recent years. Anviksha Patel spoke to WorldSkills UK to find out why the UK went backwards
In the hours after the EuroSkills closing ceremony last weekend, Team UK’s competitors were determined to return to training and “go for gold” at next year’s global competition in Shanghai.
But despite the positive attitudes, there was no hiding from the fact that 15th place ranked Team UK alongside Luxembourg and Slovakia in the table of 33 competing countries.
WorldSkills UK chief executive Ben Blackledge hailed his competitors’ “mature approach” after winning a bronze and five medallions for excellence, but revealed some rival countries selected more experienced competitors in Denmark.
“The amount they’ve learned and the amount of people on the flight saying, ‘we want to go home and train’, it was really positive,” he said.
“But we knew that we were going up against more experienced competition.
“Reflecting on that, it makes me really proud of their performance, but we always want to do better.”
Blackledge explained EuroSkills has grown in size and prestige since its launch in 2008, meaning the quality of competition has risen.
EuroSkills is the first international pressure test for many members of Team UK and forms the first part of WorldSkills UK’s two-year competition cycle, so it is not the pinnacle of competition for the UK, unlike some other European countries.
“We always go in knowing that we’ve got competitors who are relatively new to our programme. And this year, we’ve got some training managers who are also new.
“There is always a tension between performance and learning.
“We’ve got to make sure that we’re still close enough to achieving gold, silver and bronze, but also we are the only European country that has a Centre of Excellence.
“We’re the only country that is looking at how to use medals for more than prestige.”
As he looks ahead to WorldSkills Shanghai, the chief executive faces a tough financial outlook.
Funding from the Department for Education has declined year on year and WorldSkills UK now raises more from commercial income than it receives from government grants. Last year the DfE cut its grant by 15 per cent to £5.7 million.
Blackledge said the charity aimed to grow commercial income through “cash and value in kind” via industry-leading specialist training and cutting-edge equipment.
“There is more work for us to do around the collective employer voice, because looking at Germany and Switzerland and Hungary, they have strong chamber engagement and government and industry partnerships are backing their work,” he added.
But Blackledge hailed skills minister Jacqui Smith’s visit to Team UK last week which he said provided a “real boost”.
“There is absolutely value in having public support for the work we’re doing,” he said.
“We want to get Number 10 and Number 11 more involved and say, WorldSkills UK is part of our growth strategy and flying the flag for the UK.”
Blackledge added that whilst there was no prospect of extra money from the government, there was value in being embedded in policy and strategy.
Among the criteria to achieve ‘exceptional’ for participation and development in the new Ofsted inspection toolkit is a reference to “having internal and external competitions”.
Being a member of the WorldSkills UK Centre for Excellence, and having learners take part in WorldSkills UK competitions, was also listed as a selection criteria in the recent bidding round for construction technical excellence colleges.
Meanwhile, skills minister Smith hinted at “support for WorldSkills” in the upcoming post-16 white paper.
