– Schools, colleges and independent learning providers fail to enrol learners on English and maths

– 35,000 16 to 19-year-olds without pass didn’t go back to studying the subjects, representing loss of up to £150m to FE

– New exemption from ‘condition of funding’ granted to some and others keep the cash

 

Newly-appointed Shadow Skills Minister Gordon Marsden has called for an urgent review after the Department for Education (DfE) watered down a key 16 to 18 English and maths funding rule.

Mr Marsden, who was confirmed in the post on Friday (September 18) and previously served in the role under former Labour leader Ed Miliband for three years, hit out after the DfE said it would not fully apply the condition of funding in relation to last academic year.

The rule states that any 16-18 student that does not have a grade C in English and maths and fails to enrol in the subjects would be removed in full from the 2016/17 funding allocation.

However, the Education Funding Agency (EFA) confirmed this week that the penalty would be halved. And even then it will now only apply to providers where more than 5 per cent of relevant students (by value) did not comply with the funding condition.

The announcement came in light of data showing that 3 per cent of 16 to 19-year-olds without at least a grade C in GCSE English and maths attending an FE institution did not continue their study of the subjects.

The DfE did not specify how many learners this equated to but according to FE Week research, around 35,000 learners did not meet the condition, representing a potential loss of earning to the sector of up to £150m.

“This particular process and set of requirements has clearly caused problems for providers across the sector,” Mr Marsden told FE Week.

“The belated EFA recognition of this by partially relaxing them may have staved off some of the immediate difficulties.

“But Ministers must urgently now ensure there is a process that’s more simple and transparent for providers while delivering the strong strategy for English and maths which learners need.”

The condition of funding emerged from Professor Alison Wolf’s 2011 review of vocational education in which she recommended that 16 to 18-year-olds who do not have at least C grade for English and maths should keep studying the subjects.

The recommendation was brought in as part of her study programmes package for 2013/14, and made a condition of funding the following year.

Stewart Segal, chief executive of the Association of Employment and Learning Providers, said: “Some programmes have to be focused on work readiness and providers need the flexibility to deliver the right programme.

“Providers have responded to this new requirement so we hope those specific circumstances will be taken into account in any funding adjustment.”

David Corke, director of education and skills policy for the Association of Colleges, said: “This funding condition has been a major challenge for colleges as it would mean a financial penalty if 100 per cent of students do not take GCSE English and maths.”

James Kewin, Sixth Form Colleges’ Association deputy chief executive, said: “We welcome this move, but believe our members have stepped up to the plate in terms of condition of funding.”

A DfE spokesperson said 16-19 English and maths learners had gone from 53 per cent in 2012-13 to 97 per cent in June 2015, with the rule having been introduced a year ago.

“Ministers have decided not to impose the full planned funding reductions from the 2014/15 academic year.”

---

 

Editor’s comment

EFA gets a grade D

The English and maths condition of funding was introduced a year after Study Programmes began.

So school sixth forms, colleges and independent learning providers had time to prepare.

Despite this, we estimate in 2014/15 there were 35,000 learners worth £150m that should have been studying English and/or maths, and weren’t.

The EFA’s softening of the condition represents an inevitable consequence of so many providers failing to implement the rule.

And it is a condition which only gets tougher, as providers have to stick with the GCSE option this year if learners have a grade D.

This is a failure on the part of the EFA to enforce its own policy, as well a minority of providers that have let their learners down.

More broadly, the climbdown is a blow to fairness and the principle of providers being treated equally.

It also adds yet more complexity to the funding allocations process.

For these reasons the EFA gets a policy implementation grade D, making a retake inevitable.

Chris Henwood

FE Week editor

chris.henwood@feweek.co.uk

Burton & South Derbyshire College (B&SDC) is set to leave the Association of Colleges (AoC), FE Week can reveal.

A spokesperson for the college, which received a grade two Ofsted rating in December 2011 and was allocated £6m by the Skills Funding Agency as of July, said it would not be renewing membership this academic year, but declined to comment further.

AoC membership fees, which its spokesperson said were based on “total income of a college from the previous year” and ranged from £1,886 to £47,323 last year, coincide with academic years.

The AoC website listed 246 general FE colleges, including B&SDC, 82 sixth form colleges, and 21 specialist colleges as members on Thursday (September 24).

An AoC spokesperson declined to reveal whether any other colleges would also not be renewing membership, but said: “We invite members to renew their subscriptions [which will increase 1 per cent for 2015/16] at the beginning of each academic year and it is for each individual college to decide whether they join us.”

It comes as the results were announced on Thursday (September 24) of the long-awaited Gazelle membership review, in which its annual membership fees had been slashed from £35k to £15k.

But along with the membership fee price cut, it was also revealed that the number of college members had more than halved in just over a year from 23 to just 10 — with three of its five founder college members among those to have left. It comes after FE Week reported last summer how Gazelle had raked in around £3.5m from colleges in membership and other fees since launching around the start of 2012. A key criticism was that no return on investment (ROI) analysis had been carried out by Gazelle to justify the spending of public money amid shrinking budgets — and the results of the membership review do not indicate any plans for an ROI assessment.

Nevertheless, Gazelle chair Stella Mbubaegbu, principal of continued Gazelle member Highbury College Portsmouth, said Gazelle “needed to change in order to better reflect the financial pressures facing colleges”.

Meanwhile, the 157 Group, which formed in 2006, is also undergoing a “strategic review” set to be completed by December.

Chief executive Ian Pretty tweeted on Thursday (September 24) that it was “focusing on productivity and devolution as key drivers”.

Membership of the group, which cost £15,000 for 2013/14 according to Companies House, has fallen from its peak level of 30, to 26. Among those to have left were Lewisham Southwark College and City of Liverpool College.

 

Further education is set to come under the spotlight with the House of Commons Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) Select Committee having announced a new inquiry into “the digital economy”.

Committee chair, and Hartlepool’s Labour MP, Iain Wright told FE Week that he wanted to look at, among other issues, government actions to ensure the availability of a workforce with the skills to support businesses in the digital economy.

Mr Wright said: “I have a broad ambition to look at the FE and skills sector in detail in the upcoming evidence sessions.

“We will be looking into apprenticeships related to digital skills in the session and we will review the current apprenticeships provided, and how they could be improved.”

He added: “Apprenticeships are of key importance in the digital skills sector of FE and we want to know how traditional businesses are continuing and progressing in this new digital economy.

“Newly qualified plumbers, for instance, should be able to engage with their local FE provider and be able to expand their business on forms of social media in a flexible and fast changing way.”

The inquiry was launched on Monday, September 21, and the committee is seeking written submissions addressing digital skills issues, among others.

Evidence sessions are yet to be announced, as are witnesses, but Mr Wright said he also wanted to look at the role of the government and its record in helping to produce a skilled workforce for the digital sector.

“I want to really push the government to find out what they will do to make sure apprentices and FE students have the skills to support businesses in the digital economy,” he said.

The committee will also be covering how businesses can utilise digital infrastructure to improve their performance and address the lack of women studying science, technology, engineering and maths (Stem) subjects in FE.

He said: “Women in Stem will be a key part of the discussion as we want to know what we can do to get more women involved in it.”

The committee further intends to pick up on the issues raised in the report on digital skills from the House of Lords select committee chaired by Lady Morgan in February.

It emphasised the importance of training and education to keep pace with the constantly advancing technological field.

Mr Wright said: “The key message I have about the upcoming digital economy inquiry is that I really want to encourage a bold and ambitious investigation and want an array of people who care about digital skills to contribute and share their ambition for the sector.”

The development of digital skills is one of six strands off inquiry for the committee. It will also be looking at the following:

1 – What are the major barriers to UK business success in the digital economy? What steps could the Government take to help businesses to overcome these barriers?
2 – How effective are UK financial markets in supporting the digital economy? What actions could the Government take to improve their effectiveness?
3 – What lessons can be learned from the Government’s support of tech start-ups and other measures targeted at the digital economy? How is this developing around the regions and nations of the United Kingdom?
4 – Does the UK’s Intellectual Property regulatory regime provide effective protection for the digital economy and sufficient scope for innovation and competition?
5 – What actions could the Government take to foster the development of potentially disruptive technologies? Are further safeguards warranted to help existing businesses adapt to the impact of these technologies on their traditional business models?

“Digital technology is rapidly changing the economic landscape in which firms operate. Nothing short of a digital and tech revolution is taking place, with new entrepreneurs and business models emerging and existing businesses having to adapt quickly to keep pace,” said Mr Wright.

“There are huge opportunities for competitive advantage for UK firms, but also real challenges.

“The BIS Committee wants to evaluate existing initiatives by the Government and to consider what other actions the Government might take to enhance the UK digital economy.

“We want to hear from all those interested and involved in this area, whether you are a tech entrepreneur ambitious to start a business or  a company in an established part of the economy hoping to use digital technology to improve your business, so we can help ensure that the UK is at the forefront of the global digital economy.”

The closing date for submissions to the BIS digital economy inquiry is Thursday, October 29. Click here to send in submissions.

Blackburn College has found itself at the centre of a Twitter storm after a user was sent an abusive message by one of its learners who also made a rape threat.

Abby Tomlinson, who describes herself on the social media site as a Labour Party member and leader of the #milifandom group of fans of former leader Ed Miliband, claimed that she was trolled by Andrew Nicholson on Twitter yesterday (Tuesday).

She complained to the college that Mr Nicholson, who says on Facebook that he began studying criminology and criminal justice at Blackburn College in 2013, posted sexist abusive messages including “rape threats”.

In response, the college tweeted: “The college does not tolerate abusive or indecent behaviour. Please be assured that we have formally dealt with the incident.”

A college spokesperson told FE Week this afternoon that it “became aware of the incident on Tuesday evening and have dealt with it as a matter of urgency”.

The spokesperson added that students were “aware through the tutorial and guidance provision given by the college that social media should be used responsibly, and where it brings the college into disrepute formal disciplinary action will be taken”.

The college did not say what action it had taken against Mr Nicholson.

Ms Tomlinson later tweeted: “The moral of this story is, that the things you say on social media, like those you say irl [in real life], have consequences.”

After being criticised for his behaviour by a number of other Twitter users, Mr Nicholson tweeted: “I didn’t threaten to rape the milifandom girl”.

He claimed a tweet from his account in which the rape threat was made was not directed at Ms Tomlinson, but admitted sending her an abusive message in which her boyfriend is mentioned.

Two Midland colleges that are already in a federation have sped up plans to merge on the advice of FE Commissioner Dr David Collins after he saw how their recurring deficits were hitting finances.

Dr Collins visited North Warwickshire & Hinckley College in May and South Leicestershire College the following month over concerns about the colleges’ finances.

The two colleges claim to have made significant improvements in quality alongside cost savings since forming a federation in 2013.

However, these savings have not kept pace with the scale of funding reductions, leading to Dr Collins’ visit, Marion Plant (pictured above), principal of both colleges, told FE Week.

“Quality is good. Financial improvement has not been quick enough,” she said.

Ms Plant said the two colleges had been planning to merge for some time, and that the commissioner had endorsed these existing plans.

“What the commissioner is saying is that there are further benefits, both financial and in terms of simplicity of running a business, for merging,” she said.

The merger is expected to take place by the end of the current academic year, subject to approval.

In his report, which has yet to be published, the college claimed that Dr Collins said: “Since the Federation, the college [South Leicestershire College] has made rapid progress in success rates for both classroom and apprenticeship learning”.

*The commissioner’s reports on both North Warwickshire & Hinckley and South Leicestershire, along with letters from Skills Minister Nick Boles (North Warwickshire & Hinckley and South Leicestershire), were published on Tuesday, October 27, 2015.

North Warwickshire and Hinckley College, which has around 12,000 learners, had a pilot inspection under the new Ofsted framework in January, and was rated ‘good’, according to the college. Ofsted has declined to reveal the results of pilot inspections. In its last published inspection report, in 2012, the college was also rated as ‘good’.

South Leicestershire College, which has around 8,000 learners, improved its rating from ‘requires improvement’ to ‘good’ in its last Ofsted inspection, which was carried out in November.
North Warwickshire and Hinckley College governors’ board chair Dr Peter Lavender OBE said: “We are looking forward to a future as one combined college that will be good for local people and financially stable.”

Toni Fazaeli, governors’ board chair at South Leicestershire College, said: “The financial environment is tough, but the college has a robust recovery plan and is making good progress. We anticipate being in financial surplus by the end of the academic year.”

The Department for Business, Innovation and Skills declined to supply a copy of Dr Collins’ inspection report ahead of its publication, while Ms Plant said the colleges did not have a hard copy to give.

 

The government has rejected calls to make employers subject to proposed new laws aimed at preventing “misuse” of the apprenticeship brand and will continue to allow such ‘in-house’ programmes to take less than a year, it was revealed today.

The Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) in July put forward plans to outlaw providers using the term ‘apprenticeship’ or ‘apprentice’ for any course or training in England that does not meet the same rules that apply to the government-funded programme.

Its three-week consultation on the proposals ended on August 19 and drew more than 90 responses, a number of which called for the proposals to also cover employers offering their own ‘apprenticeships’ without government funding.

Such employers had been exempted under the proposals and even firms running internal ‘apprenticeship’ programmes with government funding not specifically for the official scheme were outside the plans.

But today’s government response to the consultation rejected calls to make these employers, unlike providers, subject to the same rules that apply to providers and employers running BIS-funded apprenticeships — such as the 12-month minimum duration.

“While the government has considered expanding this measure to employers it feels that the potential costs of doing so would outweigh the benefits,” it says in the BIS response document.

“There are many employers that offer high-quality apprenticeships of their own and we do not want to prohibit this practice, nor do we want to put in place any measures that could be perceived as burdensome or put off employers from offering apprenticeships.”

Courses can currently be marketed as apprenticeships despite either not being funded by the government, or being government-funded under a different programme. Such courses do not have to meet strict rules that apply to government-funded apprenticeships, like the minimum duration. The government is happy to let employers continue doing this, but wants providers to stop.

And so providers who run courses labelled as apprenticeships that do not meet BIS rules on the official programme will face the shame of an appearance at the local Magistrates’ Court along with a fine under the new rules.

In its response, the government said: “It is our current intention that the local weights and measure authorities will enforce the offence. The Secretary of State, or others with the consent of the Director of Public Prosecutions, may also take enforcement action.”

It added: “We have considered a number of other options as an alternative to legislating (for instance trademarking the apprenticeship brand). On balance, we did not consider that these would be sufficiently effective in addressing the risk of other training programmes being misrepresented as high-quality apprenticeships.”

However, “the majority of responses were supportive of the aims of the legislation,” according to the 13-page response document, which said the new rules would be appearing in the Enterprise Bill.

But it was also revealed that around 60 per cent of respondents (82 in total responded) to one of the questions said there would be unintended legal consequences as a result of implementing the new rules.

“One respondent was concerned that those employers that run their own non government-funded apprenticeships would be affected and would have to change the format and content of their existing training programmes,” it said in the response.

“The government recognises that many of these in-house schemes are of a high quality and does not wish to prohibit employers from this practice which is why we are proposing to only including training providers in the scope of this legislation.”

It added: “A couple of respondents raised the issue of how the proposed legislation would work alongside the new apprenticeship levy. The government launched a consultation about the levy on August 21, 2015, which closes on October 2 and will consider this issue further as the levy proposals are developed following the consultation.”

There was also concern over providers using the label ‘pre-apprentice’ to describe non-apprenticeship training in a bid to attract young people.

In response, the government said: “The provider will be able to state that the training could lead to an apprenticeship provided that it is clear that what is on offer at that stage is not an apprenticeship itself.”

A supplementary cost analysis states that, “the government estimated the cost to businesses of complying with the legislation to be no more than £0.11m”.

It adds: “Lost profit due to restricting previous marketing strategies estimated to be negligible.”

Skills Minister Nick Boles said: “Everyone knows what a university degree means. It’s an official title. Young people doing apprenticeships should get the same level of distinction.

“I’m supporting working people by defining the word ‘apprenticeship’ in law. This will ensure people get the best training and opportunities.”

Newly-appointed Shadow Skills Minister Gordon Marsden has told how FE’s “funding crisis” was among the first issues he will look at having been returned to the sector by new Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn.

Mr Marsden, who previously served as Shadow Skills Minister under Ed Miliband for three years, also said he wanted to tackle “the continuing lack of comprehensive joined up thinking across the Department for Education (DfE) and Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS)”.

“I am very pleased to be returning to cover skills issues as a Shadow Minister at a critical time for FE,” he told FE Week in his first media interview since his reappointment.

“I am looking forward to having in-depth conversations across the sector about people’s concerns on how government ministers are handling the funding crisis and about the continuing lack of comprehensive joined up thinking across DfE and BIS.

“Instead of an obsession with micromanagement of process FE and Skills needs to see focus on progression and a strategy to inspire and energise both teenage and older learners and those in training right across the sector.”

Mr Marsden, who was the subject of an FE Week profile article in March 2013, was previously Shadow Skills Minister from May 2010 until October 2013, when he was succeeded by Liam Byrne, MP for Birmingham Hodge Hill, who stepped down last week.

But he was handed Mr Byrne’s BIS shadow brief and also the DfE shadow brief last held by John Woodcock, to more closely align the Labour role to that of Skills Minister Nick Boles. Mr Marsden will now therefore answer, as reported by FE Week on Friday (September 21), to both Shadow Business Secretary Angela Eagle and Shadow Education Secretary Lucy Powell.

Born in 1953, Mr Marsden grew up near Stockport in Cheshire, and attended Stockport Grammar School before heading to New College, Oxford to study Modern History.

He then went on to postgraduate studies at Harvard University in the US, as a Kennedy Scholar in politics and international relations. He edited History Today magazine for 12 years and was an Open University tutor before being elected MP for Blackpool South in 1997.

During the Labour government Mr Marsden served as Parliamentary Private Secretary to a number of different Secretaries of State, including Tessa Jowell, then Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport.

Prior to his reappointment as Shadow Skills Minister, Mr Marsden had been Shadow Transport Minister from October 2013 to September 2015.