The funding of courses to help foreign people speak English is currently organised through three ‘entry’ levels. Stephen Hewitt explains the difficulty this is causing and sets out his view of how the situation could be remedied.
The excellent paper, Esol (English for Speakers of Other Languages) Qualifications and funding in 2014: Issues for consideration, by the National Research and Development Centre for adult literacy and numeracy for the Association of Colleges describes very clearly and concisely the problem with funding Esol courses.
It says there isn’t an “average” learner and, more importantly, there isn’t an equal spread of learners at different levels in any given provider.
This means that the “average” funding given to us through the Skills Funding Agency’s (SFA) Matrix cannot work and that those losing out are the ones with the furthest to go — those with little schooling in their first language, who haven’t grown up with the Roman script, who have been in the UK for a good while developing coping strategies to survive.
The current Esol qualifications were almost the last thing to be sorted out when the Matrix of funding rates was implemented at the start of this academic year — a sign perhaps that the SFA couldn’t construct a fair and equitable way to fund this vital provision.
If a qualification isn’t going to get Ofqual approval, the awarding organisations won’t develop it and, as it currently stands, it’s unlikely the SFA will fund it
This means we end up in a situation where Esol funding clearly doesn’t work this year and we need a transitional factor to smooth out the large differences between the methodologies.
Development on the new QCF qualifications is very slow to the point where it seems unlikely they will be ready for delivery in September. This suggests there will be another year of fudge, transition and arguing.
I think we could fit Esol into the Matrix. The only problem is I don’t think we can do it and continue to rely exclusively on the Entry one, Entry two, Entry three model.
For Esol to work on the Matrix we need to split all three Entry levels into two chunks, so (to use the NRDC terminology) “slow lane” learners can take two years over each level. This would make so much sense. They could be 15 credit certificates with programme weighting to match Entry maths (I know this seems unlikely, but this is an ideal future I’m imagining here) so we could take around 150 hours to teach them, which sounds a lot more like how we were funded up until this year.
Esol learners literate in their own language, with a background in the Roman script, could go straight to the “second half” of the qualification (I’d strongly advise against the very complex diagnostic information NRDC suggests including in the ILR, providers should be trusted to do the right thing on this).
The problem with this Utopian vision is Ofqual. It will only approve qualifications at Entry one, Entry two or Entry three, not a halfway point between them.
If a qualification isn’t going to get Ofqual approval, the awarding organisations won’t develop it and, as it currently stands, it’s unlikely the SFA will fund it.
Now, while a re-write of the National Literacy Standards to correct this might be the best solution, I’d suggest this will take longer than we have.
But maybe the new Skills Funding Statement recognises this problem? Certainly that’s one way of reading Paragraph 21, where it states: “We recognise the relevance of non-regulated provision for some learners. We will continue to fund this provision when we are assured that it is of high quality and supports progression to enable learners to access qualifications or, where a qualification is not appropriate or available, supports the learner towards a meaningful outcome, including preparing for and entering employment.
“For 2014/15, the SFA will make clear the categories of non-regulated provision it will fund. More generally, the Vocational Qualifications Reform Plan will consider whether funding qualifications is suitable for all learners, or whether an alternative approach to funding may be more appropriate.”
Is this a get-out clause? Something signalling the removal of the “80/20” rule (where providers weren’t meant to deliver more than 20 per cent non-regulated Skills for Life)?
If we can fund “slow lane” learners through this method and only put them on qualification-bearing aims when we think they are ready, is this an acceptable solution to the tricky problem of the Matrix?
Stephen Hewitt, strategic funding, enrolments and examinations manager, Morley College
Putting employers at the heart of FE and skills reform gives it an air of authority under the current political climate. Mick Fletcher looks at the differing viewpoints that could be taken on this theme.
All the headlines about the long-awaited Skills Funding Statement were understandably about the 19 per cent cut to adult FE funding and the climbdown on loans for older apprentices.
Tucked quietly away, however, was the announcement that a vocational qualifications reform plan would be published early this year.
Those who have been around for some time will have received the news with a heavy heart — governments have been announcing reforms to vocational qualifications since well before the current skills minister was born, and the sector’s resulting turbulence compared with the stability of the academic route is a major cause of their poor public standing.
Two things can be said with near certainty about the forthcoming plan.
It would be more accurate and productive to stop talking of employer ownership and talk instead of social partnership
One is that it will promise to put employers in the lead, or in the driving seat, or at the heart of the reforms — they always do.
The second is that like all its predecessors it will fail. It is worth spending a few moments reflecting as to why.
The core of the problem is that employers and government mean different things by employer ownership.
For government, it means taking away power from providers and giving it to employers.
For employers, it means taking away power from government with a capital G.
Employers don’t make fine distinctions between colleges, civil servants and quangos like Ofqual — they are all government and they all need to be rolled back.
Whitehall, on the other hand, is happy to take power away from almost anyone — colleges, local authorities, universities or the European Union. It just doesn’t want to give up any of its own.
Take for example the employer ownership pilots.
Neither employers nor government (and still less the UK Commission for Employment and Skills, which dreamt them up) sees any benefit in announcing their failure.
They are doomed to succeed despite the flimsiest of track records to date.
Yet talk to employer representatives off the record and they will complain mightily that all their efforts and initiatives have been frustrated — they have been drowned in red tape.
Civil servants on the other hand will describe in similar terms how they have laboured ceaselessly to inject common sense and logic into incoherent and sloppy proposals.
This is not a marriage made in heaven but at best a marriage of convenience.
The same tension can be seen at work in the proposals for apprenticeship reform.
Employers are nominally in the driving seat ‘ensuring’ that the new standards that will replace frameworks are based on and reflect their needs — but at the same time government insists on a minimum duration, requires that assessment should come at the end, specifies that apprenticeships should be graded and legislates that apprentices must take a level two test in English and maths even if employers say it is not needed in their sector.
None of these requirements are necessarily wrong, indeed many would strongly support them.
What is wrong is that current skills policy is founded fundamentally on a deceit.
Government not only pretends that employers are in charge when they are clearly not, but it tries to justify the pretence by marginalising other legitimate voices — providers, assessment organisations and trades unions to name but three.
It would be more accurate and productive to stop talking of employer ownership and talk instead of social partnership; to recognise the inherent tensions in skills policy and seek to reconcile them through negotiation rather than sleight of hand.
This after all is what happens in those countries that we profess to admire, Germany, for example, and Switzerland.
The alternative is that two or three years down the road yet another government will announce yet another reform of vocational qualifications with, yet again, employers at its heart.
Six months after the government revoked regulations requiring that teachers at colleges and independent learning providers be qualified, FE Week reporter Freddie Whittaker looked at whether providers now had their own requirements in place.
At least 94 per cent of England’s colleges and independent learning providers (ILPs) will only take on qualified teachers or staff working towards qualifications six months after the government removed legislation, an exclusive FE Week survey has suggested.
The government scrapped the statutory requirement for teachers, lecturers and tutors in FE to obtain Qualified Teacher Learning and Skills (QTLS) and Associate Teacher Learning and Skills (ATLS) qualifications in September.
The move followed a review of professionalism in the sector by Lord Lingfield and in effect removed the national guarantee for FE and skills learners that their teachers were qualified.
Speaking at the time, he said it would “help free the FE sector from unnecessary regulation and bureaucracy and enable it to take responsibility for its own professionalism”.
From left: Jean Kelly, IfL director of professional development, David Russell, chief executive of the Education and Training Foundation, and Ian Pryce, principal at Bedford College
Throughout the review and afterwards, the Association of Colleges was supportive, with a spokesperson saying: “It is appropriate that the type and level of qualification for different staff should be determined by the college.”
And now an FE Week survey of some FE colleges and ILPs picked to give geographical spread, has suggested that most still require their teachers be qualified, or train up to a specific level in their first few years of work.
Of the 19 providers that responded to the survey, 17 required unqualified teachers to work towards a qualification within a given timeframe and one said it simply did not employ unqualified teaching staff. One provider declined to comment.
There was no response from the remaining nine that were contacted. The results would indicate that at least 94 per cent of providers will only take teaching staff already qualified or working towards qualification.
The results have been welcomed by the Institute for Learning (IfL), which still encourages teachers to gain qualifications on the job.
Jean Kelly, IfL director of professional development, said: “It is encouraging to learn from the FE Week survey that most providers would employ unqualified teachers only if they were working towards achieving a teaching qualification in a given timeframe or not employ them at all.
“This stance is perhaps a positive legacy of the 2007 regulations, which led to an increasing proportion of teachers in FE being qualified — by 2011, around 80 per cent of college teachers were qualified and 19 per cent were working towards qualification.
“This was reassuring for learners, parents and employers, and we sincerely hope that the trend continues, in spite of the government’s policy reversal.”
She added: “We persistently make the case, backed by evidence, for teachers and trainers across FE and skills to have teaching qualifications.
“Most teachers in FE train to be teachers on the job, and before the 2007 regulations were revoked, new entrants to teaching had a year in which to complete a very basic introductory award for teaching, and five years to gain the certificate or diploma.
“The latter timescale was originally devised with part-time teachers and trainers in mind, and most people can achieve this within three years.
“We support colleges and providers insisting that new teachers achieve teaching qualifications within two or three years, and that all teachers undertake continuing professional development in their subject or vocation as well as in teaching methods, to ensure that young and adult learners receive the highest possible quality of education and training.”
The revocation of the government’s teacher qualification requirement was said to pave the way for the role of the Education and Training Foundation.
A spokesperson for the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills said last year the foundation, “would define and promote professionalism in the sector and ensure the availability, scope and quality of initial teacher training. It is for individual institutions to decide what teaching qualifications are appropriate for their particular situation.”
He added: “The highest quality of teaching is paramount to the success of each college and we trust FE institutions to employ those they believe to be best qualified for the job.”
Foundation chief executive David Russell told FE Week he thought it was “rarely a good idea” to have “an absolutely hard and fast rule” on teacher qualifications.
He said: “My own position is that you want the considerable bulk of your teaching workforce to be qualified. Whether it necessarily makes sense to say that absolutely everyone must always be qualified from day one, I would say it’s rarely a good idea to have an absolutely hard and fast rule.”
He said he recognised people were divided on the issue, and said he had heard from college principals who called for clear regulations and others who said it should be up to them to make sure teachers were of the right standard.
Among those in the latter camp has been Ian Pryce, principal at Bedford College where unqualified teaching staff are employed only if they work towards a qualification.
“We don’t agree that qualifications should be a matter for government, we want to see teachers take charge of their profession, and allow employers to be free to set their own policy in this area,” he told FE Week.
“This approach will lead to a more effective and more responsive system. Professional qualifications should denote excellence and not be just a hurdle.”
A BIS spokesperson said: “Colleges and other FE providers determine which qualifications they want their teachers to hold, and how they achieve them. This is in line with the government’s policy of freedoms and flexibilities for the sector.
“The new diploma in education and training is set to become the minimum standard for all new teachers in the sector. All providers and potential teachers are free to decide how this initial teacher training is to be achieved either before or during employment.
“We remain committed to supporting the sector to recruit appropriately qualified teachers and up-skill existing teachers.”
“Our policy at B&FC is that teaching staff are all required to hold the appropriate qualifications.”
Chichester College:
“We are happy to employ unqualified lecturers if they hold the appropriate knowledge needed to meet the requirements of the teaching delivery.
“We would expect all lecturers to undertake a full teaching qualification equivalent to a certificate in education or PGCE within a specified timescale once they have joined us.
“The specific details regarding obtaining teaching qualifications are currently under review by the Professional Development and Teacher Education teams but the proposed timescale for completion of the full qualification is three academic years from joining the college.”
Cornwall College:
“We expect teachers to be appropriately qualified in the subject they are teaching, and be qualified to teach. Both requirements will depend on a mixture of experience and qualifications.
“For teachers in a full-time teaching role we normally expect post holders to hold or be working towards a certificate in education, PGCE or equivalent. In other roles, teachers and trainers are expected to hold or be working towards other relevant teaching and training qualifications.
“We contract staff to undertake their teaching qualifications, once in employment, within a two-year period, if they do not already hold them. The exception to this is specialists who work very few hours.”
Exeter College:
“Selection procedures are rigorous and include assessment of teaching ability, vocational knowledge and interpersonal skills. Any appointed person undergoes a Disclosure and Barring Service check before they are able to work unsupervised with students. We ensure that these members of staff receive the relevant in-house teacher training at our cost (for a certificate in education or Preparing to Teach in the Lifelong Learning Sector (PTLLS) qualification) and also have timetable remit to support them to become qualified.”
Gloucestershire College:
“Despite the change in legislation, we still require all teaching staff to achieve a teaching qualification. In order to support this, we provide financial assistance of between 50 and 100 per cent
remitted time as well as mentoring support.”
Hull College Group:
“Our policy is to advertise for vocationally-qualified and competent staff who will typically hold a relevant qualification at the level above which they will be teaching. In respect of teaching qualifications, this is listed in all lecturing role descriptions as an essential criterion
to be appointed or to achieve within two years of appointment.”
Leeds City College:
“We are currently looking at our policy with regards to teaching staff having to obtain an appropriate teaching qualification. As part of our commitment to an outstanding provision of teaching and learning, we want all relevant staff fully qualified to the required level or working towards an appropriate qualification.”
Manchester College:
“We expect all our teachers to be professionally qualified, however in certain curriculum areas unqualified applicants may be appointed to teaching posts because they have the right vocational expertise and knowledge, and through the selection process demonstrate characteristics of good teachers.
“Successful applicants will then be required to gain a teaching qualification within an agreed time period. The college will support them to achieve this through the college’s own teacher education provision.”
Newham College:
“Our position is that all academic teaching staff are required to have a full teaching qualification, or to undertake one within two years. This is monitored at executive board level.”
Sunderland College:
“Lecturers are required to hold a relevant teaching qualification as identified on appointment. If appointed subject to gaining a relevant teaching qualification they will remain on the unqualified points of the salary scale until such time this has been achieved.
“It is expected they will gain a relevant qualification within two years of appointment or within an agreed timescale. In the event they fail to secure requisite qualifications within the period specified on appointment
the college may terminate employment.”
Jobwise Training operations director
James Pearson: “In general we do require our tutors already hold teaching qualifications, however if they move into a teaching role from a non-teaching role or they have previously been a teaching assistant that has shown an interest in progressing into a full-time teaching role, we would then put them through the relevant teaching qualifications.
“We are not opposed to training up our own tutors, it’s just a case of finding the right person and having enough resource to support them.”
Prospects Learning Foundation chief executive Neil Bates:
“We require all new staff to have a Diploma in Teaching in the Lifelong Learning Sector (DTLSS) within two years of starting with us.
“Until they achieve this they are associate instructors and then move to qualified instructor status. We also have an advanced practitioner status which normally requires a certificate in education or QTLLS.”
The Education Innovation conference and exhibition takes place in Manchester on Thursday and Friday. Here, speakers Bob Harrison and Pauline Odulinski give insights into their talks at which Skills Minister Matthew Hancock is expected to appear via videolink.
Employers tell us they want learners to be better prepared to enter the working environment.
Whether a small enterprise with a team of less than ten, or a FTSE 100 company, organisations need employees with work skills who can problem solve, communicate effectively, use initiative and be flexible.
They also need employees who can use, develop and be creative using the right equipment for the job, and who can effectively operate modern technology in its many forms.
As key providers of people to the workforce, and as employer needs evolve at an ever more rapid pace, the education and training sector recognises it has a duty and responsibility to build effective relationships with employers to understand their technological wants and needs.
The sector recognises it has a duty and responsibility to build effective relationships with employers to understand their technological wants and needs
Many young people are of course already adept at using and indeed creating technology but, given the speed at which it is evolving, we need to ensure they all have the skills not only to comfortably use it, but to innovate and progress alongside it.
With the right support, encouragement and nurturing, young people can take their skill and capability to a new level in partnership with their teachers, instructors and the business community.
The sector recognises the need to horizon scan, in partnership with employers, to lead the development of relevant long term learning strategies, to integrate employers further into curriculum design and development, and to ensure that the FE and training workforce has the up to date skills needed to equip learners effectively.
What is now needed is support for the sector to engage with employers to develop strategic leadership with a clear focus on how to ensure learners have a great, interesting, innovative learning experience and also are able to operate in the competitive global market.
At the Education and Training Foundation we are about to commission work which will provide an opportunity for the sector to develop innovative projects that support the development of FE workforce skills to enhance learning with the effective use of technology.
It is pleasing to see the government is also serious about investing in these skills through Feltag and the Education Technology Action Group (Etag), and the foundation has committed to be a part of this at the highest levels.
Together, we have a key role to play in making technology work for employers.
Pauline Odulinski OBE, interim director of leadership, management and governance, Education and Training Foundation
Harrison’s talk, Findings of Feltag — The way forwards for FE and technology, is due to take place on day one of the conference at 1.10pm. It is expected to take place in the Blue Seminar Room, sponsored by FE Week, at 1.10pm with Professor Pauline Odulinski, OBE, due to take part in the subsequent panel debate on the Findings of Feltag and its Implications for FE. Mr Harrison is also expected to speak on day two, at 10.20am in the Green Seminar Room, on Whose curriculum is it anyway? A critical look at the development of the new national curriculum and the challenges that schools and teachers face. Bob Harrison’s talk, Findings of Feltag — The way forwards for FE and technology, is due to take place on day one of the conference at 1.10pm. It is expected to take place in the Blue Seminar Room, sponsored by FE Week, at 1.10pm with Professor Pauline Odulinski, OBE, due to take part in the subsequent panel debate on the Findings of Feltag and its Implications for FE. Mr Harrison is also expected to speak on day two, at 10.20am in the Green Seminar Room, on Whose curriculum is it anyway? A critical look at the development of the new national curriculum and the challenges that schools and teachers face.
Like many young people given power and responsibility early in life, National Union of Students (NUS) vice president for FE Joe Vinson certainly comes across as old beyond his years.
But there remains a hint of the naivety that led to an unwise tweet he sent soon after he was elected one of the youngest parish councillors in the UK at the age of 18.
A member of the St Agnes Parish Council, he posted on Twitter: “Living in Cornwall is really getting to me. Can’t wait to move away in September.”
It hit local media headlines and some may think the lesson should be that you never undermine — or even appear to undermine — your supporters. But that’s not quite how Vinson sees it.
“I don’t particularly do regrets,” he says, “but I think I learned a lesson that you can’t always express how you feel in 140 characters.
“I think it was really easy for people to target someone who was young and really quite fresh-faced in politics, and I think that’s a shame.
“I don’t regret tweeting it, but I certainly regret how it was interpreted.”
He adds: “I really enjoyed talking about my local area and representing the people who felt they hadn’t had a voice for a long time on the parish council.
“There were a lot of old men in the room and I think that skewed the way we had debates a lot of the time.
“I think a lot of people didn’t respect me as much as they should have in those meetings because of my age and thought I was irrelevant to them and I think that’s one of the reasons local politics gets very stale.”
But if ballot box popularity is anything to go by then those “old men in the room” could do a lot worse than take note of Vinson’s example.
I don’t think anyone in the sector ever gets their own way, and I think that’s a good thing
Aged 20, he has already been an elected member of the UK Youth Parliament, a parish councillor, the president of Cornwall College’s students’ union (SU) and has held his full-time post with the NUS since June last year.
So far, he has followed faithfully in the footsteps of current NUS president Toni Pearce, who also held the president role at Cornwall before him before taking up the FE brief at the NUS and then taking the very top job.
Inset Vinson: with a mascot for Cornish baker and popular pasty maker Rowe’s
But he is adamant he has no intention of challenging her.
Sitting, without a hint of irony, at Pearce’s desk at the state-of-the-art NUS offices in Gray’s Inn Road, near London’s King’s Cross, Vinson is relaxed and happy to talk about his rise to the upper echelons of the student movement, and how it all started in a tiny village on the north coast of Cornwall.
After an education at St Agnes Primary School and the Richard Lander School in Truro, he decided to go to Cornwall College. It was, he says, an odd decision for alumni of his school.
“It was interesting because there was an FE college next to my secondary school where about 90 per cent of students went — but I chose not to go there,” says Vinson.
“I was quite taken with the idea of going somewhere that was completely new and was a bit alien to me.
“There were a few reasons I guess, mostly because I wanted a fresh start. I had just come out as gay, so I wanted to reinvent myself a little bit.
“That was important to me, although I don’t think I realised that at the time. But also the biggest thing for me was that the college I went to had I thought a much better approach to education and had a students’ union which was much more active politically.”
His interest in politics stemmed from his election to the UK Youth Parliament at the age of 14, and he joined the Labour Party at a similar time.
Four years later, he would run for the sabbatical position of Cornwall’s SU president as he studied for A-levels in biology, sociology, politics and law.
He soon discovered that representing 40,000 students at different locations across a 65-mile expanse of countryside— and without a car wasn’t easy. Understandably, transport for learners became a campaign issue for him.
He says: “I had an office which I worked at the most close to my home, but that wasn’t the HQ of the college so I spent a lot of time at other bigger campuses and trying to get to the small ones as and when possible.
“In the first year I didn’t have a car, so there was a lot of getting up at 6am and getting on the train to places I didn’t know existed.”
In the end, it was an interest in national policies that made Vinson run for an NUS role, and he said the FE sector had been very receptive during his first seven months in post.
He says: “I have never felt alienated particularly in the sector, but whether or not we get our own way is very different from whether or not we feel we are being listened to.
“I don’t think anyone in the sector ever gets their own way, and I think that’s a good thing. We definitely change the debate quite a lot and the narrative of what goes on around education.”
He says he has a good working relationship with ministers and departments, but doesn’t seem afraid to dish out criticism. One example is over government plans to cut funding for 18-year-old learners.
He says: “I think cuts to funding are always a bad idea. I think this has been handled
really badly, because the sector didn’t necessarily see it coming and I think it was very much an ad-hoc move the government realised it had to make.
“What I think was disappointing was that I think government thought it could get away with saying they could target it at 18-year-olds and nobody would realise or pick up on the fact that funding for colleges would go down overall.
“What you can’t do is take 17.5 per cent of the resources away from an 18-year-old in a classroom sat next to a 17-year-old. What it means is that everybody loses out and I am disappointed government felt that was the natural place for them to go.”
But it is uncertain whether Vinson’s history as an elected official will lead, as it inevitably does for many people, to Parliament or another career in politics. He is more than willing to admit he is uncertain about the future.
He says: “I really enjoy working for the NUS, really enjoy staying around in the FE sector. I have managed to enjoy the fruits of FE and the debate which goes around it for a long time.
“As to where I go next I don’t know,Vinson adds: “I think university is a fabulous experience. It’s not something I have done or will ever do, but it’s beneficial for students to know what all their options are.”
I haven’t read a book since I joined the NUS, but I do like reading. The last book I read, which is probably my favourite, is One Day, by David Nicholls
What is your pet hate?
I don’t like it when people don’t listen to me
Who would you invite to a dinner party?
I would probably invite the Queen because I think she is quite funny in real life, but you never get to see that. The secrecy of the royal family fascinates me. I would quite like to invite Russell Brand to talk about his views on political apathy. I would also invite somebody like Nye Bevan, because to pick his brains would be a real privilege. And my mum
What do you do to switch off?
I am addicted to soaps. It used to be just Eastenders, which only got heightened by living in the East End. But now I’m into Coronation Street as well
What did you want to be when you grew up?
I remember telling my dad I wanted to be a QC, although I wasn’t really sure what that meant at the time. That changed to being a doctor, and now I have no idea
The Education Innovation conference and exhibition takes place in Manchester on Thursday and Friday. Here, speakers Bob Harrison and Pauline Odulinski give insights into their talks at which Skills Minister Matthew Hancock is expected to appear via videolink.
My grandchildren are six, four, three and one.
They are fortunate enough to have been born in England, with all the educational opportunities that this country expects and provides for its children. They will leave school between 2025 and 2029.
Having spent most of my career working in further, adult and vocational education and training I would like them to have the choice to attend a local FE college.
But will they want to and will there be a college in their community?
Unless we have a significant paradigm shift in the way we invest in, and utilise fully, digital technology I am worried the answers to the above questions will be no and no.
Some may think I am alarmist, but as I spend a lot of time in schools and with young people and have been heavily involved in the reform of the ICT curriculum in schools, am vice chair of governors at a college, as well as having read many horizon scanning reports as part of my Further Education Learning Technology Action Group (Feltag) work, I am concerned.
We need to develop some ‘paradigm pioneers’ who will challenge the current analogue mindset which permeates the culture of FE and skills policy and practice at all levels.
We have ‘institutional analoguism’ which threatens the very future of FE.
That is why the successful implementation of the Feltag recommendations is critical to the survival of the FE system in which I have spent most of my working life.
The Feltag report and recommendations are expected to be published by Skills Minister Matthew Hancock at the Education Innovation conference.
And my prediction for the education of my grandchildren is that they will leave school with no paper, no pens or pencils, no chalk or whiteboards.
They will have no hard copy text books, no libraries, no desks or desktop PCs and no written exams.
They will expect touch screen technologies, voice to text and text to voice software, learning analytics (not that they will know what they are), personalised learning, virtual and augmented reality, immediate formative feedback and on-screen summative assessments.
It is probable they will be wearing their computers and will expect to access learning whenever and wherever they want to learn and be assessed.
The relationship between the learner and the teacher will be fundamentally different to what it is today.
That is why the Feltag report recommendations are crucial to the future of FE.
The six workstreams which formed the focus of its work were horizon-scanning; investment and capital infrastructure; regulation and funding; workforce capacity; employers; and, learners.
These should form the platform for the recommendations to the minister.
Mr Hancock will then have the opportunity to respond either in ways the government can intervene directly or indicate where other agencies/bodies have a direct responsibility or in some cases where government needs to act to remove some of the obstacles which currently inhibit innovation.
Of course it is not just a case of government actions that are important and there are other players who are passionate about the role of technology enhanced learning in FE and skills.
The UfI charitable trust has recently agreed to fund a Vooc (Vocational open online course) for those working in vocational, further and adult education to help them increase their confidence and capability using digital technology and social media to improve access to and support of learning.
The trust is acting as a catalyst by funding several projects predicated on the findings of its Scaling Up report.
But if policy-makers, providers, funding agencies, governors, principals, employers, regulatory and assessment bodies, among surely others, take on board recommendations and implement them teachers will be allowed the space to creatively use digital technologies to enhance learning and assessment.
Then there is a chance my grandchildren will have the choice of a local FE provider.
Bob Harrison, vice chair of governors at Barnsley’s Northern College, a Feltag member and education adviser at Toshiba Information Systems (UK)
Bob Harrison’s talk, Findings of Feltag — The way forwards for FE and technology, is due to take place on day one of the conference at 1.10pm. It is expected to take place in the Blue Seminar Room, sponsored by FE Week, at 1.10pm with Professor Pauline Odulinski, OBE, due to take part in the subsequent panel debate on the Findings of Feltag and its Implications for FE. Mr Harrison is also expected to speak on day two, at 10.20am in the Green Seminar Room, on Whose curriculum is it anyway? A critical look at the development of the new national curriculum and the challenges that schools and teachers face. Bob Harrison’s talk, Findings of Feltag — The way forwards for FE and technology, is due to take place on day one of the conference at 1.10pm. It is expected to take place in the Blue Seminar Room, sponsored by FE Week, at 1.10pm with Professor Pauline Odulinski, OBE, due to take part in the subsequent panel debate on the Findings of Feltag and its Implications for FE. Mr Harrison is also expected to speak on day two, at 10.20am in the Green Seminar Room, on Whose curriculum is it anyway? A critical look at the development of the new national curriculum and the challenges that schools and teachers face.
Dame Jackie Fisher has defended new employer Barnfield Federation amid claims it got £1m of government funding for learners it had no record of teaching…
Dame Jackie Fisher has defended new employer Barnfield Federation amid claims it got £1m of government funding for learners it had no record of teaching.
Within days of Dame Jackie taking over as chief executive of the Bedfordshire-based federation last week, it emerged official reports in which the claims were made had been passed onto police.
A Hertfordshire Police spokesperson said it was looking into “what, if any, crimes have been committed”.
There is much to do but we are all working hard and pulling together to rapidly put in place our plans for improvement.
But Dame Jackie, who notoriously kicked Ofsted out mid inspection two years ago while she was chief executive of NCG (formerly Newcastle College Group), told FE Week: “I am very pleased to have been invited to be chief executive of the Barnfield Federation.
“There is much to do but we are all working hard and pulling together to rapidly put in place our plans for improvement.
“There are excellent activities taking place in the college and the academies and we continue to focus on providing excellent educational experiences for all young people.”
The reports with officers had been drawn up by the Skills Funding Agency (SFA) and the Education Funding Agency, who had both investigated the federation, which includes Barnfield College, after allegations of financial mismanagement and grade massaging.
Dame Jackie Fisher
The funding agencies’ findings have not been made public on advice from police, according to a government spokesperson on behalf of the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills and the Department for Education.
She said: “This investigation has now concluded and the reports have been passed to the police. The police have advised us not to publish the reports until they have concluded their assessment.”
However, the BBC claims to have seen the SFA report, saying the number of hours of learning claimed by Barnfield did not match registers, meaning the college was overpaid.
The claim for 16 the 18-year-olds was therefore reduced by £464,176 and by £477,000 for the adult skills budget.
The Hertfordshire Police spokesperson said: “We are assessing the reports but at this point in time an investigation into a crime has not begun. We are at this point assessing what, if any, crimes have been committed.”
Interim chief executive Dame Jackie, who led NCG to three outstanding Ofsted grades plus one at good, replaced interims Helen Mayhew and Stephen Hall who stepped in after federation founder and director general Sir Peter Birkett left in August.
He later became chief executive of GEMS Education, but quit the international school operator late last year with the funding agencies’ probes under way, saying: “In order that this issue does not become an undue distraction for my colleagues and the work of GEMS Education I have decided to resign from my position.”
The college was also visited by the FE Commissioner David Collins last month, and his report is due soon. In a letter to Labour’s Luton South MP, Gavin Shuker, Skills Minister Matthew Hancock last year said the commissioner would review the federation leaderships’s “capacity and capability” to bring in “financial control improvements within an acceptable timescale”.
A spokesperson for the federation, which according to its website, also includes four academies and a free school, declined to comment on the agencies’ reports.
Sir Peter has been reported in local media as declining to comment until the reports were published.
Ms Husband, national education manager at McDonald’s Restaurants Ltd UK, will fill the shoes of David Way, who stepped down as director of the Skills Funding Agency’s apprenticeship division in August.
Stewart Segal, chief executive of the Association of Employment and Learning Providers, told FE Week: “I think it’s great that someone from an employer background has been appointed to this role. We look forward to working with her.”
Martin Doel, chief executive at the Association of Colleges, said: “We are pleased to see someone with a solid grounding in education and industry taking the lead in this important area of delivery.”
Ms Husband was in charge of training at employer provider McDonald’s when it received a grade two rating from Ofsted, in November 2010, following its only inspection to date.
The agency paid McDonald’s £10.5m in 2010/11, £6.8m in 2011/12, and £5.1m in 2012/13. Its current allocation is £10.1m from 16 to 18 apprenticeship funding and the adult skills budget. Learndirect is a subcontractor allocated £4m.
Christine Doubleday, deputy executive director of the 157 Group, said: “It is interesting to see someone from a private commercial background appointed to this role. We look forward to continuing our work with the National Apprenticeship Service [NAS] under Sue’s stewardship.”
Lindsay McCurdy, chief executive of Apprenticeships4England, said: “I think this is a very positive appointment. It is going to be a steep learning curve for her, as it will be very different from McDonald’s, but maybe having someone come in from a business background will shake things up for the better.”
The agency had put the director of apprenticeships and delivery services role out to advert in December with a £100,000 a-year salary.
Ms Husband is expected to have responsibility for the delivery of employer engagement and the NAS. According to the job advert, she will have “an outward-facing role … promoting the benefits of apprenticeships to employers and embedding the new relationship between the agency, employers and providers”.
She started at McDonald’s in 1987 when she was 16 years old and studying for her A-levels. She worked her way up through the company from serving customers and working in the kitchen to being appointed head of education in 2007.
An agency spokesperson said: “We can confirm that Sue Husband will be taking up the post of director of apprenticeships and delivery service later this year.”
Nobody from McDonald’s was available for comment.
