A review of the UK Commission for Employment and Skills has been launched by the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS).
The commission’s performance is under the spotlight in the consultation, opened this week to close on Friday, March 14.
It looks at how people view the role of the commission, its impact and success, among other things.
A spokesperson for the Association of Employment and Learning Providers confirmed it would be taking part in the survey having spoken to members first.
He told FE Week: “We wish to see the commission using partnership approaches to advance its proposals, working across the sector with employers and providers.
“Its proposals for skills and employment programmes should also integrate with mainstream delivery.”
The review takes place every three years as part of a regular government examination of publicly-funded bodies, “with the aim of increasing accountability for actions carried out on behalf of the state”.
Charlie Mayfield
In the consultation document, published by BIS, the commission’s role is defined as providing labour market intelligence, helping to “generate greater employer investment in skills” and “to maximise the impact of changed employment and skills policies and employer behaviour to help drive jobs, growth and an internationally competitive skills base”.
It is chaired by Sir Charlie Mayfield, chairman of the John Lewis Partnership, who leads 29 commissioners drawn from employers and skills organisations, including Skills Funding Agency interim chief executive Barbara Spicer and Eastleigh College chief executive Tony Lau Walker. It employs around 100 staff in South Yorkshire and London.
The commission’s budget from BIS was £66.1m in 2011-12 and £70.1m the following year. Its current BIS budget was set at £66.4m.
The survey asks respondents how well it is achieving its mission and to define what they believe the commission’s role to be, and whether its functions overlap with any other organisations.
It also asks in which areas people think the commission has the most impact, in which areas it has the least, whether there is anything it should do more or less of, and if there is anything it should stop doing altogether.
The consultation document further asks if the commission will be affected by the possible decline of Sector Skills Councils, which will not be funded after next month, and if there were any other bodies which could do the work the commission does, such as local government or charities.
The results of the consultation will feed into the overall review.
The commission and the Association of Colleges declined to comment.
Former beautician Jaqueline Butler had a career rethink after redecorating her house. Two years later, and with level one qualifications in building, plastering, and painting and decorating under her belt, she’s planning to launch her own construction business, writes Paul Offord.
“Construction is a lot like beauty,” says Jaqueline Butler, “you start with a blank canvas and create something.”
The grandmother-of-four is well-qualified to make the comparison having earned a living as a mobile beautician, along with part time barmaid, before turning her hand to the building trade.
After raising six children and being unemployed for three years, Jaqueline was looking for a new challenge and found it in the form of a level one plastering course at Birmingham Metropolitan College.
The 46-year-old had decided to start redecorating her five-bedroom house and enjoyed tiling the bathroom and kitchen and painting the living room so much that she was inspired to retrain.
She passed level one courses in bricklaying and painting and decorating and now has four weeks to go on a plumbing course.
She said: “As soon as my children were old enough to look after themselves, I thought: ‘Right, it’s time for me to do what I want now and the courses have brought me a lot of satisfaction’.
“I was the only woman on my bricklaying course but all the men were very supportive. It was really nothing to worry about and we all got on with learning our new trade together.”
Jaqueline plans to use her new skills to launch a building and decorating business.
She said: “Now that my children have grown up, I’m determined to do something with my life and this is a great start on the road to getting an end result.
“If my business ever took off I would only want to employ women.
“I think there would be a niche for female builders and decorators, as most of the ladies I know have told me they would feel more comfortable if a woman came into their home to do work.
“Maybe this kind of work could do with a woman’s touch anyway. I like whatever I work on to be beautiful, whether that’s building a wall or putting up wallpaper.”
Jaqueline said her children Matthew, aged 28, Marie, 26, Martin, 26, Melissa, 22, Daniel, 21, and David, 20, and grandchildren Kierna, seven, Cassias and Calib, both three, and Tayon, two, were all proud of her achievements.
She said: “My family are all chuffed to bits and proud of the skills I have learned.
“I’m looking at what I can do with my plumbing skills next. I would like to install an en-suite bathroom by my bedroom at some point.
“I like to do things properly with whatever I do, and take a lot of pleasure from seeing a project go from the planning stage to me actually completing it myself.
“My courses have allowed me to do all sorts of extra work around the house — for example I built a lovely brick wall in my back garden and plastered my hall.”
Tony Holder, construction lecturer at Birmingham Metropolitan College, said: “Jaqueline has been like a mother figure to all of the lads who were studying with her.
“She shows great patience and takes her time over her jobs and I’m really pleased that she has successfully passed her qualifications.”
Cap: Jaqueline Butler building a wall and, inset, showing off her trowel
Students from Bromley College of Further and Higher Education heard a talk from an author who lost her father, aunt and two brothers to Huntington’s disease.
Deborah Goodman wrote the book Hummingbird about her experiences since childhood of Huntington’s.
She described to social cae students how her father, aunt and two brothers were diagnosed and eventually died from the disease — which is a hereditary and degenerative disorder for which there is no known cure.
The lecture finished with a question session about dying with dignity and Lord Falconer’s Assisted Dying Bill, which advocates relaxing the law on assisted suicide.
Deborah said: “This was a great opportunity for the students to get a personal account of how the hereditary disease can devastate families.”
Psychology lecturer Stephen Elworthy said: “Deborah talked with great honesty about her personal experiences of Huntington’s disease and assisted dying, both very emotive subjects. Our students were touched by her openness and inspired by her story.”
Cap: Deborah Goodman with students Emma Foley, aged 18 (left), and Jade Drake, 17
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.
