Diana Laurillard, chair, Association for Learning Technology

Diana Laurillard, 65, is a woman on a mission. The Institute of Education’s professor of learning with digital technologies wanted to be a university lecturer when she was a teenager and achieved that ambition by the time she was just 25 years old.

And, she concedes: “That’s too soon to achieve your life’s ambitions. You need to be older than that, certainly mid-forties at least, or it leaves you in a position where you’ve got to reinvent yourself and say ‘who am I?’ and find a new mission in life.”

Fortunately, she didn’t have long to wait. As a research assistant at Southampton University in the early 1970s, Laurillard was shocked by the abilities of her students.

“All these students had passed A-levels or equivalent in order to get on to the course, but they just didn’t understand mathematics,” she says.

“So that was the beginnings of a mission — how can you can go through all that teaching and learning, pass exams, but not understand maths and not love it?”

Laurillard’s career seems to have been driven by this mission to improve teaching, first for her own students. While trying to help that initial class at Southampton, she stumbled upon some BBC resources for the Open University.

“I discovered they had some great television programmes on mathematics, where they used graphical computer simulations of, for example, the limit of theorems in four dimensional geometry — things that were really hard to understand,” she says.

When I got to decimals, I couldn’t make any sense of what they were saying”

“They were really great, so I’d use them in lectures — but that got me interested in the idea of what you can do with computers and teaching.”

Laurillard went to the university’s computer department and asked if it could develop some simulations of its own.

“It was in the days of computing where you would hand a bunch of printed cards and paper tape for a program, then wait a week and it would come back with ‘syntax error’ or something,” she explains.

“So asking ‘could we please do some computer simulations?’ was not a good question.”

But, undeterred, Laurillard took a job with a national development programme for computer-assisted learning. It was a move down a career path that would lead to a pro-vice chancellor’s post at the Open University and also one of civil servant.

“The way I thought about it was I would spend two years making simulations, then I’d be able to go back to my university and be the maths teacher I really wanted to be,” she says.

“However, the world isn’t like that and although we did create some great graphical simulations, we then got more and more into the business of saying ‘how could we develop it further? How can we take it into other subjects?’

“So I never went back to teaching, I will do. When I retire one day, I’ll do something like that.”

Laurillard’s love of maths stems from her childhood. “I was the kind of child who would do IQ tests for fun. I liked being the first one to finish in a class — I just enjoyed it so I did it naturally,”  she says.

But she does recall one instance when she struggled with maths, which has, she says, been important throughout her career.

“When I got to decimals, I couldn’t make any sense of what they were saying,” explains Laurillard.

“I realised the reason I was struggling so much was the metaphor I was taught of moving the decimal point when you multiply by 10. I thought ‘why?’ and there was no good answer.

“It’s a very misleading metaphor, because the decimal point is the one thing that doesn’t move, so it’s sort of setting you off on the wrong track in how you model what’s going on.”

These teaching techniques, she says, are geared towards getting students to get the right answer to the question in front of them, rather than understand the underlying maths.

“You can see that time and again in the way kids talk about maths. They will parrot some rule without having a clue what they’re talking about,” she says.

“So that was a good experience for me, because most of the time in school I had no problem with it.

“It’s a problem for a maths teacher if you can’t relate to the way your student is thinking — you’ve got to listen to the way the student talks about it.”

The idea of listening and explaining is something Laurillard says she carried over to raising her own children Amy, aged 29, and Anna, 26.

“They’re great arguers and this can be a problem, but our whole child-rearing process was about negotiation, making an argument for your case — we very rarely had to tell them what to do,” she says, proudly.

Laurillard married Brian Butterworth, professor of cognitive neuropsychology and University College London, in 2010 — even though the couple have spent almost 46 years together.

“I never would have gone for marriage at all, because I distrusted it and disliked the whole thing,” she says.

“I’m of that disposition — terribly unromantic,” she says briskly.

“Every romantic film ends with marriage. If it begins with marriage, then it’s a romantic comedy, or it’s going to go wrong, or it’s Doris Day and you can’t aspire to that.

“And in the sixties, wives were effectively second-class citizens and I just thought ‘no’.

“So we held out against marriage. It was fine as it was, thank you.”

Finally, financial considerations and concerns about travelling eventually forced them to relent.

“There was this very romantic proposal from Brian,” Laurillard says wryly.

“Something like ‘Are you going to be free to pop into Camden registry office on your lunchbreak?’

“We really downplayed the whole thing — there were just the two girls and us and we cut out everything until the bare bones of it were left. It was hysterically funny — even the registrar was in hysterics. Then we went and had a slap-up meal and went back to work.”

And with combined interests in math and psychology, the couple have collaborated on work studying dyscalculia — a learning difficulty similar to dyslexia where the sufferer struggles to understand numbers.

Butterworth studied the condition from a neuropsychology perspective, while Laurillard examined the education side of things. Her desire to solve problems in the classroom is probably derived from her love of maths and abstract problem solving, she says.

“I do have a sense that there is a right answer to the ways in which we change education, for instance, and, I think there’s an essence to what’s involved in enabling a learner to get the point about subtraction, for example,” explains Laurillard.

“There’s a way to do it and I’ve just got to discover what it is and work at it.”

It’s a personal thing

What’s your favourite book?

The Tin Men by Michael Frayn

What’s your pet hate?

Michael Gove

If you could invite anyone to a dinner party, living or dead who would it be?

Robert Louis Stevenson and Mark Twain, because although they’re both novelists, it’s their travel writings that are absolutely wonderful

What did you want to be when you grew up?

First, I wanted to be a vet, and then I wanted to be [1960s French nightclub singer] Juliet Gréco, because she was cool, very sexy and hung out with philosophers and I couldn’t imagine anything better

What do you do to switch off from work?

Mostly family and friends allow me to do that — also walking and pilates

 

Ofsted finds significant prison shortfalls

Ofsted FE and skills director Matthew Coffey has delivered a damning verdict on prison education and training in England and Wales.

In a speech on Thursday at London’s Wormwood Scrubs prison he pointed out how 65 per cent of the 78 prisons inspected since 2009 had failed to achieve at least a good grading.

“None was outstanding. Eleven were inadequate — that’s nearly 15 per cent,” he said.

Weaknesses, said Mr Coffey, included poor attendance, poor punctuality, weak careers information and advice, poor quality teaching, and vocational qualifications that were “too low”.

He added: “Far too few prisoners enter prison and then leave it able to calculate a weekly budget, complete a simple work log book or follow written instructions on a work schedule.

“Data from initial assessments have shown that, in some prisons, about 75 per cent of prisoners’ English and maths skills are assessed to be below the equivalent of a GCSE at grade C — 50 per cent do not have the skills expected of an 11-year-old.”

Mr Coffey went on to make six recommendations on prisoner rehabilitation for the 123 prisons that come under Ofsted’s inspection remit.

They included making prisoners gain English and maths qualifications, giving prison governors more responsibility for education and training, setting prisoners vocational and employment-related skills targets at level two and above.

He also called for incentives, such as the tax credit recommendation currently being looked at by the government for apprenticeships, to those who train and employ ex-offenders.

Minister attacks FE for allowing learners to ‘give up’

Further education leaders have lined up to defend the sector after Liberal Democrat Schools Minister David Laws claimed new figures “exposed” colleges for allowing learners to “give up” maths and English.

Figures published for the first time by the Department for Education (DfE) show almost three-quarters of school students who achieved an English GCSE grade D, and two-thirds who achieved a maths GCSE grade D, were not re-entered for the exam.

Mr Laws said: “Colleges and [school] sixth forms should be clear with their students that these are essential subjects and must be continued.

“These figures expose the vast number of young people allowed to give up these subjects after so nearly achieving the level employers demand.

“With just a bit more teaching, these students could have achieved the grades that would make all the difference to their job prospects.”

A DfE spokesperson added the figures underlined why the government now insisted all post-16 education providers must teach English and maths to young people who fail to achieve C grades in their GCSEs.

But Julian Gravatt, assistant chief executive at the Association of Colleges, was quick to highlight school sixth forms were also in the frame, telling FE Week: “The statistics confirm more than 100,000 16-year-olds who don’t get GCSE at grade C in maths or English at school do not then reach this grade in their two years in sixth form.”

He added: “Many colleges dropped GCSE retake courses in the last decade because of low pass rates.

“The new funding condition and the new emphasis on core skills in study programmes, traineeships and apprenticeships makes this a priority for colleges which is why they are taking action across a broad front, including recruiting, re-deploying and retraining teachers and informing and educating students.”

Others also pointed out that it was “wrong” to imply learners were no longer studying English and maths.

Lynne Sedgmore, executive director of the 157 Group, told FE Week: “For many, the key to success in English and maths lies in contextualised study [such as functional skills qualifications] rather than simply resitting the GCSEs that perhaps did not inspire them at school.

“It is wrong to imply that students are not making progress in English and maths just because they are not resitting their GCSE exams.”

The point was echoed by David Hughes, chief executive of National Institute of Adult Continuing Education, who said: “We can take them [learners] to water but we can’t make them drink — so the challenge all too often is to motivate them and engage them in different ways to school.

“That takes creativity, time and skill from the teaching workforce and we believe that there is a need to review the funding available to support what can be a tough challenge.”

And Mike Hopkins, chief executive of the Middlesbrough/Gateshead College Confederation told FE Week: “I would estimate that 20 per cent of the FE budget is spent on deficiency. This is not the fault of students and so until professionals and government face up to their responsibilities, we’ll witness a horrible loss of potential.”

Mr Laws’ comments the same day Conservative Skills Minister Matthew Hancock appeared to suggest in the House of Commons that schools should take responsibility for numeracy and literacy failings.

Reflecting on the Organisation for Economic Co-operaton and Development’s damning report on skills in England and Northern Ireland, Mr Hancock said: “We have learned that, above all else, alone in the developed world, our 16 to 24-year olds are not better educated in English and maths than those aged 55 to 65.

“Yes, money is important in solving the problem, but money alone is not the answer.

“Expectations, rigour and challenge matter too. The solution will not happen quickly. It takes years to turn around schools, but then it takes years for those turned around schools to educate the next generation.”

————————————————————————————

Editorial: FE — don’t wait to be told

Schools Minister David Laws clearly had the “post-16 education” sector in his cross-hairs when he said government figures “exposed” “vast numbers” of learners being “allowed to give up”.

And while this includes school sixth forms, clearly colleges are in the frame for the bulk of his criticism. But was he right?

What Mr Laws fails to point out is second chance learners typically study functional skills and before that key skills, as opposed to GCSEs.

However, that does not mean colleges are completely off the hook if you agree that an A* to C grade at GCSE is more valuable to the work prospects of an FE learner than an equivalent non-GCSE qualification.

If the lack of an A* to C grade at GCSE really is a barrier, and you only have to look at an increasing number of apprenticeship adverts with pre-entry criteria to see that it is, then colleges do need a rethink.

That rethink should not be just because the funding rules are changing, but because, like it or not, it will improve the life chances of learners.

If that means learners study contextualised functional skills to stay engaged and learning, and then sit the GCSE exam to claim the currency of a certificate, then so be it.

Nick Linford, editor

MP ‘desperately sad’ over numeracy and literacy failings

Poor adult numeracy and literacy levels in England and Northern Ireland were the subject of a House of Commons debate.

It was prompted by findings from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), which warned of some of the highest proportions of adults scoring at or below level one — the lowest possible level — in numeracy, where adults can only perform basic mathematical processes.

It stated: “In fact, 24.1 per cent of adults, around 8.5 million people, scored at that level, compared to the average [among participating countries from across the world] of 19 per cent.”

Tory MP Caroline Dinenage (pictured), who secured the Commons debate on Thursday, said: “I am angry, frustrated and desperately sad that we have failed so many generations over this issue.”

The OECD report further indicated that around 16.4 per cent of adults, or around 5.8 million people, in England and Northern Ireland scored at level one or below in literacy, which is closer to the average of 15.5 per cent of adults among all participating countries.

At level one in literacy, adults can only read brief information on familiar topics.

England was also the only country surveyed where the oldest age group (55 to 65) had higher proficiency in literacy and numeracy than the youngest group (16 to 24).

Skills Minister Matthew Hancock told fellow MPs: “It was a shocking report and it will reverberate down through the education debate in Britain for many years.

“I hope it will persuade many who are sceptical or resistant to the reforms being put in place to come onside and support more rigour, and support stronger maths and English within schools.”

He also announced the launch of a programme to produce more FE maths teachers. It is understood the programme would involve the retraining up to 600 existing FE teachers by the end of the current academic year.

They would cater for thousands of extra pupils now expected to have to study maths at college because they had failed to achieve at least a C grade for GCSE, or equivalent qualification.

“Of course, good teaching of English and maths requires good English and maths teachers, so we are today announcing new Department for Education support for the National Centre for Excellence in the Teaching of Maths to develop a maths enhancement programme to upskill existing teachers of maths in further education,” added Mr Hancock.

Labour MP Barry Sheerman said there would be no easy solutions to improving numeracy and literacy.

He said: “It is something that has evaded all governments from all parties for a considerable length of time.”

Shortlisted college eyes-up K College degrees

One of the eight organisations shortlisted to take over the troubled K College has told FE Week it is only interested in taking on higher education provision.

Canterbury College is one of eight colleges and training providers that has been invited to bid for provision delivered by the Kent college.

But it has revealed it is only looking to take on K College’s higher education programmes.

“Canterbury College has a newly-opened, purpose built higher education centre and is keen to ensure there are suitable opportunities for learners in Kent to progress to higher education,” a spokesperson told FE Week.

“Hence the college is making a bid for the higher education provision currently delivered by K College.”

Nine organisations had been asked to develop their bids to take over provision at K College. They had been whittled down from 30 organisations, including colleges and private firms, who sent the Skills Funding Agency a total of 87 expressions of interest (EIs).

One of the organisations has since pulled out, but, other than Canterbury College, those still in competition are East Kent College, Mid Kent College, Hadlow College, Portsmouth’s Highbury College, Ixion Group Contracts Ltd, SEETEC Business Technology Centre Ltd and NCG (formerly Newcastle College Group).

They all declined to comment on their possible tenders, although an NCG spokesperson insisted the 250-mile distance between its HQ and K College would not be a problem as it was already a national training provider.

K College was formed following a merger between West Kent College and South Kent College in 2010, but ran up at least £15m in debt to the agency, which has issued it with a notice of concern.

Phil Frier, who became interim principal of the college in January following the resignation of former principal Mr Fearon, has conceded the merger failed.

The agency has declined to say whether K College debts would be transferred to the winning bidder.

The Canterbury College spokesperson said: “We are very mindful of the need to safeguard our own finances and other resources, and do not wish to jeopardise our own position and that of our students and staff.

“The college will therefore not be bidding for any of K College’s campuses, or for other FE funding contracts that come with various high levels of bank loans and other debt.”

Seven parts of the college’s provision are on offer, including 16 to 19 provision in Dover, Folkestone or Ashford, Tonbridge and Tunbridge Wells grouped together and 19+ provision in these three areas.

Higher Education Funding Council for England directly-funded provision at Ashford and Tonbridge is also up for grabs.

The first, EI, stage of the tendering process was initially supposed to have been completed in August.

But it was delayed by the agency “in order to allow organisations to better prepare their tenders” as many organisations would be closed over the summer, according to an email sent to interested bodies.

That resulted in the second stage of the process, where invitations to tender (ITT) were due to be sent out by the agency between July and September, being pushed back.

However, the delay should not prevent contracts from being awarded on time, an agency spokesperson told FE Week in July. They said: “Contracts will continue to be awarded in line with the indicative timetable we have set out.”

The short-listed organisations who have made through to the ITT stage are due give presentations and attend interviews on their bids this month with contracts being awarded the following two months.

SFA warned about its unpaid traineeship post

The Skills Funding Agency (SFA) has been warned about “exploiting” young people, after it advertised an unpaid traineeship vacancy which could last up to six months.

The agency posted the advert on the National Apprenticeship Vacancy Matching website.

It was for a business admin trainee, as part of the government’s new traineeships scheme, where learners complete work experience alongside English, maths and employability training.

Tom Wilson, director of Unionlearn, the teaching arm of the TUC, acknowledged the potential benefits of traineeships, but warned they could be exploitative.

He said: “Looking at the advertisement for the unpaid traineeship at the SFA, it appears trainees will have to do a wide range of tasks which will be of value to the employer, without receiving any pay.

“Traineeships can be a useful route towards an apprenticeship or job, but they must be high quality.

“Trainees should gain a realistic experience of work, including proper pay for work carried out.

“The TUC is concerned unpaid traineeships risk exploiting trainees, without improving their job prospects, and displacing existing staff.”

The advert stated the trainee would be expected to work at least 21 hours a week for up to six months.

It gave the hours as Monday to Thursday, from 9.30am to 4.30pm, with Wednesdays spent doing off-the-job training with Coventry and Warwickshire Chamber of Commerce.

The notice also made it clear the role was unpaid, but the trainee may be able to receive a bursary to help with travel expenses.

Applications closed on September 20 with interviews to take place the following week.

A possible start date given as last week.

The advert added the traineeship would last up to six months, the maximum allowed under the traineeship rules.

The trainee would be expected to perform duties such as data entry, sending emails, scanning, filing, shredding and postal duties.

A spokesperson for the agency said: “There is no expectation for employers to pay young people taking part in traineeships.

“Students undertaking a work placement, as part of a traineeship, are exempt from any national minimum wage entitlement.”

The spokesperson added the agency could not guarantee the trainee would be offered an apprenticeship, or a job when the traineeship ended.

But along with the provider, it would “see what progression opportunities could be identified and facilitated”.

The learner would gain “improved skills and an enhanced CV with purposeful learning activities within a real workplace setting, giving the learner a “greater chance of competing successfully” when applying for jobs elsewhere.

The training branch of Coventry and Warwickshire Chamber of Commerce declined to comment.

An Access Training advert on the National Apprenticeship Vacancy Matching Service website — which advertised an unpaid warehousing traineeship with Newcastle Council — was pulled following complaints from unions.

A Newcastle Council spokesperson said the advert had been put up in error by Access Training and it had not intended to be the employers in the arrangement.

The spokesperson added: “”Clearly we would like to explore every opportunity to provide entry to work experience for as many people as possible.

“But our concern would include fair remuneration for any work undertaken during extended work experience.”

Minister writes to new apprentices on pay

Skills Minister Matthew Hancock has written a letter for every apprentice telling them what they should be earning — despite hundreds of adverts for underpaying apprenticeships remaining on a government-funded website.

The letter, which will be distributed to apprentices starting from October 1 by providers, outlines the minimum wage for 16 to 18-year-olds as £2.68 an-hour.

Mr Hancock’s message says: “Your employer will support your training and pay you at least the hourly National Minimum Wage.”

It comes with the government’s Apprenticeship Pay Survey having recently been released, showing 29 per cent of the 5,635 apprentices were underpaid in 2012, a jump of 9 percentage points on the year before.

Meanwhile, underpaying apprenticeships are still being advertised on the National Apprenticeship Service (NAS) website, even after FE Week highlighted the problem to the Skills Funding Agency, which runs NAS.

More than 600 jobs were being advertised on the website earlier this month paying £2.65 an hour— the minimum rate before October 1 increase. And many were still on the website almost a week later.

However, an agency spokesperson said: “We have put measures in place to ensure all new vacancies being posted adhere to the increased apprenticeship national minimum wage rate, of at least £2.68 per hour.

“We have written to all training organisations and employers reminding them of the new rate.

“We are currently in the process of contacting any training organisations and employers where we have identified adverts, posted before October 1, that are still displaying the old rate.

“To date we have experienced good co-operation on this matter from our training organisations and employers, and they are in the process of changing the rates online.”

The government’s Apprenticeship Pay Survey echoed the findings of the Low Pay Commission’s 2013 report published in April, which found that a similar number — just over 27 per cent — of all apprentices were underpaid.

TUC general secretary Frances O’Grady said: “These findings are shocking and show how many apprentices are currently seen as little more than cheap labour.”

Some industries had even higher percentages of apprentices not getting their full entitlement.

In childcare, underpayment was up 65 per cent on the previous year, while 69 per cent of hairdressing apprentices were underpaid.

An agency update to providers sent out on Wednesday said Mr Hancock’s letter was in response to the April report, and told providers to ensure the letter was issued “to all new apprentices starting on or after 1 October 2013” — excluding higher apprentices, who are covered by separate regulations.

The letter explains what wage entitlements are for apprentices in each age category, and gives the number of the pay and work rights helpline.

An agency spokesperson told FE Week it would be monitoring whether providers were giving out the letter through its relationship teams.

She added: “We would expect training organisations and employers to want to do this so they can ensure that the apprentices they have just taken on have the information they need on their pay and benefits.”

And Mr Hancock himself is setting a good example, paying his apprentice well above the minimum wage at £6.31 an-hour.

His current apprentice is coming to the end of his 12-month job and so the minister is looking for a new parliamentary apprentice in Westminster.

The programme combines on-the-job training working for Mr Hancock with a formal level three qualification in business and administration.

Foundation announces first round of tenders

The Education and Training Foundation has released its first invitations to tender under a new competitive bidding process.

A total of four contracts are up for grabs — three concerning professional standards for teachers and trainers in England and the fourth about a workforce survey.

It comes a week after a letter from the foundation’s interim chief executive Peter Davies and interim chair David Hughes was posted on its website saying contract bids made under its old non-competitive process had been binned.

A foundation spokesperson said: “As part of our commitment to open and transparent ways of working, we have released four invitations to tender.

“Three of these will enable us to progress the review of the professional standards for teachers and trainers in England, as outlined in our delivery plan including to lead the consultation to inform the review of professional standards; establish the set of professional standards, following the review; and, develop guidance for teachers and trainers on the use of the professional standards.

“The fourth invitation to tender focuses on the workforce survey.”

She added: “Specifically the [fourth] invitation is for suppliers to design and deliver a consultation regarding the workforce survey, so we can ensure that this meets the data and reporting needs of the sector.”

Sue Dutton, foundation interim lead for professional standards, teaching, learning and assessment, said: “These are significant pieces of work. One of the priorities identified in our delivery plan is the review of the professional standards for teachers, trainers and tutors.

“The standards play a key role in supporting the professionalisation of the FE and skills workforce, underpinning both initial teacher training and continuing professional development.”

Other contracts that could be offered to bidders in the coming months involve traineeship and apprenticeship support programmes.

The changes to the tendering process followed news that £75,000-worth of contracts had been awarded to organisations, such as the Association of Colleges and the National Institute of Adult Continuing Education, through the foundation’s non-competitive process. It is understood these contracts will remain in place.

Bids for the workforce survey are due by October 18 and for professional standards for teachers and trainers by October 23 — the same date bids for specification for the development of professional standards for teachers and trainers in England are due.

Bids for work on guidance for the use of professional standards for teachers and trainers are due by October 28.

Email tenderqueries@etfoundation.co.uk for more details.

Colleges achieving from ‘burning platform’

The Organisation for Economic Development caught everybody’s eye with a report uncovering “poor” levels of adult numeracy while also questioning literacy skillsBut, explains Martin Doel, there was another report earlier this month that was equally deserving of attention.

The Organisation for Economic Development (OECD) recently published a review of vocational education and training, covering core areas of colleges’ work. It was called A Skills Beyond School Review of England.

The report was notable for the positive way in which it characterised FE colleges as “entrepreneurial and flexible,” and the near total lack of interest it generated with the media and the government.

Perhaps this is because journalists and the government are more interested in negative stories than in positive endorsement of the achievements of colleges and training providers.

Indeed, the difficult messages in the report are more for the government and awarding organisations.

In the case of the government, the OECD report identified a relative lack of investment in tertiary education and a regulatory model that neither underpins true autonomy, nor provides a more directed and regulated model as seen in Germany and elsewhere on the continent.

In relation to awarding organisations, it identified an overly complex and expensive model of testing and assessment that confuses employers and means they stick with inappropriate academic qualifications when recruiting staff.

Based on these criticisms, a reasonable reader might conclude that the problem, if there is one, is not with colleges and providers, but with the system they are obliged to operate.

They achieve great things despite this system, rather than because of it. This, funnily enough, is the same conclusion that Ofsted chief inspector Sir Michael Wilshaw reached in his annual report last year — perhaps this is a case for more ‘rigour’ in policy-making and implementation, as well as within colleges and training providers?

But does all this really constitute a ‘burning platform’ from which we are being forced to jump?

I don’t think the OECD report identifies any such inferno, nor is one suggested by an apprenticeships completion rate of more than 70 per cent, which is a world-beating figure.

There is, of course, room and a need for continuous improvement, refinement and adjustment, but not for abrupt, disruptive, systemic change.

The much-lauded German dual system has changed significantly only twice in the last 50 years.

At my last count, our skills system has seen radical change at least 40 times within the same period.

It is hardly surprising students, parents and businesses say they are confused about how the system operates.

The only justification for a revolutionary rather than an evolutionary change is a clear and pressing imperative.

In my view there is no such urgent need in relation to the skills system.

This OECD report, the recent Confederation of British Industry report on rising satisfaction levels among employers and college performance against a range of benchmarks seem to confirm this view.

We need a considered and progressive programme of incremental, yet challenging, change, building upon past and current success, together with a need to adapt to meet new and emerging requirements.

Martin Doel, chief executive of the Association of Colleges