Latest news from FE Week | FE Week

Keeping the options open on Functional Skills

The government has already downgraded Functional Skills more than three years before they are fully replaced in the apprenticeship programme by GCSEs. Roger Francis makes the case for viewing the qualifications as equal again.

Few people would deny that the UK faces a huge skills crisis.

Nearly 50 per cent of the adult working population has the level of maths competency expected of an 11-year-old and probably cannot interpret their own pay packets.

Moreover, a raft of surveys last year from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development placed the UK close to the bottom of global tables for maths, English and science in developed countries.

In those circumstances, and with UK companies constantly reporting an inability to find staff with the relevant skills, it almost seems churlish to criticise a government initiative aimed at addressing the problem.

Yet that is exactly how a wide range of experts across the sector have responded to the governments’ proposal to replace Functional Skills (FS) within the apprenticeship framework with A to C grade GCSEs from 2017.

The government’s position appears to be that it wants GCSEs to be adopted as the “gold standard” and that leaving FS in a similar position would cause confusion and detract from that long-term aim.

So FS, which up until six months ago was positioned as an equal alternative option to GCSEs, has now become a “stepping stone”.

This instant downgrading appears to have taken place without any consultation with the relevant stakeholders and without any statistical analysis of the impact of FS on competency levels.

However, in setting out that strategy, I believe the government has failed to recognise the very real differences between vocational and academic career paths.

FS were developed specifically for people who chose the former. Many of the learners whom we support have already failed their GCSEs in maths and English and achieve the equivalent FS qualifications not because they are easier or because they are merely “stepping stones”, but because they are more relevant to their job roles and to situations they meet in everyday life.

The vast majority of learners on apprenticeship programmes do not need to know about quadratic equations and have an intimate knowledge of the novels of John Steinbeck.

Instead, they need to be able to quickly calculate the value of a 20 per cent discount, to be able to contribute effectively to a team meeting and to deal sympathetically with a customer complaint.

Those are skills which it is almost impossible to develop within the strict confines of an academic qualification.

The government clearly hopes that a revised GCSE will become an aspirational target for young people, but aspirations have to be realistic and achievable as well as challenging and with nearly 50 per cent of learners currently failing to achieve an A to C grade in maths and English, there is a real danger that we will disenfranchise the very people whom we should be supporting and encouraging.

Having already closed off an academic career, we are now telling them that the vocational pathway is no longer an option either unless they can achieve a qualification which they probably consider irrelevant and unobtainable.

My other concern is that FS is being side-lined before any credible evidence has been obtained as to its impact.

Surely we need some thorough research and analysis before effectively ditching a qualification which employers and practitioners alike believe is genuinely raising standards and competency levels?

It was very pleasing to read that the government is listening to employer feedback and re-evaluating the proposed grading scheme for apprenticeships.

I would urge it to adopt a similarly flexible approach on FS and allow employers to set new standards which retain the option of FS or GCSEs.

By all means continue to develop the standards for FS and evaluate their effectiveness, but let’s not consign them to the Museum of Ancient Qualifications when employers, practitioners and experts across the sector are voicing their almost unanimous support.

Instead, let’s re-position FS as the “gold standard” for vocational training. That will surely give us a much better chance of tackling the current crisis and providing employers and learners alike with the skills they so desperately need.

Roger Francis, director, Creative Learning Partners

Colleges hit with pensions bill rise

A 16 per cent hike in employer pension contributions next year could cost the college sector tens of millions of pounds and lead to job losses, it has been claimed.

The Association of Colleges (AoC) said plans to increase employer contributions to the teacher pension scheme could hit individual FE college budgets by an average of £250,000 a-year, and sixth form colleges by £90,000.

The Treasury wants to help plug a £1bn shortfall in public sector pension schemes by increasing college contributions from 14.1 per cent to 16.4 per cent from September 2015.

The AoC has warned it will increase the overall cost of employing a teacher by 5 per cent.

Julian Gravatt, AoC assistant chief executive, said: “There is widespread concern in colleges about the Treasury’s announcement of an increase in employer contributions to teacher pension scheme to 16.4 per cent before the actuarial valuation is published and without any plan to consult.

“We calculate that the increase will cost £250,000 for the average FE college and £90,000 for the average sixth form college.

“In the year after the general election the pension and national insurance rises will increase the on-costs of employing a teacher by five per cent.

“Unless the Department for Education [DfE] also acts to improve 16 to 18 funding, these increases will depress teacher pay and cause job losses.”

East Norfolk Sixth Form College principal Daphne King said: “Whilst this does not represent a cut in funding per se, it will affect our bottom line and is yet another hammer blow for colleges trying to prepare balanced budget projections.

“Sixth Form Colleges have had a series of cuts over the past three years and the cumulative effect combined with this latest increase to pension contributions means some more very tough decisions about our future curriculum offer.”

Lynne Sedgmore, chief executive of the 157 Group, said: “Our view is that on top of other rising pension costs and changes in the pension system this is yet another serious funding issue for FE colleges and will require careful planning to mitigate.”

Association of School and College Leaders colleges specialist Stephan Jungnitz said: “The increase in pensions contribution, together with pay rises and general inflation will create profound difficulties.
“It seems that there is little comprehension in government that you get what you pay for.

“The government’s proclaimed intention of improving quality and raising standards seems like empty rhetoric in the face of rising costs and a spiralling decline in post-16 funding.”

The DfE confirmed the figures, but said the official policy change and announcement had come from the Treasury and would not comment further.

It comes after staff in colleges were warned they could face an increase in their contributions of up to 1.2 per cent

From April, providers will be able to implement an average rise of 0.6 per cent for employees enrolled on the teacher pension scheme.

The DfE has said that although the majority of respondents to a consultation on the planned rise had opposed it, the Department had decided to go ahead with the change anyway.

FE providers are not required by law to implement the “new fair deal” proposals, but the DfE says they can choose to do so.

The changes, if implemented, will mean a member of staff earning £35,000 in the next academic year would take home £174 less, and someone on £50,000 would see their annual take-home reduce by £276.

The Great FE & Skills Survey of 2014

The state-of-the-nation survey, which is a joint project between the Policy Consortium and FE Week, aims to provide a detailed picture of shifting attitudes and responses to changes in government policy and practice.

The Great FE & Skills Survey of 2014

The Great FE & Skills Survey of 2014 has been launched.

It is planned to become an annual event and the results of the initial survey will feature in edition 100 of FE Week.

Chris Henwood, FE Week editor, said: “One of the prime motives in setting up the survey was to determine the views, priorities and moods of those in the sector about what is going on, what really matters and, indeed, what keeps you up at night.

“There are big questions about how the dominant issues of the day are perceived by people across the sector as a whole — support staff, lecturers, college directors and beyond, including those who work in unions, professional bodies and agencies.

“The survey is wide-ranging. It embraces governance, money, resources, learners, curriculum, CPD and much more.”

Mick Fletcher, a Policy Consortium member and FE policy analyst and non-executive director of RCU Ltd, said: “A frequent mistake of those who make policy or seek to lead change is to assume that everyone sees the world in the way that they do; that there is a shared view of what matters and how things work.

“In practice, there is rarely a consensus and often things which keep those at the centre awake at night barely register for many practitioners; the reverse is also true.

“If we are to improve policy and practice we need to make a more determined effort to identify how things look to those who work in the FE system and find out what matters most to them.”

Respondents to the survey can choose to remain anonymous. Those who opt to provide their contact details — so that the Policy Consortium can email a copy of the analysis of the survey — will have them treated in strict confidence. No-one will be subsequently contacted unless they’ve given their express permission.

Competition: all respondents will be entered into a prize draw

First Prize: iPad Air and an FE Week Gold Subscription

Second prize: an FE Week Gold Subscription

Third prize: an FE Week Subscription

The survey will be conducted over the next fortnight — closing date for responses is midnight on April 4 and the key findings will be reported in the 100th edition of FE Week, dated Monday, April 28. Competition winners will be notified by April 10.

No competition for ‘transparency’ role

Burton and South Derbyshire College principal Dawn Ward will chair its data and management information advisory group. — Burton and South Derbyshire College principal Dawn Ward will chair the Skills Funding Agency data and management information advisory group

The chair of a new board established by the Skills Funding Agency (SFA) to ensure transparency was appointed without an open and competitive application process, FE Week can reveal.

The SFA has announced that Burton and South Derbyshire College principal Dawn Ward will chair its data and management information advisory group, which aims to “ensure the SFA’s data requirements remain open and transparent”.

The SFA conceded it had not opened up the application process for the unpaid advisory role, but it declined to justify the move, prompting criticism of an old boys’ network impression.

A spokesperson said: “Ms Ward has been asked by the SFA to chair this group which will be made up of representatives and stakeholders from the FE sector and skills sector.”

Ms Ward said: “I am pleased to support the SFA’s commitment to making data and information more transparent.”

Lindsay McCurdy, chief executive of Apprenticeships4England said: “All appointments for such high profile roles should be open for all in the sector to apply.

“This will take away the old boys’, or girls’ club, impression which rightly or wrongly is that which comes across.”

It comes after the Education and Training Foundation was criticised in August last year for also not holding a competitive application process for several senior posts.

Adult budget cuts prompt rethink call

The government has been urged to rethink its approach to funding for FE after it was revealed learning providers will face an average cut of 15 per cent to their adult skills budgets.

In a letter to providers, Skills Funding Agency (SFA) interim chief executive Barbara Spicer (pictured) said although funding for apprenticeships and traineeships was “prioritised”, remaining funding would be cut by 15 per cent.

It provides the first indication of the impact of a 19 per cent two-year adult skills budget cut outlined in the Skills Funding Statement last month, and means the average-sized college could see between £400,000 and £800,000 wiped from its non-apprentice and traineeship adult skills funding.

The announcement has drawn a sector backlash, with calls for the SFA and Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) to rethink the cuts.

Martin Doel, chief executive of the Association of Colleges (AoC), said: “Both AoC and colleges understand that they need to take their fair share of austerity as the government seeks to rebalance the books.

“However, it is time for politicians to think seriously about what they want colleges to achieve on behalf of the nation and to what extent this should be funded by the taxpayer and to what extent by employers and the students themselves.

“For example, the Department for Education cannot continue to protect some of its budget and not the rest — this is unsustainable especially as we raise the education participation age to 18.

“Meanwhile, BIS needs to review the amount of money it devotes to adult students, in both further and higher education, and consider whether they are being treated equally with other students.”

Stewart Segal, chief executive of the Association of Employment and Learning Providers, said: “The budget cuts will hit hard and as well as apprenticeships and traineeships, the government needs to be prioritising skills provision for the unemployed and English and maths.

“We will be looking at the provider impact and considering the announcement in more detail.”

In her letter, Ms Spicer said: “We will continue to fund and invest in high-quality apprenticeship provision. All providers that are on target to deliver their 2013 to 2014 allocation will receive the same level of funding in 2014 to 2015.

“In 2013 to 2014 we allocated additional traineeship funding to support the highest performing providers. For those providers that have delivered Traineeship places, we have consolidated extra funding into your 2014 to 2015 allocation.

“In prioritising the funding for apprenticeships and traineeships, the remainder of the ASB will reduce by 15 per cent.”

FE Loan pots have also gone up as directed by the 2013-16 Skills Funding Statement.

Elmfield probe results ‘with minister’

The findings of an official investigation into defunct training provider Elmfield are on the desk of Skills Minister Matthew Hancock, FE Week can reveal.

A spokesperson for the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) would not say if the report would be made public, but MPs on the Business, Innovation and Skills select committee were expected to grill the minister on the issue next month.

Committee chair Adrian Bailey said: “I understand that the findings are currently with the minister.

“I have no information yet whether it will be made public, but we will be interviewing the minister in early April. Obviously if it is not [made public] by then the minister will be questioned on the reasons for this.”

He confirmed Mr Hancock would be questioned by the committee on April 1 or 8.

The committee is also planning to call former Elmfield director Ged Syddall and Skills Funding Agency (SFA) finance director Paul McGuire to a later hearing, but no date has been finalised for this.

Mr Syddall previously appeared before Mr Bailey’s committee in April 2012, when he said Elmfield’s entire income of £30m in 2011/12 came from public funds and defended his own £3m company dividend.

But a BBC Newsnight probe screened in October last year, supported with information uncovered by FE Week, put Elmfield back in the spotlight over its dealings with workers at supermarket giant Morrisons.

It was alleged Elmfield signed Morrisons staff up to apprenticeship programmes they had declined, enabling the provider to claim public funding for training.

A separate probe into the allegations was launched around five months ago by the SFA which has now concluded.

A BIS spokesperson said: “The report has been received and is now being considered by the minister.”

Both BIS and the SFA declined to comment on whether the report will be made public.

Elmfield went into administration in November last year owing £11m.

It was in debt to more than 180 firms, including provider Skillsfirst Awards which was set up by Mr Syddall and owed £863,550.

A spokesperson for the company said Mr Syddall no longer had any involvement in either the running or day-to-day finances of Skillsfirst.

After it went into administration, the majority of Elmfield’s business and assets were sold for £1.5m to EQL Solutions Ltd, which is 100 per cent owned by CareTech Holdings plc. It is understood the deal saved 300 jobs.

The Morrisons contract was sold to NCG (formerly Newcastle College Group) for £20,000, which is belived to have saved the remaining 50 jobs at the company.

Fears remain as quals list published

Further concerns that valuable qualifications could fall victim to a government cull have been raised after a leading awarding organisation saved nine of its qualifications from the public funding axe, but lost three.

The Skills Funding Agency (SFA) has published its first list of qualifications eligible for funding in 2014/15.

The list includes 6,558 qualifications — almost half the 13,011 on the final list for the current academic year.

But NCFE, which managed to save nine of its qualifications after appeal in the SFA’s “exception” process, has raised concerns about the cuts.

Chief executive David Grailey said: “We feel that many of the qualifications in danger of losing funding actually do have real value to learners and what’s more, they’re held in high regard by employers.

“For these qualifications within NCFE’s portfolio, we are working hard to secure their funding for the 2014/15 session.

“For example, we proactively put in an appeal with the SFA for a number of qualifications to be considered as exceptions.”

The nine NCFE qualifications saved, all level two certificates, include areas such as customer service, business and health.

Mr Grailey said: “We felt that there were qualifications on the list in the health and social care sector such as ‘working in mental health’ and ‘end of life care’ which fill a skills gap and are integral to those who work in this incredibly worthwhile profession.

“Therefore, we’re pleased that the SFA is treating these qualifications as exceptions and granting them public funding.”

The news comes after Skills Minister Matthew Hancock announced that the axe would fall on upwards of 5,000 qualifications, leading, it was claimed, to savings of almost £200m. But the minister faced criticisms for seeming to belittle some qualifications which help vulnerable people into work.

However, other organisations have welcomed the clarity of new funding criteria, but questioned the need for some of the rules, including a 15-credit threshold.

Charlotte Bosworth, skills and employment director for Oxford Cambridge and RSA (OCR) Examinations, said: “Some of the rules do feel a bit arbitrary — particularly around size and where 16-19 performance table criteria have been adopted.

“It seems more about ‘system tidiness’ than considering what is needed to support adults into sustainable employment. It is just as important to develop the values, habits and characteristics needed in work as to foster direct technical knowledge about an occupation.”

Under the SFA’s exceptions scheme, providers can make submissions to the government of qualifications they think should be included on the 2014/15 list. Submissions for 2013/14 are also still being accepted until early May.

Colleges and schools to get ‘robust comparisons’ regime

Further education leaders have welcomed Ofsted plans that would allow parents and learners to compare the post-16 performance of school sixth forms with that of colleges.

A separate inspection grade for school sixth forms could be introduced under much-anticipated proposals put out to consultation by the education watchdog.

An Ofsted spokesperson had told FE Week in July of the plans, adding that the effectiveness of post-16 provision did already inform wider inspection judgements on a school and that Ofsted recognised the importance of sixth forms in helping students to progress to employment or higher education.

And Ofsted’s national director for schools, Michael Cladingbowl, said this month: “It’s important that parents and young people have a clear understanding of how well the school’s sixth form is doing so they can make informed choices about where to continue their studies when they reach 16.”

Martin Doel (pictured left), Association of Colleges chief executive, said: “We have been pressing for many years for school sixth form provision to be graded separately in order for parents and students to be able to make a considered judgement about the best place to continue their studies.

“With the variety of options for 16-year-olds, it’s imperative there’s a robust comparison managed through an inspection regime that compares all provision in the same way.

“It doesn’t make sense that a school can be judged outstanding while its sixth form, if compared with a college’s provision, is only satisfactory.

“This long-overdue reform will help students and parents but it will be important to ensure inspectors use the same standards in school sixth forms and colleges.”

James Kewin (pictured below), Sixth Form Colleges’ Association deputy chief executive, said: “We have long campaigned for Ofsted to inspect school sixth forms and sixth form colleges in the same way.

“This proposal is an important step in the right direction and will help students to make an informed choice about where to study in the sixth form.

“At the moment, the absence of a separate grade can mask the quality of sixth forms in schools.”

The Association of Teachers and Lecturers also welcomed the move, but was critical of the timing.

Its general secretary, Dr Mary Bousted (pictured), said: “We are not particularly opposed to separate judgements for sixth forms, but ask why Ofsted is not introducing this at the same time as all the other recent and planned changes?”

She added: “Ofsted will never rebuild its reputation with teachers and heads while it constantly moves the goalposts for how it carries out inspections.”

The eight-week consultation, which ends on May 13, asks: “Should there be a separate graded judgement on the effectiveness of a school’s sixth form?” The change would apply to maintained schools and academies.

The consultation also proposes introducing separate graded judgements on the quality of nursery and reception in its inspection reports.

Mr Cladingbowl added: “We are keen to hear the views of parents and learners as well as providers about our proposals to bring in these separate judgements.

“We are also giving a lot of thought to how school inspection might develop over the longer term and will bring forward proposals for consultation in due course.”

Visit the Ofsted website for details on how to take part in the consultation.