Leipzig looms for top WorldSkills competitors

Hopefuls for a UK team place in WorldSkills 2013  have been put through their paces at two Midlands colleges 

Young people from across the UK flocked to the Midlands last weaek to show off their skills and compete for a slot in the UK team for WorldSkills 2013.

The top apprentices, learners and recently qualified skilled workers under 23 demonstrated their abilities in hairdressing, bricklaying, carpentry and more than 15 other areas at Stephenson College, in Coalville, and North Warwickshire & Hinckley College, in Nuneaton.

One competitor in each skill area will go forward to represent the UK at the international finals in Leipzig in July.

For David Thomas, training manager for the electrical installation squad, it wasn’t not just the opportunity to represent the country, but skills the competitors gained that made the selection process important.

He said: “From when squad members start competing, you see them raise their game to get to national level. But international level is even higher. They end up way above their peers.”

In the four-day selection event, which followed regional events last year and EuroSkills 2012, competitors were given complex and strictly timed 22-hour projects that were later judged by training managers.

From left: Confectionery and pastry: Stephen Smith, 18, and from Harpenden, Herts, is a student at Westminster Kingsway College and  Electronics: Heather Peach, 18 and from Wigan, is an apprentice training at Wigan and Leigh College and employed by MBDA UK

Training managers also acted as trainers and mentors. joinery training manager Andrew Pengelly said: “Competitors also develop in themselves through the contest, in terms of their ability to work under pressure, their problem-solving, confidence, and interpersonal skills.”

Some skill areas had only one squad member, but still had to demonstrate that they could meet the standard required to get through to Leipzig.

In many cases they worked alongside hopefuls from other nations who travelled to the UK selection to give themselves and the local candidates more competition experience.

Jaine Bolton, chief operating officer for the National Apprenticeship Service (NAS), said she had seen how WorldSkills had an impact on learners at Stephenson College.

She said: “They see what’s going on and they want to know more. I’ve seen them stand and applaud as the squad came into the college. The squad were amazed, it was a real boost for them.”

“You can see how important World Skills is from the judges and training managers — these are busy professionals willing to take time out because they’ve seen what it does for these young people and their skill level.”

Hairdressing: Hannah Clague, 21 and from Quedgeley, Gloucestershire, attends Red Edge Training Company and is employed by Reds Hair Company.

North Warwickshire & Hinckley College curriculum manager Martin Shelton said employers were enthusiastic about the benefits of WorldSkills.

He said: “Local companies have been massively supportive, whether through sponsorship or allowing their apprentices the time to come and take part. They can see the value it’s adding.”

Pastry chef and confectioner squad member Stephen Smith, 18, said he was certain that being on the squad would impress employers.

“Learning how to use techniques professionally has been great and it will definitely help me with getting a job,” he said.

“It’s too soon to say whether I’ll get on to the team or not but it’s all gone well so far.”

The final team for Leipzig will be announced Friday, March 15.

Wall and floor tiling: John Morgan, 20 and from Newry in Northern Ireland, attends Southern Regional College and is employed by Gobal Tiles and Bathrooms

Caption for featured image: Aircraft maintenance: Luke Greenaway, 22 and from Andover, in Hampshire, works at QinetiQ 

A break with tradition

What are the value of MOOCs? Are they an opportunity or a threat, asks Carolyn Lewis

Massive open online courses (MOOCs) have been around for a while, educating many people for a lot less money than more traditional methods. They provide great opportunities for life-long learning, particularly for those who face barriers to education.

They generally do not lead to a formal qualification, although some institutions do offer credit by exam. But with many courses offering only automated or peer grading, the real objective is to get people to learn, something that must be applauded.

Enrolment is completely open so it’s quick and easy to get started. Most content is provided by the institution, using links to resources already freely available on the web. Content can be varied, but it has been said that some courses rely too heavily on video lectures — not the most engaging way of learning.

Support comes mainly from a student’s peers, with tutors and or mentors online to answer questions. But there is a significantly lower ratio of educators to students, with some quoting 100,000 students to one teacher. MOOCs use a connectivist approach — each student responding with detailed answers to course questions.

Are MOOCs successful? It depends on your perspective. Many students drop out — but as enrolment numbers are often in the hundreds of thousands, it could be argued that even a small success rate is worth celebrating.

How can FE and HE institutions afford to design and develop MOOCs and then share them free?”

For example, about 46 per cent dropped out at the first stage in one Massachusetts Institute of Technology MOOC that had more than 150,000 sign-ups. Around 5 per cent passed the final exam.

Clearly, participants need to be highly motivated and able to learn on their own with little support, which is probably why there appear to be few young adult learners. According to the Cousera website, more than 60 per cent of those taking MOOCs hold postgraduate degrees.

What is their future in the UK? The increasing cost of university tuition and the introduction of student loans for mature learners in FE could make them extremely popular.

But how can our FE and HE institutions, many of them facing funding cuts, afford to design and develop MOOCs and then share them free? It is true that offering something free can lead to further participation in other costed provision, but an initial investment has to be made. Can our universities, colleges and training providers afford to do this?

Caution is needed: we should recognise the challenges and potential impact of MOOCs on our educational organisations. They do offer opportunities, but I’d like to see them supplementing existing face-to-face and online courses, rather than replacing them.

We must not lose sight of the benefits and value of what we already do well. Once it’s gone, it’s difficult to get it back.

Carolyn Lewis, managing director of Vocational Innovation Ltd and eLearning Marketplace Ltd

Advertorial: We believe in small change, big difference

Workpays engages in projects that make big differences a reality – and always starts by asking the people that matter questions about what matters to them

The most important question we ask is whether students are better equipped for work by their time at college. It’s also the reason why we have developed a suite of teaching and learning materials that are aimed at improving the performance of staff within a quality framework.

This is not in isolation; our delivery maps to units within the IAG, employment related services (ERS), customer service, and sales and marketing.  Independent training providers, welfare to work providers and FE colleges can see an improvement in their outcomes as a consequence of accessing this training for their staff.

Evidence of how a  small change made a big difference to one of Workpays clients is demonstrated by Scott Parkin FIEP, director of employment at Advance Housing and Support Ltd who said: “We are delighted with the initial impact of the employment–related services programme being delivered by Workpays.  In the first month we have seen our job outcomes increase seven-fold, which is a real positive for the team and, of course, our customers.  The programme has raised our performance levels and has exceeded our expectations and has certainly justified our investment.”

Workpays provide a competency-based programme tailored to organisation and personal job roles to improve performance and build new skills following national standards in ERS. The programmes are delivered to reduce off-the-job time and support staff in real-time situations to provide a programme that is both cost and time effective.

Working with Workpays increased job entries seven fold”

Workpays are also a licensed delivery partner of the Digital Youth Academy (DYA), an organisation that has built up a network of FE colleges and training providers to deliver its cutting edge and innovative social and digital media products.

The programmes currently on offer are a level one social digital routeway (SDR) and a full level two social digital apprenticeship.  Both these programmes were developed in partnership with the awarding organisation, Edexcel.

The SDR centres on a level one diploma and is designed as a classroom-based programme that can be delivered either part-time or full-time through the current foundation learning funding stream or moving forward under the new study programme banner.

Workpays began delivery of the level one programme to a cohort of NEET learners in February from within the Custard Factory in Birmingham.

As a progression pathway from the SDR, the social digital apprenticeship is a full level two apprenticeship that is predominantly delivered in the workplace through innovative e-learning.

During the programme, learners are taught about topics such as social media applications for business, search engine optimisation, Google Analytics and blogging. If better performance of employability and skills destinations matters to you or you’re interested in adding DYA Work Study Programme to your learner offer get in touch, we’re all ears. Go online at www.workpays.co.uk, call us on 07572 262013 or email us at info@workpays.co.uk

Apprentices in the spotlight

Six years after it was first conceived, National Apprenticeship Week has become about so much more than just raising awareness of alternative pathways. This year’s will be the biggest and best yet, says David Way

It seems incredible that we are celebrating the sixth National Apprenticeship Week.

As in previous years, it will provide a great opportunity to showcase the best apprenticeships, apprentices and employers, and will put work-based training in the limelight.

It promises to be the biggest and best yet, with more than 500 events (and counting) taking place around England.

Thanks are due to those who have got behind this. It is only through this collective effort that we get the attention of millions and gain the opportunity to highlight the value of apprenticeships and how they change lives.

When the event was first conceived, its purpose was simply to raise awareness of apprenticeships.

We are well beyond that now, with the breadth of events demonstrating just how far we have come: for example, apprenticeships are now breaking down barriers to professions once seen as the preserve of graduates and creating fresh opportunities to go right to the top whether it is in a local business or a global company.

The preparatory work that we have carried out ahead of the week makes clear that apprenticeships are still very newsworthy. They tell stories about real people whose achievements often go well beyond anything they first expected.

I hope the week will also bring more people up to date with the occupations now available in new and emerging sectors, such as professional services, banking and the creative industries, and at higher levels in vital sectors such as engineering.

We must not forget the growing number of small employers taking on apprentices”

The theme of this year’s week is ‘Apprenticeships deliver’. We want to showcase the achievements of apprentices and their employers, and to demonstrate how apprenticeships really are transforming lives and improving business.

Our evidence about boosting productivity, employment prospects and income needs to be got across – as do our many examples of successful businessmen and women who started as apprentices.

There is no shortage of events, including business breakfasts hosted by premier league football clubs, apprenticeship buses touring cities and regions, and major conferences, including our own fourth international conference.

Previous National Apprenticeship Weeks have shown that the most powerful advocates of the benefits of apprenticeships  are the apprentices themselves.

They are our principal ambassadors, which is why this year we are putting them in the spotlight.

There will be apprentice ‘job swaps’ between some of our apprenticeship award-winners and their chief executives for the day, while in  #247 Apprentice, a selection of apprentices will use various forms of social media to report on their working day.

But my personal favourite will be a national ‘Made by Apprentices’ campaign to showcase the talent of the nation’s apprentices and the contribution that they make to the economy.

Many large employers will be showcasing their programmes during the week, but we must not forget the growing number of small employers taking on apprentices.

I have been delighted with the increasing number of small employers taking up the Apprenticeship Grant for Employers of £1,500.

Such has been its popularity, the government has decided to extend the grant until Christmas 2013.

‘Bring back apprentices’ used to be the cry.  National Apprenticeship Week is the opportunity to show not only that they are back, but that they are working for business and for the talented young people wanting a great start to their working lives.

David Way, chief operating officer of the National Apprenticeship Service

The rules of changing partners

With great power comes great responsibility: what should governors think about when deciding to merge? asks Smita Jamdar

The number of stories in FE Week recently about how decisions to merge colleges are made may be a reflection of the paucity of guidance and advice to governors.

Before the Education Act 2011, the ultimate decision on any merger lay with the Secretary of State. The decision to propose a merger was that of the relevant funding agency, after public consultation, and the suitability of merger proposals and prospective partners was judged against criteria promulgated by the funding agencies.

The 2011 Act introduced a new power of governing bodies to dissolve their corporations and transfer their assets and liabilities to “prescribed bodies”. Incidentally, the prescribed bodies include private for profit companies, provided they are established for educational purposes, although in such cases the dissolving college’s property transfers subject to a charitable trust to be used exclusively for charitable purposes.  The power is therefore one that has the potential to change forever the landscape of FE and the nature of FE providers.

This new power was not accompanied by much guidance as to how governing bodies should go about making this highly significant decision. Instead, we had the publication of New Challenges, New Chances, the  government’s  strategic vision for FE. Though not particularly detailed, this set out the government’s expectations that in making decisions about the future shape and delivery model of their colleges, governors would be expected to be accountable to their local communities, learners and employers, and to work with LEPs and local authorities.

The power has the potential to change forever the landscape of FE”

Any changes to delivery models could be undertaken only after completing a college structure and prospects appraisal, and wide, transparent and meaningful consultation of the communities they serve. Partner selection was expected to be transparent through open and competitive procurement practices.

Are there other obligations that should guide governing bodies in making merger decisions? In my view, there are other areas of law that impose duties on colleges and their governors which could be relevant to deciding whether and if so with whom to merge.

These include:

Firstly, charity law and the duty it imposes on trustees to act in the best interests of their charities. Without the open, transparent and competitive process to which the minister referred, how can governors be sure that the partner they choose provides the best possible future and opportunities for their learners?

Secondly, the public law constraints on exercising discretionary powers such as this, which imply obligations to exercise those powers following careful, rational and reasoned deliberation. These obligations, again, may not be satisfied without openness and receptiveness to the range of options available to the college to deliver the best outcome for learners.

Thirdly, the obligations under the Financial Memorandum in terms of accountability for public funds and value for money, which presuppose a measured and balanced consideration of all the available options.

And finally, the single equality duty that requires decisions to minimise adverse impact and improve opportunities for disadvantaged learners from protected groups.

So despite the absence of specific guidance, there seem to be a range of legal obligations and duties that point in the direction of a transparent and a reasoned decision-making process. Even if there weren’t such obligations, one has to wonder why governing bodies would do anything else, given that these are not commercial mergers where private interests make confidentiality and exclusivity required characteristics, but, rather, are decisions that determine the future of educational charities with substantial public assets on which the cleansing spotlight of public accountability and scrutiny should surely fall.

Smita Jamdar, partner and head of education, SGH Martineau LLP

Adrian Bailey, chair, Business, Innovation and Skills Select Committee

You might expect to find industry awards and citations from the world of commerce hanging above Adrian Bailey’s fireplace.

As chair of the Business, Innovation and Skills Select Committee, you’d think ‘grip-and-grin’ pictures with business leaders such as Lord Sugar or Sir Richard Branson would adorn the home of the West Bromwich West MP.

But what you’ll find at the 67-year-old’s house in Oldbury, near Birmingham, are donkey ornaments, hundreds of them.

“I’m very interested in history in general, but antiques in particular, largely for the insight they give you into past life,” says Bailey, who ran an antiques auction business before entering parliament as a Labour MP in 2000.

“My wife was somewhat dismissive that lots of it was junk, but now she works as a guide at the Black Country Living Museum and is fascinated by the same stuff as me.

“Most of our recreational time now is spent mooching around antique shops and she collects donkey ornaments — we’ve got a collection of around 250 of all ages and all origins.”

Having first won his parliamentary seat at a by-election after three failed attempts more than a quarter of a century before, Bailey’s affection for antiques seems fitting considering he once saw himself as something of a relic.

“I thought I’d got too old to have a career in parliament and that 2000 would be my last shot, but I did it and having got there, it realised my basic ambition,” he says.

“I was 54 when I got in and in the New Labour era that made me pretty neanderthal, so my chances of getting a government position were slim.”

Since that election Salisbury-born Bailey has served as secretary of the All Party Parliamentary Group for Steel.

However, it’s his election as the BIS committee chair in 2010 that has made him most proud.

“It fulfils just about everything I’d wanted to do,” says Bailey, a “football fanatic” season ticket-holder at Cheltenham Town.

“Lots of people say that when you’re in opposition, it [the select committee chair] is the best position because you have much more influence over government policy than if you’re a frontbencher in opposition.”

But he also knows that his committee’s remit is sometimes questioned, with FE and higher education split from the schools agenda, which is examined separately by the Education Select Committee.

“Having FE and higher education in with business might be a less than perfect division, but trying to deal with them all through one department, monitored by one select committee, would be a vast task and I don’t think it would be possible,” explains Bailey, who has a stepson.

Among his committee highlights have been the “rigorous and robust” interview of Kraft’s American management over the takeover of Midland-based Cadbury, and the apprenticeships report which, among other things, called for greater definition of the term itself.

However, a rare division within the committee is a career lowpoint. It happened over the appointment of Professor Les Ebdon to head the Office for Fair Access, after he said he would impose financial penalties on universities that failed to meet access targets.

From an early age I saw how government could alter the quality and life chances of working-class people”

The committee’s Tory MPs rejected Business Secretary Vince Cable’s recommendation, following which Labour member Paul Blomfield said the vote against Prof Ebdon, who later got the job regardless, was “a political ambush which had more to do with coalition politics than concern with access to our universities”.

Bailey concedes: “It was the first time we’d done such an interview and had rather assumed it would be a formality.

“Nobody had detected the undercurrent there — I was as guilty of that as anybody — and, as a result, we had a rather bitterly divided committee. It’s the only thing there has been any sort of division on. We’ve always been able to come to a consensus, evidence-led on every issue.”

The willingness to reach agreement with those who sit opposite in the Commons is somewhat surprising, given the strength of his left-wing background.

“My dad [Edward Arthur] was an aircraft fitter with Gloucester Aircraft Company and was a supporter of the Bloomsbury Group,” says Bailey.

“He was also an amateur artist and did some paintings for the Spanish Republicans. And for quite a while he was a member of the Communist Party before joining the Independent Labour Party.

“I’m told that he used to do the cartoons for the Independent Labour Party magazine, but he was more of an intellectual — he was never an activist. And my mother [Sylvia Alice] was always very strong Labour.

“But the one thing that left the biggest impression on me was that my sister [65-year-old Jennifer Avril] was seriously ill when she was very young and appeared to be dying of pneumonia. My mother always said that had it not been for the NHS, which had just been introduced, we’d never have been able to afford the treatment.

“From an early age I saw how government could alter the quality and life chances of working-class people.”

Working-class interests still feed into Bailey’s select committee work and, indeed, his everyday constituency work — West Bromwich West has more foundries than most constituencies, he proudly asserts.

“Talking to the owners of these foundries you find attitudes so representative of industry,” he says.

“You get the concern that young people aren’t going into manufacturing because of the public perception, then you’ve also got the attitude from a lot of small businesses that the young people they’re getting aren’t work-ready or of the quality expected.

“And talking to apprentices, they will highlight obstacles that might have blocked them, for instance where their school tried to encourage them to go to university when they actually wanted to go into manufacturing, or, in some cases, I’ve had anecdotal evidence of schools trying to persuade young people to stay on in sixth form rather than go into the local FE college.

“It’s ludicrous that you’ve got businesses and educational establishments, perhaps understandably, fighting to protect their own corner.

“It’s not in the best interests of the young people they’re supposed to be upskilling — you can only do that by a much more collaborative approach to education.”

It’s a personal thing

What’s your favourite book? 

Swallows and Amazons, by Arthur Ransome. As a working-class kid it was an insight into a middle-class world that fascinated me as it didn’t reflect my personal experiences

What did you want to be when you were younger?

A merchant sailor, like several of my uncles, but my eyesight was too poor

What do you do to switch off from work?

Watch football, swim, mooch around antique shops and watch various antique-based TV programmes

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

A 1920s actress named Madeleine Carol. She came from a terraced house in West Bromwich and became Alfred Hitchcock’s first leading lady. Her sister was killed in the Blitz and she gave up her film career to work for the Red Cross on the front line in Europe, and worked for Unicef after the war. She was honoured by the Americans and the French, but not our own government

What would your super power be? 

To promote tolerance in people

Richard waits for minister’s verdict

Entrepreneur Doug Richard has reignited his argument with the Association of Employment and Learning Providers that workforce tax breaks were “integral” to the success of apprenticeships.

The former Dragons’ Den investor spoke out in the lead-up to the sixth National Apprenticeship Week when FE Minister Matthew Hancock is due to respond to his government-commissioned report into apprenticeships.

The association rejected Mr Richard’s claims that tax breaks would encourage employers to take on apprentices, although he remained “convinced” that they were the way forward.

“We need to focus on securing workforce tax breaks,” he told FE Week.

“The Association of Employment and Learning Providers quickly rejected my recommendations; however, I am still convinced that tax credits are integral to the success of apprenticeships.”

He said apprenticeships were valuable initiatives that must be made as “attractive as possible to employers.”

“Offering workforce tax breaks is an excellent way to make that happen,” he said.

But Graham Hoyle, the association’s chief executive, said the group still “seriously questioned” Mr Richard’s  proposal.

Some of the big things are wrong”

He said credits might have the “advantage of simplicity” but could cause cash flow problems – the “biggest threat” to otherwise effective and profitable SMEs.

He said to ask “invariably cash–strapped” SMEs to purchase apprenticeship training up front and wait for a retrospective tax deduction was “bizarre and unworkable”.

“We have no objection to making the option available but doubt whether it would be a successful vehicle to switch SMEs on to the apprenticeship route,” he said.

When Mr Richard’s report  was published in November last year, the association rejected his key recommendations for a closer relationship between employers and providers, with employers paying providers directly for apprenticeship training with tax credits, or other forms of government incentives,  dished out later.

It said the review “created a hugely damaging picture” from its front cover illustrated with various tools to its “lack of understanding”. It also said that “some of the big things are wrong” and that Mr Richard’s assertion that the report be accepted on an “all-or-nothing” basis was like a “diktat”.

Mr Hoyle said one of Mr Richard’s key recommendations — that “testing and validation process of apprenticeships should be independent and genuinely respected by industry” — particularly upset members.

Mr Richard, a Californian who made his money though technology transfer, bit back on Twitter, dismissing the group’s reaction as “self-interest”. He told FE Week at the time that his proposals were not “a laundry list” from which the government could pick the elements that it wanted.

His findings have since been considered by the government and Mr Hancock is due to make an announcement on the its response later this week.

Students stay in official net migration figures

The government’s response to the Business Innovation and Skills select committee report on overseas students and migration is a “disappointment”, says the Association of Colleges.

In the initial report, Overseas Students and Net Migration, which was published last September, the committee recommended that overseas students should not be counted in the overall figures for immigration, a proposal that the government has now rejected.

Although David Cameron made it clear on his recent trip to India that there would be no cap on the number of foreign students, the coalition government has pledged to cut the net migration figure.

The association’s international director, John Mountford, said: “It is something of a disappointment that the government has reasserted its aim to continue to count students within net migration.

“They are here to learn, not earn, and should be treated appropriately.”

He said that removing students from the overall figure would be a better reflection of why they had come to the UK; those choosing to stay would have to go through a further application process.

According to parliamentary convention, government departments should respond to select committee reports within two months, but the government took four months to publish its response to the initial report.

The BIS select committee replied to the government’s response within three days with ‘Too Little Too Late’, a report that urged the government to reconsider its position.

It concluded: “The government’s response was late, woefully short on detail and fails to take account of recent developments. It seeks to underplay the urgency of the problem and thus excuse the failure to act decisively to address this serious matter. The government should listen, think again and change course.”

The government’s response coincided with the release of figures by the Office of National Statistics showing that the number of student visas issued by the UK Border Agency (UKBA) fell 20 per cent in 2012 compared with 2011.

In the same period the number of visas issued for FE study fell 62 per cent to 31,587, while visas issued for HE rose 3 per cent.

Mr Mountford echoed concerns raised in the Overseas Students and Net Migration report that removing students from net migration was necessary to demonstrate clearly that the UK welcomed overseas students.

He said: “People are refused visas because of the criteria set by the UKBA, so including them in net migration or not won’t, on a nuts and bolts level, affect that. But, on the other hand, if we are giving  the impression that Britain is difficult to get into, then we will lose out on learners.”

He acknowledged that the fall in both overall student visa numbers and those issued for the FE sector was partly connected to the government’s clampdown on private colleges offering bogus qualifications, but warned this could have a negative impact on the sector.

“I think there’s a default setting that there’s something suspicious about the FE sector. It’s not justifiable because we do have robust
application monitoring systems in our colleges. It would be helpful if the UKBA could reflect that.”

‘Excellent’ grade dismissed

FE bosses have urged Ofsted chief inspector Sir Michael Wilshaw to be cautious about creating an “excellent” Ofsted grade for college governors working in disadvantaged communities.

The education watchdog told FE Week that Sir Michael was interested in “exploring” a rating to top the ‘outstanding’ mark for leadership in colleges. He recently introduced the concept for governors working in underperforming schools.

But the Association of School and College Leaders (ASCL) said ad hoc changes to the inspection system could be “confusing and destabilising”, while the Association of Colleges (AoC) said it was “concerned” that inspectors might not “recognise” pathways that were more than “just a quick fix” for providers in deprived areas.

Speaking to an Education select committee last month, Sir Michael said that a “good leader” helped to further teachers’ professional development by making sure that the right training programmes were available.

He said the watchdog was thinking of introducing a new excellent grade for leadership in “more difficult areas”.

Brian Lightman, general secretary of ASCL, said: “There is nothing wrong with recognising excellent leadership and governance but I question whether the inspection system is the most appropriate way.

“Ad hoc changes to the inspection system are confusing and destabilising, and make it impossible to compare year on year performance. What we need is continuity and coherence.”

AoC’s director of policy, Joy Mercer, agreed that leadership in colleges that faced difficult circumstances should be recognised.

However, she added: “We are concerned that Ofsted may not understand these challenges nor do its inspectors recognise pathways that are more than just a quick fix.

“We want Ofsted to acknowledge this determination to get the best for those who most need it. If it feels it can only recognise this with an additional grade, then so be it.”

“However, just giving credit to the most able leaders of learning through the current inspection process might do the trick too.”

The 157 Group welcomed the “focus on peer support across institutions to foster improved practice”.

Its executive director, Lynne Sedgmore, said the group had long been at the forefront of “thought leadership” and how outstanding leadership could impact on “outstanding teaching and learning”.

“Any move that places a focus on peer support across institutions to foster improved practice is to be welcomed,” she said.