Robin Landman, CEO, Network for Black Professionals

Robin Landman’s experience of social injustice is rooted much deeper than the workplace.

Being forced to flee apartheid-era South Africa as a boy for the London suburb of Eltham — where schoolboy Stephen Lawrence was murdered in a racist attack in 1993 — helped the 61-year-old understand the need for a Network for Black Professionals (NBP).

“When we started in 1996 it was a bit of a no-brainer — there were 500-plus college principals and only two were black,” says Landman, who wrote a bid for funding to form the Black Leadership Initiative in 2002, which later became part of the NBP.

“Now we’ve seen that number grow to 15 — that doesn’t mean they wouldn’t have become principals without us, but it’s quite likely many of them wouldn’t have had the confidence to go forward.”

Before he became the network’s director, Landman rose through FE to the deputy principal’s post at Hackney Community College. In 2010 he was awarded an OBE for services in FE to black and minority ethnic (BME) communities.

But it hasn’t been an easy ride.

“My parents were both teachers and were anti-apartheid,” says Landman, who lives  in Tunbridge Wells with partner April Carroll.

“It was very scary. The police would raid the house, our phone was tapped and we were constantly monitored. I remember once when the police found a piece of work that my mother, who taught Latin, had marked. They saw red markings and thought they’d found a code . . .”

He says the family fled to the UK after his father’s freedom was threatened. It was a tough move for both his parents, who had to restart their professional careers.

“My mother started working as a primary teacher and a colleague in the staffroom said ‘the degrees you people have aren’t up to much’. And that was from someone who didn’t have one,” he says.

Landman, an international relations graduate, experienced similar problems and left teachers’ training college after rugby players goaded him with racist songs.

He says: “I thought ‘I’m not putting up with that’. I was very upset but in those days — the 1970s — casual racism was common.”

He moved on to finish his degree but then experienced difficulties getting a permanent job.

“My girlfriend at the time was white and sailed into a job but I found it very difficult,” he says.

Eventually he started as a history teacher at Crown Wood Comprehensive in Greenwich, but lost out on an after-school mentoring role because his morals were “questionable” as he “lived in sin” with his girlfriend.

“I pointed out that the man who got the job was also living in sin — it was an excuse,” explains Landman.

After working in a pupil referral unit and a stint teaching in Jamaica, he decided to try back home for a job in FE. In 1986 he got a job at Brixton College, which had many black staff.

“It was the tail-end of the Inner London Education Authority, which had a pro-active approach to race equality,” he says.

“You would walk into an interview and have 20 people in the room. Race equality people, gender equality, disability equality people, everyone was represented — I did a good interview and was offered the job.”

The Arsenal fan was quickly promoted to senior lecturer and, by the time of incorporation, was working as head of faculty at Southwark College.

He says: “In 1993 it was a great time to be a senior manager because you could actually start doing things.”

He and a colleague used the opportunity to generate income by delivering bespoke training to quangos, using surplus cash to buy IT equipment and build a crèche.

But it was also a time when black presence in FE suffered.

My concern is that we’re losing a generation because we’re not giving them positive role models and alternatives. Why does such a high proportion of black men end up in prison? And why do many universities not recruit black students like they should?”

A role with the Association for Colleges [precursor to the Association of Colleges] gave him the chance to look into black presence in FE.

“I wrote an article saying incorporation had a bad impact on black representation in colleges. Positive county council policies attempted to increase black presence — when those colleges became independent, people lost their jobs,” he remembers.

“Incorporation was good in many ways but lots of good staff weren’t making it.”

In 1996, the sole black principal in the country invited him to Liverpool and the pair set about forming a network and self-help group, eventually evolving into the NBP.

“In 1993 Stephen Lawrence had been murdered so there were various campaigns going,” he says.

“In 1998 the Macpherson Report questioned institutional racism and said that colleges had a special responsibility to ensure students had a more positive picture about diversity. We established a commission that carried out a two-year investigation into black people in FE.”

A key recommendation was for “adequate” funding to address the under-representation of BME staff, he says and the Black Leadership Initiative was born, with funding of £600,000 a year.

Landman, who had by now spent time in South Africa helping to restructure FE, in 2005 switched from part-time duties to full-time at the network.

As he prepares to step down this summer, Mr Landman reflects on the lessons he’s learned.

“I’ve no doubt that many of the things that happened to me could have been avoided if I’d been less vocal and more politically astute,” he says.

“It’s an important balance of being able to identify when it’s the organisation at fault and when it’s you — you have to lobby effectively, not just criticise the sector’s failings, and have solutions that work, with resilience to stick with it.

“It’s been a slow process for the network but we would contend that we’ve made a difference.

“Last year we were awarded the Queen’s Diamond Jubilee Award for Volunteering for our mentoring programme, a major confirmation that we are seen outside of the sector as effective. For such a small organisation [there are 10 staff] to attract that much recognition says that we’re good at what we do.

“The start of this process was the murder of a young black man by a white racist in the area where I grew up and experienced similar incidents,” he says, remembering the recent anniversary of Stephen Lawrence’s death.

“The question we should be asking is what’s changed?  The casual racism that characterised the UK in the 1960s and 1970s is not acceptable any more and it’s very rare for the police to operate in the overtly racist way they did. But what’s not changed is also a big question.

“Now the issue of black-on-black violence has risen. My concern is that we’re losing a generation because we’re not giving them positive role models and alternatives. Why does such a high proportion of black men end up in prison? And why do many universities not recruit black students like they should? And why are black apprentices so under represented at just 9 per cent?

“More students should be able to see people that look like them walking through the corridors of power of further education colleges.”

And while representation has risen it still “falls short”, he says, considering 22 per cent of student intake in FE is BME.

“I think the day when the network withers and dies is still a long way off. We now have to focus on how we do our work with government funding getting tighter,” explains Landman.

It’s a personal thing

What’s your favourite book? 

Emile Zola’s Germinal — it made a big impression

What did you want to be when you were younger?

A journalist

What do you do to switch off from work?

Travel, eat out and watch Arsenal

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

Close friends and family

What would your super power be? 

Mindreading

Principal questions local merger

Two Midland colleges planning to merge have been accused of “ignoring” guidance from Skills Minister Matthew Hancock.

Stourbridge and Birmingham Metropolitan Colleges are set to become one institution with the 12,500-student Stourbridge’s property, rights and liabilities transferring to Birmingham Met, which had 26,000-plus learners two years ago.

The proposals had triggered a letter from Mr Hancock to David Beasley, clerk at Stourbridge, which is in the borough of Dudley.

But a spokesperson for the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) said there had been a constructive response and that the merger now had the minister’s blessing.

“The corporation has gone through the proper process and undertaken a college structure and prospects appraisal as set out in New Challenges, New Chances,” said the spokesperson.

However, Dudley College principal Lowell Williams (pictured), who has previously questioned the need for the merger, criticised the move.

He said many in the sector would be “surprised” the corporation of Stourbridge College had issued a dissolution order on the strength of the process it followed.

“The consultation response document does now provide some further information on the plans for Stourbridge post-dissolution — information that really would have been more helpful in the initial consultation document,” he said.

“But the process through which this decision has been reached still seems weak.”

He added: “The minister called for a ‘meaningful’, ‘open’ and ‘competitive’ process especially ‘should one of the options involve dissolution of the college’. This advice appears to have been ignored.

“The consultation response document does make reference to a ‘range of discussions with potential partners’ but the nature and status of these discussions are unclear. Some appear to be little more than informal exchanges rather than more formal approaches authorised by the corporation, which would be anticipated in the circumstances.

“Certainly the ‘open and competitive process’ the Secretary of State envisaged is missing. Sadly, the decision to go ahead with the dissolution of Stourbridge College, in this manner, may reflect badly on the sector as a whole.

“I’m guessing the Secretary of State has already directed civil servants to rewrite the rules on merger and dissolution, putting into place statutory requirements to curb some of our sector’s hard-won freedoms.

“Not surprisingly so, as many, like myself, would question whether this dissolution is an appropriate exercise of the freedoms recently bestowed on colleges.”

A spokesperson for the two colleges reissued a statement from last week and declined to comment further.

The statement read: “Both corporations have worked closely with BIS outlining the rationale for the merger and the many benefits it will bring to local learners, employers and the wider community.

“All the requirements have been met and we are now looking forward to delivering education and training to serve the needs of our communities.”

A BIS spokesperson said: “There are no plans to remove the freedoms granted in the Education Act 2011. The minister has made clear to all colleges that he expects them to follow the proper process.”

NAS investigates apprentices’ hours

The National Apprenticeship Service is investigating claims that apprentices are regularly working “over and above their contracted hours”.

UnionLearn, the learning and skills organisation of the Trades Union Congress, has reported that apprentices are breaking their contracts by doing their contracted hours in the workplace — and then studying on top without pay.

A UnionLearn spokesperson said the practice was happening largely with 30-hour contract apprenticeships. Learners would spend four days in the workplace — using up all their contracted hours — and then a fifth studying for their apprenticeship.

“We’ve got concerns that training providers and employers are failing to deal with this problem. The question is whether there’s intent or not to exploit young people,” said the spokesperson.

Tom Wilson (pictured), director of UnionLearn, said: “It is essential that apprentices are protected and valued.

“Apprenticeships are a vital way to ensure that people are learning the skills needed for the UK economy and that they are receiving quality training that will lead to them being highly employable.

“Pay is an essential component of valuing our apprentices. If they are not receiving at least the minimum they are owed, the whole concept of apprenticeships is devalued.

“Given the importance the government has placed on increasing apprenticeships, we know that protecting their ‘brand’ is essential.”

A spokesperson for the service said it would “assess” evidence to see if there was a problem.

“We have been made aware by UnionLearn that . . . some apprentices are working over and above their contracted hours without additional recompense,” she said.

“We are committed to the delivery of high quality apprenticeships and require all apprenticeships to be delivered in line with the requirements set out in the Apprenticeship framework and the Statement on Apprenticeship Quality.

“We are talking to UnionLearn, and once the details and evidence of these claims has been assessed, we will work with colleagues across the Skills Funding Agency and the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills to take appropriate action.”

New website misses national providers

A newly-launched apprenticeship website aimed at employers could be leaving out national providers, it has been claimed.

A mandatory postcode section, combined with a mandatory distance field, means that providers without a base in the search area won’t show up in the results.

The Association of Employment and Learning Provider’s director of employment and skills, Paul Warner, said the promotion of providers was a concern.

“It is only fair that this issue should be rectified quickly,” he said.

The search facility, part of the National Apprenticeship Service (NAS) website, returns providers and lists their Overall Apprenticeship Success Rates.

It also returns their success rates in individual apprenticeship frameworks, such as construction building — woodmachining, and compares the rates with the national average.

It was designed in response to a review of apprenticeships for small and medium-sized enterprises.

Among the recommendations of the review, carried out by jeweller Jason Holt and published last May, was for the NAS to do more to put businesses in touch with suitable providers.

A new code of conduct for dealing with queries about providers subsequently came out. The Service Standard set out how NAS handles calls from employers.

It was launched along with a nationwide radio advertising campaign promoting apprenticeships and news that the government was extending the £1,500 Apprenticeship Grant for Employers of 16 to 24-year-olds (AGE 16-24) to March next year.

But it sparked concerns in January that subjective official advice could be dished out because just the single “most appropriate college or training provider” would be put forward.

Paul Eeles, chief executive at EMFEC (formerly East Midlands Further Education Council) said: “It is important the criteria used are only based on evidence of college and provider performance, rather than subjective views and third-hand understanding of provision.

“It may be beneficial for NAS to publish these criteria.”

However, a NAS spokesperson later said that “if more than one provider meets their [employer] criteria we will mention this, but most often employers ask us for one name”.

“If more than one provider meets their criteria we will mention this, but most often employers ask us for one name,” he said.

“To get to the fewest providers we will ask the employer to tell us what is most important to them, which might be for example where the provider’s physical premises are or what its success rates are.

“No information will be withheld from the employer — we’re facilitating the employer to make an informed choice.”

Mr Warner said the new website represented progress.

“Progress has been made since the NAS originally floated its proposals in the sense that the employer can now be presented with more than one choice of provider and FE Choices is being used to help inform the choice,” he said.

“However, it does appear that AELP’s concern that all local centres of a national training provider should be covered by the service has not been resolved yet and it is only fair that this issue should be rectified quickly.”

Nobody from NAS was available for comment.

[download#108]

SFA ‘moves goalposts’ for small contracts

The future of the Skills Funding Agency’s minimum contract level policy has been called into question after it emerged 50 providers have been given allocations of less than £500,000.

More than £7m could be paid out by the agency on contracts below its minimum level.

The smallest of these is for £11,274 and the biggest £414,832. They appear on the agency’s website under its outcome of quarter two review for 2012/13.

Paul Warner, Association of Employment and Learning Providers director of employment and skills, said: “The large number of new providers on the latest allocations list has to prompt the question of whether the minimum contract policy has been abandoned.

“We are increasingly taking the view that any good quality provider who wants a direct contract should have one.”

The total amount allocated to the 50 providers is £7,312,834. Included in the figure is funding for 16 to 18 apprenticeships, which the agency has said also falls under the minimum contract level rule. But, despite the number of allocations below the minimum level, an agency spokesperson said the policy was still in place.

“We continue to apply the principles of minimum contract values,” she said.

“The level at which these are set for individual procurement exercises is driven by the ability of providers to meet the needs of their communities and the provision procured.

“Investment in apprenticeships continues to be a priority for the agency.

“To ensure we continue to meet the needs of employers, in 2012/13 the agency invited new organisations on the Register of Training Organisations to submit plans to deliver new high quality apprenticeships.”

The minimum contract policy of £500,000 came into place for the 2011/12 academic year. The agency claims it has “allowed efficiencies to be realised within the sector through a reduced agency role; economies of scale and more opportunities for shared services between training organisations”.

It is understood that more than 200 providers lost their agency business when the policy was introduced because they were unable or unwilling to increase their contracts to the £500,000 mark.

“If the goalposts have now been moved, we need to have a discussion with the agency about it and perhaps have a review for the good quality providers who lost their contracts when minimum contract was first introduced,” said Mr Warner.

Lindsay McCurdy, chief executive of Apprenticeships4England, said: “It’s fantastic if the agency is reducing minimum contract levels, but there needs to be more clarity on how this has been done and how providers can get these contracts.”

An agency spokesperson said: “We ran three pilots for apprenticeships, one contracted in September for 19 to 24 apprenticeships, and two for 16 to 18 apprenticeships contracted in April and May 2013.

“All provision was openly and competitively tendered, and contracts were awarded to the organisations that could demonstrate the highest quality and support from employers.”

Traineeships launched, but only for some

The 11-month wait for a government outline of traineeships is over — but “disappointment” has been expressed about who can take them.

They were first proposed by Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg in June last year to help 16 to 24-year-olds gain work-related skills and attitudes.

But it wasn’t until today that the Skills Minister Matthew Hancock finally revealed their framework (click here to download the document).

They are being rolled out in August, but only 16 to 19-year-olds can take them, along with young people with learning difficulty assessments up to the academic age of 25.

David Hughes, chief executive of the National Institute of Adult Continuing Education, said: “It is disappointing, but understandable given the split of funding between government departments, that the statement is only about 16 to 19-year-olds.

“The need for traineeships is as compelling and urgent for young adults as it is for 16 to 19-year-olds and we are looking forward to an announcement on their offer soon.

Graham Hoyle, Association of Employment and Learning Providers chief executive, said: “It is very disappointing that the government has decided to restrict traineeships to 16 to 19-year-olds only, even if ministers have promised to review the criteria at some point.

“To make a real impact on the NEET figures and to provide a ladder for more young adults to get on to apprenticeships, the start of this vital new programme should have been more ambitious.”

Shadow Skills Minister Gordon Marsden said: “It is deeply concerning that the government at this stage is only bringing forward this policy for 16 to 19-year-olds, despite the high levels of NEETs aged 20 to 24.

“Government ministers must ensure traineeships provide a clear progression route for young people into apprenticeships or employment.”

Martin Doel, chief executive at the Association of Colleges, said: “We look forward to continuing to work alongside government and employers on the initial roll-out of the traineeship programme on the basis of our experience of delivering to 16 to 19-year-olds and to the potential of extending them to young people up to the age of 24, for whom we think traineeships could represent a very effective means of improving life prospects.”

A government spokesperson said: “We are announcing the 16 to 19 framework so that delivery of traineeships for this age group will be possible from the start of the 2013/14 academic year.

“We are looking to extend the traineeships programme to young people up to age 24 and we are continuing to explore the implementation issues.”

Traineeships will include work placements of up to six months, flexible training to build character and to help young people get ready for work — such as job search and interview skills, time-keeping and team working — and will develop learners’ English and maths.

However, providers without an Ofsted grade one or two will not be able to run traineeships in the scheme’s first year.

The framework document says: “Where this means there is no eligible provider in a location, we will support efforts to ensure that outstanding and good provision becomes available in that area.”

Lynne Sedgmore, 157 Group executive director, said she would be speaking to members about the policy, adding: “Ofsted grades are but one way of assessing provider quality.”

The AELP declined to comment on the Ofsted grade limitation to traineeships and nobody from the AoC was available for comment.

————————————————————————

Editorial: Good, but not perfect

The long-awaited traineeships announcement came with news that colleges and training providers without an Ofsted grade one or two will be banned from being involved.

This will have come as a surprise to many as the ban was not floated in the traineeship discussion document published in January.

In the FE Week office, there has been an interesting debate about the merits of the ban.

On the one hand, the policy is simple, transparent and sends an important and strong message about the importance of quality.

But is an overall Ofsted grade a reliable indicator of quality in the context of delivering traineeships?

For example, typically an Ofsted grade for a large college relates to long qualification teaching and success rates for classroom delivery — not the type of innovative employer engagement traineeships will demand.

So, an overall Ofsted grade is likely to be a crude and potentially unreliable measure.

But, on balance, and with no time to consider tenders or individual cases, it probably is the better quality criteria at hand.

All that said, a ban based on an Ofsted grade does raise a number of important questions.

What will happen to traineeship providers if an Ofsted inspection leads to a downgrading to a grade three or four?

And what pressures might this put on Ofsted to revisit providers?

Further, will providers without a grade one or two be banned from being a traineeship subcontractor?

And finally, given traineeships are part of the 16 to 19 study programmes, is the policy inconsistent because grade three and four providers are funded to deliver these?

Nick Linford, editor of FE Week

————————————————————————

Want to find out more? The sign up for this free webinar delivered by Nick Linford, sponsored by NCFE Traineeships, 3-4pm on Wednesday 15th May. Click here to register.

New chief executive at the Association of Employment and Learning Providers

The incoming chief executive of the Association of Employment and Learning Providers has told how apprenticeships will be at the top of his agenda.

Stewart Segal (pictured) takes over from Graham Hoyle OBE in three months having impressed association bosses who interviewed more than 50 candidates for the job.

Mr Segal has experience of the FE sector, where he counts funding issues among his areas of expertise, having already worked with the association for a number of years. He was also chief executive of national training provider Spring Skills and Hertfordshire Training and Enterprise Council.

The married father-of-two has also worked with the Learning and Skills Improvement Service and the Skills Funding Agency and Education Funding Agency, serving on a number of advisory groups.

And apprenticeships were top of his ‘to-do’ list for the new job, he told FE Week, in his first interview after being appointed.

“We need to take the apprenticeship programme on at a time when budgets are pretty tight and funding is under pressure,” said 56-year-old Mr Segal, from Maidenhead, Berkshire.

“We need to ensure the programme is transparent and open and has a great deal of engagement with employers.”

He added: “We know that there is pressure on government funding, but we are now seeing an apprenticeship programme that is getting the recognition and credibility that it deserves.

“These major improvements have been delivered by effective professional training providers responding to employer and learner needs. That is what will drive even further improvements in the sector.”

Traineeships, a new skills funding system, study programmes, work programme challenges and the need to respond to a number of recent reviews will also figure in his new chief executive agenda.

“This is a challenging agenda but I am very confident that the association and its members will have a vital role to play if we are to create an even stronger skills agenda that supports economic growth in the UK and gets more people back into work,” said Mr Segal.

He said he was “delighted” with his appointment and said he had a keen interest on working on the development FE Guild.

“The FE Guild is a great opportunity for the sector to take more ownership of professionalism and quality of delivery,” he said.

“It will be an important part of establishing the credibility of the sector. I’m sure I will continue to support the development of the guild.

“Hopefully, I’ll build on the programme that’s been set out already so that all training providers can develop in their professionalism. This will help the status of vocational learning.”

Association chairman Martin Dunford OBE said: “Stewart has extensive experience of direct delivery of training as well as his knowledge of the policymaking roles of the key stakeholders. This is a challenging time for training providers with reducing budgets and a range of reviews and recommendations on the future of skills funding while the effectiveness of the work programme is also under scrutiny.

“Stewart has been involved in the major improvements made in the sector in terms of responsiveness and quality and we know he will take that agenda forward.

“We have an important role to play in shaping the skills and employment agenda for the future and Stewart will work with our partners to ensure that we remain focused on delivering high quality training provision to employers and learners.”

Mr Segal is expected to speak at the association’s national conference, which takes place in London on June 10 and 11.

Guild to meet at Windsor Castle for ‘complex thinking time’

Twenty-nine “key people” from FE have been invited to eat, drink, sleep and “think” in secret at Windsor Castle about the sector’s new professional body.

A spokesperson for the proposed FE Guild — which will set professional standards across the sector — said it had hired St George’s House, a retreat within the castle, for 26 hours from May 13 to allow delegates to “commit their time to confidential thinking” and to  “help drive forward” the body due to launch in August.

She said the delegates — including Skills Minister Matthew Hancock — had been asked along to ensure the guild was committed to being “sector-owned and led” and “fully fit for purpose”. But while the guild confirmed 27 delegates would attend, a spokesperson for the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) said the meeting was “not in the ministers diary”.

The new body — yet to be officially named — would foot the £8,265 bill, equal to £285 per person, to include lunch, a three-course dinner, drinks and accommodation, the guild spokesperson said.

It represents fair value for delegates who we are asking to commit to 26 hours of their time to complex, in-depth and detailed confidential thinking on behalf of the sector.”

But one FE leader, who did not wish to be named, told FE Week: “I question the wisdom of spending money on high profile external venues when funding is so tight, redundancies are rife and any number of boardrooms could have been used at little cost.”

The guild spokesperson defended the move saying: “While this is, of course, more than we spend on routine events, it is appropriate for a strategic sector-wide meeting that will shape the guild over the next decade and represents fair value for delegates who we are asking to commit to 26 hours of their time to complex, in-depth and detailed confidential thinking on behalf of the sector.”

Over the two days, delegates would consider the body’s priorities, and strategic and operational relationships with employers, and would agree on what was meant by “collective leadership”.  Represented bodies would be invited to commit to the new organisation.

The spokesperson added: “The venue was chosen because of its values of openness, honesty, trust and respect.

“People from all areas of society, holding diverse views, opinions and beliefs attend St George’s to debate freely. It is important to all of us in the learning and skills sector that this is the spirit in which we, too, can shape our own future at this strategically crucial time.”

Described on its website as a “safe haven, an environment receptive to new ideas, to taking risks, to living at the intellectual edge,” the venue also gives delegates the chance to pray three times over their stay.

In a leaflet advertising the venue it says: “The offering of prayer in the chapel finds a practical expression in consultations, where the house offers space for nurturing wisdom.”

FE Week reported last month that BIS had confirmed funding, excluding VAT, of £18.8m for August to April next year and the same figure again for 2014-15 to develop the guild.

David Hughes, independent chair of the guild’s development steering group and chief executive of the National Institute of Adult Continuing Education, said at that time the group would now be able to recruit a chief executive before its launch.