Professor Daniel Khan OBE, chief executive of OCN London, offers a response to Sir Michael Wilshaw’s ‘Deptford not Delhi’ speech

ir Michael Wilshaw has a reputation for making controversial statements, and his speech at AoC’s conference this month has once again thrown him into the media spotlight.

The Ofsted chief inspector warned of the dangers of concentrating on attracting international students to FE colleges. He spoke of focusing on Deptford rather than Delhi, in a speech aimed to promote the recruitment of domestic learners.

However Sir Michael’s speech reveals a rather short-sighted and narrow-minded approach to FE. FE exports are valued at £1bn a year and international learners are important both culturally and economically to colleges and communities.

Are Sir Michael’s misguided comments based on arrogance or, perhaps, ignorance of the FE sector?

Sir Michael appears extremely close-minded in ignoring the advantages of a multicultural student body”

In May John Hayes announced an FE ‘Global Strategy’.  The AoC conference in which it was launched encouraged colleges to open themselves up to international students and stakeholders.  Hayes advocated an international strategy in order to create a mobile and culturally diverse student body, which will be well-placed in the global marketplace. By doing so, colleges and students will have the skills and knowledge required to compete against the most competitive emerging markets.

Furthermore, the government’s 2011 New Challenges, New Chances paper spoke of the increasing demand for technical and vocational skills and their importance to sustained economic growth. Hence, the government has demonstrated its commitment to ensuring colleges remain focused on international recruitment.

In the light of such commitment, Sir Michael’s words seem somewhat ill-informed.

He also woefully ignores that students from across the globe do not just benefit the college in which they study, but the community as a whole. International students bring their own traditions, enriching the local area culturally. They can help in widening the horizons and experiences of local students, exposing them to new values, beliefs and opportunities.

He appears extremely close-minded in ignoring the advantages of a multicultural student body. An influx of international learners can offer a wealth of experience to our students, colleges and communities.

Aside from cultural concerns, foreign students are also of enormous benefit economically, to both the communities in which they live and the country as a whole. Such economic value extends well beyond their fee payments. International students, especially those arriving with expertise, can fill skill gaps and generate new economic growth during study and after graduation. This is particularly the case in students from emerging markets, primarily China and India, who bring with them cutting edge technical expertise. At the same time, the local economy also benefits from ‘subsistence’ spending, the money that students spend on goods and services outside their studies. Inevitably local businesses profit from such expenditure.

A good example of a college’s success in tapping into the international market is the Grimsby Institute of Further and Higher Education. In conjunction with major local employers, the college helped create an Institute of Food and Fisheries.  It did so to meet the needs of the industries based in the town, the largest concentration of food industries in Europe. The Grimsby institute recognised an excellent opportunity to provide expert training and consultancy in this area.

Since its creation it has been recognised internationally and attracted students from across the globe to its programmes. This has enabled local students to integrate with people of diverse backgrounds, which they would need to do when working in a global economy.

In the light of these considerations, Sir Michael’s words seem ill-judged and short-sighted. He fails to see the wider perspective and the importance of an international outlook for colleges.

The creation of an international student body extends beyond bringing in money for the College; it diversifies the local community and boosts the economy with new skills and innovation.

If colleges follow Sir Michael’s advice they are in danger of sacrificing their share in the country’s best export and compromising the strength of the FE sector as a whole.

John Mountford, AoC international director, defends colleges’ foreign recruitment

In recent weeks criticism has been levelled at colleges for their hugely beneficial work abroad.

This very paper reported a turn of phrase by Sir Michael Wilshaw, Her Majesty’s chief inspector, which appeared to question the benefits of FE’s international work.

In his speech to an AoC conference, Sir Michael challenged colleges to consider whether international work was being sought at the expense of the local community and quality improvement or, as it was phrased, Deptford not Delhi.

I think it is important to answer that challenge – and the public should be assured that both from quality and strategic perspectives there are plenty of reasons why colleges should embrace and develop their international work.

It is by working with Delhi that you can give learners the education they need to be successful in Deptford.

Colleges have a long and successful tradition of developing programmes that meet the needs of local and national partners. It therefore makes sense to use the skills and experience we have gained from this work and export our world class FE system to international partners.

These commercial opportunities allow colleges to develop programmes, generate income that allow them to run courses they wouldn’t normally run, hire local staff and purchase resources that they couldn’t normally purchase. It is a credit to the sector that we were asked to lead on the government’s FE Global Strategy.

To address the quality issue there is no known correlation between poor quality and international provision. A quick study of 20 colleges, all with sizable international operations, shows them to typically demonstrate grades of ‘good’ or better.

The proven benefits in internationalising the curriculum in a global skills market, coupled with the confidence working internationally brings to students and staff, has obviously benefited these colleges.

However, as I’m sure the chief inspector is aware, international provision sits outside the Ofsted remit and due to this gap a number of colleges have stepped forward to undergo a review of the quality of their international work to become AoC International Charter members.

The college sector knows that to be effective internationally you need to display a high commitment to quality. To suggest that we can take our eye off this essential element, when working with international partners and students, simply doesn’t make sense.

Colleges work with their local communities, to provide learners with meaningful skills and qualifications that allow them to be competitive and productive in the workplace or in their future studies. With this key mission in mind, it is important to acknowledge that we live and work in a globalised environment, where technology and industry have radically changed. It is one that needs a fluid, high-skilled and internationally competitive workforce.

In this technologically driven age it seems both outdated and out of touch to start questioning whether colleges should be taking an international perspective”

A large number of students will have jobs that are directly linked with multinational companies. Colleges’ international work goes a long way to provide an environment where learners can start to gain these skills.  It is by working internationally that we can inspire our learners to think internationally and show them how they can develop and grow from their local communities.

Shouldn’t we be applauding colleges who have the ambition and strategic vision to work together to establish a UK Colleges office in Delhi; isn’t it a credit to the sector that we have been asked to lead on the government’s FE Global Strategy?

The income generated from international projects and initiatives helps develop the quality and resources for all our provision and grows our sector’s worldwide reputation.

In this technologically driven age it seems both outdated and out of touch to start questioning whether colleges should be taking an international perspective – a more pertinent question would be how we can do more.

We should strive to remember and celebrate the great benefits overseas students and partnerships bring to all our colleges and home students’ experience – in fact the real headline should be ‘Delhi for Deptford’.

Susan Easton, NIACE programme manager for digital learning, looks at the role new technologies could play in adult learning.

The concept of learning innovation is not new, as adult learning practitioners and providers continuously review and revise their practice and delivery models. What is new, are the rapid, startling and increasingly frequent changes in technology, and the potential for these to support and initiate learning innovation.

Technology can facilitate learning at any time and almost anywhere; using audio, video and text content from broadcasters, education providers or their other learners; through social media; and through an increasing number of devices, including smartphones, games consoles and tablets.

Without technology, many adults would have limited access to learning opportunities due to geography, finance and lifestyle”

Use of technology in learning is no longer optional – without it, we limit the number and range of adults who can access learning and constrain the quality of their learning experience. By utilising technology, we open a world of possibilities in the way adults learn, progress, record and get support for their learning.

Without technology, adults with physical difficulties would find it difficult to access learning. Without technology, many adults would have limited access to learning opportunities due to geography, finance and lifestyle. With the help of technology, no one is barred from participation in some form of learning – whether formal or informal – only knowledge and confidence stand in the way.

In spite of this, while society embraces the adoption of technology, learning delivery remains two steps behind.  Undeniably, the term ‘innovation’ brings with it some negative connotations.  Funding often requires “innovative approaches” and the term has come to equate reinvention, often at the cost of the tried and tested. However, the word should suggest something different – renewal and change – and the need for renewal in post-16 learning has never been greater.

What is the best way to support adult learning practitioners and providers to become familiar with recent developments in technology, and consider their use in realistic learning contexts?

Who better to work with than the BBC, with their learning remit, wide experience in learning with broadcasting and their vast number of high quality learning resources?  Subsequent discussions helped to develop a shared vision, resulting in a decision to host a joint conference that offers new and exciting ways for practitioners to engage with the cutting edge of learning technology and consider their use in adult learning.

The conference will support practitioners and providers with limited experience in using technology as well as those with more extensive experience, by discussing innovative uses of familiar technologies, introducing new resources and supporting delegates to keep pace with recent technological changes.

The conference on December 4 in Manchester will open with a keynote speech from Saul Nassé, controller of BBC Learning, who will discuss how it is using the unique power of broadcasting and technology to inspire audiences of all ages to learn.

He will provide an overview of BBC content available for adult learners and discuss how the teams within BBC Learning are using television, online, mobile and social networking to deliver innovative educational content.

‘A Slice of Raspberry Pi’, from Eben Upton, executive director of the Raspberry Pi Foundation, will stimulate discussion on the possibilities of programming within the adult curriculum, while Steve Stanley, HMI, principal officer, adult skills and employment, will discuss what inspectors are looking for in the use of technology for learning.

Presentation sessions on the use of mobile apps, the Flipped Classroom, learning outside institutions and E-Reading rooms will lead to a discussion on different contexts for learning, while workshops and knowledge exchanges will range from augmented reality to Community Learning Trusts; learning with community radio to massive open online courses; digital identity to using learners own technologies.

The day will end with the presentation of the digital practitioner of the year awards. We are looking for nominations for these awards which will recognise those tutors who have made adult learning more accessible, engaging and innovative and who have used technology to help adults get the opportunity to learn in new and exciting ways.

Register for the conference at www.niace.org.uk/campaigns-events/events/Innovating-Learning

Nominate for the Digital Practitioner of the Year Awards www.niace.org.uk/campaigns-events/events/digital-practitioner-awards-information