AELP members respond to Richard Review with ‘anger’

The Association of Employment and Learning Providers (AELP) today responded to the Richard Review of Apprenticeships. See their response in full below:

The Richard review of apprenticeships has now hit the streets and unlike most reviews asserts that it has to be accepted on an all or nothing basis.  That condition alone makes it impossible for AELP and its members to accept this composite set of proposals.

Our rejection, however, is not based solely on this ultimatum.

It starts with the cover, of both the main and summary documents, which displays in a sort of pictorial way, a stereotypical view of traditional basic craft occupations as the depiction of apprenticeships.  This is a hugely damaging picture which both ignores the current reality regarding apprenticeships and dangerously misinforms everyone about the future breadth and use of apprenticeships across the whole of the service sector and indeed new high-tech sectors, including the emerging media, performing arts and ‘green’ environmental sectors.

Understandably the greatest anger immediately articulated by apprenticeship providers was focused on the insulting and unfounded assertion that the work of their highly qualified, experienced and skilled independent assessors, who have a very good knowledge of the industry, needed additionally to be independently assessed!  An assertion which, with apprenticeship success rates nationally at 75% and above cannot be substantiated.

One of Doug Richard’s core proposals was, as expected, that future apprenticeship funding should be directed solely to employers for them to find a provider of choice.  A route also proposed by large employers via UKCES; a route that will decimate SME involvement.  AELP have always accepted that this option should be available to employers, but as an option not a sole, no choice diktat.  It is an option that has been available for many years through the LSC’s NES, which was however taken up by only a very few large companies, with most still preferring the contract to deliver the high quality, complex, training service which is not their own core business to be held by proven training providers.

The greatest anger immediately articulated by apprenticeship providers was focused on the insulting and unfounded assertion that the work of their highly qualified, experienced and skilled independent assessors, who have a very good knowledge of the industry, needed additionally to be independently assessed!”

But it is not the large companies that everyone seems to be concerned about.  It’s the SMEs!  By all means give them the option.  AELP’s apprenticeship providers, who currently deliver half a million apprenticeships and work with 350,000 employers, mostly SMEs, are persuaded that they will not take it up.

As to the other proposals (which AELP will respond to in detail over the next few weeks) most of them build upon existing AELP policy, and more to the point existing provider practice; most are certainly not radical and, in the most part are not even new.  We are particularly disappointed at the clear lack of understanding of how the apprenticeship programme currently works.  Apprenticeships naturally need to be continuously developed and improved – yes, by employers not the government – using the high level of expertise and professionalism found in the vast majority of providers; many with a track record of fifty years in the apprenticeship delivery business

And one more thing; whatever the report asserts, apprenticeships are not and never have been supply side driven, nor indeed supply side designed.  Providers are only engaged when an employer has decided to recruit a worker and utilise an employer designed framework – they are already operating in an entirely demand-led, employer driven market place.  And while there are many examples of effective college delivery, it is not merely “in some instances partnering and hosting small and specialist niche providers”, but in reality 75% plus of apprenticeships are actually delivered by independent providers.

There are suggestions in the review which AELP might agree with, but for the most part they exist already, build upon existing arrangements or confirm and support arguments that we and others have already made.  It was good to see Doug Richard ultimately agreeing with AELP’s strongly held belief that apprenticeships must be available for ‘all-age’ employees and that they should not be restricted to level 3 and above.  It was also good to see the confirmation of our vigorously argued demand for a comprehensive ‘preparatory training’ programme to extend and replace the myriad of well-meaning government funded schemes currently on offer.

Independent advice and guidance must be available to all whilst at school, without schools operating any kind of veto for the protection of their 6th forms and schools have just got to better at preparing all young people for the world of work, especially in getting their English and maths achievements up to first base.  AELP’s proposals for output related funding for schools in this regard really need to be explored.

Overall, therefore, some of the big things are wrong and much of the rest demonstrate a lack of understanding of existing arrangements; arrangements that have seen a doubling of apprenticeships over the last couple of years whilst continuing to increase successful completion rates to above international comparisons and attracting hugely impressive satisfaction rates from both employers (92%) and apprentices (89%) alike.  Current apprenticeship delivery is not ‘broke’, in need of continuous improvement – of course.

AELP will be developing a detailed response to all of the suggestions made in this review over the next few weeks in order to inform the imminent ministerial review of the Holt review, the Richard review, the Heseltine review, and the Select Committee’s review.

Meanwhile, we will suggest policy makers consider the proposals that can be found in AELP’s recent policy paper, which was made available as part of this review.

New FE Guild chair looks to technology

The chair of the FE Guild steering group has revealed to FE Week why he would make it an “important priority” to support teachers to become more “technologically literate”.

David Hughes said there hadn’t been enough investment and focus in FE on technology such as video lectures and the use of apps in the classroom – and discouraging the use of smartphones in the classroom was “archaic”.

Mr Hughes, the chief executive of NIACE and the chair of the FE Guild steering group, a new, single body being created to set professional standards and codes of behaviour in FE, was speaking from a NIACE and BBC Innovating Learning conference in Salford.

“We think there is an untouched potential around use of technology and learning in FE, which, if used more creatively and innovatively, will help improve the learning experience,” he said.

“It’s about making it more exciting, more interesting and embedding the use of technology in a way that people will get used to so when they go out into society and the working world they’ll be better prepared.”

We think there is an untouched potential around use of technology and learning in FE”

He said he wasn’t talking about aids such as electronic whiteboards but video lecturing and apps that allowed students to access information in and out of the classroom. He cited Massive Open Online Classes (MOOCs) as a successful example – in the US, 100,000 people tuned in to hear a MOOC about artificial intelligence, he said.

“If by doing video lectures rather than physical lectures we can get to 100 people rather than 20 at the same time, that is a fantastic result,” he said.

“As resources are reduced per learner it’s important that the resources available are targeted in enhancing the learning experience.

“The savings mean practitioners could spend more time with learners who need extra support.”

The big issue was how to persuade FE leaders that investing in the use of technology would improve the learning experience. “The guild should play an important part in this,” he said.

“The benefit is about learners being empowered, about being able to direct their own learning. That is why it’s so exciting — learners can learn in their own time and in their own ways and not be reliant on teachers. And technology could enable more peer support for students created by online networks.”

He said he believed qualifications such as Mozilla Open Badges, obtained free through online learning, might mean something to employers in the future and that the sector should welcome them.

He added: “This isn’t about cutting jobs — it’s about getting teachers involved with technology so they can feel more empowered themselves to get better learning happening.”

A search for the top maths apps and app developers was launched at the conference.

Twigg: You’ve snatched our Tech Bacc

The Shadow Secretary of State for Education, Stephen Twigg, has accused Skills Minister Matthew Hancock of “stealing the idea for a Technical Baccalaureate”.

During a parliamentary exchange Mr Hancock responded saying: “I am absolutely delighted by the positive tone coming from the Opposition . . . the Tech Bac, as suggested by Lord Adonis, a man for whom the Government has huge respect, is one of the things that we will do to ensure higher quality occupational and vocational qualifications and more respect for them. I look forward to consulting widely and will set out more details in due course.”

The Department for Education announced last month that it would consult on the details of a Tech bacc, and publish a list of courses that will qualify next year.

Approved courses are expected to involve a high degree of external assessment rather than tutor marking.

Far too little genuinely occupational education takes place among 16 to 18-year-olds.”

The Association of Colleges (AoC) has called on the government to work with the Labour party on the new qualifications, which are expected to be available from September 2014.

“It would be good if all three major political parties were able to work together to ensure commonality in their proposals,” said Martin Doel, the association’s chief executive.

“In this way we might have some prospect of a proposal that will stand the test of time, help students achieve the best that they can and not go the way of diplomas, NVQs or the other previous ‘new’ ideas in vocational education.”
He added that it was unsurprising employers, parents and students did not understand vocational education when changes were made so regularly to qualifications and systems.

Mr Twigg told FE Week that Coalition support for the idea was “good”, but its plans looked half-hearted.

“While pupils under Labour would have the chance to start a Tech Bacc from 14, and be able to switch between academic and practical courses, the government’s Tech Bacc looks like an afterthought for those who haven’t passed Michael Gove’s much derided EBacc at 16.”

In an interview with FE Week, Mr Hancock was asked about the potential for cross-party consensus.

“My approach will be very consultative. There are a number of different proposals already on the table and I’ll want to consult widely,” he said.

The proposals include plans to present A level and vocational data separately on performance tables from January 2014. Minimum standards for school sixth forms, sixth-form colleges and further education colleges would also be introduced.

“Far too little genuinely occupational education takes place among 16 to 18-year-olds. In the coming weeks we will publish a consultation on how to identify those with the highest value,” he said.

Judith Norrington, group director of policy and research at City & Guilds, told FE Week: ‘We strongly believe vocational achievements should be given prominence alongside academic qualifications – this notion is, in fact, long overdue. We created a technological baccalaureate many years ago with this in mind.

“However, if we are to encourage and engage those people who need it most, especially as the raising the participation age policy comes into force, we must ensure we have the utmost confidence in the way qualifications are considered for performance tables and that the ranking process is entirely fit for purpose.”

VAT plans will dent adult apprenticeships

Training experts say adults will be put off apprenticeships after the government announcement that training providers must charge VAT on new FE loans.

Chief executive of the Association of Employment and Learning Providers (AELP), Graham Hoyle, pictured right, said the charges would have a “serious impact” on higher apprenticeships.

The charge, which Mr Hoyle expects will be about 20 per cent, will be introduced as part of the “24-plus advanced learning loan” scheme next year, but will not affect learners studying at general FE colleges.

“The current position is very unsatisfactory because it is bound to have a serious impact on the number of adults entering the apprenticeship programme next year,” Mr Hoyle said.

“The government’s ambitions to see more higher apprenticeships will be badly affected. The skills minister has been made aware of this and he has given AELP an assurance that further deliberations will continue in tandem with the current consultation on VAT on higher education.”

In their latest online update, the Department for Business Innovation and Skills (BIS) and HMRC confirmed that no changes will be made to the VAT treatment of further education for 2013/14.

The current position is very unsatisfactory because it is bound to have a serious impact on the number of adults entering the apprenticeship programme next year,”

It said: “It has not been possible to find a solution that would deal with the issues associated with the introduction of loans in isolation, without considering the VAT treatment of further education as a whole.

“The agency, BIS and HRMC are aware of issues raised by some commercial training organisations about the impact that the VAT rules would have on them. BIS and HMRC will continue working together to consider these issues.

“The 24-plus Advanced Learning Loans Policy Overview and FAQ have been updated to reflect this decision.”

FE Week first reported the imminent charge in June. At the time, Martin Doel, chief executive of the Association of Colleges (AoC), said that colleges, universities and schools operated on different “playing fields” to private providers.

He argued that general FE colleges were different in particular because they were not-for-profit and served their local community. Mr Doel said that if independent training providers wanted to operate on a par with colleges they would need to accept accountability to their local community.

Gordon Marsden, shadow FE minister, told FE Week the problem was because of the different legal statuses held by colleges and independent training providers. However, he later admitted there was “nothing immediately that can be done”.

Learner voices at heart of 157 Group publication

The 157 Group has published ‘a collection of ten learner voices’, compiled in collaboration with the National Association of Specialist Colleges (Natspec), on the experiences of students with learning difficulties and disabilities in further education. Click here to download.

Chief executive of Natspec, Alison Boulton, and executive director of 157 Group, Lynne Sedgmore, write in the forward that the voices of learners are key to understanding how colleges can offer the best support.

“The traditional wisdom says that policymakers make policy and practitioners implement it. We believe that it does not have to be that way, and seek, through publications like this, to allow the real experiences of learners to influence those who make policy decisions,” they said.

One of the students featured in the report was former Ruskin Mill College student Charlie Avent, 24, who’s autistic.

Mr Avent is pictured above launching the publication at the 157 Group annual reception this evening, with Lynne Sedgmore, where he said in a speech about his experience being a learner:

I don’t have learning difficulties, I had teaching difficulties”.

With permission from the 157 Group we have included Charlie’s story below, as written by Jan Murray in the publication.

Charlie: Harmony through horsemanship

I didn’t get on well in mainstream education. Reading and writing was a struggle for me, but my teachers didn’t seem to understand my difficulties. Their constant criticism made me angry and confrontational, so it was difficult to make friends.

The kids at school didn’t seem to like me: they’d just beat me up and call me names. I felt completely isolated, as if I were in a foreign country where no one understood my language. By the age of 15, I was losing the will to live.

I did try riding as a child, but autism makes you very sensitive to the world around you and I was often panicky around the horses. Looking back, I realise I was freaked out by the violence of it all, particularly seeing horses being whipped, but I just wasn’t able to articulate those feelings at the time. I’d just freak out or have panic attacks.

I was moved to a special school at 15, and then on to Ruskin Mill College at 19. But despite having greater freedom, I still struggled to fit in at college. Then my art teacher Patricia introduced me to her horse, Oscar, and everything changed.

When I first saw Oscar, it was like meeting a long‑lost member of the family. I knew instinctively that I wanted to understand more about how horses communicate. Having noticed my enthusiasm, staff at Ruskin Mill College arranged for me to do work experience at Heartshore Horses, a centre for natural horsemanship near Minchinhampton in the Cotswolds.

Dawn, who owns the stables, introduced me to the concept of natural horsemanship, explaining how horses communicate through their movement and gestures. If you know what you’re looking for, you can tell if a horse is happy, sad, in love – or even if they like you.

In all, I had 18 months of weekly work experience and learning natural horsemanship at Heartshore. When I left Ruskin Mill College, I asked Dawn if I could stay on doing regular volunteer work at the stables, which I have been doing ever since.

I knew early on that I wanted my own horse, but had no idea how I would afford the livery. After talking it through with Dawn, she said I could keep a horse at Heartshore in exchange for helping out at the stables a few days a week.

Thanks to the help of staff at Ruskin Mill College and Dawn and my colleagues at Heartshore, I now have a much better understanding of myself.”

In natural horsemanship, your horse chooses you, not the other way round. As soon as I saw Spirit, she lowered her head and pawed the ground, which was a very clear sign that she was the horse for me. When your horses chooses you, it is a very powerful moment and I decided then that I wanted to use my interest to help raise awareness of autism.

Since then, I’ve continued to work part time at Heartshore and have started giving demonstrations in natural horsemanship to children and young people with autism. Last year, I gave a talk at the Natspec conference about autism – something I’d never have done before I started working with horses.

When you’re on the autistic spectrum, it’s like your brain is on a different operating system from other people’s; if you compare the brain to a computer, it’s like the difference between Apple and Windows 7.

Thanks to the help of staff at Ruskin Mill College and Dawn and my colleagues at Heartshore, I now have a much better understanding of myself, which means I am far more able to control my behaviour. I’ve learned that no one listens when you’re ranting and raving, which means I am far less likely to flare up like I used to.

I’m 24 now, and when I look back on my teenage years, I can see why I was angry. I felt I had no voice and no choice. I’m sure a lot of young people – and not just those on the autistic spectrum – feel like that.

Young people’s interests are their strength, and if we could develop a system that helped young people pursue their passions, instead of trying to educate everyone in the same way, I’m sure we could reduce anti‑social behaviour and underachievement.

I used to think of autism as a disorder, but my experiences have taught me that being on the autism spectrum is a disability only if you perceive it that way. Imagine an axe: in the wrong hands it can be destructive, but if used in the right way, it can create beautiful things. That’s how I see autism now. And for the first time in my life, I feel I can have my say.

Charlie with his horse Spirit

 

Principal of Leeds City College to be chair of 157 Group

FE Week can reveal that today Peter Roberts (pictured), principal of Leeds City College, has been unanimously elected as chair of the 157 Group.

Mr Roberts takes over from Marilyn Hawkins, the former principal of Barnet and Southgate College, who retired from the post in April 2012.

The 157 Group is a membership organisation, which “represents 27 large, successful and regionally influential Further Education colleges in England.”

Mr Roberts became the first principal of Leeds City College in July 2009, following the merger of Leeds College of Technology, Leeds Thomas Danby College and Park Lane College Leeds and Keighley.

The new merged college received an overall Good – grade 2 – from Ofsted in May 2012.

Prior to joining Leeds City College, Peter was principal at Stockport College for seven years, and he has worked in the FE sector for 25 years.

Mr Roberts is also a member of a number of local, regional and national committees including national Vice Chair of the Mixed Economy Group (MEG); the Learning and Skills Improvement Service Council; the AoC Strategic Quality and Strategic Skills Groups; the Yorkshire and Humber Regional Planning Provider Representative Group, and the National Bureaucracy Reduction Group.

Mr Roberts said: “I am very excited to be taking up the role of chair of the 157 Group at this critical and busy time for the sector. Our impact review demonstrates how much we have achieved under the chairmanship of my predecessor, Marilyn Hawkins, and the learner voice publication launched yesterday is an example of how our work aims to keep a focus on those who matter the most – our learners.”

Sarah Robinson OBE, principal of Stoke on Trent College, was unanmimously elected to the position of vice chair.

FE Week will be at the 157 Group annual reception this event, so stay tuned for more information.

 

What should FE expect in the coming years?

With the budget announcements tomorrow coinciding with the half way point for this Government, Steve Besley, Head of Policy at Pearson, looks at what might lie ahead for the world of FE 

The end of the year is always a busy time for the FE sector but this year it brings the added twist of marking the halfway point for the Coalition Government. From now on, the context will be increasingly set by the build up to the May 2015 general election. Indeed there’s already been talk of updating the Coalition Agreement though it seems we’ll now have to wait for the New Year for any announcements on that.

For FE, the last two and a half years have been spent coping with the funding settlement set out in the early stages of the Coalition while trying to provide the skills programmes needed. Its faced some new ambitions such as those on apprenticeship numbers, levels of English and maths, and quality standards, some important consultations on funding reform, 16-19 programmes, apprenticeship provision and ESOL, and some significant Papers including those on HE, adult and community learning and fee loans. Its had a few sticks waved at it in the form of new inspection criteria, new efficiency requirements and a new intervention escalation process but also had some carrots dangled in front of it such as simpler systems and greater freedom. It has survived but it has been a tough slog.

So what now, what should FE expect for the next two and a half years, more of the same or something different? The new(ish) Minister’s commissioning of a Guild suggests he’s keen to keep the momentum of the New Challenges, New Chances reform programme going while funding will never be far away especially with a new spending round tomorrow. It points in other words to more of the same.

Four issues in particular, however, look likely to dominate.

First, further transformation of the skills system away from centralised planning and towards local responsiveness. The mantra here is employer ownership, putting employers in the driving seat and where possible diverting funding to them so that demand led becomes a reality. This approach can be seen in such mechanisms as the Employer Ownership Pilots and some of the City Deals and has been adopted as a way forward by both major Parties. Ed Miliband’s Conference speech pledging to put a cool £1bn of apprenticeship funding into the hands of managing employer groups and Michael Heseltine’s recent single pot proposition for locally commissioned provision are both examples of where this approach is gathering momentum.

Providers are left grappling with some of the teething problems associated with funding change while having to operate two increasingly divergent funding systems.”

The issue here is responsiveness, a strong theme in Ofsted’s challenging Report in July and a big driver for Government generally but one that is not always straightforward. Labour market signals are not always clear and providers need to know where responsibilities for identifying them lie. Under the Heseltine model for instance, labour market needs would be articulated through (LEPs) Local Enterprise Partnerships and providers would negotiate business plans with them. The danger here is that this adds another layer of complexity to an already perceived complex system. As ever, the fit between demand and supply in the world of FE remains uneasy and is likely to see further refinements in the coming months.

Second, and never far away, funding reform. The story here over the last two and a bit years has been threefold: streamlining the system so as in theory at least to free up providers from bureaucratic restrictions; protecting essential provision and those most in need; ameliorating where possible the impact of cuts by adopting more efficient forms of provision on the one hand and fee loans and co-investment on the other. Views remain mixed about the effect of all of these and given both the new funding system and 24+ fee loans don’t kick off in until next year, the full picture is unlikely to be clear for some time.

For the moment, providers are left grappling with some of the teething problems associated with funding change while having to operate two increasingly divergent funding systems, one for pre-19 provision, one for post-19 and facing considerable uncertainty about the impact of fee loans on 24+ provision. According to recent figures from the SFA, 40% of colleges have strong financial health ratings compared to 29% four years ago; it says a lot about how well the sector has adapted and it will need to continue to do so.

Third, qualification reform. Much of this is being driven by changes in the schools sector but these and other waves will equally hit FE over the next few years. At 16-19 for example, apart from the proposed introduction of English Bacc Certificates due in core subjects from 2015, there are important changes coming to both A’ levels and general Programmes of Study from next September. Maths too remains an important element as the Level 2 threshold becomes established, alternative provision post-16 is identified and the big heave to raise performance levels for a substantial number of adults gets under way. Elsewhere, further development work seems likely to follow recent consultations on ESOL and Higher Apprenticeships, Ofqual continues to review the QCF, NOS and market generally while the impact of the Innovation Code remains a subject for debate. The issue here, as for much of the qualification system, remains how best to ensure quality while providing for flexibility.

Fourth, quality, or more precisely professional standards leading to quality, brought to the fore recently by the Lingfield Review. More wide ranging than anticipated, the Review has pointed the sector in a particular direction with its proposals for different forms of governance, the setting of professional responsibilities in a standard Covenant, new forms of peer assessment for high-performing institutions let alone of course the creation of a leading representative body in the form of a Guild.

Quite what impact this Review will have on the sector is hard to say at this stage but coupled with the work of the Commission on Adult Vocational Teaching and Learning and that of LSIS on professional qualifications, we may yet see much stronger professional recognition for the sector. Something at least to look forward to.

Steve Besley is Head of Policy at Pearson

College principal appointed as AoC deputy chief executive

A new deputy chief executive has been appointed to the Association of Colleges (AoC).

Gill Clipson, principal of Amersham and Wycombe College, will replace Lesley Davies who left the AoC to become Director of Quality and Standards at Pearson.

The announcement follows an unsettled time for the AoC, which has been making voluntary and compulsory redundancies as part of a cost saving and restructuring process, as reported in FE Week in May.

Gill held a number of senior management positions before joining Amersham and Wycombe, one of the largest educational institutions in Buckinghamshire, made up of over 2,000 full-time and over 5,000 part-time students. The college which specialises in the arts was ranked as satisfactory — a grade three, by Ofsted who last inspected the institution in 2011.

Gill has worked nationally on the quality and improvement agenda and has also worked as an inspector. She is a trustee on the Board of Creative and Cultural Skills and has worked with the Peter Jones Enterprise Academy since its inception. She was a board member of the Buckinghamshire Economic and Learning Partnership as well as a principal on the Gazelle Colleges Group which aims to “transform colleges through entrepreneurship”.

The AoC employs over 100 members of staff, as well more than 30 staff at three sister organisations located in separate regions.

An AoC spokesperson said: “The AoC can confirm that Gill Clipson, currently principal at Amersham and Wycombe College, is being appointed as our deputy chief executive, subject to the usual negotiations around a start date.”

At the time of going to press Gill Clipson was unavailable for comment.