English and maths may well be key to learning, but let’s not forget the practical skills of time management, teamwork and communications, according to Graham Hasting-Evans of the National Open College Network (NOCN)

Hardly a day goes by without the government, business groups or some MP having their say on the state of our education system, schools and exams.

We all know education is essential and our politicians need to set the policy agenda. However, we must get it right for the 21st Century not try to fix the problems of the 20th century.

It is critical we also listen to employers about the skills they need our young people to have – evidenced in the debates last week at the CBI Conference with its calls for more vocational educations and a focus on employability skills.

Education Secretary Michael Gove is particularly verbose with personal words of wisdom on teaching and learning – they litter the pages of the more serious daily newspapers.

I’m not sure whether anyone has already coined the phrase ‘Goveism’, but I’m going to use it now.

The last few weeks have been particularly prolific for ‘Goveisms‘. But one that Mr Gove is particularly focused on is learning by rote.

It comes up time and again, and to us at the National Open College Network (NOCN) it’s particularly disturbing.

The dictionary definition of rote is: “A memorising process using routine or repetition, often without full attention or comprehension.”

How scary a thought is that? Can you imagine an electrician or a doctor repeating procedures without comprehension?

I don’t mean to be flippant but there’s a time and a place for rote, and I don’t think the 21st Century, in our schools and colleges, qualify. We need to prepare our young people for the global skills market that is already upon us.

Indeed, Louise Robinson, president of the Girls’ School Association, argued schools should prepare pupils for the Star Trek society of the 2020s rather than look back at the 1950s and 60s.

I have to agree, but with 2020 just eight years away, I believe we should be more ambitious for our young people’s futures.

Schools and colleges need to focus on ensuring that young people have the necessary skills to become productive members of the workforce – and by workforce I don’t mean ‘blue collar’ factory workers who perform their tasks by ‘rote’ – those days are long gone.

Our workforce is one of diversity and innovators, and innovation doesn’t evolve through rote learning.

People need to be able to take responsibility, use their initiative and react to constantly-changing circumstances.

Our future is global. Britain was recently ranked the most powerful nation on Earth.

Monocle magazine’s annual Global Soft Power survey, published this month, ranks nations according to their standard of government, diplomatic infrastructure, cultural output, capacity for education and appeal to business. They placed Britain top.

The global jobs market is already in place for millions of Britons and we need to equip our young people to compete with the best from other nations.

Such 21st Century skills are learned by practical exercises that engage and excite young people and integrate the necessary skills within exercises and activities that can be applied to real life situations. And certainly not by rote.

But these skills aren’t just the domain of post-16 learning – primary schools should be looking to their pupils’ futures too.

Young people need crucial “employability” skills as identified by the employer organisations. The Confederation of British Industry, Federation of Small Businesses, British Chambers of Commerce and employers themselves – and increasingly universities – are calling for these skills, too.

Such skills include English and maths, but also IT, time management, teamwork, communications, problem-solving and, crucially, a work ethic – one that’s not just about turning up on time and not going off sick every Friday.

The future workforce needs to be reliable, show initiative and pursue new skills because these aren’t just skills for work they’re skills for a successful life.

Graham Hasting-Evans, managing director of National Open College Network (NOCN)

Agreeing to chair a group setting up yet another representative body for FE is probably a career-limiting move unless there is a very good reason for another one. So I am pleased to say I think there is indeed a great need for a new body to take a leadership role in FE and I am excited by the unique opportunity we have to enhance the status and reputation of the sector.

The challenge we face in FE is huge because the world is changing rapidly around us and we need to serve young people and adults who are grappling with changes in society, work and technology which can sometimes seem bewildering.

We need to develop the sector to be fleet of foot, to keep up with changes in work, to use technology to deliver learning which equips people with the skills they will need to keep learning and be resilient to the changes around them.

The best in the sector do this day in day out, so we know that FE can do it, but we need stronger leadership and focus from employers, practitioners and their representative bodies to set standards which everyone aspires to.

The new guild provides us with the chance for the sector to come together just as the government and its agencies have retreated.

It also represents a moment of truth for the FE sector.

Can the sector take responsibility, collectively for its own future when part of its very strength is the diversity of organisations and learners in it?

I believe the diversity of learning, learners and organisations in FE should be celebrated as a key strength and that a new guild can play a leadership role across it.

A clear focus on delivering and supporting great learning to all adults across their lives will bind and unite the diverse voices, interests and organisations.

What we need is for employers and practitioners and the organisations which represent them to come together to make this work on behalf of the adults and young people who are served by the sector.

I am certain we can develop a new organisation which advances professionalism, improves leadership and governance and helps to deliver even better learning opportunities across England.

It will be this clarity of purpose which we will use to bring people together and keep us all focussed.

I believe the diversity of learning, learners and organisations in FE should be celebrated”

I was invited to chair the steering group, I believe, for two reasons. Firstly, because of the unique place and purpose of National Institute of Adult Continuing Education (NIACE) in advocating more, different and better learning for all adults.

This means we are not representing any particular interest group, other than learners.

Secondly, I hope that I have a reputation for getting things done and there is a lot of work to be done in order to build consensus about the purpose, role, structure and governance of the FE Guild and I hope to be one of the people driving that forward over the coming months.

We are planning now for an intense period of engagement with employers and practitioners and representative bodies to debate and discuss what the FE Guild should focus on, how it should be set-up and what the governance arrangements will look like.

That debate and discussion needs to be thorough and professional and I would urge everyone with any interest in FE to get involved.

We cannot afford for people with positive ideas and contributions not to come forward in the new year to enter the debate. Part of my role as chair of the steering group is to support an inclusive process in which all views are heard.

Our aim is to have the guild up-and-running in mid-2013, starting to develop its role and its activities and having an impact in the next academic year.

In order to achieve that we will work hard, consult properly, listen well and be decisive because all of us came into FE to support and deliver great learning and the guild can take a critical leadership role in achieving that.

David Hughes, NIACE chief executive and chair of the FE Guild steering group

A watchful eye on quality becomes more important as FE colleges increasingly deliver higher education, says Dr Stephen Jackson

The tectonic plates of UK higher education are shifting with students basing their study choices on changing criteria.

Providers newer to the game have been eager to compete with the university sector by offering significant benefits in terms of cost, location and flexibility. Privately-funded providers are competing fiercely to recruit students on to the specialist programmes that they can deliver at a lower cost than the traditional sector.

Meanwhile, FE colleges can provide higher education programmes that meet local demands, are competitively priced and available ‘at the end of the street’.

It is increasingly clear that one size does not fit all in this new world of student choice and provider offers.

However, we believe there should be one measure of quality assurance so that HE students, wherever and whatever they study, can be guaranteed nationally agreed academic standards and quality.

Around 12 per cent of UK higher education is delivered in FE colleges – although that percentage is expected to increase.

For more than a decade, the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA)  has monitored the standards and quality of college higher education — first via subject and academic reviews, then through our Integrated Quality and Enhancement Reviews (IQER). These were the first bespoke review methods for higher education delivered in FE colleges.

Around 12 per cent of UK higher education is delivered in FE colleges”

IQER taught us that colleges do a good job in delivering higher education; that what they do is broadly compatible with what universities do, although in a different way and sometimes for different reasons. And IQER has led to a maturing in the sector, a reduction in the paternalistic relationships between awarding bodies and their colleges, and an increase in a sense of parity and self-confidence.

But we have now introduced  the Review of College Higher Education (RCHE). Why? It goes back to what I said earlier about having one measure of quality assurance — a single framework — for all UK higher education.

RCHE brings us a step closer to this by applying the same criteria, expectations and judgments as our institutional reviews of universities.

We have worked with FE colleges to develop the new method and, so far, the response has been positive. It’s easy to understand why. It’s not an inspection, it uses peers to review and judge the colleges, and it can be a useful catalyst for change.

We want colleges to benefit from review by getting an external perspective on their higher education provision, the standards of the awards they offer, the quality of their learning opportunities, the quality of the information that they provide and the measures that they take to enhance what they do.

Colleges will be able to make direct comparisons between what they do and achieve, and what their colleagues in universities do and achieve.

They will work to the same guidance and the same set of expectations we provide to higher education institutions with the UK Quality Code for Higher Education. They will be able to use the action plan from the review as a planning tool.

As with IQER, we will publish the outcomes of every RCHE review, showcasing the good practice that our reviewers find in each college as well as the recommendations we ask them to action.

We are inviting FE colleges to join universities and other UK higher education institutions in subscribing to QAA, as a signal of the maturity and confidence of the college higher education part of the sector. Visit www.qaa.ac.uk/AboutUs/subscribing-institutions/Pages/Applying-to-QAA.aspx for details on how to sign-up.

Dr Stephen Jackson is  director of
reviews at the QAA

Sixth-form colleges must not rest on the laurels of past successes, says Mark Bramwell. First up, let’s tackle the relationship with academies… 

Sixth-form colleges are proving to be robust with most achieving high success rates and good or outstanding Ofsted grades.

And most are oversubcribed – despite the demographic drop in the number of eligible students.

But we need to critically assess future options for this success to continue.  Looking ahead, some colleges are worried about being marginalised and about their long-term viability. The prospect of a 6 per cent funding cut over the medium term and increasing competition from new providers are serious concerns. I hope to address some of these issues at next week’s AoC annual conference where we will explore strategic issues with college leaders.

First, let’s look at our successes so far, including influencing government policy.  For instance, funding rates between school sixth forms and colleges are being equalised. Sixth-form colleges’ (SFC) capital funding is now largely in line with academies. The unfair higher benchmark used in SFC inspections by Ofsted is to go in March.

There are more inequalities to face, of course. However, with the national emphasis on value for money, high standards and social mobility, SFCs should be confident of more success.

Looming on the horizon is a growing debate about the relationship between SFCs and academies.  It is clear that the Department for Education and the Office of the Schools Commissioner are enthusiastic about SFCs sponsoring academies but currently only four  have such a role.

Should SFCs respond to the new political landscape through more involvement in academies, as is the case with general further education colleges? They would have a lot to offer having left local authority control themselves in 1993 and having flourished through self management and governance – although their small leadership teams could be an obstacle.

There is a concern that one day, perhaps under a future Government, academies could be returned to the local authority fold”

And should SFCs apply for 16-19 academy status? Some benefits might follow. For example, a VAT rebate could be worth £200,000 a year, but there is no guarantee that academy status would bring this; free meals could be available to eligible students and the academy brand is at the heart of Government policy. Would 16-19 academy status move SFCs to a position of greater influence? Would it bring quality improvement funds not currently available?

There could be a downside, of course. There is a concern that one day, perhaps under a future Government, academies could be returned to the local authority fold (or some other commissioning agency).

The SFC brand is distinct, but it could be lost in a sea of 3,000 or 4,000 academies (there are currently 2,400). Would the SFC sector divide into a two or three-way split over this strategic decision?

The old call for funding was for equity across school sixth forms and colleges. Today it is about calling for equity between 11-16 funding, 16-18 funding and perhaps post-19 funding. Currently a SFC student attracts £3,900, an 11-16 pupil over £5,000 and an HE student over £8,000. With less public funding SFCs might diversify their funding streams. Many already do with adult learning, higher education, international work or work-based learning. However, the challenge is to diversify and to keep an eye on the ball of ever-growing accountability for the quality of 16-18 teaching and learning.

Finally, in challenging times, can SFCs take a leaf out of the work of other organisations and collaborate even more with each other while remaining competitors? ‘Co-opetition’ would mean more strategic alliances between SFCs, more federated models or relevant shared services options.  This could help to retain the distinctiveness of SFCs while strengthening their ability to survive and flourish in the new educational landscape.

Mark Bramwell is the AoC’s associate director of sixth-form colleges