We saved a social care workforce pathway cut off by level 3 reforms

For nearly a decade the landscape for level 3 health and social care has been stable, offering a clear route for adults and apprentices and another for 16-19 learners. But that’s all set to change.

Back in 2023, NCFE identified the need for clear entry pathways into the social care workforce as part of our Sector Spotlight report.

It highlighted the risks of reducing the number of entry points and the need for action to ensure those who want to pursue a career in the sector can access the right course, including addressing the absence of funded, specific qualifications for social care.

What happens when a pathway disappears?

A year later, the Department for Education published its post-16 qualification reform review. As part of this first cycle, awarding bodies were tasked with developing new technical provision in those sectors that overlapped with first and second-wave T Levels – health and science being among those areas.

However, the plan to defund most level 3 health and social care provision left policymakers with a problem: there is no social care T Level and, therefore, there would be no level 3 provision available to learners from 2026 onwards.

Before pausing the reforms, the DfE wisely proposed one further short ‘mini cycle’ of approvals specifically focused on level 3 social care. Here, awarding organisations had the opportunity to submit level 3 technical qualifications in adult social care, funded from August 2026. 

Last month, it was announced that NCFE was the only awarding body to have any level 3 technical qualifications approved in adult social care through the post-16 reforms. This means, whilst existing technical provision will still be defunded, NCFE is making sure learners have a route into the social care workforce with new approved versions.

This is important because in Skills England’s recent publication of the Assessment of priority skills to 2030 report, adult social care is highlighted as containing some of the most in-demand occupations, and the highest need for level 3 qualifications.

How do learners currently access social care qualifications?

At present, learners wishing to study level 3 adult social care as an apprentice or through adult skills funding do so via a diploma in adult care. This is a standardised qualification delivered by multiple awarding organisations, including NCFE.

In 2023-24, there were over 8,000 adult-funded enrolments and almost 19,000 apprenticeship enrolments through this route.

Conversely, in the world of college 16-19 study programmes, learners usually undertake a level 3 extended diploma in health and social care. This kind of large technical qualification is offered by a range of awarding organisations.

In 2023-24, enrolments (almost all 16-19) on these large diploma programmes totalled close to 23,000. For context, the T Level in health had 3,534 enrolments that year.

Do T Levels directly replace existing diplomas?

It is a common misconception that T Levels replace these large extended diplomas. This September marked the fifth year the health T Level has been available, and most providers choose to run a level 3 health and social care extended diploma alongside it to ensure they have pathways suitable for all types of learners. We fully expect this need to continue.

Using the combined enrolment data, the removal of funding would leave around 31,000 learners without a viable level 3 pathway moving into the 2026-27 academic year. That is why we made it our number one priority to protect these routes.

What’s next for learners and providers?

The two key qualifications NCFE won approval for are a level 3 technical occupational entry in social care, designed for 16-19 study programmes, and a level 3 technical occupational entry in adult care, designed for adult learners or apprentices.

There was a real concern that following the outcome of the level 3 review, students could be left without viable options to pursue a vocational course in social care through a classroom-based route.

Thankfully, having these pathways approved means we can begin to address these acute recruitment challenges, and provide some stability and clarity for both providers and learners.

Candour becomes law – what Hillsborough Law means for colleges

The deaths of 97 Liverpool football fans at Sheffield’s Hillsborough Stadium in 1989 became the UK’s worst sporting disaster. It led to a 30-year long campaign for justice by families and survivors.

This has culminated in the Public Authority (Accountability) Bill 2025 (known as the Hillsborough Law), aimed at embedding transparency and accountability within UK public bodies.

Its provisions could have significant implications for colleges.

Ethical conduct and codes of practice

Public authorities will be required to publicise, develop and implement codes of ethical conduct that promote candour and integrity. These codes must align with the Seven Principles of Public Life (Nolan principles) and include provisions for protected disclosures (whistleblowing) where staff believe colleagues have breached ethical standards. The code must mandate that people working for the authority act in accordance with the duty of candour in work matters, specify disciplinary consequences for breach and guidance for reporting perceived misconduct.

Legal duty of candour

At its heart is the new legal and professional duty of candour.  Public officials and authorities will be legally required to act with honesty, integrity, and transparency during investigations, inquiries, and inquests, seeking to reduce the institutional defensiveness which has historically undermined public confidence and trust in investigations and the institutions themselves.  This new duty mandates that relevant information must be disclosed proactively and promptly, rather than reactively or selectively. Failure to comply, especially with intent to mislead or obstruct, will be treated as a criminal offence punishable by up to two years’ imprisonment and/or a fine.

New offence: Misleading the public

Public officials who knowingly or recklessly provide false or seriously improper information in their professional capacity may face criminal sanctions. The conditions required for the offence are dishonesty that was significant or repeated (including concealment or obfuscation), caused or had the potential to cause harm to a person and departed significantly from what is to be expected in the proper exercise of the persons functions. For example, if college governors had suspicions that learner grades were being inflated in an improper way then we could see how, under the proposed bill, they may have a legal duty to report this matter. There is, though, a defence of reasonable excuse.

Implications and next steps

FE colleges are listed as bodies to which the legislation will apply. Apart from changes to relatively rare circumstances involving inquests and formal inquiries or the offence of misleading the public, the main implications for colleges relate to the requirements for ethical conduct which are:

  • A broad duty to promote and maintain high standards of ethical conduct (essentially conduct compatible with the Nolan Principles) at all times by employees; and
  • An obligation to adopt, publish and enforce a code of ethical conduct.

The code of conduct must set out behavioural expectations for discharging the duty of candour and explain what employees should do to comply with it. It must set out the disciplinary consequences for failing to act in accordance with the code (including any circumstances where such failure may amount to gross misconduct); and the code should promote ethical conduct, candour, transparency and frankness within all parts of the college’s work.

The code will need to include a mechanism for employees and others to raise concerns about unethical conduct and breaches of the codes by college employees and to whistleblow where appropriate. The code will also apply to independent and student governors, and to staff governors and governors, all of whom are currently expected to observe the Nolan principles as a matter of good practice.

These new legislative requirements will require colleges to review how they do things in many different areas, particularly when considering how to deal with matters regarded as controversial or confidential and how these sit with their duty as charity trustees to protect the reputation of the college. Staff will need to be trained on what the duty of candour means and how it interacts with other legal duties.

Colleges will need to review their processes for managing disclosures and concerns about unethical conduct as they could face significantly more of these once the legislation comes into force.  Finally, it could have a significant impact on dealing with complaints and claims.

The Hillsborough Law therefore represents a potentially seismic shift in public accountability, not only addressing the failures of the past but also setting a blueprint for how public life should be conducted in the future. 

A guarantee isn’t enough… our youth deserve a work promise

When a young person leaves education, their chance of finding decent work shouldn’t depend on luck, postcode or background. Yet almost a million 16 to 24-year-olds are not in education, employment or training (NEET). More than six in ten are economically inactive, and NEET rates have hit their highest recorded level in a decade.

This isn’t a new story. England has lived with entrenched youth unemployment for too long. The government’s refreshed youth guarantee is welcome, but it is a safety net, not the solution.

Unless it sits within a connected, long-term youth employment strategy, we will keep treating the symptoms of youth unemployment, not its causes.

For years, Youth Employment UK and partners in the Youth Employment Group have called for a joined-up national offer. Fragmentation has failed young people. Post-16 education, skills funding, careers support, employer incentives and local delivery are too often designed in isolation, leaving young people to navigate a complex and unfair system.

A youth guarantee must be part of a wider youth promise connecting learning, skills and work, not another short-term scheme.

Quality post-16 choices and careers advice

Our Commission on Post-16 Education Reform highlighted how too many young people lack access to clear, inclusive pathways. High-quality technical routes, accessible apprenticeships and supported internships must be available in every community, backed by flexible funding and equitable access.

The Youth Futures Foundation’s toolkit shows how combining learning, mentoring and real work experience drives better outcomes.

Young people tell us they want early, accessible, trusted careers support, not a system that only reaches them after they have fallen out of education or work. Moving careers advice into Jobcentres risks narrowing its reach further.

The 2025 Youth Voice Census found only half of young people rate their careers guidance as good, and just a third feel Jobcentres understand their needs.

The government should guarantee universal careers support up to age 25, available through schools, youth hubs and community partners, not just at the Jobcentre door.

The jobs guarantee: essential, but not enough

A modern skills system must centre on young people while also incentivising employers.

Local skills improvement plans can help shape priorities, but delivery must be joined up. Youth hubs and local partnerships should act as the front door to opportunities, and a single national employer platform could simplify engagement and strengthen quality.

The youth guarantee can succeed if it builds on past successes. Evidence from Kickstart shows employer take-up depends on simplicity and generosity.

A 100 per cent wage subsidy is critical to engage private, public and voluntary sector employers. Quantity is not enough, though. Quality must be guaranteed. Jobs should meet the Good Youth Employment Standards on pay, supervision, training and progression, and run for at least six months.

For young people furthest from the labour market, wraparound support like coaching, wellbeing, health, and confidence-building is essential.

Building permanence, not pilots

Short-term schemes create churn. A permanent youth guarantee infrastructure that’s nationally funded, locally delivered and able to scale with economic conditions would give the UK the standing youth employment promise that many other countries already have.

It would also allow employers to plan confidently, embedding young people as part of their long-term workforce strategies.

Right now, around 400,000 NEET young people are hidden – not on benefits and invisible to the system. A joined-up data spine linking the Department for Education, Department for Work and Pensions, Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport and local authorities would help track each young person’s journey from learning to earning, building transparency and accountability.

What needs to happen

The 2025 Youth Voice Census offers a powerful mandate for change. We urge the government to:

  • Secure a young person’s entitlement to core skills, enrichment and at least two meaningful work experiences before leaving education
  • Guarantee early help, within six months of leaving education or work, with multi-agency support for those furthest from the labour market
  • Make the youth guarantee permanent, fully funded and quality assured
  • Resource local partnerships and youth hubs to join up provision and reach hidden NEETs
  • Lead a national culture shift, making opportunity visible, youth-friendly and co-designed with young people

The jobs guarantee can serve as a safety net, but a connected system means fewer young people will fall into it.

Trainee mechanics must be tooled up or the EV revolution falls flat 

Electric vehicles are no longer a futuristic vision; they’re fast becoming the norm on UK roads. With the 2035 ban on new petrol and diesel cars edging closer, demand for EV-ready technicians is accelerating.

However, there is a serious skills shortage in the industry. We run the risk of coming to a complete standstill unless providers of further education step up.

Vehicle technicians have been proficient in the intricacies of internal combustion engines for many years. Hundreds of moving parts, finely tuned mechanical systems and oil-stained diagnostics were the bread and butter of the trade.

EVs require a completely different skill set and tool set.

Electrical and electronic expertise, awareness of high-voltage safety, and confidence with software-driven systems are now essential. Colleges cannot simply ‘add EVs’ into existing motor vehicle programmes as an afterthought. It requires a full rethink, from curriculum design and workshop equipment to staff training.

The transition to EVs may be accelerating, but the availability of skilled technicians isn’t keeping up. Unlike combustion engines, EVs are mechanically simple, but far more complex in their electronic and diagnostic demands.

Working safely and efficiently on high-voltage systems calls for specialist tools. The right tooling enables compliance, confidence, and speed. With the right tools, technicians can handle electronic controls, diagnose battery systems, and work on high-voltage cabling without endangering their safety.

Training and tooling must evolve side by side. Training technicians without access to the correct tools leaves them unprepared. On the other hand, providing tools without the necessary expertise can put people in danger. Only by addressing both at the same time will the industry be able to address the EV skills shortage.

Businesses that thrive in the EV era will be those that invest equally in training and tooling.

By supporting further education, providing access to specialist equipment, and fostering collaboration across the sector, we can ensure the workforce is future-ready and safe.

Risks of falling behind

The consequences of inaction are already visible. Independent garages report turning away EV jobs due to lack of confidence or equipment. Learners risk graduating into a workforce where their training no longer matches real-world demand. The public faces the risk of safety incidents involving technicians working beyond their competence. And perhaps most critically, the UK risks missing its net-zero targets because the workforce cannot keep pace with industry change.

We also need the government to recognise that funding qualifications alone is not enough. Without investment in tooling, colleges cannot deliver safe and effective EV training. Without staff development, even the best equipment risks sitting unused.

Why specialist tooling matters

Specialist tooling is the often-overlooked partner in building skills and confidence. Safe, hands-on learning requires access to the same diagnostic and protective tools that’s used in real-world environments.

Without diagnostic tools designed for EVs, learners can’t properly test battery systems, trace faults in high-voltage cabling or manage complex electronic controls. Asking them to train without such equipment is like teaching science without a lab, it creates a false sense of competence.

The risks extend beyond inefficiency. EV systems operate at voltages high enough to cause serious injury. Insulated tools, EV-specific diagnostic devices and appropriate protective gear are not optional extras; they are critical safety essentials.

Too many training facilities and workshops, however, are ill-equipped and use improvised or antiquated equipment. This is a false economy.

Investing in the right tooling not only improves learner outcomes, it gives employers confidence that new recruits are truly job-ready. For colleges it sends a clear message: we’re serious about keeping pace with the industry, and we’re preparing our learners to do the same.

EDL confrontation underlined why Black History is more than a month

This year’s Black History Month theme – “Standing in Pride” – resonates deeply with me. Standing in pride isn’t just about celebration; it’s about sustaining pride and purpose throughout the year.

As an educator, consultant and proud black mixed-heritage British woman, I’ve spent years helping colleges and schools weave black history into the curriculum – not just for one month, but every month.

Earlier this month I was invited to an anti-racism conference, where I spoke about connecting arts, heritage, local communities and educators to support young people on their educational journeys, and to embed black history 365 days a year. We celebrated schools and colleges already working to make their teaching more inclusive and representative of the diverse Britain we all share.

Yet on my journey home, that optimism met a harsh reality. As my train travelled back towards Suffolk, passing through parts of Essex, I encountered hostility that sharply contrasted with the conversations I’d just had. Flags were waved. Voices shouted “EDL” in my face. It was Black History Month – a time meant for unity, learning and respect – yet I was reminded that racism doesn’t take a month off.

A few passengers asked if I was OK, realising the distress that the situation was causing. But it made me wonder, do people truly understand allyship?

I also thought about the young people heading into college after the weekend. How many might see those flags or hear those words? What messages are they absorbing about identity, inclusion and belonging?

Our role as educators is to help them understand that we live in a multicultural, interconnected society – where respect must be learned, modelled and lived. Black History Month should never be an “add-on.” It should reframe how we understand Britain’s story, showing that Black history is British history, woven into our collective narrative all year round.

From my own experience and reflection, here are some reminders not just for October, but every month that follows it.

Essential reminders for educators

1. Inclusion is everyone’s responsibility. Black History Month isn’t about overloading your black or global majority staff. It’s not a free pass to hand over all the planning and speaking to them. True diversity work is shared work. Take time to plan and develop opportunities both inside and outside the classroom, from displays and “lunch-and-learn” sessions, to staff CPD. Create or review your anti-racism framework, and work with student EDI ambassadors to ask what they’d like to see in enrichment activities. Even simple things, like celebrating cultural foods – from puff-puffs to roti – help make your environment more inclusive.

2. Avoid last-minute planning or “tick-box” exercises. Representation should be intentional and embedded. Don’t be afraid to ask for help. Collaborate with local communities, consultants, museums and libraries. Many hold rich collections of black history.

Did you know British libraries are celebrating 500 years of black music this year? There’s a wealth of local and national resources waiting to be explored. Make history relevant and local. Who are the black heroes on your doorstep? Was there a Windrush RAF sergeant from your area, or a black Tudor in your region’s archives? Local stories bring history to life.

3. Let October be the launch pad, not the finish line. Black history, excellence and culture deserve visibility all year – in lessons, assemblies, displays and everyday conversation. Review your anti-racism policy. Do you have active student or staff EDI ambassadors, or even an EDI governor? What resources are in your collection – and are they up to date? Most importantly, are you asking students what they want to see represented? Let October be the start of something woven into the fabric of your institution’s identity.

Real inclusion means more than inviting people into the room. It’s about joining the dance to equity. When we all move together, education becomes the rhythm that unites us. So let’s remember pride in allyship, and continue this daily with our actions in and outside the classroom.

My T Level journey at the Sharp end of digital skills

I’m working towards becoming a security engineer, but my journey onto this career path began with my two-year T Levels course at the Basildon Centre for Digital Technologies in Basildon town centre.

I liked the idea of studying for a T Level as it meant I could focus solely on the subject I was interested in, rather than picking up two other subjects alongside it for A-levels.

I chose South Essex Colleges Group for my studies because I got the impression all of the lecturers I spoke to at the open days were nice people. I was also keen on the technology they had to offer, from high-spec computers to physical networking equipment to test.

The best part of the T Level was the industry placement at Every Child Online, a charity which assesses, repairs, and prepares broken electronic devices to ensure they are in perfect working condition before being distributed to those in need. It was a nice change of atmosphere from the college one day a week and gave me insights on the working day I could expect to experience after my studies.

The balance of three days in college and a one-day industry placement was perfect, in my opinion. It gave me enough time to learn the content and skills in the classroom, and then I could practise that on the placement.

I developed a range of different skills at SECG, from technical skills like networking basics to personal skills like teamwork. However, I think the biggest skill I gained was the ability to push myself out of my comfort zone and take risks.

A typical day on the placement would consist of the following tasks:

· Building Windows devices from scratch, even fixing the devices’ hardware components beforehand if necessary.

· Recycling old components and devices that weren’t suitable for use, while complying with Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment regulations.

· Cleaning devices professionally so they were ready to be sent out to users.

· Talking with customers and potential customers about the business and what it could offer.

Building devices prepared me for the time in a workplace where I would have to onboard new users and build them a new device. The recycling of old components got me into the habit of complying with legislation and laws when working in the IT industry. Talking to customers definitely gave me good practice in using the correct terminology when speaking to non-technical people, plus it increased my confidence.

I’m now working for Sharp. I manage the deployment of security products to our clients, I test new tools by simulating attacks and payloads, and also help to improve processes and playbooks so the team can respond quickly and efficiently. Occasionally, I will respond to security alerts that have been escalated from a security operations centre or helpdesk.

Overall, my T Level has provided me with practical and technical skills, industry experience and most importantly, confidence in public speaking.

It prepared me with the mandatory networking fundamental knowledge that I will build on in my career.

T Levels are an important alternative because they are a great mix between academic studying and real-world work. Unlike A-levels, you’re exposed to workplace environments before your career, and unlike apprenticeships, you build up knowledge around the industry first. Overall, I’d say T Levels are the perfect choice for being as career-ready as possible.

I feel SECG supported my journey into employment because they put me in contact with Sharp. Also, the lecturers there encouraged and convinced me to attend, and ultimately go on to win the Power Platform Challenge competition, which helped me stand out and land employment with Sharp. 

My career ambitions now consist of achieving more qualifications and certifications in cyber security, in the hope of advancing into more technical cyber security roles.

Let’s ensure that apprenticeship reform doesn’t set us back a decade

AAT has been at the heart of apprenticeships since End-Point Assessments (EPAs) were introduced in 2017 and before that by way of using our qualifications as a core element.  And as members of the Level 2-4 assistant accountant trailblazer group, we’ve been working closely with the government on the detail underpinning their reform. We take this role seriously, with a clear focus on delivering the best outcomes for apprentices and employers.  

The government’s ambition to make apprenticeships simpler, more flexible and more cost-effective is absolutely right. It’s something we can all agree on. Through apprenticeships, we’ve been able to open-up careers for more people, which positively contributes to in addressing the skills shortages within the UK.

However, we’re at risk of turning the clock back on the progress made since the 2012 Richard Review. To deliver for learners, employers, and the economy, I’m urging policymakers to prioritise three principles: effective collaboration, maintaining standards and consistency, and protecting learner outcomes. 

Effective collaboration  

There’s growing concern across the sector about the lack of detail on how these reforms will play out in practice. Without this, we risk disrupting the apprenticeship journey and crucially undermine learner and employer confidence in a system we’ve been fighting so hard for, for the past decade.  

To work, reforms require close partnership between the government, regulation, awarding organisations (AOs) such as AAT, and employers. What’s becoming clear as I speak to colleagues and partners, is that we’re not all speaking with one voice. We’ve seen already Ofqual’s consultation proposing that revised assessment plans should only be available for new starters. This is a misalignment with the messaging from the government that existing transitional rules will be applied. Mixed messages like these could lead to a disjointed landscape undermining progress, leading to confusion and uncertainty on the part of all awarding organisations, training providers and employers, who are ultimately the key driving forces working together to ensure the success of these reforms.  The end result of this could be less potential apprentices on quality programmes.

Maintaining standards and consistency  

Apprenticeships are now firmly and quite rightly taking their place at the table, alongside traditional routes like a university degree. This is because we’ve all worked so hard to ensure the apprenticeship assessment is rigorous, transparent and consistent – meaning students can be confident that their hard work will help open doors and be recognised because employers know and value exactly what they’re getting. The 2023 DfE survey found 80 per cent of employers view EPAs as essential for validating occupational competence.  

With no clearly defined approach to how employers will verify behaviors and the removal of explicit references to apprenticeship behaviours within the new standards, we’re at risk of eroding the quality and objectivity that has made apprenticeships the success they are.  

Protecting learner outcomes  

Learners are and should remain at the heart of apprenticeships. Protecting learner outcomes means delivering reforms that are transparent and consistent, preparing apprentices for real-world challenges. But uncertainty around shifting standards is already causing anxiety, with some apprentices worried about delays to their qualifications or job prospects. Equally, employers will become unwilling to invest in a system they are unclear about.  

The overall ambition being proposed is difficult to argue against.  Collaboration between the government, awarding organisations and employers will be vital to delivering clear, timely guidance for a smooth transition and most importantly to retain confidence and value in apprenticeships and apprentices.   

For apprenticeships to thrive, we must protect the quality and objectivity of assessments, retain employer trust and above all, we must protect learner outcomes.   

Governors Havant a clue about college’s finances going South

Trust between leaders and governors at a Hampshire college has broken down after the full scale of its deteriorating financial position came “out of the blue”, an FE Commissioner report has revealed.

Shelagh Legrave’s team found that Havant and South Downs College (HSDC), which teaches around 7,000 students across three campuses, entered severe financial distress last year after senior leaders lost control of finances.

Her report, completed in May but only published today, said governors were “not appropriately sighted on, or informed of, the financial risks developing” and that some board members told investigators the news of the crisis came “out of the blue”.

“The financial pressure the college was facing was more significant than had been initially recognised,” the report added. “Some [governors] were now questioning how they could regain trust in information they would be given as a board in the future.”

The Department for Education placed HSDC in formal intervention earlier this year following the discovery of mounting deficits that “shocked” governors, “inaccuracies in financial reporting” and “poor financial controls”.

Large-scale redundancies have since hit staff, and the college’s principal has decided to retire.

Governors in the dark

The FE Commissioner said the college has experienced a “significant fall” in 16 to 18-year-old learner numbers in recent years, with “consequent year-on-year reduction in income”.

Until summer 2024, the college’s management accounts and budget forecasts suggested a healthy position, with plans for a small surplus.

But by October, the finance team admitted that the year would end in deficit after “late identification” of expenditure.

Governors told the FE Commissioner’s team they were blindsided. Some had believed the college’s position was stable after earlier positive assurances from an external governance review and a ‘good’ Ofsted rating.

Ofsted’s report, published in May 2024, judged that “well-informed governors provide leaders with strong challenge, support and strategic direction”. 

And an external governance review in July 2024 found that board structures and processes were “currently effective”. The external review noted that “governance provides senior management with one of its lines of defence” and that “the current approach should give assurance to stakeholders that the college is managing its assets prudently”.

But Legrave’s team found that financial reporting to the board had been “inaccurate”, and there was “risky reliance” on future land-sale receipts to fund an “ambitious property strategy”.

The college also did not report financial contribution by campus and although its recovery plan “addresses some inefficiencies”, it is “unclear if each individual campus is financially viable”.

There was also an “expressed concern from staff” that communication is “limited, mostly one way, leadership remote and closed, and that staff have not been kept informed of the issues that the college is facing”.

Legrave said: “There will inevitably be work the principal and executive need to lead and undertake to restore confidence and trust in leadership’s financial oversight and the information being presented to the board and to the wider college.”

An HSDC spokesperson said reference to governance and leadership by the FE Commissioner “was in February and is now outdated”, adding that there has been a “refresh of the leadership team since this date and the executive team work in a highly effective way with governors”.

Gast-off: Redundancies and leadership exit

HSDC’s principal Mike Gaston warned staff in July that “significant redundancies” were inevitable as part of a recovery plan.

As FE Week previously reported, the college planned to axe around 100 workers as it tries to bring its staff-cost ratio — which hit 72 per cent of turnover — back within the FE Commissioner’s benchmark of 65 per cent or below.

The University and College Union announced three days of strike at HSDC in June. HSDC said only one strike day was taken.

HSDC said today its restructure resulted in a staffing reduction “of 67.28 full-time equivalent (FTE)”, made up of “redundancies (42.91 FTE), retirements, resignations and post deletions”.

Gaston, who has led the college for a decade, has announced his retirement for early 2026 but will remain in post through the recovery process.

Governance overhaul

In response to the intervention, HSDC’s governors have created a new recovery, sustainability and accountability (RSA) committee to oversee “the developing financial sustainability plan”.

The board has also committed to redesigning its management accounts, producing campus-level financial analysis, and introducing clearer key performance dashboards for enrolment, curriculum efficiency and cash flow.

The long-term sustainability of the college “is in the control of the board and senior leaders, but it is recognised the path to financial recovery presents a major operational challenge”, Legrave’s report concluded.

HSDC said that since May, the college has appointed “new governors with expertise in finance, audit, education and stakeholder engagement” and “enhanced staff and student voice mechanisms to ensure inclusive decision-making”.

HSDC’s spokesperson said the college “acknowledges the findings of the FE Commissioner’s report and accepts its recommendations in full”.

“The report reflects a challenging period for the college, and we are committed to addressing the concerns raised with transparency, urgency and care,” they added.

A formal FE Commissioner “stocktake” visit is scheduled for November 2025.

Helping every learner use AI responsibly

The AI genie is well and truly out of the bottle.

AI’s influence on further education isn’t a slow burn. It’s quickly reshaping how we teach, assess and think about knowledge itself. In FE, conversations about AI have often centred on practical implementation and staff efficiency – important goals in themselves.

But for AI integration to be effective, students will need support in developing digital judgement and applying these tools with care. The challenge now is to build the confidence, skills and judgement needed to make AI a force for better learning – not just faster work.

Confidence isn’t competence

According to the upcoming Pearson College Report 2025, launching next month, 62% of college students feel confident using AI to support their learning. That’s the good news. The twist? Many don’t feel confident choosing appropriate tools, applying them accurately and fairly, or judging the quality of AI content.

One in five say they want to learn how to use AI more accurately and fairly, and nearly as many say they need help understanding how to use it ethically. Meanwhile, most tutors agree the curriculum needs to evolve to embed digital and AI skills, and over half say they need more support themselves.

There’s a gap – a significant one – between how students are using AI and what they’re being taught. Tutors can see it. Many cite the increasing use of AI in teaching, learning and assessment as one of the top challenges they’ll face this year.

While some learners are already confident with AI, many are still experimenting – copying, pasting and refining prompts without clear guidance on how to use these tools well.

Why digital confidence matters

This isn’t about banning AI or policing behaviour. For AI integration to be truly effective, guidance and digital judgement will be key.

As AI becomes woven into everyday life and learning, familiar priorities like safeguarding, academic integrity and employability are being shaped by AI – adding new layers to the digital landscape that students must navigate.

Can learners recognise bias in AI outputs? Do they know when a chatbot is bluffing? Can they credit their sources, explain their thinking and use AI as part of their own process rather than instead of it? Those are the skills that turn AI from a shortcut into a genuine support tool.

A practical place to start

At Basingstoke College of Technology (BCoT), staff could see the gap – so they decided to act.

Supported by Pearson, they developed AI Essentials, a short, self-paced course that introduces students to responsible and reflective use of AI. It’s not a qualification or a coding module. It’s a 90-minute foundation designed to build confidence, curiosity and awareness.

Delivered during induction or tutorial sessions, it explores questions such as:

  • What exactly is AI, and where do we come across it?
  • What makes an AI-generated answer helpful or harmful?
  • How can students use these tools without crossing ethical lines?
  • What does fairness look like when a chatbot can write your essay?

Richard Harris, a Digital and IT Lecturer at BCoT, saw the impact straight away. “It was fantastic to see students not just getting excited about the topic but really starting to think critically about the content they consume every day. It’s given them up-to-date, practical skills that will be vital for their future.”

The college worked with Pearson to host the course on ActiveHub, making it available across departments under a site licence. It’s designed to flex around different courses and teaching schedules – the aim is to start a conversation, not add another layer of workload.

What’s at stake

A recent report from the Institute for the Future of Work ranks AI literacy among the top priorities for employers across every sector. They’re not just looking for coders – they’re looking for critical thinkers who can use technology thoughtfully and responsibly.

If students aren’t supported to use AI well, we could see a new kind of digital divide – not based on access, but on understanding. That gap could quietly influence learning outcomes, confidence and future opportunities.

With its close ties to both employers and learners, further education is well placed to help close that gap. Not through sweeping reforms or expensive new frameworks, but through small, structured steps that bring AI into everyday learning in a safe, thoughtful way.

Anthony Bravo OBE, Principal of BCoT, added: “This isn’t about being cutting edge. It’s about being responsible. Our job is to get students ready for what’s next – to help them make smart, ethical choices with AI, now and in the future.”

The genie is already out of the bottle. We don’t need to put it back in. We just need to learn how to work with it – and help students do the same.

Find out more about the AI Essentials course developed by BCoT and supported by Pearson: Access your sample pack