DfE plans ‘classification’ tool to fix ‘fragmented and deficient’ skills system

Government plans are afoot to develop a “long overdue” skills “classification tool” in a bid to help training providers to be “more efficient”.

The Department for Education (DfE) announced the proposal in a report released on Thursday. Such a tool would “[enable] better matching between the needs of employers and the skills available in the workforce”, it said.

The project, which could be developed over 18 months, will define jobs via a combination of core skills, skills areas, skills groups and occupational skills and tasks into a system known as the “standard skills classification” (SSC). Defining jobs in that granular detail and in one system would “generate positive economic benefits” by pushing efficiency and adaptability in the training system, the DfE said.

It also said that the new system would help employers to be “more innovative and flexible” and “enhance employment opportunities” by making it easier to progress within work.

Skills classifications are available in other countries but adapting them for use in the UK would previously have been a “slow and prohibitively expensive process”, the DfE’s report said.

Recent advances in Natural Language Processing (NLP) tools “present a timely opportunity to combine and refine the best of the existing provision, adapting it to our needs to develop the world’s best classification of skills”.

Currently, the system to assess skills in the UK is “fragmented and deficient”, while the language used to define skills needed for jobs is “inconsistent and unnecessarily complicated”, and sometimes does not relate directly to the UK jobs market.

The classification tool would include information from the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education’s occupational standards and the National Careers Service with O*NET, a free US tool developed to help people develop their careers.

The DfE would also use information from the European Union’s career development tool, the European Skills, Competences, Qualifications and Occupations framework.

A beta version of the classification could be available in six months for testing and assessment.

As part of the SSC, the DfE would develop around 30 “skills areas” which it defined as “broad skill domains that relate to most occupations” such as making decisions or solving problems. 

A job would also have a number of skills groups assigned to it, which the DfE defined as “intermediate skills domains”. These might include the ability to diagnose health conditions or disorders. The DfE is proposing to develop around 300 of them.

On top of that it will develop around 2,000 “occupational skills” which would “relate to a small number of occupations”, such as the ability to diagnose neural or psychological disorders.

A job would have occupational tasks assigned to it. An example would be the ability to identify psychological, emotional or behavioural issues, and to successfully diagnose disorders.

The DfE said the resource would make it easier for local authorities to “articulate clearly” to training providers which skills are needed in the local area and which ones could be needed in the future. 

Employers could use the SSC to create a long-term skills plan to “quantify and prioritise skill shortages”, and to recruit workers based on their skills more efficiently.

The DfE said job seekers would also be able to figure out what their transferable skills are, look at their career possibilities and see where they have skills gaps which need filling.

Strikes: Government to introduce minimum service levels in colleges

Minimum service levels are set to be introduced in schools and colleges, the government has announced.

The Department for Education said the proposals will “put in place protections for children, young people and parents to ensure education can continue during any future strike action”.

Education secretary Gillian Keegan has written to union leaders inviting them to discuss proposals on a voluntary basis in the first instance. 

DfE said “she is clear” that should a voluntary agreement not be reached, the government “is committed to using powers” granted through the controversial Strikes (Minimum Service Levels) Act introduced earlier this year. 

This would lead to a consultation and is “expected to include a range of models” for minimum service levels in education. 

It follows over 10 days of strike action in schools this year in a dispute over teacher pay and working conditions. Government says 25 million school days were lost cumulatively. 

Strike action in colleges has been increasing in recent years. Staff at 32 colleges have voted to strike this autumn through the University and College Union. It follows the Association of College’s staff pay recommendation of 6.5 per cent, mirroring the offer made to schoolteachers.

The government first proposed minimum service levels last year. It has consulted on introducing them in ambulance, fire and rail services.

Keegan announced earlier this month that the DfE also intends to consult on minimum service levels in universities.

Today she said: “We cannot afford a repeat of that disruption – particularly as schools and teachers continue to work so hard to help children recover from the pandemic. 

“I am asking the teaching unions to engage with us and agree to put children and young people’s education first – and above and beyond any dispute.” 

Geoff Barton, general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders, said this is “nothing more than an attempt to distract from her department’s own shortcomings”.

He added it was “unimaginable that there will any agreement over legislation that involves removing the basic rights of employees. Industrial action is only ever taken as a last resort, when all other options have been explored.”

David Hughes, chief executive of the Association of Colleges, said his membership body will engage with DfE to help ensure that colleges can achieve a voluntary agreement on minimum services during strike action.

He added that if the DfE was to move ahead with regulations, the AoC will push to ensure that the “specific circumstances” of colleges are covered and that there aren’t “overlapping rules resulting from their dual rule in education of young people under the age of 18 and higher education provision”.

Jenny Arrowsmith, partner and head of educations at Irwin Mitchell, told FE Week that the consultation is likely to mirror the consultation for ambulance services.

“The employer must identify who is needed to carry out a minimum level of work during industrial action – this should not be more than is reasonably necessary,” she explained.

“The employer must then inform the union of who this is and the union must, in response, take reasonable steps to ensure that those persons do not participate in the strike. The consequences of the union allowing those members to strike is significant both for the union and its members. All strikers, for example, would lose the usual unfair dismissal protection.”

“The indications of the higher education consultation suggest this may include a proposal that it should allow for all marking to be done and for undisrupted teaching of specific groups,” she added.

UCU has been approached for comment. 

MOVERS AND SHAKERS: EDITION 439

Lesley Seary

Chair of Governors, Redbridge Institute

Start date: September 2023

Previous Job: Interim Chief Executive, Redbridge Council

Interesting fact: Lesley is a life-long Chelsea fan and season ticket holder – and she doesn’t mind who knows it

Imran Anwar

Governor, Middlesbrough College Group

Start date: July 2023

Concurrent Job: Founder and CEO, Alt Labs

Interesting fact: Imran learnt to fly planes at a very young age and was awarded his gold wings at RAF Topcliffe at the age of 15

Darush Dodds

Governor, Middlesbrough College Group

Start date: September 2023

Concurrent Job: Director of Corporate Affairs, Esh Group

Interesting fact: Darush starts his day earlier than many, sometimes as early as 3am, and often uses the early start to walk his three sausage dogs – Boris, Freddie and Eric

It’s time to focus policy and resources on the other 50 per cent first

As party conference launches reach orbit and yesterday’s boosters head back to Earth, we should all take a satellite look at our education and skills system. Some amazing organisations and dedicated people have ensured FE was on board for lift-off this time, but nothing any politician has said over the past few weeks has abated my 30-year-long frustration.

Today, the happy 50 per cent at school will go on progressing to A Levels and university. And down this easy, well-trodden, well-understood and well-funded path, they will find access to the Lifelong Learning Entitlement (LLE) of £28k to spend on level 4 and above as and when they want.

Meanwhile, the other 50 per cent face 12 years of a school curriculum, teaching and assessment that aren’t right for them and don’t nurture their amazing talents. They get to feel like failures, and worse, the very talents that are taught out of them are often the ones most desired by employers.

Worse still, demotivated and let down by GCSE exams with their baked-in failure rate, they finally escape school for FE to pick them up off the floor – only to be beaten down again with GCSE retakes with a pass rate of 16 per cent.

Worst of all, FE gets the lowest funding in the education sector to support them, regardless of the fact they are some of the learners with the most need.

I say worst of all, but it doesn’t stop there. Level 2 and 3 apprenticeships are underfunded, and participation and opportunities have reduced. If you can work your way to a degree apprenticeship you might have the added benefit of not having to pay £28k for a degree – but  the advantaged are slowly elbowing out the disadvantaged here too.

Then there are T Levels. Sunak’s Advanced British Standard reveals them as little else than vocational A Levels. And for those who don’t meet the entry requirements? We are wiping out BTECs and removing pathways, leaving them nowhere to go.

Does this feel like a system designed for all?

At least when the disadvantaged 50 per cent get past 18 adult learning will support them! No chance. Adult funding is in an even worse state and there is no prospect in sight for any form of level 2/3 lifetime entitlement to make up for systemic failures pre-19. That’s only for those ready for a level 4.

In his new book. Equity in Education: Levelling the playing field of learning, Lee Elliot Major argues that class is missing from the debate about diversity. Contending that middle-class advantages are “baked into” the education system, he suggests pupils from low-income families should be referred to as “under-resourced” rather than “disadvantaged”.

So in summary the under-resourced 50 per cent spend 12 years as an ill-fitting peg in a school-shaped hole, after which they progress to organisations that lack the funding to make the most of the two or three years they have to turn their chances around, and if they don’t succeed the funding and opportunities only shrink after that.

Does this feel like an education and skills system designed for all? I see one that forever favours the advantaged and leaves the under-resourced, well, under-resourced.

Before we tinker with programmes, curriculum and qualifications, we need to step back and start by looking at what an education and skills system should be providing all our young people and adults, not just those who have been favoured by policies that supposedly favour the “working-class aspiration to go to university”.

This isn’t a time to review A Levels to make the 16-18 phase even better for them. It’s a time to resource the under-resourced first.

Some fine words have been spoken at the party conferences. But they have for the past few decades.  Whatever party is in power always gravitates towards A Levels, higher skills, universities and schools.  Talk of technical excellence colleges and Advanced British Standards already show a drift in that direction. 

Maybe, for once, the parties should start at the bottom and work up, rather than at the top and never reach those that need the support the most. That’s what we need if our skills system is going to be stellar, rather than crash back to Earth with a bang.

Learning about the dark web safely (for over-18s only)

After a thirty-year career in cyber security and with a desire to share my passion for it, I entered the classroom as a lecturer at the South Central Institute of Technology. Now in my third year as a full-time educator, I have been on a professional journey that has taught me a great deal, including a very different way of operating compared to my experience in industry.

I’m a very practical person by nature. I learn by doing; in reality, trying, failing, trying again, etc., until I succeed. Theory only gets us so far and I know from my own personal experience that unless I anchor my knowledge in something tangible, new information can erode quickly. I also believe deeply that difficult conversations and debate are essential to understanding a topic well.

My classroom activities have a strong practical element – cracking passwords, hiding data with steganography, performing a forensic analysis with autopsy software and, among many other things – a class outing to the dark web. This is a very well-attended lesson which, while billed in something of a controversial way to drive excitement, addresses some very serious points.

It is important to point out that all of my students are aged 18 or over, and some of them will have been using the dark web for several years with information they’ve personally researched on the internet. The quality of this information ranges from the good to the downright dangerous.

The lesson is conducted using just-in-time Azure Cloud Virtual Machines, which the students have learnt to build in an earlier lesson. The Virtual Machine (VM) is both an enabling tool and a protective layer; if it gets infected with malware, then you just delete it and start again. Using an Azure VM – as opposed to a constrained dedicated educational VM – has a reinforcing action on prior learning as well as instilling essential, work-ready cloud skills and knowledge.

A significant percentage are already exploring the dark web

The students will then download and install anti-virus tools and the TOR Browser to their Virtual Machine and at this point we stop to discuss what we are about to do. First, we debate the dark web. What is it? How does it work? What are secure routes? Are you really anonymous there? What are the risks? Many learners don’t know there is more law enforcement on the dark web than anywhere else on the internet; in fact, one of our destinations is the CIA dark web homepage.

We debate online marketplaces; the places where you can buy literally anything. We talk about how users can know they are not law enforcement sting operations (there are many); and what happens if the site is raided and customer details are seized (yours will be too, and then they will be routinely shared with law enforcement agencies around the world).

We also debate the dark web as a force for good, which it certainly can be. It offers freedom of speech not permitted by oppressive regimes and the ability to research and self-solve Ransomware attacks. These essential topics balance conversations around more lurid areas such as drugs, firearms and fake passports

When I explained this lesson at the Education and Training Foundation’s ‘Big Data, Cyber Security and the Future of Learning’ conference earlier this year, a small number of people in the audience expressed a valid safeguarding concern: that such a lesson could expose learners to information that would put them at risk.

In response, I think we need to ask whether there is a better environment in which these learners could be informed and guided on this subject. A significant percentage are already exploring the dark web, guided by information from forums. Many aren’t insulating themselves well from malware attacks, and many are registering on websites and online marketplaces that lead to guilt by association.

The answer I gave then and by which I stand now is that we have a duty as educators to explore the difficult, debate wisely and drive safety through better knowledge. If we don’t teach the right way of doing things, it will be taught by others – and almost certainly not how we’d want.

The party conferences have given me renewed hope for the future of our sector

My top takeaway from the three party political conferences I’ve attended in recent weeks (Lib Dem, Conservative and Labour) is that change is afoot. Each party is positioning itself as the party of change, renewal, new approaches, a break with the past. The electorate will decide which one they believe is best placed to deliver that, but it’s clear that the polling is showing that this is the message the population wants to hear.

For all of us in further education, that is good news. After 13 years of austerity in which post-16 education and colleges were among the biggest losers, a change is long overdue. But being subject to change is rarely nice, and that is where we have been until recent years – subject to change, neglected and not respected.

So my second reflection on the conferences is pleasingly how much that seems to have changed. I am sure that colleges have never been so central to both the prime minister’s and the leader of the opposition’s speeches in successive weeks. But it goes deeper than mere warm words: we are seeing new investment coming in and we’re being engaged at the heart of government as well as with the opposition in ways we could only have dreamed of a decade ago. 

Not only is it good news that colleges are now being talked about by the most senior politicians, we are helping them understand the priorities, the realities and the changes which are vital for colleges to thrive. Of course, much of this is about money, and colleges need a long-term boost in funding.

To achieve that, we need to understand that broadly speaking governments only ever invest in services and infrastructure that are both effective in realising their priorities and politically attractive to the electorate. It usually has to be both – and both can only be achieved if there is understanding and respect for what colleges are, what they do, who they serve, how they help, what impact they make.

The conferences suggest we are making great strides

The conferences suggest we are making great strides on all of that too, with more fringe events about and with colleges than I have seen in over a decade on post-16, apprenticeship and skills issues. The AoC team was busy and in demand throughout. In itself that is a strong signal, but what was most remarkable is how often people from employers, business organisations, universities, thinktanks and others talked about the issues we are passionate about.

None of this brings quick solutions or funding to address long-standing shortfalls, of course. College leaders are still having to creatively and expertly make the books balance, deal with pay levels that are simply inadequate and work through qualification reforms which look likely to be damaging. It’s easy to forget those stark realities in the bubble of party conferences, so I am not going to get carried away. I know how far there is to go to restore pay levels and invest in facilities, IT and estates.

It’s easy to scorn the announcements of the Advanced British Standard and Technical Excellence Colleges by pointing to the scale of the wider challenges or to the history of similar approaches. There’s something attractive and cathartic about that reaction. For me both announcements were significant because they signalled that colleges are being noticed, understood and engaged in ways that augur well for the future.

I have to be optimistic, and I know that’s easier for me because I don’t have to deal with the day-to-day realities of running a college. However, looking to the longer term and building the relationships we need with politicians, it feels like we’ve turned a corner.

Optimism runs through the heart of our sector. Just look at the events, stunts, student voices and case studies emerging as part of Colleges Week for proof that colleges embody it in everything they do for and with learners.

Maybe, just maybe, we can believe that the future will be better for colleges themselves, their staff as well as their students. I truly believe it will be, and all of us at AoC will do all that we can to make sure it happens.

The skills sector is vital for social justice and systemic change

A week after returning from the last political party conference in Liverpool, where City & Guilds hosted the first ever Skills Hub as part of the Future Skills Coalition (FSC), I was struck by just how much skills were on the agenda. However, the recent Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) report is a reminder if we needed it that there has been a long period of significant lack of investment in skills. Conversely, our own recent impact report demonstrates just how much economic and social value is possible when you do invest in skills.

I don’t think anyone would disagree that skills are a force for good. At City & Guilds, the value we add seems to be a ‘no-brainer’, but we really wanted to hold ourselves to account and put some hard data behind our suppositions to make the case for skills. So, in 2019, working with Cranfield University, we set up an impact framework to really understand the value of the skills we develop to people, organisations and wider society. The report clearly demonstrates how our purpose is being put into action.

I am proud to say that 72 per cent of our learners have progressed into further employment or study upon achieving their City & Guilds qualification. That’s good for learners, for businesses and desperately needed for the economy if we want to increase productivity and compete alongside our G7 partners, whom we are currently languishing behind.

Supporting marginalised people

As many of our research reports show, employers are crying out for skilled workers, while at the same time many people are locked out of work. That is why City & Guilds have been investing in numerous programmes to unlock the potential of people who face barriers to the workplace and future success.

One such example is our work with refugees seeking a new life. In the past year we have supported 244 refugees. Today 140 are already in employment. Recipients of our bursary fund also reported a 92 percent increase in feeling optimistic about the future.

In 2022/23, City & Guilds funding supported the training of prisoners in fields like construction, transport and IT. Developing these skills means people have a choice about which path to take upon release, which they often didn’t have upon entering custody. Armed with a skill, they can genuinely choose employment and rehabilitation over recidivism and reincarceration.

Our report shows that for some of our programmes, the reoffending rate is nil. As one bursary recipient recently told us, “As well as providing me with a new skillset to build a successful career, I gained confidence and a chance for a new start.”

Upskilling the UK’s workforce

It’s no secret that the economy and jobs market are changing rapidly. For example, against a backdrop of rapid climate change, many people who work in the energy and utilities industry understand that their jobs will change as energy demands change too. The report shows demand has quadrupled for City & Guilds green skills since 2019.

That is why we have been investing heavily in the creation of skills to support low-carbon industries over recent years, including our new EV charging qualifications. If we want to turn the dial on climate change, it’s crucial that we develop the skills needed to build a robust, highly-skilled workforce to meet the demands of a more sustainable world.

For me, the time is now to look to skills not just as a narrow policy lever, but as a step change for society. The window to reset our thinking about skills and their role in delivering social justice and systemic change is open.

Our impact report shows how we are doing that at City & Guilds and that investment in skills has returned £11.2bn in economic and social value. If the next government took the same approach and saw skills as an investment and leveller for society, imagine what the impact could be then.

Firm that took over Learndirect owes ‘large debt’ to ESFA, liquidators reveal

The company that bought Learndirect, formerly England’s largest training provider, owes the government a “large debt” after officials identified dodgy funding claims during its liquidation.

Dimensions Training Solutions (DTS) and LD Training went bust last year after failing to secure enough skills contracts to clear “significant liabilities”.

A new statement of affairs from liquidators at James Cowper Kreston shows that they identified 175 creditors who were owed £1.9 million as of July 25, 2023 for DTS. LD Training, formerly called Learndirect, owes around £8.3 million, of which £6.3 million is related to “intercompany balances”.

Since then, the Education and Skills Funding Agency has completed an internal audit of DTS and LD Training’s previous multimillion-pound contracts and found “ineligible” funding claims that equate to an undisclosed “large debt”.

The liquidators’ statement said: “A further large debt from the ESFA was identified. It was confirmed shortly after the reporting period that debtor position has been offset in its entirety owing to large creditor sums and the identification of ineligible funding claimed for contracts carried out prior to our appointment.”

The liquidators refused to tell FE Week how much the ESFA is owed or the time period for when the ineligible funding claims were made.

DTS was incorporated in 1998 and delivered a range of commercial and government-funded training.

It took over Learndirect in 2018 from Lloyds Development Capital shortly after the adult training and apprenticeship provider received a fatal grade four Ofsted report following a High Court battle. The ESFA then stepped in and cancelled Learndirect’s contracts which were worth around £100 million.

DTS and Learndirect, under the ownership Wayne Janse van Rensburg, managed to secure around £35 million in European Social Fund contracts from the government a year later despite Learndirect’s failure.

In 2020, Learndirect changed its name to LD Training Limited, and the name Learndirect was transferred to another company, also owned by Janse van Rensburg, which continues to operate.

Janse van Rensburg sold DTS and LD Training to The Firebird Partnership in January 2022, just over a year before the European Social Fund contracts expired in March 2023.

The Firebird Partnership put DTS and LD Training into liquidation in July 2022 – just six months after the acquisition. Its board said the decision to close followed an unsuccessful attempt to win new government-funded skills contracts and a failed effort to refinance the business with external investment.

Both former owners claimed to have no knowledge of the dodgy funding claims identified by the ESFA or the “large debt” owed to the agency. 

Ian Finlay, a director at The Firebird Partnership, said: “The ESFA debt and the ‘ineligible funding claims’ both pre-date our ownership. We only owned the business for a very short amount of time and were unaware of these issues before we got involved.”

Janse van Rensburg told FE Week: “I have no knowledge of any funds or claims owed by the ESFA to DTS or by DTS to the ESFA.”

The ESFA declined to comment.

Provider won max national AEB allocation after appeal

A training provider awarded a special national adult education budget contract following an appeal after initial allocations had been revealed received the maximum amount possible, new figures show.

The Portland Training Company’s “additional” contract was for £2.5 million, which takes the total amount allocated through the Department for Education’s tender to £77.5 million.

Portland did not appear among the 55 original winners from the DfE’s national AEB tender, which was supposed to be worth £75 million in total. Contract outcomes were communicated in July and allocations revealed in September.

Days after the allocations were published, however, the DfE announced that Portland was to be awarded an extra contract.

After initially keeping the reasons for the additional contract under wraps, the DfE has now confirmed to FE Week that Portland won it following an appeal during the 10-day voluntary standstill period.

The department said the provider successfully challenged the score awarded to it by in relation to a single question. No further details have been shared.

The Association of Employment and Learning Providers previously said the extra award “further undermined” the controversial tender which is being challenged through the courts by Learning Curve Group, one of several major training providers that had bids rejected.

Funding allocations for all types of training offered by providers in 2023/24 were published this week and revealed that Portland is among the biggest winners from the AEB tender, with a total contract of just under £2.5 million.

Portland said it was pleased with the outcome but declined to comment on the details of its appeal.