The problem with badges

We all have them. You go to a college, they give you a Visitor Pass and then you forget to hand it in when you leave. It’s on your lapel and then you see folks in the street staring at your chest.

Not a problem for me, but the ladies amongst us might find this distressing, or flattering perhaps. I know not. My car is full of them. I reckon I could get into half the colleges in the country.

When I worked in Wandsworth the Chief Executive of the Council was bothered about these badges and, in what he thought was an inspired moment, decreed that they should be worn “at eye level”.

Whether this was to be achieved by the careful application of BluTak or SuperGlue was not explained, but it might have been helpful, if painful.

But those badges on neck wotsits are a pain. Just back from the AoC conference I spent my time staring at people’s tummies (unobtrusively of course).

You know how it is, “I seem to know that person, let me get close in a sidelong and subtle kind of way of course. Glance sideways and look down. I shall try to stare at their midriff without arousing suspicion.” I felt like a pervert!

Then they spot this and try to read yours. What is the etiquette for this? Now you are both trying to read tummies in an unobtrusive way.

What is worse is that you think that you vaguely know them but they are so much older and seem to have gone grey, and, worse, you have no idea if they are friend or foe.

And by the time you have both clocked one another it is too late to escape. “Nick,” they say, “didn’t we meet at…” wherever and then you realise how you know them and fake a phone call and run off into Starbucks.

The AoC should bring back lapel badges. Or something at eye level. Or maybe bar codes.

 

By Nick Warren

NAS asks for help to stamp out substandard apprenticeships

The Chief Executive of the National Apprenticeship Service (NAS) has called for the sector to work together in order to stamp out poor quality apprenticeships.

Simon Waugh (right), speaking at the fourth national ‘Future of Apprenticeships’ conference last week, said if everyone was “on the case” it would be possible to get substandard training down to three per cent of total programmes.

“If we’re all on the case, then what we can do is, if we’ve got five, six, or seven per cent of the programme which we collectively would agree is substandard.. I’ll tell you what, between us we could get it down to four per cent, and then we’ll get it down to three per cent, Mr Waugh said.

He added: “Will it ever be perfect? I don’t think so. I honestly don’t think that with 450,000, or 500,00 starts, every single one will be perfect. But I tell you what. We’ll get as close to perfection as we possibly can.”

Mr Waugh said the NAS would review every training provider deemed to be delivering short apprenticeships.

“We are going to look at every single one of the frameworks, and every one of the programmes which are being delivered materially in less time, with the question ‘why are you doing it in significantly less time?’ and ‘why are we paying you for it?’”

Mr Waugh added: “If only 10 per cent of the money in the last year went to 25 plus, you can see we’re already paying a very, very, very heavily discounted rate for 25 plus.

In the last two years, with all the growth we’ve achieved across the programme as a whole, 29 per cent of that growth has been 16 to 18 year-olds in an incredibly tough employment market for young people.”

“But it doesn’t matter. We don’t want to pay £1 to anybody to say you’ve delivered an apprenticeship if it’s one that actually is not one that is really an apprenticeship, and there’ isn’t embedded learning in that, and also the period of time to prove the skills have been embedded.

“So we have a whole programme now around looking at quality, and the minister has said very clearly in the last few weeks that the absolute priority for us as an agency is quality, quality quality.”
Mr Waugh said concerns about the rise in apprentices aged 25 plus was a “British disease” damaging a great success story.

“I hear all the time, ‘isn’t it such a shame that all apprenticeships and all the growth are around adults, what about young people?’

“In the last two years, with all the growth we’ve achieved across the programme as a whole, 29 per cent of that growth has been 16 to 18 year-olds in an incredibly tough employment market for young people.

“Last year, 89 per cent of all apprenticeship programme funds went to 16 to 24 year-olds, and I think that’s a really stunning number.

“It’s a very British disease in my view, taking something which is potentially a great success story and looking at the five, ten per cent on the margins.”

The conference, held at the International Coffee Organisation (ICO) in London, was attended by more than 150 delegates from further education colleges and training providers.

The morning session played host to some of the heavyweights of the apprenticeship community, including Dr Susan Pember, Director of Further Education and Skills Investment at the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS).

“I must say from the onset that I’m still in awe of what Simon has managed to achieve over the last 18 months, because you’re right, in 2003/04 we didn’t get the word apprenticeship talked about that much, but with Simon’s work and leadership over the last few years, nearly every leading company, if they’re not offering apprenticeships, know they should. And that is an amazing achievement,” she said.

Although the title of conference referenced the future of apprenticeships, the civil servant was also keen to remind delegates of the past.

“Over the last year the government has worked with the UK commission to find ways in which to engage employers more,” Pember said.

“The concept of guilds has come forward and the Growth and Innovation Fund has had several bids and projects accepted to actually establish skills.”

She added: “The reason that John Hayes particularly is advocating that is about ensuring that vocational education and training is seen as prestigious.”

Dr Susan Pember also wanted to reiterate the importance of apprenticeships and how they would enable Britain to compete in the global marketplace.

“It’s not something you do for one or two years in your youth, you carry it through as a profession, and that’s really important,” Pember said.

“It’s important that apprentices turn into master craftspeople, who then turn into teachers and trainers themselves, either in the workplace or back with the provider, and they carry on the professional updating.

“That cycle of professional updating is the only thing which will make us an incredible nation that can compete with other nations.”

The speech was followed by Michael Davis, Chief Executive for the UK Commission for Employment and Skills (UKCES), who discussed what should be done to improve apprenticeships over the next 10 years.

Mr Davis said he wanted employers to take on a “collective responsibility” that included investing more in the labour pool and accepting more accountability.

It’s important that apprentices turn into master craftspeople, who then turn into teachers and trainers themselves”

“Public expenditure will only go in one direction over the next 10 years. The government has done an awful lot, but at some point in the future maybe the government does less, because employers themselves really own the agenda and want to take it forward,” Mr Davis said. That in turn creates a real sense of action.”

Proposals from the UKCES included funding employers directly for apprenticeships, for example through the tax system or incentivised work, and extending the scope and needs of competitive investment funds.

Following a quick refreshment break there were a number of sessions analysing the delivery of vocational training, including how access to apprenticeships could be improved for young people and the best way to incentivise small and medium sized employers.

This then led into an afternoon seminar featuring, among others, Nick Linford, Managing Director of Lsect and Managing Editor of FE Week, and Peter Cobrin, Director of Not Going to Uni.

The conference concluded at 4:30pm after a series of additional case studies, as well as a question and answer session from a selection of the speakers.

 

Policy Review TV’s interactive online broadcast

A video feed of the conference was broadcast live by Policy Review TV.

Anyone who was unable to attend the event could watch all of the speeches, as well as their presentation slides, by paying a reduced fee on the Policy Review TV website.

The service allowed users to ask questions and participate in an online comments section, and also follow the official Twitter hashtag for the event, #vocation11.

Paul Rushworth, Marketing Manager for Policy Review TV, said: “Rather than just sitting and watching they can actually interact, so any questions that come up will come to someone like myself or the team inside filming, and they’ll then be passed through to the Chair.”

FE Week was given a demonstration during the morning sessions and discovered that more than 100 people were using the service.

Mr Rushworth said: “Because the price point is considerably lower, people who are perhaps in more junior positions but could still use the information are able to access and participate.”

Presentations could still be accessed once the event was finished using an on-demand service provided by Policy Review TV.

It’s about time we rescued apprenticeships from politics

Apprenticeships are far too popular with the general public for their own good. It’s so easy for politicians to bask in a warm glow of approval when they announce increased support for apprenticeships that they are currently seen as the answer to far more problems than they can realistically solve. Here are four examples.

– Apprenticeships are not the answer to providing good quality provision for the majority of 16-19 year olds who don’t want to do A levels (or in many cases do want to but are not wanted by A level providers). Changes in the youth labour market mean that apprenticeships will only ever be available for a small minority of the cohort: continual demands that they should be better understood by school leavers simply disguises the fact that the real issue is to provide more and better vocational provision, mostly in colleges, and broadly along the lines set out by Alison Wolf.

– Apprenticeships are not the answer to unemployment; it is jobs that are needed for both adults and young people. A job with training is clearly better than a job without but measures to stimulate employment need to be quite different to and more broad ranging than incentives to turn jobs into apprenticeships. Once again promising more apprenticeships disguises the lack of real action to create jobs.

– Apprenticeships are not the answer to up-skilling the adult workforce. As a country we probably need to invest more in training adult employees and there is a potential role for public funding to play; but simply re-badging Train to Gain type interventions as apprenticeships helps no-one, and risks damaging the apprenticeship brand. Issues around who should pay to increase the skills of the existing workforce need to be tackled head on.

– Apprenticeships are not the answer if large numbers of young people feel they can’t afford HE. Increased demand from those who would formerly have gone to university will create no more jobs and will displace existing applicants; moreover there is a real shortage of apprenticeships at Level 4 and growth in their number is likely to be slow. Answers to our HE problems should include better student support, better communication of the generous support there already is, and increasing opportunities for part time and locally based degree level work, probably offered through FE colleges.

What then should be done to rescue apprenticeships from the hugely inflated expectations that are currently attached to them? Part of the answer might be to recognise that the public understands apprenticeships as a good way of progressing young people into skilled employment, and for policy to go with the grain of that understanding.

That means stepping back from a bureaucratic attempt to create an apprenticeship route into all occupations; and also rethinking whether it makes sense to put a developmental programme for young people in a Department and Agency that both major in adult skills. There is a strong case for policy on the initial training of young people to be led by the Department of Education.

It’s so easy for politicians to bask in a warm glow of approval when they announce increased support for apprenticeships that they are currently seen as the answer to far more problems than they can realistically solve”

The second part of the solution is to take seriously the arguments advanced by bodies such as AELP and the IoD that apprenticeships should essentially be an employer driven programme. That means that government agencies should back off and leave it to employers to determine how many apprentices to employ and within broad limits what they should study. This does not mean handing public money to employers to spend – all that would do is perpetuate the game whereby training providers chase public investment and in some cases collude with employers to get their hands on it without adding any significant value.

Government should be very clear and quite restrictive in what it funds: basic skills for 16-19 apprentices for certain – its not for employers to meet the cost of the general education we prescribe for those under the compulsory participation age.

A good case can be made for government funding for the general education component of apprenticeships for those aged 19-24. Beyond that funding should be a matter for employers. There is an interesting debate to be had as to whether some support for employers might be delivered through loans – the need to repay would ensure that money was only spent on things that add value – but in the main employer led should mean employer funded.

The final step is to stop counting. In a system which is truly employer led the numbers of apprentices would find their own level. There would certainly be a fall in numbers and a serious fall in those areas where growth has been inflated by easy access to government money. Apprentices would be taken on where they represented a sensible investment and not where there was no need. This would save money; but more importantly it would require government to address the serious problems identified earlier without the fiction that simply beating the drum for apprenticeships will solve them all.

 

By Mick Fletcher

The devil is in the detail for new teacher training bursary scheme

The Annual Conference of the Association Colleges is a highlight for many of us in the FE sector. Debate and discussion on the big issues of the day, high profile keynote speakers, showcases of the very best in teaching and learning and, of course, silently judging exhibitors based on the quality of their freebies.

Ministerial speeches always provoke a reaction, and this year the speech by FE Minister John Hayes was true to form, offering us a round-up of progress made and of progress still to be made, in a fashion we’ve all come to know and expect.

He told us that FE is no longer the neglected middle child of education, that the sector is getting the freedoms it needs and that he wants “to abolish as much uncertainty for FE as I can.”

For me, the brilliance of FE lies in its adaptability, its flexibility, its ability to embrace change and respond to the challenge of the new.

When it comes to teaching and learning it is the unknowns of what the future holds that leads to curriculum innovation and vibrant provision meeting the needs of business and industry.

I suspect it is answers to the big questions that FE wants and this was true this week when the Institute for Learning questioned the Government’s direction on FE Initial Teacher Training.

I see one of our key responsibilities as a professional body as ensuring that future generations of learners benefit from highly qualified and dedicated teaching professionals.

To achieve this we must be able to attract and retain the very best professionals from industry and support them properly to become dual professionals; vocational experts and teaching experts.

This is something IfL is passionate about which is why we raised these issues in such detail through our responses to government consultations and directly with Ministers.

When it comes to teaching and learning it is the unknowns of what the future holds that leads to curriculum innovation and vibrant provision meeting the needs of business and industry.”

It was reassuring, therefore, that John Hayes announced in his speech at AoC Conference that this would be addressed by government through the introduction of new bursaries for new teachers and trainers undertaking teacher training.

“To ensure that our teachers are the best in the world and have access to HE I can announce today that we will introduce a bursary for initial teacher training” John Hayes MP, AoC Conference, November 15, 2011.

The Minister reinforced his vision in a series of interviews and his post-speech press conference, where he talked about how he wanted the system to be similar to the system for trainee school teachers because the status quo disadvantages FE in a way that “wouldn’t be compatible with the priority and status we are affording it.” The announcement was also welcomed strongly by Martin Doel, Chief Executive at the AoC.

As always, the devil will of course be in the detail and we will be hoping for equal support for those following the non-academic route in to teacher training – those from engineering, construction, hospitality, care, etc, who have taken vocational pathways – as well as graduates taking an academic route.

John Hayes has set out the challenge and IfL looks forward to working with the sector and the Department to ensure the new ITT bursaries featuring strongly in government’s new skills strategy ‘new challenges new chances’ due to be published shortly.

After six-and-a-half years at IfL, Lee Davies will be leaving in February 2012 to take on his new post as chief executive of the Chartered Institute of Patent Attorneys. He began his 23-year career in further education as a part-time plumbing lecturer at Highbury College Portsmouth, and will continue to be an IfL Fellow.

AoC reveals 14 per cent Level 1 learner drop

Colleges have revealed a 14 per cent drop in Level 1 learners, new figures from the Association of Colleges (AoC) have revealed.

Although the AoC’s data arrives from only a sample of colleges – 116, which is around one-third of its membership – it mirrors figures in their October survey and is also likely to be similar to an updated version due in January.

The new recruitment report, which was issued as the government announced record numbers of 16-24 year-olds considered NEET yesterday, gives an initial snapshot of recruitment within the sector in the 2011/12 academic year.

It is based, the AoC say, on “anonymised Individualised Learned Records submitted to the MiDES data server immediately prior” to November 11, which is around three weeks prior to the official submission to the Data Service.

Key Findings: 16-18 year old

  •  16-18 year old learner numbers in the sample declined by three per cent between 2010/11 and 2011/12. However, the recruitment pattern, the AoC say, was “quite varied” across the country with more than 36 per cent of colleges reporting an increase in enrolment numbers and around 64 per cent a decline.
  • The was a significant variation in recruitment patterns between different regions with the South East seeing the smallest decline and Greater London and the Eastern Region seeing the largest falls.
  • 16-18 year old learner numbers fell sharply in the most deprived areas in the country with declines of between five per cent and six per cent.
  • The fall in male learner numbers was greater than the fall in female learners.
  • Subject areas which saw the largest declines included Information and Communications Technology, Leisure Travel and Tourism and Art, Media & Publishing. Learner numbers fell only slightly in Health, Public Services & Care, Engineering and Business.
  • Level 1 learner numbers declined by more than 14 per cent and Level 2 learner numbers by around four per cent. Entry Level learner numbers increased, whilst Level 3 learner numbers remained fairly static.

Key Findings: Adult

  •  Adult learner numbers in the sample declined by 12 per cent between 2010/11 and 2011/12. However, the recruitment pattern, the AoC say, was again “quite varied” across the country with more than 21 per cent of colleges reporting increases in enrolment numbers and around 79 per cent a decline.
  • Theew was a significant variation in recruitment patterns between different regions with the South East seeing the largest decline and the North West seeing the smallest fall.
  • Adult learner numbers fell sharply in the least deprived areas in the country with declines of more than 20 per cent in the most affluent wards.
  • Subject areas that saw the largest declines included Art, Media & Publishing, Engineering and Construction.
  • The largest decline in learner numbers was at Level 3, but declines occurred at all levels.

Martin Doel, AoC chief executive, said: “These (NEET) figures add weight to the results of our October survey of colleges and a new set of interim enrolment figures collected from colleges – both of which suggest there has been a fall in the number of students leaving school with low levels of qualifications starting at college this year.

“The new enrolment figures show a 14 per cent drop in Level One (basic skills and pre-GCSE course) students among member colleges.

“Sadly, if these young people are not studying at college they are likely to become NEETs; most schools do not provide the types of courses they need, and work-based learning routes are also likely to be closed to them.”

However, Mr Doel, said it is “not clear yet exactly” what is behind the rise in NEETs for some age groups and the fall in enrolmemts.

But he added: “Local authority transport cuts, the loss of the Connexions service and the Education Maintenance Allowance, together with worries on higher education costs and the general economic situation, may play a part in young people’s decisions but there does need to be more research on causes and effects.

“In the meantime, we would want to continue our dialogue with government about how to mitigate the impact of any unintended consequences of policy and funding changes on students and their families.”

SFA chief says he is ‘grappling’ with apprenticeship ‘teething problems’

The chief executive of the Skills Funding Agency (SFA) says he is “grappling” with apprenticeship issues after admitting to “teething problems” in the current system.

Geoff Russell, speaking to FE Week at the Association of Colleges (AoC) Annual Conference, said the SFA has “spotted” concerns and is trying to better define apprenticeships.

He said: “One of the important elements of an apprenticeship is experience at work. And you know the benefits of that aren’t necessarily as measurable as perhaps one would like, but I think most people recognise there is a value for spending a year or two working with people in a work environment.

“So it’s kind of a definitional thing and it’s arisen because of the huge, successful increase in the number of apprenticeships.

“There’s always going to be some teething problems and this is the emergence of one. I don’t think you’ll be surprised to learn that it’s been spotted and we’re working with colleagues in the National Apprenticeship Service to get a tighter definition of what an apprenticeship is.”

Mr Russell said the SFA would “probably need to tighten the rules” around what is considered to be a reasonable length of an apprenticeship, while admitting some cases were raising questions about the structure of apprenticeship frameworks.

He said: “I think we’ve probably been operating on the assumption that apprenticeships should be one or two years.

“I guess instances like that provoke the question ‘well should we be a bit more proactive in terms of saying what the expectation should be around the average duration of an apprenticeship?’ If someone is an outlier from that expectation, it’s about having a look at it and saying ‘well is there a good reason for that?’ or maybe we should be saying to people, ‘we think it needs to be a bit longer’.”

Mr Russell (above) said the SFA was “grappling” with issues. He added: “If you are in retail or if you are in health, versus if you broaden into mainstream engineering. These are the kinds of issues we’re grappling with.

“In the meantime, I think I can say pretty conclusively, there are very few people out here that we’re aware of that are just breaking the rules. There are a lot of people following the rules in a way that is to their advantage.

“It’s incumbent on us to possibly look a little more carefully at some of those cases, and we are, but I just think we need to keep it in perspective Of the hundreds of thousands of apprenticeships which are out there, the vast majority, are doing something which pretty much looks like an apprenticeship.”

Mr Russell was also asked about Elmfield Training, one of the UK’s fastest growing training providers.

The firm has been highlighted recently by FE Week and TES magazine for its profit margins and use of public money.

He said: “There’s an issue that says, what is a reasonable amount for an organisation to make, in terms of profit delivering training. I don’t know the details, but my guess is Elmfield is delivering in a way which is quite possibly entirely compliant with the rules.”

Daniel Khan, CEO, the Open College Network London Region

Daniel Khan had his first lessons in entrepreneurship from his father, who ran a corner shop in Trinidad.

Helping out in the shop at weekends and cycling round the neighbourhood delivering groceries, he quickly developed a head for business. “It was a good education because you learned the value of hard work, but you also learned the value of money because margins were so tight. He was flexible with customer service, pricing and going that extra mile,” he says.

These are lessons he has carried through his professional life – particularly the bit about going the extra mile. He has had an impressive portfolio career that has included accountancy, financial management, teaching, college leadership and now a chief executive role at the qualifications awarding body the Open College Network, London Region. At some points in his career, he has had two or three jobs on the go at a time.

As a child, Khan set his sights on studying engineering at university. But as the second of five children, he was reluctant to burden his parents financially and chose to train on-the-job as an accountant instead.

When I first moved back to the UK, my parents were back at home, I didn’t have anyone to rely on…I felt I really had to make myself sustainable and financially independent”

In the early 1970s, he was offered the chance to finish his training in London. But after the “nice weather, beaches and barbecues” he had enjoyed growing up in Trinidad, living in the UK was a culture shock. “It didn’t dislike it, but initially it was different,” he recalls. “It was so vast and impersonal…I found the winter and the grey skies difficult, so I was definitely going back to Trinidad as soon as possible.”

Khan did go back to Trinidad – with his wife, who he had met while studying in London – but returned to the UK in the early 1980s and settled in Kent. After a short spell working for Lyon’s Ice Cream, he landed a financial management role at the University of London and spent the next sixteen years working, amongst others, for the Institute of Education, School of African and Oriental Studies and the Institute of Neurology.

In his spare time, he set up an accountancy practice, did a Masters degree in financial management, a diploma in Theology and had a variety of part-time lecturing roles, including both accountancy and bible studies. In 1986, he became the first “non-white” to be elected as a councillor for Gillingham Borough Council, in Kent, where he served for eight years.

Khan’s strong work ethic and endless energy (he sleeps for just four hours a night) is characteristic of many immigrants, he says. “I think it’s something that drives many of us,” he says. “When I first moved back to the UK, my parents were back at home, I didn’t have anyone to rely on…I felt I really had to make myself sustainable and financially independent.”

But when he was offered a job as deputy principal at York College in 1996, Khan recognised his limits and sold his accountancy practice to a friend. Three years later, he moved to Grimsby College (now Grimsby Institute of Further and Higher Education) as principal; making history as one of just two black college leaders at the time.

Khan gushes about his achievements at Grimsby, where under his leadership, the college turnover went from £15 million to £60 million and hoovered up other institutions until it had “had grown to stretch from Scarborough to Skegness”. His efforts won him an OBE for which he is justifiably proud.

It was also during his time at Grimsby he picked up the title of ‘Professor,’ a source of puzzlement for some, as has has not held a senior academic role at a university. Khan says the professorship was awarded by Yangtze University in China, where he lectured when he visited on college business.

But it came as a surprise to the sector when he left, suddenly, last year. While a confidentiality agreement prevents him from talking about the exact circumstances of his departure (it will all be in his book, he jokes), Khan hints there was a growing gulf between him and some of his colleagues about the future direction of the college.

“I could forsee that my style had taken the college where they were and where they wanted to be – but the general feel was this period of economic growth was over,” he says, clearly choosing his words carefully. “They [colleagues at the college] had to consolidate and maybe even look at if we needed to be involved in all we were involved with.”

In retrospect, the timing of his departure was “miscalculated,” he says. “We had new governors on board and different people bringing different views and I thought maybe the time was coming to leave…but what I probably should have done was leave in six months, but at that time, I had some friends who were starting up a catering business. Because I had said I wanted to leave they said ‘maybe it would be better to leave sooner rather than later; when do you want to leave?’ I said if we could cut a deal, I’d leave straight away.”

My big drive in life is that there are two factors that affect lives – that’s religion and education.”

He left soon afterwards with £100,000 in his pocket. But because Khan had always dealt with journalists direct, there was no one to deal with the media. As a result, it was “not handled well,” he says, which led to speculation in local and trade press about the reasons for his sudden departure.

When the catering venture didn’t work out, Khan moved into consultancy” but a few months after leaving Grimsby, found he was missing working for an organisation and having a direct influence on peoples’ lives. So when a job came up as chief executive of the Open College Network, London Region, he jumped at the chance.

He has taken up the post at an interesting time; the Open College Network, London Region, along with nine other regional networks has recently been given independent awarding status which will give them the freedom to develop qualifications that meet the specific needs of their region alongside the Open College Network qualifications they already deliver. There is a possibility that some may choose to go it alone – and solely deliver their own qualifications – but decisions won’t be finalised until next month.

The increase in university tuition fees, due to rise to £9,000 a year, will mean big changes right across the education sector and Khan predicts a much bigger demand for a “part-time learning, part-time working” model. Universities and colleges will be under far greater pressure to prove they are providing value-for-money – and that their courses help students get jobs, he says.

As well as looking at developing advanced apprenticeship programmes, The Open College Network, London Region, is exploring the idea of partnerships with universities that would allow students to do their first year of a degree at a college, at a reduced cost.

But while there are many advantages to a more competitive education market, quality does need to be monitored carefully, says Khan. “It’s like the American health service – you will find that some providers will want to do the easy things they can make money on. So they will do all the simple operations but the expensive surgeries, they don’t want to do. So, in education, what you will find is lots of business courses and those that are easy to deliver, but the really difficult things like medicine or engineering, they won’t go into.”

Khan, who recently turned 60, says he “loves working” and has no intention of retiring. But after 40 years of working long days and attending functions most evenings, he has recently joined a gym and now tries to keep at least two evenings free a week. What continues to motivate him about further education is its capacity to transform lives.

“My big drive in life is that there are two factors that affect lives – that’s religion and education.

“In religion you can have a life transforming experience and change your life. In education, you can have a better quality of life, a job, work your way up and do things better for yourself, your family and community.

“There is something very satisfying about that,” he says.

AELP calls for clarity on taxpayer spending

Greater clarity is needed to ensure taxpayers know where their money is being spent, a further education (FE) body has warned as a new pilot is launched.

The Association of Employment and Learning Providers (AELP) say that government contribution to employer funded training should be clearly specified and should not subsidise training investment companies “have always made”.

It follows Prime Minister David Cameron’s announcement of a new £250 million pilot fund for businesses to design, develop and buy vocational training. An initial fund of £50m is available in 2012/13 for employers to bid, but if it is a success then a further £200m will available the following year.

However, the specification has yet to be written and the AELP will be making suggestions about how it should be framed. Graham Hoyle, the AELP chief executive, said: “I have absolutely no problems with the concept of ‘employer ownership’ and have indeed argued that the pendulum has swung far too far in the direction of government interference.

“It will be very important, however, for the government to be perhaps clearer than it has ever been about what it, on behalf of the taxpayer, is paying for.”

He added: “What the government should never be paying for is development of specific vocational skills required by employers to run their own, profitable, businesses. These skills have always been funded by employers, who have recognised the bottom line return that such investments invariably bring.”

At the Association of Colleges (AoC) Annual Conference last week, Business Secretary Vince Cable described the pilot as a “radical” approach.

He added: “The introduction of a pilot using employers as purchasers might sound threatening to some providers, and perhaps to some of you, it actually represents an opportunity for the best to expand.

“We aim to build on, not undermine, the strong relationships many of you already have with employers. Our approach will be flexible, rather than bureaucratic – enabling you to work more closely with business.”

AoC chief executive Martin Doel, although admitting that not enough detail was available yet, questioned the plan. Mr Doel asked: “What accountabilities will they accept for receiving or having direct control of skills funding?

“And how will they demonstrate that they are delivering public value, just as colleges deliver public value?” During a press conference, Mr Cable responded to Mr Doel’s questions.

Mr Cable said: “The UKCES, which is the umbrella organisation that actually installs the sector skills councils and operates the levy schemes and so on, that is the main vehicle through which the employers channel their concerns.

“But accountability and the use of public money will be done in the normal way. The Skills Funding Agency is the key agency in government, which will be held to account for the money they spend, just as colleges are when they’re directly funded.”

Ofsted: Too little outstanding teaching in learning and skills

Quality of teaching in further education has been criticised in the annual report education regulator Ofsted.

The report said there was “too little outstanding teaching in learning and skills providers” inspected in 2010/11.

It said only 13 independent learning providers and two employer providers were judged outstanding for quality of teaching, with no colleges, adult and community learning providers making the grade.

The indictment has led to the suggestion that providers should only be graded with an overall outstanding mark if their teaching is outstanding. The plan is being canvassed by the Institute for Learning (IfL), which has received “strong support” for the notion from more than 2,000 members who have replied to a survey on proposed framework changes.

IfL chief executive Toni Fazaeli said: “We agree with Ofsted that excellent teaching and learning are the keys to success. It is disappointing too little outstanding teaching was seen in colleges, adult and community learning providers and prisons inspected this year.”

Other findings include less than half the colleges inspected being judged to be good or outstanding. However, this is in the context of a risk-based approach to inspection, where a greater percentage of previously satisfactory or inadequate providers were inspected during the course of 2010/11.

The most recent inspections for all colleges showed 70 per cent were graded as good or outstanding. But Ofsted criticised “slow progress” of colleges previously found to be satisfactory, with 22 no better and two worse out of 40.

Joy Mercer, director of policy (Education) at the Association of Colleges, is pleased at the overall picture.

But she added: “There are concerns about the number of colleges which continue to be identified as satisfactory under Ofsted’s new ‘at risk’ inspection regime and the one per cent which are deemed inadequate.

“Colleges are never complacent about their performance and continually strive to improve their provision.”

Independent learning providers increased in those judged good or outstanding; from 47 per cent in 2009/10 to 55 per cent in 2010/11. Outstanding grades have increased from four per cent last year to ten per cent this year. Ten of the 16 employer providers inspected this year were judged to be outstanding or good, and six were judged as satisfactory.

Although 33 of the 45 adult and community learning providers inspected were judged good, only one was outstanding overall and no providers were judged outstanding for quality of teaching for the second year.

Graham Hoyle, chief executive of the AELP, said: “It is very encouraging. The chief inspector also highlights high success rates in the independent sector, which means that we are delivering value for money for the taxpayer and the economy.”