CBI backs call to make maths compulsory for 16+

A further voice has been added to the call for young people to study maths after the age of 16.

The Confederation of British Industry (CBI) asks for the Department for Education to “ensure that all young people continue studying maths post-16 at a level appropriate to them” in its report, ‘Skills for the creative industries: Investing in the talents of our people’.

The report, available here, highlights that only 15 per cent of students study maths beyond GCSE level, a figure far behind other nations such as France and Germany.

The lobbying organisation later states they welcome the ambitions of Education Secretary Michael Gove to ensure that “within a decade the vast majority of pupils are studying maths right through to the age of 18”.

The report argues advanced numeracy skills are “important to elements of the creative sector” and essential for tackling the “underachievement on basic skills”.

It follows a review comissioned by the Conservative Party proposing that all young people should be forced to study mathematics up to the age of 18.

The report, led by Carol Vordeman and titled ‘A world-class mathematics education for ALL our young people’, is available here.

It states: “To bring this country into line with the rest of the world, mathematics, in some form, should be made compulsory to the age of 18. The implementation of this recommendation is a matter of urgency.”

The report does not reference the role of FE colleges, apprenticeship programmes nor alternatives to the GCSE in mathematics, such as the Functional Skills qualification.

Central Sussex College redevelopment on-time despite ‘batty’ resident!

Work on the final phase of the redevelopment at Central Sussex College’s Sixth Form Haywards Heath campus is now well underway, despite the best efforts of one campus resident – Plecotus Auritus – AKA a brown long-eared bat!

Mansell Project Manager, Kevin Spreyer explained: “Mansell has been working closely with College staff to ensure the building work is completed on time, despite the setback. People may find it staggering that one bat can effectively cause a 70 tonne piece of machinery to grind to a halt, but it is important they are protected.”
This final phase of the £30 million campus redevelopment is due for completion during the 2012/13 academic year. New facilities will include science laboratories, classrooms, a music suite, learning resource and IT centre, four court sports hall and a new reception area.

Family tax benefits barrier to apprenticeship starts

Learners are turning down apprenticeships as families cannot afford to miss out on vital benefits payments.

An investigation by FE Week has found families lose child benefit and child tax credits, if a young dependent person takes up an apprenticeship, with the national apprentice minimum wage rate of £2.50 an hour.

Although the minimum wage, which is due to rise to £2.60 from October 1, is designed to offer a pay which is greater than money received in benefits, some families face being left more than £150 out of pocket.

This startling reality has proved a barrier for entry, forcing them to make the difficult decision to pull the plug on an apprenticeship – causing the young person to miss out on work experience – in favour of a college-based programme.

Patrick McLeod, head of business engagement at Filton College, said a learner turned their back on an apprenticeship, due to be paid £2.50-per-hour for working 30-hours-a-week, after it proved too costly for the family.

Mr McLeod said the mother was told she would lose her £60-per-week in child tax credits, child benefit of £20-per-week and £159-a-month in child support allowance. Taking into account the minimum wage whilst on an apprenticeship, that left her £179 out of pocket per month.

…mothers “won’t let” a family member do an apprenticeship”

Mr McLeod said: “It’s a lot of money to lose a month. The learner turned down the apprenticeship and did a full-time college-based course. It was a shame because they had the chance to get employment experience.”

He also believes it could have a far wider impact, adding: “I’m sure it has and will put people off apprenticeships. There might be many people who have looked into it themselves, made their decision not to do one and not told us about it.”

FE Week understands this is just one of a number of similar cases affecting families. One senior staff member at a London college said they are aware of three cases where mothers “won’t let” a family member do an apprenticeship.

The staff member, who asked to remain anonymous, said: “Parents need to be made aware of the opportunities. They can only see benefits disappearing.”

The National Apprenticeship Service (NAS) said employers often pay more than the minimum wage, but they are aware of benefit issues.

A statement from NAS said: “(We have) been made aware that this is an issue for some apprentices and their families.

“Although the minimum wage for apprentices is £2.50 an hour, employers often pay more, and the average apprentice pay is £170 take home pay per week.”

Lynne Sedgmore CBE, executive director of 157 Group, said they are “fully behind apprenticeships” and the benefits they bring to learners.

However, she also added: “In a well-planned apprenticeship programme, both the employer and young person reap substantial benefits, which is why we have been shocked to learn some providers are employing young people as apprentices for just 16 hours per week at the minimum wage of £2.50 per hour.

“This results in a loss of child benefit and child tax credits so hard-working families are losing money, while young people lose valuable work experience.”

A spokesman for HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) said child tax credit and child benefit cease when a young person takes on a waged apprenticeship.

He said: “Yes that would be true in all cases. It is only when a young person continues in full time, non-advanced education or unwaged training that we treat them as dependent on their parents.”

When FE colleges choose not to call themselves ‘colleges’

Some say it is a source of pride, while others say it has become ill-defined and devalued. Regardless of which view is right and which is wrong, the use of the word ‘college’ is sparking debate in the further education (FE) sector.

This academic year, West Nottinghamshire College became the latest FE institute to rebrand without the word ‘college’ in its title.

The college made the change on September 1 to publicly be known as Vision West Notts and it will continue to phase in the new identity over the next 12 months.

Louise Knott, Director of Communication, Marketing and Learner Engagement at Vision West Notts, said the rebrand is designed to reflect the diversity of their services.

She said: “We are a large employer, a £50 million business, an exceptional college and training provider and run successful subsidiary companies such as bksb, Safety Plus and Vision Apprentices.

“Our new identity reflects the entirety of what we do.”

“This is not about devaluing the word ‘college’ and in fact, we still refer to ourselves as a college in literature targeted at our students.”

Vision West Notts is still legally known as West Nottinghamshire College and has not entered the legal process needed to change its name.

Miss Knott said they are not looking to devalue the term ‘college’ in any way.

She said: “We are immensely proud of being a strong college and our principal is a powerful advocate for the colleges’ sector on the national stage.

“This is not about devaluing the word ‘college’ and in fact, we still refer to ourselves as a college in literature targeted at our students.”

Miss Knott said students and staff feel “very proud” to be a part of the college’s new image, which she believes is partly because of the new names subtlety.

“Many local people, particularly students, already refer to us simply as West Notts.

“Therefore from an identity point of view, we felt it was important to retain this in our name,” she said.

However, David Shuttleworth, Head of Learner Recruitment and Directorate for Curriculum and Innovation at Petroc, believes the term ‘college’ is “a bit ill-defined and devalued.”

Petroc changed its name following a merger between North Devon College and East Devon College in 2008.

The new identity came about because some of the funding North Devon College received from the Learning and Skills Council was ring-fenced for rebranding.

Mr Shuttleworth, who managed the rebranding process, said he was aware many schools in his local area were starting to use the word ‘college’ in their names.

He said: “The word ‘college’ is used so widely that it’s become a bit ill-defined and devalued.

“We’re clearly differentiated from the competition and that’s increasingly important in a crowded, competitive marketplace.”

The rebrand was initially seen as controversial and received a huge reaction on newspaper and social networking websites initially.

“Our research shows that there are signification issues with the term college”

However, the college later won two Transform Awards for the rebranding project in 2010.

As such, Mr Shuttleworth said the new image has been “liberating” for Petroc.

He said: “Together with the rebranded identity, the name allows us to present ourselves as the inspiring, bright, challenging organisation that we know we are.”

Ben Verinder, Communications Director at the Association of Colleges (AoC), believes there is a significant amount of confusion regarding the use of the term “college”.

Research conducted by AoC and ICM Research this year has shown just under 75 per cent of the general public think Trinity College Cambridge, part of Cambridge University, is a further education college.

“I wonder whether that (confusion) has been influencing colleges’ decision to change what they’re referenced as,” Ben said.

He also stressed many principals and members of AoC still believe the term “college” has value.

He said: “It’s an on-going debate.

“Even though all of our research shows that there are signification issues with the term college, it is still actually a valuable marker and therefore it’s still got quite a lot going for it – even though the general public has some confusion about it.”

NCG, which comprises of Newcastle College, West Lancashire College and the Intraining Group, has taken a different approach altogether.

The organisation rebranded their trading arm in 2009, and chose the word NCG because it “represented and reflected all three divisions.”

Unlike Petroc and Vision West Notts however, NCG decided to retain the original titles for each of their three educational providers.

This is because NCG believes students still respect and identity the branding of each individual FE provider, including the use of the term ‘college’.

Caroline Anderson, Head of Communication at NCG said: “We serve thousands of learners and employers each year through our three highly successful divisions.

“Learners choose to come to either one of our colleges or Intraining based on the excellent reputation that each division has built independently.”

Caroline said that NCG wouldn’t consider changing the name of Newcastle College or West Lancashire College in the future.

She added: “NCG is a unique organisation within the education sector and steers the strategic direction of the group.

“It is recognised on a national platform and combines the strength and expertise that exists across the three divisions.”

Petroc, NCG and Vision West Notts have taken vastly different approaches to their branding, and have also chosen to drop the word ‘college’ in contrasting and often unorthodox ways.

In tough economic times FE providers will continue to look at how they can differentiate themselves from their competitors – including name changes and branding.

The effect that this is having on the term ‘college’ and its perception both to students and professionals in the sector remains unclear.

What is clear however is that the word ‘college’ is no longer being used coherently in the education sector.

This begs the question – what’s in a name?

NIACE distributes manifesto of womens’ right to learn

A ten-point manifesto is being distributed by NIACE to help ensure every woman has the right to learn.

The statement of policies is being given out at the three main party conferences, starting with the Liberal Democrat Party Conference which was held in Birmingham yesterday.

The manifesto is currently in a draft format, and will be published as a final version called ‘Every Woman’s Right to learn’ on International Women’s Day 2012.

Carol Taylor, Deputy Chief Executive of NIACE, said: “There is a danger that some of the gains made in recent years will be lost.

“This manifesto, born out of a desire to say ‘we have come so far, let’s not lose it all now’, is open for discussion.”

The idea for the manifesto began at International Women’s Day 2011, held on March 8.

The current ten-point manifesto states that there should be:

1. Lead a debate on women and learning.

2. Inspire women to widen their horizons and achieve their dreams.

3. Involve more and different women in learning.

4. Make sure that adult learning promotes gender equality.

5. Make sure that learning is affordable and accessible to all women.

6. Make sure that work-related learning expands opportunities for women.

7. Make sure that Information, Advice and Guidance opens up the full range of possibilities for women.

8. Train all members of the workforce to understand and advance gender equality.

9. Demand equal participation in adult learning decision-making.

10. Campaign for gender equality across all adult learning providers and partners.

Mrs Taylor added: “We want women from all over the UK, and across the world, to help us to shape this manifesto into something that we can launch on International Women’s day 2012.

“We want a manifesto that will start a process so that, whoever they are and wherever they live, every woman will have the opportunity to transform their lives through learning.”

DfE consults on plans to make FE teachers fully qualified in schools

A consultation has been launched which could pave the way for further education (FE) teachers to work in schools as qualified members of staff.

The Department for Education (DfE) has outlined plans to reduce relevant bureaucracy so lecturers can be qualified for school teaching without doing any further training, assessment or serving statutory.

Under the proposals, teachers with Qualified Teacher Learning and Skills (QTLS) status will have qualified teacher status and be able to work in schools on a permanent basis.

The current system means FE teachers can only be appointed in schools as temporary and unqualified members of staff.

Schools Minister Nick Gibb said: “These are important deregulatory proposals that will make it easier for many highly talented teachers to remain in the classroom.”

Professor Alison Wolf recommended the restrictions on QTLS status be removed in a review of vocational education published earlier this year.

She argued the measures were making it increasingly difficult for schools to provide a high standard of vocational teaching.

Toni Fazaeli, chief executive of the Institute for Learning (IfL), said: “Some 5,000 further education teachers made the case for QTLS to be recognised for teaching in schools, on a par with QTS, as their contribution to the Wolf review.

“IfL has consistently made the case for our members’ professionalism and the professional status of QTLS to be recognised for teaching in schools’ settings as well as further education, so that young people have access to expert vocational teaching wherever they learn.”

The consultation also suggests teachers with QTLS status should not be required to complete a statutory induction period in schools.

DfE, through the same consultation, also hope to make it easier for fully qualified teachers from the United States, Canada, Australia and New Zealand to be permitted to teach in schools as qualified teachers.

The revised regulations, if approved, would come into effect from April 2012.

The consultation, available here, will close on December 16.

Remind me again why I pay the training budget of a $422bn company?

The supermarket chain Asda is owned by Walmart, which for fiscal year ending January 31, 2011 (according to Wikipedia), “reported a net income of $15.4 billion on $422 billion of revenue with a 24.7 per cent gross profit margin”, making it “the world’s 18th largest public corporation, according to the Forbes Global 2000 list, and the largest public corporation when ranked by revenue.”

I therefore nearly choked on my Morrisons cornflakes when I read that the UK government will be covering all the costs of the Walmart Apprenticeship programme. As reported last week in this newspaper, the Skills Funding Agency have handed City & Guilds their first apprenticeship training contract, and all £8 million of it will be spent on Asda employees. Walmart, nor their supermarket Asda, will be paying City & Guilds anything. How do we know this? Well, because that is what they told FE Week.

Wait, really? That can’t be right can it? But public sector funding is being slashed, ESOL course cuts, and so on. Why would our beloved Minister, John Hayes, one of the biggest critics of free workplace training (under Train to Gain) when in opposition, allow this? If Walmart and Asda really wanted this training for their staff they should spend a small fraction (about 0.08 per cent) of their $15.4 billion net income, right?

This expensive and lazy approach to spending scarce skills funding resource makes me so angry.”

It’s total utter madness, and I can think of four reasons as to why it’s been allowed to happen:

1. The National Apprenticeship [sales] Service are still paranoid they won’t achieve the increased apprenticeship recruitment targets, so are being lazy.

2. It’s a quick and cheap way for the government to buy a rise up the international league tables for first full level 2s in the workplace (the reason Train to Gain was invented by Gorden Brown when in the Treasury).

3. Maybe Asda have pointed out that the competition (Morrisions) have had money thrown at them, so it is only fair they get a similar slice of the apprenticeship big give away.

4. Apprenticeships are such a complex yet sexy policy area Asda and BIS ‘investment’ press releases remain good for business.

There are so many questions. Here are four:

1. Did the Skills Funding Agency put this £8 million contract with City & Guilds to tender to secure best value for money? If not, why not?

2. Does a contract of this size with a single employer, who is not making a cash contribution, break EU competition law (State Aid)?

3. Why is the contract not with the National Employer Service, who can negotiate rates?

4. How many of the planned 25,000 Asda apprentices are already adult employees?

This expensive and lazy approach to spending scarce skills funding resource makes me so angry. Let us not forget the ESOL discretionary Learner Support Fund has been scrapped, and it was worth just half the City & Guilds Asda contract.

Could the Asda motto: ‘saving you money every day’, be any less appropriate? Minister Hayes, you have some explaining to do.

Related FE Week articles:

City and Guilds allocated more than £8m for 25,000 Asda Apprentices

Morrisons, Elmfied and the over 25 Apprentices

External related links:

BBC Radio 4 In Business programme on supermarket apprentices

FE Week mini-mascot (edition 2)

Follow the adventures of FE Week’s biggest and smallest fan!

Mostly this week I have been learning that autumn leaves are crunchy

And also you can follow our FE Week mini-mascot on Twitter @daniellinford

 

Committee accuse Minister of ‘ramshackle’ approach to funding

FE Week held an evidence gathering session at the House of Commons on Tuesday to allow college principals, agency officials and front and back bench MPs to discuss the Government’s most recent policy U-turn.

The ‘clarification’, which covers all 19+ Skills Funding Agency funded learners, including those seeking fully funded English for speakers of other languages (ESOL) courses, has caused widespread confusion for further education (FE) providers during enrolment. The session was an opportunity to discuss the impact of the sudden changes and what could be done to improve funding regulation in the future.

It’s ridiculous that people don’t know if they are charging for fee remittance or not. We need to get some clarity on the situation.”

Many speakers argued that the Government announcement was ‘dripped out’ and inconsistant. The clarification, which was released discreetly on the Skills Funding Agency website in August, was poorly publicised and left many FE colleges confused going into the peak enrolment period.

Heidi Alexander, Shadow Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs said: It’s ridiculous that people don’t know if they are charging for fee remittance or not. “We need to get some clarity on the situation.”

Although the government U-turn has been welcomed by most FE colleges, some of the witnesses at the session emphasised that the ‘rescue’ of ESOL courses could be short lived.

Sue Rimmer OBE, Principal and Chief Executive of South Thames College said: “We need to know what’s happening next year.”

Dan Taubman, Senior National Education Official for Further Education and Lifelong Learning and lso involved with the Action for ESOL campaign added: “Nobody knows what the financial situation will be next year. “We have only won the battle, we haven’t won the war.”

Much of the discourse fell back to the issue of clarity within the funding policy. Stephen Hewitt, Strategic Funding, Information and Enrolment Manager at Morley College said: “There are lots of things that we are not quite sure about. “It’s the most ramshackle thing that I’ve had to work with in the last 15 years in the sector.

“Saying it will be all okay is something I find very hard to believe.”

As an example Susie Kusnierz, Head of ESOL at Lewisham College, added that although the situation with course fees had been remedied, there was no clarification on how the policy would affect other learner costs, such as examination fees.

Both clarity and flexibility are needed to develop successful Esol courses. During the session many of the speakers seemed to be at odds with one another about which ideal should be prioritised in the future.

Sue Rimmer argued that each local community is unique, and that FE providers couldn’t help or empower communities without certain freedoms.

Andy Wilson, Principal of Westminster Kingsway College added that the sector had experienced tighter regulation whilst Labour was in power. This resulted in “huge rulebooks” and a tendency to prioritise performance targets; a landscape which many FE providers would probably wish to avoid in the future.

Toni Pearce, Vice President for FE at the National Union of Students was keen to bring the focus of the talks back to the impact and needs of students. She said: “We’ve talked about what’s best for colleges, but what about what’s best for students?”

If this had happened to schools or universities there would be flaming pitchforks

Toni said that she was concerned that the FE sector was being directed and driven by the private sector, and not the needs of local people.

Joy Mercer, AoC’s Director of Education Policy said that the current level of funding provides an insufficient number of hours needed to learn the English language. She said that “way more than 72 hours” were required, and asked how attendees would feel about trying to learn Japanese in a similar time frame.

The latter part of the event topic touched upon the role of large corporations, asking why they weren’t being forced to provide some sort of cash contribution to the delivery.

Sue Rimmer added that big businesses were ‘taking money for what they should be doing anyway.’

Stephen Hewitt suggested that help should be prioritised for small and medium sized corporations. He said: “If this had happened to schools or universities there would be flaming pitchforks. It’s always FE that gets messed around.”

Gordon Marsden, MP for Blackpool South and Shadow Minister for Further Education and Skills was present for the opening remarks of the debate.

He said that there was “a very broad philosophical debate to be won here”, and that he would continue to press the government on the issue. At the end of the session John McDonnell, Labour MP for Hayes and Harlington asked for suggestions on how these issues could be discussed further, putting forward the idea of an early day motion as an example.

David Hughes, the new Chief Executive of NIACE responded by asking that John Hayes, Minister of State for Further Education, Skills and Lifelong Learning conduct a lessons learnt investigation into how the original policy change was introduced and why it took so long to undo.

See more photos, by Laura Braun, here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/feweek