Latest news from FE Week

FE has lost something primary schools get right

In primary school, every student has a person.

A teacher who knows them, their moods, their friendships, their worries, the way they walk in when something isn’t right. There is consistency, familiarity, and a clear sense of belonging.

By the time students reach further education, that person has disappeared.

Instead, they are passed between subject specialists, registers and reporting systems. Known in fragments. Tracked in spreadsheets. Measured in attendance percentages and submission dates.

And yet, we expect more from them than ever before.

As a college teacher, I teach around 90 to 100 students across multiple levels. I might see each group once or twice a week, often for a limited number of hours. In that time, I am expected to track attendance, monitor wellbeing, understand who has an education, health and care plan (EHCP) and everything about it, notice friendship dynamics, support academic progress, chase coursework, and produce meaningful reports multiple times a year.

All while delivering lessons, meeting targets, and feeding data into systems that suggest I “know” my students.

The truth is, I know parts of them.

But not enough to be their person.

Further education sits in a strange, often overlooked space. Students are no longer children, but they are not yet fully independent adults. This period is marked by significant personal changes, identity development, fluctuating confidence, increasing mental health challenges, and growing external pressures.

This is not just anecdotal, it is ecological. Urie Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory reminds us that development does not happen in isolation. It is shaped by the systems around a young person, relationships, environments, and daily interactions. When those systems become fragmented, so too can a student’s sense of stability and belonging.

And yet, this is the stage where we remove consistency.

We assume independence means distance.

It doesn’t.

What if FE borrowed something simple from primary education?

A “college class teacher” model.

Each group would have a consistent, central teacher, someone who sees them regularly, not just to deliver content, but to know them. A person responsible not just for data, but for connection. Someone who notices when attendance dips before it becomes a statistic. Someone who understands the quieter students, not just the loudest voices.

This is not about adding another layer of administration. It is about refocusing what already exists.

Belonging is not a soft outcome. It is a predictor of engagement.

Abraham Maslow reminds us that belonging sits at the core of human motivation. Without it, progress in learning becomes harder to sustain.

Students who feel known are more likely to attend, more likely to participate, more likely to ask for help, and more likely to stay.

We talk endlessly about retention, attendance, and outcomes, but rarely address the simplest question:

Do students feel like they belong to someone – and somewhere?

From a teacher’s perspective, this is not about reducing workload. It is about restoring purpose.

Most of us did not enter further education to become data managers. We came to teach, to guide, and to support. But when relationships are fragmented, so is our impact. We are left trying to piece together a full picture of a student from limited snapshots, while being held accountable for outcomes that depend on connection.

Give us the space to know our students properly, and we will do what teachers have always done best: show up, notice, care, and make it count.

Because spreadsheets do not change lives.

People do.

System needs to catch up with young people’s growing appetite for technical education

Skills minister Jacqui Smith recently described apprenticeships as “tougher to come by than Oxbridge places”. Her assessment points to a striking paradox. At the same time as young people’s burgeoning awareness of – and interest in – apprenticeships, starts among young people are down 40 per cent over the past decade and more than one million young people are not earning or learning.

Awareness is rising

The legislation requires schools to provide at least six encounters with approved technical education or apprenticeship providers for all students from years 8 to 13.

Data collected by The Careers & Enterprise Company (CEC) offers, for the first time, a national picture of delivery.

Across England, the disruptive effect of schools thinking actively about promoting all routes is strengthening links with technical and apprenticeship providers.

81 per cent of schools now deliver at least two PAL compliant encounters for most key stage 4 students – up from 71 per cent in 2022-23.
91 per cent of schools say most of their pupils had encounters with FE Colleges, up from 86 per cent in 2022-23.
Reporting has increased significantly: over 95 per cent of eligible institutions now submit data – around 400 more schools than when the legislation was enacted.
Most young people in year 11 (79 per cent) report understanding apprenticeships. This finding has been consistent since 2021-22 and mirrors increasing compliance with PAL among schools.

This shift in awareness and understanding is changing the profile of young people considering technical pathways. For too long, vocational pathways were viewed as second-choice options and lacked the prestige parity of A-Levels and higher education routes.

The challenge now is ensuring the system has the capacity to meet this growing ambition.

Can colleges cope?

Many FE colleges are already experiencing significant pressure on places, facilities and staffing, resulting in students being turned away as demand outstrips space.

Success in raising aspirations cannot be accompanied by a shortage of opportunities. If we want more young people to choose technical education and apprenticeships, we need to ensure colleges and training providers have the resources, infrastructure and workforce required to support them.

As touchpoints increase, so too does recognition of routes

Recent DfE research shows every year 11 student surveyed had heard of apprenticeships, while 81 per cent were aware of T Levels. CEC data from more than 330,000 students show understanding of apprenticeships more than doubles between year 7 and year 11. By the end of key stage 4, understanding of apprenticeships is almost on a par with A levels. Last year, nine in ten schools reported that the overwhelming majority of learners had meaningful encounters with colleges.

This is no accident. It reflects sustained collaboration between schools, colleges, employers and training providers to ensure young people encounter these pathways early and often.

Where this approach is embedded, the impact is clear. The Cheshire and Warrington Careers Hub shows what’s possible when schools and post-16 providers work in partnership.

By bringing together colleges, sixth forms, training providers and employers, it has expanded access to high-quality encounters and challenged misconceptions about technical routes.

Awareness is not enough

Apprenticeships offer promising routes into skilled employment, but increased awareness among young people must be matched by greater participation from employers.

UCAS and Sutton Trust research finds that nationally, three in five learners do not pursue apprenticeships due to lack of availability.

Reasons are complex and multiple, ranging from transport barriers, skills mismatches and limited access to training options. Equally, if employers create roles but young people are not prepared or supported to access them, those opportunities remain unfilled. Strong transitions depend on all sides moving in step.

Wider access is needed to make the system work

Recent government support through foundation apprenticeships, new V Levels and wider incentives, is a welcome step forward.

But more can be done. The industrial strategy sector jobs plans offer an opportunity to align growth sectors with entry routes for young people. Proposed reforms to social value in public procurement could help stimulate more diverse, local talent pipelines.

Access must be inclusive. Alan Milburn’s review is clear that work-based learning helps young people get into work. But as Milburn points out, the upward drift in level and age narrows opportunity for young people who need it most, especially those leaving school with lower levels of attainment and those at risk of becoming NEET.

Andy Burnham’s long-standing call for a closer line of sight between education and employment makes the case more urgent than ever.

We also need employers to work more closely with SEND institutions to ensure effective job matching and supportive pathways for their learners into employment. Strong examples already exist, including brilliant collaboration between McDonalds and Catcote Academy.

The direction is clear: awareness is rising, and access needs to keep apace.

Tutoring can help GCSE resit learners – but only if they turn up

At EEF, we generate evidence about what works to improve outcomes for learners, particularly those from socio-economically disadvantaged backgrounds. We also help the education sector put that evidence into practice.

We’re always searching for programmes and approaches that will help leaders and teachers make the most of their limited time and budgets. So we’re actively looking for what will help learners resitting their GCSE English and maths exams achieve a grade 4.

One approach with a strong evidence base in other phases is tutoring. Overall, research consistently shows that tutoring can be an effective method for improving attainment. We wanted to understand tutoring’s impact in a 16-19 context, and how tutoring programmes can be most effective.

To do this, we’ve funded evaluations of tutoring programmes for GCSE resit students.

What we’re finding points to a central implementation challenge for colleges: despite some suggestions of positive impact for pupils who did engage, poor attendance and low learner engagement is limiting the impact of tutoring programmes. In other words, while tutoring has the potential to improve outcomes, initial evidence shows securing consistent participation can be difficult.

This suggests that for colleges investing in tutoring, the starting point is not the design of the tutoring itself, but a clear, deliberate strategy to support attendance and engagement.

Our study

This week, we’ve published findings from a pilot of a tutoring programme for resit learners led by Tutor Trust: a charity with a track-record of delivering high-quality tutoring to socio-economically disadvantaged children and young people with a positive impact on their attainment.

Tutors were typically local university students or qualified teachers. The programme included training for tutors on coaching strategies that focus on relationships, confidence and motivation building. The pilot targeted learners in 20 settings in disadvantaged communities.

The findings show a mixed picture. Just over a quarter (26 per cent) of the 117 learners for whom GCSE grades were received achieved a grade 4 or higher, which is higher than the national average pass rate for GCSE resits. However, retention proved challenging: 31 per cent of learners withdrew before tutoring began, and only 24 per cent completed the minimum 12 hours of tutoring.

Key barriers included limited learner motivation and timetable constraints. This is consistent with challenges faced retaining learners for other 16-19 tutoring, such as that had been provided via the implementation of the 16-19 tuition fund.

Implementation and student engagement was most effective when there was a proactive and engaged partnership lead in the setting, who monitored student attendance.

Creating an attendance strategy

These findings do not suggest that tutoring is ineffective for resit learners. Rather, they underline a more fundamental point: tutoring only works if learners actually attend and engage with it consistently.

For colleges considering investment in tutoring, the key question is therefore how to create the conditions that make sustained participation more likely.

Based on the wider evidence, there are some practical considerations for colleges thinking about how to support attendance at tutoring sessions:

Develop clear communication about why tutoring is taking place. Learners may perceive tutoring as an ‘optional extra’ and not core to their qualification. Explaining to learners why these sessions matter, how they will directly contribute to meeting the learner’s goals and the costs of missing opportunities for study can help them understand why attendance is important.
Where possible, build tutoring into existing structures and routines. We heard that for many learners, tutoring session were more likely to be missed when they stood apart from other learning. For example, taking place on a day where someone wouldn’t otherwise be in college or in an unusual location that the learner may not know how to reach. Making it easier to attend – bringing it closer to the ‘default normal’ – should increase engagement.
Consider incentives. Depending on your context, positive incentives may be appropriate to create a ‘pull factor’ to sessions. For example, earning ‘points’ towards a reward that demonstrates the incremental build-up of benefit.
Consider other practical barriers to attendance. It would be easy to assume that lack of attendance is due to lack of motivation. But it’s important to interrogate that assumption and explore what other factors may be at play. Are there caring responsibilities, work commitments, lack of funds for transport, medical limitations, or home circumstances playing a role? Of course, no setting can solve all of a leaner’s problems. But being aware of them may help small adjustments to be made to maximise tutoring impact.

Being evidence-led is a crucial practice for improving attainment and reducing disadvantage. That means following the evidence where it takes you. That may to a new programme, but it may be towards removing the barrier that’s preventing further progress. Improving engagement with tutoring can unlock its potential.

Ofqual’s doing fine with record annual penalty haul

Ofqual issued £2.5 million in penalties last year, the highest total since it gained power to fine rule-breaking awarding organisations in 2012.

The qualification regulator’s 2025-26 annual report for the year to March 31, published today, shows fines more than tripled from £805,000 the previous year and surpassed the previous high of £1.35 million in 2022-23.

Six monetary penalties were issued against four awarding organisations in 2025-26. Pearson was hit with £2 million in fines in December 2025 for “serious” rule breaches that affected tens of thousands of students taking language qualifications, including GCSE resits.

That alone was enough to break Ofqual’s previous penalty record.

The year also saw financial sanctions on WJEC worth £350,000, University of West London was fined £350,000 and ProQual paid out £15,000.

Fines are not retained by Ofqual but are paid to the Treasury. But the regulator does keep funds it recovers in costs, which amounted to £63,000 in 2025-26, up from £15,000 the year before.

Slowly at first

FE Week analysed every monetary penalty Ofqual has imposed since the power came into force on May 1, 2012.

The regulator did not impose a fine for more than four years. Its first was £38,000 against City & Guilds in August 2016, over the late release of results for 22,229 learners.

In total, Ofqual has fined awarding organisations £5.63 million. Almost half of that, £2.52 million, came last year, and £3.33 million came in the last two years.

Ofqual issued no fines in three of the past ten years: 2015-16, 2020-21 and 2023-24. In four more, the annual total came to less than £405,000.

Last year’s number of penalties – six – topped the previous high of five issued in 2024-25.

Fine words

Ofqual’s strategic enforcement committee met once during the year and scrutinised how fines were determined, alongside the regulator’s fining history, the new report said.

The committee also examined the chief regulator’s rebuke, a new enforcement tool introduced in October 2025 for breaches serious enough to require a public outcome but which fall short of meriting a financial penalty.

Ofqual did not use it during the reporting year, but has used it twice in the current financial year.

WJEC was rebuked in April over centre declaration forms that were missing across three subjects between 2019 and 2025, seven months after being fined £350,000. Pearson was rebuked in May over the design and delivery of its 2025 A Level maths exams, sat by around 75,000 students. That rebuke was published earlier this month, having been held back while this summer’s exams were running.

Meanwhile, Ofqual imposed special conditions on awarding organisations on 23 occasions in the last financial year, covering 19 existing organisations and four newly recognised ones. It opened four investigations, up from one the previous year.

A separate regulatory efficiency report, also published today, sets out how Ofqual has cut the burden it places on awarding organisations.

Among the efficiency measures it lists is the introduction of the rebuke, credited with streamlining investigations and enforcement routes.

A head start

The financial fines record is unlikely to survive the year. Ofqual has already imposed £1.145 million of fines in the first quarter of 2026-27, with penalties of £270,000 against Cambridge OCR in April and £875,000 against Cambridge English in June.

That is more than the regulator imposed in any full year before 2022-23.

DWP swerved apprenticeship overspend with mid-year cash boost

The government narrowly avoided a second consecutive apprenticeship budget overspend in 2025-26 thanks to a mid-year funding boost, figures show.

Annual accounts for the Department for Work and Pensions, published today, also reveal ministers expect apprenticeship spending to peak at almost £3.3 billion next year before falling in each of the following two years.

It raises questions about how a £725 million pot committed for the growth and skills levy over the rest of this parliament will be spent, considering only around half has been committed so far.

Overspend near-miss

The government overspent its apprenticeship budget for the first time in the 2024-25 financial year, forcing ministers to inject £345 million and push the total allocation above £3 billion in 2025-26.

Last year’s original budget was set at £3.075 billion but was boosted by £43 million mid-year to £3.118 billion to meet higher-than-expected demand.

Today’s accounts show the total apprenticeships spend in 2025-26 was £3.095 billion – £20 million higher than the original budget, but £23 million, or 0.7 per cent, lower than the topped-up budget.

FE Week revealed in March that the 2026-27 apprenticeships budget had risen further to £3.3 billion.

Today’s DWP accounts show the department expects to spend 99.9 per cent – £3.298 billion to be exact – of this year’s budget.

Ministers have been under pressure to rein in costs on apprenticeships since the pandemic saw soaring spend on higher-level apprenticeships, mostly taken by older learners, which are more expensive to deliver.

The government has already defunded level 7 apprenticeships for people aged 22 and older, and will this year defund 16 other apprenticeships, including popular management standards, that are mostly taken by existing and older workers.

The changes form part of a wider reform of the apprenticeship levy into a broader “growth and skills levy”. This has expanded the scope of funded provision, including the rollout of short courses – dubbed “apprenticeship units” – and new foundation apprenticeships in sectors such as hospitality and retail since April.

Ministers have an ambition to deliver 50,000 additional apprenticeship starts for young people by March 2029, reversing almost half of the decade-long decline in participation among 16 to 24-year-olds. Apprenticeship starts in that age group have fallen by around 40 per cent over the past decade.

Skills minister Jacqui Smith last month commissioned Skills England to provide urgent advice on which apprenticeship standards most used by under-25s are not funded at a “sufficient” level to incentivise take-up among training providers and employers.

No new money was announced to fund recent band uplifts, stoking concern that further savings would need to be found within the existing apprenticeships budget, which is fully spent.

Spending forecast to fall from 2027-28

DWP’s accounts show that officials expect apprenticeship spending to start dropping after 2026-27.

Total planned outturn sits at £3.195 billion in 2027-28 and then £3.161 billion in 2028-29.

This fall is be the anticipated effect of restrictions on level 7 and management apprenticeships, DWP confirmed.

If the apprenticeships budget does reduce after next year, it raises questions about the £725 million additional funding committed over the next three years for the growth and skills levy in November’s budget.

Taking the baseline for 2025-26 as the outturn figure of £3.095 billion, an additional £203 million will be added to the apprenticeships budget in 2026-27, another £100 million for 2027-28 and £66 million for 2028-29.

This leaves £356 million of the £725 million unallocated.

DWP refused to provide details of how the remainder of the £725 million will be divvied up.

Top-slice to grow

If apprenticeship spending does fall, then the issue of the Treasury’s top-slice will intensify.

Money raised through employer levy contributions isn’t hypothecated in the sense that it doesn’t determine the apprenticeship budget – this is separately set by the Treasury.

The top-slice is the amount the Treasury keeps after collecting the funds paid by employers and dishing out budgets for apprenticeships to the DfE and devolved nations.

Employer levy contributions are forecast by the Office for Budgetary Responsibility (OBR) to generate £4.5 billion in 2026-27. Of this, around £500 million will be allocated to the devolved nations. Combined with England’s £3.3 billion apprenticeship budget, this leaves an estimated £700 million not returned to the system.

Levy contributions are expected to rise to £4.7 billion in 2027-28 and then to £4.8 billion in 2028-29. If the DWP’s apprenticeship spending estimates are accurate, this means the Treasury top-slice will increase to £1 billion and £1.14 billion respectively.

Simon Ashworth, Association of Employment and Learning Providers deputy CEO and director of policy, said: “It is welcome that the apprenticeship programme budget has been topped up further to avoid another overspend. However, the department appears to have allocated only around half of the additional £725 million announced in the 2025 spending review.

“With the levy itself generating record receipts, it would be a kick in the teeth for employers if this comes to fruition. It would also fly in the face of government priorities to deliver economic growth and tackle the NEET challenge.”

He added: “Looking ahead, the figures also raise important questions about funding in future years.

“Ministers will shortly enter an even more critical spending review period amid intense pressure on public finances. They must resist the temptation to hold back investment in one of the few programmes that delivers across multiple government priorities.

“Given the challenges the country faces, this would be the worst possible time to shy away from maintaining a sustainable, high-quality apprenticeship system.”

AI’s biggest threat is to those trying to get their careers started

We need to be honest about AI. It is not a distant threat or a future disruption. It is already reshaping the way work is organised, who gets hired, and what skills are valued.

But much of the national conversation is focused in the wrong place.

The assumption is that AI will mainly threaten established workers. That people in mid or later career will be hardest hit as automation reshapes roles around them. There is some truth in that. But it misses a far more profound risk.

The greatest disruption will be felt by those trying to enter the workforce in the first place.

For decades, careers have been built from the ground up. Entry level roles, junior tasks, and early responsibilities have provided the bridge between education and employment. They are where people learn how organisations work, build relationships, and develop confidence.

These are precisely the roles that AI is now beginning to replace.

If the first rung of the ladder disappears, the whole structure of career progression is put at risk. It becomes harder for young people to gain experience, harder to demonstrate capability, and harder to build the networks that sustain a career over time.

By contrast, those already established in work often retain something AI cannot easily replicate. They have trust, relationships, context, and credibility. These things matter more, not less, in an AI driven economy.

This creates a very real danger. Not simply of job displacement, but of exclusion. A generation of capable young people who find themselves locked out, not because they lack potential, but because the route in has narrowed.

This is where education must lead.

FE colleges sit at the centre of this challenge. Not just as providers of qualifications, but as active partners in shaping opportunity. We must work far more closely with employers to design pathways that do not rely on outdated assumptions about entry level roles.

That means building new kinds of experience. Real projects, employer-led learning, and practical environments where students can demonstrate value before they are hired. It also means focusing on the skills that matter most in an AI enabled workplace. Communication, problem solving, adaptability, and the ability to work alongside technology.

At the same time, schools need to shift much earlier in the journey. If we continue to define success through exams alone, we risk preparing young people for a model of work that no longer exists. Learning must feel relevant, applied, and connected to the real world.

This is not about abandoning standards. It is about ensuring that what we value reflects what the future demands.

There is also a role for government. Investment in further education is essential, but it must be targeted towards building genuine pathways into employment. That means supporting partnerships between colleges and employers, and recognising the critical role FE plays in economic development.

AI will undoubtedly reshape the workplace. But the most important question is not how we protect what exists today. It is how we ensure that the next generation still has a way in.

If we get that right, we will not simply respond to change. We will shape a more inclusive and resilient economy.

Attack fears at synagogues rule out teacher visits

College staff signing up to an antisemitism scholarship are now unlikely to visit synagogues or Jewish schools due to heightened security risks.

Enrolment opened this week for the Department for Education-funded course for school and college staff, with the first cohort expected to start in November.

But planned “domestic study visits” to learn about Judaism and the impact of antisemitism probably won’t go ahead, ex Labour MP Natascha Engel said.

Engel, founder of cross-party policy institute Palace Yard that will deliver the scholarship, said: “We don’t know whether we’ll be able to do that. It was in the original tender by the DfE, but that was before there were these very serious security problems.

“It’s not so easy now to go into a synagogue or a Jewish school, because the security is so massive. They’re literally under attack.”

The programme was created in response to teacher uncertainty about discussing the Israel-Palestine conflict with students following the October 7 terror attacks in 2023.

Conducted mostly online, it aims to educate up to 1,500 teachers and staff on real-life scenarios that could happen in an education setting.

Palace Yard won the £1.3 million contract to deliver the scholarship. Instead of visits, the institute may now stage conferences for course graduates at Jewish community centres in cities with large Jewish populations such as London, Manchester or Leeds, where strong security measures are already in place.

Palace Yard is working alongside the Union of Jewish Students, which runs university staff training, to deliver the scholarship programme to school and college support staff, designated safeguarding leads and those in charge of curriculum, HR and policy.

Engel, a former panel member of the all-party parliamentary group on antisemitism and a trustee of the Antisemitism Policy Trust, told FE Week it conducted a pilot involving antisemitism specialists and education staff. It subsequently shortened the course “significantly” due to teachers’ workloads.

Fatal terror attack

The Community Security Trust recorded 3,700 antisemitic incidents in the UK in 2025, a 4 per cent rise from the year before but 13 per cent lower than 2023.

The most serious incident of 2025 happened in October, when two men were killed at Heaton Park Hebrew Congregation synagogue in Manchester on Yom Kippur – the first fatal antisemitic terror attack since CST began recording incidents in 1984.

In April, two Jewish men were seriously injured in a stabbing in Golders Green, north London, which the Metropolitan Police declared a terrorist incident. A man was charged with attempted murder and is due to stand trial next year. The UK terror threat level was raised to severe days later.

In the same month, a review found a school, Bristol Brunel Academy, had postponed local Jewish MP Damien Egan’s visit due to safeguarding concerns amid planned pro-Palestine protests.

Although Engel has not gathered specific data on the prevalence of antisemitism in further education, she said staff had reported “uncertainties” in how to manage discussions relating to the conflict in Gaza.

“People are uncertain where something is a legitimate criticism of the Israeli government and what it’s doing in Gaza, versus something that is then antisemitic. Where that line is can be quite difficult to judge,” she said.

Former Ofsted and Department for Education boss David Bell is currently leading an independent review into how schools and colleges identify, respond to and prevent antisemitism. The review closed its call for evidence this week.

Palace Yard did not formally submit evidence but has shared its research with Bell, particularly around spikes in antisemitic incidents driven by events in the Middle East, and how education staff log antisemitic incidents.

Engel said: “There was an example of a schoolboy shouting out a really horrible antisemitic joke, and the teacher picked up the boy about the antisemitic joke, who then back-chatted her.

“He got punished for the back-chatting, not for the antisemitism, and it wasn’t logged as an antisemitic incident. I think that kind of thing is something that really needs looking at.”

Tackling microaggressions

The scholarship comprises four modules of around 30 minutes each. Staff can complete them online over the course of a year.

The modules walk staff through real-life situations, such as a scenario involving a pupil using antisemitic language in the playground.

“If the teacher doesn’t respond and lets it go, they might think it’s children bantering,” Engel said. “But equally, if they overreact and that student does not know what they are saying, over-punishing and calling that child a racist might entrench something that wasn’t there to begin with.”

The course will provide scenarios across all education settings, allowing teachers to transpose each incident to the age group they teach.

It will not deal with radicalisation or extremism, which colleges already address through the Prevent programme.

Instead, it will focus on microaggressions and microincivilities that can arise in the workplace or classroom.

It also features a module on online antisemitism, detailing how people use coded language such as “guice” (pronounced Jews) to evade social media content moderation, and material on Holocaust distortion and denial.

Following the course, participants will be invited to join an optional “action learning” network to share what they have learned.

Palace Yard is working with the Association of Colleges and its subcontractor the National Union of Students to promote the scholarship to support staff and curriculum and policy leads.

Of the 1,500 staff who will be offered scholarships, half will be from schools and colleges while the other half will be from universities.

The Department for Education said it expects at least 100 of the 750 participants from the schools and college group to be made up of college staff.

WorldSkills UK: Over 400 learners revealed for 2026 national finals

Hundreds of the UK’s most skilled students and apprentices have been named as finalists for this year’s WorldSkills UK national competition.

Following a series of qualifiers, over 400 finalists will battle it out later this year to become the UK’s best across dozens of skilled trades.

As well as winning gold, silver and bronze medals in 44 competitions, champions at the national finals will also have a chance to represent the UK at the 2028 global skills competition in Japan.

The 407 finalists will descend upon college and university venues across south Wales to compete in the competition from November 18 to 20.

It will be the last time the event is held in south Wales as the finals are set to move to London in 2027.

View the full list of WorldSkills UK 2026 national finalists

The finalists were selected from 4,400 young people from across the UK who competed in an initial entry stage competition, which was then whittled down to around 1,800 taking part in a qualifying round.

Mark Smallman, operations director at WorldSkills UK, said: “Congratulations to everyone who has secured a place in this year’s WorldSkills UK National Finals.

“Our competitions recreate the pace, pressures and standards of the workplace, challenging competitors to solve problems, think critically and perform at their very best.”

WorldSkills UK said participation from universities has risen sharply by 42 per cent this year, likely from the higher education providers offering degree apprenticeships.

Mandy Crawford-Lee, chief executive of University Vocational Awards Council (UVAC), said: “The growth in higher education (HE) participation in WorldSkills UK competitions reflects the sector’s desire to maximise its contribution to technical training, to creating progression to the professions and to increasing individual opportunity.”

Entries from independent training providers also increased by 37 per cent compared with 2025, though the proportion of employer directly entering young apprentices remained stagnant and heavily skewed to large apprenticeship employers such as Amazon and BMW.

“It’s encouraging to see the diversity of learners taking part continue to increase, reflecting the growing reach of skills excellence across the UK,” Smallman added.

“That’s why organisations are embracing skills competitions as part of their teaching practices, they see first-hand how the experience builds confidence, resilience and the skills people need to be truly work ready.”

WorldSkills UK chief executive Ben Blackledge recently urged more ITPs to get involved in the national finals in London in 2027.

The 44 competitions this year include mechatronics, beauty therapy and industrial robotics. Eight competitions in foundation skills will test the 78 talented young people who have made it to the finals.

Six competitors are taking part in a test competition in esports this year. While esports is not yet recognised at international competition level, the contest will become part of WorldSkills UK’s permanent portfolio for national competitions from next year.

Leaders are expected to discuss new competitions at international level at the biennial WorldSkills general assembly next year in Mongolia.

FE’s duplicate degree-rules headache eased by OfS

The universities regulator has scrapped multiple overlapping requirements placed on FE colleges that deliver higher education courses.

It follows an Office for Students (OfS) consultation on proposed rule changes that received “consistent support” from the college sector earlier this year.

The OfS changes come into effect today and remove five conditions of registration for colleges that apply to deliver higher education courses, and scrap four ongoing conditions placed on colleges already registered with the regulator.

Overlapping burdens the OfS had imposed alongside existing Department for Education rules included producing statements about participation by disadvantaged or underrepresented groups, financial viability and sustainability.

OfS interim director of quality and access Jean Arnold said: “We’re making it simpler for FE colleges to take up their crucial role in the regulated higher education sector.

“In doing so, they will be able to give their students confidence that they will meet the same high expectations we have for all institutions to deliver high quality teaching and learning, student protection and support.

“It’s important we have high standards for every institution that wants to register with us and access public funding – but the way we regulate shouldn’t get in the way of further education colleges offering students a flexible and diverse route into higher education.”

Some of the requirements, such as providing a statement on financial viability and sustainability, will continue to apply to colleges seeking degree-awarding powers.

The OfS said this was because these colleges are responsible for overseeing academic governance, standards, and the continuity of students’ study.

Responses to the consultation were made by 45 organisations and individuals, including FE colleges, sector bodies, universities and individuals.

According to the OfS’ consultation summary, most responses supported a more “proportionate” approach that reduced duplication.

Some raised concerns about creating a “two-tier system” for colleges with and without degree-awarding powers.

But the regulator said colleges without degree-awarding powers were subject to external validation or awarding arrangements with higher education providers, as well as DfE oversight.

A small number of respondents called for OfS fees to be cut for colleges in line with the reductions in regulatory requirements, but the regulator pointed out that registration fees are set by the DfE.

The DfE is carrying out a separate consultation into a new fee structure that closes on July 21.

The university sector is suffering a funding crisis and growing debate around the value of some degrees.

The rollout of the lifelong learning entitlement loan system is expected in September, which the government hopes will make level 4 and 5 higher education courses more easily available, including through modular courses.