Latest news from FE Week

South Devon College principal Laurence Frewin to retire in 2027

Laurence Frewin will retire as principal of South Devon College at the end of the 2026-27 academic year, following 17 years at the college and eight years leading it.

It was announced today that Frewin will remain in post until summer 2027, with the college’s board of governors now preparing to appoint his successor.

He joined the college in February 2010 as vice principal for corporate services, becoming deputy CEO in 2015 before taking over as principal and CEO in September 2019.

Announcing his retirement, Frewin said personal and family changes over the past year had prompted him to reflect on his priorities for the years ahead.

“This has been an incredibly difficult decision for me,” he said. “The past year has brought some significant changes for my family, alongside some happier milestones, and these have caused me to reflect carefully on my priorities for the years ahead.”

Frewin said he remained committed to leading the college through his final academic year.

“Although I have announced my retirement, I am definitely not winding down. We still have an important year ahead and much that we want to achieve together. I remain completely committed to leading the college with the same energy, passion and determination until my last day in post.”

He added that it has been the “greatest privilege” to serve as the leader of South Devon College.

Martin Foulger, chair of the board of governors, said Frewin’s “passion” for South Devon College and its communities “is evident to everyone who knows him”.

“He is a highly respected and valued leader, and his commitment to the college, its students and its staff has been unwavering,” Foulger said.

He added: “While we are naturally saddened by his decision, we fully understand the personal reasons behind it. We are grateful that Laurence will continue with the same energy to lead the college throughout the academic year and will work with the board to support a smooth transition.

“The board will now begin the process of appointing Laurence’s successor.”

South Devon College teaches thousands of students across Torbay and South Devon and employs more than 600 staff.

It was judged ‘good’ by Ofsted in 2024. The college is currently in financial intervention but leaders plan to exit intervention by no later than July 2027, according to its latest set of accounts.

Defining antisemitism won’t silence debate on Israel

We need to be plain about what antisemitism is.

Sir David Bell’s review into antisemitism in schools and colleges spotlights the scale of the problem we face. 51% of Jewish teachers surveyed experienced antisemitism in school in the past year. One in five 16-19 year olds surveyed witnessed or experienced antisemitism, the number rising to three in five for Jewish students. 40% of school teachers surveyed who teach about the Holocaust reported encountering antisemitism in these lessons.

Fixing this requires action on a range of fronts. But it starts with defining antisemitism clearly, in a usable way. That is why the government is expecting schools and colleges to adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) working definition of antisemitism. The working definition must be adopted in a way that means that schools and colleges can meet their legal duties, including on equality and free speech.

This is the first of the 27 recommendations from Sir David’s review. We have accepted his review in its entirety, and we will start to implement it immediately.

Despite the report being published only days ago, I have already seen misleading suggestions that adopting the IHRA definition will prevent discussion of Israel or suppress legitimate political debate. That is simply not true.

The IHRA definition has been adopted by 47 countries, and countless public bodies. The working definition spotlights the insidious and often subtle form that antisemitism can take, and provides a practical framework that helps teachers and pupils spot and tackle it.

It opens up, rather than shuts down, essential conversations. It also explicitly states that criticism of Israel similar to that levelled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic.

The examples included in the definition cover denial of the Holocaust, making stereotypical allegations about the power of Jews as a collective, and questioning the loyalty of Jews to their own nation.

It also includes an example worth defending: “Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavour.” Throughout history, Jewish people have been denied agency stemming from antisemitic ideas that they are an untrustworthy or malicious minority. The founding of the State of Israel, following the Holocaust and endorsed by the UN came following extreme global persecution.

Those who find this example uncomfortable should reflect on how denying a different minority group their right to self-determination would be experienced by that group. Worse still, what are the ideas that would lead one to label this right to self-determination itself as “racist”?

This example in the working definition in no way limits criticism of the State of Israel. The UK government itself has criticised recent action by the Israeli government in Gaza, and it is perfectly possible to do this without denying Jewish people’s right to self-determination. The claim that the IHRA definition makes criticism of Israel impossible is a lazy misrepresentation.

I know that the conversations teachers are navigating in light of political events in the Middle East and with the backdrop of hate spread online are not easy. I was a citizenship teacher myself and I have had to navigate these very same conversations. The definition will give teachers the confidence to protect legitimate political expression and tackle antisemitic behaviour.

Education is the most powerful disinfectant against the disease of antisemitism. Acting on Sir David’s review is a task for all of us. And it starts with being plain about what antisemitism is. Only then can we work together to root it out.

Sharing the story of their lives, from the frontline of FE

Rebecca Gater was already preparing for two of the biggest tests of her professional life when the phone rang.

It was 2022, and Solihull College & University Centre’s vice principal for curriculum and quality had a gruelling two-day interview approaching for the top job. She was also preparing to defend years of doctoral research in her viva examination.

Then came the call from Ofsted. The college was about to undergo its first inspection since merging with Stratford-upon-Avon College four years earlier. Gater was its nominee.

“I had the worst, most stressful two weeks ever,” she recalls. “It was super high pressure.”

Yet she emerged from these three formidable challenges with a clean sweep: the college was rated ‘good’, she passed her doctorate and secured the principal and chief executive position.

A new book that Gater has edited, Inspiring Senior Leadership in Further Education: Stories from the front line, brings together similar personal accounts of how 17 college leaders have overcome adversity to thrive in the top jobs.

The book grew from her frustration that so much leadership literature focused on schools and universities, while few explored the people running colleges.

She also wanted to challenge the perception that there is a particular type of person destined for FE senior leadership.

Former Cornwall College principal John Evans traces his emphasis on customer service to growing up in his family’s corner shop.

Capel Manor College deputy principal Heather Marks previously ran a flower shop, while London South East Colleges principal Asfa Sohail moved from Pakistan to join her husband and entered FE after a lecturer asked her to cover an IT class.

Runshaw College principal Clare Russell writes about being a rebellious teenager who married at 17 and was abandoned by her husband three years later while eight-and-a-half months pregnant – giving her “the empathy required to see the real barriers some students face”.

Gater sees common threads running through these apparently disparate lives.

Most leaders came from working-class backgrounds. Few followed a straightforward career trajectory. None imagined themselves becoming college principals when they were young.

Now leading a three-campus college group, Gater has come a long way from when she was a “directionless” young mother teaching for three hours a week.

Gater and her husband with their eldest daughter, Emily, when she was two years old, 25 years ago

Directionless beginnings

Gater is a Midlander through and through. Her Black Country accent gives away her roots in Stourbridge, where she was born, raised and still lives.

Her journey into education began in a crystal glass showroom, where she worked full-time in retail management while attending evening lectures at the University of Wolverhampton.

She was studying human resource management with Spanish, juggling the demands of work and university while saving to build a future with her boyfriend, now her husband.

A month after graduating, aged 22, she gave birth to the first of their four daughters.

The couple were still living with their parents, “saving every penny to start our new life together”.

But Gater felt “directionless, with a young baby and no clear path forward”.

Then Stourbridge College offered her three hours a week teaching business to sports students.

She was hooked. What appealed was the diversity of FE, its sense of purpose and, above all, its capacity to give people another chance.

Her teaching expanded to include evening language classes for adults. Meanwhile, four daughters arrived within six years.

She felt “always in a rush” to get things done, rushing out of the house as her husband returned from work at 5pm. They shared a car, so if he was late, she was late to teach.

“It was challenging, but it’s made me as a person. It’s made us as a family as well, because we’ve done all that growing together,” she says.

Now a grandmother of two, she attended two daughters’ university graduations the day before our interview. Her other daughters also work in education. She is proud of the example she has set.

“It’s important to me as the mum of girls, that they know if they want to do something, they can do it.”

Gater and her husband (Darren) with their two middle daughters, Liv (left) and Anya (right), at their graduation this summer

The pull of FE

Gater then joined a graduate programme to teach in secondary schools, spending two years at a West Bromwich school in special measures.

She was one of 26 new teachers recruited together and progressed to become a head of year, alongside responsibilities including key stage three IT.

The experience offered a sharp contrast with college teaching. Where FE teacher training had to accommodate subjects ranging from engineering to adult languages, she found the school system much more prescriptive.

“There’s a formula in schools that everyone does the same kind of thing, regardless of the subject or type of school,” she says.

She missed the variety of FE and upon becoming pregnant with her fourth child, the daily demands of getting three other children ready each morning became overwhelming.

Part-time working “wasn’t part of the school’s ethos”, whereas she saw FE as more flexible and family-friendly.

She returned to Stourbridge College as a programme manager in business just as its business and IT departments were merging, and took a sideways move into student services.

Her involvement in student disciplinary cases exposed the difficulties learners were navigating outside college.

“It helped me to understand the workings of the wider college much more so than I’d ever done before.”

She then moved to South Staffordshire College as an assistant head of faculty and, through successive restructures, progressed to managing its Cannock campus and a faculty.

She later joined Solihull as vice principal for curriculum and quality, while also becoming an Ofsted inspector.

That combination has given her a perspective on leadership extending well beyond her own institution.

A photo that is particularly special to Gater, taken during Covid period when restrictions had eased enough for people to socialise in their gardens. Her sister, husband and their two children came to the Gater house for a barbecue, and it felt incredibly significant, having not seen family face-to-face for many months. Looking at the photograph reminds Gater not to take precious family moments for granted

The inspector

Gater’s first assignment as a fully-fledged inspector was a difficult one: inspecting a large London college that was downgraded from ‘good’ to ‘requires improvement’.

She was relieved not to know anybody there, making it easier to remain objective.

Inspecting other colleges has since become an important source of professional development.

She can see how other leaders tackle problems and bring ideas back to Solihull.

But knowing exactly how the inspection process works does not make her any less nervous when inspectors arrive at her own college.

“There’s so much to lose, isn’t there? It feels like such high stakes,” she says.

Despite Ofsted’s insistence that its new inspection framework represents a significant change, Gater sees more continuity than disruption.

She acknowledges “a bit of a fear” across the sector about inclusion becoming a standalone judgment. But inclusion, she argues, has always been central to colleges’ work.

“Our philosophy is that there is a place here for everyone. We don’t turn those students away.”

Gater with her four daughters at a baby shower earlier this month. (Left to right Neve, Emily, Liv, Anya)

Stepping into the unknown

Gater had been Solihull’s vice principal for just two years when principal and chief executive John Callaghan died suddenly in October 2021.

Only weeks earlier, he had offered to mentor Gater with a view to her succeeding him when he eventually retired.

His illness progressed so rapidly that the mentoring never happened.

The loss was deeply felt at Solihull. Gater describes a period of “institutional bereavement”, accompanied by “feelings of a lack of stability”.

She applied to become permanent principal “not because I had all the answers, but because I believed in the college and the people within it”.

I put it to her that the personal qualities celebrated in her book seem a long way from the leaders who once appeared more interested in building empires than nurturing institutions.

“People came from being principals to CEOs, and it was that CEO badge that led to some of those behaviours,” she says.

She believes that culture is changing.

“This generation of leaders have a recognition that to be the best leader you can be, you need to be authentic, relatable and build that trust, and not focus on your own gains.”

But does that authenticity extend beyond the college gates?

Many principals are candid in private about government policy and the difficulties facing their institutions, yet reluctant to speak publicly.

Gater acknowledges that tension.

FE leaders are “very aware of our role in protecting the reputations of our organisations and the sector itself”.

Her own greatest challenge is balancing the two sides of her job.

Being principal means looking after students and staff, an approach she describes as “servant leadership”.

Being chief executive involves politics, positioning the college, building its reputation and anticipating what comes next.

“I’m constantly reflecting on, ‘am I focusing on the internal workings too much at the detriment of the external big position?’.”

Leadership development programmes have helped her find that balance.

She is currently one of 28 participants in the Cabinet Office’s public leaders programme, which brings together senior figures from education, local government, the NHS and emergency services.

It has challenged her to look beyond the traditional boundaries of FE.

“We’re breaking down barriers because we’ve all got the same struggles but we don’t necessarily think about going outside our own sector to be part of wider solutions,” Gater says.

That thinking is particularly relevant to SEND reform.

Solihull has around 500 students with education, health and care plans, issued by 17 different local authorities.

Each has its own procedures and approaches, creating considerable administrative complexity. Gater hopes reform will bring greater consistency.

But she is also thinking about how colleges can collaborate more closely with councils and NHS trusts, rather than simply discussing SEND challenges among themselves.

Two regions, two systems

Solihull College’s geography presents another leadership challenge.

Its Blossomfield and Woodlands campuses sit within the West Midlands Combined Authority, while its Stratford-upon-Avon campus falls within Warwickshire.

Gater must navigate two very different systems of skills devolution. The West Midlands has years of experience exercising devolved powers, while the Reform-led Warwickshire County Council only assumed responsibility for adult skills commissioning this summer.

“We’re helping them on their journey to work out what that looks like and how they should set things up,” Gater says.

Employers in the region had complained they were receiving too many approaches from different education providers, leaving them unsure whom to contact.

Gater helped establish Skills West Midlands and Warwickshire as a collective intended to simplify those relationships and translate regional skills priorities into delivery.

Combination complications

The introduction of V Levels is already creating practical dilemmas. Gater wants the college to offer them, but their intended combination with other qualifications creates complications.

Solihull currently offers a limited number of A Levels at Blossomfield. To make V Level programmes viable, it may have to introduce A Levels at its other campuses. That would represent a significant departure for two relatively specialist sites.

Woodlands, in north Solihull, concentrates heavily on STEM subjects, and Stratford-upon-Avon has traditionally specialised in creative arts and is increasingly expanding its construction provision.

Meanwhile, the college’s experience of T Levels has been mixed.

Digital, engineering and animal care courses are performing strongly, but health and science remain a “real challenge”.

Gater believes damaging publicity surrounding the early problems with health and science T Levels, including an examination fiasco that led to results being recalculated, has “put parents and students off”.

Industrial placements create another difficulty.

Many Solihull students work part-time to support themselves, and sometimes their families. Finding time for a substantial unpaid placement can be extremely challenging.

There are pressures on the staffing side too, with board minutes last year highlighting a “high number of agency staff”.

Demand for construction courses “continues to go through the roof”, but recruiting lecturers with the necessary trade expertise is difficult. When it comes to construction subjects, Gater says “we don’t have the people to teach the growing number of students, and that’s really difficult. We’re competing with industry who can pay a lot more.”

The college’s 16-18 learner numbers rose by 8 per cent in 2023-24 and 4 per cent in 2024-25, prompting temporary classrooms and plans for additional sites.

Gater says Solihull can afford generous teacher salaries compared with its West Midlands counterparts by keeping staffing structures lean elsewhere and benefiting from economies of scale.

Above all, Gater wants staff to “feel valued, connected and know their contribution matters”.

Her book ends with a prediction: that the next generation of senior FE leaders will “not be forged by perfection but by persistence, not by pedigree but by practice”.

“Your difference is not a deficit; it is your advantage. Use it to inspire, to transform and to serve.”

Frustration at Skills England’s apprenticeship review slowdown

Just 270 reformed apprenticeship assessment plans (AAPs) have been published, falling well short of Skills England’s August 2026 deadline to review all 700-plus apprenticeship standards.

The government agency admitted it had “adapted the pace of change” after spending the past year pushing the sector to meet what officials acknowledged was an ambitious timetable.

Employers and awarding organisations are understood to be frustrated by a lack of communication from Skills England about the slowdown.

FE Week also understands that Skills England paused full reviews of individual apprenticeships, other than in exceptional cases where there was an urgent need to complete work, address a ministerial priority or respond to priority local needs.

It comes amid a wider review of occupational standards through Skills England’s recently launched “skills for work” programme, raising concerns that apprenticeships awaiting updates to their funding bands and knowledge and skills requirements have been left in limbo.

Finish the job

Reform began last year to replace the end-point assessment model in apprenticeships with new assessment plans that introduce sampling of knowledge and skills, strengthen the role of mandatory qualifications in some standards, and remove the independent assessment of behaviours.

Carmel Grant, Skills England’s deputy director of reform and development, told the Federation of Awarding Bodies (FAB) conference in November that “August is the date by which we’ve been asked to review all the apprenticeship plans in delivery”.

She added: “It is ambitious. It is challenging. We will need to evaluate along the way. Some will go smoothly, and some won’t. We recognise that, but that is the timeline.”

But the deadline passed with just 142 AAPs published and a further 350 in development.

By 22 October, the total published had risen to 270.

In response to the figures, a Skills England spokesperson said: “Skills England is committed to delivering assessment reform so the benefits are realised as early as possible – but we are equally committed to taking the time needed to get this right.

“We have listened to stakeholders’ feedback and adapted the pace of change where appropriate.”

They added that work is progressing on AAPs, and stakeholders would be updated at the “appropriate time”.

Terry Fennell, chief executive of awarding body Food and Drink Qualifications (FDQ), said there had been a “clear sense of collective urgency” around the approvals process, but that progress had “slowed significantly” since August.

He revealed that communication from Skills England, which had been “so proactive earlier in the year”, had “virtually ceased”.

“This is creating uncertainty for FDQ that, like all awarding organisations, are trying to redesign standards and support employers and providers during the transition to apprenticeship assessment 2.0,” he added.

Daniel Green, policy director at FAB, described the original timetable as “ambitious” and called for clearer communication from Skills England, while urging the agency to finish the reviews rather than “leaving the work half-done”.

He told FE Week: “If the pace of progress has eased to allow Skills England to get implementation right, that is a sensible course of action, but this needs to be communicated clearly by Skills England to those involved in delivering the change.

“It’s also important to note that no new apprenticeship assessment has yet been delivered; the challenge now is not designing reform, but delivering it successfully.

“Skills England and other actors must remain firmly on ensuring the changes are landed for the benefit of apprentices and employers rather than leaving the work half-done. We must avoid the all-too-common temptation to move on before the job is done.”

Employer confidence is critical

The government’s reforms triggered a backlash last year from construction and built environment organisations, which warned that assessment changes risked “dumbing down” apprenticeships and letting unqualified learners pass.

In July, Skills England announced it had agreed to a sector-specific, risk-based approach designed to protect competence in safety-critical jobs following strong employer opposition.

The new methodology uses “risk profiling” to tailor assessment requirements according to the level of occupational risk rather than applying a single model across all construction standards. This approach was extended to all sectors.

Sam Callear, CEO of GTA England, a network of not-for-profit training organisations, said the August deadline “always felt very challenging” and that “maybe government had originally underestimated the extent of employer feeling” and their level of engagement in the reformed AAPs.

He told FE Week: “Thousands of employers have invested many hours in developing occupational standards and assessment plans and, rightly, want any future changes to reflect their requirements.

“Credible employers of apprentices and quality providers do not want the system undermined by the introduction of assessment regimes which do not give an employer confidence in someone’s practical, not just theoretical, ability to be competent and safe in the workplace.”

He added that employers in areas like engineering and manufacturing would value a slowdown in reviews if it meant a “greater level of upfront consideration of the relative risk associated with any given occupation and the creation of an adequate assessment approach to reflect that risk”.

Set your priorities straight

Skills England launched its “skills for work” programme last month, led by the agency’s board chair Phil Smith, to consider how occupational standards and the training they underpin can “better support growth, employers, places and young people”.

A blog announcing the programme said it “isn’t about individual standards – it’s about making sure the system is fit for the future”.

This work has paused revisions of most apprenticeships except for their assessment plan.

Sector leaders argue the work on occupational standards is ill-timed, does not need a root-and-branch review, and should have been conducted before assessment reform began. The priority right now should instead be on completing reviews of individual apprenticeships.

Ruth Evans, chief executive of the Brewing, Food & Beverage Industry Suppliers’ Association (BFBi), said the level 3 drinks dispense technician apprenticeship was among those left in limbo.

The standard has “not been fully reviewed since its introduction in 2019, despite significant changes in technology, working practices and industry requirements”, she told FE Week, and is also “woefully underfunded” with a funding band of £8,000.

Evans added: “It is deeply disappointing that a government which consistently talks about the importance of upskilling school leavers and young people is seemingly unwilling to invest in the specialist skills required by industries such as drinks dispense.

“We can only assume that decisions are being driven by a numbers game, prioritising apprenticeships with high volumes of starts rather than taking a holistic approach to developing the skilled workforce this country needs.”

In June, skills minister Jacqui Smith ordered a review of apprenticeship funding bands and told Skills England to identify which standards have strong take-up from young people and therefore should be first in line for “potential funding uplifts”.

Smith asked for advice on potential funding rate changes by October. No decisions or advice have yet been made public.

DWP picks 12 providers for national jobs guarantee

An FE college is among 12 organisations chosen to roll out the government’s flagship jobs guarantee scheme to tackle the youth unemployment crisis.

Leeds College of Building has been selected to run the programme in West Yorkshire, while employment support provider Ingeus will cover five of the 25 areas across England, Scotland and Wales.

The guarantee promises eligible 18 to 24-year-olds six months of paid work alongside training and employment support. The national rollout is due to begin in November.

The Department for Work and Pensions announced its preferred delivery partners yesterday. These organisations will source jobs, match participants with employers and deliver tailored support throughout the placement.

After a five-week application round earlier this year, Ingeus was awarded the largest number of areas, covering the North East, Tees Valley, the Black Country, Birmingham, Solihull and Coventry, the East Midlands and Central London.

Employment support providers Fedcap and AKG have been selected for three areas each. PeoplePlus, the King’s Trust, the Growth Company, Reed in Partnership and Seetec will each cover two areas, while Twin Training has one.

Meanwhile, Cornwall Council will cover Devon and Cornwall, and Ealing Council will cover West London on behalf of the West London Alliance.

The jobs guarantee is aimed at young people who have been on universal credit and looking for work for 18 months. Ministers expect it to support more than 90,000 people over three years.

The national rollout follows a first phase, launched in April, across six areas of Great Britain, with the first participants starting jobs in May.

Four of the six organisations running that phase – Ingeus, the Growth Company, Reed in Partnership and the King’s Trust – have been selected for the national programme.

But Catch22, which ran the scheme in Birmingham and Solihull, and Itec Training Solutions, which covered southwest and southeast Wales, are absent from the national list of lead organisations.

Under the published funding model, organisations can claim between £2,150 and £2,650 per participant for running the programme. Guidance states funding cannot be used to make a profit.

The DWP will also cover eligible employment costs for up to 25 hours a week at the relevant minimum wage for six months, plus up to £250 per participant for employers’ onboarding costs.

Referrals must come through Jobcentres. The initial rollout is due to run until November 2028, with final funded job starts by May 2028 and an option to extend the programme by a further year.

Ministers announced last month that young people receiving health benefits would also be able to join voluntarily from April 2027, three months after their work capability assessment.

FE Week has asked whether the selected providers will support this expansion and receive additional funding, and whether November referrals remain on track in all 25 areas. The DWP did not respond.

Jobs guarantee delivery areas across England, Scotland and Wales

Teachers’ political badges influence students, warns Bell

Political badges and symbols worn by college staff will fall under the spotlight following a landmark review of antisemitism in education.

The Department for Education today accepted all 27 recommendations from a report by Sir David Bell which laid bare the “pernicious impact” antisemitism is having in schools and colleges.

The review heard “numerous” examples of teachers and students wearing or displaying badges, flags and other political symbols expressing support for Palestine, and received “mixed” views on whether they should have a place in education settings.

“The issue is not necessarily the presence of Palestinian flags or slogans but the context and impact, for example, who is displaying it, where, and whether it is connected to teaching, targeted at individuals, or whether schools respond consistently to comparable symbols of forms of expression,” the report said.

Bell said it may be appropriate to discuss contemporary political issues in lessons but staff attire and classroom displays “carry institutional authority and may reasonably be subject to different expectations”.

He also heard that political expression was “causing distress to Jewish students and staff within colleges”.

Ban ‘impossible to implement’

Colleges are not bound by political impartiality legal duties that apply in schools unless they teach 14 to 16-year-olds. Leaders must follow statutory duties to secure freedom of speech, equality and safeguarding for under-18s.

Bell said he resisted calls for an outright ban on political symbols as it would be “impossible to implement” and was not legally tested.

He said colleges “may be justified” in placing proportionate restrictions on staff’s lawful political expression where necessary.

Education secretary Lucy Powell said: “I accept his recommendation, but as education secretary, I am clear: I would not expect to see teachers coming to school or college wearing or displaying any political material.”

Ministers also agreed to more robust reporting of antisemitic abuse and dedicated teacher training in FE, as recommended by Bell’s report.

A UCAS survey of more than 5,000 applicants aged 16 to 19 found one in five had experienced or witnessed antisemitism.

Of the 92 Jewish respondents in the survey, three in five said they had experienced antisemitism.

Jokes, stereotypes and comments made up 85 per cent of incidents in education.

Around half were not reported as they did not believe it was “serious enough or would be taken seriously”. Among those that were reported, 27 per cent felt their school or college’s response was “ineffective”.

Bell, who was commissioned in March to examine how schools and colleges prevent and respond to antisemitism, will undertake a one-year review of progress aided by an implementation group that includes Noni Csogor, senior research and policy manager at Sixth Form Colleges Association, and Jeff Greenidge, the Association of Colleges’ director for diversity and governance.

David Hughes, chief executive of the Association of Colleges, said: “I totally agree that education needs to play a crucial role in prevention, and that teachers across all phases of education need practical tools and support on how to discuss antisemitism with students.

“These tools cannot be one-size-fits-all, and there needs to be resources for both schools and colleges which are appropriate to students’ age, context and experience.

“We acknowledge the recommendations in the report aimed specifically at colleges, and we will engage with and support our members as they work through these, helping them to strengthen inclusion, foster positive relationships and ensure that all students and staff remain safe.”

Ramping up training

The review said colleges should address antisemitism during tutorial and pastoral time.

It also recommended the DfE develop resources that address contemporary antisemitism and teach media literacy and online safety to help learners identify harmful online content.

The DfE will commission an online training package for schools, college leaders and designated safeguarding leads, and run a support service featuring an “expert advice network” to help navigate complex cases.

Last year the DfE contracted a think tank and the Union for Jewish Students to develop staff scholarships to learn more about antisemitism.

Only 9 per cent of professionals responding to the review’s call for evidence said they had been offered training focused specifically on antisemitism, and just 24 per cent said their institution used the IHRA working definition of antisemitism, which colleges will now be encouraged to adopt.

Bell also recommended colleges create a specific category for recording antisemitic incidents and support anonymous reporting.

Questions for unions

The review also reported that some Jewish staff felt they could not rely on their union for support due to their campaigning on Israel-Palestine.

The National Education Union came under fire earlier this year after members prevented Jewish MP Damien Egan from visiting a school in Bristol because of his pro-Israel views.

Bell concluded he did not believe any education union was “inherently antisemitic” but advised unions to strengthen their policies and train members on discrimination and antisemitism.

But shadow education secretary Laura Trott criticised the recommendation.

“Asking them to examine their own actions is allowing them to mark their own homework, and we already know that this doesn’t work,” she said.

“Without accountability, nothing changes.”

Recommendations in full

Here are all the 27 recommendations accepted by the government, in full…

Recommendation 1

The Secretary of State for Education should encourage all schools and colleges to adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) working definition of antisemitism.

Recommendation 2

The Department for Education should ensure that school and college leaders, staff and trainee teachers receive training in understanding antisemitism. To enable this:

The Department for Education should commission the preparation of a dedicated training package on antisemitism for school and college leaders and designated safeguarding leads (DSLs).
The Department for Education should encourage school and college leaders to integrate understanding of antisemitism within safeguarding, equalities, and anti-racism training. This should encompass all staff and others working in schools and colleges, including support staff, governors, academy members and trustees.
The Department for Education should ensure teachers have a good understanding of antisemitism delivered through initial teacher training and the early career framework for schools and initial teacher training for further education teachers

Recommendation 3

The Department for Education should strengthen Keeping children safe in education to make clear that racism and prejudice, including antisemitism, may constitute harm. The guidance should make clear that early identification, challenge and intervention are important safeguarding responses, where appropriate.

Recommendation 4

Schools’ and colleges’ online safety policies, safeguarding policies, and associated staff training should ensure that staff are appropriately informed about the nature and risks of harmful antisemitic content that children and young people may encounter online.

Recommendation 5

The Department for Education should update the behaviour and preventing bullying guidance for schools to include advice on identifying, preventing and responding to antisemitism and other forms of hatred and prejudice, including setting out expected standards of support and good practice for victims of abuse.

Recommendation 6

College leaders should consider if their behaviour policy and student code of conduct includes steps to identify, prevent and respond to antisemitic and other forms of abuse, harassment and intimidation.

Recommendation 7

Schools and colleges should establish clear and accessible systems for reporting, recording and monitoring antisemitic incidents. To enable this:

Schools and colleges should support peer reporting and anonymous disclosures, and signpost learners to information about available support services (such as Community Security Trust)
Schools and colleges recording systems should include a specific category for antisemitic incidents, including the nature and type of incident, involving identifiable victims as well as wider manifestations of antisemitism.

Recommendation 8

The Home Office should work with the Department for Education to expand Prevent advice for schools and colleges, to provide clarity and support decision making on when antisemitism, and other themes relevant to extremist narratives, may be indicators of radicalisation risk.

Recommendation 9

The Office for Equality and Opportunity should launch a cross-sector awareness campaign to reinforce Public Sector Equality Duty responsibilities with respect to Jewish identity, as both a race and religion, so that it is fully recognised within school and college policies and processes to meet equality and safeguarding duties.

Recommendation 10

The Department for Education should produce, in partnership with relevant stakeholders, good practice guidance to support school and college leaders in developing a coherent and sequenced approach to tackling antisemitism. This should include curriculum content and wider educational opportunities that support understanding of historical and contemporary manifestations of antisemitism, alongside the policies, processes and support needed to ensure a whole-institution response.

Recommendation 11

The Department for Education should strengthen the national approach to Holocaust education, underpinned by evidence and clear expectations, to ensure all pupils develop a secure understanding of the Holocaust, including the role of antisemitism within it. To enable this:

The Department for Education should commission an evidence-informed review of the effectiveness of Holocaust education to understand better how pupils encounter and make sense of the Holocaust, identify effective practice and areas for improvement, and inform future guidance and support for schools.
The Department for Education should ensure that the purpose of, and expectations for, Holocaust education are clearly articulated and consistently supported through non-statutory guidance, including understanding antisemitism as a central explanatory factor in explaining the Holocaust.
All schools and colleges should mark Holocaust Memorial Day, supported by secure historical understanding and linked to wider educational provision.

Recommendation 12

The Department for Education, schools and colleges should address antisemitism through appropriate places in the curriculum, tutorial time and pastoral provision. To enable this:

The Department for Education should ensure that citizenship education has sufficient opportunity to address contemporary antisemitism, alongside other forms of hatred and prejudice, within a coherent programme of learning.
The Department for Education should ensure schools and colleges embed high-quality teaching on media literacy and online safety, helping learners to recognise and confront harmful online content, including antisemitism and conspiracy theories.
Schools and colleges should make effective use of tutorial time, pastoral provision and wider learning opportunities to address contemporary antisemitism alongside other forms of hatred and prejudice.
The Department for Education should develop, quality assure and publish practical resources and tools to support schools, colleges, academy trusts, college groups, and/or local authorities in addressing antisemitism and wider hatred and social cohesion issues. These resources should include guidance and materials to help all staff discuss controversial issues and respond to significant global events, particularly those relating to the Israel-Palestine conflict and contemporary antisemitism.

Recommendation 13

The Department for Education should ensure that Judaism is represented with appropriate depth and coherence within the proposed curriculum framework for religious education. The aims for the subject should reflect Judaism as a diverse and contemporary tradition, so that where antisemitism is addressed, it is grounded in a secure knowledge of Jewish life, belief, culture and community.

Recommendation 14

The Department for Education, the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, and the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government should promote and enable opportunities for schools and colleges to engage with Jewish communities and contemporary Jewish life through social mixing, enrichment and cultural engagement.

Recommendation 15

The Department for Education should ensure that professionals working in schools or colleges are clear that antisemitism and other forms of prejudice and hatred are forms of discrimination that are incompatible with professional conduct. To support this:

The Department for Education should amend Part One of the Teachers’ Standards to enhance expectations on teachers to manage pupil behaviour includes a requirement to challenge prejudice and hate-based behaviour, including antisemitism.
The Department for Education should amend Part Two of the Teachers’ Standards to ensure antisemitic, racist and other discriminatory behaviour is incompatible with professional conduct, within and outside the school, including online.
Schools and colleges should ensure their staff code of conduct specifies that antisemitic, and other forms of religious and racial harassment, abuse and discrimination, are incompatible with professional conduct.

Recommendation 16

School and college leaders should consider the appropriateness of political expression and identifiers in their respective settings, considering the time place and manner alongside their respective legal duties. To enable this:

School leaders should carefully consider the time, place, and manner of political expression (including in relation to staff dress codes and pupil uniform policies), ensuring that the wearing or displaying of political symbols, flags, or slogans, and the expression of political views, are compliant with their legal duties in relation to political impartiality, whilst being mindful of promoting respectful dialogue, inclusion and engagement.
College leaders should consider setting out how they will approach the wearing or displaying of political identifiers by staff, balancing their duties relating to safeguarding, equality and freedom of speech, with the need to ensure that all students can engage effectively in their education and that the welfare of students under 18 is protected.

Recommendation 17

The Department for Education should strengthen guidance for schools on political impartiality to provide clear examples that illustrate how it should be applied in practice, particularly in relation to contemporary and sensitive geopolitical topics.

Recommendation 18

School and college employers should have a robust reporting, escalation and response to antisemitic abuse, bullying, harassment or discrimination against staff and, where relevant, governors and trustees. All incidents against staff, including those involving pupils, students, parents, colleagues or third parties, should be identified, recorded, investigated and addressed promptly and appropriately.

Recommendation 19

Education unions should have robust policies and processes to tackle antisemitism and ensure members are sufficiently trained in understanding, recognising and responding to antisemitism. Any incidents of alleged antisemitism by trade union officials, representatives or members must be consistently addressed in line with union policies to tackle racism or prejudice.

Recommendation 20

The Department for Education should establish a dedicated support service to help schools, colleges and local authorities manage complex incidents related to antisemitism and other forms of prejudice and hatred. To enable this:

The Department for Education should establish a well-defined and well publicised ‘front door’ for support
The Department for Education should establish a network of peer-topeer advisers (at local authority or at school/college leader level, as appropriate) to provide rapid, expert support.

Recommendation 21

The Home Office should utilise some of the £250 million recently announced by the Home Secretary for additional security support for Jewish communities to help ensure that Jewish schools and colleges can undertake educational visits safely, alongside meeting wider security needs.

Recommendation 22

The Department for Transport should deliver a joint communications campaign with relevant stakeholders to deter antisemitic behaviour, with campaign activity strategically placed at transport hubs near Jewish schools and colleges and accompanied by an evaluation to assess impact and inform future activity.

Recommendation 23

The Department for Education should work in partnership with relevant organisations and community stakeholders to ensure that Jewish school and college leaders have access to comprehensive support, specialist advice on security and safeguarding risks, opportunities to participate in professional networks for sharing good practice, and leadership support and mentoring.

Recommendation 24

Ofsted and the Independent Schools Inspectorate should each build on existing training and professional development to support inspectors’ confidence in evaluating and reporting on how effectively leaders identify, manage and prevent incidents of antisemitism and other forms of racial and religious prejudice.

Recommendation 25

The Department for Education should commission Ofsted and the Independent Schools Inspectorate, separately and within their respective remits, to undertake thematic work on how schools and colleges identify, prevent and respond to antisemitism and other forms of racism and religious prejudice, helping to build a stronger national picture and improve understanding of effective practice.

Recommendation 26

Local authorities should, through existing responsibilities, partnerships and local intelligence arrangements, work with safeguarding partners and other relevant agencies to strengthen local visibility of patterns of antisemitism and other forms of hatred and prejudice affecting children and young people, and to support schools and colleges in responding effectively where concerns arise.

Recommendation 27

Ofsted should consider, as it develops its academy trust inspection framework, how trust-level oversight of responses to antisemitism and other forms of hatred and prejudice can be reflected proportionately, particularly where concerns are serious, repeated, or evident across more than one school.

Acland-Hood replaced as DfE permanent secretary

The Department for Education’s top civil servant will be replaced next month after six years in post.

Susan Acland-Hood has worked alongside eight education secretaries since she became DfE’s permanent secretary in 2020.

The Cabinet Office has announced Simon Ridley will become the new permanent secretary in November.

Ridley is currently the second permanent secretary at the Home Office, and has previously been the acting permanent secretary at the Home Office, and head of the Cabinet Office Covid-19 Taskforce.

His appointment follows a “managed move” approved by the prime minister and the education secretary.

Acland-Hood is leaving the civil service for a role outside government.

Acland-Hood ‘exceptional’

A former chief executive of the Courts and Tribunals Service, Acland-Hood was seconded to the DfE in early 2020 as interim second permanent secretary to help with the Covid-19 response.

She then took over the role full-time in September 2020, taking over from Jonathan Slater. Slater stepped down amid the fallout of the government’s handling of the exam grading controversy during the pandemic.

Education secretary Lucy Powell said Acland-Hood has been an “exceptional” in her role, “helping children and families recover from the pandemic, expanding childcare provision, strengthening the skills system and so much more.”

Powell said: “This government is determined to make sure that every child, whatever their background, can achieve and succeed.

“I look forward to working with Simon, who brings a breadth of experience and track record of delivery, to drive forward this work.”

‘Immensely proud’

Acland-Hood said it had been a “privilege” to lead the DfE and was “immensely proud of the work we have done to take our system ever closer to being the best in the world”.

“My colleagues in the Department are remarkable, and I know how brilliantly they will carry on this work of restless improvement, change and growth across education and children’s social care under Simon’s excellent leadership, as I move to my new role,” Acland-Hood said.

Ridley said: “I am thrilled to be appointed permanent secretary at the Department for Education. There is nothing more important than making sure every child and young person has the best start in life and every opportunity to succeed.

“I am looking forward to working with all the brilliant people in the department, and leaders and practitioners throughout the country, to deliver the secretary of state’s ambitious agenda.”

‘Chaos’ at Lakes College leads to formal staff dispute

Teachers at a Cumbrian college have threatened to take industrial action over “excessive” workloads and stress.

Members of the University and College Union at Lakes College have voted for a formal dispute with their employer, which could escalate to strike action unless “meaningful” negotiations take place.

UCU said the vote stemmed from ongoing issues around college leaders making changes to timetables and weekly teaching hours without consulting staff unions.

FE Week has asked the union how many of the college’s 300-strong workforce are UCU members.

It comes as the union is preparing a collective nationwide ballot of college staff as a new strategy to secure better pay and conditions for FE teachers across England.

A UCU spokesperson claimed teachers at Lakes College were struggling with “excessive” weekly hours combined with the rise in learner numbers, particularly for those teaching maths and English. The union also claimed “lots” of lecturers are being asked to teach outside their subject areas without notice or cover plan.

Principal and CEO of Lakes College Mark Fell admitted there was “some disruption” at the start of the academic year due to a change in its student record system, but any teething issues have since been resolved.

“We are disappointed that UCU has taken this direction while early and constructive discussions with the union are still ongoing,” he said.

“We recognise that there was some disruption at the beginning of the academic year, with systems changes introduced to improve the experience for both our students and staff. We have worked collaboratively with staff to review individual timetables and work patterns.”

A college spokesperson added that it was normal practice for staff to cover lessons across the college but they are “very rare” occasions and are not “widespread practice”.

Fell added that the college had introduced staff voice and wellbeing initiatives over the last 12 months to be “mindful” of workloads at the start of a busy academic year.

He said: “We value our relationship with UCU and remain committed to working constructively with union representatives and the wider staff to address the issues raised and seek a positive way forward. Throughout this process, we will remain focused on our students and ensuring they continue to receive a positive, high-quality experience at Lakes College.”

UCU general secretary Jo Grady said: “Industrial action is a last resort for our members, but this vote to enter a formal dispute shows that they have had enough and are ready to fight.

“Staff and students shouldn’t have to suffer the chaos at Lakes College, and management must change direction and work with us to get things right for staff and students, or potentially face disruption in the coming months.”

What I learned in my first 42 days as an FE lecturer

Having recently joined an FE college after 15 years of teaching in state schools, I was surprised by the lack of ambition across the campus when it comes to student success.

The culture seemed to come from management and to be thrust upon those of us teaching on the front line.

A recent article argued that progress should be a significant measure of success in FE. That may suit the college business model, but it is not an opinion shared by many staff at the coal face, who would rather see students succeed than simply make progress.

But does the college business model support greater success?

From what I have seen so far, no.

For most full-time 16-to-19 study programmes, a student must remain on their programme for 42 days to count as a funded start. If they leave before reaching that qualifying period, they generally do not count.

And from where I sit, there is an enormous management focus on getting students beyond that 42-day threshold.

Having just completed my first enrolment cycle, I have encountered an extraordinary range of students.

Many arrive keen to begin a new journey. Others are returning to the same institution after an unsuccessful previous year, seemingly biding their time until they can leave education.

Some arrive curious about the range of courses on offer, only to find themselves signed up to bricklaying.

That might raise a smile if I hadn’t witnessed variations of it numerous times during enrolment.

It can feel as though it is all about the numbers.

In an ideal world, a student beginning a one-year course without grade 4 English and maths would complete their vocational qualification while also achieving their English and maths targets.

The reality can be very different. Some students arrive a considerable distance from a grade 4. Experienced teachers can often identify early on those for whom achieving it within a year will be extremely challenging.

Yet the system keeps them on the same treadmill.

A student working at functional skills level or GCSE grade 1 or 2 is unlikely to reach a grade 4 after just one year at college.

I am not saying it is impossible. I have taught students who have made that leap. But they tend to be identified early by experienced teaching staff and require many hours of coaching, encouragement and additional support to get there.

For everyone else, failure can mean another year of resits and another year at college.

That risks creating what can feel less like an education model and more like a repeat-business model.

The distance between management and the classroom does not help.

As a maths lecturer, there are seven layers of management above me, all with their own responsibilities and priorities. But the further you travel from the coal face, the harder it becomes to see the problems confronting students and lecturers every day.

When was the last time a director simply dropped in to say hello to staff – let alone to the students whose education ultimately funds the institution?

Meanwhile, lecturers can spend the first half of the autumn term buried in administration, only to use the half-term break to complete the numerous tasks expected of them rather than refuelling for the weeks ahead.

And there, once again, is that number: 42 days.

By then, the qualifying period has been crossed and the students count as funded starts.

Colleges obviously need financial stability. Nobody working in FE can ignore the extraordinary funding pressures the sector faces.

But funding rules inevitably shape behaviour.

My concern, having crossed from schools into FE, is that we have allowed the 42-day threshold and the relentless focus on retention and progress to become more important than a much harder question.

Are we giving every student a realistic chance of succeeding?