ASCL and NEU to support NAHT in legal action against Ofsted

Two unions will formally support the National Association of Headteachers’ legal action against Ofsted over its new inspection framework, it has been announced.

The National Education Union and Association of School and College Leaders will provide witness statements for leaders’ union NAHT’s judicial review against the inspections watchdog.

Ofsted is proposing to issue schools and FE providers with one of five colour-coded grades ranging from ‘causing concern’ to ‘exemplary’ across up to 16 different inspection areas.

But the NAHT filed a claim for judicial review in the High Court in May, warning its members feared the increase in the number of sub-judgments “will only increase high-stakes accountability and pressure”.

The union is opposing the report card proposals on legal grounds, “arguing that adequate consultation has not been conducted regarding the plan for a new five-point scale”.

Now, the NEU and ASCL have confirmed they will provide witness statements for the review and will support the legal action going forward. FE Week’s sister publication Schools Week has asked which unions will fund the legal action.

An Ofsted spokesperson said it is “really disappointing that these unions have taken this stance”.

Legal action ‘the only avenue’

Pepe Dilasio

Pepe Di’lasio, ASCL general secretary, said: “It is a sorry state of affairs that legal action is the only avenue open to get Ofsted to think about a new inspection system which will clearly place more pressure on leaders and teachers.”

ASCL dropped proposals to ask leaders to quit as Ofsted inspectors earlier this month, but said it was mulling legal action.

“We have spent months trying to persuade the inspectorate to understand that its five-point grading scale will certainly not improve stress levels,” Di’lasio added. “However Ofsted has remained resolutely intransigent, and we have to turn to other means to protect the education workforce.”

NEU general secretary Daniel Kebede said supporting the legal action “is a reflection of the strength of feeling from our members that these proposals should not go ahead”.

He said the reforms “do not fix the fundamental problems with inspection, and the new grading scale will only make things worse, not better”.

Daniel Kebede
Daniel Kebede

Paul Whiteman, general secretary of NAHT, said the NEU and ASCL’s support “sends a clear and public message that the sector is united in its view that the consultation was fundamentally flawed and that the revised framework represents a clear risk to the health and wellbeing of those we represent”.

NAHT is currently waiting for the court to give permission for the case to proceed.

An Ofsted spokesperson said: “We have every confidence that our new-look reports will be better for parents and their children – because they provide more detailed and useful information. 

“We also believe our revised inspections will be fairer, because they will highlight strengths and areas for improvement, and not come to a single overall judgement.

“It’s really disappointing that these unions have taken this stance – even after months of genuine discussions between us. Our pilot inspections have gone very well, which makes us confident that headteachers will recognise a positive change when inspections begin.”

Unqualified apprentices could pass under assessment reforms, employers warn

Government reforms to apprenticeship assessments risk allowing apprentices to qualify without proving they are competent, employers have warned.

Plans currently being developed by Skills England involve assessment bodies testing only a sample of knowledge, skills and behaviours (KSBs) rather than all of them, inferring overall competence from partial evidence.

A group of 22 construction industry bodies this week wrote to prime minister Keir Starmer to accuse officials of a “dumbed down” approach that will cause “a race to the bottom”.

Coordinated by the British Woodworking Federation (BWF), the letter said: “Whilst Skills England have gone on to qualify the use of sampling somewhat, it is likely any form of sampling will create inconsistency across different assessment providers and stimulate a race to the bottom, as providers are incentivised to create lighter touch assessments to secure better pass rates and cost efficiencies.”

A Skills England spokesperson told FE Week they have now paused a pilot that was testing the changes to the level 2 carpentry and joinery apprenticeship “subject to further consultation”.

A ‘dangerous’ shortcut

The employers claimed that if the reforms move ahead, the Construction Skills Certification Scheme (CSCS), which certifies cards for workers, will “no longer recognise apprenticeships as they will not be confident individuals who have met the minimum standard to demonstrate competence and safety”.

A CSCS spokesperson told FE Week that the organisation has itself raised concerns that the proposed reforms to apprenticeship assessment “could undermine the confidence of both employers and apprentices”.

“The CSCS Alliance urges government and regulators to work closely with employers and industry bodies to ensure that reforms strengthen—not weaken—the quality and credibility of construction apprenticeships,” they added.

“Safeguarding competence, consistency, and trust in the assessment process is critical to the safety of the built environment and the sustainability of the construction workforce.”

The Construction Industry Training Board (CITB), a non-departmental public body, said it is “actively engaged” with Skills England and employers to “ensure that apprenticeship reforms support the construction industry’s skills needs whilst maintaining the safety and quality standards our sector requires”.

Helen Hewitt, chief executive of the British Woodworking Federation, said the government’s proposed apprenticeship reforms “risk dismantling the foundations of competence and safety in our industry”.

She told FE week: “By replacing rigorous, impartial assessments with lighter-touch alternatives, these changes threaten to dilute skills, undermine confidence and create dangerous inconsistencies across the construction sector.”

Hewitt added that should these changes go through, all apprenticeships delivered in England will be impacted meaning “other industry sectors should also be taking keen interest in the progress of these reforms”.

Concerns ‘pushed aside’

Skills England is currently testing new apprenticeship assessment “principles”, announced in February, through pilots for five standards: carpentry and joinery, assistant accountant, adult care worker, data technician and early years educator.

The government last week said this initial group of assessment plans are expected to be published “later this autumn”.

Construction employers involved in the carpentry and joinery assessment pilot hit out at the approach being taken by Skills England, accusing the government agency of a “clumsily managed” consultation process with unrealistic timelines imposed. 

“At every step of the process, the feedback provided by employers, awarding organisations, training providers and trade bodies has either been ignored or pushed aside by Skills England, with the line ‘we are following principles set by the Department for Education’,” the letter said.

FE Week understands at least one other trailblazer group involved in the pilots, for the adult care worker apprenticeship, has raised similar concerns with Skills England.

A Skills England spokesperson said: “We have listened to concerns from the construction industry. This was a pilot and changes to the apprenticeship were paused subject to further consultation.

“We seek to deliver apprenticeships that have the rigour and quality employers need, with the proportionate, timely and efficient assessment required.

“We value the views of the construction sector who we want to work with to get this right.”

Mandated qualification fears

Skills England’s reforms also state that new-style assessment plans will contain “no duplication of assessment, unless it is a statutory requirement”.

“For example, if there is already a mandatory industry recognised qualification that provides a licence to practise as part of the standard, the knowledge, skills and behaviours demonstrated in this do not need to be subsequently retested,” February’s announcement said.

Assessment organisation DSW Learning said it understands that Skills England will allow mandated qualifications to “become the sole form of assessment for many apprenticeships”.

David Pearson, DSW Learning chief executive, told FE Week his organisation has “significant concerns” over this proposal.

“Such qualifications were not designed for the purpose of assessing full occupational competence, which is the defining characteristic of an apprenticeship and has been for hundreds of years,” he said,

“We risk sleepwalking into a scenario where employers lose faith in the value and currency of apprenticeships, as clearly outlined in the BWF’s letter to the prime minister. It is vital that apprenticeships continue to convey full competence, and that a robust, skills-based assessment is used to validate this.”

Pearson explained that most of the mandated qualifications within apprenticeship standards are solely knowledge-based, and test just a sample of the curriculum with pass marks as low as 50 per cent.

“In this scenario, apprentices will not be assessed at all against the skills and will only have to demonstrate a small proportion of the knowledge to pass,” he said. 

“In most cases, apprentices may actively fail multiple elements of the assessment and still be marked as fully occupationally competent. This is a danger to apprentices, their colleagues, and the communities they serve.”

Nudge unit calls for ‘eye-catching’ national Ofsted inspection survey

Ofsted should consider introducing an annual version of its education inspection surveys and “emphasise” in inspector training how to reduce “the formality” of conversations with pupils and parents, a new report has recommended. 

The watchdog commissioned the Behavioural Insights Team (BIT) to research how it can improve engagement with learners, carers and staff during its education inspections. 

It follows Ofsted’s ‘Big Listen’ exercise, which found some stakeholders would like better opportunities to have their views heard. 

Ofsted said it will be considering BIT’s recommendations as part of its ongoing reform programme.

Here’s what researchers found and recommended…

1. Introduce a new ‘eye-catching’ annual survey 

Researchers found many barriers to inspection survey completion, such as tight deadlines and technical wording. 

Some education providers struggle to circulate the inspection surveys in a timely way – with usually only a day to prepare for the visit – and some parents don’t always have time to complete it. 

Some groups of learners struggle to access the surveys without support, which can be tricky to organise in a short timescale. 

BIT said an additional annual survey would “complement” the current education inspection surveys and help inspectors hear from a broader and more representative range of views.

It would be an “eye-catching, high publicised, national ‘event’” with a longer completion window for all providers. 

People may feel more honest, if they know everyone across the country is currently giving feedback, and their provider isn’t being currently inspected, they added.

However, BIT warned of risks such as costs for Ofsted and a time lag between inspection.

2. Be less formal

Some people find speaking to an inspector “intimidating”, BIT found. 

“This can be especially true when they dress very formally, take notes while people are talking without explanation, or ask questions in public places. These things can make people less open.”

One primary school parent said: “You see them in the playground with their suit and their clipboard. They look like the taxman! It creates this fear and anxiety so you can’t really be yourself.” 

Parents of young people with SEND and those from disadvantaged backgrounds were particularly worried about being open. Some feared their feedback would not be confidential and that the child’s support could worsen as a result. 

Parents were also worried about saying the “wrong thing” that could impact their education provider. 

BIT recommended that inspector training should be “emphasising how to reduce the formality of conversations, where appropriate”.

They suggested inspectors should be clear that feedback is confidential, and provide reassurance that constructive feedback will be handled proportionately. 

Inspectors could also use play-based methods to help put younger children at ease. 

For children with SEND, BIT recommended training for inspectors on best practice for engaging with these pupils, such as using visual aids, drawing or alternative communication methods. 

3. Improve guidance shared with leaders

To help support education provider staff to share the necessary information during inspection, Ofsted could provide a simple checklist of actions alongside the inspection notification letter. 

BIT suggested also sending it to a nominated member of administrative staff, as well as the headteacher. 

Education providers could be asked to send communications through multiple challenges or the most appropriate one, such as WhatsApp, provider-app notifications or emails. 

Ofsted should also give education providers recommended subject lines to help the survey stand out in people’s busy inboxes. 

Posters with short URLs or QR codes for surveys could also help, BIT said.

4. Make online surveys easier to use

Some parents said they found accessing the Ofsted Parent View survey challenging and time-consuming, particularly on a mobile phone. 

BIT advised the watchdog simplify or remove altogether the registration step to help increase responses. It should also be made more mobile-friendly. 

Researchers also suggested providing a link to express interest in speaking to an inspector and only asking questions that were relevant to the respondent. 

5. Use AI to look at survey feedback quicker

Parents, children and staff told Ofsted they like writing their thoughts in their own words, and would like more chances to do this. 

But it may mean that Ofsted wouldn’t be able to read all the responses. 

BIT suggests artificial intelligence could be used to process responses. It may help inspectors identify lines of inquiry quicker without overwhelming them. 

To ensure responses with sensitive or serious content are not missed, the system could flag responses containing key words for the inspector to read individually. 

New V Levels qualification must build on the best of BTECs

What a start to the week for FE.  The Post-16 Education and Skills White Paper marks a significant shift in the system of vocational education for young people that will help tackle the UK’s widening skills gap in industries vital to economic growth.  

We believe the UK needs a broad qualifications landscape, offering clearly defined pathways from foundational levels through to degrees and higher technical and professional qualifications. This will build a highly skilled workforce capable of delivering on the ambitions of the UK’s industrial strategy.   

As the UK’s largest awarding organisation, Pearson has extensive experience of delivering a range of post-16 qualifications, including BTECs, A levels, and T Levels.  Throughout the swirling debate around the future of vocational education in this country we have maintained that there should be a third route for students alongside A levels and T Levels.  Every young person should have access to high-quality technical and vocational qualifications, supported by clear progression pathways that offer choice, flexibility, and opportunity.  We are encouraged that government has now set a clear ambition and statement of support for this third route in perpetuity. The task ahead now is to define and deliver this in practice. 

While it is right to update and review our qualifications system so it’s fit for the future, we mustn’t dismiss or forget what has worked well. For decades, Pearson’s BTEC Nationals have helped millions of people enter the workforce, progress to further and higher education, and achieve their career ambitions.  

Changes like this don’t happen overnight and much of the finer, practical detail remains unclear in these early stages.  This will come in due course and we look forward to bringing our extensive experience in designing and delivering vocational qualifications to V Levels, working with the Department for Education and Ofqual to ensure the new qualification helps people build successful careers and equips employers with the skills they need to drive productivity and growth.   

One in five of the UK working population has one or more BTECs – it’s part of the fabric of people’s lives and careers in this country. From these many years of providing vocational qualifications to millions of students, we have learnt a number of valuable key lessons that we urge the government to consider as they begin this journey to create and launch V Levels: 

Progression to higher education

V Levels must have the same level of recognition from higher education as existing smaller vocational qualifications. BTECs provide a valuable route for students into higher education – around 20 per cent of entrants to nursing degrees hold a BTEC Level 3 National qualification, for example. We know that the demand for higher level skills will increase in the future and students taking vocational qualifications must be supported to progress both into employment, and into degrees and higher technical and professional qualifications, as a route to higher level employment. 

Accessibility of larger qualifications should be addressed on sector-by-sector basis

The ongoing defunding of larger vocational qualifications in key sectors – including BTECs in digital, health and social care, engineering, and creative media – remains a major concern. These qualifications are crucial pathways to both employment and higher education. Removing them before clear, scalable alternatives are in place risks leaving students without viable routes into industries already facing acute skills shortages.  Larger qualifications need to be made available until T Levels are made more accessible, and where occupational standards are not appropriate for the sector. Occupational standards at Level 3, and therefore T Levels, will not be relevant for all sectors.  

Relationship between qualifications and occupational standards

V Levels should not be based solely on occupational standards but based on content drawn from occupational standards alongside broader knowledge and skills such as critical thinking, problem solving and research, to ensure that learners can progress to higher level study. 

The assessment model will be critical

One of the strengths of BTECs is that they offer students, who may not thrive under a qualification based entirely on high-stakes exams, a path to succeed and progress through practical learning.  We welcome the recognition that V Levels will generally have an increased proportion of non-exam assessment compared to many A levels. A one-size fits all assessment model does not work and this approach will allow for valid assessment of applied knowledge and skills. 

Designing and delivering new qualifications will take time and we stand ready to work closely with DfE and Ofqual to understand the details, and start the process of developing new qualifications.  Our teams will also be working hard over the coming days, weeks and months, to support colleges, schools, teachers and students through any changes ahead.  

V Levels can streamline, but beware a re-badging exercise

The skills white paper sets out a promising vision for a streamlined post-16 system. But to avoid yet another iteration of the continuous and exhausting cycle of FE reform, care must be taken to ensure this vision is delivered on, not just re-badged.

The post-16 qualifications landscape has long been overcrowded and confusing, making it extremely difficult for students, parents and employers to navigate.  In our research at EPI, we showed using Ofqual’s VTQ (vocational and technical qualifications) landscape tool that students and parents often have hundreds, if not thousands of potential qualifications to choose from. 

This bloated and confused landscape is clearly not conducive to a high-quality and sustainable post-16 system. As such, the newly announced V Levels have the potential to make welcome improvements to a flawed system.

While T Levels were supposed to simplify this landscape and become the main vocational level 3 offer, there are clearly too many learners left without suitable qualifications – they want to study for a level 3 vocational qualification, but not to study for a narrow and large T Level. V Levels are a welcome arrival designed to sit alongside A and T Levels. In 2024, we proposed the introduction of smaller T Levels and we are pleased the white paper is following in this direction.

V Levels will also actively promote and enable students to take mixed-level 3 pathways, combining academic and vocational education into one programme. Our work has shown that these mixed tracks are becoming increasingly popular with learners over time. And wider research shows hybrid programmes tend to deliver good outcomes for students.

The true test for the policy will be whether this momentum can be sustained without creating more complexity. A question going forward will be: what scope will V Levels have to genuinely simplify the landscape?

If existing vocational qualifications are simply badged as V Levels without reducing the number of different awarding bodies, sizes, content and assessment structures, there will still be an unhelpful and complex qualifications landscape. The focus on simplifying the post-16 qualifications landscape in its entirety must remain a key focus as V Levels are developed.

Critical to V Levels success will be forging clear pathways between level 2 and level 3 qualifications. The removal of the T Level foundation year (which we found was doing more harm than good for many students) is a step in the right direction.

Resit reforms fall short with current model

The white paper also proposed changes to the resit policy. Specifically, the government plans to introduce a new level 1 foundation, GCSE stepping stone qualification that students can take before doing their GCSE resit. Skills minister Jacqui Smith argues this will “end the resits treadmill”, yet this is far from clear given the information we currently have.

The proposed changes aren’t a massive departure from the current condition of funding policy. Students who achieve lower than a grade 3 can already take level 1 stepping stone qualifications (typically functional skills qualifications) to build towards achieving their GCSE. However, this is an increasingly uncommon approach used by colleges, as our research shows. For example, the use of stepping stone qualifications fell by around 50 per cent between 2015-16 and 2021-22, as colleges substituted them for GCSEs.

As such, new stepping stone qualifications need to be designed very closely with the sector to ensure they meet provider and student needs. Many students and providers prefer GCSEs over existing stepping stone qualifications because they are graded on a scale and allow students to feel a sense of progress. New stepping stone qualifications should also be graded on a scale to allow such progress to be measured and demonstrated.

Additionally, the white paper doesn’t say enough about addressing a range of other underlying challenges in delivering resits, including funding and staffing shortages in the FE sector and the need for more targeted support for disadvantaged students.

Ultimately, introducing a new level 1 stepping stone alone will fall short of addressing challenges with the current resit model. Until the underlying problems of acute staffing shortages and the need for targeted investment (such as a 16-19 student premium for disadvantaged learners) are solved, resits will struggle to deliver for all students.

Funding Is Flowing, Demand Is Rising — It’s Time for FE to Deliver on Green Skills

For Further Education colleges, this is no longer a niche opportunity — it’s a national mission. And the clock is ticking.

The Ambition: Big Numbers, Bold Promises

In the government’s Net Zero Strategy, the goals are crystal clear:

  • 440,000 jobs in net zero sectors by 2030
  • 190,000 of those by 2025 — that’s now
  • Up to £90 billion of private investment leveraged by 2030

From retrofitting old homes to rolling out EV infrastructure, the UK needs tens of thousands of skilled workers across energy, construction, transport and tech. In theory, the FE sector is at the heart of that delivery.

The Reality: Colleges Are Catching Up – But Slowly

The latest ONS data (July 2025) shows there were 690,900 green jobs in the UK in 2023 — up 35% since 2015. Green job ads are rising fast too, especially in construction and renewables.

But here’s the problem: very few learners are currently enrolled on explicitly green programmes.

Take adult learners in the West Midlands: just 56 signed up last year to a course in carbon awareness and energy management. Nationally, green apprenticeships remain a fraction of total provision. And fewer than 1 in 10 workers receive green skills training at work.

Meanwhile, employers are crying out for people who can install heat pumps, maintain wind turbines, or build sustainable homes — and they’re struggling to find them.

The Funding Is There – But So Are the Gaps

In fairness, the government has begun backing the sector with serious money. A £302 million capital upgrade fund is now supporting colleges to expand and modernise their facilities. Several major institutions are developing green tech workshops, EV labs and net-zero training hubs.

Institutes of Technology are also expanding — with programmes in sustainable engineering, clean power, and construction tech.

But the patchiness remains. Provision is uneven across regions, and many colleges still lack the facilities or staff to deliver truly hands-on, industry-relevant green training. And with no central data tracking how many green learners there actually are, it’s hard to measure progress.

What FE Needs to Do — Now

FE colleges are the engine room of the UK’s green skills revolution. But to deliver, they’ll need to move fast — and with focus. Here’s what the sector must prioritise:

1. Specialise to local demand

Use LSIPs and employer partnerships to align provision with local green sector needs — whether that’s offshore wind in Grimsby, heat pumps in Bristol, or EV tech in the Midlands.

2. Invest in people and kit

It’s not just buildings — it’s trainers. Colleges must attract and retain industry-standard tutors in green trades and technologies, from electricians to retrofit assessors.

3. Track and showcase impact

Colleges should start collecting and publishing their own Green Skills enrolment, completion and job progression data. The sector can’t manage what it doesn’t measure.

4. Make green careers visible

Too many learners still think “green jobs” mean climate science or tree planting. Colleges must raise awareness of high-paid, hands-on roles in solar, construction, hydrogen, and tech.

5. Embed sustainability across the board

From business to beauty therapy, all courses should integrate sustainability — not just specialist pathways. Green Skills aren’t a silo; they’re the future of work.

Conclusion: No Time for Half Measures

The government says it wants a clean energy workforce, a net zero economy, and millions of new green jobs. The money’s starting to flow, the policy is in place — but the skills system isn’t yet at full speed.

FE colleges are crucial to delivering this transition. But they need to be empowered — and held to account — to meet the scale and urgency of the task.

Green jobs are coming, whether we’re ready or not. The question is: will FE lead the way — or be left behind?

We can help!

Green Skills Solutions has a suite of City and Guilds Assured Training programmes, including: Understanding Decarbonisation; Smart Home Heating Systems; Understanding Wind Technology; Introduction to Electric Vehicles and Charge Points and Understanding Heat Pump Technology. We can also work with you to create bespoke programmes.

We are proud to partner with Sabre Rigs, who can provide the physical resources and equipment to support your delivery needs. 

Contact us today to learn more or visit “Team Sabre” at the Association of Colleges Conference on 18th-19th November in Birmingham at Stand F16.

Contact Information

For more details on programme delivery, partnership opportunities, or any additional inquiries, please do not hesitate to contact us.  We look forward to hearing from you and exploring potential collaborations:

Sabre Rigs Website

orders@sabre-rigs.co.uk

Telephone: 07468 759 512

Green Skills Solutions Website

hello@green-skills-solutions.co.uk

Telephone: 07468 759 512

FE is no longer Cinderella, it’s the government’s Fairy Godmother

FE is often talked about as the Cinderella sector. It is a phase of education that, proponents of this metaphor say, is too often overlooked by policymakers. Having spent time working across different parts of the education system, I always find myself drawn back to vocational education and training. That’s where it all happens.

Each new skills minister – and, increasingly, Prime Minister – wants to stamp their mark on the system, usually just as the ink has dried on next year’s college prospectuses. So far from treating FE like Cinderella, the government is treating it like the Fairy Godmother, hoping it will make all their wishes come true.

The post-16 white paper grants us a first look at this government’s vision for the skills system in the round. It is fully loaded – trying to present a coherent strategy for a national skills system that works locally for young people and adults, the unemployed and in-work, employers and individuals, and for FE and HE. You can feel the tussle between the Department for Work and Pensions, the Department for Education and the Treasury as you read the 72-page document. A single overarching narrative is hard to find – the kind of omission that no amount of fairy dust can cover.

This feels like shaky ground to embark on a programme of ambitious reforms from. Ministers should learn from recent qualification reform agendas as they plan the introduction of V Levels.

Most vocational qualification reform begins with good intentions: often, to simplify and to strengthen. The 2005 white paper that underpinned the 14-19 Diplomas following the Tomlinson Review referenced an “alphabet soup” of vocational qualifications. The 2019 ‘case for change’ to consolidate level 3 qualifications, following from the 2011 Wolf Review and 2016 Sainsbury Review aimed to shed light on an “extraordinarily complex and opaque” system. And, the 2023 Advanced British Standard (ABS) consultation document sought “clearer options” post-16.

While there is a zeal for change, too often the purpose of change either isn’t clear or isn’t shared. The 14-19 diplomas promised a bridge between academic and vocational routes, but their aims became muddled and neither universities nor employers really knew what they stood for. The Advanced British Standard (ABS) promised breadth, but quickly became shorthand for something that might simply replace A Levels and T Levels without a clear rationale. There was confusion over what T Levels were preparing young people for: work, apprenticeships, higher technical study, university, or all of the above at different times to different people.

The lesson for the V Levels rollout is simple: before thinking about structures, we need a unifying purpose – one that is sufficient enough to justify the upheaval and public investment of wholesale qualification reform.

What is the problem the government is trying to solve, and where does the current offer fall short? Is it about coherence, about quality, about labour market value, or is it a rebranding of the existing options?

Skills minister Baroness Smith said that V Levels would “build on what’s good about BTECs”. Applied general qualifications like BTECs, Cambridge Technicals and others have currency with the public and, crucially, employers. There will need to be work to ensure the value of V Levels is understood.

If V Levels are about creating a “line of sight” into work, there is too little in the white paper on careers information, advice and guidance. Too often, qualification reform focuses on simplification for employers without thinking about how young people will navigate the new system.

For learners who are still deciding which career path to take and want to take a mix of courses, retaining “A Level sized” Level 3 qualifications feel like the right way to go. The model is popular with industry leaders, and it polls well with the public: 74 per cent of adults think young people should be able to “mix and match” academic and vocational subjects to suit their interests.

But without a shared “why”, implementation could become a firefighting exercise. For those rolling out V Levels, the real test will be whether this reform finally learns the one lesson its predecessors never did: that coherence begins with purpose.

Skilled migrants should train British workers in colleges – report

Skilled migrants should train and mentor domestic workers in places like colleges to fill shortages and quell fears about immigration, a think tank has said.

Under a proposed new “work and teach” programme, skilled foreign workers would have to share their specialist expertise with local businesses and colleges as a condition of their visa.

The proposal was made in a new report by The Good Growth Foundation, a think tank with links to Labour ministers, which recommended linking immigration policy to a “revitalised” national skills strategy.

Experts at the think tank said a “lack of focus” on skills and opportunity for domestic workers is the undercurrent driving growing anti-immigration rhetoric.

Former education secretary Lord David Blunkett, who wrote a foreword for the report, said: “The public’s unease about immigration cannot be separated from their frustration about opportunity.

“When people feel locked out of progress, resentment grows; when they see investment in skills and prospects, confidence returns.”

‘Take back control’

The “take back control” report polled over 2,000 adults from across the country and held focus groups with former Labour voters who intend to vote for the Reform party or alternative left-wing parties in the next election.

Almost two-thirds (63 per cent) said adult and lifelong learning would have the most positive impact on the country and 57 per cent said colleges should play a “leading role” in adult skills.

But only 43 per cent “express confidence” that their local FE college “delivers high-quality, job-relevant training”.

Four in 10 (41 per cent) said funding cuts were the biggest barrier to skills and training opportunities while over half (52 per cent) called out employers for failing to provide enough training or apprenticeships.

Just less than half, 49 per cent, of polled participants approved of the work and teach programme, which would address shortages where there are not enough British workers to train the next generation. Among Labour voters, the approval rating reached 57 per cent.

“The appeal lies in fairness: people welcome immigration when they know it is helping to build opportunity here at home,” the think tank said.

Under the “work and teach” proposal, skilled foreign workers would be “granted visas on the condition that part of their time is dedicated to training and mentoring domestic employees – sharing their expertise with local workforces, SME (small and medium sized enterprises) and colleges”. 

The think tank said this policy would “transform immigration from a perceived shortcut into a visible investment in Britain’s own talent pipeline”, adding: “In a labour market still recovering from years of undertraining and chronic shortages, this approach would make migration a tool for renewal rather than a source of tension”.

One example it gave was requiring an engineer hired from overseas to fill a technical vacancy to spend 10 to 15 per cent of their week teaching specific software skills or advanced manufacturing techniques to a cohort of junior domestic engineers.

‘This proposal is an exciting one’

The report’s authors said this pathway should be tied to “skills transfer plan”, which would mandate employers to build their own strategy for upskilling their workforce and would have to report the plan to the Home Office as part of their licence to sponsor skilled workers.

As part of the skills transfer plan, the government could “explore making safeguards available, such as colleges and other educational providers, for foreign workers to use for delivering training as part of their work and teach visa”.

Ben Rowland, CEO of the Association of Employment and Learning Providers, said: “This policy proposal is an exciting one, bringing two problems together to create a solution: the political tension created by having to bring in skilled overseas workers and the shortage of skilled trainers.”

The foundation also recommended a migration budget that transparently shows how immigrants’ fiscal contributions, such as income tax, National Insurance, visa fees, and the immigration skills charge, are reinvested into the economy. 

Calls have long existed for the government to publicise where receipts from the immigration skills charge are invested. The Treasury has faced criticism for treating it as “simply a tax” that goes into its main “consolidated fund”.

It follows an FE Week investigation that found “zero transparency” over whether the tax actually funds domestic training as was promised.

Recent figures show ISC income fell for the first time in four years, by £100 million.

This week’s skills white paper confirmed the ISC is set to rise by 32 per cent.

The Good Growth Foundation said transparency would help “flip the narrative” that “every gain for newcomers is a loss for British workers”.

“For sceptics, this distinction is decisive. Immigration framed as a substitute for investment in Britons is resented. Immigration framed as a complement – directly tied to expanding opportunity at home – can command broad support,” the report said.

Praful Nargund, director of the Good Growth Foundation, said: “Linking immigration and skills reform flips the narrative from pressures to partnership, giving new arrivals and British workers the chance to work together to fix our country.”

White paper misses the mark by omitting adults

The government’s new post-16 education and skills white paper could have been the defining moment for a genuine lifelong learning revolution. Instead, it risks being remembered as the ‘pre-19 paper’ – a document that narrows opportunity to youth and higher education while overlooking the millions of adults who also need, and deserve, access to learning. 

Although the white paper consolidates the government’s technical and organisational reforms, it’s vision remains narrow. It treats adult education primarily as an engine for productivity – a valid goal, but one that misses its full social and economic potential. Without participation and confidence, the productivity it promises will remain out of reach. 

Adults missing from the story 

In a 38,000+ word document, adult learners like those at WM College barely get a mention. Yet the government says it wants to “level up” skills, drive growth and “leave no one behind.” That ambition cannot be realised while community education remains an afterthought. 

As chair and CEO of HOLEX – representing local authority and community adult education providers across England – we both welcome the ambition to strengthen skills. But economic growth will stall if education policy continues to focus on institutions rather than people. A system that prioritises young people, colleges and universities but neglects adults, communities and lifelong learning cannot deliver inclusive growth. 

Adult learners are not a niche group. They are parents, carers, jobseekers, mid-career workers and older people rebuilding confidence through learning. Providers have the infrastructure and trust to engage adults who are economically inactive or furthest from work. Yet their funding has been eroded for a decade, and the white paper offers little reassurance this will change. 

Essential skills review: the test of intent 

The proposed essential skills review is welcome, but it must not become another consultation that drifts. The consultation will focus on improving outcomes for learners who did not achieve expected standards in GCSE English and maths. It needs to be wider than English and maths, and look at core language, literacy digital and numeracy skills which will not only boost employability prospects, but support lifelong learning and reduce barriers to those who struggle with traditional academic formats.

The review must fund these routes properly, set a clear timetable, and give community providers a formal voice in shaping delivery. Without that, the review risks diagnosing a problem without backing the solution. 

Skills passport: make it genuinely lifelong

The proposed skills passport as part of the UK’s ‘plan for change’ is an interesting innovation, but it is focussed exclusively on the energy sector now.

It is designed to help learners transition between roles and to recognise transferable skills, but it must then record all learning, in all sectors; it would be good to have more details on what the learning has been to enable it to expand from energy into other sectors. 

Equally, if it only tracks accredited or employment-linked qualifications, it will ignore the vital informal and community-based learning that underpins many adult journeys. 

For thousands of adults returning to study after years away, the first step is a short course that rebuilds confidence or language skills. Those experiences must count. A genuinely lifelong skills passport should recognise every stage of learning – accredited or not – so that adults can see, and show, their progression. 

Investment and inclusion must go hand in hand 

Funding remains the core issue. Investment is still weighted toward higher education and Level 4 + courses, yet the greatest economic and social return often comes from supporting adults with the lowest starting points. HOLEX is calling for a £5 billion increase in the adult skills budget this Parliament and for funding to be distributed locally, through authorities that understand community and employer needs. 

A fair, locally driven model would empower the networks already proven to engage and upskill adults who are economically inactive or furthest from work. 

A people’s skills solution 

 The white paper’s emphasis on employment outcomes is understandable, but employment alone does not define success. Adult learning improves mental health, civic participation and family stability – outcomes that are measurable, proven and economically valuable, yet absent from the government’s metrics. 

If ministers truly want a skills revolution, they must recognise that people – not just institutions – are its driving force. A people’s skills solution would put learning power in citizens’ hands, value practical and vocational skills alongside academic ones, and build a system that works for everyone, everywhere. 

HOLEX and its members stand ready to help design and deliver that system. We urge government to embed community adult education in the essential skills review, make the skills passport genuinely lifelong and inclusive, and deliver fair funding so that adult learning can play its full part in growth, wellbeing and community renewal. 

Because adult learning isn’t an optional extra – it’s the backbone of an inclusive, productive and healthy society.