Oliver: Postponing Ofsted inspections too risky

Ofsted chief inspector has criticised calls to postpone the launch of new-style inspections, saying any delay would be “dangerous” and “seriously worrying”.

From November, inspections across early years, schools and further education will follow Ofsted’s new reformed inspection model; replacing inspection reports with report cards and a new five-point scale of grades.

But it was revealed this month that confirmed plans for reformed inspections won’t be released until September, leaving colleges and training providers just weeks to prepare for November inspections. This is because Ofsted needed more time to analyse consultation responses.

Full inspections will not take place in September or October so inspectors can be trained. Monitoring visits and new provider monitoring visits can still go ahead.

The pace of Ofsted’s inspection reforms, and the short timescale between announcing details in September and launching inspections in November, has angered unions. 

Two leaders’ unions, the Association of Schools and College Leaders (ASCL) and the National Association of Head Teachers (NAHT), are considering asking their members to quit as Ofsted inspectors.

On Monday, the leaders of four education unions wrote to education secretary Bridget Phillipson requesting a pause on the new inspection regime from November to the start of the 2026/27 academic year.

The letter, signed by the general secretaries of ASCL, NAHT, NEU and NASUWT, warned: “If the responses to the consultation exercise indicate that significant revisions to Ofsted’s original proposals are required, then it is not clear how they could be made in the very short period of time that would be available”.

That same day, Ofsted chief inspector Sir Martyn Oliver was a keynote speaker at the Association of Employment and Learning Providers (AELP) annual conference. AELP itself suggested new-style inspections shouldn’t be introduced until January. 

Responding to a question from FE Week, Sir Martyn said his advice to the secretary of state on how to respond to the unions’ demands would be “private”, before then listing off reasons why delaying inspections was “seriously worrying”.

“I would worry, seriously worry, about not inspecting for the whole of September, October, November and December,” he said.

“Whilst everyone in here [training providers], 88 per cent of you get ‘good’ or ‘outstanding’, there are some 12 per cent where it’s not good enough for learners and apprentices. I would worry what’s happening in those sectors.”

He concluded: “The question is, do we want the pause of inspection, or do we want to continue on with the education inspection framework? But I think no inspection is a dangerous and bad thing”.

Elsewhere in his speech, the chief inspector praised the training sector for increasing apprenticeship achievement rates last year, and congratulated the 88 per cent of the 161 apprenticeship inspections this year that scored ‘good’ or ‘outstanding’ results. 

Sir Martyn said he was “really sorry” to have delayed publishing his final inspection proposals. 

He added: “We fully intend to read every bit of feedback before we publish any improvements to what we proposed in February.

“Our consultation has provided us with a great deal of information to consider. We had over 6,500 responses from parents, providers and representative bodies. We’ve been testing inspection methodology and gathering feedback from providers who took part in well over 200 test visits.”

PAC: T Levels could remain ‘minority pursuit’ without serious campaign

T Levels could remain a “minority pursuit” if ministers fail to achieve a “critical mass” of student enrolments by clarifying career pathways and improving employer engagement, MPs have warned.

Parliament’s public accounts committee (PAC) recommended the Department for Education enter “campaign mode” and set out “publicly” how its flagship qualification fits with other qualifications and career routes.

In a report released today following its inquiry into T Levels, the PAC urged the DfE not to “lose focus” and detail a plan to improve employer awareness through local skills plans after finding only a third of businesses knew about the qualification.

The probe followed a National Audit Office report in March that highlighted doubts about the scalability of the technical education route for 16 to 19-year-olds after finding student number forecasts were missed in three-quarters of subjects.

PAC chair Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown said: “T Levels have the potential to be a significant force for good in equipping young people with everything they need for their burgeoning careers.

“But without the wider awareness in industry and critical mass of student enrolments, T Levels may remain very much a minority pursuit, when they could become a natural and enriching step in many students’ lives”.

A DfE spokesperson said it would consider the PAC recommendations “carefully” and respond in due course.

Understanding college costs

The PAC made six recommendations, including speeding up updates to teaching content to “meet evolving skills gaps”, and gaining a better understanding of how awarding organisation fees and costs impact the T Level-related funding pressures faced by colleges.

The report concluded T Levels have a “risky” all-or-nothing assessment approach – a point raised by City & Guilds – where failing one part of the course leads to an overall fail, which deters enrolments.

The PAC also recommended the introduction of a workforce strategy to support colleges recruiting and retaining T Level teachers “especially given that T Levels themselves are addressing areas of skills shortages”.

Benefits of T Levels uncertain

Education civil servants told MPs in April that T Levels needed 60,000 to 70,000 students to enrol each year to be viable.

The NAO report said the DfE feared T Levels would be a major value-for-money risk if they failed to offer more benefits than other level 3 qualifications.

While the DfE’s best judgment is T Levels are 25 per cent more valuable than other level 3 qualifications and bring £23,000 more lifetime benefits to students who achieve them, the committee found this was “very uncertain”.

With permanent secretary Susan Acland-Hood’s estimation of 66,000 enrolments by 2029, the DfE expects T Levels to reap £8.10 of benefits for every £1 spent.

PAC members pointed out the DfE did not track two of the four benefits associated with T Levels: student earnings data and employer confidence.

It recommended the department refine its benefit tracking, update the estimated economic benefit for T level students, and define clear milestones to better understand whether progress, for example on pass rates, aligns with expectations.

“For these benefits to be realised, the department needs to ensure students enrol, complete and pass T Levels,” the report said.

Clifton-Brown added: “As well as providing true clarity on what T Levels can offer interested students and employers, government must allow far more flexibility for the qualification for it to be a tool that can swiftly meet needs where they arise.”

The PAC said of the DfE: “It expects pass rates to increase over time, as T Levels mature, but the proportion of students passing has fallen from 97 per cent in summer 2022 to 89 per cent in summer 2024. It does not have a target”.

One of the PAC’s main recommendations was the development of a “campaign approach” to raising student awareness of T Levels within six months.

It also recommended an examination of how curriculums could be tailored to appeal to a “diverse student group” including women, after it was revealed women were underrepresented on engineering T Level courses.

Industry placement pressure 

The report also raised the risk of colleges not being able to secure enough industry placements. T Level placements are a mandatory 315 hours, or 45 days, and must be completed over the two-year course.

While the PAC noted recent changes, such as allowing 20 per cent of placements to be done remotely, and this week’s boost to employer financial incentives, it said colleges would need to find “significantly more” placements if student numbers increased in line with forecasts.

We must build to deliver our city’s big reconstruction goals

Big changes are on the horizon for Bradford. After decades out of the limelight, our city is finally in the spotlight for all the right reasons. 
 
As we celebrate the rollout of Bradford 2025 City of Culture, other exciting initiatives grow closer. The Bradford City Village development promises to create 1,000 new houses, and the just-announced Southern Gateway Scheme would double our city centre and make it one of the largest regeneration sites in the UK.  

With talk of £4.5 billion transport upgrades and substantial economic and social benefits, this period of renewal will transform Bradford. However, add in the government’s target of 1.5 million new homes by the end of this parliament, and we start to see a separation between national agendas and local skills gaps. 

Just before her Spring Statement, the chancellor announced £600 million worth of investment to train up to 60,000 more skilled construction workers. Given the scale of impending capital and infrastructure work in our city alone, this funding is both timely and urgently needed. 

Bradford College is well oversubscribed for construction courses. We receive four applications for every place available. The sector-wide difficulty of recruiting experienced lecturers (caused by FE’s inability to keep pace with construction salaries) is problematic, but for Bradford College, the real issue is capacity.  
 
As one of the region’s largest FE providers, which has invested over £40 million of funding into new facilities over the last three years, we are ready to scale our impact even further. With the right capital investment, our ambition is to create a flagship technical excellence college in construction.  
 
Our proposal will be a catalyst for regeneration and produce the skills desperately needed to deliver the government’s social mobility agenda, the transition to net zero, and infrastructure-led economic recovery. More than this, a new technical excellence college in construction will solve another Bradford challenge – large scale under-employment.Sadly, geography and poverty still dictate life chances and social mobility in the UK. This point was underscored by the recent Sutton Trust opportunities index report. Take Bradford South – the constituency of deputy speaker Judith Cummins MP.  This area is classified as one of the most disadvantaged in England but is also where we recruit about a third of our 16 to 18-year-old cohort. 
 
Despite extensive partnership work, 37 per cent of Bradford South’s young people are on free school meals, and only 14.1 per cent of those achieve English and maths passes. Around 12.6 per cent complete a degree by 22, and only 7.4 per cent have moved to a different region by age 28. 
 
Likewise, although NEET (not in education, employment or training) numbers here are lower than the national average, we also see a huge amount of economic inactivity as soon as young people reach 18. Bradford has the largest cohort of 18 to 24-year-olds claiming universal credit in the UK (11 per cent). These young people are massively behind national achievement rates: nearly -11 per cent at level 2 and -12 per cent at level 3.  

Construction is a West Yorkshire local skills improvement plan priority sector and acute skills shortage area. Establishing Bradford College as a technical excellence college would promote high-quality training pathways through to level 3 and support the jobs plan, green skills manifesto and regional growth championed by West Yorkshire Mayor Tracy Brabin. 

In the last year, Bradford College has opened £3.5 million vocational T Level facilities and a higher education STEM facility called Garden Mills after a £6.9 million refurbishment project. Our £17 million Junction Mills building under construction is also set to become the home of our modern automotive curricula in 2026 – specialising in electric and hybrid vehicles. 

Capital investment in a new technical excellence college in construction would bolster these world-leading facilities and anchor Bradford’s ‘knowledge quarter’, driving a more diverse, future-ready workforce. With our construction results already surpassing national averages by 9 per cent, we’re ready to act at pace and help shape the city’s next chapter. 

Marples trial: Witnesses end with 3aaa ‘fraud’ scrutiny

Civil servants investigating 3aaa “had it in” for some providers, “jumped to conclusions” about data manipulation and took a “guilty until proven innocent” approach, internal government emails shown to the High Court suggest.

Allegations of “fraud” that led to the apprenticeship provider collapsing in 2018 have played a part in the Marples’ family lawsuit against the Department for Education, even though it was two years after the change in control issue at the heart of the case.

The DfE has relied on this as a key part of its defence, referencing multiple other cases of alleged data issues and clawbacks at providers owned by Peter Marples.

David Smales and Keith Hunter, who have 20- and 30-years’ experience in the civil service respectively, gave evidence to the High Court today. They said 3aaa had manipulated data to enhance qualification achievement rates, namely by “alteration of learners’ planned end dates and withdrawal dates”.

This put £521,000 at risk of recovery, plus 3aaa owed £1.2 million worth of Apprenticeship Grant for Employers (AGE) funding that should have been paid to employers. A referral was made to the police, but no further action was taken. 

Adam Solomon, KC for the claimants, attacked the competence and investigative approach of the DfE officials.

Smales, who Solomon pointed out had been accredited as a counter fraud specialist through a four-week residential course with the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy, admitted not all learner files at 3aaa had been reviewed because their investigation “didn’t get to that stage”.

Of 3,000 learner files, the then Education and Skills Funding Agency (ESFA) identified 253 to closely examine. 

Solomon asked why he didn’t look at all of the underlying data. Smales told the court: “Had 3aaa not gone into liquidation, and had they challenged the findings of the investigation instead, then at that point it would have been necessary for the ESFA to go to 100 per cent audit.”

3aaa went bust in October, a month after co-founders Peter Marples and Di McEvoy Robinson resigned. 

Hunter said it “wouldn’t have been a good use of public money to continue investigating a liquidated provider”. 

‘Does he not learn?’

The ESFA’s data science team calculates numbers of learners who withdraw from their training across the whole sector.

“It turned out that the average was 7 per cent, with a median of 5 per cent. At 3aaa, Keith [Hunter] calculated that the figure was about 20 per cent. That was obviously a much higher rate than usual anyway,” Smales said.

Solomon asked Smales if he knew what was meant by the “mean” and the “median” in statistical analysis. He answered “no. I could guess, but I’m not prepared to take a guess”.

The KC then showed a draft briefing paper Smales had prepared before the investigation concluded, which included the words “in addition to data manipulation”. These words were crossed out by his boss who included a note which said Smales was suggesting 3aaa was “guilty until proven innocent”.

Solomon also read out an earlier email from Smales who had received analysis of 3aaa data from Hunter following allegations from multiple whistleblowers inside the company. He told his bosses: “I had a chat with Keith Hunter earlier this week about 3aaa and data manipulation and the conclusion is it appears 3aaa has been manipulating data for at least two years.”

Solomon showed an email from ESFA deputy director Karen Sherry to Smales’ line manager, named in the court as Ms Allen, which said: “The more I think about it the more angry I am getting. This should have been shared with me and you BEFORE BEING SENT TO DAVID. Does he not learn?” Sherry was referring to Hunter.

Sherry’s email added that “we need to do an audit” and “we need to be very careful about using words like 3aaa manipulated data”.

Allen replied: “I just don’t get it. It gets to a point where I feel I can’t even share anything anymore for fear of what he will do! Despite warnings.”

Sherry then said: “He has ‘got it in’ for certain providers and will do anything to damage them!” She added: “I showed Paul and he said the same as us. Completely out of order. What I am really cross about is he hasn’t told us he is doing it and jumped to conclusions before further work.”

Hunter told the court he was doing “what I considered to be my responsibility under the civil service code to safeguard public funding”.

While Smales told the court that accounting firm PwC “confirmed the findings of the 3aaa Investigation”, he admitted to Solomon he could only “suspect” 3aaa had manipulated data.

Smales and Hunter still work in the DfE’s investigations team.

All fingers pointed to Lee Marples

Smales also told the court that, as a result of the interviews with former 3aaa managers, “all fingers were being pointed at Lee Marples having been the perpetrator, on the instruction of the CEO of 3aaa at relevant times, Peter Marples”.

This “corroborated what 3aaa’s new management had told us in their response of 3 October to the ESFA’s allegations”.

Lee Marples, the nephew of Peter Marples and who was 3aaa’s resources manager at the time, attempted to distance himself from the responsibility of data submissions to the SFA during his evidence, claiming that manipulation would require “collusion across multiple people within the business”. 

He told the court how funding rules are “very subjective” and there are “multiple different opinions of what people constitute as in learning, as a break-in-learning and a start date”.

James Segan KC, for the DfE, pointed to claims of “manipulation to inflate the organisation’s value” including “shortening aim lengths, restarting withdrawn learners, starts claimed without learning taking place”. The barrister asked: “These were all things that were happening, yes?”

Lee Marples replied: “There are reasons why aim lengths should be shortened, because they could be input incorrectly in the first place. There were various components and each of these would have a different timeframe against them because of the volume of data we were processing.

“There would be legitimate reasons to change the dates if they were wrong. The restarting of withdrawn learners – if a learner comes back after they’d previously withdrawn and hadn’t been on a break in learning, learners could be restarted.”

The court heard that one of Lee Marples’ team members told the ESFA: ” …well aware that Lee Marples [was] actively changing information in the Maytas system which would be submitted in the ILR. This usually revolved around end dates for apprentices being manipulated. This was a constant issue.”

Segan added that the team member said he would “correct Lee’s changes to end dates but would often find them changed back. He never confronted Lee directly but described it as a kind of ongoing silent battle between them.”

Other 3aaa workers made similar allegations against Lee Marples.

Lee Marples denied all data manipulation accusations.

‘Poor use of language’

Former SFA director turned college principal Keith Smith denied having a direct role in 3aaa’s change of control during his evidence, despite making significant amendments to official government communication about the process.

He also admitted to “poor use of language” in enforcement rules that led to the multi-million-pound sale of the training provider falling through.

Smith, who is now CEO of Harrow, Richmond & Uxbridge Colleges (HRUC), held multiple roles in civil service for 30 years until 2022. During 3aaa’s proposed sale to TLP he was an SFA director who worked on the implementation of post-16 funding policy. 

A member of Smith’s team, Sharon Forton, took the lead on 3aaa’s change of control request.

In early November she sent an email suggesting the case should be approved. Smith, who told the court he had limited involvement in this specific case, replied “no further questions from me…if Peter is happy to approve I would want to make sure we review this carefully over the next few months to make sure nothing changes or starts to raise alarm bells”.

But following the refusal letter a month later, Forton asked Smith for his advice on how to respond to 3aaa. Smith made series of track changes that included concern around the business plan, namely TLP’s expected non-levy growth. 

And in January 2017, Forton drafted a letter to then skills minister Robert Halfon to inform him of the 3aaa situation. Smith made significant changes to this and changed the name of the sender from Sir Peter Lauener to himself. Solomon pointed out this was despite what Smith claimed to be a “lack of knowledge” about the case.

Solomon showed Smith an email he sent following conversations with 3aaa about their potential sale following a tip off in September 2016. Smith’s internal response was “they know the rules too well not to proceed without our agreement” and another said “we must approve any sale”.

Solomon put to Smith: “You were under impression that at the time you had the power to veto a proposed sale, wasn’t you?”

Smith denied this, stating that while he knows “how this type of language might look”, what he is referring to in those emails “is the process where we could approve the continuation of a contract”.

He added: “I accept that was a poor use of language, I was never at any point approving a sale per say, what I was saying here is about approval of transfer of contract.”

Kirsty Evans, a former SFA director of funding who now works in the Construction Industry Training Board (CITB) which Sir Peter Lauener chairs, also gave evidence to the court. She was pressed on the impact of levy funding reforms and achievability of TLP’s business plan around non-levy growth.

An email from Evans at the time said projections were “challenging but not unreasonable” and that 3aaa needed to “diversify” followed by a list of unanswered questions for TLP and 3aaa. 

She also questioned whether or not the possible new investors and contract holders were “more likely to pull the plug, cut and run, than the current owners of 3aaa who had demonstrated their commitment” to the training market. 

Allen and Linford

It was claimed by Tony Allen, a witness for the claimants who worked in the SFA’s large contracts unit until May 2016, that Smith and Sir Peter would take issue with private providers making profit.

Smith strongly denied this to the court, stating that private providers are a critical part of a healthy training market. He said there was concern about “excess profits” because a core responsibility of the agency was to deliver value for money, but there was a “difference between profits and excess profits” and he would expect Allen to understand that.

Allen also claimed he heard, but had no evidence, that Smith would meet former FE Week editor Nick Linford regularly, while Solomon accused the SFA director of being under the influence of Linford and taking everything he said at face value. This was largely due to a tip-off that Linford gave the SFA in 2016 that led to the KPMG investigation of 3aaa. 

“I not only deny the allegations, I do not believe there is any possible basis for them to be made about me,” Smith said. 

The court heard Allen questioned about his assertion that changes of control at other apprenticeship providers would happen “with little in the way of questioning” from the SFA.

Allen claimed to recollect changes of control to this effect for Lifetime Training and Babington, which he said took place in 2015.

They in fact took place in 2016, one of which was after he left the SFA. He admitted he had no involvement in either process during cross-examination.

Allen told the court: “My memory has failed me on this occasion.”

The court will hear from experts for both sides tomorrow followed by a week’s break before closing statements on July 9 and 10.

You can read our report on the opening statements here, cross-examination of Peter Marples here, and evidence from ex-SFA chief Sir Peter Lauener here.

£1.5m loan plea triggers intervention for South Devon College

South Devon College has been placed under government intervention after securing emergency cash from the Department for Education.

The college announced it received a financial notice to improve, which has not yet been published, triggered by its request for short-term cashflow support.

Chief executive Laurence Frewin told staff the FE Commissioner would scrutinise its financial plans during a college visit on July 10, which include cutting up to 65 jobs as part of a £2.75 million savings target.

He added emergency funding – understood to be a £1.5 million loan over two years – was needed to cover the “cost of the restructure” and to ensure the college had “sufficient cash in the bank”.

Reclassification into the public sector in 2022 means the college can no longer access “traditional forms of public borrowing” from banks, the CEO explained.

Under the two-year intervention, South Devon College will agree an improvement plan with the commissioner, which could include measures such as a merger with another college, sale of property, curriculum changes or further staff restructuring. 

The commissioner is also likely to publish a summary report outlining the issues the college faces, and its recommendations.

South Devon College joins a group of five other colleges under financial intervention measures including Warwickshire College Group and SMB College Group.

Financial record

In the past five years South Devon College has consistently scored ‘requires improvement’ under the DfE’s financial health rating and ended the last financial year with an operating deficit of £793,000 on an overall income of £36 million. The college has outstanding loans of £8 million from three lenders, including Torbay Council.

Frewin said it was operating in an “increasingly challenging financial and competitive environment” resulting in “difficult decisions”.

“We welcome the additional oversight and support from the DfE and FE Commissioner’s team as we implement our recovery plan,” he added.

“With this in place, we remain fully focused on delivering for our students, communities and employer partners.”

A ‘tough year’

The college announced a round of up to 65 redundancies in April in a bid to secure its “long term financial stability”.

It said the staff cuts decision came after a period of “rigorous financial planning and review” earlier this year.

This week, Frewin paid tribute to staff directly after an “incredibly tough year”, adding: “Throughout everything please remember we are a college with excellent quality teaching and learning, a strong reputation for being innovative, we are resilient and we are on the front foot with our plans”.

‘Rich curriculum’

The college has about 6,575 students of various ages at its four main campuses, which include a specialist automotive engineering centre, marine academy, university centre and high school for 200 pupils aged 14 to 16.

In 2024 Ofsted inspectors rated the college ‘good’ in overall effectiveness and said it provided a “calm and exceptionally purposeful environment” with a “rich curriculum”.

According to its accountability statement, 70 per cent of its students live in the Torbay area, which includes seaside towns Torquay and Paighton, with the remainder in the more rural Teignbridge and South Hams districts.

The Torbay council area has a population of about 136,000 people, nearly half of whom are aged 50 or over, with only about eight per cent of residents aged 16 to 24.

It “suffers from several issues common to coastal towns” including a low-wage, low-skill economy that is “over-reliant on seasonal tourism and is now “one of the weakest in the country”, the college said.

AoC delays pay recommendation until September

The Association of Colleges has delayed making a pay recommendation to its college members due to “late decisions” on funding this year.

The college membership body met for the second time with the National Joint Forum (NJF) trade unions today to discuss its 2025/26 FE pay claim. 

Unions wanted a 10 per cent pay rise and national workload agreements.

They were told colleges should not expect to receive a “firm” non-binding pay recommendation until the week beginning September 15.

Last month, the government accepted the independent school teachers’ review body (STRB) recommendation of a 4 per cent pay rise for school teachers in 2025/26.

The same day, it also announced £160 million for 16 to 19 FE providers, delivered through a boost to per-student 16 to 19 funding rates.

AoC chief executive David Hughes said the timing of the funding boost, as well as the extra £155 million to cover national insurance hikes, was the reason for the delay in its pay recommendation.

“There’s been lots of late decisions on funding this year,” he said, adding that most colleges received updated 16 to 19 allocations this week.

He added that more time was needed to understand the “moving parts” of the national insurance funding covering between 50 to 85 per cent of colleges extra costs, plus the lack of clarity on in-year student growth in September. 

Hughes added: “Colleges just haven’t had enough time to work with their boards to set the budgets. We all know that these aren’t just one-year decisions. If you make a big pay award now, and you get an extra 300 students in September and you take them on, can you afford to do both?”

He told FE Week that AoC was expected to match 4 per cent pay rise, but it needed to work with colleges who had low 16 to 19 numbers on their affordability of such a pay rise.

There are a reported 35 colleges with over 20 per cent of income from adult education funding, as well as colleges with large apprenticeship funding. 

Governing boards of these colleges will need to go to the drawing board to “really understand the implications of quite a few moving parts”.

This summer, the AoC said it is inviting the unions to be involved in its campaign on adult education funding.

“I don’t think we’ve done that piece of work well enough now to convince Treasury. So that’s where we are,” he said.

Last year, the AoC did not make a recommendation until October, offering up a “disappointing” 2.5 per cent pay rise for 2024/25 after the government refused to include colleges in the £1.2 billion public sector pay award.

Unions ‘disappointed’

Hughes added that the unions were “very disappointed” that the AoC was not able to make a recommendation today.

“In my view, we had a reasonable discussion,” he said.

But UNISON national officer for education Leigh Powell told FE Week: “Leaving staff without any certainty about pay with further delays is extremely disappointing. The Association of Colleges had already been given more time.

“It beggars belief the association has only just realised the complex arrangements for further education have led to pay disparities between colleges. Unions have been telling them for years.

“The extra money put into further education over the past two years, hasn’t been reflected in staff pay packets. That must change.”

The FE pay claim for 2025/26 made by the unions also urged the AoC to call for a “better” bargaining system that would align with the STRB. 

The government has made no suggestion that an FE pay review body would be on the cards in the future, though its employment bill will introduce new pay review bodies for school support staff and adult social care workers.

Hughes said the college membership body has repeatedly offered to do research with the unions on the true cost of matching school pay with college staff pay.

The pay claim also demanded more resources for college admin staff, a national policy on delivering guided learning hours and a set of agreed workload and wellbeing protocols.

Hughes said it will carry on with the workload working groups with the unions but said he pushed back at representatives for “frankly” not putting “as much energy” into college workload issues as they do in schools.

Today, the University and College Union also presented the results of its FE consultative ballot at negotiations, which found 86 per cent of members said they would be prepared to take strike action to secure an “above inflation pay rise, binding national bargaining and a national workload agreement.

UCU did not provide FE Week the breakdown of the results, including turnout rates and raw votes. Its FE committee will consider the results and decide on the next steps at a meeting on July 4.

UCU general secretary Jo Grady said: “It is disappointing that even after delaying negotiations until today, the AoC was unable to come to the table with any pay recommendation whatsoever.

“The skills minister has already made clear that additional funding confirmed by the spending review should be used to raise pay.

“Likewise, our consultative ballot gained an overwhelming 86 per cent yes vote in support of strike action. It is imperative that the AoC now comes back tot he table in September with a serious pay recommendation to help close the earnings gap between college teachers and those in schools and avoid potential strike action.

“It is clear the current bargaining framework is not delivering for college workers, causing a recruitment crisis, which in turn is harming student learning. Staff and students urgently need a new deal for FE, centred on higher pay, binding national bargaining and action on workloads.”

The unions were contacted for comment.

Northcoders bags full stack of top grades in first inspection

A coding skills bootcamp provider has been rated ‘outstanding’ by Ofsted for “skilfully” teaching recruits.

In its first full inspection, Manchester-based Northcoders received the highest grade in all inspection areas.

The company runs 13-week skills bootcamps focusing on data in the cloud and software engineering, training about 200 students via online courses.

A team of four inspectors found an “extremely engaging and stimulating curriculum” delivered by staff who had their students’ “best interests at heart”.

Almost all students “swiftly” gain work in the digital industry after learning to tackle complex coding challenges with “persistence, patience and determination”.

Northcoders’ CEO Chris Hill said the company is “incredibly proud” of the Ofsted grade – a “clear validation” of the quality staff strive for and the “life-changing impact” the skills bootcamps have on learners’ lives.

He added: “This result significantly strengthens our position in the competitive tendering landscape, particularly with government and regional funding bodies which we are currently navigating.

“It enhances our credibility, bolsters our bid-winning capability, and positions us as a leading provider of high-quality digital skills training at a time when confidence and rigour in provider selection has never been more critical”.

The company, which specialises in coding training, began delivering bootcamps in 2016. It advertises working with employers including the BBC, the Office for National Statistics, Debenhams and Wren Kitchens.

According to its 2023-24 accounts, it won an 18-month, £10 million Department for Education contract to deliver skills bootcamps in January 2024.

The company had a revenue of £8.8 million that financial year, enrolling 1,144 students and netting a profit after tax of £388,855.

Inspectors found Northcoders has cultivated “very strong links” with an “extensive range” of employer partners to produce an “extremely ambitious, current, and industry-informed curriculum”.

Inspectors were particularly impressed with the company’s teaching using Structured Query Language instead of MongoDB and teaching about complex coding using React instead of jQuery.

Teachers make “extremely good use” of information about students’ starting points to ensure teaching meets their needs and “skilfully” deliver training with precise explanations that learners “consistently” recall.

They follow lectures with well-planned activities and projects and provide “very effective feedback” on students’ performance.

Inspectors also praised Northcoders’ careers support, which includes a variety of useful tutorials and a high proportion of employers offering guaranteed interviews, a key feature of skills bootcamps.

Ofsted pledges specialist inspectors for most visits from November

Ofsted has committed to enlisting “at least” one inspector with “specific” sector experience in “most” of its inspection teams from November.

Today’s announcement on inspection team structures will come into effect when the watchdog’s proposed inspections overhaul is rolled out later this year.

The revamp comes after Ofsted heard during its Big Listen consultation that its inspectors do not always have the necessary expertise of particular types of provision, such as special schools or apprenticeship providers.

The watchdog said it will “make the best use” of Ofsted inspectors’ (OIs) current sector knowledge to deploy them onto visits of providers that match their expertise to “specific” types of provision.

Chief inspector Sir Martyn Oliver said: “All inspection teams will have the right blend of inspection expertise and current sector insight.

“This will help us better understand the context of the schools and colleges we inspect, to provide a fair and accurate report for parents”.

Oliver also announced that inspectors employed as His Majesty’s Inspectors (HMIs) will only be able to lead visits from November in a bid to “draw on expertise” and keep “consistency” across the country.

This means only HMIs, or contracted Ofsted inspectors (OIs) with HMI experience, will lead inspection teams.

An Ofsted spokesperson said around two-thirds to three-quarters of all inspections are currently led by HMIs.

Inspections led by OIs with recent HMI experience (currently within the last three years) will be decided on a case-by-case basis.

“We want to make sure our inspections are as consistent as possible, from Cornwall to Northumberland,” Oliver said.

He added: “We have already put stronger quality assurance measures in place, and utilising the expertise of our workforce as effectively as we can is another significant step forward.”

Oliver encouraged delegates at the Association of Employment and Learning Providers (AELP) conference this week to join Ofsted as an inspector.

An Ofsted spokesperson told FE Week that it currently had around 2,000 people registered as interested in becoming an OI.

Oliver said at the conference: “You can help us even more by contributing your skills and becoming an Ofsted inspector. The more of you that join, the better I can build a peer-led inspectorate, and I better can match inspector expertise to the providers out there. So get involved. Please be part of the system.”

Leadership unions this week warned they will ask their members to quit as inspectors if Ofsted did not delay the rollout of new inspections until September 2026.

The industrial strategy is quietly remaking skills policy

One year into the new government and skills policy is being reshaped. Not by legislation, but by the return of industrial strategy as an engine of reform.

When the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills was closed in 2016, responsibility for further and higher education moved to the Department for Education, marking a shift towards a more education-led approach.

Now the pendulum is swinging back: the new industrial strategy, published this week by the Department for Business and Trade, is shaping where investment flows and is fast becoming an organising framework for skills policy.  
 
Here are five things we’ve learned from this week’s publication.

The industrial strategy is now a major force driving choices in skills policy 

The so-called ‘IS-8’ sectors it identifies are now at the head of the queue for most new skills initiatives, such as the lifelong learning entitlement, foundation apprenticeships and short courses funded by the growth and skills levy.

This focus on key sectors is something we should get used to. The strategy has buy-in from across government, including the Treasury for which it is a helpful mechanism to force spending choices. 

It is deliberately focused on the long term, and this government is both more stable and more ideologically committed to an industrial strategy than the last government to develop one in 2017, so the approach is likely to be in place for the rest of this parliament.

But its sectoral approach is uneven

Looking across the individual sector plans published so far, we see different approaches.  
Advanced manufacturing and defence sectors are to benefit from specific investment and new programmes, building on an existing skills package for construction, whilst others do not.

This shows the government is thinking sectorally: responding to those who can make a compelling case for their skills needs and, crucially, are able to be a partner in meeting them.

For other sectors to benefit from similar attention they will need to develop their own proposals; the workforce strategies due to be developed – starting with one for clean energy – are a crucial opportunity for this.

More growth and skills levy flexibility, but this may be it for now

Plans to allow the levy to fund short courses in IS-8 sectors are the first meaningful example of the flexibility many employers and training providers have been calling for.

The strategy’s reference to these being rolled out in ‘waves’ from next spring suggests it will be phased in over several years, potentially linked to the slow growth in levy receipts over the parliament.

But it is difficult to see where funding for any significant further flexibility will come from in the medium term; the £1.2 billion for skills announced in the spending review will mostly be spent on a rise in 16-19 learners and other pressures, and much of the forecast rise in the apprenticeship budget will go towards reforms already announced. 

Short courses are a welcome change, but confirm the new levy is falling a long way short of the kind of flexibility Labour promised before the election.

Skills England is just one voice in the system

The industrial strategy includes many references to Skills England but these typically refer to convening stakeholders, and informing and implementing policy rather than deciding it. For example, Skills England is tasked with feeding into new workforce strategies for IS-8 sectors but these will be coordinated and published by relevant departments which will be listening to others too. 

Skills England certainly matters. But for all the focus it has received over recent months, it will be just one voice influencing government decisions. Real power over system-wide changes to skills policy continues to lie with the Department for Education and Treasury.

Skills policy is having its moment 

Stepping back, it is striking to see how much more the industrial strategy and various sector plans focus on vocational and technical education than higher education.

There were some warm words for universities, but almost no policy.

This reflects the importance the government attaches to building a stronger and more diverse skills pipeline for the high-growth sectors, but also the political benefits of focusing on skills, given that investment in apprenticeships and other forms of training is far more popular than more money for higher education.