ETF pledges whole-sector movement to professionalise FE staff

The Education and Training Foundation (ETF) has pledged to better service independent and adult training organisations, as part of a new strategy.

The sector body also wants to boost its commercial and philanthropic income amid declining contracts from the Department for Education and work more closely with chartered bodies to award professional status to FE teachers.

“We recognised that we have struggled in the past to service the entire [FE and skills] sector well. But we are committed in this strategy to working across the sector and are clear that we need to adapt our language, programmes and thought leadership activity to facilitate this,” ETF chief executive Katerina Kolyva told FE Week.

The strategy, called Together We Transform, commits ETF to four overall goals: to drive professionalism, improve teaching and learning, champion inclusion, and enable sector change.

The strategy was launched on Monday with a video and a series of case studies on the ETF’s website but without a detailed official document.

Its headline aim, “to support everyone working in the sector by championing the vital role of educators and leaders in transforming the lives of learners aged 14 and over,” might already sound familiar to the sector.

“The core purpose of ETF as a charity has not changed. What is changing is the approach we are taking in engaging with all parts of the sector, ensuring we enable sector change while being inclusive,” Kolyva said.

The organisation’s relaunch comes after a turbulent few years involving a multi-million DfE clawback from its T Level professional development contract and declining income from government contracts.

It was first launched and funded by the then Department for Business, Innovation and Skills in 2013 but is co-owned by sector representative bodies the Association of Colleges (AoC), Association of Employment and Learning Providers (AELP), and adult education network HOLEX.

In 2018, AELP ditched its ownership claiming ETF was not doing enough to support staff involved in delivering apprenticeships. AELP rejoined as co-owners in January. 

Starting a movement

Poor teacher recruitment and retention is weighing heavily on the FE and skills sector, with the FE Commissioner and Ofsted both recently saying the issue is causing some courses to close and damage the quality of others.

The 2019 Augar review of post-18 education and training called for a “greatly enlarged and professionalised FE workforce.” But while much of the attention since has been on attracting skilled industry professionals into teaching roles, ETF is making plans for those already working in the sector. 

Kolyva wants her new strategy to trigger a debate about professionalism in the sector, but is clear she doesn’t want to see a return to the past where teacher registration and CPD were regulated by law.

“I want this to be a movement that the entire sector talks about”

“What we are saying in the strategy is that being a professional is about being clear about a set of professional standards that the profession sets for itself. It’s not for us at ETF to dictate this, but to facilitate and encourage a debate around professionalism,” she said.

“I want this to be a movement. I want this to be a movement that the entire sector talks about.”

It’s been ten years since professionalising the FE workforce was last seriously put under the microscope. An independent review by Lord Lingfield, who now chairs the Chartered Institution for Further Education (CIFE), first proposed an “FE Guild” to lead on professionalism in the sector. The body was established and eventually became ETF

Around that time, the coalition government removed regulations requiring FE teachers to complete a set number of hours of CPD and join a compulsory professional body, the Institute for Learning. 

IfL eventually folded following major controversy over its membership fees. Its functions transferred to what is now the ETF’s Society for Education and Training (SET).

Kolyva wants to avoid a repeat of the “transactional” approach to professionalism.

“I recognise that perhaps in the past we may have gone down that transactional route, which hasn’t helped us. I want to flip that. I don’t want to call it membership. You don’t just pay a fee to get services. It’s not transactional in that way. It’s about ownership of your professional standards.

“I want people to be queuing up to be part of this professionalism journey with us rather than being forced to come to the party if you see what I mean. I want people to say, ‘I am part of this and this is how I have progressed as a result’.”

ETF already holds professional standards for teaching staff and leaders in the sector. Kolyva, who joined ETF in February, said she has heard “different ways” about how they’ve been used in colleges, “from building strategies and values to using the standards in appraisals and job descriptions”.

The new strategy commits ETF to “develop and enhance” those standards alongside a new CPD framework and new practitioner networks across the wider sector.

Kolyva said: “ITPs love it because they feel it’s what’s going to drive a community, to have something in common. I think this is something across adult, charity and local authority organisations. So we have to start rallying for that movement of professionalism.”

The sell

Kolyva admits her new strategy will require ETF to change “a lot,” helped by receiving less money from the government.

“There may be a shift in the type of CPD we focus on, but it will be sector-led and evidence-based. I would expect this shift to be about government continuing to support, but perhaps not fully.

“We expect our income to be more diversified including government funding but also through commercial and philanthropic activity.”

ETF’s “behaviour needs to change” too. Rather than telling the sector what it needs, Kolyva wants her organisation to “be very humble and very facilitative” with “a lot more engagement with the sector.”

According to the body, they have already begun talking to representative bodies in the ITP and adult learning sector to develop specific engagement action plans to improve its offer and take-up.

“It will be for those colleagues working in ITPs and adult education that ultimately will judge whether we deliver for them, and I am committed to working with them directly.”

One idea is to use other professional bodies to grant status to FE teaching and training professionals. 

Currently, teachers who achieve advanced teacher status (ATS) through ETF automatically also receive chartered teacher status from the Chartered College of Teaching.

“We will be developing communities of practice on a thematic basis. So, once you get to a point of excellence, we’ll collaborate with other bodies and the chartered organisations to support that. We can work a lot more towards that collaborative model in the future.”

FE must play its part in tackling engineering’s costly image problem

As I had the chance to tell Robert Halfon and Keighley and Ilkley MP, Robbie Moore at an event at Keighley College recently, outdated stereotypes and a lack of visible role models are preventing women from entering the engineering sector. I know this from my own experience as a woman working in the industry, which is still far too often seen as a ‘male’ career choice.

That should concern everyone, because this exciting, innovative and ever-evolving sector is crying out for talented people – whatever their gender. Yet a 2022 report found that only 16.5 per cent of engineers in the UK were female – better than the 10.5 per cent level of 2010, but slow progress indeed.

Keighley College is home to an industrial centre of excellence for advanced manufacturing and engineering. I studied there, and I know the valuable work it and other further education providers like it around the country are doing to attract young people into the sector. But nationally we have a real problem with encouraging girls and women to consider engineering as a viable career choice.

More than machining

Our education system exacerbates this by often only offering very limited routes in, mostly focusing on areas like tooling or machining. But engineering in the 21st Century is so much more. It spans everything from designing cars, aeroplanes and railway networks to clothing, telecommunications, food science and all kinds of consumer goods.

We need to do much better to showcase the wealth of opportunities on offer. The impression that engineering is all about hands-on work or structural design is long outmoded and really unhelpful.

Woman in the mirror

Another vitally needed change is to get more role models in the public eye to act as ambassadors and inspire our young women. Right now, there are very few well-known female engineers, which presents a huge barrier – as Nobel laureate Professor Frances Arnold recently highlighted.

Speaking to the press, Arnold, an American chemical engineer and the only woman so far to have won the Millennium Technology Prize stressed the importance of making the sector more diverse in terms of plugging skills gaps and boosting innovation.

To this end, the government needs to lead a national outreach drive where successful female engineers visit educational and other settings to talk to young people about their career options. That would be a really practical way of demonstrating that this profession has no intrinsic dependency on any one gender: a powerful message for young minds to hear. This should also be a key aspect of how apprenticeships are promoted.

 Widening the view

It goes without saying that engineers need to have strong STEM skills, which in itself should not be a barrier to women. This summer’s GCSE and A level results showed that, while the trend for more boys studying STEM subjects is continuing, girls perform better in them.

What is less appreciated is that a whole range of ‘softer’ skills, particularly linked to communication, are vital to the industry too. Engineering projects are, after all, all about teamwork – whether they involve huge river bridges or the latest hair dryer.

I have been involved in engineering for just over five years. My current role involves everything from designing products for manufacturing and leading prototype builds to reviewing specifications and leading the change management system. It is a challenging, dynamic and exciting position that I relish.

More than machines

But it’s important for me to always remember the reason I got involved in this industry in the first place: wonder. It all started while watching Robot Wars, and to this day I still aspire to create an all-conquering fighting robot!

Robots are actually a perfect symbol for engineering. They currently play a key role in all kinds of areas including construction, hospital equipment and manufacturing. Their technical wizardry is underpinned by mechanics, material composition and electrical communication systems, which all have professional roles within engineering. The wonder they inspire, meanwhile, is based as much on aesthetics and artistry as it is on the underlying tech, which demonstrates the power of good design.

Their potential is limitless. And, of course, they have no gender.

Literacy is for life, not just the classroom

The majority of my teaching career has been within a mainstream secondary setting as an English teacher and Head of Department. Two years ago, I was lucky enough to join Harrison College, a college which supports students with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) –  mainly, but not exclusively, for students who have an Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) diagnosis.

It soon became apparent to me that developing literacy skills was going to be key to support our students to succeed.

For my first day teaching, I was fully prepared to deliver a ‘mainstream’ lesson to students; quickly I became aware that that was not going to work. Delivering English functional skills would provide our students with a valuable qualification, but that alone would not help them in the world of work.

For some, school had been a challenge, and, for a few, school had not been an option! We had students who had spent several years out of the classroom, and they required more than an examination to make them ‘employable’.

As part of the core study programme, the college introduced two new strands to the English/employability curriculum: ‘literacy in the workplace’ and ‘effective communication’.

All students access ‘literacy in the workplace’. This subject takes English skills (writing, reading, speaking, and listening) and transfers the application of those skills to a work-based focus. Working cross-curricula, ‘literacy in the workplace’ is able to support all students on their journey into work by delivering examples of real-life scenarios and responding appropriately.

One project that we are currently covering with our year 1 students is the ability to identify key information and prepare an email, report, and/or a presentation for an employer. Even though some students have their English grade 4+ or equivalent, they are required to take part in this lesson; Skills can become rusty, and for some of our students whose lessons were affected by Covid, their centre-assessed grades do not fully reflect their knowledge.

Our course is very much focused on life after college

When the employability team are exploring internships for our students, we found that employers positively responded to the fact that literacy hadn’t ended just because school had and that by increasing the length of time studied and focusing on the employability benefits, we are helping students make the leap from classroom to employment.

Within our college, we have a small group of students who struggle with their literacy more profoundly than others. Their needs are more complex, and their attendance may have been more sporadic. For one reason or another, these students require something more to help them bridge the gap and prepare for work. ‘Effective communication’ is a method for us to work with the students and not only improve their communication but also their confidence.

The course is very much focused on life after college and employment; all lessons aim to provide students with the skills they need. At the beginning of the year, we began by looking at bias and fake news – some of our students are quite naïve and believed everything they heard or read.

We unpicked several news articles and identified the impartiality/partiality of each whilst discussing the purpose. But why did we do this? The link was once again made to the workplace. Imagine if you are asked to identify information for your line manager, or you need feedback from your colleagues. Is everything you are told always accurate? What could influence responses?

After the Christmas break, we are moving on to appropriate workplace conversations. Although this will be challenging for some (they don’t always like to speak), we will reinforce the importance of this skill and how beneficial it will be when they leave college and enter the world of work.

Literacy is not just an issue for small pockets of students. Nationally, we are facing a literacy crisis. To make a difference, we need to collectively ensure that literacy isn’t something that just belongs in a classroom.

Family learning: Where next for the ‘hidden jewel’ of adult education?

Family learning programmes have had to fight for survival in a competitive funding environment that demands quantifiable outcomes for learners.

But the provision, which involves adults and children learning together, now seems to be enjoying a bit of a revival, with over 20 per cent more people taking up family learning courses in 2022-23 than the previous year.

Schools and local authorities speak passionately about the impact of this hidden part of the adult education system, which can simultaneously improve English and maths for adults and children, and help to close skills gaps.

Advocates insist that family learning holds the key to engaging hard-to-reach, economically inactive families. They claim the long-term benefits extend to improved mental health and community wellbeing, as well as helping unemployed people find work.

Earlier this year the Campaign for Learning, part of NCFE, established the National Centre for Family Learning as a focal point for the fragmented sector of practitioners, who work for local authority services, specialist adult learning institutes and charities among others.

The centre already has over 1,000 members who it estimates are working with 240,000 families a year.

Campaign for Learning’s national director Juliette Collier believes these families include people who “would never have gone into college, and who wouldn’t even have the confidence to look at you when they start these programmes.

“If you found school irrelevant and humiliating, and you associate it with failure, why would you go back into education? Well, you might do if you wanted the best for your children.”

family learning materials

Family (learning) history

During the Blair-Brown years, cash flowed into family learning programmes, often taking place in children’s centres (many of which have since shut down) and schools, and in some cases funded through the European Social Fund. In the years since much of that funding dried up or was restricted to delivering programmes in deprived areas.

In the 10 years up to 2021/22, the number of adult learners on community learning programmes (which includes family learning) fell by 55 per cent.

It looked like the death knell was sounding for family learning last year when the Department for Education consulted on proposals to end the funding of non-qualification provision that is not directly linked to employment outcomes, from 2024-25 onwards. It took an outcry from the sector, for family learning, health and wellbeing and community integration to be reinstated as acceptable outcomes.

The number of community learning students climbed last year by 8 per cent to 328,690. And those involved in family learning jumped 21 per cent to 49,490, making up 15 per cent of the total.

However, there were still fewer community learning participants last year than in the years leading up to the pandemic. Over half a million students a year took community learning courses prior to 2018/19.

DfE data on family learning

Family learning recipients

Last year more than a fifth of working-age adults were economically inactive, including one in four women. It is these people that family learning programmes generally seek to target.

They consist of two streams. Wider family learning programmes, which Collier describes as the “gentle first steps” getting reluctant learners in the door, made up 10 per cent of overall community learning participants in 2022/23.

And 5 per cent took family literacy, language or numeracy programmes, normally “explicit” courses which lead to practical qualifications. 

In her previous life as a community outreach worker for Warwickshire Council, Collier met Becky, a mum who had missed much of her own schooling due to illness and lacked the skills to read to her two children.

Becky was too anxious to dive straight into a literacy class, so Collier persuaded her to do a cracker-making session in the run-up to Christmas. That built up Becky’s confidence and, from there, she went on to courses in literacy, computing and numeracy.

She could then read to her children, aged 3 and 11, and got her first job aged 31.

On one occasion, Collier visited Becky in her high-rise flat, where “nappies and rubbish” lined the hallway. But Becky’s family learning certificates took pride of place sellotaped to the living-room wall. “That’s how much it meant to her,” she says.

Similarly, the parenting course that Henriett Toth took in 2019 at her local children’s centre run by Learning Unlimited, which provided a creche for her small children, was a “lifeline.”

She says: “It was also good to learn that others were experiencing parenting challenges in similar ways to mine, that we all fail from time to time.”

She has since done family learning courses in maths and supporting SEND children, and is now a teaching assistant.

Henriett Toth

Hidden benefits

Toth’s progression onto work in a school is a common route: a 2004 study by Horne and Haggard, which tracked families up to four years after they had completed family learning programmes, found that a third went on to further learning or training, one in five volunteered at their child’s school or wider community and one in seven became paid classroom assistants.

Most parents said their “next step” activities would not have happened had they not participated in family learning.

Schools are currently struggling to recruit and retain support staff, with almost 10,000 school teaching assistant roles currently posted on the jobs site Indeed.

But, despite family learning courses offering schools an opportunity to train up the next pipeline of support staff, schools are not always happy to host them.

Sue Pember, policy director for adult education body Holex, says “a lot of” family learning happened in schools before Covid. But since the pandemic, some heads are “reluctant” to reopen outside normal hours.

Collier recalls one primary head who was hesitant to provide space for family learning, who told her that he “only sees parents when they come in to eyeball him”.

But, after 29 women were trained as teaching assistants through her programme, his attitude shifted. “We gave the certificates out to parents in the school assembly,” she says.

Sue Pember of Holex

On location

At Realise Future’s working together class at Trimley Primary in Suffolk, participants are learning about the developmental milestones that children should be hitting at different ages. 

The course, which consists of a two-hour session each week over 12 weeks, is not what most people think of as family learning. There are no children present. But the learning that these parents gain helps them not only to understand their children better but acts as a stepping stone onto a school support role.

The course includes a mandatory classroom placement, for which participants write diaries to note observations about pupil behaviour.

The tutor, Bernadette White, an experienced primary teacher herself, finds it “much harder” to get parents interested in family learning courses since the pandemic.

Whereas pre-Covid she had a waiting list for the course, today’s class only has four learners, all mums with children at the school.

She blames a “communication breakdown” between schools and parents, as “parents weren’t encouraged to come back into” schools after Covid. “It’s a shame because it’s so important that parents feel they can come in to air their grievances and anxieties.”

White splits them into two groups, each exploring what the national curriculum says about developmental goals for five and seven-year-olds. They draw and label stickmen accordingly.

The goal of “tying shoelaces” sparks hot debate, because shoes with laces are apparently no longer fashionable.

White says parents often express “genuine surprise” when they discover on the course “just how much children are learning at school”.

Carrie, a mum of three, is hoping the course will help get her “foot in the door” to become a teaching assistant. The course has taught her that “primary school is hard” for children.

“I said to my husband, imagine if you had to be at work all day with people of all different levels, and have lunch with them all. Yet we expect it not to be ridiculously stressful for these kids.”

Susannah Chambers

Family learning courses

Family learning practitioners often have scope to be creative with their curriculums.

Susannah Chambers, a former family learning manager for Nottinghamshire council, recalls writing a “Family Bloodhound” course using materials about the world land speed record-holding car, which incorporated engineering and maths. Another course, about Doctor Who, aimed to teach science and technology.

In Suffolk, Realise Futures delivers 91 per cent of family learning.

The company’s initial engagement activities include cookery workshops, sessions on e-safety and Snappy Stories, a workshop White runs in which parents and reception-age children do creative storytelling together.

Last week’s stories involved “lots of fairies, and an evil pea!”.

Realise Learning’s more in-depth programmes include film-making and investigations in science, which are underpinned by the primary curriculum. Students progress onto courses in mental health, working in the childcare sector or CV writing and interview skills.

Family learning can also be a godsend for migrant families wanting to learn English and feel part of their local community.

In London, the Welcome Project, run by Learning Unlimited, delivers weekly sessions in children’s centres for newly-arrived families living in hotel accommodation, which involve arts and crafts and play activities. The sessions give families respite from cramped hotel rooms, and mums can ask questions of the professionals there to support them.

The Welcome Project

Uncertain future

The family learning uptick has been partly driven by numeracy-related courses provided as part of the government’s £559 million Multiply programme, which includes sessions in family budgeting and homework clubs.

But Multiply is set to end in 2025 and the long-term prospects for family learning are uncertain.

The Skills for Jobs white paper pledged to “prioritise the courses and qualifications that enable people to get great jobs” to “support our economy”.

It led to the drawing up this year of 38 Local Skills Improvement Plans, of which only one – Herefordshire’s – gives a passing reference to family learning provision.

The Campaign for Learning has been engaging with shadow skills minister Seema Malhotra, in the hope of persuading Labour to secure a stable future for the sector if the party wins the election.

In Scotland, family learning provision is mandatory in early years settings, and the Campaign for Learning is calling for it to become a universal entitlement in England too as part of the upcoming expansion of free childcare provision.

Collier believes such a move could help to address the current shortage of early years workers.

But Chambers sees family learning as being about much more than recruiting more childcare workers. She calls it the “jewel in the crown of adult learning” in how it “engages people and keeps them on a progression route”.

“Family learning saves the government money on health and crime outcomes, because it is helping children communicate better with their parents.

“Over the years, it has been absolutely heart-breaking that it has not had the profile it deserves.”

When Collier bumped into Becky recently, she had just read the eulogy at her nan’s funeral – something she never thought possible four years ago.

“That was incredibly moving to hear,” said Collier. “Family learning really is the foundation of creating lifelong learning.”

Devolution is not incompatible with learner demand – but it is a barrier

I am convinced what Bon Jovi’s famous Living on a prayer was really about was a demand-led adult skills system. Let me explain.

Got to hold on to what we’ve got

The introduction of the apprenticeship levy saw a seismic shift in employer-led funding. While employers rightly still challenge whether the system is genuinely an employer-led system, the funding itself is definitely demand-led. Indeed, depending on the outcome of the election, the levy might be opened up to fund other employer learning in addition to apprenticeships.

However, for individuals accessing FE it is still very much based on central government-controlled funding model. And when it comes to adult learners devolved authorities also continue to exercise a lot of control, with over half of adult funding allocated and tendered through them.

The question we should be asking is ‘how can we have a proper learner demand-led system?’. The question we’re actually left with is ‘how can such a thing even be compatible with devolution?’.

We can probably answer both of these questions. “[whoa-oh] we’ll give it a shot”

We’re half-way there

Level 4 and above learning is getting the Lifelong Learning Entitlement and finally supporting a unitised approach to learning. But why does the government think it is appropriate for higher-level courses and not for level 3 and below? This stinks of bias, and only makes things tough, so tough for the already under-resourced.

As to cost, there’s no reason the policy couldn’t be rolled out in phases. Let’s not forget there is an adult entitlement to level 3 and below learning too. We just make it impossible to access!

Meanwhile, level 4 learners get access to £28,000 of funding while others don’t.  With such an individual account (which includes grant funding for the entitlement along with loan funding), there could be all sorts of exciting opportunities to provide tax incentives for individuals and employers to add to their pots.

You live for the fight

Those who argue against a learner demand-led system always quote the scandalous failure of the individual learner accounts over 20 years ago. There are probably three key lessons that need to be heeded:

The provider free-for-all

At the time, there were 8910 providers, with no quality control. We know how to do provider registers and appropriate regulatory controls now. From day one, our existing registers would safeguard every learner and every penny spent.

Horses for courses

The anything goes approach to courses that characterised individual learner accounts is no longer even imaginable. Clearly, we need a clear set of approved, funded courses, which should and easily could include approved units to allow a unitised approach to learning, while still working towards a full qualification.

Tech utopianism

IT systems quite simply didn’t work. But the future promised then is with us now. Even the possibility of a learner account app is readily deliverable.

We’ll make it I swear

The fact is that a fully learner demand-led system is possible. The challenge is to make it work in a devolved world – one that, depending on your viewpoint, is either creating a postcode lottery or responding to local need.

If we agree that every citizen has a right to access the same funding for training wherever they are in the country if they have a learning need – which is surely the premise of the LLE – then the key concern is not really about learners, but about the role of devolved authorities in such a system.

But they needn’t worry for them. Baby it’s okay. There are specific regional needs, skills deficits and priorities. Someone has to stimulate the supply and demand to meet these needs, and devolved authorities are perfectly placed to be given funding and powers to do so, as well as identify gaps and stimulate or pump prime colleges and providers to deliver the necessary programmes.

So take my hand, and let’s build on the LLE to deliver the kind of genuine learner demand-led system that works for all learners. By giving them the funding, we can stimulate employers, providers and create a bespoke role for devolved authorities to deliver for communities. More than that, we can ensure fewer of our potential learners go on living on a prayer.

What Labour and Lib Dems can learn from Singapore’s SkillsFuture Credit scheme

The debate around the Advanced British Standard and possible changes to the apprenticeship levy since the autumn party conference season has meant that little discussion has taken place on another reform proposal for the further education sector which is shared by both the Labour party and the Liberal Democrats. This is the idea of individuals having access to their own accounts to pay for lifelong learning or upskilling.

Labour outline their proposal as “the development of Individual Learning Accounts (ILAs), which would share the cost of learning between the individual, the employer and the state – and, where appropriate, the devolved budgets to Combined Authorities and elected Mayors”.

Bringing back a proposal included in their 2019 election manifesto, the Lib Dems are calling for the introduction of “Skills Wallets for every adult, giving them £10,000 to spend on education and training throughout their lives; these Skills Wallets will empower people to develop new skills so that they can thrive in the technologies and industries that are key to the UK’s economic future”.

Of course, the last Labour government presided over a short-lived ILA scheme in 2000-01 dragged down by an underestimation of its expected use and widespread allegations of fraud due to lack of proper oversight. But given the lessons learned and technological advances, it would be foolish not to consider some form of resurrection.

Learning from Singapore

Both parties will hopefully be looking closely at Singapore’s SkillsFuture Credit scheme as a successful example of learning accounts working effectively since the scheme’s introduction in 2015. As of October 2023, over 1.2 million Singaporeans have used their SkillsFuture Credit and this represents approximately 30 per cent of the eligible population.

The scheme has three elements which relate to whether or not the individual is in employment. The Lifelong Learning Credit is targeted at working adults aged 25 or over who are looking to upgrade their skills to stay relevant in their current jobs or to pursue new career opportunities. It is a one-off credit of S$500 (approx. £328) that can be used to pay for a wide range of approved skills-related courses, including online courses, part-time courses, and full-time courses to pursue lifelong learning or upskilling.

Devolution offers the opportunity to be innovative with adult skills funding

The SkillsFuture Credit is different in that all Singaporeans aged over 25, regardless of employment status or career goals, are eligible and they can obtain a yearly credit of S$500 that can be used for courses covering a wide array of skills, from technical and vocational to soft skills and digital literacy.

The third element is made up of SkillsFuture Work-Study Programmes. These programmes are designed to offer a blend of work experience and education, allowing individuals to earn a wage while learning on the job. All three elements are backed by a well-resourced Careers Guidance Framework to support individuals in making their choices.

Similar to Labour’s proposals, SkillsFuture Credits allow employer and individual contributions in addition to the government funding.  In 2022, employers contributed a total of S$1.2 billion to the scheme while individual learners or employees contributed a total of S$200 million. The Singapore government has invested around S$10 billion in the scheme since 2015 and has committed an additional S$10 billion over the next five years (2023 to 2027).

Fit for LSIP priorities

The choice of courses is wide, but mindful of English devolution and the arrival of LSIPs with their sector skills priorities, policymakers here should note that for ‘high-demand sectors’ in Singapore, a S$500 top-up to a credit is available and 15 sectors are beneficiaries. There are also other SkillsFuture initiatives covering: digital workplace; mid-career professionals; older adults; and persons with disabilities.

When proposals for bringing back ILAs have been put to central government, the response has not been positive and there are no indications that this is about to change. However, devolution and the deeper deals offer the mayoral combined authorities the opportunity to be innovative with their adult skills funding. They should grasp it by piloting these accounts.

LCG case latest: DfE defends overruling AEB tender scores

The Department for Education has batted away claims that it unlawfully overruled the scores of a major group of training providers in the latest adult education budget procurement. 

Revised defence documents were filed by DfE lawyers on Friday in response to fresh allegations raised by Learning Curve Group (LCG) and its seven subsidiary training companies last month. 

LCG launched a High Court case in August demanding a re-run of the £75 million procurement after all eight of its bids were unsuccessful. They claimed that the department breached its duties under procurement regulations in its evaluation of their bid, and were “deprived of a real chance of winning a contract”. 

The case rests on a row over Learning Curve’s Q1B1 submission – a template for bidders’ mobilisation and delivery plan which the DfE said should have included forecasts for training courses and learner numbers. A strict two-page limit was in place on the template, and bidders needed to score of at least 75 (good) to be successful. 

DfE claimed the group’s submissions did not include the necessary detail to achieve a high score for Q1B1, namely an explanation of how their plans align with corresponding “volumes and values and spreadsheet”. LCG allegedly recorded forecasts for learning aim starts for sector subject areas rather than courses. 

LCG countered this following sight of voluntary disclosure material which showed DfE’s evaluators scored their Q1B1 response as ‘very good’ – a score of 100. The material also revealed that non-evaluators were responsible for downgrading LCG’s response from ‘very good’ to ‘satisfactory’ – a score of 50. 

Learning Curve also claimed that a “reasonably well-informed and normally diligent tenderer” would read and evaluate Q1B1 alongside the volumes template that was previously denied by DfE. 

But DfE has now admitted that “a reasonably well-informed and diligent tenderer” would have understood that the mobilisation plan and the volumes template would be read – but not evaluated – together. 

DfE’s fresh defence admits that the procurement evaluators “failed to apply” the award criteria for that crucial question because of the alleged missing information. As a result, the usual “consensus score” process, where two evaluators agree on a final score for a question, did not apply and the lower ‘satisfactory’ score was decided by a moderator. 

The “major gap” in information, DfE claimed, meant LCG’s response couldn’t score higher than ‘satisfactory,’ contradicting the evaluators’ original judgement. 

DfE lawyers maintain overruling evaluators’ scores in this way was lawful because the moderators “applied the published award criteria” to LCG’s submission through its quality assurance process. 

It was also revealed that moderators intervened to revise Q1B1 scores for other providers’ bids. 

LCG alleged that voluntary disclosure documents showed that the department evaluated Q1B1 responses from different bidders “on an inconsistent and unequal basis”. 

DfE confessed to this in its latest defence. It said: “It is admitted and averred that the evaluators originally evaluated different bidders’ responses to Q1B1 on
an inconsistent and unequal basis. The defendant accordingly sought to remedy that failing in quality assurance, which it did.” 

LCG declined to comment. The case continues.

Overseas FE teachers exempt from new immigration earnings thresholds

FE teachers from overseas will be exempt from the government’s new minimum earnings thresholds for visas, FE Week understands.

Home secretary James Cleverly unveiled plans earlier this week to cut down on net migration by increasing the minimum salary required for foreign workers to apply for a skilled worker visa by 48 per cent to £38,700. 

Certain occupations on national pay scales, which includes teachers in schools, further and higher education, would continue to be exempt from the new higher earnings threshold and be eligible for a visa if earning at least £26,200, according to Home Office guidance. 

Under guidance published in 2021, overseas FE teachers can apply for a skilled worker visa if they can speak, read and write English; are employed by a licenced Home Office employer sponsor; and the role pays at least £20,480 or the relevant minimum rate for FE teachers in England – £20,508 for an unqualified lecturer.

Applicants can also be recruited into FE if they have the following visas: a graduate visa, a youth mobility visa, a family visa, or a skilled worker visa.

Current FE workforce data from the Department for Education does not specify the visa status of staff in FE. Yet, the gap in FE recruitment remains large and sector leaders say that more effort must be made to fund colleges and training providers if the government wants to increase reliance on domestic workers.

At the end of the 2021/22 academic year, there were 5.4 vacant teaching positions across all FE providers per 100 teaching positions. 

Ministers lined up to defend the migration reforms, claiming they would encourage businesses to invest more in training for domestic workers.

Robert Jenrick, who resigned as immigration minister days after the reforms were announced, said: “My message for big business is it is not right that they reach for the easy lever of foreign labour in the first instance – we want them to be improving and investing in British workers,” he said.

But FE leaders have flagged rigid benefits rules, low education funding rates, and low teacher pay as obstacles.

Emma Meredith, director of skills policy and global engagement at the Association of Colleges, told FE Week: “If the government is serious about filling vacancies it will need to invest more in colleges to open up opportunities for all people in the UK to train.

“That requires better funding rates so that colleges can attract and retain expert staff, more places for adults to learn flexibly whilst working, and more opportunity for people in receipt of Universal Credit to get the training they need.”

Other reforms included overseas health and social care workers not being allowed to bring in dependants, and applicants of family visas will have to declare a minimum salary of £38,700.

Simon Ashworth, director of policy at AELP, said these restrictions will make it harder for employers to attract candidates.

“The government clearly wants UK nationals to upskill but this once again highlights the need for a joined-up national skills strategy. Now, we’re left asking how can we train our own adult care workers when the funding rates are so low that it’s uneconomical for providers to deliver?

“As an absolute minimum, all apprenticeships should be funded at a rate of £5,000 per annum and the government needs to urgently look again at the exit requirements for apprenticeships. Perhaps then we might see the country able to fill its skills gaps,” he said.

Meredith agreed, and added that the migration changes could harm key sectors on the DfE’s priority list such as engineering, construction, digital and health and care.

“The skills bootcamps are part of the answer, but much more needs to be done over the long term to reverse the severe cuts to learning and training opportunities we have seen over the last decade and more. In 2003, there were 5.5 million learning opportunities in England for adults, now there are fewer than 1.5 million,” she added. 

A DfE spokesperson said: “We are investing an additional £3.8 billion over this Parliament to boost access to a range of skills offers. This includes continuing to offer a range of Skills Bootcamps, free courses at Level 3 and working with employers to create more apprenticeship opportunities so businesses have access to the skilled workers they need.”

Migration reforms include:

  • Increasing the salary threshold for a skilled worker visa to £38,700
  • Overseas teachers exempted from the salary threshold
  • Reducing the number of occupations and review the “shortage occupation list”
  • Scrapping 20 per cent salary discount for jobs on shortage occupation list
  • Health and social care workers exempt from salary threshold rise but banned from bringing dependants
  • Increasing the minimum income for family visas to £38,700, from £18,600
  • UK citizens must earn £38,700 to bring in dependants
  • Minimum income for family visas raised to £38,700 to bring dependants in

Awarding giants silent as bids open to run ‘Gen 2’ T Levels

The awarding giants that deliver the seven T Levels put up for relicensing are keeping tight-lipped over whether they will bid for the contracts again.

Pearson, City & Guilds, and NCFE won the race to design and deliver the flagship qualifications during waves one and two of the rollout that got underway in 2020.

Their contracts run for an initial five years, at which point the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education launches another procurement to seek bids to “refresh” the courses.

The current awarding bodies must submit another bid if they want to be considered for running the qualifications in the future. 

But all three have refused to say whether they will apply to recontract after IfATE launched the process for T Levels “Generation 2” last week, stating this decision is “commercially sensitive”.

FE Week understands that the awarding bodies have been running the contracts at a loss which could make them think twice about staying involved in T Levels. The running of the qualifications has also been difficult due to several layers of bureaucracy at decision-making level.

IfATE is responsible for procurement and management of the technical qualification (TQ) within T Levels, and the awarding body is responsible for designing and delivering the TQ; Ofqual regulates the TQ and the Department for Education issues T Level certificates, and is responsible for overall T Level policy.

There is also the new hurdle of the prime minister’s proposed Advanced British Standard, which would replace A-levels and T Levels in the next 10 years. 

The attractiveness of T Levels has taken a hit since the announcement in October, with leaders warning the already difficult task of selling T Levels to parents, students and employers has now been made even harder.

IfATE addressed this issue when it launched the relicensing process, insisting that T Levels will, “in the meantime, remain the gold standard employer-shaped technical qualification at level 3 for 16- to 19-year-olds”, adding that it is “vital that the Generation 2 qualifications are refreshed and developed to the highest standard”.

While seven T Levels have this week been put up for relicensing, three of the qualifications – offered by NCFE in health, healthcare science and science – that were part of the wave two rollout have been left out.

All of those qualifications suffered with well-publicised issues which led to results being regraded in their first year. Various changes have been made to the content of the T Levels over the past year to make them fit for purpose.

A spokesperson for NCFE said: “For the health, healthcare science and science T Levels, we are under contract with IfATE and will continue to deliver these contracts. The future procurement is being managed by IfATE and we recommend you liaise with them directly on the timings of this. 

“In terms of our bidding intentions for the T Level routes in the procurement round announced this week, this information is commercially sensitive. We continue to be focused on ensuring the T Levels we deliver are rigorous, high-quality, and meet the needs of those in industry. We will, of course, inform our providers of our plans, as soon as we are able to do so.”

Procurement documents, seen by FE Week, state the health and science T Levels “will be extended by one cohort”. FE Week understands that a separate relicensing process for the health and science T Levels will be conducted in 2024.

Pearson and City & Guilds both said their decision to bid for T Level contracts is also commercially sensitive.

NCFE delivers three of the seven T Levels part of this current tender, while Pearson & City and Guilds are responsible for two each. The contracts, expected to be awarded in July 2024 for delivery from September 2025, are worth £28,093,974 in total.

Chris Morgan, IfATE’s deputy director for commercial, said: “This exciting opportunity will see the first two waves of T Levels, rolled out from 2020, going back to market for bidding in three key sectors. We welcome widespread interest and look forward to receiving submissions from awarding organisations.”

The 7 T Levels up for relicensing

T Level nameCurrent AOContract value
Education and Early YearsNCFE
£5,526,068
Design, Surveying and Planning for ConstructionPearson£3,426,668
Building Services Engineering for ConstructionCity & Guilds£3,962,768
Onsite ConstructionCity & Guilds£3,902,468
Digital Business ServicesNCFE£2,786,268
Digital Support ServicesNCFE£3,789,868
Digital Production, Development and DesignPearson£4,699,868