Labour: Sunak’s Advanced British Standard plans ‘careless’ and ‘undeliverable’

The prime minister has undermined efforts to raise the parity of technical education through his “careless” and “undeliverable” announcement to replace T Levels and A-levels, the shadow education secretary has said. 

Bridget Phillipson attacked Rishi Sunak’s 10-year plan to create the Advanced British Standard (ABS) during a fringe event this afternoon ahead of her mainstage speech at the Labour party conference on Wednesday morning. 

She was asked how a Labour government would balance parity between academic and technical education routes for young people following the prime minister’s announcement last week that A-levels and T Levels would be merged to form the ABS, with increased classroom teaching hours.

T Levels were designed to be the Conservative government’s technical version of rigorous and respected A-level qualifications. But they only launched in 2020 and aren’t yet fully rolled out.

Sunak said technical education is “not given the respect it deserves” but he is “changing all of that, pulling one of the biggest levers we have to change the direction of our country” with the creation of the ABS.

The ABS would require a minimum of 1,475 teaching hours over two years and all students will continue English and maths regardless of prior attainment.

“What we see from the prime minister is undeliverable in its current form,” Phillipson said.

“To then effectively junk T Levels having botched their roll-out I find absolutely extraordinary and staggering.

“And I think it does nothing to bring greater parity in terms of the academic and the technical to behave in such a cavalier way when it comes to the roll-out of such an important qualification.

“So I find it just unbelievable that he would act in such a careless manner. But then, I think that’s Rishi Sunak and the Conservatives down to a tee.”

But Labour is yet to reveal its plans for 16 to 19 education.

Phillipson’s swipe at Sunak comes months after the Labour party pledged to pause and review the defunding of level 3 applied general qualifications, like BTECs, should it win the next election. This commitment was repeated at Labour’s conference by the new shadow skills minister, Seema Malhotra in various appearances at fringe events today.

Labour has supported T Levels but it remains to be seen whether they will unveil their own version of Sunak’s baccalaureate-style ABS with the extra teaching hours and continued English and maths.

Labour leader Keir Starmer announced yesterday that a Labour government would introduce ‘technical excellence colleges’ – a new status for existing colleges awarded through a bidding process for colleges delivering in-demand specialist courses. He is expected to reveal more details in his main stage speech at the conference tomorrow. 

Politicians have finally embraced FE. But why now?

This party conference season has firmly placed the spotlight on colleges and apprenticeship training providers. Both Labour and the Conservatives have said they will prioritise technical education as we head into the general election.

The significance of this damascene conversion is not lost on those working in the sector, who have had well over a decade of feeling under-appreciated. While this new focus is to be welcomed, it begs the question: “Why now?”

Apart from the obvious need to fill the massive skills gaps in the economy, which cause productivity to flag and hamper growth, the striking answer is that prioritising vocational education and training is massively popular with the electorate.

A report by Public First for Progressive Britain, charged with finding out voters’ views on how to pay for university, uncovered resounding support for colleges and apprenticeships.

Conducted without the initial intention of comparing support for FE versus HE, our research discovered an overwhelming, untapped public endorsement for increased investment in FE.

The findings, drawn from a huge nationally representative poll of 8,000 people and focus group discussions with parents in key constituencies, underscored remarkably high levels of support for vocational training, particularly in the form of apprenticeships. Participants expressed a palpable frustration over politicians’ disproportionate emphasis on higher education.

In the polling data, vocational options such as expanding apprenticeships for 18-year-olds (48 per cent) and allocating more funding for training courses for working-age adults (34 per cent) emerged as significantly more popular than other tertiary education policies, including restoring maintenance grants for university students and lowering tuition fees.

In broader terms, the research suggests that facilitating greater access to apprenticeships and college courses would be positively received by a substantial portion of the population. Importantly for the Labour Party, this approach resonates well with key voter groups.

Importantly for Labour, this approach resonates well with key voter groups.

The data showed that 52 per cent of individuals who voted Conservative in 2019 and are now leaning towards Labour consider apprenticeships a priority for over-18 education funding. Moreover, 59 per cent of those who were Conservative voters in 2019 and are currently undecided also prioritise apprenticeships.

In a notable trade-off, more than two-thirds (67 per cent) of the public voiced the opinion that there is a need for more people to go to college to acquire vocational skills, as opposed to only 20 per cent advocating for increased university enrolment. Among Labour voters, 60 per cent held this view, but among those who have switched allegiance from the Conservatives, a substantial 72 per cent shared the sentiment. Even among those Conservatives currently uncertain about their vote, a striking 80 per cent expressed the need to focus more on colleges.

The qualitative data from focus groups further underscored widespread support for apprenticeships. Discussions on boosting the number of apprenticeships emerged in every single focus group, with particular prominence in groups comprised of the least well-off parents. The enthusiasm for apprenticeships was largely fuelled by a collective aversion to the prospect of long-term debt and the overall cost associated with higher education.

One father of a secondary school pupil in Wycombe provided an oft-repeated narrative around going to university, “the thought of just coming out of higher education with a giant debt, when you can actually go and get the same qualifications and get paid and make progress in a company at the same time.”

Apprenticeships were perceived as a more economically viable option, offering an equivalent quality of education and promising career prospects without the financial burden.

While there is undoubtedly widespread support for higher education, both in principle and practice, our research brings a significantly higher level of public endorsement for further education and apprenticeships than politicians currently acknowledge.

The call to action is clear: There is a high level of public support for politicians who champion FE, apprenticeships, and training opportunities, driven by a real enthusiasm for practical, skills-oriented education across society.

Excluding adults from FE reform is a costly political error

Government education announcements are often a popular last resort when the mood in the room is souring. It certainly felt like that at the Conservative Party conference, when Rishi Sunak announced that his “main funding priority in every spending review from now on will be in education”.

Is this the prime ministerial equivalent of shouting “Free drinks!” after delivering your best man’s speech? Or is it a real vision from a prime minister looking to tackle the very real problems besetting education today?

The only clear direction he gave was on the Advanced British Standard. It may well be true that five-year-olds currently entering the education system will benefit from the prime minister’s Advanced BS plan. But what about the people who need support right now?

Right now, post-19 education is being hung out to dry. Sunak rightly argued that education “is the best way to spread opportunity and create a more prosperous society”. So why is he ignoring one of the most obvious routes to spreading opportunity and creating a more prosperous society? What is he planning to do right now for adults whose lack of qualifications – and sometimes basic literacy and numeracy – is keeping them out of the workplace?

The Resolution Foundation predicts that 300,000 extra people will fall into absolute poverty next year. This is not surprising in the face of increasing unemployment, the death of the high street and customer-facing roles, a growing need to retrain and upskill, an unmanageable mental-health crisis and so much more.

Earlier this week, a new study from the National Literacy Trust and Experian revealed that 436 out of 533 (81 per cent) of English political constituencies contain at least one ward that has significant issues with literacy. 

And government statistics suggest that at least 17 million adults have numeracy levels we expect of primary-school children. This is 49 per cent of the working-age population. Research suggests this costs the UK economy £20 billion a year.

Post-19 education is being hung out to dry

Government must put as much focus on adult learning as on the rest of education. It’s not just the under-19s who need support.

We see the effect of adult learning first-hand. Forty-five per cent of our learners who were unemployed found work after taking courses with us. And 43 per cent of employed learners reported increased earnings. Furthermore, 45 per cent of learners who were unemployed prior to studying with us had stopped claiming benefits six months later.

And it isn’t just employability outcomes that matter, but also wellbeing and health. Ninety-two per cent of our learners made fewer visits to their GP than the national average, saving the NHS approximately £1.6m. In addition, 55 per cent of learners with a mental health condition felt their course improved their mental health. And 45 per cent of our learners say learning with us helped them to make friends, reducing social isolation. 

If the prime minister wants to boost the economy and prove that education really can make a difference, he needs to extend his funding support to those who are falling through the gaps right now.

We welcome the 6.5 per cent pay rise for teachers working in schools and the £500 million investment colleges have received to give their staff pay rises over two years. But what about those in the post-19 sector? They are working hard to equip adults with the skills they need to enter the workforce, but have again been forgotten.

The government must immediately set out a package of funding that will enable adult-education tutors to receive a 6.5 per cent pay rise too, bringing them in line with their colleagues in schools and other colleges.

And in terms of reform, government must remember that many adults left school without GCSEs. Focusing interest, investment and improvements on level 3 qualifications will fail many who aren’t ready to take that step – even if many will need to once they are able.

We wait to hear what the Labour conference will bring, but if either partly leader means to “spread opportunity and create a more prosperous society”, this must involve putting as much interest and funding into post-19 adult education as schools and colleges.

Our learners and our economy depend on it. 

The Advanced British Standard could be the making of T Levels

The reactions were, perhaps, all too predictable. When the Prime Minister announced bringing together A and T Levels into a single framework to create the Advanced British Standard, sector leaders responded with either glee or dismay at this supposed early end of the T level journey. The fact that the announcement was made in national T Levels Week (of all weeks) only added to the chorus of derision.

However, contrary to the sector rhetoric, the Advanced British Standard does not appear to constitute the scrapping of T Levels (or A-levels for that matter). The plan is to merge them, building on the best of both to provide greater flexibility and choice for young people. The stand-alone qualifications may disappear, as would the current either/or binary choice between technical and academic education; but the main components look like they would remain. There would still be technical cores, occupational specialisms and industry placements (Sounds like a T Level to me.) but in this framework you’d also be able to take an academic option alongside. Or vice versa.

It looks suspiciously like what they’ve been doing so well in Germany for a long time – and about time too. Now, before anyone thinks I’ve become a government spokesperson for the awfully named Advanced British Standard, I won’t get too excited until we have more detail. A lot can happen in a decade, which is how long the government has warned this would take to fully implement.

However, it is hard to argue against the principles driving these proposals. Young people should benefit from greater breadth and flexibility in 16-19 education; they should receive more teaching time; and we should ensure more of them leave education and training with a good standard of maths and English. Tick. Tick. Tick.

Further, it is right to address the divide between academic and technical education and the continued lack of parity of esteem if our aim is to develop a truly transformational education for 16– to 19-year-olds and to solve some of the country’s long-term problems. This will only happen through a bold vision and ambitious solutions.

This government is clearly learning from the mistakes of the 2000s

The last time there was the potential for this was back in the days of New Labour and the recommendations from the Tomlinson Report. The government of the day decided not to grasp the opportunity of an all-encompassing baccalaureate and instead opted for a confused, watered-down approach that resulted in the debacle of 14-19 diplomas.

Which leads me to the conclusion that this latest proposal is also rather clever. This government is clearly learning from the mistakes of the 2000s. When the 14-19 diplomas were introduced, one of the main barriers to uptake was the failure to “switch off” the vocational alternatives. The current approach to defunding will help ensure T Levels gain traction.

However, the other challenge to T Levels is of course A levels. Most of us in the sector have taken the view that the entry requirements for T Levels should be in line with A levels, given they are of similar demand and rigour. But a young person with such a GCSE grade profile is most likely to take A-levels – encouraged and influenced by parents and schools. A levels are as big a threat to T Level uptake as the BTECs. Arguably, the Advanced British Standard is a case of “if you can’t beat them, join them together”.

Perhaps the greatest threat to these proposals (other than a looming general election) is that the sector responds with reform fatigue and cynicism. That would be a mistake. A huge opportunity was missed in the mid-2000s that we should grasp now. The problems identified and the principles behind the Advanced British Standard are absolutely the right ones.

Yes, it is hugely ambitious. (Incidentally, Andy Burnham’s equally ambitious vision of the Manchester Baccalaureate was roundly welcomed and would make great sense alongside this.) Yes, lots of questions will need answering. And yes, some parts of the education system will see it as a huge threat to the status quo.

But the status quo isn’t working – and it will only be solved by something bold.

Let’s lobby to get that name changed, though.

Starmer to introduce ‘technical excellence colleges’

Further education colleges will be able to bid to become specialist ‘technical excellence colleges’ under a Labour government, Keir Starmer will announce at his party’s annual conference on Tuesday. 

Under Starmer’s plans, universities will get a seat around the table in the development of local skills improvement plans (LSIPs) and new statutory guidance would make the plans “democratically accountable” to local communities. 

Local government as well as local businesses will be involved in developing the plans.

Labour said existing LSIP funding, like the local skills improvement fund, would be “repurposed” to help colleges specialise and become ‘technical excellence colleges.’ 

It’s unclear what advantages gaining specialist status would bring to colleges, or how others not awarded the status would be disadvantaged. 

Bids for the new status would be assessed by Skills England, a new body that would oversee skills interventions as well as Labour’s planned skills and growth levy, a successor to the apprenticeship levy. 

Labour said college bids for specialist status would be informed by reformed local skills improvement plans. Colleges that prove they can meet skills needs, lever investment from employers and utilise other local colleges and universities, would be awarded the status by Skills England. 

It’s also not clear how many colleges could be awarded the new status in each of the 38 LSIP areas.

David Hughes, chief executive of the Association of Colleges, said Labour were right to recognise the role of colleges rather than commit to introducing a new set of institutions.

“The UK underperforms on skills, productivity and employer investment in training and colleges have suffered from years of underinvestment so it’s good to see an ambition to address this, through an expanded role for colleges across the country.

“In the last twenty years, ministers have enjoyed inventing new organisations which is an approach that often results in duplication and wasted spending. It’s significant and reassuring that these latest plans are explicitly focused on strengthening the existing college network, rather than creating new institutions,” he said.

The last Labour government introduced a similar scheme to encourage colleges to deliver courses meeting local and national skills needs. The then Learning and Skills Council oversaw the Centres of Vocational Excellence (CoVE) programme in the early 2000s.

By 2006, over 400 colleges and training providers had been awarded a CoVE status. In 2007 though, the then Labour government announced it was replacing the scheme with a “new standard” that would cost £8,000 to apply for.

Starmer plans to set out how he will deliver his five missions when he gives his mainstage speech at Labour party conference on Tuesday.   

We worked hard to make T Levels a success – and our work has not stopped

T Levels success at York College has not come easily. There has been a carefully considered approach to promoting our technical education mission within York and North Yorkshire and this has resulted in a momentum being built that has established ourselves as one of the leading providers of T Level education. 

As one of the early T Level adopters, our approach started with an attempt to educate people about the qualification. Initially, this was an internal exercise, but it very quickly extended to parents, potential students, and (potentially most significantly) key members of staff in secondary schools. 

As the T Level brand became more established, we started to focus on the quality of delivery. Successful applications for capital grants allowed us to carefully invest in our facilities so they could be sector-leading in the areas offering T Levels, such as the current extension work that is being carried out on our construction centre. 

It centred too on supporting staff to upskill where necessary by accessing the support available from the Education and Training Foundation’s professional development programmes. In some areas, we have also made investments in specialist staff to teach the highly technical content of T Levels, for example employing registered nurses as dual professionals so that our health T Level students benefit from current practice and knowledge. 

Meanwhile, we leverage good news stories locally, whether that has been excellent results achieved by students, the case studies provided to us by employers, or interviews with T Level students who have successfully completed the qualification. 

We have also promoted what our students have gone on to do after completing their studies, such as higher-level apprenticeships, securing employment and progressing to university, including extensive work between the delivery team at the college and university admissions co-ordinators to ensure the value of T Levels is recognised in their entry criteria.

The factor that has had the biggest impact on our T Level offer, though, is the work we have done with fantastic employers. Our partnership work with them has allowed us to ensure that they are fully aware of the support that they can offer to us as a college and the benefits that a T Level placement student can have on their business. 

Of course, the employer support fund has helped to facilitate industry placements, but what we have found is this has not been the determining factor in terms of whether someone takes a student on industry placement from York College or not. 

Instead, it is the focus on providing meaningful and supportive industry placements for highly enthusiastic, skilled students – and getting employers to recognise the value that such a student can bring to their organisation – that has been a game-changer in the way that we have been able to engage with employers.

Our work to promote T Levels and ensure healthy recruitment has not stopped. Just last week, we held an afternoon T Level party with careers and guidance advisors from our feeder secondary schools to ensure that they were aware of the developments in our T Level offer and for us to share the good news stories that we have about our T Level successes. 

Our recent focus on the purpose and development of our level 2 programmes has involved changing the curriculum offered so that potential T Level students develop the knowledge and skills they need to progress. For example, we have introduced a mathematics for engineering option on our level 2 programmes to ensure students have the higher-level mathematics skills they need to be successful. 

There is a belief among staff at York College that T Levels are the ideal technical learning platform for students to develop their knowledge, skills and understanding of subjects that directly link to their future employment opportunities.

T Levels’ struggle to gain credibility just got harder

It is rare for a prime minister to spend time talking about post-16 education from the stage at a Conservative party conference and there was a lot for FE to welcome in Rishi Sunak’s speech on Wednesday. 

His plan for a new Advanced British Standard involves increased funding for up to 195 more post-16 teaching hours per student, tax-free bonuses to a maximum of £30,000 for lecturers in key subjects, and education becoming “the priority of every spending review from now on”.

On the face of it, the new qualification, reminiscent in ambition (if not detail) of recommendations made by the Tomlinson report in 2004, is a positive shift towards the ever-elusive parity of esteem between academic and technical education. 

However, given the dire state of polling for the Conservative party and the fact that the new qualification has an anticipated gestation period of a decade, many commentators suggest that, like Tomlinson’s diploma, it will never see the light of day. 

Which leaves me thinking of all those people across the country responsible for teaching, marketing and timetabling T Levels, the new qualification celebrating its own promotional “week” on the day that the prime minister announced plans for its demise.  

Our research into public awareness of T Levels, in common with that of the Department for Education, shows that the majority of parents, school teachers and employers have limited awareness of the qualification. In our most recent study, undertaken on behalf of an Institute of Technology among IT firms and departments, half of respondents had never heard of them. 

So, for many the first thing that they will read or hear about T Levels will be this week’s coverage of their proposed expiration. 

If you are a parent attending a college open day with your child, and a lecturer suggests they should consider this new T Level qualification, what are you now going to think? 

If you are an employer who is approached to provide work experience for T Levels, are you more or less likely to say yes based on what the PM has just said about T Levels? 

If you are a university that does not accept T Levels as an entry qualification for degrees, are you more or less likely to change your mind?

As someone involved in the launch of the 14-19 diploma, discontinued in 2013, I have first-hand experience of the challenges in rolling out new qualifications. They require sustained positive promotion in the public and political sphere in order to generate sufficient credibility among young people and their families; if you are going to dedicate two years of your life to studying a course, you need to be sure that it will get you where you want to go. Collective confidence is crucial. 

The struggle to recruit to T Levels is well documented. As of this week, it just got harder. 

T Level courses canned as low GCSE grades bite

Several colleges have abandoned T Level courses this year after falling GCSE English and maths pass rates for school leavers hit their recruitment targets.

West Herts College Group dropped four T Level programmes in recent weeks while Aylesbury College cancelled one course because “unfeasible” enrolment numbers would have left classes empty.

They join a host of colleges warning that lower English and maths GCSE pass rates from this year’s school-leavers have made it harder to hit T Level recruitment goals.

At an event run by Westminster Forum Projects last month, James Scott, chief executive at Trafford College Group, which missed its T Level recruitment target by almost a third this year, said: “There’s a clear trend coming out, which is the impact of GCSE results on the number of students being recruited onto T Levels.

“We certainly haven’t achieved our targets. You’ve got many colleges reporting greater numbers of students on level 1 and 2 programmes, less on level 3 including T Levels and A-levels, and much larger increases in young people having to re-sit GCSE maths and English.”

Chichester College Group T Level development manager James Watters added: “We have seen a drop in our T Level starts for September 2023 due to GCSE results. Our level 2 and foundation year study programmes are either full or oversubscribed as a result.”

Ofqual data shows the proportion of 16-year-olds who passed maths with a grade four or above dropped from 75.1 per cent in 2022 to 72.3 per cent in 2023. The proportion of 16-year-olds who passed English language fell from 77.2 per cent to 71.6 per cent.

FE Week analysis suggests that 38,000 more students will have to continue studying English at post-16 compared with last year, while nearly 22,000 more students will have to continue maths compared with 2022.

Colleges are free to set their own entry requirements for T Levels, but research has found that many require students to already hold a grade 4 in English and maths.

West Herts College Group cancelled four T Levels – in education and childcare; onside construction, carpentry and joinery; electrotechnical engineering for construction; and plumbing and heating engineering. 

It blamed the decision on “low application numbers”, caused by lower English and maths GCSE passes and young people “deciding to study other qualifications in the same subject area”.

Aylesbury College, part of the Buckinghamshire College Group, dropped a T Level in lab science after it missed its 12-student target. Only six students signed up, which made the course “unfeasible”.

A spokesperson for the college told FE Week that lower GCSE English and maths pass grades “have meant that many students have not met the T Level entry criteria this year”.

They added: “That contributed to an increase in numbers on our level 1 and 2 provision as well as an increase of over 50 per cent in GCSE re-sit numbers.” Many of those students went onto a T Level foundation course instead.

The group confirmed that it was running the rest of its T Level courses as planned in areas such as digital and education and childcare.

Colleges have cancelled or deferred T Level courses before. Department for Education research released this year revealed that a fifth – 14 of 62 – of colleges did so for their cohorts starting in 2021 due to low recruitment.

But the continuing trend will add to concerns that colleges are not ready to move away from offering alternative level 3 qualifications like BTECs, which are in line for the chop from 2025, while T Levels find their feet.

Students at both Aylesbury College and West Herts College who were hoping to do a T Level have been moved onto a BTEC instead, with some others switching to A-levels.

But concerns around low T Level enrolments are not universal. Neil Thomas, chief executive at Dudley College of Technology, said the number of students studying its 11 T Levels had risen by 126 per cent in total, which he put down to the qualification “gaining traction in the market”.

He did point to a “deflation in the grade profile of many learners” which meant a “large number of learners” joined the college for level two courses. But that “has not been at the detriment of T Level programmes”.

York College has also bucked the trend. Deputy principal Ken Merry said: “York College & University Centre has not closed down any of the T Level courses that we had planned to run.

“In fact, we have witnessed 400 per cent growth in terms of the numbers that have enrolled on our health science and business T Levels. We have a smaller than expected group for digital, but the course is still viable and running.”

Dorset merger on the cards to secure future of struggling college

A cash-strapped land-based college in Dorset is considering a merger to secure its long-term survival.

Kingston Maurward College is in discussions to join Weymouth College off the back of a recent FE commissioner-led review.

A joint statement from the principals involved said the plan is for each college to “retain its own identity”, but under a larger corporate structure which will “make both colleges and the group more financially resilient”. The pair are aiming for a merger date of August 2024.

Kingston Maurward College has been put in and out of formal government intervention multiple times since 2015 for deteriorating financial performance. The land-based college, which is set in 750 acres of farmland, parkland, gardens and a conservation area near Dorchester, suffered a big hit to its commercial income during the Covid-19 pandemic and lockdowns.

The college is still yet to publish accounts for 2021/22 but previous financial statements showed an anticipated deficit of £1.3 million by the end of July 2022, and an EBITDA (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization) deficit of £234,000. The college’s cash resources were also “at the lowest level”.

Kingston Maurward is also currently locked in a dispute over off-the-job training evidence with the Education and Skills Funding Agency which could force it to repay £850,000 in apprenticeship funding.

The college has not received any emergency bailout funding to help it stay afloat from the government so far, but principal Luke Rake admitted this was “likely to be necessary” this financial year because of inflationary pressures.

Merger will make both colleges ‘more financially resilient’

Asked whether Kingston Maurward’s survival is in doubt if the merger with Weymouth does not go ahead, Rake said: “The provision? No – the need for land-based provision in one of England’s most rural counties is a given, and the strategic value of this and the site as well is recognised by everyone. The corporation? Maybe – it would need to be considered as part of a wider costs review by the Department for Education.”

He added: “At this stage though, closure is nowhere near the table and we are all, including the DfE and FE commissioner, committed to finding the best solution for the county.”

Weymouth College has experienced its own financial difficulties in recent years. It was handed a financial notice to improve in 2020, but had it lifted in August 2022.

Julia Howe, principal of Weymouth College, said: “We believe that this place-based solution [merger], providing education, skills and training across rural and coastal Dorset will deliver a cohesive and high-performing offer across many sectors for our local and regional communities.”

Weymouth College teaches over 2,800 students while Kingston Maurward has around 1,000. The colleges, both rated ‘good’ by Ofsted, are located around 10 miles apart.

Rake said the idea of a Dorset college group has been floated several times over the past decade. A public consultation on the plan is expected to launch in the spring.