Managing the risks and maximising the opportunities of AI for apprenticeships

Barely a day goes by without a prediction of how advances in artificial intelligence are going to (take your pick) destroy humanity, put us out of work, help us lead more fulfilling, productive lives or solve climate change.

A group of school leaders recently formed a body to advise and protect schools from the risks of AI, but in the world of apprenticeships there has mostly been silence. The DfE’s policy paper in March, titled Generative artificial intelligence in education, mentions research into the skills needed for future workforce training, but includes not a word on apprenticeships.

There is now a DfE call for evidence, which closes on 23 August, but in the wider economy things are moving much more quickly. AI is already being used for tasks previously done by entry-level staff. In legal services, AI tools can draft and summarise documents. Automated code generation, code analysis and debugging are encroaching on the work of software writers. Customer service roles are being replaced by AI-powered “bots.”

The jobs, apprenticeships, and T levels where change is most likely are at levels 2 to 5. In 2021/2, there were 306,000 apprenticeship starts at these levels. Those involving physical labour or where tasks are performed outdoors are at lower risk. All of which makes for an uncertain future, but there are things

providers can do now to prepare.

Experimentation as standard

All apprentices should use AI at least once. It doesn’t matter if it’s to prepare a first draft of research, to improve a document or email or to write some code, as long as it’s relevant to their job role.

This will allow them to safely explore the benefits and risks. AI is great at producing first drafts or suggesting amendments, but it gets things wrong. Have the apprentice check their work using authoritative sources. This leads to wider ethical conversations – about identifying fake news, plagiarism, how to spot AI “hallucinations” or problematic outputs.

In short, it’s an excellent primer on AI’s capabilities and on why we need to exercise caution and responsibility to use it productively.

Focus on what AI can’t do

Apprenticeships should complement strong foundational knowledge development with an increased focus on skills and behaviours where AI is poor, such as teamwork and higher-order thinking skills such as critical analysis, synthesis, evaluation, and creativity (as opposed to memorisation, repetition, and imitation).

Over two years ago, Damar partnered with O Shaped to embed its competency framework within the paralegal apprenticeship. The framework focuses on areas such as emotional intelligence and trust, problem solving and identifying opportunities. These are human-centric skills and behaviours where AI is unlikely to compete any time soon.

Use AI to widen access

Through Damar’s technology partnership with BARBRI  on solicitor apprenticeships, AI is adjusting the pace of learning to reflect individual strengths and weaknesses and help widen access to the legal profession.

This is just the start. AI can already create lesson plans for students at different levels and make sensible suggestions on syllabus sequencing. This gives us the chance to better personalise the learning journey, whether through recognition of prior learning, adjustments for SEND or other individual characteristics. We aren’t quite at the point of AI developing full, individually tailored training plans, but AI-assisted elements can already sit within a standard delivery model.

We can also use AI to improve marking and student feedback and help teaching staff manage their workloads and improve work/life balance. By asking students to use AI to evaluate their essays for ideas, content, sentence structure and organisation, we free up time for more detailed and valuable feedback and can spend longer on the highest impact teaching and coaching.

While some assessment methods will have to change, apprenticeships are well-placed to cope with concerns about “cheating”. Most end-point assessments feature a professional discussion where the assessor probes the apprentice’s understanding, so the apprentice cannot hide behind a nicely scripted AI presentation.

So, while we should be cautious, educators have less reason to be fearful than some may think. AI is here to stay, and apprenticeship providers who rise to the challenge will quickly see the benefits.

Collaboration is key to ensuring teaching and learning meet the needs of employers

It can be difficult to find the time to take a look at what is happening outside of your classroom, lab, or workshop. However, collaboration, when well planned, can make a huge difference in how we teach.

I moved into FE teaching following a career in aerospace manufacturing and knew immediately that I’d found the right job for me. It gave me the opportunity to share my passion for engineering with a diverse group of learners, and support them into exciting careers. It was – and still is – hugely rewarding.

I have been fortunate to experience diverse teaching across the country at all levels and in different roles. I began at Fareham College and went on from there to Warwickshire College and then to north east Scotland, before moving to Birmingham, where I have been for ten years – first at Solihull College & University Centre, and now at University College Birmingham.

I have taught core skills maths, worked within a quality team and then as a curriculum manager. More recently, I’ve managed employer engagement and partnerships, working closely with our apprenticeship team. In this role, I’ve had the opportunity to explore ways in which collaboration can support teachers’ professional development.

One of the challenges with teaching in further education is the lack of ‘off-the-shelf’ resources to support teaching. This means that we are all busy creating our own resources, which can mean less time to think about innovative delivery. This is particularly challenging for very specialist subjects, who also have fewer opportunities to collaborate internally.

In 2017, I joined a consortium of three colleges, four universities and several engineering employers to develop a proposal for one of England’s first institutes of technology. We were awarded a license to operate as an Institute of Technology (IoT) in 2019, with the objective of increasing level four and five provision to support the advanced manufacturing and engineering sector in Greater Birmingham and Solihull. I was appointed to lead the new company and the collaborative work between educational institutions and employers.

It was a key priority for me to ensure that the collaboration was effective at all levels so that our lecturers, teachers, and technicians would benefit from working more closely with neighbouring colleges, universities and employers.

Specialist subjects have fewer opportunities to collaborate

With DfE funding, we invested in a ‘Learning Factory’ in Birmingham City Centre, available to engineering students across the consortium. We’ve been able to invest in industry-standard software and CPD, and our academic teams benefit from collaborative training sessions.

All partners can access a digital twin of the Learning Factory too, meaning that engineering and digital students can simulate the factory environment at their own campus before travelling to test their designs.

Recruiting teachers familiar with these specialist industry requirements can be difficult, but we invest centrally in experts who can train and update our college teams, ensuring we meet employer requirements. Our teachers value this new academic network and our learners benefit.

The IoT was also seeking ways in which collaboration could enhance outreach activities to encourage more female engineering students and learners from diverse backgrounds with different experiences and non-traditional qualifications. I was honoured to be awarded an ETF-Royal Commission Technical Teaching Fellowship to support this research, and that award has allowed me to evaluate what works well and share my experiences.

As a result, the IoT was able to attract additional funding to launch a new regional digital platform – The Hub – showcasing engineering careers in education.

As well as supporting regional partnerships in responding to employer requirements, my position at an IoT has provided me with broader influence, as vice-chair of the National Network of Institutes of Technology.

The launch of new engineering and construction departments at University College Birmingham is also a direct response to the regional and national skills gaps that collaborative activity has identified. The effect of all this is that our learners are developing the skills and behaviours identified by industry.

As satisfying as all this has been personally and for colleagues, it is that, more than anything, that underscores how incredibly important collaboration is.

Getting LSIPs right. Why adjusting the current model could reap rewards for skills in England

Across England, employers, providers and stakeholders have been working together to develop local skills development plans (LSIPs) for their region, designed to improve skills provision to meet identified local needs and support local economies.

And it’s clear that they are needed – there is an urgent requirement to improve the skills of the UK’s workforce, not just for the sake of those local economies, but for the wider economy too. Statistics show that there has been a steady decline in skills investment over the last two decades with employer-funded training dropping dramatically. Overall, UK employers invest just half of the EU average in training – a trend which is damaging the UK’s productivity and ability to keep pace with international competitors.

Investment in skills could change this. However, it is not clear that the system of LSIPs will be equipped to tackle the existing problems.

The work and employment expert group, ReWAGE, has published Getting LSIPS Right, a new report that advocates for LSIPs but argues that their existing remit is unlikely to fully address the UK’s skills problems, suggesting three key ways in which it could be adjusted.

Employers as stakeholders, not customers

First, employers need to take a more active role. They do feature largely in the LSIPs system, but as customers setting out their requirements.

In many regions, great efforts have been made to gather employers’ requirements, but only limited responses have been received. The truth is that many employers, especially SMEs, don’t have the skills or resources to set out their future staffing needs in any detail.

LSIPs also aim to link local education and training suppliers more closely to employers. In theory, this encompasses all aspects of both academic and vocational education but in practice most of this activity is linked to FE colleges. Although many FE colleges have positive links to employers, few have dedicated time or resources allocated to these relationships. While LSIPs will provide colleges with resources, if this is another temporary ‘pot’ of funds then it is unlikely to result in long-term impact.

A far better model has employers as co-producers, fully involved in skills delivery and implementation, with appropriate checks (training hours, number of apprenticeships) on activity and quality. Activities could further be strengthened, following the German system, by including worker representatives, trade unions and local authorities as co-producers.

Retraining our focus

Second, there needs to be a greater focus on enhancing the skills of established workers as well as those of new entrants to the labour market. Both are important for the UK’s future competitiveness.

New entrants are a small fraction of the labour market as a whole. and limiting training activity to new entrants means that existing skills shortages are not addressed. Also, it is common in the UK for young people to experiment with various occupations and sectors once in work, so targeting training primarily at young people in the hope that they will stay in the area in which they have been trained is a far from perfect solution to skills shortages.

Training efforts focused on this group will be helpful but they do not make major inroads into overall levels of workforce skills. For that we need to look to employers to provide training for people already in work.

Better guidance for all

Third, good careers guidance needs to be introduced for everyone in work. A previous ReWAGE paper explains the benefits of making effective careers guidance available to everyone of working age. In essence a well-connected and established skills system with career guidance at its heart will support the labour market in meeting future employer demands.

Any investment in England’s skills infrastructure will need to be supported by improvements in a range of other areas, including job design and organisational strategy. And the wider complexities of the UK’s job market also need to be considered; in some sectors, such as social care, it is unattractive pay, terms and conditions that discourage workers and that result in high turnover.

Expecting training and recruitment to solve this problem is a little like pouring more water in to a leaky bucket. It could result (at least temporarily) in more water in the bucket, but it would be far more effective to fix the leak.

Lifetime Training CEO next in line for the chop

England’s largest apprenticeship provider is set to part ways with another one of its top leaders – this time the chief executive – as it prepares to bring in a turnaround specialist.

Jon Graham (pictured right), who has held the top job at Lifetime Training for just over a year, will leave the company next week.

The company told FE Week that Graham is leaving “to pursue other endeavours”.

New Lifestime Training CEO, David Smith
David Smith

Graham will be replaced by David Smith, who comes from outside the FE sector having led big-name companies like Parcelforce, Royal Mail, City Link, Serco and most recently estates management company The Bellrock Group.

The CEO switch comes a week after Lifetime Training’s executive chair Geoff Russell (pictured left), who used to head up the Skills Funding Agency, suddenly left his post.

Both Graham and Russell were brought in from another large training provider, JTL, last year. Their departures come months after Lifetime Training was taken over by its lender Alcentra.

The provider has experienced a rocky year including a critical ‘requires improvement’ Ofsted report, an ongoing government audit dispute that could result in a £13 million clawback, and around 60 job losses.

Graham, who is also currently an Association of Employment and Learning Providers and Education and Training Foundation board member, took over the top job at Lifetime Training in June 2022 following the departure of Alex Khan who had led the company for a decade.

His replacement, Smith, worked at Parcelforce Worldwide in the 2000s where he was said to have played pivotal role in the turnaround of the company. He then moved to head up the Royal Mail before leaving to lead the struggling courier firm City Link in 2011.

Smith could not save City Link from collapse however and was charged before being acquitted of criminal offences after allegedly failing to notify the business secretary of the company’s closure in 2014.

Smith said: “Throughout my career, I have witnessed first-hand the profound impact of apprenticeships on the success of organisations. Joining Lifetime presents a tremendous opportunity for me to make a tangible difference. 

“My experience at Bellrock highlighted the critical role vocational education plays in addressing the UK’s skills gaps, particularly in engineering, healthcare, hospitality, and retail. 

“I firmly believe in the power of vocational education to drive social mobility and contribute to solving these challenges.” 

The provider has also announced University of Bristol finance director Jason Smerdon as its new chief financial officer.

Lifetime Training delivers training mostly in retail and hospitality and has been attempting to recover from the financial impact of the Covid-19 pandemic, which hit the provider’s apprenticeship start numbers hard.

The provider recorded 23,020 starts in 2018/19, before falling by more than a third to 14,980 in 2019/20. In 2020/21 Lifetime’s starts further slipped to 12,910 but increased slightly in 2021/22 to 16,720.

Lifetime has however remained the provider with the most apprenticeship starts in England. In the first two quarters of 2022/23, the firm achieved 7,280 starts – almost two thirds more than the second largest apprenticeship provider, the British Army.

The falling starts numbers contributed to large-scale redundancies in 2020 and 2023.

Accounts for the 18-month period ending January 31, 2022, show the firm’s turnover increased to £71.1 million compared to £59.9 million in 2020. But its EBITDAE (earnings before interest, tax, depreciation, amortisation and exceptional items) fell from £9.391 million to £2.249 million over that period.

The accounts also show the company made a loss for the financial period of £9.2 million, compared to a profit of £6.8 million in 2020.

More research needed into GCSE resit teaching methods, charity says

Alternative methods of teaching GCSE resit students need to be explored and tested to improve pass rates, an education charity has said.

The Education and Endowment Foundation has today published a review into English and maths GCSE resit practices in sixth forms and colleges in collaboration with the University of Warwick and think tank Centre for Education and Youth.

Current policy means that students who do not gain a grade 4 in English and maths in their first attempt must continue to study these subjects post-16. However, in 2022, just 15.2 per cent of learners resitting their maths GCSE gained a grade 4, while just 24.1 per cent did so in English. 

The EEF’s review found that the ability of FE institutions to recruit and retain practitioners with the right subject expertise was the biggest barrier to ensuring that these learners receive high quality teaching.

The charity was also concerned to find a lack of “well-developed evidence-informed programmes and interventions” to support learners and professional development for those teaching resit classes.

Joe Hallgarten, chief executive of the Centre for Education and Youth, said the findings show how those 16- to 19-year-olds who struggle with basic maths and English face a “double disadvantage”.

“Having arrived at a new sixth form or college branded as GCSE failures, they are too often: given too little curriculum time; taught by teachers who may not have the subject expertise or the professional development to teach these young people adequately; and supported by academic and pastoral interventions that lack a strong enough evidence base of their impact,” he said.

The report explained that the existing evidence base for post-16 practices is “much more limited than for pupils in schools”, and there is a lack of “high-quality” programmes targeting 16- to 18-year-olds.

The research, which involved a desk-based review, site visits and interviews with college leaders, found that while there are “numerous, diverse practices and approaches to improving provision and outcomes” in post-16 GCSE resits, there are “relatively few ‘packaged’ interventions designed specifically for this cohort and context”.

“No clear trends emerged in relation to any particular techniques, tools or systems of assessment which colleagues are engaging with at this stage,” according to the report.

It said that the review found examples of effective pedagogy from other phases and subjects using “relatively well-established, evidence-informed principles” related to formative assessment, cognitive science like spaced learning, or mastery approaches.

But “we need to know more about how these principles and practices can be effectively adapted and translated into post-16 resit contexts,” the report added.

The report recommended that the EEF should “sustain and grow its focus” on post-16 English and maths for low-attaining and disadvantaged learners – including, but not limited to, GCSE resits.

“The persistent underperformance of resit learners coupled with the relatively poor evidence base on interventions in this space reaffirm the rationale for investment, which, in terms of outcomes, could lead to sustainable, systemic change and improvement,” the report said.

EEF chief executive Becky Francis said: “We know gaps in outcomes between socio-economically disadvantaged pupils and their classmates grow as they progress through school which means they’re at their widest when students enter post-16 education.

“This phase is our ‘last chance’ to try and minimise these gaps before most young people leave the education system. We also know the importance of a Grade 4 or above at Maths and English GCSEs for young people’s future life chances. So for us, finding better ways to support teaching and learning for GCSE resits is a crucial part of this.”

Winners of the 2023 Festival of Learning awards announced

Learners who have had to deal with family tragedy, severe brain damage and homelessness are among this year’s Festival of Learning Awards winners.

Ten students, tutors, colleges, providers, and employers were recognised for their inspiring stories as part of a celebration of lifelong learning at an awards ceremony run by Learning and Work Institute and supported by Phoenix Insights.

“This year’s Festival of Learning award winners are truly inspiring,” said Stephen Evans, Chief Executive at Learning and Work Institute.

“Their stories demonstrate the many ways adult learning holds the key to improving people’s job and career prospects, increasing health and wellbeing, widening participation in society, and much more besides.”

The award sponsors were NOCN, the ETF, City Lit, and the Skills and Education Group.

Illness didn’t hold back award winners

Jackie Butterworth was diagnosed with bowel disease ulcerative colitis in 2013 and had a stoma fitted the following year.

The LWI awarded her the learning for health award after she took part in support groups and courses. She has now set up her own group to support others going through similar challenges.

The new directions award went to Jason Richards, who was recovering from severe brain damage and years of homelessness when he found training opportunities through Newground Together.

Following his learning, Jason found not only work opportunities, but also got the chance to reconnect with his family.

Paul Eeles, chief executive at Education and Skills Group, the award sponsor, said the award highlights one of the best things about lifelong learning, allowing people to make a fresh start and follow a new path.

“Life can lead you in unexpected directions, and continuous learning is vital to taking the opportunities that come your way,” he said.

Learners overcame unimaginable struggles

Fakhra Irfan was awarded the English language learning award.

When she first moved to the UK, Fakhra didn’t speak any English and lacked the confidence to explore beyond her home environment.

She pursued adult learning and gained newfound independence after her husband died shortly after she gave birth to her third child.

Meanwhile the return to learning award was won by Tyrese Williams.

Tyrese found school extremely challenging and left without any GCSEs. But her life changed when she was referred to a first steps to learning course at Buckinghamshire Adult Learning, which is aimed at young parents developing English, maths and digital skills.

“People coming back to learning at any point in their lives is something to applaud. The knowledge, skills, joy and fulfilment they gain is something that changes and improves lives immeasurably,” said Mark Malcomson, CEO at City Lit, the award sponsor.

The winner of the patron’s award, chosen by LWI patron Princess Anne, was Margaret Porta. She won after gaining new IT skills through tutoring with the Open Age DigitALL Project and successfully put together a digital campaign to promote her first ever art show.

Tutors make ‘transformational’ impact

The tutor award went to Emma Iliffe for her dedication and passion for deaf culture and the deaf community. Emma is a teacher of British Sign Language (BSL) at City Lit.

“The transformational impact tutors, trainers and educators have is not limited to learners,” said Katerina Kolyva, chief executive at Education and Training Foundation, the award sponsor.

“It extends beyond the learners to their families and communities. In a world where we are all contending with diverse and rapidly-evolving challenges—ranging from the accelerating impact of technology on work to a cost-of-living crisis—this has never been more important.”

The winner of the learning for work award, sponsored by NOCN Group, went to Geoff Carter.

Geoff secured employment on the HS2 project after an extended period of unemployment followed by a family tragedy. Judges said his construction training not only brought him skills and qualifications, but it also empowered him to show his children what a good working life looks like.

Employers were also celebrated at the ceremony. One such award went to charity St Giles Trust, which won the president’s award for its London Peer Hub. The programme trains and supports learners to ‘turn a past into a future’ and achieve a level 3 NVQ in Advice and Guidance – usually the first qualification that they have ever attained.

Nuneaton Signs won the employer award, sponsored by NOCN Group. Since 2021, the company has offered supported internships for young people with special educational needs and disabilities in partnership with North Warwickshire and South Leicestershire College (NWSLC).

Meanwhile, Fircroft College was selected to win the Learning Provision Award. As one of only two adult residential colleges in England, judges found the college provides a safe and welcoming environment for learners with multiple and complex needs.

MPs blast DfE for refusing to pause BTEC cutback

MPs have hit out at the government’s refusal to pause its controversial bonfire of BTECs after they warned it could deepen skills shortages and restrict student choice.

The cross-party education select committee urged the Department for Education in April to “place a moratorium” on defunding applied general qualifications (AGQs) due to problems with T Levels that were raised by expert witnesses during its inquiry into the future of post-16 qualifications.

The committee said AGQs “should only be withdrawn as and when there is a robust evidence base proving that T Levels are demonstrably more effective in preparing students for progression, meeting industry needs and promoting social mobility”.

But in a response published today, ministers refused the moratorium request and failed to address the lack of evidence that T Levels have yet been proven superior to BTECs and other AGQs, simply stating that “our reforms will increase outcomes for learners and build a strong pipeline of skills for the future”.

Robin Walker (pictured), chair of the committee and Conservative MP for Worcester, said the DfE’s response was “disappointing”.

“[The DfE’s response] gives the impression of prioritising saving face over ensuring its reforms are carried out in the interests of young people,” he added.

The DfE is moving towards a streamlined system for students finishing their GCSEs which pushes them to study either A-levels, T Levels, or an apprenticeship from 2025.

Alternative AGQs like Pearson’s popular BTECs will only get funding from August 2025 onwards if they do not overlap with the other qualification and pass a strict approvals process.

The committee argued in a report in April that defunding other AGQs risks “constricting student choice and deepening the skills shortages that these reforms are meant to fix”. It said government should wait to make sure T Levels are a “more effective” replacement.

But the government is standing by its plan.

It argued it is reforming the qualifications landscape because many of the existing level 3 alternatives “have low and no enrolments”, are not based on the employer led occupational standards set out by the Institute for Apprentices and Technical Education, and do not push students to follow up their qualifications with relevant occupations.

It claimed that students with BTECs are nearly twice as likely to drop out of university as those that have A-levels.

The DfE response said feedback on T Levels had been “positive” and that 92.2 per cent of the first cohort achieved at least a pass grade.

But the committee said government “failed to address” that a fifth of that cohort had dropped out of the course.

Risks ‘exacerbating existing inequalities’

While Walker said his committee “welcomed” the ambition of having a higher value vocational qualification system, he said MPs “remain concerned that T Levels may not adequately fill the void that hastily withdrawing AGQs may create”.

“There is insufficient evidence that T Levels will be an achievable option for swathes of young people who do not achieve the top grades at GCSE, or who have SEND,” he added.

“Failing to take this into account runs the risk of exacerbating existing inequalities.”

James Kewin, deputy chief executive of the Sixth Form Colleges Association which leads the Protect Student Choice campaign, said: “The government’s risible response to the education committee’s report shows that ministers remain in denial about the viability of their plans for reforming level 3 qualifications.

“Despite facing almost universal opposition to its plan to scrap most AGQs, the government continues to press ahead while ignoring the serious concerns raised by students, the education sector, employers and now the education committee.”

Appear to be ‘setting targets’

T Levels will all include 45-day industry placements as a core part of their curriculum. The committee called on the DfE to publish forecasts on the demand for and any shortfall of industry placements, to prepare industries for the wider T Level rollout.

Though the DfE said it would “consider” that request, it said it will “need to be careful” as it would then appear to be “setting targets”. 

The DfE did commit to publishing data on the employment or education destinations of the first T Level students in late 2023 or early 2024.

The committee’s report also called for a “wholesale review” of funding for 16 to 19 education and more targeted support for disadvantaged students. But it said the DfE did “not directly” address that point in its response. The department said it would “continue to keep 16 to 19 funding under review”.

MPs call for mandatory sex education in colleges 

Sex and relationships education should be made compulsory in colleges to help young people avoid “potentially harmful and dangerous situations”, MPs have said.

Currently relationships, sex and health education (RSHE) is mandatory in secondary schools up to the age of 16. But the gap between 16 and 18 without RSHE means young people are left “under-supported” and “less equipped” with important knowledge about RSHE, according to a report by the Women and Equalities Select Committee.

The report follows an inquiry by the select committee into sexual harassment in schools and colleges, following the emergence of the MeToo movement and of Everyone’s Invited, an online platform set up to document stories of harassment which went viral.

Ofsted also published a review in 2021 covering sexual abuse in schools and colleges – which the MPs welcomed but said needed to go further. For instance, the select committee warned female staff are “not immune” from abuse and called on Ofsted to investigate their abuse by other staff, pupils and parents as part of its inspections.

One of the report’s key recommendations is that RSHE be made compulsory up to the age of 18.

“[A lack of compulsory RSHE after 16] leaves young people making their first steps in the adult world under-supported and less equipped to navigate potentially harmful and dangerous situations and keep themselves safe and healthy in relationships,” the report said.

“RSHE should be extended to young people in post-16 educational settings.”

The committee suggested it would like all young people between the ages of 16 and 18 to receive RSHE but that it “will be up to the government how that can be implemented”.

But the committee did not hear evidence on how this could apply to independent training providers, and so has not made any recommendations for ITPs.

Though there is agreement that RSHE is needed in colleges, some sector leaders have urged the government to support colleges with funding and resources so that they can offer that provision.

Geoff Barton, general secretary at the Association of School and College Leaders (ASCL) said sexual harassment and violence is “treated as an extremely serious matter in schools and colleges”.

But he warned colleges had received “very little” in the way of support or training for teachers to teach RSHE.

“Schools and colleges are striving to uphold good values but they cannot fight this battle alone. They need to be supported in terms of funding, resources and an online regulatory framework that protects young people.”

He also warned the Online Safety Bill, which was partly developed to tackle misogyny and abuse online, is “plodding its way through parliament”.

The bill entered parliament in March 2022 but is still in report stage in the House of Lords.

Bill Watkin, chief executive of the Sixth Form Colleges Association said sixth form colleges “almost invariably” already offer RSHE as “they understand how important it is”.

But he said there is “unlikely to be any significant advantage in making [RSHE] compulsory”.

“Evidence shows that sixth form students are only funded for 15 hours a week of tuition, so were this to become an additional requirement on the timetable, the delivery costs would need to be fully funded by government”.

The Department for Education was approached for comment.

Ofsted declined to comment.

AoC calls on next government to create ‘one tertiary system’

The next government should regulate and fund colleges, universities and training providers through a new “one tertiary system”, the Association of Colleges has said.

The membership body made the call in a new report out today called “Opportunity England”, which makes over 20 other policy recommendations to create a “national post-16 education and skills strategy” after the next general election.

Among the proposals is a demand for apprenticeships to only be taken by new job starters, a pause of the proposed axing of level 3 courses that compete with T Levels, and increased funding rates so FE providers can match the new starting salary of £30,000 a year for school-teachers.

Here are the key recommendations from the report.

‘One tertiary system’

Colleges, universities and other learning organisations “need to be regulated and funded together as one tertiary system”, the report said.

According to the AoC, separate regulation, funding, data and success measures make it “hard for people and employers to understand and navigate the learning and skills they need and want”.

Learning organisations are in turn “forced to compete for scarce resources, resulting in a reduced breadth of offer, efficiency and quality of provision”.

The AoC’s report doesn’t go into detail about how this new system would work in practice, or which regulator should run it.

Rather, it states the new system would need to be developed “in partnership with learning organisations and across a range of other institutions including local government, employer groups, unions and community organisations”.

Only allow apprenticeships for new job starters

The AoC said the overall apprenticeship programme “is not working” because of the government’s refusal to set any priorities for how the levy is used by employers.

This “failure” has led to “unwanted and major shifts, with higher-level apprenticeships for existing employees in big companies growing at the expense of opportunities for young people and new labour market entrants where numbers have reduced”.

Apprenticeships need to be focused on new job starters – which would be a return to the recommendations of the 2012 Richard review, the AoC said.

The programmes should be “clearly targeted at and promoted” to those who are new to a job or role that requires sustained or substantial training.

Training and accreditation of existing workers should be “delivered separately”, as should provision aimed primarily at entry-level jobs, the AoC’s report said.

The association also called for a review of the levy, to look at where the money is currently spent, what forecasts suggest about future spending, whether there are options to pool employer contributions and whether it will be necessary to increase the levy rate from 0.5 per cent to 1 per cent.

Lifelong loan entitlement should include grants

The AoC said that since 2004 participation numbers in government-funded learning have almost halved with now only one in three adults self-reporting any participation in learning – the lowest level in 22 years.

To address this, the current government is introducing the lifelong loan entitlement in 2025, which will provide individuals with a loan entitlement to the equivalent of four years of post-18 education to use over their lifetime.

The AoC said that as well as loans, this entitlement should make grants available to “ensure wider access” to the scheme.

In addition, the association said a “universal entitlement” to a first full level 3 qualification, building on the “Lifetime Skills Guarantee” introduced in 2020, should be implemented but with a wider range of courses on offer and with maintenance support.

Poor staff pay must be addressed

There is a crisis in college workforce recruitment and retention, driven largely by poor pay, the AoC said.

The average pay for teaching staff in colleges sits around £8,000 a year below that of their colleagues in schools.

According to the AoC, funding rates need to be increased for colleges to at least be able to match the new starting salary of £30,000 a year for teaching staff in schools.

There is also a big pay gap between college lecturers and the industries they train people for.

The AoC wants the next government to invest in a “cadre of sector experts” to be employed by colleges in priority sectors, paid closer to industry levels, to “stimulate demand, engage with employers and to help ensure curriculum, delivery, quality, CPD and work placements are all adequate to meet labour market needs”.

Pause level 3 reforms

The Department for Education is working to introduce a streamlined system for students finishing their GCSEs that pushes them to study either A-levels, their new technical equivalent T Levels, or an apprenticeship.

This involves axing funding for many existing alternative level 3 vocational and technical qualifications (VTQs), like BTECs and CTECs, from 2025 despite warnings from colleges, MPs and Lords that this rushed timeline will have a big negative impact on frontline learning.

The AoC’s report said: “We need an immediate pause to the proposed defunding of existing level 3 and below VTQs, until we can see how T Levels are working in terms of accessibility and progression for students, meeting industry needs and promoting social mobility.

“This pause would allow a wider review of the whole suite of qualifications to ensure that they are enabling and supporting every young person and adult to access the best possible pathways and outcomes.”