Apprenticeship starts for the whole of 2022/23 fell by 3 per cent on the previous academic year – solely driven by falling numbers in small and medium-sized employers, new data shows.
Provisional government figures published this morning show 336,510 starts reported to date for last year compared to the 347,920 recorded at the same point in 2021/22.
Starts for 16- to 18-year-olds held up compared to other age groups, increasing by a few hundred from 77,150 to 77,510. Apprenticeships for those aged 19 to 24 fell by the biggest proportion of all age groups – declining by 7 per cent from 105,940 to 98,490.
Continuing the trend since the launch of the apprenticeship levy in 2017, it was level 2 starts that saw the biggest drop. Level 2 starts fell 17 per cent from 91,310 to 76,210. Higher apprenticeships at levels 4 and above grew by 7 per cent from 105,840 to 112,890.
Starts among levy-paying businesses also increased slightly, up by 2 per cent from 222,940 to 227,850.
Whereas starts for non-levy paying businesses dropped by 13 per cent from 124,980 to 108,660. It adds further evidence to the consistent message from providers and business leaders that SMEs find the apprenticeship system too difficult to navigate.
Simon Ashworth, director of policy at the Association of Employment and Learning Providers, said today’s figures show a “really concerning decline” in SMEs taking on apprentices, but “sadly do not come as a surprise”.
He told FE Week: “If we’re to support more SMEs harness the amazing opportunities that apprenticeships bring, we need a much more accessible and less bureaucratic apprenticeship service system, scrap the 5 per cent co-investment requirement for non-levy paying employers; and introduce more effective and targeted incentives for both employers and providers.
“The chancellor has the perfect opportunity to address this worrying decline in his forthcoming autumn statement, and we urge him to be decisive with targeted financial intervention.”
The long-term outlook for the labour market is bound to be high on the agenda leading up to the next general election. With 80 per cent of the 2030 workforce already in work today, adult education holds the key to upskilling and reskilling those most at risk of losing their jobs due to the rise of automation and AI.
The recently published results of Employer Survey 2022 highlight worrying increases in the proportion of employers reporting vacancies and skills gaps. Meanwhile, it is widely anticipated that trends including automation and AI will change the jobs available in the labour market and the skills needed to do these jobs. Goldman Sachs have even suggested that generative AI could substitute up to one-quarter of current work.
As with any change, there will be winners and losers. Projections from The Skills Imperative 2035 suggest some sectors (like transport), and occupations (e.g. receptionists) are likely to experience significant losses. Rethinking adult education is likely to be paramount to supporting these workers.
Sideways moves won’t be an option for everyone. Occupational change is now driven by ‘upgrading’ (the growth of higher-paid occupations), and job-to-job moves are less prevalent in declining occupations. More people in declining occupations need to be able to ‘upgrade’ into stable and expanding sectors.
This is more feasible for those with higher levels of transferable ‘essential employment skills’ (like problem solving and creativity), but these skills are less easily developed in roles performing routine and/or manual tasks. Peoples’ prospects of returning to work are also significantly greater if they have undertaken qualification-bearing training, yet people without ‘higher’ level qualifications are the least likely to receive qualification-bearing training at work.
Numbers of mature learners taking qualifications have declined considerably. From 2010/11 to 2020/21, the number of adult learners on qualifications equivalent to GCSEs or below fell by 50 per cent, and adults taking qualifications equivalent to A levels fell by one-third. This was partly due to large cuts to adult education funding, with total spending on adult education and apprenticeships falling by 38 per cent in real terms.
Rethinking adult education is likely to be paramount
The number of (mostly mature) students on part-time undergraduate degrees also halved, while numbers on ‘sub-degree’ qualifications plummeted by 28 per cent between 2015 and 2018 following funding reforms that saw means-tested tuition fee grants abolished.
These cuts are being partially reversed. Adults with few qualifications can access free 12-16 week training programmes, butthese are unlikely to contribute to qualifications. Adults without A level or equivalent qualifications will be able to gain their first full level 3 qualifications, but most people still won’t be able to afford a break from employment. Mature students studying higher technical qualifications will be able to access full living cost support, but they will still be reliant on non-means-tested loans.
Overall, spending on adult education and apprenticeships will still be 25 per cent lower in real terms in 2024/25 compared with 2010/11. Is this going to be enough for education to win the race with technology?
The UK stands out for having a large share of adults who only have low-level qualifications. What if we took a leaf out of Norway’s playbook? In 2003/04, Norway began offering high-school dropouts a monthly stipend equivalent to around 13 per cent of median monthly income for 30-34 year-olds to have a second stab at completing upper secondary education. Rates of high school completion among the early treatment group subsequently increased significantly.
The UK, and England in particular, also stands out for having relatively few adults with mid-level qualifications such as HNCs and HNDs. UK adults are one-quarter as likely as adults from the US to have undertaken an advanced vocational qualification. What if we gave students who are eligible for the new part-time maintenance loan the option of a tuition fee grant instead? The Sutton Trust suggest this would come at low or zero additional cost per student and the long-term return on investment would be positive.
Faster change in the labour market strengthens the business case for reducing the costs for adults of returning to education. Through The Skills Imperative 2035, NFER will be further exploring how reforms to adult education could help mitigate the risks on the horizon.
Since the early 2000s, public spending on adult education has dropped by nearly one-third. Alongside that, employer spending on training has decreased by 27 pe cent per trainee since 2011.
This decline in training investment has occurred alongside a fall in participation. The number of publicly funded qualifications started each year by adults has dropped from nearly 5.5 million in the early 2000s to 1.5 million by 2020. And the average number of days of workplace training received each year is almost 20 per cent lower than in 2011.
These are eye-opening statistics. On the face of it they seem a cause for concern, but they require context. Some of the reduced government funding supported adult courses with modest returns. Additionally, subsidies for private training often went to training that would have happened anyway – a phenomenon economists call ‘dead weight’.
However, given the scale of the decline in training participation and ongoing concerns about skills shortages and low productivity it is worth considering how the existing skills system could be reformed and improved.
Clearly this is not a straightforward task. In our new report, Investment in training and skills, part of the IFS Green Budget 2023, we set out options for reforming the funding and financing of adult education in England. One of the key policy areas we consider is the apprenticeship levy, which has been the subject of much scrutiny lately.
Introduced in 2017, the apprenticeship levy is a tax on large employers (with a pay bill over £3 million). In England, the revenue generated through the levy is used to provide subsidies for apprenticeship training costs. Levy-paying employers can access a subsidy for 110 per cent of training costs (i.e. the full costs and a 10 per cent top-up), while non-levy-paying firms can subsidise 95 per cent of apprenticeship training costs.
There are sound economic grounds to provide financial support for training. Employers often face borrowing constraints and might not account for the broader benefits of their investment, which leads to under-investment. Yet there are three features of the existing subsidy system that raise questions.
The current skills landscape suggests a need for action
First, the subsidy rates introduced in 2017 mark a significant increase on historic rates, which typically funded half the apprenticeship costs for adults. The rates are also higher than those currently set in Scotland (up to 50 per cent) and Northern Ireland (50 per cent) for older apprentices. The risk of such a high subsidy rate is that it might steer employers towards apprenticeships without thorough consideration of whether they satisfy their actual training needs, and may also lead to significant ‘dead weight’ costs.
Second, there is a differential subsidy rate for levy and non-levying paying firms. While it may be tempting to argue that levy-paying firms deserve a higher subsidy rate because they have borne the costs of the tax, this is misguided. If subsidy rates were to vary, they should be directed at firms facing the biggest constraints to investment, which may well be smaller (non-levy paying) firms.
In practice, it is difficult to measure the level of barriers to investment in training faced by different employers. Instead, a uniform subsidy rate for all employers set at a lower rate than the existing rates is likely to be both more appropriate and much simpler to administer.
Third, subsidies are solely focused on apprenticeships, but other forms of training may also be under-provided. In this context, the Labour Party has proposed to transform the apprenticeship levy into a broader growth and skills levy which will extend financial support to other forms of training.
There is appeal in balancing incentives across different forms of training. Yet past experience with programmes such as individual learning accounts and train to gain shows that there is a need for effective regulation to ensure that this policy does not simply subsidise existing employer-provided training. In other countries with broader training subsidies, policymakers have drawn up lists of approved qualifications that are eligible for subsidies.
The current skills landscape suggests a need for action. Clear and stable incentives for high-quality training are essential irrespective of how training is labelled. There are concrete steps, such as reforming the apprenticeship levy, that the government should take to improve the existing skills system.
A Bristol-based apprenticeship provider has been awarded the highest rating from Ofsted at its first full inspection.
The education watchdog praised Professional Apprenticeships Ltd’s efforts that enable all apprentices to pass their end-point assessments, with 81 per cent achieving a distinction.
The provider launched in 2016 and offers apprenticeships in digital, technology, marketing, and business. At the time of Ofsted’s inspection in mid-August, the provider had 154 apprentices, 32 of whom were aged between 16 and 18.
In a report published on Friday, inspectors pointed out the “high-quality teaching” that apprentices receive.
Learners’ attitudes to work and their professional manner with future and current clients were also praised. “As such, they are very well prepared for their next steps in employment or further study,” the report said.
Professional Apprenticeships staff worked well with employers to formulate a curriculum for apprentices where they have quickly gained technical knowledge through shadowing and apply to their own work, Ofsted added.
“They coordinate apprentices’ training well so that they make significant and substantial progress from their starting points.
“For example, level 3 digital marketing apprentices working in marketing agencies often need to understand ‘pay per click’ early in the apprenticeship. In these cases, apprentices undertake shadowing of experienced colleagues before they are required to learn the technical content of the concept.”
Inspectors also found that staff particularly help those who have been disadvantaged by the pandemic and other socio-economic factors, which has resulted in a cohort of apprentices from all backgrounds.
Ofsted noted that three fifths of students pass first time and around four fifths of apprentices are expected to successfully achieve their apprenticeship this year.
The report additionally found that leaders use “thorough and well-considered quality assurance processes” to ensure a “highly effective” curriculum and put additional qualifications to good use to “enhance the apprentice’s knowledge and skills and strengthen their employability”.
Governors were also praised for continuing to challenge leaders to “set and monitor ambitious targets to maintain this advance” and said they have been “instrumental in shaping the provider’s strategy, focusing on limiting the curriculum offer to those sectors they have expert knowledge of”.
Carina Bush, a director at Professional Apprenticeships, said the whole team had worked “so hard” to achieve the grading.
“We’ve worked so hard to deliver the best recruitment, training, and support to our apprentices and employers, and the whole team is immensely proud of this achievement,” she said.
“We have lived and breathed apprenticeships for so long and we are excited to support more apprentices and employers throughout England.”
Staff at 32 colleges have voted to strike over low pay – but half of those balloted for national action failed to meet the turnout threshold.
The University and College Union (UCU) today called on college chiefs to negotiate “realistic” deals where workers have voted to down tools, warning that strikes could come as soon as November.
UCU balloted 89 colleges in total, but the 50 per cent turnout threshold required by law was only achieved in 32 colleges. Members at 13 colleges voted to settle their disputes after receiving pay offers of up to 8.5 per cent, but 43 colleges failed to hit the 50 per cent threshold.
Staff at another, North Warwickshire and South Leicestershire College, received a pay offer shortly after the ballot launched which paused their vote.
The union described the 50 per cent threshold as “anti-trade union” but refused to release the votes and turnouts for each college. UCU did however say that 90 per cent of the staff who did vote said they would back strike action.
UCU is demanding a pay offer in excess of RPI inflation, a national workload agreement, and a commitment to binding national pay negotiations. The ballot was launched on September 5 and closed yesterday.
Two weeks after the ballot launched the Association of Colleges (AoC) recommended its members offer staff pay rises of 6.5 per cent, in line with what is being offered to school teachers.
AoC chief executive David Hughes called on staff to “put down their ballot papers” after the recommendation was made.
From left: Jo Grady and David Hughes
UCU general secretary Jo Grady said: “Our members have emphatically voted to strike over the low pay and high workloads that plague further education. Good quality education cannot be built upon the backs of staff who cannot afford to heat and eat.
“The 6.5 per cent pay recommendation by the AoC is a good start but we fear many employers will simply ignore it as they’ve done in the past. Where employers can pay more, they should, the money is there.
“If college bosses want to avoid disruption, they need to offer realistic pay awards, address workloads, and make a commitment to binding national bargaining.”
Hughes said he was “disappointed” to see UCU move ahead with the ballot “after we made what UCU itself has described as a good start in putting college pay back where it should be.
“This year, after over a decade of government funding cuts, our campaigning helped secure extra funding for colleges to help match the pay award in schools. That money is welcome and allowed us to make a strong offer in response to UCU’s pay claim, but the unions know that, frustratingly, not every college will be able to offer 6.5 per cent because of the way the funding was distributed.”
Hughes added that the low number of colleges where the “crucial” threshold for pursuing strike action was reached shows that “most college staff agree that the settlement we recommended is reasonable”.
UCU’s further education committee will meet in the next two weeks to decide next steps.
Colleges that beat the 50% threshold and voted yes to strike:
Abingdon & Witney College,
Bath College,
Bolton College,
Bournemouth & Poole College,
Brockenhurst College,
Burton and South Derbyshire College,
Calderdale College,
Cambridge Regional College,
Capital City College Group,
City of Bristol College,
City of Wolverhampton College,
Colchester Institute,
Craven College,
Croydon College,
Farnborough College of Technology,
Furness College,
Gloucestershire College,
Hugh Baird College,
Isle of Wight College,
Loughborough College,
Myerscough College,
New College Swindon,
Newcastle and Stafford Colleges Group,
Nottingham College,
Petroc,
Runshaw College,
South Thames College,
The City of Liverpool College,
The Heart of Yorkshire Education Group,
Warrington & Vale Royal College,
Weymouth College,
Windsor Forest Colleges Group,
Colleges where UCU has now settled its dispute:
Bishop Auckland College
Bury College
Cheshire College
Dudley College
Ealing, Hammersmith & West London College
East Durham College
Exeter College
Leeds College of Building
Middlesborough College
City College Plymouth
Stoke on Trent College
Wiltshire College
Yeovil College
Colleges that failed to hit the 50% turnout threshold:
It’s Ada Lovelace Day – and what better time for digital skills, and technical education, to be top of the agenda. And indeed, with the prime minister’s focus on 16-19 education last week, this is a pivotal moment. Because it is absolutely critical we raise the aspiration and prestige of technical pathways if, as a nation, we are to compete globally and realise our industrial aims and economic needs.
In tech, where we at Ada, the National College for Digital Skills, are focused, employers are crying out for talent. Yet fewer than half of British employers believe young people are leaving education with sufficient digital skills to access the industry. And no wonder, when over 50 per cent of secondary schools in the UK were not even offering computer science as a GCSE in 2021.
So while I support the prime minister’s ambition, I question whether his proposals are the best way to achieve it.
Unaddressed gaps
Recruitment and retention problems in teaching are well known, but there is a regrettable lack of focus on FE – where the situation is far worse. According to research for the Lifelong Education Commission, staffing rates have fallen by one-third over the past 10 years.
So I fear that career bonuses of £30k, while obviously welcome, won’t be enough to recruit the high-calibre dual professionals we need, who can combine up-to-date experience and expertise in industry with the ability to teach young and adult students to a high standard. This is particularly the case in tech, which already commands salaries 80 per cent higher than average.
On top of this, we have seen at Ada that qualifications alone are insufficient. To be successful, young people need a strong technical foundation as well as excellent communication, project management, initiative, creativity and the experience and confidence to use these to good effect in the workplace. So blending is the right approach – but with more than just academic and technical education in the mixer.
An easier fix
There is another way to bring this expertise into our colleges. At Ada, we work in lock step with industry to deliver our bespoke curriculum, aimed at developing the skills businesses actually need. All our students work with current professionals and gain first-class industry experience through our partnerships with a raft of global businesses.
In common with the prime minister’s proposals, Ada students also follow a blended academic and vocational curriculum of BTECs and A levels, with T levels on the way. They already receive over 1,450 teaching hours over two years, very close to the Prime Minister’s figure of 1475, and the majority study maths to 18 (core or A level).
And this approach is delivering results. 91 per cent of Ada’s apprentice alumni are in aspirational tech-focused jobs. 98 per cent are in full-time employment or higher education. 43 per cent of Ada’s most recent graduating cohort of apprentices achieved first-class degrees validated by the Open University with 100 per cent passing their degree programme. Our high-performing sixth form was the top centre for the computing BTEC nationally in 2020, and among this summer’s sixth form graduates were two students taking up apprenticeships at Lloyds Banking Group – with starting salaries of £35k.
With T levels still bedding down, further change may be difficult to deliver and the outcome we all desire harder to achieve. So what is the answer?
Today marks the official opening of Ada’s fantastic new London campus – a state of the art tech space where our students, who have increased four-fold since our launch, can thrive. Interestingly, our new building – a converted free school and now a flagship technical institution – shows change doesn’t have to break the bank when everyone pulls in the same direction.
In Ada, government already has a blueprint for change and a proven approach for delivering the prime minister’s ambition quickly, with relatively modest resources and using established industry pathways employers already understand and support.
It’s great to hear the prime minister make the case for transformational technical careers – now we just need the right approach to achieve it.
This week is Colleges Week, the perfect time to celebrate the incredible work which our FE colleges do, offering a ladder of opportunity and the prospect of a skilled job to people.
Technical education means a foot in the door. It means practical, on-the-job experience and support to learn the vital skills that our economy – and country – needs. It opens up competitive sectors to people from disadvantaged backgrounds.
I share the vision of the prime minister and the education secretary to bring about parity of esteem between academic and technical education.
This is why T Levels were first introduced, and why we have made significant investment in apprenticeships, including degree apprenticeships, to broaden options and get people to take technical education seriously.
This is not the end of T Levels, which will be the backbone of the new qualification. Thousands of young people who have completed T Levels have gone on to apprenticeships, jobs with top employers, and places at university. This year, over 90% of T Level students passed, and over 95% completed an industry placement before getting their final results.
Our groundbreaking new qualification, the Advanced British Standard, will build on the success of T Levels and A-levels. Students will continue to have the option to do an industry placement.
By combining technical and academic routes into one qualification, we will boost the prestige of technical education and level the playing field. This will, at long last, put an end the artificial divide between academic and technical education.
T Levels will be the foundation of the technical options within the Advanced British Standard, and we will continue their roll-out. Those of you familiar with T Levels’ structure will recognise much in the proposals published last week, including a ‘core’ module, an occupational specialism and industry placement.
T Levels will be the foundation of the technical options within the Advanced British Standard
The Advanced British Standard represents the next steps in delivering much-needed reform of our 16-19 system, which we are backing with £600 million of initial investment.
That initial funding boost over two years includes offering payments of up to £6,000 tax free for teachers in key academic and technical shortage subjects such as maths and science in the first five years of their teaching career, helping to bring in the talented staff we need to deliver.
And, for the first time, we are extending these incentives to all FE colleges. It is wrong that they have been overlooked to date, so we are changing that.
The new qualification will raise the floor and extend the ladder of opportunity for everyone, providing more breadth, increased teaching time, and a greater focus on technical education. That’s how we will give our children the brighter future they deserve, by better preparing them for the future workplace.
The Advanced British Standard is a long-term reform that will take a decade to deliver in full. In the meantime, we will continue to champion and promote T Levels as an ongoing priority.
We will not hold back T Levels’ growth and development, or our wider reforms to technical qualifications. More T Level courses will be rolled out, and students will be encouraged to consider these options. Let’s not forget that, since launching in 2020, tens of thousands of students have already successfully enrolled in these high-quality qualifications.
A consultation will open this autumn on the Advanced British Standard, asking education providers and other stakeholders for their views on its development.
I am excited to work with you as we shape the proposals set out last week, which will build on T Levels’ success. These reforms will give young people the best start to adult life, through a world-class education system that prioritises the skills that businesses need.
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.
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.
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.
