‘Inadequate’ private provider escapes ESFA contract termination

An independent training provider will keep its government apprenticeship contract despite an ‘inadequate’ rating from Ofsted because of “unique” circumstances, FE Week understands. 

Officials at the Education and Skills Funding Agency have taken the unheard-of decision to retain the funding agreement for Medipro’s emergency care training and there will be no suspension on new starts.   

After the East of England Ambulance Service NHS Trust’s apprenticeship contract was terminated in late 2021 amid safeguarding concerns, the ESFA and Health Education England asked Medipro to take on 537 apprentices, in addition to its own 700 apprentices.    

In recognition of the “calamity” facing the sector and learners who would have been unable to complete their programme, Medipro agreed and spent £500,000 to open a new training school to house the apprentices.  

However the provider received the education watchdog’s lowest possible grade in a report published on Wednesday.   

Despite the report being full of praise for the training delivery, inspectors judged Medipro to be ‘inadequate’ overall because leaders had allegedly failed to act “quickly or effectively enough” to ensure a smooth transition for apprentices who the company was forced to step in and save.   

The majority of the transferred apprentices, many of whom were already past their planned end date and carried over very little allocated funding, have now completed their programme. At the time of Ofsted’s visit to Medipro in November, however, 230 of the apprentices were still on programme.   

The inspectorate said “too many” of the transferred apprentices are “demotivated” and “frustrated” by the “lack of guidance and clarity they receive about their progress”.   

Ofsted also claimed that the apprentices had experienced “long delays in the return of marked work and, in too many cases, have been without a tutor for a long period of time”.   

Medipro leaders “have not put in place the infrastructure and resources needed to support the significant growth in provision following the transfer,” the report said.   

“Leaders have not ensured that transferred apprentices have had a good learning experience. Consequently, too many of these apprentices are not making rapid enough progress.”   

The ESFA’s rules state that it will terminate an apprenticeship provider’s funding agreement if the company receives an ‘inadequate’ from Ofsted. The agency can however decide to not terminate in exceptional circumstances.   

The case highlights the risks for providers that agree to step in to complete the training for large cohorts of apprentices who unexpectedly find themselves without provision.   

Medipro told FE Week the agency has contacted them to confirm it will not cancel the apprenticeship contract but will monitor their provision.   

Brian English, managing director of Medipro, said: “Medipro is grateful to ESFA for taking the context of the report and our unique circumstances into account by deciding not to cancel our contract. This allows us to continue to support students in a much-needed sector. We will continue to engage with them whilst we are making the required improvements.”   

Medipro was given ‘requires improvement’ ratings in four of the five fields judged.   

Apart from those who have been transferred from another provider, inspectors found that apprentices are “fully attentive, motivated to learn and eager to participate in sessions”.   

The report said leaders and managers provide training that “meets the skills needs of the emergency and urgent care sector”, adding that leaders are qualified paramedics and understand the industry “extremely well”.   

Leaders and managers have also “designed a curriculum that contributes to meeting a significant skills gap in the sector” and recruit “qualified staff who are highly experienced in their field”.   

English said he was “disappointed” with Ofsted’s rating which he feels is “not a true reflection on the overall standard of training we provide”.   

“The report focused on the learners who were passed planned end date and many of them were in the group that transferred to Medipro from another provider,” he told FE Week.   

“Given the numbers of apprentices involved, the accelerated timeframe required for the transfer and that the learners were on paper-based portfolios, this process for the transfer was not straightforward but we supported it to ensure there was minimal disruption to this group of learners and to support the clinical workforce at a challenged time.”   

Phil Carver, regional director East of England at Health Education England, said: “Health Education England has fully supported Medipro as appropriate in relation to our apprentices. We will continue to work with the ESFA and other stakeholder partners to ensure our learners training pathway is not disrupted to ensure we protect the future NHS workforce.”   

An East of England Ambulance Service spokesperson said it was aware that some of its apprentices who transferred to Medipro have had “some difficulties which is reflected in the Ofsted report and we are sorry for their experiences”.   

“We are committed to working with Medipro to successfully support all apprentices through their qualification,” they added.   

The ESFA declined to comment. 

Vocational training sector mourns loss of ‘inspirational’ Steve Lawrence

Tributes have been paid to EEVT cofounder Steve Lawrence, who died at the weekend aged 71 following an illness.

Lawrence, who was managing director of EEVT, set up the business development firm in 1999 with his partner, Lisa Caley. His career in training and education spanned over 30 years and he would go on to play a leading role in the drive for diversity in apprenticeships.

Caley told FE Week that Lawrence died “after a battle bravely fought”.

“Passionate about education and training, Steve was a committed advocate for the sector and believed strongly that teaching and lifelong learning could change lives for the better. He always placed learners at the heart of everything he did, supporting many, often disadvantaged, into training and employment,” she said.

For over two decades, Lawrence and EEVT worked with businesses in vocational training and employment support sectors on bid writing, strategy development and business advice.

David Morley, director of Pitman Training Essex and Suffolk, said: “I have known Steve for over 20 years and he was always there whenever I wanted any advice or ideas to help our businesses.

“He was one of the nicest people I have met and always had time for you, no matter how busy or inconvenient it was for him. His death is a massive loss to us all and will be missed greatly.”

Meetu Madaan, managing director of Skills Provider Limited, said: “Can’t express how sad I am. He has always been by my side, ready to help, listen, support. He was true and honest inside out. I have known him for more than 10 years and he was one of the pillars of where I am now. You will always be remembered.”

Lawrence ran his own business but had also held roles at Reed In Partnership, Computer Gym UK and IC Training Centre, among others, and was the first head judge of the Multicultural Apprenticeships Awards.

Saf Ali, founder of the awards and CEO of Pathway Group, said: “The skills and employability sector has suffered a great loss with the passing of Steve Lawrence. Steve was genuinely valued for his honest talk, his knowledge, his honesty and openness to support and encourage others.”

Lawrence’s commitment to inclusion and diversity in apprenticeships was praised in a tribute from the Association of Employment and Learning Providers. Chief executive Jane Hickie said: “On behalf of AELP, I’d like to send our condolences to Steve’s family and friends. He was a strong advocate for a better skills system so this is a very sad day for our sector. In addition to his work with EEVT, Steve will be remembered fondly for his role as an ambassador at the Multicultural Apprenticeship Awards, helping to promote inclusion and diversity within apprenticeships.”

Caley added: “Steve was highly valued for knowledge, honesty and integrity, always happy to listen, help and support where he could. A mentor, inspiration, oracle, or legend, depending on who you ask. He truly was one of a kind and is a great loss to the industry.

“I would like to say thank you for everyone’s comments about Steve. He would be moved and humbled and it has been a great comfort to read them all. He will be missed more than words can say.”

Principal and social mobility tsar to move colleges

Principal and new interim chair of the social mobility commission Alun Francis is moving college.

Having led Oldham College for more than a decade Francis announced today that he is set to join Blackpool and the Fylde College as principal later this year.

He will replace Bev Robinson at Blackpool who will be retiring after a near-30-year career in further education.

Francis joined Oldham College in 2010 from Oldham Council where he served as director of transforming learning. He was made an OBE in the Queen’s New Year 2021 Honours for his services to education.

Francis said it was a “tough decision” to leave Oldham for Blackpool.

“I have huge affection for our staff and learners, and for the wider Oldham community, because we have been on amazing journey together,” he added.

Francis was named as the new deputy of the government’s Social Mobility Commission in October.

He stepped up to be chair of the commission last week, for an interim period at least, after Katharine Birbalsingh – Britain’s so-called “strictest headteacher” at Michaela Community School in London – quit.

Writing exclusively for FE Week, she said her controversial opinions “puts the commission in jeopardy” and was doing “more harm than good”.

Francis will now lead the commission until a permanent chair is appointed.

His departure date from Oldham College, which is judged as ‘good’ by Ofsted, is yet to be finalised and arrangements for the appointment of his successor will also be confirmed at a later date.

Bev Robinson

Robinson has led Blackpool and the Fylde College, also judged ‘good’ by Ofsted, since 2013 and will be retiring in the summer.

She has been a contributor to influential government reviews including serving as a member on the independent panels for both the Augar review on post-18 education and Sainsbury review on technical education.

Robinson, who was made a CBE for services to further education in the King’s new year honours list 2023, is also on the board of the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education – a role she will continue in her retirement.

DfE and Ofsted staff to hold one-day strike

Staff at the Department for Education and Ofsted will go on strike for one day on February 1 as part of coordinated action across the civil service.

It is not yet known how many staff will walk out as part of the strike by the Public and Commercial Services Union in 124 government departments and agencies, which also includes the Office for Students and Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education.

It follows votes in favour of industrial action over pay, pensions, jobs and redundancy terms last year.

At the DfE, 911 staff, or 88 per cent of the 1,031 employees who cast a vote in the ballot were in favour of industrial action. The 1,816 PCS members at the department equate to 24 per cent of its total workforce.

Of the 161 Ofsted employees who voted, 88 per cent were in favour. In total, 291 staff members – 16 per cent of the inspectorate’s workforce – were entitled to vote.

It comes as results of ballots of school staff by the National Education Union, NASUWT teaching union and NAHT school leaders’ union are awaited. 

PCS general secretary Mark Serwotka said he had “warned the government our dispute would escalate if they did not listen – and we’re as good as our word”. 

He said he was meeting ministers tomorrow, and if they put some more money on the table “there is a chance this dispute can be resolved”. 

If not, the government will see “public services from benefits to driving tests, from passports to driving licences, from ports to airports affected by industrial action on February 1”.

It comes after FE Week’s sister paper Schools Week revealed that more than 500 Department for Education staff have applied for pay-outs to quit under a “selective voluntary exit scheme” for staff “who don’t have the skills the department needs for the future”.

Degree awarding powers put colleges at the heart of future prosperity

With employer and government concern about skills shortages at higher technical levels, let’s shine a spotlight on the power of colleges to create the talented thinkers and workforce needed for the UK labour market: Degree awarding powers.

NCG occupies a unique position in college-based higher education (CBHE). We have held taught degree awarding powers (TDAP) for six years. Indeed, last year marked our tenth year as an awarding institution, with our power to award foundation degrees granted in 2012.

For the past six years we have had the autonomy and flexibility to validate provision from certificate in higher education to masters (level 7), passing foundation degrees (levels 4 and 5) and bachelor’s degrees (level 6) along the way. This means we can nurture the talent of our students from entry level, studying further education, all the way through to our post-graduate master’s provision.

In a blog at the start of the autumn term, Collab Group CEO, Ian Pretty talked about the UK’s collective bias toward universities.  Those working in CBHE have become quite used to the prompt “… and colleges” as we remind employer groups and government alike about our level 4, 5, 6 universities “… and colleges”. We are used to sharpening our elbows as we maintain space in higher education following the removal of student number control and the drift of universities into the college-based higher education space.

But hopefully, times are changing. The recent skills and post-16 education act and all the talk of levelling up have reduced the need for the “…and college” prompt and sharp elbows. The landscape has shifted to one of higher and further education collaboration and partnership.  

But collaboration must mean mutual respect for what that looks and feels like to both parties. It must be a two-way street and balanced, with both parties valued for what they are bringing to the table. Without that, it can quickly begin to take the form of a takeover, rather than collaboration.

Without mutual respect, it could quickly begin to take the form of a takeover

This new spirit of collaboration must not become a thin veil for a way of a recruiting more students into universities, with these seeing further education as feeder material at best and easy pickings at worst. It is about supporting the wider community and working with like-minded institutions. Trust, respect, clear communication will all help to create a new context for provision that ensures a steady state for students and offers them the right outcomes to succeed in their ambitions.

Which brings us back to degree awarding powers, which we must use as a sector to create a ‘by colleges, for colleges’ solution in response to the challenges the country faces of skills shortages, low productivity and a rapidly changing workplace. Designing and developing the provision we need to meet these obstacles to prosperity now requires colleges with degree awarding powers to work in partnership with further education colleges to deliver higher education.

An Office for Students’ pilot project with the Open University launched last year, trialling an offer of level-4 and -5 technical and vocational courses in partnership with FE colleges, was a good start. It recognised colleges as important to higher education delivery. But it’s still a bit “… and colleges”. Few know the needs of those furthest from higher education better than further education colleges, and this is among the most compelling reasons to team up with a college with degree awarding powers to bring innovative, technical provision to our students.

As a sector, we know that students who study college-based higher education are discerning. They make a conscious, credible, positive choice to study higher education at college. We must reject the biased deficit position that more must be done to encourage them to attend university. Students stay and succeed at college because it is great, not because they are not ready for university.

We have the power, and we have an important role to play in filling a gap that has too long held learners and the economy back. If we believe in the unique value we bring, others will believe in it too. And that can spell the end of “… and colleges”.

Citizenship: FE must play its part in bridging political inequalities

Citizenship education plays an important role in fostering the competences and qualities that young people need in order to participate effectively in a democratic society. Extant research shows that it can promote political knowledge, skills and engagement both through the formal curriculum and through open discussions of political and social issues in class. Moreover, citizenship education also helps to reduce inequalities in political outcomes, with studies from different contexts showing that it is associated with smaller social gaps in political knowledge, political interest and voting intentions. These studies found that children from disadvantaged backgrounds benefit more from citizenship education than children from middle-class families.

Given these advantages, one would expect citizenship education to feature prominently in current discussions around the reform of vocational education and training (VET). However, it is conspicuously absent in the government’s white paper on post-16 technical and vocational education and training, which exclusively focuses on advanced technical skills.

This is a missed opportunity, all the more so as our current system of technical and vocational education does not offer any general courses such as citizenship education. As a rule, only practical, job-related subjects and training are provided.

Compared to other European countries, further education is highly specialised in England, meaning that not only students on vocational pathways but also many of those sitting A levels do not study any courses that prepare for democratic citizenship, such as citizenship education, history or social studies. By contrast, in France students in upper secondary vocational education also take ‘enseignement moral et civique’, history and geography.

This lack of citizenship education in post-16 VET may well explain why there is a marked difference in political engagement between those taking the academic pathway and those studying for a vocational qualification, as demonstrated by various recent studies. Taking family background and pre-16 levels of political engagement into account, A level students have significantly higher levels of voting and participation in demonstrations than students in VET.

A recently published report based on research funded by the Nuffield Foundation found that the branching out of post-16 education into academic and vocational pathways indeed had this inequality-fuelling effect. More specifically, it found that students doing A levels were not only more politically interested at age 16 (i.e. before this branching out) but also that their political interest rose significantly faster than that of students going for a VET qualification after the age of 16.

The report could not assess whether this was due to a lack of citizenship education in VET. But as students in VET are more often from disadvantaged backgrounds and tend to be less politically engaged to begin with, it isn’t a huge leap to suggest that the absence of citizenship from VET curriculums may well be amplifying pre-existing inequalities in political engagement.

The same report also found a marked genderdifference in the development of political interest between ages 16 and 30: while men already had a higher level of political interest at age 16, their level increased more than that of women after age 16, resulting in a much greater gender gap at age 30.  Looking more specifically at what might explain this divergence, it found that women with vocational qualifications were the only group that experienced a decline in political interest between ages 16 and 30. This suggests that tailor-made forms of citizenship education could be particularly effective in promoting political engagement in vocational pathways among girls, such as those focusing on care, hospitality or beauty.

There are strong indications that the pronounced specialisation in the English further education system, as exemplified by the absence of citizenship education, exacerbates inequalities in political engagement. We would need an international longitudinal survey of young people devoted to civic attitudes and citizenship education to draw a more definite conclusions, but there is no reason not to act now.

Whether or not the absence is driving class and gender inequalities, some provision will doubtless have a positive impact on closing the gap. Providers and reformers alike should care deeply about doing so.  

The Staffroom: How to develop a student-centred approach

Human connection in the classroom is the golden thread to human flourishing, and this works both ways for teachers and students. I am an advocate for the idea that in order to develop knowledge, skills and behaviours need to be developed and practiced first. This approach to classroom practice is built on values, empathy, trust, ambition, integrity, kindness and belief.

The way I teach is informed by my own lived educational experiences, from a time when I never fitted in and felt I did not belong in a classroom, unnoticed, voiceless and lacking confidence. Now as a teacher, I am inspired by the work of Eduardo Briceño on the performance zone (where all our focus is on immediate results) and the learning zone (where our focus is on improving future performance). His key insight that performance can get in the way of improvement has shaped my classroom and pedagogy for many years.

But for me, the missing part of Briceño’s learning model is the values required to develop a culture where students feel they belong, not just filled with techniques such as retrieval practice, cold calling, and do-now activities. These are great techniques, but they can’t be allowed to overtake connection, community and curiosity.

So my lessons were about connectedness. Students sitting at desks and ‘just getting on with the tasks’ seemed to be to create barriers, damage autonomy and foster dependence. Instead, I set out to create a classroom culture that was student-centred – where the learning zone and values were entwined. This seemed to me like the best way to stay in tune with the world my students were inhabiting, to meet them where they were.

I had a basic classroom. My walls were not full of content or award charts. I had four banks of desks made up of three tables and chairs for six students at each bank. On the walls next to the desks, each group had their own large whiteboard. These were framed each day with a template, and students added to them as part of a retrieval task which would then lead into the lesson. It wasn’t just about what they knew or could remember, but more about identifying any gaps and adapt my lesson accordingly.

Far from isolating us, technology formed our community

An additional benefit was that it encouraged students to get out of their seats, to talk to each other, walk around and help others with their boards. As the teacher, I had time to join the groups, to help and support, and to ask questions that would prevent me from making limiting assumptions about their knowledge. There was a buzz, but more than that; Students said they felt confident when standing up and moving. There was connection and community

I would then capture all the whiteboard content at the end of the lesson with a photo I then added to their Google Classroom. The technology aspect of our classroom culture transformed how students learned as well as how I taught. Indeed, learning to use these new tools was another way that I could reach out and meet my learners where they were – comfortable in the digital world.

Technology connected me to my students beyond our face-to-face lessons – an experience every teacher will have felt deeply during lockdowns. Far from isolating us, it formed our community. It allowed me to include those who had missed lessons and to share lesson content, assignments and lesson recordings, and to review to review and feedback on their work at any time, in and out of lessons. Chat functions enabled me to connect with them and encouraged them to connect with each other. I wasn’t their only champion; They grew to champion each other. Human connection was happening at every stage, building relationships, empathy, trust, ambition, integrity, kindness and belief.

There are many techniques to foster learning and progress. But the enemy of human connection in education is not technology. It is our fixation on performance. By putting our values first, we can create a learning zone all our students want to inhabit and are welcomed into.

This article is one of a number of contributions to The Staffroom from the authors of Great FE Teaching: Sharing Good Practice, edited by Samantha Jones and available from SAGE.

Tackling the problem of employer demand for reskilling

According to the World Economic Forum, 44 per cent of the skills employees need to perform their roles will have changed by 2025, and nine in 10 workers will need some form of reskilling. In that context, the results of two recent UK surveys are concerning. They reveal that 61 per cent of employees feel they don’t have the skills they need for the next five years and 26 per cent haven’t participated in workplace training for a decade.

The work and employment expert group, ReWAGE recently carried out an analysis of existing research for Gatsby Education. We found that there is an urgent need to upskill and reskill adult workers to enable the UK to meet the upcoming challenges facing its future prosperity and productivity, and that there could be huge risks in failing to take action.

Successive governments and employers have all agreed that training is valuable, but as the statistics demonstrate this is not always backed up with practical action.

Government can do a lot to encourage the upskilling of jobs: shaping practice in the public sector, encouraging initiatives such as the NHS Skills Escalator and ensuring that official contracts prioritise good employment practices. It also needs to actively support employers to work collaboratively and upskill workers.

But first of all we need to have an honest appraisal of systematic problems and fully embrace the fact that employers, while being part of the problem in the way that they are increasingly choosing to ‘hire in’ skills rather than upskill existing employees, are also a crucial part of the solution.

The key issue here is how to move employers from the role of ‘customers’ in the skills system to that of co-producers. Many excellent employers do take the lead in this area, but there is a clear need for a sustained conversation with employers about their contribution to what should be a joint enterprise, as well as a recognition that some employers need more basic support before they can tackle upskilling.

We lack a system for training workers in the theory and practice of workplace learning

Local Skills Improvement Plans (LSIPs) are a potential vehicle for nurturing this more in-depth conversation and moving the dialogue between training providers and employers to a new level. By encouraging employers to focus on increasing skills-based training and measuring increased numbers of apprenticeships and adult training, their involvement can evolve beyond simple links to colleges and local providers and into the stimulation of further skills-based training within their own organisations.

A great deal of learning happens in the workplace and attention needs to be paid to the development of those responsible for formal training, enabling them to develop their skills and expertise in both the subject matter and the educational process.

But let’s not forget the important role of informal training. In the UK, while individuals do mentor and develop others there is little support available for these activities. Many employees do these things well, but relying on individual interest, effort and talent is both unreliable and unsupportive. We lack a system for training workers in the theory and practice of workplace learning.

By contrast, an integral part of Germany’s ‘Meister’ (master craftsman) qualification – the stage after apprenticeship – is learning to teach, support and develop people as they learn skills at work. As a result, every German workplace includes senior workers who have learned to develop others and who see it as part of their job.

Improving links, collaboration and co-operation between adult training and education, private training providers, FE colleges and universities is also key, as is using independent advice on skills to drive policy.

The department for education’s unit for future skills (UFS) is already actively improving the quality of information on skills. It would be helpful to build on this through an independent body, working closely with the UFS but outside government and modelled on the lines of the low pay commission, to provide policy recommendations.

In the meantime, it’s clear that that the dialogue between providers and employers facilitated by LSIPs must move to the next stage. Employers can’t simply rely on colleges and others to adapt to their needs. They too must adapt to make learning a reality for their employees.

Maths to 18: A welcome opportunity to refresh and engage

It’s more than a week since Rishi Sunak’s pledge for all young people to study “some form of maths” to the age of 18. With detail distinctly absent, we know that the prime minister wants the planning done within this parliament and implementation in the next. This timing is an opportunity for consultation, for policy makers to consider the complexity of the issue, and to deliver a well-informed, fit-for-purpose national strategy.

There are several big issues. Aside from the fact that the policy would require significant additional funding, many commentators have highlighted the shortage of maths teachers and the struggle many colleges face to staff their existing maths classes. Currently, around 43 per cent of our FE learners study maths; colleges would need double that number if the policy is to be qualifications-based. What calibre of teachers are needed, where will these teachers come from, and what training do they need? The rapid decline of maths specialist teachers in FE will need to be reversed. We will also need further investment in high-quality CPD programmes to support effective teaching.

And then there’s the curriculum. Are we looking at stand-alone maths or functionality? Is it vocationally-specific maths, or transferable skills?

Fundamental to this is meeting the diverse needs of learners, only a small minority of whom will have actively chosen to study maths. Around 40 per cent of young people fail to achieve a GCSE grade 4 in maths at 16, with vast majority re-sitting in FE colleges. Fewer than 20 per cent of these achieve a grade 4 each year, and sadly a significant proportion actually decrease in grade.

Then there’s the 60 per cent who do achieve a GCSE grade 4. Some progress to A level and others study level 3 core maths qualifications, but uptake is very low. Will progression for them simply mean to a higher level, or focus on greater application of skills? Wherever the policy leads, a greater variety of options for learners will be essential.

Fundamental to this is meeting the diverse needs of learners

The Centres for Excellence in Maths (CfEM) programme was tasked by the department for education with delivering sustained improvements in level 2 maths attainment in colleges. Working with 21 colleges and their networks, covering 95 per cent of colleges nationally, this five-year project provides a clear steer on how any future policy might enable engagement and attainment in FE maths. The project focused particularly on an adapted form of mastery teaching, alongside building networks of maths professionals across colleges, which proved invaluable.

One of the principles key to this programme’s success has been ‘belief in success’, developing a culture in which everyone believes everyone can succeed. To achieve this, particular effort was made to upskill teachers to use coaching, mindset and resilience strategies with their learners. This has implications for initial teacher training and CPD and demonstrates the need to value and foster the soft skills of maths teachers as a priority.

In addition, many CfEM colleges are reporting success with teaching for mastery approaches that emphasise conceptual understanding, reasoning and problem solving. Those with low grades appear to benefit disproportionately from the use of visual models and representations to support their understanding. The colleges are currently developing a set of mastery lessons for GCSE re-sit and functional skills teachers which will be available to the sector by the end of March. Such approaches need to be embedded more fully in FE maths practices at all levels.

Importantly, delivering the prime minister’s ambition will depend upon full engagement with a frustrated profession. In a recent ETF survey of 4,252 staff, 82 per cent of respondents told us the most rewarding aspect of their job is inspiring students, changing lives and making a difference. But the survey also revealed widespread challenges with lack of funding (31 per cent), recruitment (19 per cent) and the changing sector landscape (18 per cent).

Only a policy that recognises this, has practical application and is grounded in evidence will truly meet the needs of the sector and its learners.