Let’s ensure that apprenticeship reform doesn’t set us back a decade

AAT has been at the heart of apprenticeships since End-Point Assessments (EPAs) were introduced in 2017 and before that by way of using our qualifications as a core element.  And as members of the Level 2-4 assistant accountant trailblazer group, we’ve been working closely with the government on the detail underpinning their reform. We take this role seriously, with a clear focus on delivering the best outcomes for apprentices and employers.  

The government’s ambition to make apprenticeships simpler, more flexible and more cost-effective is absolutely right. It’s something we can all agree on. Through apprenticeships, we’ve been able to open-up careers for more people, which positively contributes to in addressing the skills shortages within the UK.

However, we’re at risk of turning the clock back on the progress made since the 2012 Richard Review. To deliver for learners, employers, and the economy, I’m urging policymakers to prioritise three principles: effective collaboration, maintaining standards and consistency, and protecting learner outcomes. 

Effective collaboration  

There’s growing concern across the sector about the lack of detail on how these reforms will play out in practice. Without this, we risk disrupting the apprenticeship journey and crucially undermine learner and employer confidence in a system we’ve been fighting so hard for, for the past decade.  

To work, reforms require close partnership between the government, regulation, awarding organisations (AOs) such as AAT, and employers. What’s becoming clear as I speak to colleagues and partners, is that we’re not all speaking with one voice. We’ve seen already Ofqual’s consultation proposing that revised assessment plans should only be available for new starters. This is a misalignment with the messaging from the government that existing transitional rules will be applied. Mixed messages like these could lead to a disjointed landscape undermining progress, leading to confusion and uncertainty on the part of all awarding organisations, training providers and employers, who are ultimately the key driving forces working together to ensure the success of these reforms.  The end result of this could be less potential apprentices on quality programmes.

Maintaining standards and consistency  

Apprenticeships are now firmly and quite rightly taking their place at the table, alongside traditional routes like a university degree. This is because we’ve all worked so hard to ensure the apprenticeship assessment is rigorous, transparent and consistent – meaning students can be confident that their hard work will help open doors and be recognised because employers know and value exactly what they’re getting. The 2023 DfE survey found 80 per cent of employers view EPAs as essential for validating occupational competence.  

With no clearly defined approach to how employers will verify behaviors and the removal of explicit references to apprenticeship behaviours within the new standards, we’re at risk of eroding the quality and objectivity that has made apprenticeships the success they are.  

Protecting learner outcomes  

Learners are and should remain at the heart of apprenticeships. Protecting learner outcomes means delivering reforms that are transparent and consistent, preparing apprentices for real-world challenges. But uncertainty around shifting standards is already causing anxiety, with some apprentices worried about delays to their qualifications or job prospects. Equally, employers will become unwilling to invest in a system they are unclear about.  

The overall ambition being proposed is difficult to argue against.  Collaboration between the government, awarding organisations and employers will be vital to delivering clear, timely guidance for a smooth transition and most importantly to retain confidence and value in apprenticeships and apprentices.   

For apprenticeships to thrive, we must protect the quality and objectivity of assessments, retain employer trust and above all, we must protect learner outcomes.   

Governors Havant a clue about college’s finances going South

Trust between leaders and governors at a Hampshire college has broken down after the full scale of its deteriorating financial position came “out of the blue”, an FE Commissioner report has revealed.

Shelagh Legrave’s team found that Havant and South Downs College (HSDC), which teaches around 7,000 students across three campuses, entered severe financial distress last year after senior leaders lost control of finances.

Her report, completed in May but only published today, said governors were “not appropriately sighted on, or informed of, the financial risks developing” and that some board members told investigators the news of the crisis came “out of the blue”.

“The financial pressure the college was facing was more significant than had been initially recognised,” the report added. “Some [governors] were now questioning how they could regain trust in information they would be given as a board in the future.”

The Department for Education placed HSDC in formal intervention earlier this year following the discovery of mounting deficits that “shocked” governors, “inaccuracies in financial reporting” and “poor financial controls”.

Large-scale redundancies have since hit staff, and the college’s principal has decided to retire.

Governors in the dark

The FE Commissioner said the college has experienced a “significant fall” in 16 to 18-year-old learner numbers in recent years, with “consequent year-on-year reduction in income”.

Until summer 2024, the college’s management accounts and budget forecasts suggested a healthy position, with plans for a small surplus.

But by October, the finance team admitted that the year would end in deficit after “late identification” of expenditure.

Governors told the FE Commissioner’s team they were blindsided. Some had believed the college’s position was stable after earlier positive assurances from an external governance review and a ‘good’ Ofsted rating.

Ofsted’s report, published in May 2024, judged that “well-informed governors provide leaders with strong challenge, support and strategic direction”. 

And an external governance review in July 2024 found that board structures and processes were “currently effective”. The external review noted that “governance provides senior management with one of its lines of defence” and that “the current approach should give assurance to stakeholders that the college is managing its assets prudently”.

But Legrave’s team found that financial reporting to the board had been “inaccurate”, and there was “risky reliance” on future land-sale receipts to fund an “ambitious property strategy”.

The college also did not report financial contribution by campus and although its recovery plan “addresses some inefficiencies”, it is “unclear if each individual campus is financially viable”.

There was also an “expressed concern from staff” that communication is “limited, mostly one way, leadership remote and closed, and that staff have not been kept informed of the issues that the college is facing”.

Legrave said: “There will inevitably be work the principal and executive need to lead and undertake to restore confidence and trust in leadership’s financial oversight and the information being presented to the board and to the wider college.”

An HSDC spokesperson said reference to governance and leadership by the FE Commissioner “was in February and is now outdated”, adding that there has been a “refresh of the leadership team since this date and the executive team work in a highly effective way with governors”.

Gast-off: Redundancies and leadership exit

HSDC’s principal Mike Gaston warned staff in July that “significant redundancies” were inevitable as part of a recovery plan.

As FE Week previously reported, the college planned to axe around 100 workers as it tries to bring its staff-cost ratio — which hit 72 per cent of turnover — back within the FE Commissioner’s benchmark of 65 per cent or below.

The University and College Union announced three days of strike at HSDC in June. HSDC said only one strike day was taken.

HSDC said today its restructure resulted in a staffing reduction “of 67.28 full-time equivalent (FTE)”, made up of “redundancies (42.91 FTE), retirements, resignations and post deletions”.

Gaston, who has led the college for a decade, has announced his retirement for early 2026 but will remain in post through the recovery process.

Governance overhaul

In response to the intervention, HSDC’s governors have created a new recovery, sustainability and accountability (RSA) committee to oversee “the developing financial sustainability plan”.

The board has also committed to redesigning its management accounts, producing campus-level financial analysis, and introducing clearer key performance dashboards for enrolment, curriculum efficiency and cash flow.

The long-term sustainability of the college “is in the control of the board and senior leaders, but it is recognised the path to financial recovery presents a major operational challenge”, Legrave’s report concluded.

HSDC said that since May, the college has appointed “new governors with expertise in finance, audit, education and stakeholder engagement” and “enhanced staff and student voice mechanisms to ensure inclusive decision-making”.

HSDC’s spokesperson said the college “acknowledges the findings of the FE Commissioner’s report and accepts its recommendations in full”.

“The report reflects a challenging period for the college, and we are committed to addressing the concerns raised with transparency, urgency and care,” they added.

A formal FE Commissioner “stocktake” visit is scheduled for November 2025.

Helping every learner use AI responsibly

The AI genie is well and truly out of the bottle.

AI’s influence on further education isn’t a slow burn. It’s quickly reshaping how we teach, assess and think about knowledge itself. In FE, conversations about AI have often centred on practical implementation and staff efficiency – important goals in themselves.

But for AI integration to be effective, students will need support in developing digital judgement and applying these tools with care. The challenge now is to build the confidence, skills and judgement needed to make AI a force for better learning – not just faster work.

Confidence isn’t competence

According to the upcoming Pearson College Report 2025, launching next month, 62% of college students feel confident using AI to support their learning. That’s the good news. The twist? Many don’t feel confident choosing appropriate tools, applying them accurately and fairly, or judging the quality of AI content.

One in five say they want to learn how to use AI more accurately and fairly, and nearly as many say they need help understanding how to use it ethically. Meanwhile, most tutors agree the curriculum needs to evolve to embed digital and AI skills, and over half say they need more support themselves.

There’s a gap – a significant one – between how students are using AI and what they’re being taught. Tutors can see it. Many cite the increasing use of AI in teaching, learning and assessment as one of the top challenges they’ll face this year.

While some learners are already confident with AI, many are still experimenting – copying, pasting and refining prompts without clear guidance on how to use these tools well.

Why digital confidence matters

This isn’t about banning AI or policing behaviour. For AI integration to be truly effective, guidance and digital judgement will be key.

As AI becomes woven into everyday life and learning, familiar priorities like safeguarding, academic integrity and employability are being shaped by AI – adding new layers to the digital landscape that students must navigate.

Can learners recognise bias in AI outputs? Do they know when a chatbot is bluffing? Can they credit their sources, explain their thinking and use AI as part of their own process rather than instead of it? Those are the skills that turn AI from a shortcut into a genuine support tool.

A practical place to start

At Basingstoke College of Technology (BCoT), staff could see the gap – so they decided to act.

Supported by Pearson, they developed AI Essentials, a short, self-paced course that introduces students to responsible and reflective use of AI. It’s not a qualification or a coding module. It’s a 90-minute foundation designed to build confidence, curiosity and awareness.

Delivered during induction or tutorial sessions, it explores questions such as:

  • What exactly is AI, and where do we come across it?
  • What makes an AI-generated answer helpful or harmful?
  • How can students use these tools without crossing ethical lines?
  • What does fairness look like when a chatbot can write your essay?

Richard Harris, a Digital and IT Lecturer at BCoT, saw the impact straight away. “It was fantastic to see students not just getting excited about the topic but really starting to think critically about the content they consume every day. It’s given them up-to-date, practical skills that will be vital for their future.”

The college worked with Pearson to host the course on ActiveHub, making it available across departments under a site licence. It’s designed to flex around different courses and teaching schedules – the aim is to start a conversation, not add another layer of workload.

What’s at stake

A recent report from the Institute for the Future of Work ranks AI literacy among the top priorities for employers across every sector. They’re not just looking for coders – they’re looking for critical thinkers who can use technology thoughtfully and responsibly.

If students aren’t supported to use AI well, we could see a new kind of digital divide – not based on access, but on understanding. That gap could quietly influence learning outcomes, confidence and future opportunities.

With its close ties to both employers and learners, further education is well placed to help close that gap. Not through sweeping reforms or expensive new frameworks, but through small, structured steps that bring AI into everyday learning in a safe, thoughtful way.

Anthony Bravo OBE, Principal of BCoT, added: “This isn’t about being cutting edge. It’s about being responsible. Our job is to get students ready for what’s next – to help them make smart, ethical choices with AI, now and in the future.”

The genie is already out of the bottle. We don’t need to put it back in. We just need to learn how to work with it – and help students do the same.

Find out more about the AI Essentials course developed by BCoT and supported by Pearson: Access your sample pack

Ofsted reforms ‘the most sensible’ way forward, Oliver tells MPs

Ofsted chief inspector Sir Martyn Oliver and chair Christine Gilbert were grilled by MPs on Parliament’s education committee today ahead of next month’s rollout of new-style inspections and report cards.

Here’s what we learned.

Consultation response was ‘transparent’

Liberal Democrat MP Caroline Voaden pressed Oliver on Ofsted’s refusal to publish a breakdown of the 6,500 consultation responses it received regarding new “report card” inspections.

Unions have criticised the decision to provide only a narrative summary as “deeply problematic”.

Voaden cited findings from the “alternative big consultation” – a smaller carbon copy of the consultation, run by a group of former HMIs – which found just one in 10 people viewed Ofsted’s proposals as an improvement on the current framework.

She described this as “a pretty damning verdict” and asked if Ofsted chose not to publish its own consultation responses, because it received similar findings.

Oliver rejected this, saying: “I think we have published openly and transparently the views that were expressed to us.

“We set out really clearly the negativity that we heard against what we proposed to consult on.”

He added the finalised framework “has changed in so many ways” since consultation.

Requests for a “granular breakdown”, he said, reflected a “fundamental misunderstanding of what a consultation is”, adding that “it’s not a plebiscite or a vote”.

Union tensions a ‘concern’

Oliver said the fact the new inspection framework has failed to win confidence of teaching unions “does concern me”, but going forward he “takes confidence” from the response of “those who’ve actually experienced an inspection” under the new framework “as opposed to those who are theoretically looking at the toolkits”.

“Those in the test visits, all of the challenges that they raised, which allowed us to refine our approach for the final consultation, have come forward and said, you know, this feels better,” the chief inspector added.

But he was not able to say whether Ofsted will publish its analysis of pilot inspections that are currently underway.

Today, the Association of School and College Leaders shelved plans to ask leaders to quit as Ofsted inspectors but has now vowed to “explore legal action” against the reforms.

Headteachers’ union NAHT has already filed a legal challenge against Ofsted’s reforms in the high court. 

Ofsted complaints go ‘further than almost all regulators’

Gilbert, who published a damning review into Ofsted’s response to Perry’s death before becoming chair, said progress has been made by the inspectorate.

She described Ofsted’s new complaints processes as “much more human” and “far better” than it used to be. “The terrible tales I heard when I was doing the review … that does not happen now, you can talk to a person.”

But she said looking at making the process independent from Ofsted is “really key”.

“I’ll look at the options for… greater independence in the process, and we’ll come back to that hopefully by about February, March time.”

Oliver said he feels Ofsted “go[es] as far and if not further than almost all of the regulators in this country, with dealing with complaints.” 

“But do I think we can go further? I think we can.” He welcomed the “experience” and “challenge” Gilbert will bring.

Board ‘will be looking at ourselves’

Gilbert’s 2024 review of Ofsted found the role of its board “appear[ed] curiously limited”, and called for it to be strengthened.

Having now been at its helm for around six weeks, she assured the education committee the Ofsted board “won’t be taking reports, nodding, and saying ‘well done’”. “We will be looking ourselves at…engaging with the sector.”

Meanwhile Oliver said the new framework “removes the ‘gotcha’ moment” from inspections and “will allow complaints to surface during the inspection rather than at the end” when “they’re allowed to fester”.

Inspectors will “talk to the provider and explain what they’re seeing” as they go, rather than revealing a grade at the end of day two.

More details on inspector ‘matching’ process

Oliver also gave insight into Ofsted’s plans to match inspectors with settings they have had experience in.

He said Ofsted had “undertaken what they are confident saying is the largest data set on civil servants, to match their experience and expertise”. He said this comprises “two million sets of data” on HMIs.

He added Ofsted now specified settings when advertising for HMI.

“Each region has looked at its strengths and deficits of experience and it’s advertising to fill that pool. We’re on it,” he said.

MPs also cited the independent wellbeing impact assessment recently commissioned by Ofsted, which found the new framework “does not reduce the pressure on leaders…and is likely to increase stress and workload”.

Asked whether this means Ofsted “has failed” in its bid to reduce pressure on leaders, Oliver said Ofsted has “made very significant changes” to the framework in light of the report.

“I can’t make inspection entirely stress free, any more than exams or tests can be stress free, but I am doing all that I can to make them manageable, constructive and, above all, useful to leaders.”

He added: “We’ve tried to find the most sensible way throughout all of this, and I think the new report card does that. It has an at a glance grade, it has the narrative which the trade unions have pushed for, it has the data, it has the context – it has all of those in the round.”

Oliver ‘corrects the record slightly’ on Caversham inspector

An inquest in December 2023 ruled that Ofsted “contributed” to headteacher Ruth Perry’s suicide. Coroner Heidi Connor said the conduct of the inspection was among the “most important areas of concern”, with some elements of it “rude and intimidating”.

Oliver today backtracked on an assertion he made at a previous committee hearing in January, when he said there was “no suggestion” inspectors involved in the fateful inspection at Caversham Primary School, where Perry was headteacher, “did a bad job or did anything wrong whatsoever”.

He thanked the committee this morning for the “opportunity…to try and correct that record slightly”.

Oliver accepted that “clearly” the coroner found “concerns about the way the conduct” of that inspection took place.

The individual inspector has also “reflected” on their conduct and the coroner’s findings while Ofsted is taking responsibility for “all of its actions”.

The chief inspector later dismissed claims that the inspector has been “promoted”, adding that they were taken out of their role and has been given “a different role and different challenge”.

DWP’s skills takeover won’t impact inspection

The recent announcement that control of adult skills policy will move from the Department for Education to the Department for Work and Pensions is unlikely to have any impact on inspections.

Oliver told MPs today: “At this stage, I don’t anticipate any significant change to our inspection activity resulting from responsibility moving from some policy areas to DWP, I think we’ll manage it carefully.

“We’ve long history. If you think about inspection of prison education, young offenders, we work really closely with the Ministry of Justice. We’re well used to doing this. I think it will be fine.”

ITPs show ‘greatest variance in quality’

Having an inspection toolkit that is “unique to FE” and report cards that grade up to 16 inspection areas will help hold the sector’s independent training providers (ITPs) to account, Oliver said.

Committee chair Helen Hayes said she had recently heard “horror story” reports from a union of an apprenticeship training provider with “unqualified staff” who were using YouTube as a teaching guide and lacked basic safety training.

Oliver responded that while some ITPs have “got some fantastic quality” their inspections also show the “greatest variance” in provider quality.

Speaking about the framework more generally, he said taking away the overall effectiveness grade gives “nuance and complexity” that will help the government “deliver on our ambition to provide the skills needed for an improved economy going forward”.

The chief inspector argued that while the number of areas is large, inspections of colleges are “some of the biggest” Ofsted carries out, stretching over a fortnight with 20 to 30 inspectors.

ASCL drops Ofsted inspector threat – but mulls legal action

The Association of School and College Leaders has shelved plans to ask leaders to quit as Ofsted inspectors, but has now vowed to “explore legal action” against the reforms.

The union said in June it was considering the “unprecedented step” of asking its members to step down as Ofsted inspectors unless the watchdog delays roll-out of new inspections and ditches plans for five grades.

ASCL has said today its council has decided not to go ahead with the plan “at this stage … to allow time to gather evidence over the impact of the framework in practice during both pilot and routine inspections”.

But the union said it has now “resolved to explore options for taking legal action” over the potential impact of new report card inspections.

When asked what action this could mean, a union spokesperson said they will be speaking to headteachers’ union the NAHT “about their legal action as part of the process of exploring the options”.

NAHT has already filed a legal challenge against the Ofsted reforms in the high court. This was updated following the publication of an independent review of the wellbeing impact of the proposals.

In the report, Sinead Mc Brearty, chief executive of the charity Education Support, warned new Ofsted report cards will create more anxiety for leaders with already “concerningly high” stress levels.

The leadership of the NAHT headteachers’ union is also considering whether to ballot members for industrial action over Ofsted reforms.

During an emergency online meeting last month, almost 2,000 NAHT members were asked if they would support exploring industrial options. Eighty-nine per cent voted yes.

‘We don’t take this step lightly’

Pepe Di’Iasio (pictured), ASCL’s general secretary, said: “We don’t take the step of exploring legal action lightly, but our members are gravely concerned about the stress and pressure likely to be generated by the new inspection system with its five-point grading scale applied over multiple evaluation areas.

“As feedback to the independent wellbeing impact assessment commissioned by Ofsted put it so succinctly, this will result in ‘many more ways to fail.’”

While he said the plans are a “recipe for chaos”, Di’Iasio added the union is “trying to be as reasonable as possible, and have decided to hold off from encouraging members who are Ofsted inspectors to withdraw their services for the time being while we gather evidence about the impact of the new system as inspections are rolled out.

“But we will be monitoring this closely and that option remains firmly on the table.”

An Ofsted spokesperson said: “We welcome ASCL’s sensible decision not to ask members who work for us as inspectors to withdraw their services. 

“We have had really positive feedback from our pilots and we’re confident that our new-look inspections will be well-received when they begin in November.”

‘Devastating’ prison education cuts will fuel reoffending, warns chief inspector

Reoffending is likely to get worse due to cuts of up to 50 per cent to prison education services, the chief inspector of prisons has warned.

Charlie Taylor said today that “devastating” real-terms cuts of at least 20 per cent to prison education services in most jails are likely to worsen already “appallingly high” reoffending rates.

Prison governors are facing severe reductions under new prison education contracts, which started on October 1, resulting in teaching staff redundancies and courses being shut down.

Taylor issued the warning on funding today alongside a report on work and training in adult prisons, which highlighted long-running concerns about “atrocious” attendance of 67 per cent on courses, a lack of training places, and demoralised teaching staff.

Ministry of Justice (MoJ) officials have told the chief inspector that the funding reductions at each prison are at least 20 per cent, FE Week understands.

The higher reports of cuts of up to 50 per cent are understood to have been reported to Taylor by individual prison governors.

Writing in today’s report, ‘just passing time’, the chief inspector said the prison service is failing to protect the public by making prisoners less likely to reoffend.

He added: “With two-thirds of prisoners not in work or training six months after release, there is little doubt that many have left jail and returned to criminality, causing mayhem in their communities and creating more victims of crime.

“Too many prisoners are spending their time in jail lying on their beds watching daytime television, often under the influence of drugs.

“Until leaders in the prison service take the provision of high-quality education and training more seriously, it is hard to see how appallingly high reoffending rates can be reduced.”

The chief inspector’s report found only a “small number” of prisons currently offer high-quality training, with few offering “meaningful qualifications” or progression opportunities.

Many can’t provide the full-time activity spaces for their population due to a lack of workshop space or instructors, resulting in “large proportions” of prisoners locked in their cells during the day.

Overall, Ofsted judged 26 of the 38 prisons inspected in 2024-25 as ‘inadequate’ or ‘requires improvement’ for education, skills and work activities.

It comes as prison education providers across the country start contracts worth up to £1.5 billion after a delayed two-year procurement process.

Lord Timpson, minister for prisons, probation and reducing reoffending, said: “I welcome this report and the challenges it brings. We inherited a crisis, and it is our job to not just sort the problem, but to create a justice system that is both sustainable and does its job of reducing reoffending.

“I have been involved in employing prisoners for over 20 years, and can confirm that we need prisons that work in giving offenders the tools they need, so when they are out of prison, they stay out.

“We have already done a lot to improve our prisons, but given the scale of the crisis we inherited, there is clearly an awful lot more that still needs to be done.”

A MoJ spokesperson said prison governors were told what their education and training budgets would be from this month to March 2027 in April this year.

University and College Union head of further education Paul Bridge said: “This latest report into the parlous state of prison education is another savage indictment of the failure of the MoJ’s stewardship of prison education.

“We welcome the positive comments made about the essential role of our members in delivering front-line prison education, but this is not the full picture. 

“The latest prison education service contract will further compound the failings highlighted in the report, rather than address them.”

Courses in functional English and maths, IT, hospitality and catering have all been cut, Bridge added.

Lasting progress depends on a connected, durable skills system

The value of technical education and apprenticeships has long been under-appreciated.  Is this about to change?  

It was hugely encouraging to hear the prime minister setting out a target for higher education and apprenticeship take-up during his speech at the Labour Party conference. 

This feels to be a very significant step in levelling perceptions of the relative worth of academic and work-focused education pathways and hopefully it will become a clarion call that genuinely rebalances Tony Blair’s announcement of his ambition for 50 per cent of young people to enter higher education during a Labour Party conference speech in September 1999.

This became the flagship education policy of his government and was framed as part of a broader effort to modernise Britain’s economy and expand opportunity – and failing to recognise the critical importance of vocational and technical qualifications as a driver for prosperity and growth. 

If followed through, the prime minister’s announcement has the potential to impact as deeply and have the same longevity – and it needs to.  

Words into action

For now, it needs to be backed up with early and strong commitments to invest and make improvements; making immediate adjustments to the reporting and regulatory regimes for schools and colleges would be a good start.  Whilst there are significant levels of ‘change fatigue’ in the skills system, there could be plenty of opportunities within the substantive and far-reaching announcements expected in the coming weeks. 

There is often cynicism about the benefits of adjustments to departmental responsibilities.  Whilst clearly a hastily made decision, the recent movement of adult education and apprenticeships to DWP has much potential as it strengthens the skills-to-work dynamic.  

The changes have been welcomed by the awarding sector, and it is a genuine opportunity to create an agile, responsive and future-facing technical and vocational education system that powers more growth and opportunity.  But we must guard against the temptation for ‘quick fixes’ and short-term outcomes focused that simply move young people into work.  We must also hold onto the positive progress of recent years in raising standards and improving quality.  

It will be important that we are not seduced into thinking that we can meet the needs of the economy by focusing exclusively on a single area or level of achievement. 

Means and ends

Skills is a system, and we must address the industrial strategy priority sectors, as well as the more populous entry routes into work, if we are to ensure that the NEET totals do not spiral higher and for our system to be progressive and incentivising – a concept to which the attainment of qualifications is a significant contributor.    

It seems inevitable that the curriculum and assessment review will result in more focus on level 3 qualifications and assessment.  But we will not get at the NEET challenge if we do not similarly focus on all aspects of the offers at levels 1 and 2. We must support the movement through work as well as doing more to support younger learners into work.  

This is where the post-16 strategy ought to help and bring bolder thinking about how we approach the needs of those who are in work and those coming into work.  And for the latter, we must not lose sight of how important behaviours and essential cross-cutting skills are to competence.  If we make the assessment of behaviours in apprenticeships effectively a bye, this will be a retrograde step and amount to lost learning from the frameworks era.  

A cogent plan for the assessment of behaviours must not be lost amongst the reforms to apprenticeship assessment. 

Collaboration calling

It is unrealistic to expect the post-16 education and skills strategy white paper and the curriculum and assessment review to get to this level of detail.  

Moreover, an overarching and longer-term vision and clearly laid-out ambitions, supported by appropriate levels of funding, are overdue and should bring sought after certainty, transparency as well as, eventually, stability.  

It will be good to see the detail, even where there are differences of opinion.  But if we are to fashion the best-fit solutions that work for all components of the skills and FE system, we do need to have more opportunity for the expertise of all those involved in delivery to contribute their ideas.  

Getting there will also require a genuine and positive commitment to discussion from all, as well as time.  The skills eco-system is delicate, but we shouldn’t undervalue the contribution of those organisations who support the delivery.  

The learning from recent policy developments is that, where this is underestimated, key stakeholders get left behind and important details get overlooked, causing problems and rolling-delays.  

It is important that implementation is sensibly paced so that key stakeholders can balance their resources, to ensure that the benefits of change and improvement can be delivered by all those who have a stake in creating a truly world-class, technical and vocational education system.

The independence brought by awarding organisation members is trusted and valued both in the UK and internationally, and notably by employers.  Awarding organisations play a key role in ensuring the quality of delivery and assurance that standards are valid and reliable.  

When informed and empowered, awarding organisations move with precision and skill to translate policy into delivery in an environment that is established, regulated and understood by all.

MOVERS AND SHAKERS: EDITION 510

Fliss Miller

Director of Skills and Employment, East Midlands Combined County Authority

Start date: September 2025

Previous Job: Director of Skills, South Yorkshire Mayoral Combined Authority

Interesting fact: Fliss loves all things vintage with a special interest in pre 1940s’ Christmas decorations, and can often be found in charity shops and antiques fayres trying to find treasures of yesteryear

Sam Callear

Chief Executive Officer, GTA England

Start date: September 2025

Previous Job: Chief Operating Officer, GTA England

Interesting fact: Sam is a keen (yet novice) CrossFit participant. With 6am classes most mornings, he is now able to do pull ups

Principals scratch their heads over new improvement teams

Some sector leaders are sceptical about Labour’s plans for raising standards, arguing the FE Commissioner and existing support networks are sufficient.

FE leaders have warned that new “regional improvement teams” for colleges risk duplicating oversight already performed by the FE Commissioner (FEC).

Sir Keir Starmer pledged “higher standards in every college” in his Labour Party conference speech last week, promising to make further education “a defining mission”.

Downing Street has trailed policies expected in a white paper on post-16 education and skills, including “new regional improvement teams” (RITs) that will “support college improvement, including how they meet skills needs of their communities, and empower high-performing leaders to support others – driving attendance and standards”.

A new model of regional improvement teams, similar to the regional improvement for standards and excellence (RISE) teams launched for schools earlier this year, pairs experienced leaders with schools that have received consecutive poor Ofsted results.

College leaders have questioned whether the move is necessary, since similar support is already available from the FEC and national leaders of further education.

Darren Hankey, principal of Hartlepool College of Further Education, said the announcement has led some in the sector to “scratch their heads’.

He added: “I don’t know of a college principal who, regardless of their college’s Ofsted judgment, doesn’t want his or her college to improve and get better.

“I think there are fewer than 10 per cent of FE colleges with a less than ‘good’ Ofsted outcome, and those who do need a bit of support to improve do so via the FE Commissioner’s team, which has arguably been a force for good for the sector over the last decade.

“All in all, it begs the question, what is the problem this move is trying to solve?”

Practitioner expertise

FE Commissioner Shelagh Legrave told FE Week her team of deputies and advisers will continue to bring practitioner expertise to all colleges.

FE Week understands that the FE Commissioner and “place-based teams” of civil servants have been developing a system to understand the key risks for the sector and which colleges are most vulnerable, which will inform how RITs work.

A DfE spokesperson said they were unable to comment when asked for further details behind the prime minister’s announcement, such as when RITs will be launched, how colleges could be targeted, or how they would fit into existing support.

Further detail will be provided in the soon-to-be-published white paper, they confirmed.

All RISE

Funded by £20 million this year, RISE teams carry out “mandatory and targeted intervention” in schools that are defined as “stuck” after receiving a ‘requires improvement’ at their most recent inspection and graded below ‘good’ at their previous one.

Under Ofsted’s incoming five-point scale for grades, officials will class schools as stuck if they are graded ‘needs attention’ in leadership and governance and previously graded below ‘good’.

RISE teams – made up of civil servants, school leaders and experts who are paid up to £600 per day – agree an improvement plan based on the school’s performance and Ofsted’s concerns.

DfE recruited 65 RISE advisors earlier this year. Most have recent experience in academy trusts, while some are from councils or maintained schools.

RISE teams also offer a universal service available to all schools seeking help with driving up attainment and attendance.

The government has also confirmed that, following a consultation on school accountability reform, it will broaden the scope of RISE teams to engage with schools that have “low or concerning” attainment levels.

Apart from plans to commission support from other trusts, councils and federations, specific examples of improvement actions are yet to be shared publicly.

Jo Higgins, chief executive of Dudley Academies Trust, which is waiting to offer support to other schools through RISE, said actions included in an improvement plan could include training teachers, teaching assistants and leaders to deliver and monitor the quality of a new curriculum.

Other support could include implementing a new behaviour management system, she added.

Speaking to FE Week’s sister title Schools Week earlier this year, Sheffield headteacher and RISE team member Paul Haigh said devising action plans will be collaborative, rather than a “wham, bam, thank you ma’am”.

Schools Week has identified 639 schools that fall under the DfE’s ‘stuck’ definition and, according to figures published last month, 396 have entered the intervention programme.

Few colleges in scope

The 213 colleges in scope represent a tiny number against more than 22,000 state-funded schools that the DfE funds and oversees.

Only two of those colleges appear to trigger the same ‘stuck’ Ofsted grade as schools, although DfE is yet to confirm whether it will apply the same intervention trigger to the college sector.

Neither of the two colleges with consecutive ‘requires improvement’ Ofsted grades are in FE intervention.

One of the colleges that falls under the schools’ definition of ‘stuck’ due to two consecutive ‘requires improvement’ Ofsted grades, New College Swindon, said it already receives “incredibly helpful” peer support from other colleges.

Deputy principal for curriculum and quality, Lynne Plested said: “Through the FE Commissioner’s active support team, we are already proactively working with Exeter College as our allocated partner, and other colleges to help us refine where our focus is needed. For example, we have worked with Exeter to specifically improve our A-level and ESOL provision, as well as our personal development models and data reporting.”

Just 9 of England’s 213 colleges have a live notice to improve, triggering FE Commissioner intervention due to poor education quality and/or financial health.

Karen Redhead, who led Ealing, Hammersmith and West London College out of financial intervention in 2023, said: “Like the majority of new announcements, the devil is in the detail.

“The majority of colleges are already rated as ‘good’ under the old Ofsted framework, so we need to be sure that something actually needs fixing before committing scarce public funds to it.”

Support lines open

Currently, college oversight is carried out by DfE civil servants known as ‘place-based teams’, who also manage day-to-day relations with college leaders.

According to the DfE’s current ‘college oversight: support and intervention’ policy, these teams monitor performance areas such as education quality and finance, as well as estates strategy.

When colleges are placed under formal intervention, the place-based teams, which are grouped into three regions for the whole of England, initiate intervention actions and monitor recovery. Meanwhile, the FE Commissioner’s team is dispatched to assess the college’s problems, recommend and then monitor changes.

The FE Commissioner also offers colleges an ‘active support’ service, including informal conversations, “health checks”, leadership mentoring, curriculum efficiency and options appraisals for restructuring.

There is also a group of ten national leaders of further education who have a “strong track record” of improvement from ‘good’ and ‘outstanding’ colleges that can be deployed to mentor or direct support struggling leaders.

Redhead added: “We need to be clear about how [regional improvement teams] would sit alongside existing forms of intervention.

“Having experienced intervention inside out, I believe that it is far more likely to be effective if it is supportive, motivational and energising for those on the receiving end.”