A-level disadvantage gap widest since records began

The disadvantage gap at A-level is the widest since it was introduced six years ago, new data reveals.

Provisional A-level data published today shows the gap in average point scores between disadvantaged and wealthier pupils sits at 5.08.

This compares to 4.52 when teacher grades were awarded in 2020-21 and 4.88 in 2018-19, when exams were last sat.

New Ofqual data also reveals far more students needed access arrangements – additional exam support – this year. The number approved for GCSE and A-level exams rose by 25 per cent since 2018-19, up from 404,600 to 512,085.

This is largely driven by requests for 25 per cent extra time in exams, which rose by 30 per cent in that timeframe.

Another disadvantage gap widens

The A-level disadvantage gap reflects the same trends at secondary and primary – where the gap widened to its largest in 10 years.

The A-level gap was 5.02 in 2017-18, before narrowing slightly during the pandemic and widening again when formal exams were brought back last year.

The Sutton Trust said the gap is largely being driven by poorer pupils with higher prior attainment at GCSE falling behind their classmates.

They said this has “concerning implications for widening access to the most selective universities and driving social mobility”.

The Department for Education said the disadvantage gap has recently narrowed slightly for A* grades, but is still wider than pre-pandemic.

Meanwhile, the proportion of entries awarded A* decreased across nearly all institution types compared to 2020-21 – with private schools observing the largest drop of 11.1 percentage points.

The exception is sixth form colleges, where the proportions of A* grades has remained level with last year.

Meanwhile, the average A-level result for poorer children in 2021-22 was C+ compared to B for non-disadvantaged. In 2018-19, this was C for poorer students against C+ for everyone else.

A DfE spokesperson said they know the pandemic has “particularly affected older pupils’ education which is why it is so important we continue to do all we can to help pupils to catch up”.

The catch up programme sits alongside “targeted investment for areas of the country where outcomes are weakest as we continue work to drive up standards for pupils in every corner of the country”.

One in four DfE staff could join civil service strike

Around a quarter of staff at the Department for Education and one sixth of Ofsted employees could strike after a vote in favour of “major industrial action” across the civil service.

It means inspections, certain regulatory services and support for leaders could be disrupted in the coming months. 

On Thursday, the Public and Commercial Services union (PCS), which represents junior civil servants, announced the threshold for action had been met in 126 workplaces. 

Unless “substantial proposals” are received from government, the union said its National Executive Committee would agree a programme of “sustained action” at its meeting on November 18.

Action “involving all members” in the areas which meet the legal requirements “would be called to have the maximum effect, including coordinated action with other unions”.

Since 2016, unions have had to show 50 per cent turnout and 40 per cent support among voting members for action to be legal. The turnout threshold was met at the DfE and Ofsted, but not at exams regulator Ofqual.

The threshold was also met at the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education, though the quango only had 14 members of staff entitled to vote.

And the Office for Students, the higher education regulator, recorded the highest turnout of all civil service education bodies at 71per cent. 88 per cent of those voted in favour of industrial action.

The overall average vote in favour of strikes over pay, pensions, jobs and redundancy terms was 86.2 per cent – the highest in the union’s history.

Employees in several other organisations that have work with providers – such as the Disclosures and Barring Service – will also take part in the walkouts.

It is not yet known when walkouts will take place. The PCS said members taking action would receive “significant financial support” from the union.

Over 1,800 DfE employees could join strike

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 is not known how many PCS members who work at Ofsted are FE inspectors, or how many of those at the DfE work on policy and support. Both bodies declined to comment.

Research from the Institute for Government shows average public sector earnings in July were 4 per cent lower in real terms than 15 years ago.

The PCS is calling for a cost of living increase of 10 per cent, holiday entitlement of at least 35 days and London weighting of at least £5,000.

A government spokesperson said: “We regret this decision and remain in regular discussion with unions and staff.

“As the public would expect, we have plans in place to keep essential services running and minimise any potential disruption if strikes do go ahead.”

Council’s main adult education provider closes suddenly

A charity that has provided adult and community education in West Sussex for ten years has suddenly ceased operations this evening. 

In a statement, Aspire Sussex announced that it was unable to continue trading due to “the devasting impact of the combination of Covid and the cost-of-living crisis on its operations”.

Aspire received Education and Skills Funding Agency (ESFA) funding under a subcontracting arrangement with West Sussex County Council.

Uncertainty over future contracts and a “significant” funding clawback when the ESFA changed its delivery threshold during the pandemic, also hampered Aspire’s finances, according to sources.

The statement adds that Aspire exhausted its reserves during the Covid 19 lockdowns in order to maintain its services for its most vulnerable learners. And the current cost of living crisis is “directly impacting availability of additional financial income and those able to pay for the cost of their courses”.

Provision ranged from specialist courses for adults with learning disabilities, ESOL from pre-entry to level 2, functional skills and GCSEs in English and maths, as well as family learning programmes and courses in understanding climate change, young people’s mental health and basic digital skills. 

Students come from across the county, including the constituencies of the education secretary Gillian Keegan, the MP for Chichester, and the minister for schools Nick Gibb, the MP for Bognor Regis. 

FE Week understands that between 1,200 and 1,300 students were enrolled at the time of closure.

It’s not yet known what arrangements are in place to relocate those students. However a WSCC spokesperson told FE Week the council will be “working closely and in partnership with Aspire Sussex, the administrators and the ESFA to support learners.’

Most of the charity’s staff were let go today but a small number will continue for the next few days to support communication to students, which is being carefully tailored for ESOL and vulnerable students. This includes 128 teaching staff and 64 operational and management staff.

The charity’s chair, Norman Boyland, said: “This is a deeply sad day for the provision of adult education to the residents of West Sussex, particularly those most vulnerable in our communities who we support.

“On behalf of the trustees, I would simply just like to say thank you to all our learners who we have had the pleasure of teaching, to our partners, and to the many staff and tutors who have provided first class training on behalf of Aspire Sussex over the last ten years.”

Aspire Sussex was established by West Sussex County Council in 2012 as part of a movement led by ministers in the coalition government to deliver adult education provision through charities, rather than local authorities. 

Aspire received around £3 million per year from WSCC for adult education and community learning as its sole subcontractor.

A WSCC spokesperson said the council has “provided significant resource, technical advice, and additional financial support to Aspire Sussex during this time and in response to Aspire’s requests.

“As recipients of ESFA funding West Sussex County Council review the adult learning contract on an annual basis. Plans will be made for a future sustainable adult learning programme to meet the needs of our communities in West Sussex and to help them to fulfil their potential.”

During the pandemic, the Education and Skills Funding Agency told adult education providers they must deliver at least 90 per cent of their 2020-21 grant funding in order to receive full funding, with providers liable for clawback for under-delivery. 

The WSCC’s subcontracting policy states that “if a subcontractor’s under delivery were to result in the ESFA clawing back funds from WSCC, the value of the ESFA clawback would be passed on to the subcontractor in full.”

While the value of the clawback has not been disclosed, it is understood to have had a significant knock-on impact on Aspire’s finances. It was this, alongside a “curtailed” ability to recover due to the cost of living crisis that forced trustees to close the organisation.

Lack of governor know-how is holding colleges back

In the post-pandemic world, colleges need vision to transform, and the leadership provided by senior teams and governing bodies is under the spotlight like never before. With the joint threats of recession, inequality, labour shortages and inflation amid ongoing political chaos, the need to raise skill levels to transform the UK workforce only adds pressure to the cooker.

The Covid pandemic presented challenges to which most educational leaders adapted heroically. Many forward-looking colleges had already introduced alternative learning methodologies and were well placed to deal with the obstacles to learning presented by lockdowns. But many had not responded and continue not to do so. These colleges must urgently develop their leadership to establish a clear vision for the next crisis – which is already here.

I was fortunate to spend much of the pandemic in British Columbia, witnessing first-hand my daughter’s experience of remote teaching in the provincial capital, Victoria. The traditional learning environment was almost instantly substituted for Google Classroom, email and phone contact with teachers and chat rooms on a plethora of social media platforms. The pandemic presented huge social challenges, but teaching, learning and assessment continued.

My research has made it clear that across our education sector, the picture is mixed, ranging from seamless continuity to near-abandonment of learning altogether. In many cases it was clear that senior leaders and their governors had not fully understood the rapidly changing pre-pandemic environment and its impact on learning. It was more than just fortitude that enabled some colleges to flex their provision and keep the show on the road. So why are some colleges failing to transform and meet the needs of their communities?

Too many of our colleges are typified by inertia

In outstanding colleges, the harmony of educational leadership provided by management and their governing bodies works hugely to a college’s advantage. In others, governing bodies charged with overseeing the educational character and performance of the college lack the skills needed to respond to an ever-changing educational world.

Most colleges have recognised the need to transform, including their leadership and learning methodologies, but mechanisms must be established to enable stakeholders and communities to demand more from underperforming colleges. Those who should be establishing that clear vision are too often not capable of doing so.

In the best colleges, governors have a wealth of educational experience and the knowledge to contribute to the establishment of a clear vision and supporting strategies. These are complemented by corporate areas of expertise, including finance and HR, to support the development of the institution. The college then must be held accountable for the leadership and vision, and how this meets the needs of its local community.

But at present it is unclear how real accountability works in practice. As a result, some colleges continue to lack direction and fail to meet the needs of learners, contributing to the very disadvantage and inequality most leaders aim to reduce.

Our ever-changing political, social, economic and technological environment demands that colleges establish a clear vision involving innovation and determined leadership. Digital learning alone requires colleges to adopt transformed teaching skills, flexible estates, and new approaches to pedagogy and student support.

To the outside world these changes seem blindingly obvious. But too frequently college leaders remain in post despite under-performance and governors stay far longer than the guidance recommends. Even when what’s needed seems obvious to the leaders and governors in those colleges, a lack of know-how ensures they continue to change little, nearly a quarter of the way through the 21st century.

As a result, in spite of Department for Education and Association of Colleges guidance on leadership vision and accountability for meeting learners’ needs, too many of our colleges are typified by inertia and poor-quality learning. This is leading to increased disadvantage and inequality.

In this context, government proposals for elite colleges make sense. In these pages last week, Ian Pryce was right to say investment in our existing colleges is a better bet, but unless there is radical transformation in the training and accountability of governors, the underperformance of a few will continue to justify the lack of faith in the many.

Skills for jobs aren’t the only factor for surviving the cost-of-living crisis

The top-line priority of the government’s skills policy is progression into work. And with the appointment of Gillian Keegan MP as secretary of state, we can expect this to be further underlined. As a minister, Keegan took forward the Skills for Jobs white paper. Its likely employment outcomes will continue to be her priority. 

This is understandable; As the cost-of-living crisis bites, steady employment becomes more important than ever. But a vocational qualification is not the answer for everyone.

The cost-of-living crisis will hurt us all, but its impact on those who are already most disadvantaged will be harder still, and it will be felt in various ways. Adult community learning is a lifeline for many people in disadvantaged communities. While it’s not a panacea, its promotion of, and support for, community learning is crucial in strained economic times. As a means of supporting individuals and communities to take back control over what matters to them, it is hugely empowering.

We know that cost is already a common barrier to learning, and additional pressures associated with the cost-of-living crisis including childcare and transport will put courses beyond the reach of many more. In addition, working extra hours to ensure you can feed the family – and the meter – will leave no spare time for learning.

But a focus on qualifications for employment alone could worsen matters. Direct progression into work is simply not a realistic prospect for all. Progression into a job or a Level 3 might take time and require incremental steps.

Adult learning that supports direct progression into work will not help those outside the workforce through illness or disability, or because they are full-time parent or carers, or because they have retired (including those below pensionable age). The crisis has severe impacts on all of these groups. Yet they might be excluded from learning opportunities that could improve their wellbeing, life skills, and support them to make a positive contribution to their communities. But help with practical day-to-day activities, such as personal budgeting and healthy cooking and eating, can contribute to coping better in difficult times.

A focus on qualifications for employment alone could worsen matters

As other forms of social connection and personal fulfilment are constrained by severe lack of disposable income, adult learning provides a means of keeping active, making friends and overcoming social isolation. This aspect is also crucial in terms of improved mental health and wellbeing, which bring their own economic benefits.

The WEA’s recently published Impact of Adult Learning report shows short courses can have a transformative effect. Our strategy is to deliver a mixed curriculum of learning for life, learning for work and learning that builds communities. And we want to see cross-party efforts to support that, by creating a national policy framework, which promotes community learning for those who need it most.

Building on Keegan’s Skills for Jobs and David Blunkett’s Learning and skills for economic recovery, social cohesion and a more equal Britain report published last week, we urge both main parties to adopt a more rounded national strategy that captures the wider outcomes of adult learning – employment certainly, but also health and connection with community.

While there is financial support available for learners on low incomes, this is not well promoted or known. The Department for Education should fund a national campaign to promote adult education courses of all types, especially aimed at those individuals and groups hardest hit by the Covid and cost-of-living crises.

Jeremy Hunt, the new chancellor, has indicated an extremely tough spending round lies ahead. But reducing spending on adult learning and skills would be a false economy. No budget is safe, but Keegan must convince the treasury that the return on investment in adult education – in terms of productivity and associated costs from improvements in wellbeing – outweigh any supposed efficiency savings.

In the hard times ahead, the right support for adult education can help communities, not just to survive, but to lay the groundwork for rebuilding.

Coaching apprentices is about more than knowledge transfer

The Prince’s Trust Class of Covid research found that more than 60 per cent of 16- to 25-year-olds said that they were scared about their generation’s future, having lived through a pandemic only to face a cost-of-living crisis. The research found that the pandemic had ushered in a new era of uncertainty and a lack of self-confidence.

Increased confidence is a core part of what an apprenticeship can achieve for young people. That goes far beyond the transfer of knowledge and competency. For coaches, there are many pastoral care skills to develop too. These are the magic ingredients that make for excellent coaching and are essential when working with hard-to-reach young people in areas of deprivation.

First and foremost, the key part in building success in any environment is creating a positive relationship. I like to have open and honest conversations with each learner about what they enjoy doing, what they want to work towards and what journey they want to go on over the next 16 to 18 months. This can uncover mutual interests while allowing me to see how I can work best with that individual.

All this takes place before even talking about the apprenticeship or what is needed to complete it. After all, ensuring I’ve done some background research and checked that the learner is on the right apprenticeship is one of the most important steps in securing their achievement.

Having regular check-ins with the learner means I can praise them individually on anything they have done that has impressed. On the other hand, it allows me to have a conversation as to why they might not be up to standard in any areas and seek avenues to support them. It could be extra meetings or sitting down with their managers to discuss anything work-related. My job is to support and guide; this puts me in a great place to keep the learner engaged on the programme.

Nobody cares what you know until they know that you care

It also lets me work with the learner on developing social skills. I always listen first and show it by making eye contact and responding appropriately to what the learner says. Learners from areas of deprivation might not have had as many chances in life to do things that seem normal to other people, such as going to work or on holiday, or even simply experiencing structure in their lives. It is even more important to build trust with them before I ask them to do something for me.

I had a similar upbringing to many of my learners. I’ve lived in a deprived area, and learned so much that allows me to relate to their problems and have them relate to me. But shared experience isn’t necessary. There’s a saying I stand by: nobody cares what you know until they know that you care. By carrying myself in this way, I am helping to transfer these skills on to others.

But it’s important to realise it’s not only the learners’ outcomes at play in these interactions. There are always opportunities to become a better coach. continuing professional development should be woven into life as a learning coach. This involves keeping up to date on what’s happening in the sectors we work in, and having the latest training on learning delivery, including managing challenging and antisocial behaviours.

Our role is to foster development and progression, and that can’t be from a career perspective alone. Personal development is vital to our impact. Learners’ outcomes shouldn’t be the only achievement of an apprenticeship, it’s also about the ability to interact with people, and helping them apply themselves and become community role models.

By putting these aims at the heart of our practice, we make it more likely they will succeed economically. But, more than that, we ensure they are equipped to play their part in inspiring future generations to do the same.

Ofsted finds apprentices on wrong programme for 4 years

A long-running apprenticeship provider is facing contract termination after Ofsted discovered that some apprentices were on the wrong programme for four years.

The Stockport Engineering Training Association (SETA), which was set up in 1966 and specialises in engineering apprenticeships in Greater Manchester, was handed an ‘inadequate’ report today.

One of the key reasons for the grade was because inspectors found apprentices were enrolled onto the level 3 engineering technician apprenticeship instead of the level 3 maintenance operations and engineering technician apprenticeship.

The report said leaders only recently identified this error when arranging apprentices’ final assessments at the end of their programme – four years after they started.

The apprentices are now enrolled on the correct programmes but a few employers were not made aware of this, Ofsted added.

Inspectors also found that apprentices nearing their final assessments had significant gaps in learning and their progress and achievement have been “severely impeded as a result of this lack of oversight”.

Other apprentices were still on their apprenticeship two years beyond their planned end date.

But there was some praise throughout Ofsted’s report, which said apprentices display positive attitudes to their learning, most enjoy their courses, develop new skills and confidence, and value the support they receive from their employer engagement managers, trainers and workplace managers.

Private training providers that receive a grade four from Ofsted typically have their skills funding contracts and ability to deliver apprenticeships terminated by the government’s Education and Skills Funding Agency.

A spokesperson from SETA said the provider was “extremely disappointed” with the final Ofsted report and explained the situation which led to apprentices being on the wrong programme was not as straightforward as Ofsted’s report suggests.

“Apprentices were not enrolled onto the wrong standard at the start of their apprenticeship, learners were enrolled on the correct apprenticeship, but their employer later changed their job role in the workplace, this then required a change in the apprenticeship standard.  The learners were still learning but we accept that the paperwork was not processed timely,” the spokesperson said.

“This had been discussed with the employers at the time but the delayed paperwork resulted in the employer not realising the change had been completed. This was one of the factual inaccuracies that we requested Ofsted to change the wording of, but this was refused.”

SETA added that Covid-19 was a major factor in apprentices going beyond their planned end date, but claimed Ofsted did not consider the pandemic when making their judgements – as several other providers have complained in recent months.

The spokesperson said the provider is now “awaiting confirmation from the ESFA with regard to the action they are going to take regarding our contract”.

SETA was last visited by Ofsted in 2016, at which time the provider was judged to be ‘good’. The education watchdog’s latest report said the quality of training that apprentices receive has “significantly declined since the previous inspection”.

They put this down to leaders not successfully managing the transition from delivering frameworks to teaching the new-style apprenticeship standards introduced in 2017.

Leaders continue to focus on qualification and unit completion rather than the development of the knowledge, skills and behaviours that the apprenticeship standards require, according to the report.

Ofsted said that in some instances, leaders meet employers’ needs at the expense of apprentices’ needs. Inspectors found that, at the request of a few employers, leaders have prioritised the achievement of qualifications over the completion of apprentices’ final assessments.

Consequently, these apprentices have not completed their apprenticeships on time and are unable to move on to their next stage in their learning and careers.

Education secretary Gillian Keegan raised concern last year, when she was skills minister, about apprentices completing qualifications that are part of their apprenticeship early in their programme and then not progressing on to their end-point assessment – a key feature of the new-style standards. She ordered a review into this as part of a wider investigation into the reasons why half of apprentices currently drop out before completing nationally.

Ofsted also criticised SETA for taking a “haphazard approach” to teaching the curriculum, after finding that on “too many occasions” leaders and trainers reorder teaching to suit the availability of teaching staff or to maximise the number of apprentices in classes.

SETA said it has have delivered engineering apprenticeships in the Northwest and surrounding areas for over 50 years, “successfully training over 12,000 engineering apprentices in various disciplines”.

“If our provision is not available it will leave a massive void,” the provider’s spokesperson added.

The college breakfast programme tackling hunger and poverty

Every day, I see learners arriving at the college I lead unable to afford breakfast or basic equipment. For some time now, people have warned of a cost-of-living crisis. It is here now. It looms large in classrooms and on campuses across the country.

Hunger is a huge distraction from effective learning. It’s why we host a community college kitchen on site, supported by Kellogg’s. Through it, students benefit from access to food and vouchers they need to set them up for the day.

But there’s only so much we can do. We are part of a bigger picture.

When times are hard, benefits become even more crucial as a financial safety net for struggling families. That’s why the current public debate about whether and how to uprate benefits is understandable and important.

However, while the level benefits are paid at is undoubtedly of the utmost importance, before getting to that question we ought to be addressing the vital issue of whether families are receiving – and aware of – all that they are entitled to.

At Trafford College, a pilot scheme is highlighting the extent to which that is not happening – and the difference it can make to lives if people are helped to claim all they can.

Kellogg’s recently partnered with Greater Manchester Poverty Action (GMPA) and they came to me with a proposal. GMPA had identified that millions of pounds in benefits were remaining unclaimed across the city. Given our previous work with Kellogg’s, I was happy to support a pilot scheme centred on the community college kitchen to see if this was correct.

Colleges are often best placed to offer this kind of assistance

So it proved. Families were indeed going without benefits they were entitled to. Ours was one of four schools and colleges across our city taking part in the pilot, which has been running since the beginning of the current school term in September. The pilot has already helped dozens of families: on average each family has received an extra £1,000 to which they were entitled but were previously unaware they could access.

To most people, £1,000 is a colossal sum – the annual UK average for raising a child is, in fact, well over £1,000. With inflation skyrocketing, this additional cashflow is nothing short of lifechanging to parents, guardians and children.

That families had been missing out on funds they were entitled to speaks to poor communication, complicated bureaucratic processes and, most of all, families needlessly going without.

What’s more, missing out on welfare is more than just a numbers game. Financial insecurity and poverty are huge contributors to poor mental health – the consequences of which are all too frequently devastating on students, their future livelihoods cruelly stunted as a result.

That’s why it was so important to me that Trafford College took part in the pilot scheme. We’re a community-focused college – helping parents and guardians hit by the cost-of-living crisis to access more support came naturally to us.

In my experience, I’ve found that schools and colleges are often best placed to offer this kind of assistance. We know our families well, so we can offer them targeted advice.

I am confident our community college kitchen, like those at the other pilot sites across the city, will undoubtedly continue to make lives better for students and their families.

Aside from the success we’re already witnessing in Greater Manchester, the scheme has a strong track record. Last year, a similar pilot took place in Glasgow. Across four schools in the city, it helped families access £700,000 in unclaimed benefits. There is clear evidence to show that we can replicate that here in Greater Manchester.

For dozens of Mancunian families’ children, a platform like our community college kitchen is a strong start and adding benefits advice into that makes it stronger still. In the current economic climate, I would encourage all colleges to look to liaise with their local councils and supportive agencies such as Citizens Advice to offer this valuable service to their communities.

We are already working beyond the pilot to expand it across our group. Every college can do the same.

Competence and competition. But which will define the new DfE line-up?

Gavin Williamson’s resignation aside, this year’s political omnishambles has momentarily paused. Once again, we have a whole new Department for Education team.

The third prime minister of 2022, Rishi Sunak has already described skills as his “silver bullet”. Unfortunately for those looking for quick progress or a radical reform agenda, the skills and FE sector might find itself a long way behind a frankly terrifying raft of national and international crises on number 10’s to-do list.

With Downing Street distracted,  it might come as reassurance to some that the new ministerial team brings some much-welcome experience and, hopefully, competence. Most of the new line-up have worked in the DfE before, or have a background in education. They’ll certainly need this sector knowledge to deal with what could prove a massively challenging few months ahead. The team must navigate industrial action on pay, big budget cuts, the much-promised, but not yet confirmed, apprenticeship levy review, the ongoing T level roll-out, and the lifelong learning entitlement. 

Gillian Keegan’s appointment, as a former apprentice and apprenticeships minister, means that in particular there’s likely to be a big departmental focus on FE and skills. Given her business background, there might well also be a renewed focus on workplace training and upskilling, which have taken a backseat in recent years in favour of schools and higher education reforms.

She’s appointed as ministers of state two political heavyweights who, on paper, come from quite different sides of the education debate.

Nick Gibb returns to Sanctuary Buildings to retake his position as schools minister. A proud traditionalist, he’ll return with a strong drive behind high standards, including pushing for more focus on studying core academic subjects.

What remains to be seen is how long this collaboration lasts

Robert Halfon, formerly skills minister under Theresa May (remember her?) has spent the past five years holding Gibb and his other new colleagues to account as education select committee chair.  His new brief is enormous, covering skills, apprenticeships and higher education. His two favourite words – degree apprenticeships – align particularly well with Keegan’s interests.

But Halfon’s education worldview very much rejects the primacy of knowledge over skills – rather seeing both as crucially important. While Gibb would be happy for knowledge and academic subjects to dominate up to the age of 16, Halfon is a much stronger champion of skills-based technical education right through the education system and curriculum, with a particularly strong focus on education being suited to future work.

It’s therefore no surprise that Gibb and Halfon have had their fair share of heated exchanges in select committee hearings over the years on whether or not the curriculum should be focused on preparing pupils for work (including a particularly bizarre argument about the taxonomy of a fish).

Their competing views on education could come to a head on plans for a new British Baccalaureate. On the one hand, this might see a knowledge-rich focus on English and maths to 18 for all students. On the other, it could be a radical overhaul of academic and vocational routes that sees a boost to technical and vocational education, and an end to the political obsession with A levels. I’ll leave readers to work out which version might suit which minister best.

It’s worth pointing out that Halfon and Gibb appear, at least initially, to be more likely to work in the spirit of collaboration. In a joint op-ed supporting Sunak for The Times during the campaign, they both backed the new PM’s ambition to build on the education reforms the Conservatives have led since 2010. What remains to be seen is how long this lasts and, crucially, how the new secretary of state will manage her opinionated and experienced junior colleagues.

At best, we’ll see a strong team effort from the DfE with a shared vision for skills reform and the experience to make some progress, even if a skills revolution feels a long way off. At worst, we’ll see blue-on-blue ideological in-fighting that paralyses internal decision-making and distracts from the mission of future education reform.

Given recent months, I’ve given up making bets on what the future holds.