Latest news from FE Week

Frustration at Skills England’s apprenticeship review slowdown

Just 270 reformed apprenticeship assessment plans (AAPs) have been published, falling well short of Skills England’s August 2026 deadline to review all 700-plus apprenticeship standards.

The government agency admitted it had “adapted the pace of change” after spending the past year pushing the sector to meet what officials acknowledged was an ambitious timetable.

Employers and awarding organisations are understood to be frustrated by a lack of communication from Skills England about the slowdown.

FE Week also understands that Skills England paused full reviews of individual apprenticeships, other than in exceptional cases where there was an urgent need to complete work, address a ministerial priority or respond to priority local needs.

It comes amid a wider review of occupational standards through Skills England’s recently launched “skills for work” programme, raising concerns that apprenticeships awaiting updates to their funding bands and knowledge and skills requirements have been left in limbo.

Finish the job

Reform began last year to replace the end-point assessment model in apprenticeships with new assessment plans that introduce sampling of knowledge and skills, strengthen the role of mandatory qualifications in some standards, and remove the independent assessment of behaviours.

Carmel Grant, Skills England’s deputy director of reform and development, told the Federation of Awarding Bodies (FAB) conference in November that “August is the date by which we’ve been asked to review all the apprenticeship plans in delivery”.

She added: “It is ambitious. It is challenging. We will need to evaluate along the way. Some will go smoothly, and some won’t. We recognise that, but that is the timeline.”

But the deadline passed with just 142 AAPs published and a further 350 in development.

By 22 October, the total published had risen to 270.

In response to the figures, a Skills England spokesperson said: “Skills England is committed to delivering assessment reform so the benefits are realised as early as possible – but we are equally committed to taking the time needed to get this right.

“We have listened to stakeholders’ feedback and adapted the pace of change where appropriate.”

They added that work is progressing on AAPs, and stakeholders would be updated at the “appropriate time”.

Terry Fennell, chief executive of awarding body Food and Drink Qualifications (FDQ), said there had been a “clear sense of collective urgency” around the approvals process, but that progress had “slowed significantly” since August.

He revealed that communication from Skills England, which had been “so proactive earlier in the year”, had “virtually ceased”.

“This is creating uncertainty for FDQ that, like all awarding organisations, are trying to redesign standards and support employers and providers during the transition to apprenticeship assessment 2.0,” he added.

Daniel Green, policy director at FAB, described the original timetable as “ambitious” and called for clearer communication from Skills England, while urging the agency to finish the reviews rather than “leaving the work half-done”.

He told FE Week: “If the pace of progress has eased to allow Skills England to get implementation right, that is a sensible course of action, but this needs to be communicated clearly by Skills England to those involved in delivering the change.

“It’s also important to note that no new apprenticeship assessment has yet been delivered; the challenge now is not designing reform, but delivering it successfully.

“Skills England and other actors must remain firmly on ensuring the changes are landed for the benefit of apprentices and employers rather than leaving the work half-done. We must avoid the all-too-common temptation to move on before the job is done.”

Employer confidence is critical

The government’s reforms triggered a backlash last year from construction and built environment organisations, which warned that assessment changes risked “dumbing down” apprenticeships and letting unqualified learners pass.

In July, Skills England announced it had agreed to a sector-specific, risk-based approach designed to protect competence in safety-critical jobs following strong employer opposition.

The new methodology uses “risk profiling” to tailor assessment requirements according to the level of occupational risk rather than applying a single model across all construction standards. This approach was extended to all sectors.

Sam Callear, CEO of GTA England, a network of not-for-profit training organisations, said the August deadline “always felt very challenging” and that “maybe government had originally underestimated the extent of employer feeling” and their level of engagement in the reformed AAPs.

He told FE Week: “Thousands of employers have invested many hours in developing occupational standards and assessment plans and, rightly, want any future changes to reflect their requirements.

“Credible employers of apprentices and quality providers do not want the system undermined by the introduction of assessment regimes which do not give an employer confidence in someone’s practical, not just theoretical, ability to be competent and safe in the workplace.”

He added that employers in areas like engineering and manufacturing would value a slowdown in reviews if it meant a “greater level of upfront consideration of the relative risk associated with any given occupation and the creation of an adequate assessment approach to reflect that risk”.

Set your priorities straight

Skills England launched its “skills for work” programme last month, led by the agency’s board chair Phil Smith, to consider how occupational standards and the training they underpin can “better support growth, employers, places and young people”.

A blog announcing the programme said it “isn’t about individual standards – it’s about making sure the system is fit for the future”.

This work has paused revisions of most apprenticeships except for their assessment plan.

Sector leaders argue the work on occupational standards is ill-timed, does not need a root-and-branch review, and should have been conducted before assessment reform began. The priority right now should instead be on completing reviews of individual apprenticeships.

Ruth Evans, chief executive of the Brewing, Food & Beverage Industry Suppliers’ Association (BFBi), said the level 3 drinks dispense technician apprenticeship was among those left in limbo.

The standard has “not been fully reviewed since its introduction in 2019, despite significant changes in technology, working practices and industry requirements”, she told FE Week, and is also “woefully underfunded” with a funding band of £8,000.

Evans added: “It is deeply disappointing that a government which consistently talks about the importance of upskilling school leavers and young people is seemingly unwilling to invest in the specialist skills required by industries such as drinks dispense.

“We can only assume that decisions are being driven by a numbers game, prioritising apprenticeships with high volumes of starts rather than taking a holistic approach to developing the skilled workforce this country needs.”

In June, skills minister Jacqui Smith ordered a review of apprenticeship funding bands and told Skills England to identify which standards have strong take-up from young people and therefore should be first in line for “potential funding uplifts”.

Smith asked for advice on potential funding rate changes by October. No decisions or advice have yet been made public.

DWP picks 12 providers for national jobs guarantee

An FE college is among 12 organisations chosen to roll out the government’s flagship jobs guarantee scheme to tackle the youth unemployment crisis.

Leeds College of Building has been selected to run the programme in West Yorkshire, while employment support provider Ingeus will cover five of the 25 areas across England, Scotland and Wales.

The guarantee promises eligible 18 to 24-year-olds six months of paid work alongside training and employment support. The national rollout is due to begin in November.

The Department for Work and Pensions announced its preferred delivery partners yesterday. These organisations will source jobs, match participants with employers and deliver tailored support throughout the placement.

After a five-week application round earlier this year, Ingeus was awarded the largest number of areas, covering the North East, Tees Valley, the Black Country, Birmingham, Solihull and Coventry, the East Midlands and Central London.

Employment support providers Fedcap and AKG have been selected for three areas each. PeoplePlus, the King’s Trust, the Growth Company, Reed in Partnership and Seetec will each cover two areas, while Twin Training has one.

Meanwhile, Cornwall Council will cover Devon and Cornwall, and Ealing Council will cover West London on behalf of the West London Alliance.

The jobs guarantee is aimed at young people who have been on universal credit and looking for work for 18 months. Ministers expect it to support more than 90,000 people over three years.

The national rollout follows a first phase, launched in April, across six areas of Great Britain, with the first participants starting jobs in May.

Four of the six organisations running that phase – Ingeus, the Growth Company, Reed in Partnership and the King’s Trust – have been selected for the national programme.

But Catch22, which ran the scheme in Birmingham and Solihull, and Itec Training Solutions, which covered southwest and southeast Wales, are absent from the national list of lead organisations.

Under the published funding model, organisations can claim between £2,150 and £2,650 per participant for running the programme. Guidance states funding cannot be used to make a profit.

The DWP will also cover eligible employment costs for up to 25 hours a week at the relevant minimum wage for six months, plus up to £250 per participant for employers’ onboarding costs.

Referrals must come through Jobcentres. The initial rollout is due to run until November 2028, with final funded job starts by May 2028 and an option to extend the programme by a further year.

Ministers announced last month that young people receiving health benefits would also be able to join voluntarily from April 2027, three months after their work capability assessment.

FE Week has asked whether the selected providers will support this expansion and receive additional funding, and whether November referrals remain on track in all 25 areas. The DWP did not respond.

Jobs guarantee delivery areas across England, Scotland and Wales

Teachers’ political badges influence students, warns Bell

Political badges and symbols worn by college staff will fall under the spotlight following a landmark review of antisemitism in education.

The Department for Education today accepted all 27 recommendations from a report by Sir David Bell which laid bare the “pernicious impact” antisemitism is having in schools and colleges.

The review heard “numerous” examples of teachers and students wearing or displaying badges, flags and other political symbols expressing support for Palestine, and received “mixed” views on whether they should have a place in education settings.

“The issue is not necessarily the presence of Palestinian flags or slogans but the context and impact, for example, who is displaying it, where, and whether it is connected to teaching, targeted at individuals, or whether schools respond consistently to comparable symbols of forms of expression,” the report said.

Bell said it may be appropriate to discuss contemporary political issues in lessons but staff attire and classroom displays “carry institutional authority and may reasonably be subject to different expectations”.

He also heard that political expression was “causing distress to Jewish students and staff within colleges”.

Ban ‘impossible to implement’

Colleges are not bound by political impartiality legal duties that apply in schools unless they teach 14 to 16-year-olds. Leaders must follow statutory duties to secure freedom of speech, equality and safeguarding for under-18s.

Bell said he resisted calls for an outright ban on political symbols as it would be “impossible to implement” and was not legally tested.

He said colleges “may be justified” in placing proportionate restrictions on staff’s lawful political expression where necessary.

Education secretary Lucy Powell said: “I accept his recommendation, but as education secretary, I am clear: I would not expect to see teachers coming to school or college wearing or displaying any political material.”

Ministers also agreed to more robust reporting of antisemitic abuse and dedicated teacher training in FE, as recommended by Bell’s report.

A UCAS survey of more than 5,000 applicants aged 16 to 19 found one in five had experienced or witnessed antisemitism.

Of the 92 Jewish respondents in the survey, three in five said they had experienced antisemitism.

Jokes, stereotypes and comments made up 85 per cent of incidents in education.

Around half were not reported as they did not believe it was “serious enough or would be taken seriously”. Among those that were reported, 27 per cent felt their school or college’s response was “ineffective”.

Bell, who was commissioned in March to examine how schools and colleges prevent and respond to antisemitism, will undertake a one-year review of progress aided by an implementation group that includes Noni Csogor, senior research and policy manager at Sixth Form Colleges Association, and Jeff Greenidge, the Association of Colleges’ director for diversity and governance.

David Hughes, chief executive of the Association of Colleges, said: “I totally agree that education needs to play a crucial role in prevention, and that teachers across all phases of education need practical tools and support on how to discuss antisemitism with students.

“These tools cannot be one-size-fits-all, and there needs to be resources for both schools and colleges which are appropriate to students’ age, context and experience.

“We acknowledge the recommendations in the report aimed specifically at colleges, and we will engage with and support our members as they work through these, helping them to strengthen inclusion, foster positive relationships and ensure that all students and staff remain safe.”

Ramping up training

The review said colleges should address antisemitism during tutorial and pastoral time.

It also recommended the DfE develop resources that address contemporary antisemitism and teach media literacy and online safety to help learners identify harmful online content.

The DfE will commission an online training package for schools, college leaders and designated safeguarding leads, and run a support service featuring an “expert advice network” to help navigate complex cases.

Last year the DfE contracted a think tank and the Union for Jewish Students to develop staff scholarships to learn more about antisemitism.

Only 9 per cent of professionals responding to the review’s call for evidence said they had been offered training focused specifically on antisemitism, and just 24 per cent said their institution used the IHRA working definition of antisemitism, which colleges will now be encouraged to adopt.

Bell also recommended colleges create a specific category for recording antisemitic incidents and support anonymous reporting.

Questions for unions

The review also reported that some Jewish staff felt they could not rely on their union for support due to their campaigning on Israel-Palestine.

The National Education Union came under fire earlier this year after members prevented Jewish MP Damien Egan from visiting a school in Bristol because of his pro-Israel views.

Bell concluded he did not believe any education union was “inherently antisemitic” but advised unions to strengthen their policies and train members on discrimination and antisemitism.

But shadow education secretary Laura Trott criticised the recommendation.

“Asking them to examine their own actions is allowing them to mark their own homework, and we already know that this doesn’t work,” she said.

“Without accountability, nothing changes.”

Recommendations in full

Here are all the 27 recommendations accepted by the government, in full…

Recommendation 1

The Secretary of State for Education should encourage all schools and colleges to adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) working definition of antisemitism.

Recommendation 2

The Department for Education should ensure that school and college leaders, staff and trainee teachers receive training in understanding antisemitism. To enable this:

The Department for Education should commission the preparation of a dedicated training package on antisemitism for school and college leaders and designated safeguarding leads (DSLs).
The Department for Education should encourage school and college leaders to integrate understanding of antisemitism within safeguarding, equalities, and anti-racism training. This should encompass all staff and others working in schools and colleges, including support staff, governors, academy members and trustees.
The Department for Education should ensure teachers have a good understanding of antisemitism delivered through initial teacher training and the early career framework for schools and initial teacher training for further education teachers

Recommendation 3

The Department for Education should strengthen Keeping children safe in education to make clear that racism and prejudice, including antisemitism, may constitute harm. The guidance should make clear that early identification, challenge and intervention are important safeguarding responses, where appropriate.

Recommendation 4

Schools’ and colleges’ online safety policies, safeguarding policies, and associated staff training should ensure that staff are appropriately informed about the nature and risks of harmful antisemitic content that children and young people may encounter online.

Recommendation 5

The Department for Education should update the behaviour and preventing bullying guidance for schools to include advice on identifying, preventing and responding to antisemitism and other forms of hatred and prejudice, including setting out expected standards of support and good practice for victims of abuse.

Recommendation 6

College leaders should consider if their behaviour policy and student code of conduct includes steps to identify, prevent and respond to antisemitic and other forms of abuse, harassment and intimidation.

Recommendation 7

Schools and colleges should establish clear and accessible systems for reporting, recording and monitoring antisemitic incidents. To enable this:

Schools and colleges should support peer reporting and anonymous disclosures, and signpost learners to information about available support services (such as Community Security Trust)
Schools and colleges recording systems should include a specific category for antisemitic incidents, including the nature and type of incident, involving identifiable victims as well as wider manifestations of antisemitism.

Recommendation 8

The Home Office should work with the Department for Education to expand Prevent advice for schools and colleges, to provide clarity and support decision making on when antisemitism, and other themes relevant to extremist narratives, may be indicators of radicalisation risk.

Recommendation 9

The Office for Equality and Opportunity should launch a cross-sector awareness campaign to reinforce Public Sector Equality Duty responsibilities with respect to Jewish identity, as both a race and religion, so that it is fully recognised within school and college policies and processes to meet equality and safeguarding duties.

Recommendation 10

The Department for Education should produce, in partnership with relevant stakeholders, good practice guidance to support school and college leaders in developing a coherent and sequenced approach to tackling antisemitism. This should include curriculum content and wider educational opportunities that support understanding of historical and contemporary manifestations of antisemitism, alongside the policies, processes and support needed to ensure a whole-institution response.

Recommendation 11

The Department for Education should strengthen the national approach to Holocaust education, underpinned by evidence and clear expectations, to ensure all pupils develop a secure understanding of the Holocaust, including the role of antisemitism within it. To enable this:

The Department for Education should commission an evidence-informed review of the effectiveness of Holocaust education to understand better how pupils encounter and make sense of the Holocaust, identify effective practice and areas for improvement, and inform future guidance and support for schools.
The Department for Education should ensure that the purpose of, and expectations for, Holocaust education are clearly articulated and consistently supported through non-statutory guidance, including understanding antisemitism as a central explanatory factor in explaining the Holocaust.
All schools and colleges should mark Holocaust Memorial Day, supported by secure historical understanding and linked to wider educational provision.

Recommendation 12

The Department for Education, schools and colleges should address antisemitism through appropriate places in the curriculum, tutorial time and pastoral provision. To enable this:

The Department for Education should ensure that citizenship education has sufficient opportunity to address contemporary antisemitism, alongside other forms of hatred and prejudice, within a coherent programme of learning.
The Department for Education should ensure schools and colleges embed high-quality teaching on media literacy and online safety, helping learners to recognise and confront harmful online content, including antisemitism and conspiracy theories.
Schools and colleges should make effective use of tutorial time, pastoral provision and wider learning opportunities to address contemporary antisemitism alongside other forms of hatred and prejudice.
The Department for Education should develop, quality assure and publish practical resources and tools to support schools, colleges, academy trusts, college groups, and/or local authorities in addressing antisemitism and wider hatred and social cohesion issues. These resources should include guidance and materials to help all staff discuss controversial issues and respond to significant global events, particularly those relating to the Israel-Palestine conflict and contemporary antisemitism.

Recommendation 13

The Department for Education should ensure that Judaism is represented with appropriate depth and coherence within the proposed curriculum framework for religious education. The aims for the subject should reflect Judaism as a diverse and contemporary tradition, so that where antisemitism is addressed, it is grounded in a secure knowledge of Jewish life, belief, culture and community.

Recommendation 14

The Department for Education, the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, and the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government should promote and enable opportunities for schools and colleges to engage with Jewish communities and contemporary Jewish life through social mixing, enrichment and cultural engagement.

Recommendation 15

The Department for Education should ensure that professionals working in schools or colleges are clear that antisemitism and other forms of prejudice and hatred are forms of discrimination that are incompatible with professional conduct. To support this:

The Department for Education should amend Part One of the Teachers’ Standards to enhance expectations on teachers to manage pupil behaviour includes a requirement to challenge prejudice and hate-based behaviour, including antisemitism.
The Department for Education should amend Part Two of the Teachers’ Standards to ensure antisemitic, racist and other discriminatory behaviour is incompatible with professional conduct, within and outside the school, including online.
Schools and colleges should ensure their staff code of conduct specifies that antisemitic, and other forms of religious and racial harassment, abuse and discrimination, are incompatible with professional conduct.

Recommendation 16

School and college leaders should consider the appropriateness of political expression and identifiers in their respective settings, considering the time place and manner alongside their respective legal duties. To enable this:

School leaders should carefully consider the time, place, and manner of political expression (including in relation to staff dress codes and pupil uniform policies), ensuring that the wearing or displaying of political symbols, flags, or slogans, and the expression of political views, are compliant with their legal duties in relation to political impartiality, whilst being mindful of promoting respectful dialogue, inclusion and engagement.
College leaders should consider setting out how they will approach the wearing or displaying of political identifiers by staff, balancing their duties relating to safeguarding, equality and freedom of speech, with the need to ensure that all students can engage effectively in their education and that the welfare of students under 18 is protected.

Recommendation 17

The Department for Education should strengthen guidance for schools on political impartiality to provide clear examples that illustrate how it should be applied in practice, particularly in relation to contemporary and sensitive geopolitical topics.

Recommendation 18

School and college employers should have a robust reporting, escalation and response to antisemitic abuse, bullying, harassment or discrimination against staff and, where relevant, governors and trustees. All incidents against staff, including those involving pupils, students, parents, colleagues or third parties, should be identified, recorded, investigated and addressed promptly and appropriately.

Recommendation 19

Education unions should have robust policies and processes to tackle antisemitism and ensure members are sufficiently trained in understanding, recognising and responding to antisemitism. Any incidents of alleged antisemitism by trade union officials, representatives or members must be consistently addressed in line with union policies to tackle racism or prejudice.

Recommendation 20

The Department for Education should establish a dedicated support service to help schools, colleges and local authorities manage complex incidents related to antisemitism and other forms of prejudice and hatred. To enable this:

The Department for Education should establish a well-defined and well publicised ‘front door’ for support
The Department for Education should establish a network of peer-topeer advisers (at local authority or at school/college leader level, as appropriate) to provide rapid, expert support.

Recommendation 21

The Home Office should utilise some of the £250 million recently announced by the Home Secretary for additional security support for Jewish communities to help ensure that Jewish schools and colleges can undertake educational visits safely, alongside meeting wider security needs.

Recommendation 22

The Department for Transport should deliver a joint communications campaign with relevant stakeholders to deter antisemitic behaviour, with campaign activity strategically placed at transport hubs near Jewish schools and colleges and accompanied by an evaluation to assess impact and inform future activity.

Recommendation 23

The Department for Education should work in partnership with relevant organisations and community stakeholders to ensure that Jewish school and college leaders have access to comprehensive support, specialist advice on security and safeguarding risks, opportunities to participate in professional networks for sharing good practice, and leadership support and mentoring.

Recommendation 24

Ofsted and the Independent Schools Inspectorate should each build on existing training and professional development to support inspectors’ confidence in evaluating and reporting on how effectively leaders identify, manage and prevent incidents of antisemitism and other forms of racial and religious prejudice.

Recommendation 25

The Department for Education should commission Ofsted and the Independent Schools Inspectorate, separately and within their respective remits, to undertake thematic work on how schools and colleges identify, prevent and respond to antisemitism and other forms of racism and religious prejudice, helping to build a stronger national picture and improve understanding of effective practice.

Recommendation 26

Local authorities should, through existing responsibilities, partnerships and local intelligence arrangements, work with safeguarding partners and other relevant agencies to strengthen local visibility of patterns of antisemitism and other forms of hatred and prejudice affecting children and young people, and to support schools and colleges in responding effectively where concerns arise.

Recommendation 27

Ofsted should consider, as it develops its academy trust inspection framework, how trust-level oversight of responses to antisemitism and other forms of hatred and prejudice can be reflected proportionately, particularly where concerns are serious, repeated, or evident across more than one school.

Acland-Hood replaced as DfE permanent secretary

The Department for Education’s top civil servant will be replaced next month after six years in post.

Susan Acland-Hood has worked alongside eight education secretaries since she became DfE’s permanent secretary in 2020.

The Cabinet Office has announced Simon Ridley will become the new permanent secretary in November.

Ridley is currently the second permanent secretary at the Home Office, and has previously been the acting permanent secretary at the Home Office, and head of the Cabinet Office Covid-19 Taskforce.

His appointment follows a “managed move” approved by the prime minister and the education secretary.

Acland-Hood is leaving the civil service for a role outside government.

Acland-Hood ‘exceptional’

A former chief executive of the Courts and Tribunals Service, Acland-Hood was seconded to the DfE in early 2020 as interim second permanent secretary to help with the Covid-19 response.

She then took over the role full-time in September 2020, taking over from Jonathan Slater. Slater stepped down amid the fallout of the government’s handling of the exam grading controversy during the pandemic.

Education secretary Lucy Powell said Acland-Hood has been an “exceptional” in her role, “helping children and families recover from the pandemic, expanding childcare provision, strengthening the skills system and so much more.”

Powell said: “This government is determined to make sure that every child, whatever their background, can achieve and succeed.

“I look forward to working with Simon, who brings a breadth of experience and track record of delivery, to drive forward this work.”

‘Immensely proud’

Acland-Hood said it had been a “privilege” to lead the DfE and was “immensely proud of the work we have done to take our system ever closer to being the best in the world”.

“My colleagues in the Department are remarkable, and I know how brilliantly they will carry on this work of restless improvement, change and growth across education and children’s social care under Simon’s excellent leadership, as I move to my new role,” Acland-Hood said.

Ridley said: “I am thrilled to be appointed permanent secretary at the Department for Education. There is nothing more important than making sure every child and young person has the best start in life and every opportunity to succeed.

“I am looking forward to working with all the brilliant people in the department, and leaders and practitioners throughout the country, to deliver the secretary of state’s ambitious agenda.”

‘Chaos’ at Lakes College leads to formal staff dispute

Teachers at a Cumbrian college have threatened to take industrial action over “excessive” workloads and stress.

Members of the University and College Union at Lakes College have voted for a formal dispute with their employer, which could escalate to strike action unless “meaningful” negotiations take place.

UCU said the vote stemmed from ongoing issues around college leaders making changes to timetables and weekly teaching hours without consulting staff unions.

FE Week has asked the union how many of the college’s 300-strong workforce are UCU members.

It comes as the union is preparing a collective nationwide ballot of college staff as a new strategy to secure better pay and conditions for FE teachers across England.

A UCU spokesperson claimed teachers at Lakes College were struggling with “excessive” weekly hours combined with the rise in learner numbers, particularly for those teaching maths and English. The union also claimed “lots” of lecturers are being asked to teach outside their subject areas without notice or cover plan.

Principal and CEO of Lakes College Mark Fell admitted there was “some disruption” at the start of the academic year due to a change in its student record system, but any teething issues have since been resolved.

“We are disappointed that UCU has taken this direction while early and constructive discussions with the union are still ongoing,” he said.

“We recognise that there was some disruption at the beginning of the academic year, with systems changes introduced to improve the experience for both our students and staff. We have worked collaboratively with staff to review individual timetables and work patterns.”

A college spokesperson added that it was normal practice for staff to cover lessons across the college but they are “very rare” occasions and are not “widespread practice”.

Fell added that the college had introduced staff voice and wellbeing initiatives over the last 12 months to be “mindful” of workloads at the start of a busy academic year.

He said: “We value our relationship with UCU and remain committed to working constructively with union representatives and the wider staff to address the issues raised and seek a positive way forward. Throughout this process, we will remain focused on our students and ensuring they continue to receive a positive, high-quality experience at Lakes College.”

UCU general secretary Jo Grady said: “Industrial action is a last resort for our members, but this vote to enter a formal dispute shows that they have had enough and are ready to fight.

“Staff and students shouldn’t have to suffer the chaos at Lakes College, and management must change direction and work with us to get things right for staff and students, or potentially face disruption in the coming months.”

What I learned in my first 42 days as an FE lecturer

Having recently joined an FE college after 15 years of teaching in state schools, I was surprised by the lack of ambition across the campus when it comes to student success.

The culture seemed to come from management and to be thrust upon those of us teaching on the front line.

A recent article argued that progress should be a significant measure of success in FE. That may suit the college business model, but it is not an opinion shared by many staff at the coal face, who would rather see students succeed than simply make progress.

But does the college business model support greater success?

From what I have seen so far, no.

For most full-time 16-to-19 study programmes, a student must remain on their programme for 42 days to count as a funded start. If they leave before reaching that qualifying period, they generally do not count.

And from where I sit, there is an enormous management focus on getting students beyond that 42-day threshold.

Having just completed my first enrolment cycle, I have encountered an extraordinary range of students.

Many arrive keen to begin a new journey. Others are returning to the same institution after an unsuccessful previous year, seemingly biding their time until they can leave education.

Some arrive curious about the range of courses on offer, only to find themselves signed up to bricklaying.

That might raise a smile if I hadn’t witnessed variations of it numerous times during enrolment.

It can feel as though it is all about the numbers.

In an ideal world, a student beginning a one-year course without grade 4 English and maths would complete their vocational qualification while also achieving their English and maths targets.

The reality can be very different. Some students arrive a considerable distance from a grade 4. Experienced teachers can often identify early on those for whom achieving it within a year will be extremely challenging.

Yet the system keeps them on the same treadmill.

A student working at functional skills level or GCSE grade 1 or 2 is unlikely to reach a grade 4 after just one year at college.

I am not saying it is impossible. I have taught students who have made that leap. But they tend to be identified early by experienced teaching staff and require many hours of coaching, encouragement and additional support to get there.

For everyone else, failure can mean another year of resits and another year at college.

That risks creating what can feel less like an education model and more like a repeat-business model.

The distance between management and the classroom does not help.

As a maths lecturer, there are seven layers of management above me, all with their own responsibilities and priorities. But the further you travel from the coal face, the harder it becomes to see the problems confronting students and lecturers every day.

When was the last time a director simply dropped in to say hello to staff – let alone to the students whose education ultimately funds the institution?

Meanwhile, lecturers can spend the first half of the autumn term buried in administration, only to use the half-term break to complete the numerous tasks expected of them rather than refuelling for the weeks ahead.

And there, once again, is that number: 42 days.

By then, the qualifying period has been crossed and the students count as funded starts.

Colleges obviously need financial stability. Nobody working in FE can ignore the extraordinary funding pressures the sector faces.

But funding rules inevitably shape behaviour.

My concern, having crossed from schools into FE, is that we have allowed the 42-day threshold and the relentless focus on retention and progress to become more important than a much harder question.

Are we giving every student a realistic chance of succeeding?

Providers turning adult learners away because of funding constraints, MPs find

Adult learners are being turned away from adult education providers due to inflexible funding rules and eligibility constraints, a parliamentary inquiry has warned.

The report, ‘Skills for life, work and place’, found that 56 per cent of survey respondents said they often or very often refuse entry for adult learners because of the restrictions despite demand in industrial priority sectors such as manufacturing, construction and digital.

A further 35 per cent said this happened occasionally, while none said it never happened.

The findings come from an inquiry by the all-party parliamentary group (APPG) on further education and lifelong learning, supported by the Association of Colleges (AoC), which gathered evidence from more than 150 contributors, including providers, employers, researchers and learners.

The cross-party group of MPs and peers offered 12 overarching recommendations to develop a national vision for adult education, including that government should establish a minimum learning offer to all adults up to level 3.

Jonathan Brash MP, chair of the APPG on further education and lifelong learning, said: “There is strong support across the political divide for lifelong learning, and I urge the prime minister to take our united plea seriously.

“We must turn this consensus into action and make sure that wherever people live, and whatever their starting point, they have the opportunity to learn throughout their lives.”

Lord Johnson of Marylebone added that both the autumn budget and spring spending review are an “opportunity for the government to reverse years of underinvestment and give more people the chance to learn, retrain and get the skills they need for good jobs”.

A Department for Work and Pensions spokesperson said: “We are committed to giving people the skills they need for employment and further education as part of our £1.4 billion Adult Skills Fund.

“Local leaders understand the skills needs of their residents and businesses which is why we are determined to providing them with the powers they need to enable growth in every postcode.”

Multi-layered barriers

The inquiry linked the restrictions facing providers to a long-term decline in investment in adult education.

It cited analysis showing that public spending on classroom-based adult learning has fallen by 70 per cent in real terms since the early 2000s.

Around three quarters of England’s £1.4 billion adult skills fund (ASF) is now devolved to local areas which create their own rules.

Out of 62 providers who answered the question, 56 per cent said they often or very often turn potential adult learners away because of funding and eligibility constraints. This included reaching their ASF allocation limit.

Childcare and travel costs, residency rules and mental health needs were also holding learners back.

One learner said: “The reason I’m having to interview for a place is because there’s a limited amount of places and a big list of people who want to do level 2.”

More than four in five respondents named funding as a major barrier to tackling skills shortages and two thirds said public investment was “not at all adequate”.

Providers also described funding as fragmented, inflexible and insufficient.

“Contributors argued that adult education is being asked to deliver increasingly wide-ranging outcomes without the stable funding, policy coherence or national direction needed to do so,” the report said.

New City College told the inquiry: “The current rulebook that we have that determines whether you’re funded or not is more than two hundred pages long.”

The APPG recommended a “baseline” adult education offer for every adult in England, multi-year investment plans for mayoral strategic authorities, and national expectations on funding and learner outcomes.

It also called on government to explore options for local anchor institutions such as colleges and community education providers to award their own qualifications at entry level, level 1 and level 2.

The AoC has previously called for awarding powers to colleges for higher technical and vocational qualifications.

David Hughes, AoC chief executive, said: “We’ve all seen how the public conversation has shifted on the NEET crisis, thanks to the work from Alan Milburn and his team, and this is exactly what needs to happen with adult education.

“The Prime Minister has helpfully pledged a “guarantee of support” for young people, and as this report highlights, that same pledge is needed for an England-wide minimum adult learning offer, so that every adult, no matter what their age or circumstances, should have access to opportunities to retrain, upskill or reengage with learning.”

Welfare system falls short

Adult education providers also poorly rated the government’s welfare support for retraining.

Zero respondents said the welfare system was fully adequate for retraining, while one quarter said it was “not at all adequate”.

The report called for a cross-government review on welfare rules for learners, a grant-based offer – in devolved and non-devolved areas – for learners below level 4 and national guidance on how universal credit interacts with learning.

The APPG also called the incoming lifelong learning entitlement “valuable and welcome” but said it “should not be seen as a response to the broader challenges in access to adult education at lower levels”.

Only 1 per cent of respondents said learner support such as advanced learner loans was fully adequate, while 24 per cent said it was ‘not at all adequate’.

Protect ESOL funding

Several providers told the inquiry they could use their “entire” ASF allocation on English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL) alone, driven by demand for the courses.

Contributors “highlighted the need for faster access and more integrated ESOL and vocational pathways,” the APPG said.

The report recommended “protected” ESOL funding for local delivery and making ESOL provision an “integral” part of a national vision for adult education.

Move prison education to DWP

MPs also heard evidence on prison education and called the scale of cuts to contract values “striking”.

Earlier this year, ministers were accused of downplaying cuts to prison education budgets after a watchdog found evidence of “seismic” reductions.

The APPG recommended urgently reviewing funding levels to improve employment outcomes and reduced re-offending rates.

It also recommended moving oversight of prison education to the Department for Work and Pensions to “help ensure it aligns with wider adult learning and employment approaches” though contributors urged for provision to shift to the Department for Education.

DWP said it was not currently considering taking responsibility for prison education.

Our students need more than hope in a world on fire

Students who starting college this term did so following a summer that broke many records – and not in a good way. 2026 is the first year since records began to reach 35°C or higher during May, June and July, with the MET office declaring this summer as the UK’s hottest on record.

This contributed to over 1000 wildfires throughout the country.

The stark reality is that the summer we have just experienced may be the coolest summer our students will know, as the climate crisis take serious hold of the UK and tips us into unchartered territory.

Ongoing research by YouGov found that in August 2026, nearly 80 per cent of young people aged between 18 and 24 believed that concerns around climate change have not been exaggerated and the threat is every bit as real as scientists are saying.

A report in The Lancet, which surveyed 10,000 young people aged between 16 and 25, from ten countries, found that 43 per cent feel climate anxiety negatively impacts their daily life and functioning; 75 per cent think the future is frightening, and 83 per cent believe people have failed to take care of the planet. Respondents rated governmental responses to climate change negatively and reported greater feelings of betrayal than of reassurance.

So what do we do with this? In my book, I draw on my experience of working for social justice and environmental care over three decades and finding ways to stop myself being overwhelmed so that I can keep engaging, and I want to implore you to help the young people in your institutions too to find ways to channel their feelings into constructive action.

I have learnt the importance of developing a vision of what I want my life to be contributing to, even if the actual outworking of that takes many shapes, and then holding onto that vision and reminding myself of it when things get tough.

I know how important it is to have people around me who share my concerns; friends with whom I can be open when I want to rant or cry about the state of the world. I have discovered that it is really important that I look after myself, follow good practices and life rhythms, and that time spent in nature helps me to keep going.

The work for colleges starts simply by giving young people the opportunity to talk about their concerns.

They are not likely to volunteer their feelings, so provide space and ask open questions. Let them know they are not on their own but part of millions of people (and young people) in the UK and around the world who care deeply and want to be part of the change.

Encourage them to find ways to turn their skills and talents into careers that can contribute to a better future, and help them find good role models to inspire vision and ambition.

Not only in relation to the climate emergency, but in so many other ways too, we live in a frightening world facing existential crises and our young people need to be equipped to navigate them, whether it be racism, worries over the cost of living, the ongoing wars in the Middle East, family struggles or other things.

Now more than ever in our argumentative and fractured society, ruled by the algorithms of social media, we need young people of character, with values that will lead them to be caring, wise and compassionate, and who will live from those values in all areas of their lives.

As we progress through this academic year, let’s determine to enable our students to face this world of many crises and find ways to engage positively, in both their personal and professional lives.

Don’t ban AI in FE classrooms, teach students how to use it

The idea of AI being used in FE classrooms is not some distant concept that has yet to be achieved. The question now is no longer whether our students will use AI in their studies. Instead, the question now is whether our students will use AI to help them in learning their subjects, or for the avoidance of learning.

AI can assist our students to understand a tough subject, give them recommendations, help them in doing research, and direct them where they might be struggling with something.

But a danger arises when our students stop learning and start thinking through AI. Students will ask the software to do an assignment for them, then hand it over without even knowing about the subject at hand. This presents educationalists with a real challenge in the future.

Instead of instructing our students not to use AI, we should instead try educating them on how to use it properly.

In my role at HRUC, I have seen students in level 1 vocational studies use AI in developing websites, programming and coding assignments. However, what surprised me was not the fact that students were using AI but the way they were using it. It was interesting because they did not just want to receive the answer but also learn how to interact with the technology to generate their ideas.

This experience has made me realise that colleges need to concentrate on how learners interact with AI and why.

For example, instead of having AI perform a task, the student could ask such questions as: “I do not fully understand this concept. Can you explain it to me and provide me with some examples?”

Learners evaluate the information received from the technology, choosing what data to utilise, whether it is true or not, and paraphrasing it. This way, the learner remains the key player.

The AI platform can detect the gaps in the learner’s knowledge and understanding, explain the complicated parts of the material and suggest new research directions. At the same time, the learner needs to critically assess the information received from AI since it can be wrong, false or even misleading. To use AI effectively, it is not enough just to have good digital literacy skills but also critical thinking skills as well.

Educators should be particularly mindful that young or inexperienced students might be more likely to accept the answers of AI without any doubts as they do not know how to distinguish between correct and false information.

This is the reason why I have a strong conviction that AI usage should be integrated in vocational education in colleges. There should be an opportunity for students to learn how to formulate appropriate prompts, evaluate the information presented by AI, detect any false or misleading answers and differentiate between the work of AI and students’ own work.

Another responsibility of colleges should be confidentiality. The students should be aware that any confidential information should not be entered into AI systems, including personal information, private messages, and photos containing identifiable information.

We should not be prohibiting AI from being used in class. It is too efficient to be prohibited. It is our job to make sure that AI becomes not a substitute for learning, but a learning tool.

There is every opportunity for the FE sector to arm students with the knowledge required to control not just the present technological equipment, but also that which they will confront throughout their careers.