Why parents are the barrier to apprenticeship uptake

The challenge to apprenticeship uptake is the stigma of the route for parents, writes Ben Hansford

In the UK, university is still broadly viewed as the default path for school leavers. A university degree is seen as the most respected route for young jobseekers which, in the eyes of many, guarantees them a ‘successful’ job.

This is despite the fact that there has been a government focus on apprenticeships and other vocational routes into the workforce over the past few years as these have opened up to include a variety of skills, including technological and digital training.

However, even with a slowdown in apprenticeship starts through the pandemic, the programme has proved itself robust, and early indications show that apprenticeships are back on the rise and proving more popular than ever.

In 2019/20 alone, there were 719,000 people enrolled on an apprenticeship across England, with 322,500 apprenticeship starts and 146,900 apprenticeship achievements (the number of those who passed the end-point assessment).

Over 4.75 million apprenticeships were started over the past decade from May 2010 to January 2021. However, in 2020/21, 47 per cent of apprentices dropped out.

So it’s encouraging that employers such as Lloyds, HSBC and Asda offer apprenticeship programmes as a route into long careers.

But one of the main barriers to apprenticeship uptake in the UK is parents.

Ever since apprenticeships were reinvigorated ten years ago, the challenge has always been to remove the stigma of this route with parents. Parents remain the number one barrier to exponential growth in a proven route into a career.

Outdated views are stopping many school leavers from looking toward apprenticeships as a viable path into the workforce.

More than 60 per cent of parents of children aged 13 to 18 said they were concerned their child would be stuck ‘making the tea’ if they were to choose an apprenticeship, according to a 2020 survey by parent website Mumsnet.

Parents are still worried learners will be stuck making the tea

Parents need to be further informed and educated on the benefits of apprenticeships, the different types and exactly how they are run.

While government initiatives such as National Apprenticeship Week are great at raising awareness of apprenticeships among young people, without parental buy-in, young people may not get involved.

In fact research undertaken by the Association of Accounting Technicians in 2019 found that students feel they are being pushed down the route of going to university. Six out of ten students said their parents wanted them to pick that option.

The government and FE providers need to urgently rethink their apprenticeship strategies to target parents. This will help to combat the lack of information parents have regarding this route into work and relieve the stresses around whether a young adult is ready to take on a work or study programme.

To do so, here are the steps to take:

  1. Widen the marketing strategy to target not only school leavers but parents too.
  2. Lead with the fact that alongside more hands-on trade apprenticeships, there are professional and degree apprenticeships that span a variety of skills and sectors. Many parents don’t realise this.
  3. The costs of university versus apprenticeships should be included. This is even more relevant given the news that students will now be paying 12 per cent interest on their university loans.
  4. FE providers should hold discussions about after-school options with both students and their parents.
  5. Invite past students who have gone on to do an apprenticeship to talk about their experience. This is also a helpful way of bringing the apprenticeship experience to life.

Apprenticeships offer people the opportunity to earn a route into a profession, a degree, gain invaluable workforce experience and sometimes, have a job at the end of their programme, all at a lower cost than a university degree.

We must make sure parents are absolutely clear about this, and see apprenticeships as a competitive opportunity.

Shadowing should be embedded in apprenticeship standards

Shadowing is highly effective CPD and also helps to build relationships within organisations, writes Priya Patel

I’m a former digital marketing apprentice at an independent training provider, and now I hold a full-time role there. It means I have first-hand experience of reaping the opportunities of an apprenticeship programme.

The most impactful opportunity I had was shadowing – something that perhaps we don’t discuss very often in the FE space.

Shadowing is the activity of working alongside another member of the business that you work for, who has a different role to you. This is so you can build upon your transferrable skills while also networking in other parts of the organisation at the same time.

The whole process helps an organisation to achieve business goals through better relationships. 

When I worked with different members of the business, I found it very useful because it put into perspective how no working day is the same.

We learnt valuable knowledge from one another which enabled us to work better together in the future.

This shows how shadowing helps not only the learner, but the business and business members to work more efficiently. It set a higher standard of work for all of us involved.

It’s important to note that shadowing is different from other aspects of an apprenticeship.

This is because it’s a practice that is changeable, depending upon the different people you’re shadowing.

It means that learners can build up their skills in line with their needs, as well as the business’s needs. Shadowing helps to close skills gaps by facilitating learning first hand, in the shoes of colleagues. 

If there’s a particular skills gap in your team, pinpointing another business member to learn from could be the way to upskill apprentices further. Also, it allows a business to do this without having to employ another team member.

Similarly, if the business has connections with another business, a way for these businesses to build connections is by allowing employees from each business to work alongside one another.

This shows how shadowing can allow your team to branch outward to other businesses in a way that will provide value to one another, as well as for apprentices. They’ll get the opportunity to network in a new streamline.

Suggesting shadowing can also, of course, be an effective strategy to deploy substantial continued professional development for your team.

Within any business, shadowing should be available to apprentices if they ask or if the business recommends it.

Shadowing in apprenticeship standards would help model good leadership

But it’s important to stress that shadowing is not in the apprenticeship standards.

If shadowing was in the standard, then more talent could be brought out on programmes and more individual apprentices could be stretched and developed.

If shadowing was embedded in all apprenticeships, we could create a new generation of apprentices who are leaders of their own learning.

By incorporating shadowing into the apprenticeship standard, this will help model good leadership. It would show learners that leaders exist at different stages of the career ladder, not just at ‘the top’ of it.

This in turn would emphasise the need to assist colleagues to gain the skills for these different stages of the career ladder. In turn, this would allow apprentices to experience a learning curve that represents the kind of leader they want to be. 

For apprentices to reach their potential, they need to be given the independence to learn in different situations. But they also need the support and encouragement to do so.

When I was an apprentice, encouragement from my peers was the key to see me through the pathway of the apprenticeship.

It gave me confidence to learn as best I could on the apprenticeship programme. This has meant that on completion of my apprenticeship, I am able to continually guide my own learning as I’ve developed that habit from the get-go.

With shadowing in the apprenticeship standard, we would have the power to pass on the torch of brilliant learning, and keep it burning bright.

What can we learn from the history of policymaking in FE?

A top-down approach has left a confused legacy of abandoned institutions, qualifications and a lack of consistent funding streams, writes Bart Shaw

Bringing young people on the margins of education policy into the centre is what my organisation strongly believes is the most pressing policy change.

All policymaking should start with the question “how does this benefit the chances of those who do least well?”

This is where the hundreds of FE colleges in England come in.

They support almost a million young people at a time. These students are disproportionately those from lower-income or non-white backgrounds, and those with higher levels of learning needs.

Yet policy making (and research) marginalises young people in FE.

One way in which policymaking undermines and underfunds young people in FE is through high levels of ‘churn’ in funding and policy decisions.

This year I read the Edge Foundation’s excellent review of the last 30 years of FE policy, by Oxford University professor Ewart Keep, thinktank founder Tom Richmond and former college principal Ruth Silver. I highly recommend a read: it’s called ‘Honourable Histories’.

High levels of policy churn undermines FE

The overall message is clear: the FE sector in England has been characterised by frequent and significant changes in policy direction.

That’s especially the case in comparison to other countries, where the pace of change is more incremental.

England’s hyperactivity when it comes to FE policy has generally been problematic.

The report notes:

“Rather than seeking to establish and build up durable institutional arrangements we have a tendency to periodically raze them to the ground, scatter the rubble and start all over again with the erection of new, ultimately equally temporary edifices.”

In other countries, change is often built on consensus, with leaders of FE institutions, unions or representative groups, regional and local government and employers. But in England change is often centrally and swiftly imposed.

Coupled with frequent changes in direction, this top-down approach has left a confused legacy of abandoned institutions and qualifications and a lack of consistent funding streams.

Even when government rhetoric prioritises the FE sector, the relative funding, accountability structures, recruitment drives and celebration of achievement remains weighted heavily in favour of schools and the push for ever-improving academic attainment.

What, then, can current and future education ministers (for whom ‘skills’ is a stated top priority) learn from the failures of FE policymaking in the past?

I have three tentative suggestions. These are made in the spirit of slow policy change and not aiming to solve all problems in one go, but rather to lay a foundation for future reform.

1.Real terms funding to at least match 2010

Whilst the capital funding promised in the levelling up white paper is useful, the universal refrain from within the sector is about the continued shortfall in revenue funding. At the very least, real terms funding for colleges should match 2010, with longer (five year?) funding horizons to enable sustainable staffing and planning.

2. Put those with the highest need first

For the Department for Education, this means resourcing the FE sector to at least the same extent at schools. Funding, recruitment and strategic position within the department has been marginalised for too long.

Focus on young people whose learning needs are more complex and less likely to fit what is already happening. Forty-five per cent of young people aged 16 plus with an identified SEND are in FE colleges compared to 12 per cent in school sixth forms.

Ensure that every new decision is made with these young people in mind first.

3. Stick with the current portfolio of qualifications

Give T Levels a chance to bed in. In the meantime, rather than imagining that the system will need streamlining, and BTECs should make way for T Levels, allow both to sit alongside each other and spend time observing, measuring and testing solutions before radically re-landscaping.

Let’s not keep repeating the cycles of the past.

MOVERS AND SHAKERS: EDITION 392

Katy Quinn

Principal & CEO,
City of Portsmouth
College

Start date: Summer term

Previous Job: Principal & CEO,
Strode College

Interesting fact: In her younger years, Katy played County netball for Somerset.

Gary Potts

Principal, Northumberland College, Education Partnership North East

Start date: August 2022

Previous Job: Group Vice Principal – Business, Innovation and Partnerships,
Education Training Collective

Interesting fact: Gary began his career as a design engineer following a five-year apprenticeship in toolmaking design and programming electric discharge machines.

IFS: Spending on adult education and apprenticeships will be 25% below 2010 levels by 2025

Total spending on adult education and apprenticeships will be 25 per cent lower in 2024/2025 compared with 2010/2011 according to new analysis by the Institute for Fiscal Studies.  

Researchers found that total spending on adult education and apprenticeships fell by 38 per cent in real-terms between 2010–11 and 2020–21. Looking at classroom based learning on its own, the IFS found that spending has plummeted by 50 per cent over ten years. 

While the 2021 spending review provided an additional £900 million for adult education by 2024–25, total spending on adult education and apprenticeships will still be 25 per cent lower in 2024/25 compared to 2010/11. 

Sector leaders were quick to criticise the government’s spending review promises on adult education at the time.

The IFS has said today this will make it harder to achieve the government’s high ambitions to improve technical education and adult skills in order to level up poorer areas of the country.

“As part of efforts to level up poorer areas of the country, the government has announced an additional £900m in extra spending on adult education by 2024-25,” said Imran Tahir, IFS Research Economist and author. 

“However, due to significant cuts over the past decade, government spending will still be 25% lower in 2024–25 than 2010–11.”

Tahir explained that taken together, the government’s adult education reform plans will provide extra help to those who left schools with good GCSEs or equivalent qualifications. 

“Yet the main plans set out for helping adults with few qualifications – skills bootcamps and the new “Multiply” programme –  are relatively untested and are unlikely to lead to formal qualifications. 

“Providing effective support and training for this group is a significant challenge that will be key to levelling-up poorer areas of the country,” he added. 

Stephen Evans, chief executive of Learning and Work Institute said that the research echoed their findings that the “welcome increases” in funding would still leave budgets far short of 2010 levels. 

“With employers investing just half the EU average per employee on training, it’s clear we need to up our game. 

“Critically that means learning at all levels, with our research showing a 63% fall in adults improving their literacy and numeracy. This is a slow motion disaster, limiting people’s life chances and business access to skills. It’s a short-term saving with a long-term cost,” he said. 

Learner numbers have dropped just as drastically as funding. 

The IFS says there’s been a 50 per cent fall in adults taking qualifications at Level 2 and below, and a 33 per cent fall in the number of adults taking Level 3 qualifications. 

Researchers noted that such falls will partly reflect cuts in public funding for such courses and the introduction of advanced learning loans under the coalition government.

Toby Perkins MP, Labour’s shadow minister for Further Education and Skills, said the government’s “neglect of further education is plain to see” in shrinking opportunities and falling numbers of adults taking part in training and reskilling.

“Together with the lowest level of workplace learning in over a generation, it is clear that the Conservatives do not have a plan to tackle skills shortages across our economy” he added. 

Apprenticeships growth focused at advanced and higher levels

The IFS also found that apprenticeships were more focused at advanced and higher levels. 

After 2010, the number of adult apprenticeship starts initially increased to about 350-400,000 per year. 

However, researchers found that apprenticeship starts have dropped off to about 250,000 per year since the introduction of the Apprenticeship Levy in April 2017. 

“At the same time, there has been [a] shift in the type of apprenticeships taken by adults. In 2020, fewer than 50,000 adults began the lowest level of apprenticeships (intermediate apprenticeships) compared to 200,000 a decade earlier,” the IFS said in a statement.  

“The number of higher apprenticeships (which include degree apprenticeships) has rocketed from a few hundred starts in 2010 to almost 100,000 starts in 2020”.  

The research found that whilst increasing numbers of higher and advanced apprenticeships is welcome, the number of apprenticeship opportunities at lower levels has been drying up.

“Both the economic downturn and the changing nature of the labour market are likely to increase demand for adult education and apprenticeships,” said Josh Hillman, education director at the Nuffield Foundation. 

“To ensure that adults from a wide range of backgrounds from across the UK are able to gain the skills required by employers, it is essential that the further education system is adequately funded.”

The DfE told FE Week: “We are targeting support where it is needed most, investing in high quality training that is delivering the skilled workforce employers need to grow, while plugging skills gaps in our economy and helping more people into jobs.

“This includes making £2.7 billion available by 2025 to support business of all sizes to create more apprenticeships, in addition to investing over £260 million in the last year to expand popular adult training schemes, such as Skills Bootcamps and Free Courses for Jobs.

“This approach is working. It is great to see the number of people starting apprenticeships across England so far this year bouncing back to pre-pandemic levels, and thousands of people have already taken advantage of the opportunity to upskill or retrain for free through one of our adult skills courses.”

Is it time to let go of the failures and ego of incorporation?

The colleges sector can only challenge the problems of incorporation if it takes the uncomfortable step of building a united political stance, writes Stuart Rimmer

With the announcement last month that the Office for National Statistics was reviewing the classifications of colleges, there was an immediate flurry among the FE Twitterati.

Did it signal the shift back to pre-incorporation? Might colleges struggle to access to bank loans and financing?

Both concerns at this stage are false dawns.

Colleges have been under various classifications over the years (in 1993, 2010 and 2012) with little impact.

A classification change would affect how colleges report to government and borrow (with requests coming to colleges this week) but are unlikely to be too dramatic.

For me, the sector can use this moment to consider whether we should be lobbying to go back into the public sector and undo some of the legacy of incorporation.

To have this debate would require the setting aside of egos and a cold, hard look at the position of the sector and how it has fared since 1993.

What we currently have is very much the worst of both worlds.

Policies around the area-based review and, latterly, local skills improvement plans are in many ways an attempt to control curriculum.

What we currently have is the worst of both worlds

When combined with funding rules and defunding rules (look at T Levels or adult funding) then curriculum is already restricted under a national banner.

It is an illusion to think colleges have wide choice.

Advice and guidance has often been found lacking in schools and colleges, with confused and duplicated local offers supported by what Oxford University professor Ewart Keep would describe as ‘quasi-markets’.

Colleges are obsessed with growth, damaging their neighbours, to keep pace with rising costs rather than nationally seeking settlements on the funding required.

We individually negotiate staff contracts and pay rather than have a national settlement. We know school teachers are paid at significantly higher rates.

National shortages plague college departments, weakening provision or prompting staff to be poached.

Nationalisation would allow college lecturers security and stronger national bargaining through unions.

In this parliament we have seen increasing control via both the Department for Education through the skills for jobs white paper, and the Treasury through recent capital funding, which is channelled through DfE rather than through the ESFA or college “bailouts”.

Colleges could also get the financial benefits of VAT, of lower cost borrowing direct from government rather than at commercial rates (which takes away from students).

Large capital projects, and the generation of public assets, could be delivered direct from government with risks sitting centrally, rather than with individual colleges.

A postcode lottery of inherited building stock or debt at incorporation hampers colleges’ ability to spend to this day.

Colleges could move away from perverse incentives to protect cash and restrict resources to keep regulators at bay – and focus on student experience and curriculum.

Since 1993, are colleges funded better or worse comparatively?

Are we more focused on educational mission or more conflicted? Do colleges feel more or less stable?

Do staff feel more or less recognised? Have colleges had the capital investment required to meet 21st century industry needs?

Has curriculum kept pace pace with European counterparts? Is there better local collaboration?

Taking all this into account: has incorporation been a success?

To discuss, colleges would need to do some very uncomfortable things:

  1. Adopt a strong and clearer collective political position. In my experience the sector has been very reluctant, or fearful, of doing this: scared of upsetting paymasters or the market. We do lack the coherence of political thinking generated through debate.
  2. Set aside our egos, as any nationalisation would lead to a giving up of individual and institutional power for the collective good. This would be undesirable for many and no doubt come with painful unintended consequences.
  3. Accept a recalibration of curriculum within localities, and of college finances nationally (losing both debt and reserves).
  4. Seize the opportunities from centrally planned responses to HE collaboration and issues such as sustainability or energy.

I may, as ever, just be politically daydreaming. But the debate is worth having.

Warning as cyber criminals try to cash in on exam season

Schools and colleges are being warned about a “despicable” cyber attack where scammers pose as a parent of a student who is in hospital and cannot make their exam, in order to potentially gain sensitive details. 

The email sent to exams officers says: “I am Jamie’s mum and I was told to contact you in regards to his examinations, I just want to make you are aware [sic] that he’s had a bad fall down the stairs. 

“I took him to hospital right away and the bone has fractured. They told him to rest but I don’t think he’s going to be able to make it to him [sic] exams.” 

The person says a medical report from the hospital is attached for the exams officer to “check over”. However, opening the attachment installs a virus on the recipient’s computer. 

When asked about the attack, a spokesperson for the National Cyber Security Centre said: “We know scammers exploit topical issues to trick people into sharing sensitive details or clicking on malicious content. 

“Any attempt to scam school and college staff is despicable and if individuals spot suspicious messages they should forward them to us at report@phishing.gov.uk”. 

The Joint Council for Qualifications warned exams officers about the email earlier this week. The body said a “small number” had received the “suspicious email containing a virus”, but did not know exactly how many had been affected. 

JCQ said in an email to officers: “This is a gentle reminder asking you to remain vigilant about potential cyber attacks. 

“If you receive this or any other email you are unsure about, do not open it or click on any links. Contact your IT department for support.”

A spokesperson for JCQ, which represents exam boards, said potential cyber security risks are something schools and colleges “take seriously throughout the year”. 

The NCSC, which is a part of government intelligence agency GCHQ, issued multiple alerts last year after an increase in ransomware attacks against schools and colleges. 

It warned: “It is important senior leaders understand the nature of the threat and the potential for ransomware to cause considerable damage to their institutions in terms of lost data and access to critical services.” 

Schools and colleges lost financial records, students’ coursework and Covid-19 testing data during more than 70 cyber attacks on the sector during the pandemic. 

More recently, colleges were warned to brace themselves for possible cyber attacks amid a heightened threat from Russia following its invasion of Ukraine. 

Cyber attacks affecting colleges, which have included doctored emails from principals and hoax terror attacks, were on the rise before the pandemic.

South and City College Birmingham was forced to shut its eight campuses following a major ransomware attack that disabled its core IT systems last year. Lincoln College was hit by a similar attack in 2020. 

The government last year trialled a new, free cyber security tool that schools and colleges can use to measure the robustness of their online security measures. 

The rise in cases has sparked an “education drive” from national crime agencies. The NCSC, for instance, wants schools and colleges to sign up to its Early Warning cyber incident notification service, which was launched last year. 

Tom Middlehurst, curriculum, assessment and inspection specialist at the Association of School and College Leaders, said: “It is sadly a feature of the digital age that malicious emails containing viruses are sent to school and college staff, as they are to many other organisations.” 

The NCSC has also published a free cyber security training package for school staff and advice on common signs to look for in scam messages.

No T Level achievement rates until wave 3 students complete

T Levels will not be included in published achievement rates until the third cohort on the flagship new qualifications have completed their course, FE Week can reveal. 

But national-level results for T Levels will be published from the get-go, with the first set of outcomes set to be released alongside A-levels in August. 

The Department for Education published qualification achievement rate (QAR) business rules for 2021 to 2022 this week. 

QARs use pass rates and retention to measure training provider and college performance. They are used to hold providers to account each year by the likes of the DfE and Ofsted. 

This is the first year that T Level QARs could have been published, because the first students to take the two-year T Level courses began in September 2020. 

However, the DfE’s QAR business rules said that T Levels and the T Levels Transition Programme are to be excluded for the time being. 

The DfE told FE Week that T Level accountability is scheduled to start based on the cohort of students who complete their study in 2023/24. 

There were 43 providers delivering T Levels in year one of the rollout, when 1,300 students enrolled on the course. 

In year two, 105 schools and colleges are delivering T Levels to almost 5,500 young people. A further 88 providers will deliver the qualifications from 2022/23. 

Steve Hewitt, a management information systems and FE funding expert, told FE Week that the DfE’s decision not to include T Levels in QARs this year was not a surprise. 

“It’s been pretty standard practice for new programmes not to have achievement rates for the first couple of years. The same happened with apprenticeship standards and trailblazers before them,” he said.

“I can understand, particularly with the upheaval of the last two years, that achievement on T Levels might not be equivalent to the more well-established programmes, so it seems fair to give it a chance to bed in.” 

While QAR data won’t be available for T Levels this year, the DfE clarified that national results for the new qualifications will be published alongside A Levels this summer on August 18. 

Tom Bewick, chief executive of the Federation of Awarding Bodies, said: “The federation welcomes the government’s confirmation that T Level results will be published at a national level from the first cohort. 

“Transparency of the data and performance of skills programmes also helps ensure greater public confidence in the significant taxpayer investment that is going into them.”

Bewick added that it makes sense to allow time for the new flagship qualifications to “bed in” before they are included in achievement rates, particularly owing to the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic. 

“However, ministers should ensure they are published from 2023, including progression data into skilled employment, particularly given what the education secretary has often told parliamentarians and the wider sector about his unwavering commitment to publishing data that helps drive better performance of the skills and qualifications system as a whole,” he said.

New alliance to offer fellowships for FE staff

Two college membership bodies have formed a “strategic alliance” that could soon see fellowships awarded to the “next generation of FE leaders”.

The Collab Group and the Chartered Institution for Further Education announced today that they have signed a memorandum of understanding committing themselves to working together on employer engagement, training future college leaders and to “act as a unified and powerful voice of advocacy”.

One of the benefits of the new partnership will be the ability to grant “fellowships” through the Chartered Institution to graduates of Collab’s leadership courses and local college CPD programmes. 

Ian Pretty, chief executive of Collab Group, believes offering fellowships to FE staff will not only “add to their CVs” but will boost the esteem and prestige of FE professionals. “It also adds to the idea that we have a professional class of people who are qualified fellows” Pretty said.

But staff will only be eligible if they work at a Collab member college that has been awarded chartered status through the Chartered Institution.

To date only five of Collab’s 29 member colleges have been granted chartered status: Bedford College Group; Blackpool and The Fylde College; Bridgwater and Taunton College; London South East Colleges and The Trafford College Group.

The Chartered Institution now has 20 members, six of which are independent training providers.

Pretty says more Collab Group members are “now in conversations” to go for chartered status, but insisted his members won’t receive preferential treatment.

The Chartered Institution for Further Education was given royal approval to confer chartered status in 2013 with the support of then minister for skills John Hayes. It relaunched in April 2021 as an independent organisation no longer in receipt of Department for Education funding.

Dawn Ward, principal and chief executive of Burton and South Derbyshire College, has been a leading advocate for chartered status in further education. Speaking as deputy chair at the Chartered Institution, Ward said the new partnership with the Collab Group will elevate professional status within the sector.

“The Chartered Institution is the only FE representative body with royal assent to provide chartered status to leading FE and skills providers. We have exciting plans to build on this and deliver new services to the sector that will celebrate dual professionalism of FE practitioners as well as elevating their professional status,” Ward said.