Are you tackling cultural poverty among students?

Ofsted is inspecting for ‘cultural capital’, but limited experience of the world is still holding learners back, writes Josh Spears

Have you ever felt like more and more learners are struggling to answer essay-style questions, not because they don’t know the facts, but because they lack good analysis?

Maybe, like me, you teach GCSE English Language re-sit, where learners struggle with fiction and non-fiction writing tasks.

Or you’re vocational studies, or A-level, wondering just why the evaluative elements of a student’s work just seem to fall flat.

It might just be because your students are living in cultural poverty.

I only really put the name cultural poverty to this issue at the start of 2020, defining it as “learners being unable to engage with creative and social concepts due to a lack of personal experiences that take place in the wider world”. So far it is holding up well enough.

To put it more simply, let’s ask this question: how can we expect a learner to write creatively about a time they went to a forest, if they’ve never been to one?

Just this year, a re-sit cohort went on a college visit to a gallery in Middlesbrough and nearly all of them had remarked that they’d never been to Middlesbrough. Darlington is 16 miles away. Yet they’d never been once.

High travel costs, lack of access to transport, no knowledge of activities. These are the bedrock of cultural poverty.

It worries me that those in cultural poverty can be at greater risk of fake news and radicalisation as they lack the ability to judge truth, having been exposed to little debate, coupled with that feeling that the community has no use for you.

Those in cultural poverty can be at greater risk of fake news

Don’t mistake cultural poverty with the failed, classist theory of aspirational poverty, which has since been debunked by academic Morag Treanor, in 2018. Aspirational poverty suggested that the poor, working class of the country didn’t aspire to “good” jobs in law, health or any such profession where you exchange business cards over a Pret lunch.

But learners want to be the best ̶ it’s just they don’t always know what is out there to be the best at! Or they do know, and they want those roles, but they don’t know how they can get there.

We give them careers advice, but do we give them varied careers experience?

American professor E. D. Hirsch suggested that learners existing in this state lacked “cultural literacy”. This idea focused around a national “shared vocabulary of ideas”-̶ not just an awareness of historical dates but the ripple effect these events had on our shared “tribe”.

The concept of cultural literacy appealed so much to Michael Gove when he was education secretary in 2012, that it inspired think tank Civitas to produce the ‘Core Knowledge’ curriculum, boldly stating that they will create “culturally literate citizens”.

This is good… but it doesn’t solve the problem of cultural poverty, and not only because it seems to focus on schools, not FE.

What we need is more than just facts, dates and their impacts. Learners at FE age need to be brought into the world and given a stake in it, a way to give something of themselves.

They need to be paid as well, because all the good feelings and intentions you offer pale in comparison to money. If we don’t offer this, then a part-time job that a learner might mistake for a career surely will ̶ I’ve seen it happen. We need to compete to win them back.

Ofsted is now inspecting for “cultural capital”, which it is calling “the essential knowledge that children need to be educated citizens”.

It’s down to organisations to determine what defines culture and how it can be championed. My own college is now investing in one of the first professional development events focused entirely around cultural poverty and how to lift learners out of it with the right tools.

Calling it cultural poverty, rather than capital, is important: we don’t tell students on free school meals that they lack food capital, so why do it with culture?

We owe our learners a way out, and into the wider world.

I’ve seen cancel culture first hand in FE

There is an intolerance in the sector for people with views contrary to the prevailing ideology, writes Tom Bewick

The minister for higher and further education, Michelle Donelan, gave a really important speech recently. She set out the government’s plans to legislate to protect free speech.

Controversially, she also delivered a critique of so-called ‘cancel culture’ on campus, saying: “Where once we found critical debate and arguments were won on their merits, today we see an upsurge in physical threats and complete intolerance of opposing ideas.”

I believe that what Donelan said deserved to be reported on, at least by the sector press. Whether we like the ‘culture wars’ or not, they are a part of our national discourse.

The backlash I received on social media, from parts of FE, makes me think we have a problem.

I was the only sector leader to draw attention to the speech.

One FE commentator, Mick Fletcher, suggested cancel culture was, “fake news”, made up by a Tory elite looking to distract from austerity.

Former FE Week editor Nick Linford echoed a similar sentiment; posting an incredulous looking gif. Tagged to my twitter timeline, it read: “conspiracy times.”

Of course, they are entitled to their opinions. But what some people are guilty of in our profession, in my view, is straight out of the cancellation culture playbook. Not in the sense of an organised conspiracy. It’s more insidious than that.

For a start, telling people something isn’t real is known as ‘gaslighting’. If you don’t know what this phrase means, it refers to a colloquialism that is about manipulating an individual or social group to question their own sense of reality.

A gas-lighter engages in false narratives. An example of this in FE is the debate about whether colleges have actually been successful in securing more funding. The government’s cheerleaders pump out the false narrative that funding has increased.

Meanwhile, respected bodies, such as the Institute for Fiscal Studies, point out that in real terms, particularly relative to the recent past, FE is still chronically underfunded.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, those who point out this fact don’t generally get invited to join government panels or speak at sector conferences. They are cancelled.

Perhaps our FE leaders don’t believe we have a problem because we haven’t seen equivalent high-profile cases like that of Kathleen Stock? The academic was hounded out of her Sussex University post for expressing perfectly lawful gender critical views.

Similarly, education secretary Nadhim Zahawi has not been asked to intervene in any major rows affecting free speech in a further education college, unlike in a school recently, where a diocese allegedly tried to get a gay author banned from speaking to pupils.

FE staff write to me all the time saying they have been ostracised by colleagues

These examples display shocking levels of intimidation and bigotry. They should have no place in a modern society.

But neither is it right for those in FE to simply dismiss growing concerns about cancel culture and self-censorship as some sort of conspiracy theory. Gaslighting or not.

I’ve seen cancel culture first hand. I had to pull out of a live college production of my podcast after the principal insisted that a national mainstream media commentator was de-platformed, refusing to give a reason why. I said I couldn’t go along with that decision.

FE staff write to me all the time saying how they have been ostracised by colleagues or lost out on promotions for admitting that they voted for Brexit, as I did, in the 2016 referendum.

Others tell me how they voted for Brexit but simply self-censor because they fear the consequences of being so open about it.

Indeed, it is this intolerance in the sector for people with contrary views to the prevailing ideology or who refuse to be part of an ‘echo chamber’, that we should now tackle.

Putting hashtag ‘be kind’ on social media profiles, or sector leaders virtue signalling about the latest EDI strategy, are not going to be enough.

Freedom of speech must be at the heart of everything that FE stands for.

Without open and contestable debates, we all suffer. 

Are you lonesome tonight? Check how your colleagues and students are feeling

Social, emotional and existential loneliness may be affecting more of your colleagues and learners than you realise, writes Stuart Rimmer

Amid busy college corridors and offices, it might seem strange to talk about loneliness.

This week a charity that the FE sector has supported for many years, the Mental Health Foundation, has placed the focus on loneliness.

A 2020 government review suggested that 47 per cent of adults experience periods of loneliness.

Almost ten per cent of 16-to-24-year olds report they often or always feel lonely.

Sadly, higher social deprivation or lower educational outcomes also negatively impacts on loneliness.

Being single, divorced, unemployed or with poor health can increase chances of feeling lonely.

Younger people can also experience loneliness and isolation around issues such as sexual orientation, low self-esteem, starting a new course or new job, relationship break-ups, or moving to a new place, such as university.

When described in these terms, the people who can often feel lonely sound very much feels like an FE cohort. 

Loneliness is different to social isolation but students and staff might experience both of these.

It has links to long-term poor physical and mental health. Within each of our classes or teams we might easily find someone who feels lonely if we look hard enough.

People can feel lonely in relationships, excluded or on the edge of teams. People can feel lonely in a crowded room. 

The pandemic undoubtedly amplified loneliness and isolation.

Digital exclusion continues to be a huge contributing factor towards “designing in” isolation.

During the pandemic, both staff and students reported this and sought solace in the community of colleagues on site. But we haven’t fully considered a post-pandemic strategy. 

Loneliness and isolation in leadership roles is well-reported, with over half of CEOs in a Harvard Business Review study reporting loneliness.

Leaders can miss out on the social elements of work and friendships (this is not me looking for mates!). This can lead to a loss of empathy and lower tolerance levels among CEOs as a result, which can then impact on staff. Isolation is also linked to burnout. 

Leaders can miss out on the social elements of work and friendships

Teacher demands of the job can add further pressure and crowd out work life balance leading to social isolation.

In my own college the changing teaching styles post-pandemic, with moves towards digital or remote preparation and some support staff still working from home, has seen greater disconnection from teams. It is much easier to become professionally isolated.

I often speak of the importance of ‘teamship’ within departments and the wider college. Being connected and having a sense of shared values and belonging is the starting point for this but we’ll need to be proactive to ensure all members of the team are included.

The What Works Wellbeing Centre suggests there are three distinct types of loneliness.

Firstly, social loneliness: a lack of quantity as well as quality of relationships.

Secondly, emotional loneliness: loss or lack of meaningful relationships or belonging.

Finally, existential loneliness: a feeling of being separate from others, which is sometimes linked to trauma. 

For me, colleges are a place of connection and community. They have always proudly been a place for inclusion. We are a place of recovery and renewal. As we have said many times, we don’t always know the lives of students or colleagues beyond the college gates.

Beyond our educational mandates, creating connection is a college’s ‘super power’.  Everyone should be able to find a place to belong – to a class, a study group, a team.

The Good for Me, Good for FE campaign has now teamed up with the Mental Health Foundation to support concepts such as social prescribing (where social activities are prescribed for people’s health) and volunteering.

So, this Mental Health Awareness Week I’d encourage everyone to take that extra moment to check in with colleagues and all students.

Ensure everyone has a connection and, as ever, welcome everyone into our college communities.

DfE – go through employers to promote the lifelong loan

The lifelong loan entitlement won’t drive behaviour change unless the public know about it, write Ed Reza Schwitzer and Patrick Thomson

During both our times in government we have seen countless policies falling at the final hurdle, whether under Labour, the coalition or Conservatives – implementation. Typically, the bigger the policy, the more that can go wrong.

And in the education and skills world they do not come much bigger right now than the lifelong loan entitlement (LLE).

As universities minister Michelle Donelan said: “Like the revolutionary ideas that shaped the founding of our NHS, LLE is based on the idea that people regardless of background or wealth should have a clear understanding about their loan entitlement, with those eligible able to access the system flexibly – as and when they need it.”

Comparing the LLE with the NHS? No pressure then.

The challenge

At its heart, the challenge for the LLE is behavioural.

If students continue to use their entitlement to study traditional three-year degrees at age 18, the LLE hasn’t delivered its objectives.

With more people living and working for longer, we need a system that genuinely supports people to access opportunities to train and reskill at all stages of life.

Success means different types of learners, including people in mid-career, returners and older workers, accessing more flexible, shorter courses offered by providers, who have in turn engaged with employers on what they need.

So how can the Department for Education achieve this?

We polled a nationally representative sample of over 2,000 people in the UK and ran four focus groups with people in their 40s, 50s and 60s to find out.

Raising awareness requires employer buy-in

The LLE will not drive behaviour change unless the public know the opportunities it provides them.

A cautionary tale on this comes from T Levels, which are also a relatively new initiative. The DfE has spent substantial time and resources raising awareness about them.

However, in our polling we found that awareness of T Levels is almost identical to the awareness of fictional ‘H levels’.

Whatever the government has done to drive up awareness of T Levels, it cannot rely on doing the same for the LLE.

A better route could be to build awareness via employers, particularly for people in mid-career who already have ties to their employer.

It is not clear from the government’s recent LLE consultation who would-be learners can go to for support around the LLE. We would hypothesise that individuals’ existing employers would be a natural port of call.

An existing ‘touch point’ the government could use is the midlife MOT, different models of which have been trialled by government, businesses and providers. The government offer consists of free online support to encourage people in their 40s, 50s and 60s to undertake more active planning in the key areas of work, wellbeing and money – and it’s aimed both at employees and employers.

Linking the LLE to the midlife MOT would utilise an existing touch point for changing behaviour.

Providers will need to change their offer

Even if individuals are aware of the LLE, they will only use it if the offer suits them. When we asked poll participants what they thought would make the LLE scheme successful, the top-ranked answer (74 per cent) was “the ability to fit the learning around other commitments (e.g. caring or work)”.

In our focus groups, this was absolutely crucial for midlife and older workers in particular. Whether this means more bitesize courses, night-time and weekend classes, part-time learning, or something else, it is clear the LLE has to be about developing more flexible courses. This can only happen through proper engagement with providers. 

In short, the LLE has great potential.

But successful implementation will require more serious engagement with employers and providers, if the government wants to succeed in driving genuine behaviour change.

Three colleges remain ‘outstanding’ more than a decade after last Ofsted visits 

Three colleges have retained their ‘outstanding’ grades despite not having been inspected by Ofsted for over ten years, with all three achieving the feat in reports published this week. 

Notre Dame Catholic Sixth Form College in Leeds and Barnsley College and Greenhead College in West Yorkshire were last inspected in 2008, 2010 and 2009 respectively. 

This week Ofsted published the results of new inspections and found that standards at the three colleges had not slipped, despite the long period of time between inspections.   

Ofsted rated Notre Dame Catholic Sixth Form College ‘outstanding’ in all key areas and praised leaders, saying that students “flourish” in the college’s “positive and harmonious” environment.  

“[Students] respect and value the wide range of cultures and views that they experience at the college,” inspectors said.  

“For many students, the college’s diverse and inclusive nature significantly influenced their decision to study there.” 

Notre Dame Catholic Sixth-Form College is situated in inner Leeds and recruits students from three Catholic partner schools and 110 high schools. 

At the time of the inspection, 2,378 students were enrolled on full-time study programmes. Nearly all students studied three level 3 subjects. Most were doing A-levels, with a significant minority studying advanced vocational courses.  

“Students are empowered by the trust that staff show in them to take responsibility for their learning journey. Highly skilled and knowledgeable teachers motivate and support students to always try their best,” inspectors said.  

Ofsted found that leaders and managers at the college had devised a “highly ambitious curriculum” and that they have “exceptionally high” expectations of students so they can “be the best that they can be” ̶ something inspectors said is reflected in students’ “highly positive behaviour and conduct”.  

The principal of Notre Dame Catholic Sixth Form College, Justine Barlow, said she was “incredibly proud” to have retained the Ofsted grade.  

“I would like to say a huge thank you to all the students who, after two very difficult years, have demonstrated an outstanding attitude to learning, outstanding resilience, and have helped to re-energise the community of Notre Dame,” she said.  

“A special thank you goes to all the staff, who relentlessly support students academically and pastorally to be the ‘best they can be’! Finally, thank you to all parents and carers: your support is invaluable and very much appreciated.” 

Leaders at Barnsley College received similar recognition from Ofsted, who said that students work in a “purposeful and very calm environment” in all areas of the college and in lessons.  

Barnsley College is a large general further education college with a number of sites in the town of Barnsley. Its latest full inspection was carried out on March 8, this year.  

At the time of the inspection, the college had 4,600 students on education programmes for young people, which equates to around two-thirds of all further education students at the college.  

There were approximately 1,150 adult students, 1,200 apprentices and 361 students with high needs studying at the institution. 

“Teachers have very high expectations for students and provide a high level of support and encouragement that enables most students to achieve well,” Ofsted inspectors said.  

“Students enjoy working with peers who have similar interests to themselves in subjects in which they have a real interest.” 

Ofsted found that students aged 14 to 16 on full-time provision demonstrated a very high standard of behaviour at the college and that students feel very safe in the college and its surrounding areas. 

Yiannis Koursis, chief executive of Barnsley College, said: “This fantastic accolade is a reflection of all the amazing work our staff, students and partners do every single day to transform the lives of our students and the Barnsley community. 

“The inspectors saw first-hand the inspirational teaching, learning and support that takes place across the college, and we are delighted that they recognised that our staff go above and beyond to give our students a truly outstanding learning experience.” 

Greenhead College, in Huddersfield, was judged to be outstanding in six key categories. 

At the time of the college’s inspection, there were 2,767 students on education programmes for young people, of whom 10 were students with high needs.

Ofsted found that staff across the college set “very high expectations” for what they expect of students in terms of their attitudes to learning and their behaviour. 

“Students respond to these exceptionally well, and their behaviour is exemplary. They are highly respectful of each other and staff,” inspectors said. 

They added that leaders and managers have a “very clear and effective strategy” to provide A-level programmes in a safe and nurturing environment that helps almost all students to progress into higher education or higher-level apprenticeships. 

“They have designed a highly ambitious curriculum across all the courses that they offer,” inspectors added.

‘Outstanding’ colleges are subject to full inspections for the first time this year since 2010, after an exemption was lifted. 

T Levels will make the qualifications system less confusing

But other qualifications, including BTECs, will continue to play an important role alongside T Levels and A levels, writes Alex Burghart

The skills and post-16 education act becoming law last month was a watershed moment in bringing our skills system into the future.

From our clear-eyed analysis of what works here and abroad, we found a key ingredient of success: employers’ voices being heard throughout the system, especially when setting the standards for qualifications and when offering courses.

Through our changes, the qualifications on offer will meet the needs of employers and support more people into higher-skilled, higher-wage jobs.

This process had already started five years ago when, in 2017, we reformed the apprenticeship system so that each of the 640 standards available reflect the needs of employers – helping employers while providing apprentices with assurances that they are learning skills that will allow them to compete in the labour market.

Since then, we have introduced new world-class technical qualifications at 16 to 19: T Levels. Equivalent to A levels, they have been designed with employers to meet the needs of employers – they give students the confidence that the skills that they are studying are those that employers are after.

The rigour of T Levels, combined with the meaningful industry placement of at least 45 days in a genuine workplace, will equip more young people with the skills, knowledge and experience to access skilled employment or further technical study.

I want every student to have confidence that every qualification on offer is high quality, and to be able easily to understand what skills and knowledge that qualification will provide and where it will take them.

That is why the benefits stemming from these essential reforms will only be realised if we also address the complexities and variable quality of the broader qualifications system.

As when we have previously introduced new qualifications – for example when GCSEs replaced O levels, or when we introduced reformed A levels last decade – the qualifications which T Levels are replacing will be retired, gradually, as each new T Level comes on stream. 

I want every student to have confidence that every qualification on offer is high quality

That means funding will be removed from qualifications that overlap with T Levels for learners aged 16-19. This will make the qualifications system less confusing and ensure that young people studying technical qualifications are studying for the most up-to-date, relevant award that employers value.

A provisional list of 160 level 3 qualifications that overlap with wave 1 and 2 T Levels was published on Wednesday, representing a small proportion of more than 2,000 qualifications at this level.

Awarding organisations have until July 8 to appeal a qualification’s inclusion on the list, and we will announce the final list in the autumn to give providers two years to adjust.  

As the post-16 qualifications review continues, we will assess the quality of qualifications that we continue to fund alongside A levels and T Levels.

I know that other qualifications, including BTECs and similar qualifications, will continue to play an important role alongside T Levels and A levels in future – and we will continue to fund these qualifications where they are high quality and where there is a clear need for them.

Taken as part of our wider package of reforms, our goal is simple: to ensure that we have qualifications designed with employers that will give students the skills that the economy and society need.

SEND college where students ‘do not feel safe’ judged ‘inadequate’

A specialist college for young people with autism has been criticised by Ofsted for failing to make students feel suitably protected from harm. 

Inspectors found that staff at Farleigh Further Education College in Frome, Somerset, were too slow to act when learners reported bullying or harassment.

The college, owned by Aspris Children’s Services, was given an “inadequate” Ofsted grade as a result and the headteacher has now stepped down. 

Farleigh Further Education College was rated “good” in its last full inspection in November 2018. But, following the inspection in February 2022, Ofsted rated it “inadequate” in all five key areas of its report.  

At the time of the inspection, 26 learners were resident at the college and 40 were attending during the day. 

Ofsted found that managers did not respond quickly enough to learners’ disclosures or involve relevant external agencies. “For example, they do not respond to or act on learners’ accusations about their peers swiftly enough.  

“Staff are sometimes too slow to take action when learners report bullying or harassment,” the inspectors said.  

They also highlighted issues regarding behaviour, noting that leaders and managers have not ensured adequate “mutual respect between staff and learners at the college”.  

Although staff have received diversity and inclusion training, too few were found to “model inclusive behaviour or use appropriate language” towards learners.  

“Consequently, a minority of learners show a lack of respect for staff and each other. When learners are disrespectful to their peers, staff do not always take appropriate action.  

“As a result, at times, learners feel uncomfortable and less valued,” the inspectors said.   

As well as failing to make sure that young people felt safe, the report said that leaders had failed to ensure that learners were studying a “well-planned or coherent curriculum”. 

A spokesperson for the college told FE Week that the governors and leadership team recognised the points raised in the report and have put in place an extensive action plan to address the issues as “swiftly as possible”. 

The spokesperson added: “There is currently a recruitment process in place to appoint a new headteacher and an extended leadership team, which will ensure the required progress is sustained going forward.  

“In addition to this, new safeguarding systems have delivered significant improvements and the college team are fully focused on supporting our students to achieve the best possible outcomes.” 

CMI earns record turnover as management apprenticeships soar despite pandemic

A chartered professional body made record high turnover last year after the management apprenticeships it assesses continued to soar in popularity despite the pandemic.   

Surging income, which one expert said should ring alarm bells across government, was disclosed in the latest filed accounts for the Chartered Management Institute.   

Turnover jumped from £18.1 million in 2019/20 to £21.5 million in 2020/21 – a 19 per cent increase and the highest ever recorded for the charity.   

CMI is approved to end-point assess (EPA) eight apprenticeship standards from the level 3 team leader to the controversial level 7 senior leader degree.   

Its financial statements show that apprentice registrations reached 16,232 last year – 13 per cent up year on year “when the national picture was down by 40 per cent” due to the pandemic.   

CMI also signed off 7,792 EPAs last year – up 90 per cent. The charity said the prices it charges for EPA are “confidential”, but FE Week previously found that fees can range from £650 to £1,400 per apprentice, depending on which standard is being assessed.   

EPA “is now a significant contributor to income”, the accounts state.   

CMI told FE Week it was the first end-point assessment organisation to gain approval to move all assessments online during the pandemic. But the company refused to say whether it lowered assessment fees following this switch.   

The accounts explain that a portion of the overall assessment fee is recognised “immediately” upon registration, while the rest is deferred and recognised when the learners undertake this work.   

The charity’s apprenticeship-driven rise in turnover in 2020/21 is all the more impressive as nearly all other sectors saw huge drops in apprenticeships owing to the multiple lockdowns and impacts on business caused by Covid-19.   

It would be very surprising and disappointing if there was anything other than a growth in management apprenticeships

A CMI spokesperson said the “desperate need” to grow the technically skilled management workforce of the UK has been “identified time and time again by the government and many others” and it would be “very surprising and disappointing if in these circumstances there was anything other than a growth in standards-based management apprenticeships”.   

The spokesperson added that CMI’s qualifications, membership and the “Chartered Award” it offers are “highly valued by employers and employees alike” and the organisation will continue to promote apprenticeship “so to support good management, social mobility, future productivity and innovation”.   

CMI’s accounts show the firm ended 2021 with “record cash and reserves” in addition to record income.   

In turn, chief executive Ann Francke received a 25 per cent pay hike as she took home £348,000 which included a £75,000 bonus, compared to £279,000, with a £12,000 bonus, the year before.   

The charity said the bonus was “in recognition of the successful achievement of financial and non-financial targets” as income and learner registrations on “our highly regarded standards of all types”, not just apprenticeships, has grown.   

Management apprenticeships have rocketed since the levy reforms in 2017. Starts on the eight standards CMI assesses, for example, have grown from 3,400 in 2017/18 to 59,640 in 2020/21.   

But their rise has not been collectively welcomed – mostly because starts on lower-level apprenticeships and for young people have dropped over the same period.   

Ministers have appeared to partially agree with the concerns. The popular level 7 senior leader degree apprenticeship has had its MBA component removed from public funding after then education secretary Gavin Williamson said he was “not convinced the levy should be used to pay for staff, who are often already highly qualified and highly paid, to receive an MBA”.   

But other officials have championed the rise in management apprenticeships.   

A board member of the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education said in 2017 that the “number one reason for our lower productivity has been analysed as leadership and management.   

“And that’s why degree apprenticeships and investing in people in terms of the right management is so important, not just for individuals, not just for the company, but for the economy at large.”   

Tom Richmond

Tom Richmond, a former adviser to two skills ministers and now director of think tank EDSK, told FE Week that given the dramatic growth in management apprenticeships before the pandemic, it is “no surprise to see organisations like the CMI continuing to cash in on these lucrative courses, even though their actions will almost certainly have meant that young people were denied the funding they needed to start an apprenticeship over the last couple of years”.   

“The soaring income and huge bonuses at the CMI should be ringing alarm bells right across government because it is disheartening to see senior and often experienced executives, including at major multinational companies, being given priority, while some of the least privileged members of our society are simply left waiting for the chance to start their career,” he said.   

But Mandy Crawford-Lee, chief executive of the University Vocational Awards Council, said the use of management apprenticeships should “not only be allowed but should be encouraged and celebrated” because the programmes “support social mobility, raise productivity and improve the delivery of public sector services”.   

She told FE Week it was concerning that “good” employers that have “historically done the right thing and invested in the training and development of their staff are now criticised for using their levy payments to continue to invest in the training and development their employees need”.   

Stephen Evans, who heads up the Learning and Work Institute, said his organisation’s research has found employers are investing 28 per cent less per employee than in 2005, with graduates three times more likely to get training than those with no qualifications.   

He added that investment in management is “important, but shouldn’t come at the expense of opportunities for career starters and those with lower qualifications”. 

Revealed: 38 BTECs facing the chop to clear way for first T Levels

More than 150 level 3 qualifications taken by 66,000 students are set to be axed in 2024 as the government clears the way for new T Levels.

Thirty-eight BTECs are part of the first chop list, including a popular course in health and social care that one college principal has said will be a “tragedy” to lose.

Awarding bodies are gearing up to fight the Department for Education over several “important qualifications” on the list which they do not believe meet the published criteria for defunding.

The first provisional list (click here to download or see below) of qualifications that the Department for Education says overlap with the first ten T Levels and face being removed from the system was finally published this week.

In total, just 160 vocational and technical qualifications of the 2,000 overlapping courses will be axed from 2024. An impact assessment shows there are 66,000 enrolments on the courses, 27 per cent of which are students deemed to be the “most disadvantaged”.

There are 662,000 level 3 enrolments for 16-to-19-year-olds nationally – meaning one in ten will be impacted.

Pearson has the most courses on the axe list (41, including 38 BTECs), followed by City & Guilds (36) and then NCFE (19).

Sector leaders said they were pleased only a small proportion of level 3 qualifications are to be cut.

But the Sixth Form Colleges Association said the BTEC diploma in health and social care – one of the qualifications set to be axed – is “enormously popular and well respected by universities and employers”.

The impact of its removal “will be felt by a significant number of young people”.

The BTEC diploma in health and social care is taken by around 200 students at the Colchester Institute, in Essex. Principal Alison Andreas said the qualification’s loss would be a “tragedy”.

She told FE Week: “This is a fantastic and very, very popular course. It gives students a really broad overview of many aspects of health and social care. Students go on to fantastic higher education destinations and work in fields like nursing, midwifery and paramedicine.”

Awarding bodies have been given until July 8 to challenge the decision. The final list will be confirmed in September.

Pearson said over half of the axed qualifications were being withdrawn already as part of its usual cycle of updating products.

It will be challenging “important qualifications” on the list, including the health and social care diploma BTEC. Around 3,000 youngsters completed the qualification last year.

T Levels are the government’s flagship new technical qualifications and sit alongside their academic equivalent A-levels.

Ten T Levels have been rolled out so far in four sectors: construction, digital, education and childcare and health and science. Thirteen more T Level subjects will be launched between September 2022 and 2023.

The DfE wants to strip funding for thousands of “poor quality” qualifications that overlap and leave pupils “confused”.

Andreas said she is not “anti T Levels”, but she is “anti T Levels being the only show in town” because the courses will not be suitable for every student especially as the new technical qualifications require students to follow a “narrow” specialism such as either adult or child nursing.

“When students are aged 15, 16, and 17 they don’t really have a sense of the specific field they want to enter,” she said. “That’s the lovely thing about the BTEC programme, they get a chance to really investigate each section before they make a commitment but in the T Level they have to commit to a particular specialism straight away.”

She added that not all colleges and schools will be able to offer every T Level, which will impact students in rural areas who do not have many education providers to choose from.

Analysis of the level 3 axe list by the Association of Colleges shows the three subject areas with the most general FE college enrolments are health and social care (13,098), engineering (11,510) and child development and wellbeing (8,783).

The top three individual courses on the list are Pearson’s BTEC national foundation diploma in engineering (3,283 enrolments), NCFE’s technical diploma in childcare and education (3,225 enrolments), and Pearson’s BTEC national extended diploma in engineering (3,031 enrolments).

AoC’s deputy chief executive, Julian Gravatt, said T Levels need to be accessible to as broad a range of students as possible but colleges “have concerns that this is not the case currently”.

He admitted there have been “some improvements” since the previous government proposals to reform level 3 qualifications, but warned it is “still concerning to see one in 10 enrolments will be impacted by these changes”, adding that “no student should be left high and dry without a qualification to study”.

NCFE chief executive David Gallagher his awarding body has “concerns over the extent of the defunding and the impact that this might have on our centres and learners”.

David Phillips, managing director of City & Guilds, said that where there are qualifications that have a “clear and unequivocable duplication” with the content of T Levels, there is a case to defund.

However, he added, “we believe that a more thoughtful and nuanced consideration about the implications of defunding so many level 3 qualifications needs to be taken”.

The DfE originally planned to begin phasing out level 3 courses that overlap with T Levels from 2023. But education secretary Nadhim Zahawi announced in November he would delay the cull by a year following pressure from the Protect Student Choice campaign, which is led by the Sixth Form Colleges Association and has high-profile political backing from the likes of Lord Blunkett.

Amid concern that the majority of level 3 courses would be defunded under the plans, Zahawi wrote to members of the House of Lords last month to promise that “significantly less than half” of the qualifications would be included in the cull.

However more qualifications will be defunded in future years.

Skills minister Alex Burghart said retiring qualifications that overlap with “new, more rigorous qualifications has long been standard practice with academic qualifications” and will “help end the confusion and complexity we know puts some young people off studying technical options”.

Tom Bewick, chief executive of the Federation of Awarding Bodies, said he recognised that ministers have listened to sector calls to “proceed with more caution” and ensure “there is a place in the future landscape for level 3 qualifications which have a proven track record of getting students into skilled jobs or progression to further and higher education”.

The 160 level 3 qualifications facing the chop from 2024 (click to enlarge):