Universal credit training flexibility extended again

A flexibility allowing universal credit claimants to undertake training for up to 16 weeks has been extended for a second time.

The Education and Skills Funding Agency announced today that the flexibility will now last until April 28, 2023. It had been set to end next month.

The flexibility, originally announced as a six-month pilot in March 2021, increased the amount of time claimants could study full-time, work-focused courses will still receiving benefits from eight weeks to 12 weeks.

This then went up to 16 weeks if the claimant was on a skills bootcamp and now applies to all types of work-related training if the person is in the “intensive work search group” for universal credit.

“Universal credit claimants in the intensive work search group will be able to attend full-time, work-related training opportunities lasting up to 16 weeks across Great Britain as part of their work search activity. This flexibility has now been extended until 28 April 2023,” an update from the ESFA said.

“This is a great opportunity for FE providers to work with their local jobcentre plus and partnership managers to offer full-time, work-related training courses.”

Universal credit claimants will need to get agreement from their work coach to “ensure this is the right support for them and appropriate for the local labour market”.

The previous eight-week universal credit rule was heavily criticised by the FE and skills sector. In June 2021, the Association of Colleges published a report saying the rule meant claimants are “prevented from developing skills that would allow them to get into better-quality, more stable, better paid employment over the longer term”.

Latest Department for Work and Pensions data shows 5.6 million people were receiving universal credit in January 2022.

Introducing SQA Advanced Qualifications

Why deliver?

SQA Advanced Qualifications were developed in partnership with colleges, universities and industry and specifically designed to meet the requirements of education professionals and the skills needs of employers.

SQA Advanced Certificates and Diplomas are education pathways at levels 4 and 5, enabling students to progress on to further study or directly into employment.

Advanced Qualifications are recognised and valued by a network of university progression partners in the UK and beyond, allowing progression to a related undergraduate degree.

How do SQA Advanced Qualifications work?

SQA Advanced Certificates and SQA Advanced Diplomas are made up of unit credits (one credit represents approximately 40 hours of timetabled learning and 40 hours of self-guided learning and study):

• SQA Advanced Certificates are made up of 96 SCQF credit points, at SCQF level 7, and usually take one year to complete.

• SQA Advanced Diplomas are made up of 240 SCQF credit points, at SCQF level 8, and usually take two years to complete.

Who are they for?

SQA Advanced Qualifications are suitable for a wide range of learners:

• school leavers
• adult returners to education
• employees who wish to enhance their career prospects
• people who wish to start their own business.

Courses

Centres can choose from a wide range of subjects, with over 45 qualifications in 15 sectors, to meet local skills requirements or complement their existing provision. Subjects available include Business, Engineering, Computing and Finance.

Designed for delivery

Designed with industry to robust standards, SQA Advanced Qualifications allow flexible delivery and assessment, to meet local skills needs and prepare learners for their next step.

Supporting local skills needs

As well as a wide range of subject areas to cover a wide set of skills requirements, these qualifications have been developed with industry and employers. Learners get the practical skills needed to do a job and the theoretical knowledge an employer will expect them to have.

In addition to being industry relevant, some are also recognised by leading professional associations, including ACCA, CIMA, CIOB and IET.

A pathway to university

The Certificate/Diploma is a trusted, short-cycle higher education qualification equivalent to the first and second year of a university degree. SQA Advanced Qualifications enable advanced entry into many undergraduate degree programmes in SQA’s partner universities and higher education institutions.

SQA’s Diploma to Degree programme is a proven route for students to progress on to the second or third year of an undergraduate degree, following successful completion of an SQA Advanced Diploma. We have over 50 university partners in the UK and around the world who recognise the SQA Advanced Diploma for advanced entry and provide students with a quality learning experience.

Progression partners include Middlesex University London, Liverpool Hope University, Auckland Institute of Studies (New Zealand) and Northern Arizona University, providing learners with the opportunity to learn locally and study globally.

Learn more

You can find out more about SQA’s Advanced Qualifications offer, including viewing a full course list, by downloading a copy of the prospectus at: www.sqa.org.uk/advanced

Discover More & Download Prospectus

What providers need to know about applying to deliver T Levels from 2024

The Department for Education has today launched the registration process for providers to deliver T Levels from 2024 – the final year of the flagship qualification’s rollout.

Here are the key things you need to know before applying.

ALL 16-19 providers can apply

2024 will be the fifth and final year of T Level rollout and will from this point become part of the mainstream offer for all students aged 16, 17 and 18.

The DfE confirmed today that all providers currently funded to deliver 16 to 19 study programmes will be eligible to deliver all of the available T Levels from September 2024.

Providers who have a contract to deliver apprenticeships or adult provision only, are not eligible to apply.

In previous years, strict criteria around Ofsted grades and financial health had applied to prospective T Level providers. These restrictions have now been lifted.

Providers have over a year to apply but get extra support if they’re quick

Providers may submit their registration form from now and up to July 31, 2023. This is the final date to register and be eligible to receive an up-front funding allocation for T Level delivery for 2024/25.

After July 2023, the DfE said any unregistered T Level delivery will be funded through the in-year growth process applicable in 2024/25, subject to affordability, so long as this is correctly coded on the individualised learner record or school census.

The DfE said it encourages providers to register as early as possible “so that they can take advantage of the support that will be offered to providers”.

If providers register by July 29, 2022 they can access a range support to assist their delivery preparations such as conversations with the DfE’s T Level support team, guidance on capital funding, access to up-front funding for additional T Level delivery hours and industry placements.

Full suite of T Levels available

There are 23 T Levels, across 11 T Level routes that will be available for delivery in 2024/25.

They encompass 81 different occupational specialisms between them.

The 11 routes are: agricultural, environmental and animal care; business and administration; catering and hospitality; construction; creative and design; digital; education and childcare; engineering and manufacturing; hair and beauty; health and science; and legal, finance and accounting.

What you need to register

Through a registration form, providers will be asked about any recent structural changes or whether they have converted to academy status.

Providers will also need to list the T Levels they plan to deliver in 2024/25 along with planned student numbers.

Whether the provider is also interested in delivering the T Level transition programme will be another question.

‘Deteriorated’ finances on the mend at large adult education college, FE Commissioner finds

A well-known adult education charity has insisted it is on the road to recovery after the FE Commissioner warned of deteriorating finances caused by the Covid-19 pandemic.

The City Literary Institute said it was the first-ever college to produce more than half of its income through enrolment fees in 2018/19 – a feat which was short lived when multiple lockdowns caused a significant reduction.

The charity, which is the largest provider of community learning in Europe, saw its fee income drop by 27 per cent, falling from £10.1 million prior to the pandemic to £7.4 million in 2020/21.

As a result, City Lit has today received a financial notice to improve from the Education and Skills Funding Agency due to ‘inadequate’ finances.

In a report also published today, the FE Commissioner said in its team’s opinion, the college’s financial recovery plan is based on “sound analysis” which will see fee income recover to pre-pandemic levels of around 30,000 enrolments by 2023/24.

The report also points out that City Lit has no long-term debt and is asset rich because it owns its main campus in London’s Covent Garden, meaning the college is “not insolvent”.

Speaking to FE Week, City Lit’s principal Mark Malcomson said his college is “far from” becoming financially unviable and insisted that “things are slowly getting better” for both daytime and evening courses.

He explained that his provider’s 5,000-odd courses were all delivered face-to-face prior to the pandemic and the switch to online learning was impossible for some areas, particularly practical subjects such as performing arts.

But around 1,300 courses were successfully transferred online, predominantly provision for languages, humanities, creative writing, wellbeing and even music, once the pandemic struck.

Successive lockdowns continued to disrupt enrolments and led to some tough decisions around restricting staff and provision. Malcomson said his staff base has fallen by between 10 and 15 per cent since the pandemic, while an external “interpreting service” function offered by the college has had to close.

The FE Commissioner’s report is however full of praise for governance and leadership at City Lit. It said: “City Lit has been proactive and flexible in adapting its curriculum offer and delivery in response to the COVID-19 pandemic restrictions and challenges that have predominated since March 2020.

“The college has remained firmly committed to promoting and maintaining the engagement and participation of its learners, with the rapid development of online learning providing a viable alternative to face-to-face delivery for many programmes.”

The report also applauded the college’s quality of provision, giving the example that achievement outcomes on accredited programmes “improved substantially” in 2020/21, with “further improvements” likely in 2021/22.

Today’s report makes clear that the impact on fee income through the pandemic has been the “primary factor” in the “deterioration of the college finances”, which has reported two years of “significant operating deficits and are likely to see a third year of this in 2021/22”.

Malcomson said he was “proud” of the way his college has responded to the unprecedented challenge of the pandemic and is “happy” with the “supportive” approach taken by the ESFA and FE Commissioner.

MOVERS AND SHAKERS: EDITION 382

Nikki Davis

Principal and CEO, Leeds College of Building

Start date: Auguste 2022

Previous Job: Vice Principal – Teaching, Learning and Quality, Leeds College of Building

Interesting fact: Nikki is a huge sports fan and loves Formula 1. She also won a national Boots sandwich competition when she was young and received a family trip to Milton Keynes to see her “Chicken Tropicana” being made

Lauren Crawley

Director of People, East Sussex College Group

Start date: March 2022

Previous Job: Head of HR, Orbital South Colleges

Interesting fact: Lauren has many hobbies outside of work including fundraising for blood cancer charities, running two successful Instagram accounts and she’s even flown planes in her time

Carla Hayes

Head of Inclusive Learning, Capital City College Group

Start date: March 2022

Previous Job: Director of Student and Learner Support, Moulton College

Interesting fact: Carla is also an exec member of the National Association for Managers of Student Services (NAMSS) and will be at their national conference next week

It’s time to talk about intersectionality in FE

The intersection of different identities is barely mentioned or discussed in FE, writes Joyce I-Hui Chen

The first time I heard the term “intersectionality” was at workshops that explore intersectionality accessibility.

The term was first coined by US academic and civil rights advocate Kimberlé Crenshaw in 1989 to describe how an individual’s differences, such as gender, race, ethnicity, class, sexuality and (dis)ability, can create different forms of discrimination, prejudices and domination.  

According to the Oxford English Dictionary, overlapping identities in multiple communities leads to complex experiences of oppression and privilege that impact on individual lives. 

It’s also important to consider identities such as age, religion, language, mental health, marital status, parental status, body size and so on.  

The workshops were facilitated by the Women’s Leadership Network (WLN) through the Education and Training Foundation-funded programme called #APConnect, for advanced practitioners.  

Here, I will explore my learning from the WLN workshops, to reflect on how we educators can use an intersectionality lens to examine our practices in FE.  

Why does it matter so much in FE? 

Learning about intersectionality makes me realise how little the intersection of differences is even mentioned or discussed in further education. That’s despite FE having a complex and diverse population of staff and adult learners.  

In her talk at TEDWomen 2016, ‘The Urgency of Intersectionality’, Crenshaw states: “Without frames that allow us to see how social problems impact all the members of a targeted group, many will fall through the cracks of our movements, left to suffer in virtual isolation.”   

Many of the social problems overlap, creating ‘‘multiple levels of social injustice’’.  

Intersectionality in practice 

To start with, let me use an example from my own teaching experience to explain intersectionality.  

I have taught two Asian female students from the same ethnicity background but different social classes.

One was single with a child, and the other was married with three children. One had a degree, and the other completed secondary school education. One had been living in the UK for three years, and the other had just arrived for a few months.  

Although they shared a similar identity as migrant workers who were both learning English as a second language, their perspectives and life experiences were different.  

As an educator, it is important to consider what the equality issues might be and where the oppression, privilege and power may be located.

By doing so, we can better understand our students, and we can plan and design programmes that enrich their learning and life experiences.  

Sylvia Duckworth, a Canadian educational innovator, produced a “wheel of power and privilege”, shown here. This perhaps provides a starting point for FE providers and educators to be aware of differences between individuals, and different communities that people may belong to.  

Meanwhile, the Social Identity Wheel Activity, created by the University of Michigan, is designed for educators to use with students to consider and reflect on their social identities.

Developing an awareness of intersectionality is a meaningful way to appreciate differences.    

What can we do about intersectionality in FE? 

It is imperative to continue the work of equity and social justice. The Covid-19 pandemic has magnified equity issues in the workplace and in education.  

Using an intersectionality lens in our practice in FE means that we become more aware of the complex forms of privilege and oppression that influence people’s lives – both staff and students.  

After learning about intersectionality in the WLN workshops, I think the following methods can help FE practitioners incorporate intersectionality into our practice. 

  1. Develop an awareness and understanding of intersectionality.  
  2. Value differences and encourage voices from less-represented communities.    
  3. Create supportive and safe spaces for dialogues.  
  4. Listen to and appreciate each other. 
  5. Collaborate with different communities.  

The benefits of doing this would help create a fairer and more equal learning environment and workplace. This in turn would help support students and staff to reach their full potential. 

The lifelong loan entitlement doesn’t fit around the situations of learners

Minimum eligibility requirements are being applied in a generic way, writes Marius S. Ostrowski

A flagship item in the government’s recent Skills and Post-16 Education Bill is the lifelong loan entitlement. This is a system of financial support that allows people to take up to four years of additional courses to retrain and upskill.

But to realise this vision the government will need to become far more sensitive to the actual situation of potential lifelong learners. By adopting a one-size-fits-all approach to skills development, the current regime unfortunately fails to capture the full range of forms that lifelong learning can take.

Take someone who learns a language or an artisan skill in evening or weekend classes while holding a full-time job. Or someone who takes on-the-job accountancy, management, or computer training sponsored by their firm. 

Or indeed someone who dips in and out of an eclectic roster of interests by tuning into “massive open online courses” in sociology or astrophysics.

And what about those who take law or veterinary “conversion courses” after a degree, or those who return to full-time study during a career break?

Unfortunately, the more “non-traditional” forms of post-18 learning are often overlooked by policymakers, whose choices have tended to make lifelong learning easier for some and arbitrarily more difficult for others.  

One such choice is the byzantine system of exemptions surrounding minimum eligibility requirements to access the lifelong loan entitlement.

There is a byzantine system of exemptions

These include learners over 25, part-time learners, learners with a level 4 or 5 award, a foundation year, or an access to HE qualification (but only to undertake level 6 study).

Why only from 25? This means that, if someone leaves school at 16 or 18, they will have to work for the best part of a decade before becoming eligible for financial support. At the very least, cutting this to 21 would make financial support more accessible.

Another innovation could be to integrate “in-work” skills development into existing accreditation frameworks. This would give learners a “fast track” to lifelong loan entitlement eligibility regardless of age, if they can show that they have already reached a skills level equivalent to the entry requirements of the qualifications they wish to pursue.

At the same time, minimum eligibility requirements cannot be applied to every qualification in a generic way. Certainly, some standards of literacy, numeracy, or vocational competence should be universal.

But learners should not be disqualified from accessing funding if they have not met a minimum standard in areas irrelevant to their next qualification.

Instead, minimum eligibility requirements need to be tailored to a system of vocation-specific lifelong learning pathways. These should be a joined-up series of courses from sixth form to higher degree study, provided by a learning ecosystem of schools, FE colleges and HE institutions.

The exit requirements for each course level should dovetail seamlessly with the entry requirements for the next level up.

This would eradicate learners’ concerns about not “making the grade” to access further funding. It would also make it easier to “step on and off” this lifelong pathway as and when works best for them.

To make the lifelong loan entitlement truly lifelong, the government must also replace the four-year limit on funding availability. Courses can deliver skills improvements over very variable stretches of time ̶ compare a year of night classes to a week of training days, or a term of college study.

Instead, the government should set a limit on the total number of course credits it will fund ̶ say, 600 credits, equivalent to five years’ worth of full-time degree study.

Then learners can see how much of their entitlement they have “left”, and it becomes easier to attach funding precisely to courses on a per-module basis.

This relies on a transparent, overarching accreditation framework for technical, academic and integrated qualifications. Scotland has already led the way on this, and Wales is close behind. It is time for the rest of the UK to follow suit.

The government has created a space for a genuinely radical transformation of lifelong learning.

It now has to ensure it creates the system that works best for learners, no matter who they are or what situation they are in.

FE has been highly responsive in the pandemic – now to face climate change

With the government’s final climate change strategy due next month, Tim Oates says sound policy is needed for FE to shape the green economy

The global pandemic has prompted a discussion in England about schools and “the future of assessment”. But there are bigger, global questions around the future of education that we need to debate too. One that simply cannot be avoided is the impact climate change is having on economies, industries and individuals.

The essential carbon reduction targets that are being adopted by nations around the world are moving us to radically different economic equilibria. New jobs are being created in the green economy, but these advances will come at a cost to abandoned technologies.

Financial analysts are already growing nervous at the extent of stranded assets in industries affected by these tectonic shifts.

With stranded assets there also will be stranded workers. These will not be young people – they will tend to be older, specialist workers, with families, mortgages and purchasing habits that drive our economy.

Hundreds of thousands of UK workers are likely to be affected directly. Finding themselves and their skills redundant will be both a shock to them and a shock to society. They will need support and retraining.

We must start to think now about their education and training needs ̶ just as much as young people.

Our thinking here in England should start with the best of what we already have – and that means further education.

We ignore FE at our peril

Hilary Steedman, one of the most informed international comparative researchers, constantly compared the German vocational education and training system with the system in England. By 2010, Steedman felt that the FE sector in England was both performing a vital function and providing a higher quality than continental counterparts.

Most recently, FE institutions have proven themselves to be inventive, adaptive and highly responsive during the pandemic, both for young people and adults.

My discussions with FE principals have highlighted the high load that came in September 2021 from students who had certificated in GCSE maths and English, but whose material performance was far lower than expected once on the course.

This required sensitive yet intensive action – just the kind of adaptive and supportive provision at which our FE service has excelled. That this did not result in a slew of press stories is testament to the dedication of staff and the application of the students.

It also reflects our lack of recognition of what the FE service does within the education system.

I have no doubt that FE will be more fundamental to our social and economic future than most realise.

The government rightly is considering all measures that can be adopted to “green” the school curriculum. But policy cannot stop at the school gate.

The development of apprenticeship provision in the past decade has been steady and effective. But we know from the continental experience that specific effort will be needed by both government and employers to sustain apprenticeship provision during this time of dramatic industrial and economic restructuring.

The skills bill currently going through parliament includes changes to FE governance, accountability, labour force, the renewal of estate and learner funding. These are welcome, since we know from the past that qualifications reform can be a necessary but not sufficient policy measure to support growth in vocationally focused provision.

We should also consider what more may be needed. This could include institutional development (buildings, staff and more), curriculum development (new programmes oriented to different groups and new industrial areas), and professional development (particularly in the new knowledge and skills required by industrial restructuring).

FE already provides a vital and highly effective bridge into work and into higher education that we should better recognise and celebrate.

Sound policy action can now support FE to become even more fundamental to our effort to shape a world-leading green economy and an equitable society. The government’s final climate change strategy is due very soon, in April.

It is my view that we ignore FE at our peril. A heroic shift in FE outcomes should be considered as worthy a target for political ambition, as improvements in school standards.

Let’s extend the post-16 phase from two years to three

A pilot for a longer learning period after GCSEs is worth considering post-Covid, writes Joe Hallgarten

When it comes to post-16 learning, it’s two that’s a crowd, not three. I’m talking about the two-year 16-to-19 phase. In reality it is about 20 months long.  

A couple of weeks after their GCSE results, most students are in new institutions, making rapid decisions about, and rapid adjustments to, new types of courses, teaching and learning. 

Less than two years later, here the next step comes, ready or not. 

For those on a semi-cushioned, near-inevitable track to university, this rushed period might just about makes sense. Good enough GCSEs leads to a fairly straightforward set of A-level choices, which then leads to a university place (with maybe a gap year thrown in).

For the majority of students, it’s a more complex journey. 

There are, of course, smooth routes into professions via technical qualifications. But many young people are much less sure about where their GCSEs should take them. Their career advice did not prepare them for the choices they need to make. They may not yet be developmentally ready for the independent maturity that most post-16 study requires. 

With a manic September start, there is no time to “try before you choose”, and the need for many to retake English and maths GCSEs adds to this complexity. 

They may start level 3 qualifications such as A-levels without understanding the extent of jump-up required, and many quit after a wasted year 12. Even if their A-level courses run smoother, they are also unclear about whether university is really for them.

At their best, post-16 institutions (and FE colleges in particular) handle this excess of choice, uncertainty and complexity brilliantly. They help their students navigate the best possible way into further work or study through both pedagogical and pastoral care. However, they do so in a time period that feels irrationally short. 

Why the hurry? Lots of possibilities, most with big price tags, are currently being considered to aid “catch-up”. The tutoring programme is already rolling out. Officials are considering options to extend the school day and reduce summer holidays.

How about we extend our post-GCSE education period from two years to three? What could this look like? Here’s one way it could work.

In the autumn term of year one, students would be given a variety of experiences and advice to make sure they are choosing the right pathway for them and the right school or college to support this. 

Some students would retake key GCSEs and consolidate other aspects of learning that will enable success in their chosen pathway. 

In addition, each student would be assigned a mentor, ideally linked to a possible career choice. Where possible, each would also be allocated a year 7 child to mentor.

Each student would be assigned a mentor

Students would also begin a personal development project, as suggested in the proposed 14-19 national baccalaureate. 

From January of year one, the next six terms would be similar to the current two-year period. Each young person would start a selected qualification pathway, with space for personal projects and mentoring.

Two years later by the end of February of year three, students would complete courses and examinations, with results announced by the end of April. 

This would leave a few months’ space to complete personal development projects, and a civic national caring service programme ̶ a placement of approximately two months that gives them experience of caring within a nursery or school, care home or day centre, hospital or hospice.

No college or school could achieve an effective three-year extension alone. It needs the types of long-term civic partnerships with local employers, universities, voluntary and community organisations that FE colleges already foster.  

This is a less than half-formed idea, which would have a financial cost. If you’re thinking “what about…?” then you aren’t the only one.

But the Centre for Education and Youth would love to create a coalition of partners who can help us interrogate this idea further, perhaps through an actual pilot. 

If we believe that Covid recovery requires radical solutions, one more year of compulsory education may well be worth considering.