Switching off Treasury cash for apprenticeships is a big mistake

Many of the same problems plague the apprenticeships system as a decade ago. We need a big review, writes Tom Bewick

This week, the Treasury switched off the £3,000 incentive scheme to boost England’s apprenticeships during the pandemic.

That’s a real pity. Because by all accounts, the scheme had been an incredibly successful way of arresting the slump in employers hiring more apprentices.

For the first time since coronavirus became a part of our national consciousness, the numbers of recorded apprentices being taken on are now at their highest levels since 2017.

As reported by FE Week, the Treasury “bonus” handed out to firms (with an eligible start of any age) available up until today had resulted in over 161,000 taking up the opportunity.

Crucially, the policy had helped jump-start a declining trend, with a 43 per cent increase in starts in the last quarter of 2021, compared to the same period a year earlier.

Meanwhile, the Australian government has made its apprenticeship incentive scheme permanent. Employers can access payments of between AUS$750 and AUS$4,000 for hiring apprentices depending on the prior attainment level of the apprentice and the extent to which the occupation is a priority skill area.

It adds up to a far more comprehensive incentive package, with both “commencement” and “retention” bonuses linked to the types of apprentices and the kind of skilled roles the federal government is trying to incentivise.

The list of 65 skilled trades are mainly at level 2 (academic equivalent to five GCSEs in England). Incentives are geared towards helping Australian employers take on more cooks, hairdressers, gas fitters, vehicle body repairers and welders.

Closer to home, France has also taken a proactive approach. Its apprentice incentive scheme is exclusively about giving a boost to the hiring of young people under the age of 26.

The “1 young person, 1 solution “ plan earmarked €1 billion in the initial period, with wage subsidy grants handed out to employers of up to €8,000 per apprentice. It’s a far more generous scheme than just across the Channel here in the UK.

What all the international evidence shows, however, is that England’s apprenticeship programme is increasingly an outlier.

The majority of opportunities go to much older workers. Is this fair?

In world leading systems like Germany and Switzerland, two-thirds of apprentices are under the age of 21.

Great Britain ranks 19th out of 32 countries for the quality of industry placement for 15-year-olds, behind Albania and Bulgaria

They are taken on at level 3, and trained up to sub-degree level education (levels 4 and 5) – precisely the areas where most skills gaps and shortages occur.

The great success of these systems is the fact that youth unemployment has been virtually eradicated by these countries.

The availability of work experience placements, leading to quality 3-year apprenticeships, is one major reason for why the “Germanic systems” top all the international league tables.

Yet the OCED has ranked Great Britain 19th out of 32 countries for the quality of industry placement for 15-year-olds, behind Albania and Bulgaria.

In England, the latest data shows that while over 40,000 starts went to under-19s last autumn (30.8 per cent), these figures were easily dwarfed by the two-thirds of older adults aged 25 plus who currently benefit.

This simply continues a worrying and long-standing trend.

Of course, we should continue to support an all-age, all attainment level programme.

But  when 453,000 under 24s are unemployed (11.3 per cent), serious questions have to be asked about whether the current focus is the right one.

It is why switching off the Treasury incentives is so short-sighted.

It comes at a time when withdrawal (non-completion) rates are higher on new apprenticeship standards, compared to the old frameworks .

This feels like a major failing of a system that underwent the Richard Review in 2012.

The government accepted the recommendations at the time.

Yet, a decade on, and we find the sector still asking many of the same questions.

Who are apprenticeships for? Why aren’t more employers making use of them? And how do we boost quality?

As we approach another celebratory National Apprenticeship Week, I believe it’s time that ministers at the Department for Education ordered another major review.

First 11 FE research scholars named

The first 11 scholars chosen to undertake funded research into areas of further education with little to no data currently available have been named by the Association of Colleges and NCFE.

Topics to be researched by the FE staff, who all work at a UK college, will cover areas such as racial inequality, regional outcomes, culture and finance.

For example, Patricia Jones, the executive director of finance at Bedford College Group, will look at “achieving sustainable financial health for the FE sector”.

The group of 11 are the first cohort of Research Further – a joint scholarship programme from the AoC and NCFE that will support practitioners to carry out Masters or doctorate level study.

Each scholar’s college has committed to giving them one day per week of remission to carry out the research.

AoC’s senior research policy manager, Julia Belgutay, said the scholars are “already real experts in their fields and their work will help us fill crucial gaps in evidence”.

“At the same time, their knowledge and experience as they go about their chosen qualifications will inspire and help grow the blossoming practitioner research community across the sector,” she added.

The scholars’ work will be tracked through a webinar series hosted by AoC and NCFE, who have promised that new knowledge on pedagogy or policy will be shared with the sector through think-pieces, reports, articles and blogs.

David Gallagher, NCFE’s chief executive, said: “Up until now there has been a shortfall of truly practitioner-led research. This programme is all about untapping potential and we believe that those closest to learners and learning have a huge role to play in the future of FE.”

The first 11 scholars are:

  • Rachel Arnold, English Lecturer, English Teaching & Learning Coach, Solihull College – whose research will focus on engaging the disengaged: what happens when the teenagers become the experts
  • Caroline Dunstan, Lead Learning and Development Practitioner, Riverside College – whose research will investigate the impact of self and peer analysis of recorded lessons on teaching 
  • Neale Gardiner, International Business Advisor, Edinburgh College – whose research will look at the impact of further education on regional inequality and labour market outcomes
  • Martin Hoskin, Head of Teaching, Learning & Quality, HSDC –focusing on the gamification of CPD and teacher agency
  • Laura Kayes, Advanced Practitioner and Performing Arts Educator, Leeds City College – her research will consider poverty-informed practice
  • Catherine Lloyd, Director of Land Based Studies, Shuttleworth College (Bedford College Group) – who will research the delivery of courses at a time of significant change in the wider agricultural sector
  • Sian Mantovani, Tutor of Sociology, York College – focusing on the experience of students of colour in a predominantly white FE college
  • Katie Stafford, Deputy Principal, New City College – the research will consider how a college’s organisational culture impacts teacher’ engagement with professional learning
  • Rachel Whitton, Lecturer in Education & Training, Coaching and Mentoring, Coleg Cambria – whose research will explore the strengths and limitations of hyflex delivery within professional work based learning programmes
  • Evan Wood, Curriculum Leader Creative Industries, Barnsley College – whose research will look at best practice and educational culture within the creative industry sector
  • Patricia Jones, Executive Director of Finance, Bedford College Group – whose research will look at achieving sustainable financial health for the FE sector

Colleges should consider a forest school on campus

Time outdoors develops confidence and communication in learners, writes James Plant

The concept of forest schools has grown in popularity over the past two decades. The idea of supporting children to experience the natural environment, while building their confidence and independence, has been hugely successful.    

It became clear to me that the same principles would apply to the young adults I teach, who have a variety of moderate to complex learning needs. 

Many of our 16-to-24-year-olds do not have any experience of the “great outdoors”, despite our borough having some of the greenest spaces in London.

This is often due to the physical challenges that many of our learners face – from restricted mobility to visual impairment. Parents and carers can also hesitate to venture into woodland, unaware of the many benefits that can come with the outdoors.

This problem is exacerbated by the unfortunate trend among young people of feeling removed from the natural environment.

There is an unfortunate trend of young people feeling removed from the natural environment

The government’s latest Monitor of Engagement with the Natural Environment report shows this age group are least likely to report being near to green spaces and least likely to visit the outdoors for health or exercise.

That’s despite the report finding that 97 per cent of visitors to the natural environment stating afterwards that they had “enjoyed it”, with 88 per cent saying it had made them “feel calm and relaxed”.

I am also an accredited advanced forest school leader and keen student of traditional woodland crafts. So I wanted to give my students access to this very different way of learning.

In 2018 I identified a wooded area on the edge of our college playing field. It was inaccessible due to dense undergrowth – but clearly had huge potential. I was supported by the college’s senior leadership team and provided with a budget for tools. Fortunately, local tree surgeons were willing to supply woodchip and logs free of charge.  

Many students chose to get involved, clearing the area and restoring the woodland to its natural habitat.

Thanks to their hard work, a nature trail is now in place. This includes a small open-air theatre, an outdoor classroom and views across a fishing lake.

The forest school sessions include outdoor cookery, making hot chocolate, wildlife watching and woodcraft. It’s not just about taking a normal lesson and teaching it outdoors.

The forest school concept turns education on its head by letting the learners lead and developing their own risk-management skills. 

We also incorporate an employability focus via our woodland management and sustainability programme. 

This gives students the opportunity to play a key role in our college’s sustainability agenda and improving biodiversity in the area – as well as developing their communication and life skills.    

The scope for learning is huge: learners build and maintain the wheelchair-accessible nature trail, and create recycled products out of wood to sell in the college shop. These experiences are equipping our students with the confidence they need to help them take their next steps.

Meanwhile, students’ dedication to the project has been incredible. From suggesting what could be done, to physically getting involved in the legwork, everyone involved has developed a sense of pride.    

The natural environment is special because it empowers students to be in control of their actions and decisions. This has positively impacted engagement both in and outside of the sessions and has opened our students’ eyes to their own abilities.   

Crucially, this is a sustainable initiative that other colleges can replicate.

FE organisations are deep-rooted within their communities and are likely to have existing links with green partners and employers to create a similar project with minimal cost and maximum benefit.    

This project is enabling our talented SEND learners to not only play a part in the sustainability and environmental agenda, but to lead on it.

I would love to see other colleges doing the same.

The new TEF proposals could punish inclusive providers

The Teaching Excellence Framework has great potential – but new baseline measures could put FE-HE partnerships at risk, writes David Phoenix

Last week the Office for Students released proposals for a revised Teaching Excellence Framework (TEF).

The TEF, which was first run back in 2017 but has been on hiatus since 2019, aims to incentivise “universities and colleges for excellence in teaching, learning and the outcomes they provide for their students”.

First off under the proposals, it will no longer be the case that previous TEF exercises will be voluntary. All providers, including colleges with more than 500 higher education students in England, will be required to participate. 

The proposals say that providers must meet a set of minimum baseline requirements for quality and standards, above which they will be judged for the excellence they provide in student experience and student outcomes. This is proposed to run every four years.

For student outcomes, the proposals say the panel should look at the last four years of data, checking three measures: year 1 to year 2 continuation, the rate of course completion, and progression into professional and managerial employment or further study.

Meanwhile, the student experience would consider the national student survey results for teaching, assessment, support, learning resources and student voice.

This data would be benchmarked against providers with similar student bodies. Providers must also submit a 20-page narrative statement (plus an optional student statement).

The panel would then make a final decision on whether to award gold, silver, bronze, or the new ‘requires improvement’ grade. 

HE and FE providers found to ‘require improvement’ will not be able to charge the highest undergraduate fees under the proposals. If given the go-ahead, the new TEF will launch later this year and would first report in the spring of 2023.

From my group’s experience of taking part in the 2017 exercise, I would argue that submitting to the TEF can be a useful process. But two details concern me.

1. More inclusive providers could lose out

I am worried about the introduction of non-contextualised, unbenchmarked minimum baseline requirements for quality and standards. FE providers will recognise this problem. 

These baseline requirements are currently subject to a separate OfS consultation. If implemented, a provider’s levels of continuation, completion and progression will be introduced as a requirement for inclusion on the higher education providers register. 

Aside from the financial impact of missing targets, such an approach will lend itself to more ranking exercises, so that institutions that take students with complex needs will always be at a disadvantage. 

This is not because such students are any less able but a reflection of the competing demands upon them, which inevitably mean that they have a higher likelihood of non-completion.

2. FE-HE partnerships under threat

There is a further unintended consequence, which I am particularly mindful of as the chief executive of an organisation that includes both a university and a college. That is the potential effect on HE-FE partnerships. 

Higher education could become far more conservative in its recruitment

The proposals could help support carefully crafted partnerships that underpin the development of higher technical qualifications and new learning pathways. But these joined-up pathways are still developing, and the concept of specialist organisations working in partnership needs to gain traction in the media.

Many universities will be forced to take action to improve their outcomes, and for some universities that may include terminating partnerships where they don’t have the resources to invest in more student support, or where stand-alone level 4 and 5 awards have not yet been fully developed.

More widely, it could see higher education becoming far more conservative in its recruitment, prioritising school and sixth-form college leavers who are most likely to help them meet their targets. 

A TEF designed to improve teaching quality and new educational pathways should be seen as a positive development, and encourage HE-FE partnerships. 

But the parallel development of non-benchmarked baselines has the potential to do the opposite. It could take us back to a place where higher education is for the privileged few. 

College barber courses to run suicide prevention training

Colleges are starting to offer suicide prevention training to their barbering and hairdressing students’ courses. 

A charity called the Lions Barber Collective trains barbers to use their position of trust with clients to look out for signs of depression and suicidal thoughts and to refer those in need to agencies for further support. 

South Devon College and Milton Keynes College have both partnered with the charity to form ‘Lions Barber Academies’ – a suicide prevention training programmes that will be incorporated into the colleges’ courses. 

The charity told FE Week it also has plans to develop a VTCT (Vocational Training Charitable Trust) qualification which could be taught at other colleges. 

Tom Chapman, the Lions Barber Collective’s founder, is a former student of South Devon College and was inspired to start the charity after losing a close friend to suicide in 2014. 

“I was completely unaware that he was struggling,” he told FE Week. “At his funeral, at the crematorium, it was so busy that there was not enough space for people to sit down. The room was overflowing and spilling out into the foyer and beyond, because there were so many people there who wanted to say goodbye to him, who loved him and cared for him. 

“It made me think, if he had all these people who loved him and he thought the only option was suicide, how many people are out there struggling alone?” 

Chapman told FE Week that the Lions Barber Academy began as a one-off project to raise awareness around suicide prevention. But he quickly realised that barbers were in a unique position to speak with people about their mental health. 

“I’ve had people sit in my chair and tell me about everything from first dates to engagements to weddings to babies,” he said. 

“All of those positive things, but I’ve also been there for the divorces, the miscarriages, the affairs, the redundancies, the funerals. We are part of people’s lives. I’ve been cutting people’s hair for 20 years, but I never had any training around that.” 

Chapman said he is working with the VTCT to turn the ‘academy’ training he offers into a qualification that can be adopted by other colleges and hopes this will be available later this year. 

There were 6,507 suicides registered in the UK in 2018 and 75 per cent of UK suicides are men. Statistics from the Lions Barber Collective said that one barber has the potential to see up to 200 people per week, 800 per month and 9,600 opportunities to talk in a year. 

Maria Woodger, assistant principal at South Devon College, told FE Week: “Mental health is hugely important to us as a college – even more so now after Covid. 

“Mental health support is really fundamental for us and when we heard about Tom’s Lions Barber Academy, of course we wanted to be part of that. We jumped at the chance of being one of the first in the country to actually do that.” 

Milton Keynes College is also working with the Lions Barber Collective to offer a Lions Barber Academy. In January this year the Lions Barber Collective gave the college an award for their work around mental health training for barbers. 

Speaking after winning the award, executive head of school at the college Maria Bowness said the institution will be offering the training to hairdressing and beauty students as well as those learning to be barbers on top of the regular curriculum. 

“The relationship between such professionals and their customers can be a very intimate one, and people will sometimes open up about their struggles when sitting in a barber’s chair in ways they otherwise wouldn’t,” she said.

MOVERS AND SHAKERS: EDITION 377

Lisa Capper, Principal & CEO, Stoke on Trent College

Start date: January 2022

Previous Job: Principal & director of education, NACRO

Interesting fact: Lisa was the first female Chair of the National Deaf Children’s Society where she was a trustee for 10 years.

Denise Brown, Principal & CEO, South Essex College

Start date: January 2022

Previous Job: Principal & CEO, Stoke on Trent College

Interesting fact: Denise once spent 3 weeks on a spiritual retreat on an ashram in India.

James Stuart

Chair, Education Partnership North East

Start date: January 2022

Concurrent job: Founder and director, One Planet Consulting

Interesting fact: James coached skeleton bobsleigh whilst in the Army.

Rod Bristow

Chief Education Aviser, Cambridge Education Group

Start date: January 2022

Previous Job: President, global online learning & UK, Pearson

Interesting fact: Rod studied at a further education college, is a governor of Harlow College, is Honorary Group Captain in the Royal Auxillary Air Force.

Rail provider considers Ofsted challenge after damning ‘inadequate’ report

A training provider faces being kicked out of the apprenticeships market after Ofsted found off-the-job training rules were being broken.

ARC Academy UK Limited, which trains almost 100 apprentices at levels 2 and 3 in the rail engineering and construction sectors, received an ‘inadequate’ rating from the inspectorate this week.

The watchdog’s report said the provider does not have sufficient assessors to cater for the number of apprentices it has enrolled, finding that learners “rarely” complete their apprenticeships on time or are significantly past their planned end dates.

Ofsted also found that in some cases, apprentices are forced to complete their 20 per cent off-the-job training studies in their own time, which is contrary to the Education and Skills Funding Agency’s funding rules.

Any training provider rated ‘inadequate’ by Ofsted is usually removed from the government’s register of apprenticeship training providers.

Paul Napier, operations director at ARC Group UK, complained that the watchdog did not sufficiently consider the difficulties caused by the Covid-19 pandemic when judging his provider. He is awaiting a response from the ESFA about ARC’s future in delivering apprenticeships before deciding whether to challenge Ofsted formally.

“Of the 100 apprentices on programme, all were recruited since Covid with employers we have worked with for several years and recognise the recent inconsistencies with tutors due to recruitment difficulties as a consequence of staff leaving during the pandemic,” Napier said.

“These difficulties in recruitment have been seen in a number of sectors, yet we know that our employers support us as we continue working with them to complete their current apprentices.”

Ofsted’s report said ARC’s leaders have been too slow to implement their plans to increase the number of assessors. As a result, “most apprentices do not receive regular visits or feedback on their progress from assessors, and too many planned visits are cancelled”.

Additionally, the inspectorate claimed there were no arrangements in place to help apprentices to catch up if they are lagging behind.

Trainers at ARC were praised for having a “wealth of knowledge and experience of national construction and engineering sectors”.

However, they “do not have sufficient expertise in teaching, despite undertaking recent professional development and gaining teaching qualifications,” Ofsted said.

“Learning materials they use show outdated work practices in areas such as track ballast compaction and give incorrect guidance on the wearing of protective equipment when working on the rail network.”

Governance was also criticised. The report said: “Senior leaders currently take responsibility for governance. They have not yet implemented their plans to introduce suitable external scrutiny of their actions.

“As a result, they lack appropriate support and challenge to help them identify underperformance or hold them to account for the improvements ARC requires.”

Napier said: “Our recent recruitment issues have led to us making slow progress on our Covid recovery plan, but as a niche provider we are awaiting a response from the ESFA while we consider challenging the Ofsted grade.”

Stoke-on-Trent College announces former skills civil servant as new principal

A former senior skills civil servant has been announced as the new principal of Stoke-on-Trent College.

Lisa Capper took the reins at the college this week after joining from Nacro – a social justice and education charity, where she worked as principal and director of education.

Capper, who previously held roles in the Department for Education and Department of Business, Innovation and Skills, will replace outgoing Stoke-on-Trent College boss Denise Brown. Brown has led the college since July 2017 and is now moving over to South Essex College as its principal.

Stoke-on-Trent College has struggled financially in recent years, and the DfE bailed it out to the tune of £20 million in 2018. Ofsted has also rated the college as ‘requires improvement’ in each of its last three full inspections since 2016.

But the college has been on the mend and recorded an underlying operating surplus of £165,000 in its latest published accounts, for 2020.

The college’s self-assessed financial health grade for 2019/20 was ‘outstanding’, and the FE Commissioner’s team praised the college that year for being on a “strong trajectory of improvement”.

The college had spent six years in government intervention but the Education and Skills Funding Agency lifted its financial notice to improve in May 2021.

Capper said she was looking forward to leading Stoke-on-Trent College through the “next phase of its journey to help even more young people, adults and employers alike to achieve their skills ambitions and to develop their careers”.

She added: “I hope that I can use my skills and experience from elsewhere, build on the current achievements, and support the team in achieving its ambition, and that of the city.”

Prior to joining Nacro, Capper was the vice principal for the schools of North Warwickshire and Hinckley College and executive director of the Midlands Academies Trust.

Previously, she served in the senior civil service as a specialist in further education at the Department for Education, working on the adult literacy and numeracy skills for life initiative.

She also developed the commission on adult vocational education, national skills academies and led the successful bid for WorldSkills London 2011 for the Department of Business, Innovation and Skills, for which she won the permanent secretary’s award. 

Capper is also an independent governor of De Montfort University and until recently the chair of the National Deaf Children’s Society. In January 2021 she was awarded the MBE for services to young people.

Jeremy Cartwright, chair of Stoke-on-Trent College, said: “I am delighted that Lisa is joining. There are both challenges and opportunities in further education at the moment, and in the city region, and we know Lisa will bring her significant and unique knowledge, skills and experience to help us make the most of these to benefit Stoke-on-Trent.”

The real revolution in the white paper was taking teaching seriously

Without high-quality teaching, solving the skills challenge is just a pipedream, writes David Russell

Last week saw a range of sector leaders give their expert analysis in FE Week on the Skills for Jobs white paper, exactly one year on. The tone ranged from raging enthusiasm, through cautious optimism to disappointment at lack of progress.   

But one thing they all had in common was what they missed – that the truly revolutionary part of the white paper was not the latest proposals for funding rules or employer forums. Rather, it was revolutionary simply because of the fact that it took the profession of teaching in FE seriously, and backed that up with concrete policy ideas. 

Bringing the best into FE

Without high-quality teachers and teaching, we cannot expect high-quality learning outcomes.  

The Department for Education recruitment campaign launched last week is a welcome recognition of the vital role that experienced industry professionals make in training and inspiring learners.  

However, its success will rely on a comprehensive pathway of support to ensure we hold on to those talented people we attract into the sector. The campaign also has to be a clarion call for the importance of high-quality teaching.  

We must ensure we hold on to those talented people we attract in

The white paper described ‘Taking Teaching Further’, an initiative to attract high-quality teaching professionals from industry into FE and training, as a “flagship programme”.

And rightly so. This national initiative, designed and delivered by the ETF, has grown rapidly in scale, increasing the number of places from 50 to 550 between 2018 and 2020.

At the same time, the ETF’s ‘Talent to Teach’ programme, also highlighted within the white paper, aims to offer a taster of further education teaching to university students and graduates.  

We have seen how Teach First has brought some of the brightest and best into schools, and that is very much the ambition of Talent to Teach for colleges. 

These programmes, alongside a whole package of development opportunities offered through the ETF (from high-quality training and mentoring to continuous professional development) are helping to boost early career retention. 

Meeting the skills challenge

So one year on from the white paper, why does all this activity matter?  

There are five significant societal and economic developments that highlight the absolutely critical nature of FE and training in the years to come. 

Firstly, the global pandemic has led to increased public expenditure (and debt), an increase in the cost of living and significant job displacement. 

Secondly, Brexit has shifted our economic, regulatory and trade model. This has also led to a reduction in migrant labour in certain sectors of the economy. 

Thirdly, rapid technological change could lead to a host of jobs becoming automated in whole or in part, alongside advances in areas such as artificial intelligence and robotics. 

Fourthly, the government’s 2050 net zero target requires seismic shifts in a whole range of sectors, from energy production to transport and manufacturing. It will also inevitably lead to workers in certain sectors, such as oil and gas, needing to reskill. 

And finally, the productivity puzzle. There are several reasons why our country is behind other nations. But it is no coincidence that we score very poorly on the proportion of the workforce with higher-level technical qualifications and on basic skills for adults. 

There is a common thread among all of these – the country urgently needs more highly skilled people working in the key sectors of the future. This will enable us to be innovative, competitive and more socially mobile. 

But – without high-quality teaching in further education – such ambitions will be no more than a pipe dream.