‘Too much content’ concerns raised in early Ofsted T Level study

A delayed Ofsted study into the implementation and quality of T Levels has found concerns that there is too much content and a need for improved planning.

But report authors say the rollout has been “a good start” and that no issues were insurmountable.

The education watchdog on Monday published an interim report into the launch of the government’s flagship new technical equivalents to A-levels in 2020 and 2021, and the T Level transition programmes.

The study, which was delayed by a year during Covid-19 and will be followed with another in 2023, sampled 24 providers (including 10 running the transition programme) to evaluate the main strengths and weaknesses of the curriculum, how well industry placements were being implemented, and how well they were meeting the needs of learners.

Paul Joyce, deputy director for further education and skills at Ofsted told FE Week: “The providers we have visited and the DfE have been very committed to making the T level rollout a success, and we have undoubtedly seen that through our visits.

“[There are] Inevitably some problems with new courses, and I don’t think anyone would have planned to roll out new provision in a pandemic. There are lots of positives to take from it but some learning and areas for improvement to make things even better.”

Ofsted’s recommendations have called on providers to reduce delays to industry placements, offer summer schools and projects to provide guidance to learners before they start their T Level, ensure coherent curriculum planning, and collaborate with employers.

It says employers must ensure their placements give relevant experience to the students’ T Level course, while the Department for Education has been tasked with evaluating the transition programme’s effectiveness and ensuring universities accept T Levels for all relevant courses.

Here are some of the key findings from the report.

Too much content

Teachers and course leaders have reported concerns that there was “too much content to cover in class”, and in some cases meant providers struggled to offer wider personal development or curriculum sessions on areas like money management or mental health.

Some also reported that there was “insufficient time” for re-sits for GCSE maths or English, which are not a requirement of the T Level but offered by some providers to help fill gaps in knowledge, while others voiced uncertainty about breadth and depth of content that should be taught.

Similarly for students, Ofsted found that not all learners were prepared for the amount of work they had to do.

The DfE said the programmes were rightly rigorous.

Delays to industry placements

T Levels include a mandatory 45-day industry placement, which Ofsted described as “broad, high-quality and appropriate experiences”, but many had faced delays as a result of Covid-19.

Providers “struggled to attract enough high-quality employers”, while staff shortages and home working meant employers were often unable to host a student.

Concerningly, in health and science placements learners had to be 18 or over in some health settings and double-vaccinated against Covid-19. They also required Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks, preventing placement starts. Both limited opportunities for younger students on health-related courses, the report said.

Ofsted said it found some employers did not routinely give learners the opportunity to put theory into practice. In a small number of cases, learners were given only basic tasks, Ofsted reported, while some placements, it said, lacked structure.

Joyce said: “We are very aware of the amount of time and of course as numbers grow, finding those placements for providers and learners may become problematic, we will have to see there. But by and large, for the relatively small number that were on courses during our initial work, they were Covid-related issues and sectors like digital, construction, health, that is probably not surprising.

Collaborative curriculum planning

Ofsted said providers linking topics and utilising practical case studies were among examples of good practice in curriculum planning.

But unrealistic learning environments, and an “underdeveloped” curriculum were reported in a small number of providers. Some providers just used the list of topics as a curriculum, it said.

The report added: “Many leaders talked about adapting and improving their curriculum planning after the first year,” noting that the best curriculum planning happened in collaboration with employers.

Teacher recruitment concerns

Some teachers were well prepared to begin teaching T Levels, the report said – particularly where there were strong links between providers and employers.

But some said they did not have enough training, and many who took part in the Education and Training Foundation’s T Level professional development programme “did not feel it prepared them”, the document said.

Some providers reported difficulties in recruiting industry specialist teachers, most notably in construction.

Questions over the transition programme

The report found that teaching on the T Level transition programme – a year-long course carried out between finishing school in Year 11 and going onto a T Level aimed at those who did not have all the skills required for the T Level – was generally of a high standard.

But Ofsted chiefs found it was “clear that many learners would not necessarily progress to a T Level course”.

A lack of careers advice and guidance was cited as one reason, while others didn’t achieve the grades needed to progress onto the T Level.

In addition, some providers offered transition programmes in subjects not yet offered as a T Level course, such as sport, and work experience placements were “not always of a high quality”.

Ofsted has confirmed it will revisit the same providers next year now that there is a benchmark.

Joyce added: “I don’t think there is anything there that we have identified that is insurmountable for any provider. I think this is about tweaks in guidance, in support, in IAG [information, advice and guidance], and in delivery practise.”

Delays in resources

Ofsted reported that “across all T Levels, providers were dissatisfied that some resources from awarding bodies were initially not available”.

That included textbooks, practise exam papers and teaching materials, and frustrations were voiced by teachers in trying to get timely answers and clarity from awarding bodies to their questions.

A DfE spokesperson said it welcomed the findings. “We commissioned this review to gather evidence about the quality of T Levels to ensure the ambitious standards we have set are being met,” the spokesperson said.

“The findings offer valuable insights that will help us to shape policy and tailor our support programmes in the future to make sure all T Level students have the support they need to be successful.”

AoC chickens out of vegetarian-only menu at annual conference

The Association of Colleges has offered a poultry concession to its annual conference delegates after backlash over a decision to offer a vegetarian-only menu at its annual two-day event this November.

An email to delegates last night admitted that “mixed feedback” had been received on the organisation’s plant-based proposal, designed to reduce the event’s carbon footprint.

The former chief executive of the Education and Training Foundation, David Russell, commented on the FE Week website at the time that “if anyone is griping about this, I think that’s disappointing. Everyone can eat vegetarian/vegan food, and nowadays it’s every bit as delicious and nutritious as eating meat, as well as being more inclusive and better for the planet. Well done AoC, this is great.”

However, delegates are now being offered a “time-limited option” to opt-in for a “locally sourced chicken alternative” for the main conference dinner. Preferences must be updated via the AoC’s conference booking website by 1pm on October 31.

“After this date and time, the chicken alternative will not be available.”

The AoC said that last year’s annual conference generated 125 tonnes of carbon dioxide, and the veggie-only menu was one of several ways the organisation was looking at to cut its carbon footprint.

Other measures include a £2.50 carbon offset fee and asking conference exhibitors to avoid the use of single-use plastics.

One land-based college chair, Robert Lasseter of Kingston Maurward College, tweeted his disapproval at the AoC’s original decision: “There are far better ways of decarbonising conferences than going vegetarian. This does not sit well with land-based colleges. Ensuring all delegates travel by train will have a far greater effect.”

In an interview for this year’s colleges week, AoC chief executive David Hughes told FE Week he was “surprised at the strength of feeling from a number of people”, adding “we did get quite a few saying well done, it’s a good idea.

“We’re not about having a fight. We have arranged with the ICC [the conference venue] to offer an option for people who want to have sustainable organic chicken locally sourced.”

‘Amazing’: WEA awards winners celebrated at House of Lords

Lords, MPs, and adult education champions gathered in parliament this week to mark the inspirational achievements of WEA learners and tutors.

The WEA awards – sponsored by Skills and Education Group and FE Week – celebrate the positive contribution of learners and tutors on their families, communities and workplaces.

This year’s award winners were invited to the House of Lords for an afternoon tea to share their stories with parliamentarians.

Simon Parkinson, the chief executive and general secretary of the WEA, paid tribute to the bravery and resilience shown by adult learners: “Every single one of our courses helps build confidence, helps build essential life skills and actually really, really enable people who maybe didn’t have the best experience of formal education to step into that space.

“And I tell you now, the bravest things you see are adults stepping back into a community venue to learn something new, maybe after being 35 years away from education.”

Skills minister Andrea Jenkyns paid tribute to the WEA’s work: “The WEA is an amazing organisation. Adult education is so important. You really reach people who quite often society writes off”, she said at the event.

https://twitter.com/andreajenkyns/status/1582793641902297090

Leaving the ‘darkest times’

But the most powerful speech came from Jayne Gosnall, winner of the community contribution award. Jayne described how she was in recovery from addiction and, for her, isolation during the pandemic were some of her “darkest times”, especially as she became a carer for her very ill partner during that time. 

“He was in quite a shocking state, so I will be a carer for as long as we’ve got. Which means it is incredibly valuable for me to stay connected,” she said.

Her experience in learning was “magic”, adding that “to go into a space – even in cyberspace – with people from as far away as St Ives and Newcastle and be believed in, is magic. Because even if you don’t have a job, we have a role and what we need is a purpose. Learning gives us a purpose.

“And when the time comes when my life takes a significant change again, I will be able to step out and be earning and contributing again in a different way.”

Greenwood and Parkinson

Inspiring stories

The ceremony recognised six award categories for learners and three tutor award categories.

The winner of the academic excellence award, sponsored by Learning and Work Institute, was learner Jay Smith. Jay successfully completed the WEA level 1 award in stress awareness earlier this year, his first ever qualification. 

He grew up in a Romany Gypsy community and described how learning English from his uncle and his wife meant finding work difficult. He is now working towards a level 1 award in mental health awareness and hopes to set up a community farm and explore volunteering opportunities.

ESOL learner Iryna Rud arrived in the UK from Ukraine with very little ability to communicate in English. With her daughter’s help, she joined a WEA beginners ESOL course. 

“When I arrived, I was very stressed because of the war in my home country. Step by step I’m starting to communicate more, and feel more confident. I believe I will be able to find a job soon. Last time I even managed to talk without a translator in Jobcentre Plus.” Iryna was awarded the WEA enhanced English award, sponsored by NOCN.

Lorna Poole won the inspirational teaching award, sponsored by Skills and Education Group, for her work with the Nottingham Women’s Centre. Lorna uses her skills in music and digital technology to support vulnerable women through difficult experiences through the WEA choir. 

“Lorna is an exceptional tutor” her nominator said, “she puts in so many hours to make sure her students get the best ever experience and is always looking for ways to improve”.

And Anila Maqbool, a former WEA student, won the tutor award for learner support. She was inspired by her WEA crafts teacher to work to become a tutor herself. “It was my tutor who not only supported me, but recognised the potential I have in teaching. The opportunity came and I took it. I want to give the same kind of support to those people who are looking for it,” she said.

Anila was nominated by one of her students, level 1 student Diane. Diane explained that the class speak several languages, with many have low levels of English. Despite this, Anila was able to motivate the whole class and get the class talking to each other.

Speaking at the House of Lords soirée on Wednesday, Margaret Greenwood, chair of the all-party parliamentary group for adult education and former adult education teacher, said adult education changes lives regardless of learners’ motivations. 

“Some people learn for a particular career path and some people step in because they’ve been away from education for a long time and they’re just a little bit curious. Some people step in because they’re retired. But the great thing is that once you engage, things can take off. It’s a wonderful way to meet new people and progress in life,” she said.

MOVERS AND SHAKERS: EDITION 403

Emma Barrett-Peel

Chief Operating Officer, Learning Curve Group

Start date: November 2022

Previous Job: Director of Apprenticeships, Learning Curve Group

Interesting fact: As a teen, Emma spent many years as an air cade. She aspired to be a jet pilot but at the time women were not allowed to fly in combat

Randeep Sami

Vice Principal – James Watt College, BMET

Start date: October 2022

Previous Job: Director of Quality Improvement, Solihull College and University Centre

Interesting fact: Randeep once competed in, and won, an episode of Come Dine With Me. These days, he trains in thai boxing with his daughter who, at nine years old, won the British championship

Nick Barnes

Assistant Principal, Stockton 6th Form College

Start date: October 2022

Previous Job: Director of Stewart Park, Askham Bryan College

Interesting fact: Outside of work, Nick enjoys cycling and swimming which has led to completing a number of triathlons including an ironman

DfE’s top skills civil servant leaving post in December

The Department for Education’s top skills civil servant is stepping down, FE Week can reveal.

Director general for skills Paul Kett will leave the role later this year. He will be replaced by Julia Kinniburgh, the current director general for strategy.

Kett has served in several roles at the department over the last six years, rising to the senior rank of director general in 2017. He was initially responsible for education standards policy, but in January 2019 took over the higher and further education group.

Director generals report directly to the most senior civil servant in the department, the permanent secretary, and have close relationships with secretaries of state and ministers. Kett is one of five director generals at the DfE.

Kett’s role changed earlier this year because of the DfE’s ‘arm’s length body review’ of the Education and Skills Funding Agency. The review concluded that the agency’s policy and delivery functions should be “consolidated” within the DfE so the agency can focus on its funding role.

This led to the creation of the ‘skills group’ within the department, headed up by Kett, which sits alongside the ‘families’ group and the ‘schools’ group. All DfE policy areas are organised under one of these groups.

A precise date for Kett’s departure has not been confirmed. However, FE Week understands that he will go by the end of December. His next role has not been revealed, but the DfE did confirmed he is leaving the civil service.

The director general for skills is responsible for higher and further education policy, apprenticeships, T levels, the lifelong loan entitlement, careers policy, student finance and is the lead sponsor for the Office for Students and Student Loans Company.

Kinniburgh will replace Kett at the end of the year. The department have begun the search for a new £130,000 per annum director general for strategy to succeed her in that role.

DfE data on senior staff salaries shows that Kett earns between £120,000-£124,999 a year and Kinniburgh £135,000-£139,999 a year.

Like Kett, Kinniburgh has experience in several senior roles across the civil service.

She first joined the DfE in 2014 and worked for four years as director of school accountability and curriculum before a two-year spell at the Home Office leading on serious and organised crime.

Kinniburgh rejoined the department in December 2020 to head up pandemic response and schools recovery and was appointed director general for strategy in April 2022.

When Roger Taylor resigned as chair of Ofqual following the 2020 grades fiasco, Kinniburgh led the appointments panel to replace him.

Exam fee hikes ‘make a mockery’ of financial planning

GCSE and A-level exam fee rises of up to 17 per cent “makes a mockery” of financial planning, claim school and college leaders. 

Edexcel, run by Pearson, and OCR have increased fees for all 2023 exams by a flat six per cent. England’s largest exam board, AQA, has hiked prices by between five and 17 per cent, although it still has the lowest prices overall.

The boards, which will earn several million more from colleges after the rises, say they need to cover higher costs. But leaders say the increases are disappointing as schools and colleges battle soaring energy and staffing costs. 

Chichester College Group, which has nine colleges and training providers, expects the hikes to cost an extra £300,000 this year on top of its “already eye-wateringly high” costs across the group which account for more than £3.3 million.

“The increase in exam costs is yet another pressure being put on colleges across the country,” said chief executive Andrew Green.

“This increase comes at a time when colleges are faced with soaring energy bills, soaring inflation and serious underfunding. Colleges have faced more than a decade of brutal cuts and increased costs, made worse by the pandemic.

“That money could have been used to assist our staff by contributing towards additional pay or funding the recruitment of more learning support assistants to provide support to our students.”

Luminate Education Group, which has seven members, including two universities and one training provider, expects the hikes to cost an extra £200,000 this year.

Less than inflation

Deputy chief executive for curriculum and quality Gemma Simmons-Blench told FE Week this increase will have a “knock-on effect, as our budgets are set far in advance”.

“At a time when the FE sector is facing growing financial pressure and with the government not making its position clear on funding provisions, the hike in prices means that we will have to look at our budgets further in order to ensure that [financial] targets are met,” she said.

“The awarding organisations have stated that the increase is less than inflation. While this may be the case, the increase far outweighs the funding increase, and we urge exam boards to reconsider their position on this.”

E-ACT, which has 13 secondary schools, expects the hikes to cost an extra £180,000. Tom Campbell, its interim chief executive, said another “unfunded cost increase” made it “increasingly difficult to do anything resembling thoughtful financial planning”. 

“It risks causing confusion amongst accounting officers and trust boards, making it impossible to deliver the budgets agreed with the Education and Skills Funding Agency at the start of the year. 

“In-year changes to costs like these make a mockery of the funding agreements and annual budget-setting cycle.”

A spokesperson from NCG confirmed with FE Week that even a 5% increase in fees would raise their costs by around £200,000 per year.

“This is at a time when colleges across the country, and the hard working staff within them, face enormous funding pressures. However, we have very positive relationships with all of our awarding organisations and we are keen to work closely with them to better understand and highlight the impact that any changes may have on colleges across our Group.”

Sciences keep rising

Frustration over fees grew last year after FE Week’s sister publication Schools Week revealed boards were raising prices, despite cancelled exams and teacher-set grades.

AQA has hiked prices for A-level art by 17 per cent – from £89.65 to £105.10. Other subjects have risen between five and 12 per cent. The non-for-profit organisation said increases for most of its qualifications were “well-below inflation”, currently at 9.9 per cent.

Rises above inflation were to “better reflect the market and true costs of delivering these qualifications”.

Fees for A-level biology, chemistry and physics have risen by 10 per cent, while GCSE geography and art are up 12 per cent. A maths GCSE now costs £41.20, up from £39.15.

AQA could gain an extra £4.9 million if entry rates remain the same as this summer. Tracey Newman, the board’s director of customer and sales, said: “As an independent charity, we don’t charge more than we need to for our qualifications and services, and we’ve kept entry fee increases well below the rate of inflation for most of our qualifications.”

Sufficient warning needed

Ofqual’s conditions say boards should publish fees “sufficiently far in advance” of exams to “satisfy the reasonable planning requirements” of schools and colleges.

All three boards published fees in the past three months – OCR and Edexcel in August and AQA last Friday – but schools and colleges set budgets months in advance.

A maths GCSE with Edexcel now costs £46.80, compared with £44 last year. 

A spokesperson said it recognised school budgets were “stretched” and “we will always aim to keep fee increases to a minimum while providing as much value for money as possible”.

Likewise, OCR, a not-for-profit owned by Cambridge University Press & Assessment, is hiking fees six per cent. A maths GCSE now costs £47, up from £44.25.

An OCR spokesperson said it aimed to keep any fee increases “as low as possible”. 

Colleges week interview: David Hughes, CEO, Association of Colleges

The fifth national Colleges Week comes in a time of turbulence in Westminster. Shane Chowen sits down with David Hughes, chief executive of the Association of Colleges, to talk campaigning and what’s next for the movement.

Colleges have enjoyed a few years in the limelight now. The Colleges Week campaign has no doubt helped by giving colleges, and the AoC, a hook to draw in and win around MPs and influencers.

Colleges Week was born in anger, David Hughes told a reception in parliament this Tuesday. The anger and disappointment at being “so close” to finalising a special pay deal for college staff in 2018, which was canned at the last minute by a certain then-Treasury minister Liz Truss, catalysed a noisier campaigning strategy from the usually mild-mannered trade body.

“No more Mr Nice Guy” read the FE Week headlines at the time, reporting on Hughes’ switch to a more direct strategy.

So much so that just months after that fateful summer in 2018, a rare alliance between the AoC and the trade unions mobilised thousands for a march on parliament calling for investment in further education. Teachers and students marched side by side with their principals. It was quite the sight to behold.

Fast forward four years and the Colleges Week campaigning strategy is notably less rebellious, and the sector arguably more fractured.

This year’s event coincides with the fourth week of walkouts in dozens of colleges across the country over low pay in the face of the cost-of-living crisis. A far cry from the solidarity and collectivism shown in 2018 when Hughes spoke passionately alongside union leaders and opposition MPs like Jeremy Corbyn and Angela Rayner atop a double decker bus in parliament square, slating the government’s record on FE.

There are no major campaigning events this year, but colleges have been encouraged to “engage” with MPs and stakeholder locally, and post on social media using the #CollegesWeek hashtag.

Hughes addressing the 2022 Colleges Week parliamentary reception

I arrive at the AoC’s central London offices the day after the chancellor, Jeremy Hunt, warned the House of Commons of “eye-wateringly difficult” decisions to come on public spending, keen to see which David Hughes I’ll be greeted by.

Will I get the pragmatic ‘Mr Nice Guy’ focussed on influencing through conciliatory relationship building with ministers and officials, or will I get the activist that once mobilised thousands to march behind the cause?

He starts reflectively.

“I’ve been at AoC for sixth years and I’m on my seventh secretary of state in that time. That’s quite phenomenal, isn’t it? The thing I keep clinging on to, and it is hard, is to not become hopeless. As a leader the job is not to be hopeless, you’ve got to try and find a way through.”

One reason to be hopeful is that, unlike in 2010, colleges have successfully positioned themselves as an economic priority. It was always “unlikely”, Hughes tells me, that colleges will ever have been a political priority in education against the scale and lobbying power of schools, early years and universities.

“But economically, we’ve repositioned colleges centrally in that skills role. You’ve got a skills directorate now at DfE with a director general absolutely on our case and working with us. We’re not on our own. We’re not isolated like we were in the austerity era of 2010-2011. And I think we’ve got more champions in Whitehall than we’ve ever had.”

Building those relationships has delivered results. The spending review last November delivered the first funding increase of any substance in years was “promising, not brilliant” for colleges, he says.

Even this July, Hughes says, then education secretary Nadhim Zahawi was due to meet with then chancellor Rishi Sunak to talk about how to finally exempt FE colleges from VAT and invest in college staff. “So, there was no need to do marches. We had the education secretary fighting for us.”

However, that meeting never took place. Sunak, and then Zahawi, both resigned that week triggering the end of Boris Johnson’s premiership.

Colleges emergency cash

The short-term situation looks miserable, Hughes admits. Inflation has all but cancelled out any of the funding increases and colleges again face massive financial challenges.

“I’m really worried about that. But I’m also realistic. We’ve got to defend what colleges have got already at the very least, because we’re not going to get any more money I don’t think. That just feels unrealistic now. And I’ve not thought that for years.”

Despite his despair, Hughes has presented his wish list in a recent letter to current education secretary, Kit Malthouse. He wants a workforce fund to increase staff pay, more bursary funding for students that are struggling, and capital funds aimed at improving the energy efficiency of college estates.

Another difference between now and the austerity of the 2010s is the already volatile and vulnerable state of college finances. Over the last decade colleges have merged, buildings and land have been sold, and three colleges have gone insolvent and closed their doors for good.

South Essex College announced last month it will close on Fridays to help save money in the face of a likely doubling of its energy bills.

Hughes doesn’t think there will be any more insolvencies, but admits the 2022-23 will see some colleges in “really difficult” circumstances, to the point where emergency cash may once again be needed for even more restructuring.

All of that sounds bleak, but all I’ve heard about so far in response is exchanges of letters with multiple secretaries of state and discussions with civil servants. I recall the drizzly October afternoon in 2018 atop that double decker bus and ask directly and suggest to Hughes that he’s softened up since then.

Colleges Week 2018

“I don’t think so,” he says, “I’m still saying the same things. There’s always a difficult line to tread in these roles. It’s kind of seductive to be able to stand on a platform and shout at the government but actually, I don’t know, it just doesn’t work. There’s a time and place.”

“So, I don’t think I’ve gone soft. I think we’ve been sailing with a tailwind.”

“We’re seriously considering another march on parliament in April or May next year because I think things are going to get worse this winter and there’s a point where you say ‘enough is enough’. For the first time in five or six years, we’ve got a prime minister and a chancellor that don’t get the skills agenda.”

Union relationship strained

Has one of the consequences of Hughes’ more pragmatic approach in recent years led to a breakdown of the coalition of supporters he built in 2018?

A few weeks ago I met with lecturers from a north west college that were on strike. They told me that the days of principals and teachers feeling like they were on the same side were long gone. I ask Hughes if he thinks he should have worked harder to keep the sector united.

He describes UCU’s recent strike action in colleges as intentionally “very aggressive and confrontational”.

“There isn’t a college in the country that is paying [staff] less than it can. And there isn’t a college leader in the country who thinks that they’re paying enough. But they’ve got a tough job to balance the books. If your energy costs go up two or three times in an organisation with virtually no margin, that’s bloody hard.”

Campaigning side by side again with UCU looks implausible at this point.

When I ask Hughes what his relationship is like with the UCU general secretary, Jo Grady, it’s the first time in our interview where there’s a palpable pause before answering.

“It’s quite distant,” he says carefully. The approach of the UCU’s FE committee “is very clearly to get their members out on strike as much as possible because that way they’ll win the most for their members. I don’t blame them. Inflation is shattering people’s household finances. But it’s very difficult for any employer to be giving 10 per cent pay rises.”

Grady has been visiting picket lines at colleges over the last few weeks and it’s been principals in the firing line via her megaphone. Addressing striking lecturers at City College Plymouth earlier this month, Grady described the former principal of Nottingham College as an “atrocious man” for, in her words, attempting “fire and rehire” tactics, and called on her members to “make Jackie’s [the City College Plymouth principal] life a living hell.”

“I don’t think attacking an individual in that way is acceptable,” Hughes said.

The ‘unfortunate’ comments

Grady’s comments in Plymouth were especially “unfortunate”. In December 2018, the sector was shaken with the news that the former principal at City College Plymouth, Garry Phillips, had taken his life weeks after resigning from his role at the college. 

His resignation came shortly after a union vote of no confidence and the college corporation said in a statement at the time that “external pressures on the corporation and on Garry have become a material distraction to the college’s core purpose”.

“I think given the recent history at Plymouth, with Garry, it was a really unfortunate thing to say. I would ask Jo to reflect on that kind of language.” Should she apologise, I ask. “She should”, Hughes replies, “but I don’t think she will”.

FE Week contacted UCU for a response to Hughes’ call for an apology. A spokesperson said: “Taking picket line speeches out of context and suggesting that a general secretary encouraging members to put their employer under pressure is equivalent to inciting a workplace suicide is not only insensitive but a vulgar weaponisation of mental health.

“Rather than trying to distract from the dispute, the Association of Colleges and college principals should raise pay and protect their staff from the deepening cost of living crisis.”

Colleges’ future could be public sector, but should be tertiary

Alongside budget pressures, college leaders are also preparing in the background for the possibility of being reclassified as public sector organisations.

The Office for National Statistics launched its reclassification review in May and is due to conclude at the end of this month, potentially ending a decade of colleges being classified as private sector organisations.

Hughes is careful not to land on a firm for-or-against position on reclassification. “There are pros and cons to both, right”, he explains “and we literally can’t influence the the ONS’ judgement. We’ve met with them several times to inform the process. That’s all we can do on that front. I’m being neutral because there’s no other position to take.”

A “good deal” from reclassification to the public sector could help ease some of the current cost pressures on colleges without costing the DfE any money. A guarantee on local government pensions for colleges, as it does for academies according to Hughes, for example could reduce costs significantly. Other upsides could include hefty VAT rebates and a fairer payment mechanism through the ESFA. All of which are being looked at, Hughes says.

A bad deal though could include even more control over colleges’ accounts, their ability to borrow, who can be on a board to sign them off and what happens to reserves.

If that happens, Hughes says he will lobby ministers to reverse the legislative changes that triggered the ONS review, to then in turn trigger another review to reclassify back to the private sector. “There are some companies telling colleges to hide their reserves in some kind of charitable trust in case DfE decides to take them away. Which they could. But I don’t think they will.”

“We’re being completely opportunistic,” Hughes says. “It’s within the gift of DfE to do all those good things for colleges whether they are private or public.”

Hughes’ plans for a possible future labour government offer some insight into his thinking on how the skills system should be work on the ground. The AoC, along with their counterpart for the training provider sector, AELP, and City and Guilds launched the ‘future skills coalition’ this week; an attempt to present the next government with a united policy position.

“I don’t think we’ve done ourselves any favours in the last year or two by having too many voices saying slightly different things,” Hughes says.

Part of that united position should be a more united tertiary system with colleges, training and providers and universities working much more closely, essentially eliminating competition on the ground between providers.

Hughes admits that the new coalition will involve some tough discussions, but seems convinced that there don’t have to be any losers.

“We’ve agreed with AELP and City and Guilds that there’s a big win for everybody if we get this right, which means the government stepping forward with better investment for the whole sector, and then everyone getting a share of that. And let’s not worry about whether it goes to a college, or an ITP, or an adult ed provider.

“I think mature organisations in both the college and the ITP sector will think this is a good idea. There will be some worries, I get that, but our job is to try and show that it can work.”

Rebranding the ‘lifelong loan entitlement’ would make the policy more appealing

The government should reframe the language and branding of the lifelong loan entitlement (LLE) as researchers found the term “lifelong loan” to be unappealing to potential learners.

Think tank Phoenix Insights has published research exploring the challenges people face to retrain throughout their life, and found that the key reason is because adults do not want to take on more debt.

It warns that because of this, the government’s proposed lifelong loan entitlement (LLE) will require “focused tweaks” to entice midlife and older workers to take out the loans to retrain.

The LLE, due to be rolled out in 2025, will provide individuals with the equivalent of four years of post-18 education to use over their lifetime. Funding will be available to study at levels 4 to 6, for both modular and full-time study at either colleges or universities.

Decline in adult learning

A decade long decline in adult learning is the driving force behind the scheme.

Phoenix Insights’ research, carried out by Public First, found that lack of knowledge around how loans work and the benefits of retraining are major barriers to overcome.

The think tank said the Department for Education should explore “creative ways” to highlight financial incentives for people in midlife to engage with lifelong learning, including alternative or additional means of financing the LLE.

While the report authors said they do not expect government to offer a grant for 100 per cent of costs, they believe that ministers could introduce “part subsidies or provider or employer bursaries/scholarships, particularly in skill shortage areas”.

“There is precedent for this approach in sectors such as the NHS and teaching (e.g. the NHS bursary and funded teacher training places),” the report said.

Phoenix Insights also called on the government to review the language used when discussing learning opportunities for adults of different ages.

Associations with low pay

It found that words such as “apprenticeship” and “internship” have “strong associations with low pay and ‘starting at the bottom’ – so rephrasing opportunities to lean on preferences for framing such as ‘upskilling’, ‘retraining’ and ‘on-the-job training’ will help give midlife and older people more confidence to engage”.

A renaming and branding of the LLE scheme to put it in a “more positive framing” has also been suggested, after the phrase “lifelong loan” was “widely viewed as negative and unappealing”.

The report added that having the scheme “too closely associated with government was also seen as a negative”, so the policy will “need to be delivered in an impartial and independent way that prioritises choice for the learner”.

Phoenix Insights also said that accurate information about the quality and outcomes of courses available to adult learners to support them in their careers – including potential new career routes or the number of vacancies available linked to the qualification studied – will be vital.

Risk or gamble

“Midlife and older people consider retraining to be a ‘risk’ or ‘a gamble’ and need to know what they can expect if they successfully complete a course – the presence of a ‘safety net’ as well as whether the course would be ‘worth it’ both financially and otherwise (e.g., a guaranteed job role or commitment to progression within their current role),” the report said.

Reza Schwitzer, associate director at Public First, said: “Our research shows that while people like the idea of lifelong learning, they don’t like the idea of a lifelong loan. Fear of taking on additional debt will be a huge barrier to mid- and late-career workers embracing the LLE, which is why we think there should be clearer assurances of job and career progression for everyone who retrains via the scheme.

“With some focused tweaks, the LLE can become a vital tool in helping over 40s make the shift they need o earn more, work longer, and contribute to a productive, growth economy.”

A DfE spokesperson said: “From 2025 our LLE will provide individuals with a loan equivalent of four years of post-18 education to use flexibly over their lifetime. We consulted on the LLE earlier this year and continue ongoing engagement with the sector. We will publish our response in due course.”

Flexi-job apprentice agencies pull out of scheme after a few months

Two companies that were among the first flexi-job apprenticeship agencies have pulled out of the flagship programme just months after its launch.

And another key player has warned its future as a flexi-job apprenticeship agency could come to an end next year unless the government stumps up more grant funding, after finding the scheme is too expensive to deliver.

The Department for Education launched its first flexi-job apprenticeship register in February, after the scheme was announced by then chancellor Rishi Sunak in his Budget in March 2021 to help industries where project-based employment is the norm.

The agencies employ apprentices and place them with multiple employers, moving them around different projects throughout their apprenticeship. They target industries where shorter-term or freelance working patterns are prevalent and therefore struggle to comply with the 12-month minimum apprenticeship rule, such as creative, digital, agriculture and construction.

Fifteen organisations joined the register at its launch in February, but in an update released by the DfE this month, two of those – Nottingham College Services Ltd and HR Provider Ltd – no longer appear. A new company, Future Nation, joined the list in March.

Nottingham College Services, a subsidiary of Nottingham College, told FE Week it withdrew from the scheme due to low demand. The company was unable to comment further on its recruitment struggles at the time of going to press.

HR Provider Ltd was also unavailable to comment on its withdrawal from the flexi-job apprenticeship agency register.

The Department for Education refused to comment on the reasons why the companies were no longer on the list.

Both Nottingham College Services Ltd and HR Provider Ltd were among five of the original 15 agencies not to have received any grant funding to help with running the programme. The DfE committed £5 million in grant funding to 10 of the original agencies in 2021/22 and 2022/23, with a target of 1,500 apprentices recruited in the initial rollout of the flexi-job model.

ScreenSkills, which had taken part in an informal pilot of the flexi-job apprenticeship model in partnership with Warner Media, Netflix and the Department for Culture Media and Sport over the last 18 months, has received a chunk of grant funding to become a flexi-job agency, but told FE Week that uncertainty of funding going forward put its involvement in future under threat.

DfE flexi-job support to end

Sara Whybrew, apprenticeship and policy consultant at ScreenSkills, said: “At the moment the pilot gets some support from DfE but that will come to an end, and the expectation is that industry will pay for that support.

“That isn’t realistic because, particularly in the case of screen production, those industry players are paying the wage and associated oncosts for the apprentice, and they are paying the levy to cover the cost of the training. To ask them to pay for our additional support service, even though they value it, just isn’t realistic.”

Recognising that pumping grant funding in future years isn’t feasible, ScreenSkills instead wants to see a percentage of levy funds ringfenced to provide support services – including flexi-job services.

While it is unclear how many apprentices have been signed up to the agencies to date and despite two agencies dropping off the register, there are promising signs elsewhere with other agencies reporting a positive experience.

The DfE has confirmed there were 30 applicants in the last window to join the register, which are now being assessed, adding that it hoped to test the approach with new sectors and employers.

Whybrew said that “the actual service itself has the potential to make apprenticeships more accessible,” and reported “a high level of retention for apprentices”.

Matthew Lord, co-founder and director of Inspire ATA, which operates in the education space, said the model was “apprenticeships’ best-kept secret”.

He said it allowed schools to take on support staff as apprentices to match school terms, such as running January to July and place the apprentice in another school from September.

“The main barrier is simply that most employers don’t know that this is an option until we can meet with them to explain things. Once the understand the benefits it becomes an attractive option,” Lord said.

Evolve Apprentices Ltd, Calico Enterprise and Training and Apprenticeships in Construction Ltd all reported positives to the scheme for short-term projects.

Julie Deeley, director of operations at EN:Able Futures community interest company added: “It’s not an easy model to promote sometimes, but we all feel there is a lot of positive in the model, and it creates opportunities that would have gone by the wayside had we not been here.”