Revealed: Winners of FAB Awards 2021

A WorldSkills UK teacher training project and a leading T Level awarding organisation are among the winners of this year’s Federation of Awarding Bodies awards.

Awarding organisation of the year is NEBOSH, otherwise known as the National Examination Board in Occupational Safety and Health. It offers a series of qualifications in health and safety, as well as environmental management.

End-point assessment organisation (EPAO) of the year was given to City & Guilds, which has won contracts to develop qualifications for the 2021, 2022 and 2023 waves of the government’s new flagship qualifications, T Levels.

Other awards presented tonight included the collaboration of the year award, given to WorldSkills UK’s and NCFE’s Centre of Excellence programme, which seeks to train college and independent provider teachers in the methods used to train the UK’s competitors for the international WorldSkills tournaments.

‘Immensely proud of the industry,’ says FAB chief

Federation chief executive Tom Bewick praised the “abundance of excellent nominations” they received, which were “of a very high standard”.

“I am immensely proud of how our industry has risen to the challenges of the last two years and I have heard and seen so many examples of excellence demonstrated by individuals and teams pulling together to support one another as well as centres, employers and of course learners,” Bewick continued.

He co-hosted the awards with Jackie Weaver, the parish council clerk who hit the headlines in February for her handling of a rowdy meeting.

The awards were judged by former skills minister Anne Milton, Black FE Leadership Group executive member and former Highbury College principal Stella Mbubaegbu, and National Union of Students president Larissa Kennedy.

Milton said the judges were “incredibly impressed at how well awarding organisations have “overcome the significant challenges they faced during the pandemic,” which was only possible “due to the hard work and dedication of so many staff”.

“What shone through all the entries is the commitment to learners and to the sector as a whole,” she said, calling it a “privilege and inspiration for us to be asked to judge”.

“Although not everyone is a winner, they are all worthy of special mention,” she said.

The awards form part of this year’s Federation of Awarding Bodies annual conference, FAB 2021, which is running between 11 and 12 November in Leicester.

The full list of FAB award winners

Awarding Organisation of the Year – Sponsored by Creatio

NEBOSH

EPAO of the year – Sponsored by RM

City and Guilds

Qualification of the year – Sponsored by Coelrind

Open College Network West Midlands with Level 5 Diploma in Retrofit Coordination and Risk Management

Collaboration of the Year – Sponsored by Civica

NCFE and WorldSkills UK : WorldSkills UK Centre of Excellence

Learner of the Year – Sponsored by Eintech

Deepak Ranindran nominated by CMI

Individual of the Year – Sponsored by Gordon Associates

Joint winners: Kelle McQuade and Andrew Walker from Training Qualifications UK

Innovation of the year – Sponsored by Advanced Secure Technologies

CMI with Interview360 and CV360

Exporter of the Year – Sponsored by TestReach

Active IQ

Exams 2022: Ofqual confirms ‘plan B’ details

Students must not be over-tested as schools and colleges gather evidence for the potential return of teacher-assessed grades in 2022, Ofqual has warned, as it confirmed contingency plans for next summer’s exams.

The government has said it plans to hold GCSE and A-level exams next summer. But Ofqual consulted on a plan B in case they need to be cancelled for the third year in a row.

If exams are cancelled, teacher-assessed grades would be used again next year. Schools and colleges have been asked to test pupils throughout the year and collect evidence in case the contingency plans are activated.

Today, Ofqual published its consultation response, along with guidance for schools and colleges on how to collect evidence. 

Here’s what you need to know…

1. ‘Guard’ against over-assessment

Ofqual said the total assessment time “should not normally exceed” the total time students would spend taking exams for a relevant qualification, “plus any time spent on non-exam assessment”.

Teachers should “guard against over-assessment”, the regulator said. Schools and colleges should also think about scheduling tests which would “provide evidence from broadly the same proportion of the specification as would normally be covered in exams”.

As set out in the original consultation, Ofqual said students should be assessed under exam-like conditions “wherever possible”.

2. Test students once a term

exams
Ofqual chief regulator, Jo Saxton

Ofqual said teachers should consider the balance of exam and non-exam assessments when deciding how many times students should be tested. 

A “sensible approach” would be to test students once a term. Ofqual believes that for many schools and colleges, these tests will likely already be planned.

Assessing pupils early would mean that if the pandemic disrupts education later in the academic year, there will be “some evidence” that TAGs can be based on.

3. Assess on ‘wide range of content’ 

Students should be assessed on a “wide range of content”, similar to what they would expect in their summer exams, Ofqual said. 

But in deciding how to phase the tests throughout the year, teachers should “bear in mind” that if TAGs are used, “they will be based only on content that students have been taught”. 

If a student was absent when a particular topic was taught, and that topic is covered by an assessment, schools and colleges don’t need to change the test to accommodate them.

4. Tests should be ‘similar’ to past papers

Ofqual said that in order to make the tests “as useful as possible” for students, they should be “similar” to the exam papers they are preparing to take next summer. 

Past papers could be used, in full or part, where appropriate. 

The same reasonable adjustments that would be made for a disabled student taking summer exams should also be applied to the assessments “where possible”.

5. Inform students of TAG tests

Where tests are planned following the publication of this guidance, students “must be told” before each assessment whether the results will be used as part of TAGs evidence. 

Students should be told “sufficiently far in advance” to allow them to revise and prepare. 

They should be told which parts of the subject content will be covered in the test. But they should not be told the questions in advance, or “be able to predict the questions from the information given to them”. 

Students should be provided with feedback, which could include marks or comments. 

6. Students should not re-sit assessments

Students should not be given the opportunity to repeat a test, for example, to “improve their mark in response to feedback”. 

But Ofqual accepted that performance in later assessments “might, of course, reflect feedback on their performance in earlier assessments”.

7. Disrupted schools and colleges should still collect evidence

Where “significant” disruption to education means tests cannot be completed for all or some students, schools and colleges “should take reasonable steps to collect evidence of each student’s knowledge and understanding in ways that align as far as possible with this guidance”. 

Schools and colleges will need to be “assured” that the evidence collected is “of the student’s work alone” and “covers a broad range of the subject content and assessment objectives”. 

Schools and colleges should also record the “exceptional reasons” why this has happened.

However, schools and colleges are not expected to “deviate” from the guidance for “minor disruptions” to a student’s education. 

8. No decision on appeals or quality assurance

In the original consultation, quality assurance and appeals processes appeared to be largely similar to the 2021 process. 

But Ofqual said it was not making decisions on these “at this time”. On appeals, the watchdog said it would “wish to learn” from the appeals arrangements this year.

But if exams are cancelled they would “take decisions quickly”.

Labour warns BTECs cull could hit healthcare and retail hardest

Healthcare and retail industries could be hardest hit if the government continues its “hasty” move to cut funding for most BTECs, according to the Labour Party.

In a speech to the Federation of Awarding Bodies conference today, shadow education secretary will say it is “deeply irresponsible” to defund the level 3 qualifications as T Levels are introduced.

Analysis by Labour shows that almost one million workers hold BTECs as their highest level of qualification, including 136,000 in retail and wholesale, and 105,000 in health and social work.

Green will warn that the BTECs cull “risks holding young people back from achieving the qualifications they need”.

The DfE embarked on a two-stage level 3 and below qualifications review in March 2019 to consider the 12,000 applied general qualifications in England, including Pearson’s popular BTEC courses.

The final outcome was published in July. At the time, the DfE said the reforms would involve stripping public funding from “poor-quality” qualifications that duplicate or overlap with T Levels or A-levels. They added that courses like BTECs would become “rare” in future.

The DfE has however said that some BTECs would survive the government’s bonfire of level 3 qualifications if they can demonstrate there is a “real need” for them, or if they are in an area that T Levels do not cover, such as performing arts.

There will be multiple T Levels in healthcare, but none are planned for retail.

Last week, education secretary Nadhim Zahawi told MPs that BTECs that “are of high quality and are valued will continue”.

The DfE is yet to say how it will determine which BTECs and other level 3 qualifications meets the “high quality” bar.

Labour warned in August that cutting off public funding for BTECs could entrench inequalities in exam results, especially affecting students with free school meals or special educational needs.

Green will use her speech today to warn that “40 per cent of young people” are leaving compulsory education without level 3 qualifications, “which has remained stagnant for over half a decade”.

Labour would “maintain BTEC qualifications”, she will add, to ensure this figure does not rise.

“Labour wants every student to have a choice of education pathways and support in finding the route that’s right for them and their futures. 

“Sectors such as health and retail are benefitting from the skills of workers with BTECs and we want to ensure every young person can gain a level 3 qualification whether through A-levels, T Levels, BTECs or other qualifications. 

“We are already falling behind other countries in developing skills for the future and narrowing students’ future options will not drive up the numbers gaining essential qualifications. The Conservatives plans risk holding young people and our economy back.” 

A DfE spokesperson said: “Our reforms will simplify the current system and ensure young people can be confident that the qualifications they study will be fit for the future, high quality and lead to good outcomes.

“We have set out the qualifications we intend to fund alongside T Levels and A levels, and will fund BTECs or similar qualifications where there is a clear need for skills and knowledge that is not provided elsewhere.”

Richard Branson’s Virgin Care training arm takes off with top Ofsted marks

The training arm of Richard Branson’s Virgin Care group has landed Ofsted’s highest grade in its first inspection.

Inspectors lauded The Learning Enterprise’s (TLE) 140 apprentices for demonstrating “outstanding resilience” to work and study while the pandemic continues to place additional pressures on the health and social care sector.

They were particularly impressed with how leaders and managers “embedded equality, diversity, inclusion and safeguarding into the curriculum extremely effectively,” allowing apprentices to apply “their learning to ensure service users are treated with integrity and dignity”.

TLE is the learning and development arm of health and care specialist Virgin Care – part of the Virgin group founded by billionaire businessman Richard Branson.

It began delivering apprenticeships in 2017. Learners work towards healthcare and management apprenticeship standards from level 2 to level 5.

‘The exceptional expertise of our team is what makes us unique’

Sarah Van Der Merwe, head of apprenticeships at TLE, said her providers is “thrilled” with scoring ‘outstanding’ judgements across the board.

“The exceptional expertise of our team is what makes us unique as a learning and development provider; our assessors are trained to the highest levels to support efficient and effective delivery of our programmes,” she added. “It is of the upmost importance to us that we are providing participants with valuable training, and our assessors work hard to plan programmes to support maximum outcomes.”

Inspectors visited TLE in early October and published their report yesterday.

They commended an approach which helps learners to “develop increased resilience, confidence and self-esteem”.

Ofsted noted that “apprentices take on extra responsibility at work and actively seek opportunities to progress in their learning and careers”. They also commented on how assessors planned coordinated on-and off-the-job training “exceptionally well, enabling apprentices to swiftly apply their learning in the workplace”.

They went on to highlight that “employers highly value the contribution apprentices make to their businesses”.

TLE joins 42 other independent training providers that are currently rated ‘outstanding’ by Ofsted.

Scrapping BTECs is bad for levelling up and for BAME students

It’s difficult to see how reducing choice at level 3 by scrapping BTECs will improve social mobility and diversity, writes Kasim Choudhry

Government plans to remove funding for qualifications such as BTECs could negatively impact progression opportunities for learners and the availability of skilled labour for employers, but for BAME learners, local communities and employers it could be a bigger blow.

The government recognised and promoted the notion of inclusion and diversity and pioneered the agenda of levelling up both education and opportunities.

So why now, after all the hard work that’s been done, would they want to potentially risk what has already been achieved?

Why would government want to potentially risk what has already been achieved?

There is a serious risk that present government plans would reverse current trends to widen diversity and broaden inclusion in education. 

The Department for Education’s own impact assessment published with the level 3 reform plans estimates that learners with special educational needs, from Asian or ethnic backgrounds, males, and those from disadvantaged backgrounds, are all more likely to be negatively impacted by the reforms.

Less than half of all enrolments for qualifications likely to be removed come from the least deprived students.

As a stark comparison, the students who will be impacted consist of:

  • 46 per cent for Asian students
  • 47 per cent for SEN students
  • 50 per cent for those receiving free school meals
  • 47 per cent for the most deprived students

BTECs offer more than just a qualification, they are a route of continued engagement, a vital step in our aim for genuine lifelong learning and for many, a stepping stone into higher education and entering the workforce.

BTEC qualifications also support a more diverse higher education population before they enter the workforce. 

The latest data (2017) shows a larger proportion of students from a BAME background progressing to HE with a BTEC only, compared to A-levels only. 

This difference is particularly large for black students, of whom five per cent progress with A-levels only, and 14 per cent with a BTEC only. 

Learners wanting to progress on to an apprenticeship at level 3 may also have their choices reduced because qualifications previously offered as full-time courses might no longer be available to be used as part of an apprenticeship programme at a local college or training provider.  

BTEC qualifications also support a more diverse higher education population

This is especially concerning, given how low apprenticeship numbers are currently as the UK continues to recover from the pandemic.  

There is a serious risk the proposals will also reverse trends to widen diversity and broaden inclusion within higher education. 

The same is true of progression to higher level apprenticeships and degree apprenticeships, especially in sectors such as construction and engineering.  

T levels will be a highly valuable choice for those learners who are ready to specialise at level 3, but if they are positioned as the only vocational choice at level 3, many will be left with limited or no options to access and progress. 

T Levels are heavily reliant upon industry placements. In some parts of the country, it is unlikely regions will have relevant industries to supply the placements for some T Levels. 

Without an alternative, students will have to travel long distances to their next closest college, or they will have to choose a course in a subject not their first choice. 

Where we live might soon determine our choice of educational pathway and ultimately career.  

It’s difficult to see how reducing choice at level 3 will improve social mobility, diversity and inclusion and the levelling-up agenda in areas the government wants to see thrive – I fear it is more likely to do the opposite. 

These reforms, and the managed decline of educational opportunities for young people, cannot be left unchallenged. 

We appeal to ministers to listen again to the voices calling for system reform and not potentially risk what is already working for disadvantaged groups of young people already impacted by a lack of diversity and inclusion. 

A-levels have their place and T Levels are a welcome addition, but they will not on their own solve the UK’s skills gap. 

The BAME Apprenticeship Network supports the #protectstudentchoice campaign. 

Please look into this yourself and if you agree, also make your voice heard by  signing the government petition now. 

OfS chief stepping down next spring

The chief executive of the Office for Students has announced she will stand down at the end of April 2022.

Nicola Dandridge wrote in her resignation letter to education secretary Nadhim Zahawi and FE and HE minister Michelle Donelan that it “feels like the right time to move on and hand over to a new chief executive who will bring fresh momentum to the next phase of the OfS’s important work”.

The higher education regulator is set to open a consultation on a new strategy soon, while a new director of fair access and participation will start in January 2022 after James Wharton started as the OfS’ new chair in February.

It is not known if Dandridge has accepted a new position elsewhere, though the OfS said she had not been asked to step down.

Dandridge wrote she is “enormously proud of all that we have achieved since we were set up in 2018”.

She listed achievements such as “developing a robust and innovative approach to regulating quality and equality of opportunity, taking decisive action in a number of cases where quality and governance were inadequate, and overseeing demonstrable progress on social mobility”.

Dandridge ‘leaves a real legacy’ of improving access for disadvantaged students

A qualified lawyer, Dandridge became the first chief executive of the OfS in 2017, ahead of its launch in 2018.

She previously served as chief executive of the representative body Universities UK for eight years.

Zahawi thanked Dandridge for her “excellent work” over the last five years, saying she “leaves behind her a real legacy that includes improving access to higher education for those from the most disadvantaged parts of the country”.

He added that the next steps for finding Dandridge’s successor will be announced in due course.

There is currently a review ongoing into the operating model of the Education and Skills Funding Agency, the government’s funding regulator for the rest of the education sector, with interim findings due early next year.

Regulator faced court battles and public pressure from FE sector

The OfS has had an at times rocky relationship with the FE sector: it came under criticism immediately after it started for not having an FE representative on its board. This was later rectified with the appointment of Leicester College principal Verity Hancock in January 2019.

students

It has also faced court battles over its decisions to refuse providers admission to the OfS Register, which allows institutions to receive HE public grant and student support funding, to recruit international students, and apply for degree awarding powers.

In August 2020, the Court of Appeal squashed the regulator’s decision to turn away Bloomsbury Institute, with the judges saying the OfS staff who set student continuation and progression thresholds which Bloomsbury was rejected by did not have the delegated authority to do so.

However, in October 2019, Barking and Dagenham College lost its High Court case to overturn the OfS’ decision to refuse the provider admission to the register, and for an injunction to prevent the regulator from publishing that decision.

The regulator also lost responsibility to inspect apprenticeships at levels 6 and 7 to Ofsted last April.

OfS chair James Wharton said Dandridge’s “experience, diligence and determination has been key to the success of the OfS”.

She had “retained an absolute focus on the OfS’s role to protect the interests of students, particularly in work to raise the quality bar in higher education, and to improve equality of opportunity for students of all backgrounds,” he continued.

Revealed: 39 post-16 providers to share £83m to accommodate demographic boom

The names of the 39 colleges and sixth forms who will share £83 million to build facilities to accommodate a demographic spike in 16 to 19-year-olds have been announced.

New classrooms, science labs and other types of teaching spaces will be invested in by providers receiving a slice of the post-16 capacity fund, which was promised in chancellor Rishi Sunak’s 2020 spending review and opened for bids in May.

The Sixth Form Colleges Association estimates there will be 260,000 additional 16- to 19-year-olds that will participate in education in the coming years.

The Department for Education said the fund will also support the government’s drive to reach net zero carbon emissions by 2050, with all successful colleges and sixth forms required to show how their projects will contribute to the target.

Skills minister Alex Burghart said: “Every young person should have the opportunity to gain the skills they need to reach their goals and go on to have successful careers.

“This investment will boost capacity so we can make sure there is a place for every 16 to 19-year-old, giving them access to the high-quality learning facilities they need to succeed.”

Successful bids include East Kent College Group’s Ashford campus, which will use the funding to build a new extension, create an “engineering hub” and additional space for business and IT provision, growing capacity for around 250 new students.

Wyke Sixth Form College in Hull will grow its capacity by 350 people as they build a new two-storey extension which will provide seven additional classrooms.

SFCA deputy chief executive James Kewin said: “The post-16 capacity fund provides invaluable investment to institutions as they prepare for the demographic increase in 16 to 19-year-olds, and the projects announced today will benefit young people right across England.”

As previously reported by FE Week, only sixth form colleges, 16 to 19 academies, 16 to 19 free schools such as university technical colleges, and general FE colleges were in scope for the fund. Independent training providers were controversially excluded.

The 39 providers who successfully bid for the capacity funding are:

Aston University Engineering Academy

Barton Peveril Sixth Form College

Bedford College

Bilborough Sixth Form College (Better Futures MAT)

Brockenhurst College

Christ the King Sixth Form

Cirencester College

City of Stoke on Trent Sixth Form College (Potteries Educational Trust)

City of Wolverhampton College

Dixons Sixth Form Academy (Dixons Academies Trust)

Durham Sixth Form Centre

East Kent College Group

Hereford Sixth Form College (Heart of Mercia Academy Trust)

Hills Road Sixth Form College

Huddersfield New College

Inspire Education Group

Itchen Sixth Form College

John Leggott College

Joseph Chamberlain 6th Form College

Kirklees College

Long Road Sixth Form College

Luminate Education Group

Luton Sixth Form College

Milton Keynes College

New College Pontefract (New Collaborative Learning Trust)

Notre Dame Catholic Sixth Form College

Peter Symonds College

Portsmouth College

Queen Elizabeth Sixth Form College

Ron Dearing University Technical College

Runshaw College

Sandwell College

St Francis Xavier Sixth Form College

St Vincent College (Lighthouse Learning Trust)

Suffolk New College

TEC Partnership

The Henley College

Woking College

Wyke Sixth Form College

I was a school refuser – I wish I’d known about FE

Let’s hope today’s school refusers are told about college, because I wasn’t, writes Katy George

Every week when Monday rolled around, I’d feel a despairing knot in the pit of my stomach, only undone by the arrival of the next weekend.

For Friday evening and most of Saturday, I’d have a sense of relief – only to have the Sunday scaries hit me like a ton of bricks, followed by another week of desperate unhappiness.

Sometimes, my anxiety would come out as a tantrum, and I’d fight my way out of going to school.

Other times, it would come out as nausea, headaches or stomach troubles. On fewer occasions, I’d battle in, facing questions about why I had been off and pressure to catch up on missed work.

I can look back with compassion on the young girl who I now recognise was suffering from anxiety. But at the time, rather than being regarded as a mental health issue, it was treated as a behavioural problem.

My teachers wrung their hands at my naughtiness and defiance. I felt my parents – themselves teachers – were baffled and embarrassed by me, although I knew they loved me.

Constantly in conflict with the people around me, it seemed everyone thought I believed I was winning when I “got out of” going to school.

But I knew I was always, always losing. I was exhausted from the arguments, from the tension, from the permanent feeling of dread.

Because I didn’t like going to school, I thought of myself as not academic. This was in contrast with my elder sister, who was intelligent, well-liked and reliable. The A-level and university route was written in stone for her almost from day one, and she thrived.

I could never see this path for myself and envied how clear-cut her future seemed.

My parents scrimped and saved to send us to private school. The results-driven environment was ideal for my sister, and they hoped the smaller class sizes would help me to enjoy school more.

However, my time there only served to confirm my suspicions (whether accurate or not) that I was not academic, that I would never be capable of going to university, and that I would therefore be a failure – because university was the only road to success.

It was many years before I read an article about school refusal as a form and expression of anxiety, and everything clicked into place. By that time, I had left school at 17, having failed my AS levels miserably, and got a job in administration.

My fear had always been that I just didn’t have a work ethic – that I was inherently lazy – and that was why I had been unable to go to school.

In employment, however, I found the opposite to be true. Just as my sister thrived at university, I thrived in the workplace. The realisation that I hadn’t been a bad child, just an anxious one, was revelatory for me.

I never would have dreamed of taking a full-time college course other than A-levels

When I was leaving school, my perception was that apprenticeships and FE were only for the trade industries. I never would have dreamed of taking a full-time college course other than A-levels, because I quite literally didn’t know that the courses had any real value.

This perception was never corrected or challenged by my school.  

Now that I work in FE, I’m amazed by the wealth of opportunities available to young people. I can imagine the hope I could have had for myself had I been pointed towards FE provision.

In college, the students are treated and respected as the young adults they are, and the courses are flexible and varied. Apprenticeships offer the chance to learn and earn in a range of professions.

Government figures showed 770,000 persistent school absentees in 2020. This number has risen due to the pandemic, so it’s more crucial than ever not to let these students slip through the cracks.

Fortunately, mental health is so much better understood today than it was in the early 2000s (although there is still a long way to go) and perceptions of FE are slowly becoming more positive.

I’m therefore hopeful that school refusers are now treated with greater understanding and empathy, and advised fully about their options, including FE.

Three critical questions the National Skills Fund consultation should have asked

The DfE mustn’t assume that ‘if we build it, they will come’, writes Emily Jones

The government recently consulted on the National Skills Fund – a £2.5 billion investment to help people to “train, retrain and upskill throughout their lives in response to changing skills needs and employment patterns”.

The consultation provided a great opportunity to answer some of the questions related to successful implementation of the policy.

Questions such as: how can employers be encouraged to use free level 3 courses to upskill their staff?

What challenges do providers face in delivering skills bootcamps?

And what flexibilities do adults require in order to access provision?

While the consultation asked many important questions, it missed some key challenges to engaging adults who may not otherwise take up learning or training.

All the evidence on adult participation in learning shows that those who have benefited least from learning in the past are also least likely to take up learning in the future.

Despite decades of policy changes in adult education, people in lower social grades, those with fewer years of initial education, and adults furthest from the labour market remain under-represented in learning.

Current policy doesn’t go far enough in addressing the entrenched inequalities in participation in learning. For the National Skills Fund to be effective, it must go further.

Current policy doesn’t go far enough in addressing the entrenched inequalities in participation in learning

As the Department for Education looks carefully at the responses to the questions they posed in the consultation, it will therefore be important that they take a step back and also consider the wider picture.

Here are three questions that need to be answered to ensure the policy engages the adults who too often miss out but who have the most to gain:

Firstly, how do we make adults aware of the opportunities available through the National Skills Fund?

There are significant barriers to participation in learning, including limited experience and understanding of adult learning – of its availability, what it entails and its value.

If the government wants a wider group of adults to consider learning, we need a bold communications strategy that raises the profile of the National Skills Fund and helps create a culture in which learning is an ordinary part of life.

Secondly, what support and guidance is needed to help adults choose the right opportunities?

The National Skills Fund will include a range of offers, including the lifetime skills guarantee and skills bootcamps.

Our evaluation of the DfE’s cost and outreach pilots highlighted the importance of good communication to ensure potential learners are aware of the opportunities that are on offer, how they can be accessed and the benefits of doing so.

Nearly one-fifth of learners who took part in the evaluation said that they had not received enough information about their course before starting, and these learners were less likely to have had their expectations met.

The National Skills Fund must go hand-in-hand with high-quality careers advice to help learners make the most of what’s on offer and maximise the impact of investment.

Thirdly, how do we support adults to overcome attitudinal barriers to learning?

The National Skills Fund consultation focuses on the practical barriers that adults may experience when accessing learning – mainly cost and time – and how learning provision can flex to meet individual needs.

But we also need to address the wider barriers many adults face, often from previous negative experiences, which influence their perceptions and expectations of learning as an adult.

This could involve a lack of confidence, feeling too old to learn, or not seeing the personal relevance or benefit of learning.

Our annual survey shows that adults who are least likely to learn are most likely to identify these types of barriers.

In fact, research on decision-making indicates that the practical barriers only become relevant once someone is already thinking about taking up learning.

The government assumes that ‘if you build it, they will come’

If the National Skills Fund is going to successfully engage adults who have the most to benefit from the policy, we need to address these dispositional barriers and show that learning can benefit everyone.   

Of course, the government is right to consult on the practical implementation of policy, but focusing on only this assumes that “if you build it, they will come”.

In other words, if we get the funding and provision right, adults will automatically show up. The research evidence paints a much more complex picture.

While it’s critical that we have a strong and diverse set of opportunities for adults to learn, we also need to step back and ask harder questions about how we provide an offer that will engage and support adults to succeed.