Mission statements are the holy writ no one reads

Motherhood and apple pie. The NHS and nurses. Babies and kittens. Lifelong love and long lie-ins. I’ve yet to meet anyone who would raise a word against any of these things or organise a concerted campaign objecting to their ongoing existence. Teaching the whole person, encouraging life-long learning, inspiring success, building resilience and preparing for later life. Such educational statements of aim are so anodyne as to be bland, yet so universal that any school or college who decided against them, proclaiming that from now on they would not encourage learning, care or create a safe environment, would immediately have Ofsted smashing in SAS-style through classroom windows.  

To question their utility is nothing short of heresy. Yet most teachers are probably puzzled by the exalted status mission statements are given, divorced from classroom realities. Those who mutter darkly about such statements being symptoms of a deep managerialism infecting education ensure there are no written records traceable back to them. Instead they deny everything, smile and nod, stand upright hand-on-heart as all pledge eternal allegiance to our guiding star mission statement.  

Every organisation seems to have needed one since they came to the fore in the 1980s business world. Gone are the days when a shop’s mission was simply to sell things and a school’s or college’s was to teach. Now we must be educating the whole person, helping create informed future citizens in a safe and supportive community environment. Otherwise how would they ever know what they’re supposed to be doing with their day?

Research into the real usefulness of mission statements in education is remarkably scant, despite their shibboleth status. In a 2021 review by David Coker of mission statements in what we would call the state secondary sector in America, he concluded that mission statements were “largely unknown” by employees, yet organizations were “unwavering in their beliefs on unrequited value”. There was no evidence they had any meaningful impact on results.

Coker conceded that successful schools often had unity of purpose amongst both staff and students. But a mission statement only reflected this; it did not bring it into being.  

Consultants and theorists analysing successful colleges notice that where unity of purpose seems to be present there are attempts to replicate this in other situations, articulated in collaboratively created mission statements. Such statements then quickly become emblematic, apparent levers to be pulled in achieving success. But this is a confusion of causality and correlation, a fundamental academic fallacy.

What is it we think we are doing in writing a mission statement? Those who know often say the debate is key, helping foster a unity of purpose. But then the end-result is largely irrelevant; it is the creation of a shared vision that counts. So after the composition process, one could really dispense with the statement.

But in reality statements tend to be articulated at the top then passed down from above, products of discussions in the boardroom, ready-written when presented to classroom staff (who may be symbolically consulted). They are thus decreed from on high as if by prophetic pronouncement.  

Providing a vision statement to people who haven’t shared the process of producing it will not bring discernible profit. People will not generally be suddenly struck blind at the brightness of the vision simply because it has been written.

So important is The Statement that sometimes every department is required to write a related mission sub-statement of its own. Time is set aside for it, with meetings or training days allocated and even consultants employed. Maybe the department might display their new statement proudly on their classroom walls, printed out on paper in brightly coloured font (stone tablets are harder to find these days). Their fate is then subject to the phenomenon of familiarity blindness. After a while they stop being noticed. 

Still the process continues with all the logic of trickle-down economics. From departmental mission statements there even come hydra-like individual mission statements of a sort in the ubiquitous performance management processes which still hold sway in most of our schools and colleges, who are invariably years behind the latest thinking on such matters in business.

But once all these mission statements have been written to satisfy managerial demands and fired back up to line-managers, who tick the spreadsheet off as done, then what? If a mission statement were rewritten every year, tilted slightly each time like a hand tapping on a tiller to adjust direction, there might be a usefulness to them.

In the real world people act on their own sweet reasons, pure and tainted. Some teachers are driven by very clear personal or social missions. Some simply love their subjects. Some care deeply about their students. Some less so. That is as it ever was and as it ever will be, mission statement or not. Where those personal purposes overlap is our common vision. Articulating that is a slippery fish and probably largely a waste of time.  

We fail to score ESOL students’ real progress in real life

Measures of success in English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL) often sit at a distance from how language is actually used and experienced.

For one of my learners, a key moment of progress was being able to buy a cup of coffee in English before class and arrive ready to learn alongside her peers. This kind of development is familiar to ESOL practitioners, yet it remains difficult to locate within official data. 

What we count, and what we miss

Attendance figures, qualification outcomes and narrowly defined language benchmarks continue to dominate how ESOL provision is evaluated. These measures may satisfy accountability systems, but they struggle to capture how learners actually develop, participate and use language beyond the classroom.

This is not a minor technical issue as it fundamentally shapes what is funded and valued, and whose progress is ultimately recognised as worth the investment.

Anyone who has taught ESOL understands that language learning is complex, slow and deeply social. Learners often make meaningful progress long before it appears in assessment results. This progress shows up in increased confidence, a willingness to speak, participation in group discussion or the ability to manage everyday interactions previously inaccessible.

Such developments are visible to practitioners and significant to learners, yet they remain largely invisible within formal success metrics.

Progress as capability, not performance

Recent commentary in FE has rightly highlighted the emotional and cognitive demands of language learning, alongside the wider social consequences of underfunding ESOL. However, what is missing from much of this discussion is sustained attention on how current assessment frameworks actively misrecognise success, particularly in community and adult ESOL settings.

In my doctoral research with community-based ESOL learners, participants consistently framed progress in terms of agency rather than accuracy. In interviews, learners consistently framed progress in terms of what they were newly able to do with language in everyday situations.

They spoke about being able to raise concerns with a manager about discrepancies in wages, check food labels to ensure ingredients met their dietary requirements and respond to strangers in the street when asked for directions rather than declining out of embarrassment or fear of getting it wrong.

These moments may appear ordinary, but they mark significant shifts in participation, agency and social confidence. These are not “soft” outcomes. They reflect an expansion of what learners can do with language in contexts that matter to them.

Seen in this way, language learning is not simply about accumulating linguistic knowledge. It is about developing the capacity to act, participate and make choices. Yet these forms of progress sit awkwardly – if at all – within existing assessment structures.

The contradiction at the heart of ESOL

This creates a persistent contradiction. ESOL is frequently framed as a tool for integration, employability and participation. Yet the ways we measure success prioritise short-term performance over long-term communicative capacity. Learners are expected to demonstrate progress through metrics shaped by reporting and audit requirements, prioritising administrative clarity over what learners are actually able to do with language in their lives.

Attempts to modernise ESOL by embedding wider agendas, whether civic, economic or environmental, risk reproducing the same problem if they do not begin with learners’ language needs. Expanding curricula without rethinking how success is measured simply changes the surface content while leaving the underlying recognition gap intact.

Rethinking success without losing rigour

The issue, then, is not whether ESOL should be humane or relevant. Most practitioners already teach in responsive, contextual and learner-centred ways. The problem is that these forms of practice are not adequately rewarded, captured or legitimised within dominant accountability systems.

As a result, ESOL teachers are often required to translate rich, relational learning into blunt data points, while learners are judged against criteria that do not reflect how language functions in real life. This disadvantages learners and devalues professional expertise by reducing complex pedagogical work to compliance.

If FE is serious about supporting integration, participation and social cohesion, it must rethink what counts as success in ESOL. That does not mean abandoning rigour or accountability. It means developing assessment approaches that recognise communicative growth, learner agency and social participation alongside formal language outcomes.

Until then, ESOL will continue to be judged by measures that underestimate both learners and the work done to support them – and FE will continue to misread one of its most socially vital areas of provision.

We can do so much more to help students break invisible ceilings

Qualifications are rarely the whole story in how young people progress into industry or higher levels of learning. Increasingly, educators and employers point to gaps in confidence, communication, relationships, allyship and understanding of professional environments.

Without these skills that sit beneath employability, progression can feel out of reach, particularly for students already facing systemic barriers.

True equity is not simply about access to courses or qualifications. It is about ensuring that young people understand how to navigate spaces that were not designed with everyone in mind.

Do they understand how to build healthy professional relationships? Do they know what allyship looks like in practice? Are they confident communicating across difference, culture, and power? And crucially, do they see people like themselves reflected in positions of influence and leadership?

These questions sit at the heart of a growing shift in FE partnerships.

Preparing students to not only work but belong

Traditional industry partnerships often focus on exposure: a talk, a visit, a short placement. While valuable, these tick-box models can unintentionally assume that students already possess the confidence, cultural capital and emotional resilience needed to benefit fully from such opportunities.

A more holistic approach is emerging that recognises skills development as inseparable from wellbeing, identity and lived experience. Spaces designed with this understanding aim not just to prepare students for work, but to belong within it.

The Holistic Wellness Training Centre in Ipswich was created with this ethos in mind. Rather than functioning as a conventional placement site, it operates as a collaborative learning environment where education, sports, wellbeing, creativity and culture intersect. The focus is not only on what young people do, but how they feel, relate to others and understand their own potential.

Closing invisible gaps

Across FE, learners frequently arrive without the self-belief or opportunities to gain access to industry-led experiences in a meaningful way.  For those from under-represented backgrounds, this gap can be compounded by limited access to networks, role models or environments where they feel safe to make mistakes and grow.

This is where holistic partnership models can make a tangible difference. By embedding wellbeing, reflective practice and cultural awareness into skills development, students are supported to build the foundations that enable learning to stick.

Through partnerships with local colleges that are part of Eastern Education Group, students have engaged in immersive experiences that combine creativity, communication and cultural learning.

In one example, around 20 young people on a progression construction course created a  Windrush-inspired podcast project – exploring heritage, storytelling and representation while developing presentation, teamwork and confidence. Importantly, this work did not happen in isolation.

On the same day students also worked alongside national media professionals, including the BBC, gaining insight into industry expectations and communication standards. The combination of creative expression, professional exposure and supportive facilitation allowed students to stretch themselves without feeling overwhelmed.

Role models make aspiration tangible

A defining feature of these experiences is the emphasis on relationships and representation. Students engage with diverse role models across sectors – individuals whose journeys challenge narrow ideas of success and leadership. These interactions matter.

When students see people who look like them or share similar lived experiences operating at high levels, aspiration becomes tangible. Young people not in employment, education or training (NEET) do not often get these opportunities for growth. Neither do those taking English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL) courses, who we are working closely with.

Alongside this, conversations around allyship, anti-racism, healthy relationships, and inclusive leadership are embedded naturally into learning. Rather than being abstract concepts, they are explored through discussion, collaboration and real-world context – skills increasingly essential for both education and employment.

Young people were able to interview the boxer Fabio Wardley and other celebrities as media presenters. When interviewing a world boxing champion is their first professional experience, there is no ceiling on what they can achieve.

Health and wellbeing are also part of the learning environment. Physical wellbeing activities have included working with national athletes and sports experts to create reflective spaces, and open dialogue around mental health to help students understand the link between confidence, communication and resilience.

Opportunity alone is not enough

The impact is already visible. Two students have secured an apprenticeship directly.

Holistic partnerships challenge us to rethink what education spaces can be. They ask whether we are truly creating equity, or simply offering opportunity without the support needed to access it.

When education, wellbeing, and culture come together, young people are not just prepared for their next step – they are equipped to thrive within it.

Finance T Level faces write-off after no AOs bid to run it

The Department for Education is considering the future of the T Level in finance, which launched in 2022, after no awarding organisations bid to run it in the latest procurement round. 

Pearson won exclusive licenses to develop and award five of the six wave 3 T Level qualifications under new ‘generation 2’ contracts, cementing its position as the dominant T Level awarding organisation.

The awarding giant won all three engineering T Levels, and the management and administration T Level from the current contract-holder, City & Guilds. It also retained the accounting T Level.

The course under the current awarding contract remains available. The government said it will now consider whether to proceed with the finance T Level, which is due to start teaching under the gen 2 wave 3 contracts from September 2027.

Pearson has delivered the finance T Level since it was introduced in 2022. It declined to disclose why it did not bid for the gen 2 contract.

“No bids were submitted for the finance T Level following the tender notice”, the contract notice said.

Contracts to run wave 3 T Levels were first awarded in 2020 and totalled £16.5 million.

The now-closed Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education (IfATE) put out a notice in 2024 estimating the six contracts to take over that formed wave 3 of the T Level roll-out were worth over £40 million,150 per cent more than gen 1.

Pearson rides the wave

Up for grabs in wave 3 were the T Levels in maintenance, installation and repair for engineering and manufacturing; engineering, manufacturing and process control; design and development for engineering and manufacturing; management and administration; accounting and finance.

Pearson retained accounting and won the three engineering subjects and management and administration from City & Guilds. The licences, worth £28.6 million, run until 2034.

It means that by September 2027, Pearson will award 16 out of the 20 available T Levels.

Freya Thomas Monk, managing director of Pearson qualifications, said:  “Developing talent in key business, engineering and manufacturing sectors is vital for the UK’s future workforce and to ensure employers have access to highly skilled individuals. 

“We are delighted to bring our expertise in delivering rigorous, high-quality qualifications to these important T Levels. 

“As the largest T Level provider, we are committed to offering qualifications that enable students to progress, thrive and contribute meaningfully to these critical sectors.”

Pearson, which also delivers a large swathe of BTECs, reported a 13 per cent quarterly revenue increase in the vocational skills part of its business in the fourth quarter of 2025.

Last year, it reported £226 million in revenue and an adjusted operating profit of £8 million from vocational qualifications.

Jo Grady hits back at claims of UCU election breaches

University and College Union leader Jo Grady has accused her election opponents of taking private messages out of context and “seeking to frame” her social media usage as a breach of campaign rules.

Ewan McGaughey and Vicky Blake, who lost the vote to become general secretary two years ago, presented their complaints to the certification officer – a trade union watchdog – today alleging seven election violations.

The two opponents alleged that the UCU general secretary Jo Grady swayed the election in her favour by using union resources, such as social media accounts, contractors, email lists and staff, during the 2024 campaign.

WhatsApp message evidence also revealed Grady vented to senior colleagues that “every single” decision had to be seen with the lens of re-electing herself as general secretary and ridding the union of socialist worker party members (SWP).

Grady refuted all the allegations, adding that the messages were taken out of context, and her social media usage was part of her day job as the incumbent general secretary.

Jo Grady won the 2024 election for a second term with just a 15 per cent turnout and by 182 votes in the third round over McGaughey, a law professor at King’s College London.

Blake, a contextual outreach lead officer at the University of Leeds, came third, and Liverpool John Moores University senior education lecturer Saira Weiner came last.

The ballot was conducted by single transferable vote, where members select candidates in order of preference.

McGaughey and Blake alleged that these acts violated the unions’ 2023-24 elections guidance and applied to the Certification Officer to order a re-election.

Stephen Hardy, a relatively new Certification Officer (CO), has the power to make enforcement orders, which can include financial penalties and ballot reruns.

Social media views equalling votes

The case centred around a number of Grady’s online actions, which the applicants said breached rules that prohibited use of UCU resources for the purposes of campaigning.

They claimed Grady’s first campaign video was filmed in the UCU’s London head offices in November 2023 and garnered over 29,000 views on social media site, X.

Sarah Fraser Butlin KC, who represented UCU and Grady at the hearing, hit back that the applicants were comparing “apples with pears”.

“The comparison should be between a video taken in the office and a video not taken in the office,” she put to McGaughey.

He responded: “No, I don’t accept that, and I just come back to the point that it’s still using union resources, and there was a clear prohibition against that.”

UCU head of democratic services Catherine Wilkinson added in a witness statement she could not see how any advantage was “gained” to Grady from using this location.

Another alleged breach was Grady’s use of Mélinée Dufour, a union contractor and professional videographer, to make another campaign video the following month, which was viewed over 13,000 times.

In her cross-examination, Grady said the video was made out of hours during a lunchtime but admitted she wished she had declined Dufour’s offer.

“I don’t think it suggests that I either abused my position on that day, or that this suggests a pattern of doing so,” she said.

She was also alleged to have used union software, Streamyard, to broadcast her election videos, which was viewed over 2,041 times on the first day, and over 7,000 times afterwards.

The opponents also said that UCU was regularly reposting posts from Grady’s personal X account, directing traffic to her election campaign.

Former head of equality and policy Jenny Sherrard gave evidence that when Grady first came to power in 2019, there was an “embedded practice” of so-called cross-tweeting between different accounts to “amplify” the work of the union, which included retweeting UCU branch accounts as well as Grady’s.

McGaughey accused Grady of utilising her understanding of social media to direct people to her campaign.

“You understood that when UCU reposted your tweets, that would channel traffic to your personal account, and people would see your campaign materials. You understood that that was the effect of the social media policy, didn’t you?”

She said: “No, I don’t and I think that you are seeking to frame it that way.”

McGaughey stressed to the Certification Officer this all made it “capable” of swaying 182 votes or more.

“When you have so many views, then that’s got to be a significant factor that might sway people to vote,” he said.

In her cross-examination, Grady added that one-to-one conversations were likely to sway a vote to members not “random” social media posts.

“Views don’t equal votes,” she said.

“I think that there has been a real overstatement during this entire hearing so far of the […] the determining factor of social media in elections.”

Context matters

The applicants presented screenshots from a WhatsApp group chat with senior managers at the union, which showed Grady saying the following: “I know we are just chatting here, but from now on, every single decision we make/thing we do has to be seen through the lens: 1. Win dispute, 2. Re-elect GS, 3. Rid union of SWP.”

Grady accused the applicants of “partially quoting” from the group chat and said the exchange related to a “high-pressured” moment during its 2023 UCU Rising campaign, which sought cuts and casualisation in higher education.

“It’s about winning the dispute, and it’s about a broader conversation of the disruptive nature of the SWP in the union and I think you’ve really misrepresented the discussion,” she said.

‘Hijacked’ hustings

McGaughey and Blake also argued that Grady’s extra 13 emails to UCU members totalling over one million impressions and her solo visits to branches in Aberdeen and Northumbria were considered hustings for her campaign and therefore also breached the rules.

Grady said she visited the branches to discuss redundancies in her capacity as the incumbent general secretary and it would have been “really weird” for the event to be “hijacked” by election candidates.

“It would have been useful to have views from all of the candidates on how they would approach the really serious problems […] but all candidates weren’t given a level playing field, were they?” McGaughey said.

“The fact that you can’t understand that is just demonstrative of the fact that you’ve never done my job,” she retorted.

A further hearing to cross-examine remaining witnesses will be scheduled for a later date.

Hardy will make a decision within four weeks of the final hearing before publication.

DWP permanent secretary to step down

The Department for Work and Pensions’ most senior official has announced he is stepping down this summer.

In an email to staff, DWP permanent secretary Peter Schofield said this year is a “good time” to leave the department after eight years in the role.

His resignation, which the department said is to “spend more time with his family”, comes a week after a committee of MPs criticised his department for “repeated inadequacy in response to mistakes”.

It comes months after a cabinet reshuffle that saw Pat McFadden installed as work and pensions secretary and handed control over apprenticeships and adult skills policy.

Schofield told staff: “There is never a good moment to step away from a job like this, but having passed my eight-year anniversary, now feels like a good time to pause and reflect on what I want to do next while spending more time with my family.

“There have been many highlights over the years, not least the massive achievement of completing the rollout of Universal Credit for our working age customers.

“That paved the way for our transformation journey – and our continued focus on doing things better for our customers and colleagues – providing support in better and more effective ways.”

Schofield is a civil service fast-streamer, entering the Treasury in the 1990s and moving to the DWP in 2011. He was appointed to lead the department, one of the government’s largest, in 2018.

A DWP spokesperson insisted that the permanent secretary is not stepping down for any reason other than spending time with his family.

They added: “Peter Schofield has served our country for more than three decades, and as DWP’s permanent secretary for eight years. He’s now stepping down to spend more time with his family.

“In that time, he has overseen the transformation of our services, the successful rollout of Universal Credit, and brought colleagues across the country together to overcome the challenges of the pandemic, when our customers needed us most. 

“The secretary of state thanks him for this service, and we will continue delivering for the people we serve.”

The cabinet secretary will now begin recruiting the permanent secretary’s replacement ahead of his July leaving date.

In recent weeks, the department has faced criticism of its handling of carers’ allowance benefits failures which saw more than 85,000 people in debt to the department due to overpayments.

Other issues of concern included safeguarding, its mishandling handling of the women’s state pension age changes, its work on reducing fraud and error, and high rates of underpayments of personal independence payments.

A review of the issue found that carers’ allowance overpayments were caused by systemic issues at the department, with multiple opportunities to resolve the problems.

However, the work and pensions committee has said it is still concerned about a “culture of complacency” at the department after a leaked senior official’s internal blog post blamed individual carers for overpayments.

Apprenticeships aren’t the alternative, they’re the engine of growth

Recognising apprenticeships as a cornerstone of any economic growth and youth employment strategy has never been more critical, and that’s not just because it’s National Apprenticeship Week.

Apprenticeships tackle two of Britain’s biggest challenges at once: getting young people into secure, fulfilling work and building the skilled workforce our economy needs to grow.

 They benefit everyone; young people earn while they learn, gaining real-world experience and recognised qualifications from day one.  For employers, apprenticeships allow them to develop talent already embedded in their workforce, trained to their specific needs and familiar with their working culture. Rather than competing for scarce skilled workers in a tight labour market, businesses can grow their own pipeline of talent, reducing recruitment costs and improving staff retention.

Our ambition is for two-thirds of young people to move into higher-level learning or apprenticeships, with both routes enjoying equal status and visibility. Employers remain at the heart of setting standards for their industries, ensuring that training delivers the skills businesses need. We’re cutting unnecessary bureaucracy, not corners on quality or safety.

Crucially, apprenticeships can be life-changing for young people at the very start of their working lives. Early unemployment can leave lasting scars – on confidence, wellbeing and future prospects. A clear route into sustained work gives people the chance to build a future. And when more young people are supported into good jobs, the wider economy is stronger too.

We are also making it easier for potential apprentices to find the right opportunity, ensuring that applying for an apprenticeship becomes as straightforward as applying to university. An improved online portal will bring together clear information on pay, progression and career outcomes in one place, giving young people everything they need to understand their options at their fingertips.

Alongside this, we are piloting a university clearing-style system that redirects strong candidates who narrowly miss out towards similar apprenticeships nearby, helping ‘near miss’ applicants find alternative routes into high-quality training rather than losing out entirely. It will be delivered in partnership with mayoral strategic authorities, who are best placed to understand their local skills needs.

Through the growth and skills levy, we’re putting £725 million into the apprenticeship system which will support our aim of getting 50,000 additional apprenticeships for young people. We have also introduced a new fast-track process that will get apprenticeships updated and short courses developed in as little as three months. This will benefit sectors critical to delivering major infrastructure and investment projects, prioritising those that will boost opportunities for young people.

These measures will ensure that as a country we are keeping pace with emerging technologies and new regulatory requirements, from new safety standards on construction sites to the skills needed for offshore wind turbines. 

However, we must be honest about the scale of the challenge we face. Apprenticeship starts have fallen significantly in recent years, with young people particularly affected by this decline. Too often, the system has felt complex and difficult to navigate, leaving potential apprentices unsure where to start or how to find the right opportunity. For some businesses, this has created frustration.

These are challenges I am determined to address head-on. Through my role as skills adviser, I am working to ensure the reforms we are introducing tackle these barriers directly. Our new fast-track approval process will cut waiting times while the online portal and clearing-style pilot will make the system far easier for young people to navigate.

We won’t stop there though; the apprenticeship system needs to evolve with the workforce and demands of businesses. We have committed to giving young people the opportunity to learn or earn and we will not allow barriers or bottlenecks to stop us. Changes to the system will continue as long as they are needed to ensure we are delivering what is best for those involved.

The Prime Minister has been clear: apprenticeships should stand shoulder to shoulder with university as a route to a fulfilling career.

I’m committed to making that a reality, building an apprenticeship system that allows young people and businesses to succeed together. When that happens, the benefits extend far beyond the individual, creating stronger businesses, stronger communities and a stronger British economy.

BCoT principal Anthony Bravo suddenly retires

Basingstoke College of Technology (BCoT) principal Anthony Bravo retired on Monday (Febuary 9), leaving the college under interim leadership in the middle of the academic year.

The college said Bravo, 63, has stepped down “to focus on his charitable activities” with the role of acting principal filled by deputy principal for curriculum, performance and innovation Lorraine Heath.

BCoT praised its former principal of 16 years for leading on a widespread use of technology in teaching and overseeing the opening of green and creative skills facilities.

However, the college did not include any comment from Bravo. FE Week has attempted to contact him directly.

Mike Howe, the college’s chair of governors, said Bravo’s leadership helped to develop a “happy, purposeful culture”, guided BCoT’s “excellent” estate investment and the highest FE college success rates in Hampshire.

He added: “Anthony has worked consistently well with governors, developed strong teams and led on national initiatives such as AI.

“He leaves with our sincere thanks, and we wish him a long, happy and healthy retirement.

“Lorraine Heath, who has served as deputy principal for over six years, has extensive experience and a deep understanding of the college, which will ensure continuity and stability during this period of transition.”

According to Bravo’s now deleted profile on BCoT’s website, he was appointed principal in 2009 after around 15 years in further education, including the now-closed Crossways Sixth Form in Lewisham.

He was awarded an OBE for services to further education in 2024 and holds board member roles at education technology charity Jisc and Ufi VocTech Trust.

He is also a director at the Association of Colleges and West Berkshire Training Consortium.

BCoT was judged ‘good’ by Ofsted in 2023. The college employs around 430 people and teaches almost 5,000 students, according to its latest financial statements for 2024-25 which show ‘outstanding’ financial health.

School and college builders will have to hire apprentices, DfE claims

Construction firms working on school and college buildings will be forced to offer apprenticeships and T Level placement opportunities to students to work on site, the government has said.

A press release from the Department for Education stated today that as part of its upcoming education estates strategy, construction firms working on building projects will “have to show that they are providing opportunities for apprentices and T Level students”.

The DfE said that its national construction framework contracts, approved in December 2025, require two skills opportunity places for every £3 million spent.

The government estimates that the policy will create 13,000 new apprenticeship and T Level placement opportunities by 2028. It said 90 per cent of these opportunities will be offered within a “30-mile radius of a school being built, providing a boost to local communities across the country”.

Bids are also now open for funding for new college building projects via post-16 capacity funding, FE Week understands.

Skills minister Jacqui Smith said: “We can’t rebuild schools that are fit for the future unless we have the skilled workers we need to build them.

“Our education estates strategy will set out our vision for school and college buildings to deliver growth and opportunity to their local communities, backed by our plan for a decade of national renewal.

“This government is leading by example, creating incredible opportunities for our young people by championing apprenticeships and T Levels in our school and college building projects.”

Capital funding available for post-16 capacity is understood to total £375 million between this year and 2029-30.

The government has also announced plans to allocate £283 million to metro mayors and local leaders to “boost capacity” in colleges in their areas.

The £20 billion schools rebuilding programme, funded until 2034-35, aims to replace over 750 schools and sixth-form colleges across England.

A full education estates strategy is due to be published later this week.