Employers and training providers have been urged “not to step back” from foundation apprenticeships after rollout figures revealed the flagship policy suffered a “sluggish” start.
Just 36 young people began one of the government’s new foundation apprenticeships in the first three months after their launch last summer.
The figures, published today and covering August to October, sparked concern about employer awareness. It is also feared the initial set of seven foundation apprenticeships are too focused on industrial strategy sectors rather than labour market need.
Leaders of training providers involved in the early delivery of the programme insist the figures should be a reason for the foundation apprenticeship offer to be “strengthened”.
Foundation apprenticeships are level 2 programmes for people aged 16 to 21, or up to 24 if the person has an education, health and care plan, is a care leaver or has been in prison. The programmes are paid jobs lasting eight months and are designed to be a stepping stone to a full apprenticeships and work in industry.
The seven foundation apprenticeships launched in August included three for the construction sector, two for digital, one for engineering and manufacturing and one for health and social care.
Incentive payments of up to £2,000 per foundation apprentice are on offer to employers, in addition to the existing £1,000 payment businesses receive for 16 to 18-year-old apprentices.
The most popular was the onsite trades foundation apprenticeship with 17 starts, FE Week analysis of the data found.
Next was building services engineering with eight recruits, followed by engineering and manufacturing with five, health and social care with four, and then hardware, network and infrastructure with two.
Two foundation apprenticeships – in software and data and finishing trades – are yet to get off the ground as nobody started on them in the period.
The government’s dataset described foundation apprenticeships as a “new programme which will be building over time”.
Exeter College was the biggest provider, having recorded 16 starts on the onsite trades programme during the first quarter of 2025-26.
Mike Blakeley, Exeter College’s group executive director of partnerships and apprenticeships, said foundation apprenticeships had “opened up a valuable new route into industry” and were “positively received by both employers and learners”.
He told FE Week his college is “sharing our experience of foundation apprenticeships with other colleges and key employers, and we expect momentum to continue to build over time”.
Association of Employment and Learning Providers chief executive Ben Rowland warned in November that the initial delivery of foundation apprenticeships had been “a damp squib” because the government “began by taking them to industrial strategy sectors who didn’t ask for them, need them or want them”.
FE Week understands the government hopes to have them up and running by April.
Simon Ashworth, AELP’s deputy CEO and director of policy, said: “There is an underlying danger that an over-fixation with industrial strategy sectors becomes a distraction. This shows why a broader, more inclusive approach should be taken to help create jobs, address skills gaps and tackle the NEET crisis.”
He told FE Week that if the government is serious about foundation apprenticeships helping tackle NEET numbers, it should “speed up development in sectors like retail and hospitality” as these areas have “strong entry-level opportunities and employer demand”.
“That would give the programme the boost it needs after a sluggish start,” Ashworth added, and urged ministers to announce next steps for more foundation apprenticeships during next month’s National Apprenticeship Week.
Apprenticeship giant Lifetime Training started four foundation apprentices on the health and social care programme between August and October and has since enrolled more.
They are all employed by Manchester-based social enterprise PossAbilities.
Lifetime Training CEO Charlotte Bosworth said this week’s starts figures “are not a reason to step back from foundation apprenticeships; they are a reason for government to strengthen them”.
She called for officials to give the courses “greater clarity of purpose” because employers lack a “concrete understanding of how foundation apprenticeships differ from level 2, what they are designed to achieve, and how progression works”.
“Without a clear and consistent message, the model will continue to struggle to gain traction,” Bosworth warned.
She told FE Week that tighter alignment to real labour market need was also “vital”, with clearer frameworks to prevent foundation apprenticeships becoming “simply a level 2 substitute”.
“The first 36 starters show the model is still bedding in, but with clearer policy, employer-led design and better communication across the system, foundation apprenticeships can become a powerful tool for widening opportunity and tackling skills shortages,” Bosworth said.
A government spokesperson said: “We’re investing £1.5 billion to get hundreds of thousands of young people earning or learning – including through an expansion of apprenticeships and training.
“As part of our plans, £725 million is going towards reforming the apprenticeship system, helping 50,000 more young people into work and driving economic growth.
“It’s fantastic to see the first cohort of learners successfully entering employment in critical sectors. We’re determined to go further to support young people to succeed.”
Sport-mad MP Kim Leadbeater, who entered politics after the murder of her sister Jo Cox, tells Jessica Hill she hopes to draw from her career in further education to champion the sector
Kim Leadbeater offers me a can of Coke from a small fridge hidden away in her Westminster office, and cracks open one for herself.
Leadbeater, who is best known for spearheading the terminally ill adults (end of life) bill, is a rare species these days as an influential politician who has also experienced life on the coalface of FE. She is refreshingly down to earth for an MP, perhaps because she never intended to become one in the first place.
After taking a degree in exercise and fitness at Dewsbury College (now part of Kirklees College), Leadbeater spent 10 years teaching at Bradford College and describes herself as a “passionate advocate for FE”.
Her route into Parliament followed the murder of her sister Jo Cox, propelling the unassuming college lecturer into the national spotlight.
Kim Leadbeater
Horrific attack
It was seven days before the EU referendum, and Leadbeater had taken the day off from her Bradford College job to look after her partner who had just had an operation.
As keen football fans, the pair were about to watch a match on TV. Leadbeater had just dashed out for a run to collect her car from a service when she received the call about her sister.
Cox, who was married with two children, was leaving her constituents’ surgery when she was attacked by a gunman who shouted ‘Britain first’ as he stabbed and shot her.
Leadbeater had been lecturing on an exercise course three days a week while teaching “cheesy eighties aerobics classes” on other days, but planned to quit her college job to start a Master’s degree.
Cox’s death “changed everything forever” for her, and she instead took on the mantle of championing the causes of community cohesion and civility in politics that had been so dear to her sister.
Kim Leadbeater at Bradford College
Joining politics
Cox had entered Parliament for Batley and Spen the previous year. Her first Commons speech, in which she said“we are far more united and have far more in common than that which divides us”, struck a chord with those who felt the country had become uncomfortably polarised in the run up to the EU referendum.
Leadbeater worked with others who knew Cox to set up the Jo Cox Foundation, to continue her sister’s work of bringing communities together.
She spent the next five years working on initiatives like the Great Get Together campaign, in which community events take place across the UK each year on Cox’s birthday weekend in June.
Then in 2021, Tracy Brabin, who had replaced Cox as MP for Batley and Spen, stood down to run for mayor of West Yorkshire. When it was suggested Leadbeater should stand in her place, “absolutely not” was her initial response.
But she also felt strongly that as a lifelong resident of the area, the seat should not go to someone who “didn’t care about the community in the way that I did”.
“My view was that it would always be Jo’s seat, and it would be very upsetting for us as a family if somebody without the emotional connection and loyalty to the area was doing that job.”
The Labour Party “wasn’t in a great place at the time”, having lost a byelection in Hartlepool. Leadbeater ran against George Galloway and his Workers Party of Britain in a “very toxic” campaign. At one point she was chased to her car and required police protection.
“It was a really poor example of how politics should be done, which is precisely what I didn’t want,” she says.
She won by 323 votes and sees her victory as a “triumph of good over evil”.
Kim Leadbeater
Sidelining education
Since Labour came to power in 2024, being in the party of government has created “a whole set of new challenges” for Leadbeater.
She believes Labour has “really prioritised healthcare”, and “we need to start looking much more at education and what we can do”.
She credits prime minister Keir Starmer with being “pretty open and honest” that Labour needs at least two terms in power to “turn things around, after such a long time of being allowed to go into decline”.
But she also acknowledges that “nowadays, people don’t have any patience” to wait for change.
The prospective impact on communities of having a Reform government “terrifies” her.
She is vice chair of an all-party parliamentary group on compassion in politics, which is “all about setting civil and respectful political discourse”. She fears that “if we can’t show political leadership on that, then the country’s got no chance”.
The group is pushing for an amendment to the Hillsborough Law currently making its way through Parliament, which would make it a criminal offence for politicians to mislead the public.
In the run up to the next general election, Leadbeater believes it is “really important” for colleges to become “arenas where young people can debate subjects and not feel like they’re being blocked”, and can “listen to people who they might disagree with”.
As a lecturer, she did not shy away from encouraging her learners to debate controversial topics in their professional development lessons – a “classic” debating topic being “all fat people are lazy – discuss”.
Votes at 16
Leadbeater is a “very big supporter” of the government’s decision to lower the voting age to 16, but “as long as it’s accompanied by political education”.
Public First research on young people who will be the first under-18s eligible to vote at the next general election indicates that much more needs to be done. None of those interviewed knew the voting age was being lowered, and right-wing figures such as Nigel Farage and the late Charlie Kirk were found to be more widely recognised than the prime minister.
Leadbeater is concerned about Reform UK’s dominance on TikTok, and speculation that the party is receiving funding indirectly through far-right groups in America.
Some of the rhetoric used by senior leaders of Reform against teachers has been “really dreadful to hear”.
She believes colleges must be enabled to do more to “educate young people on misinformation, disinformation and media literacy… so when they do make that decision on who to vote for, they’re making it based on facts, not on a 30-second clip on Tiktok”.
Kim Leadbeater MP and Dignity in Dying campaigners in Parliament Square
Assisted dying
Much of Leadbeater’s time has been spent working on the private members’ bill she put forward last year proposing that adults with less than six months to live can be helped to end their lives.
It is now facing heavy scrutiny in the House of Lords, with peers tabling more than 1,000 amendments to the legal text, and could run out of time for a vote to pass before the end of the Parliamentary session.
Despite the challenges involved in getting the bill through, she believes this “massive piece of work” has been “the best example” of “genuine cross-collaboration”.
As a vote of conscience there were no party-political lines drawn, and Leadbeater worked with colleagues from other parties including the Conservatives and Reform. Reform’s deputy leader, Richard Tice, was a keen supporter, she says, having “lost a loved one under very horrible circumstances”.
She believes this kind of cross-party engagement happens a lot more in Westminster than people realise, particularly on select committees.
What most people see of politics is “a combative 45 minutes of PMQs on Wednesday lunchtime, or stuff in the papers and on social media which generally gets two people with opposing extreme views to fight it out”.
But Leadbeater claims most MPs are “somewhere in the middle” politically and “there’s a lot of genuine friendships, and certainly professional relationships across political divides”.
I joke it must feel strange for her to be talking to a journalist about issues beyond euthanasia.
But she is keen to point out her other political interests, particularly around social cohesion, women’s equality and – harking back to her days in FE – health, fitness and wellbeing.
Leadbeater is a member of the women’s parliamentary football team, made up of cross-party MPs (including sports minister Stephanie Peacock), parliamentary staff and journalists.
For two years until 2024 she was chair of the all-party parliamentary group for sport and still champions health and wellbeing in Parliament “as much as I can”. But she concedes (while sipping her Coke) that “in terms of my own health and wellbeing, I’ve probably never been less healthy”.
Kim Leadbeater at Kirklees College
The rebel
Leadbeater was a keen hockey player while a pupil at Heckmondwike Grammar School, and performed well academically. But she was also “a bit of a rebel”.
Whereas Cox went on to Cambridge University to study anthropology then social political science, when their headteacher told Leadbeater that “we’d like you to go to Oxford or Cambridge”, she thought “well, I’m not doing that then”.
“It’s hard growing up as the younger sibling because you always get compared… I thought, ‘I want to do my own thing’.”
Instead, Leadbeater went to work in a laboratory analysing carpet yarn.
She later embarked on a law degree at Leeds University, then switched to philosophy and politics. But after becoming disillusioned with that course too, she became a commercial trainee at a bed manufacturing firm.
During her 12-month programme she worked in all parts of the family-owned business. While there was no formal educational element to the programme, she saw it as a “really valuable model for entering the workforce”.
Leadbeater was quickly promoted to national sales manager, but after a stint at another bed manufacturer she decided to return to the world of education.
She admits her “friends thought I was mad” for quitting her “very well-paid job and company car” for an NVQ level two in health and fitness at Dewsbury College.
“FE actually was what I needed, when I needed it,” she says.
Kim Leadbeater in her Westminster office
Championing FE
Leadbeater appreciated the small class sizes she experienced on her NVQ and subsequent foundation degree, rather than the “lecture theatre of 200 people where you can’t ask questions or might be embarrassed because you don’t know the answer”, which was her experience of university life.
She did her teacher training at Wakefield College before she started teaching at Dewsbury, then at Bradford College.
Once the assisted dying bill is “done and dusted”, she hopes to focus more of her attention on education issues. She believes FE provides “a second chance for so many” but remains “the forgotten relation within education”.
She concedes that “Labour’s not getting everything right” on education; she has friends in the sector who are “really unhappy about some things”, including the government continuing to make schools and colleges pay national insurance contributions on staff earnings.
But she also detects “a lot of satisfaction” around the recent changes proposed in the curriculum and assessment review.
She agrees with its recommendation for a “broader” curriculum, and thinks more focus should be placed on developing interpersonal skills and health and wellbeing.
However, Leadbeater is wary about putting more pressure on school and college teachers to support young people. “There’s a role for us all in raising our children and young people, particularly parents but also wider families and communities”.
She fondly recalls how her experience of coaching the girls football team at Bradford College on Wednesday afternoons was about “friendships and teamwork” more than anything.
She would like to see colleges supported to provide more extracurricular activities, but not if it creates “more pressure for teachers who are already extremely stressed trying to be the social workers, counsellors and life coaches”.
Kim Leadbeater in his Westminster office
Bonkers, beautiful place
One extracurricular activity she strongly believes all FE colleges should do is bring learners into Parliament for guided tours.
“Every single young person should get the chance to come” she says. “Every decision that’s made in this place affects young people’s lives. They should see what actually happens here and see the history, because it’s an amazing, bonkers, beautiful place.”
Politics was not a career Leadbeater “sought out”. She finds it “all consuming” and on most days, she regrets ever becoming a politician.
The scathing comments to a recent post she made on her Facebook page, announcing more support for the Armed Forces, illustrates the challenge she is up against; one featured an AI-generated coffin full of nails. But Leadbeater sees her role as being “very much like teaching”, in that the satisfaction comes from “making a difference to people’s lives”.
She recalls how during lockdown, Zach Eagling, a boy in her constituency with cerebral palsy and epilepsy, was trolled online while doing a fundraising walking challenge in his garden. People sent him flashing images in an attempt to bring on an epileptic fit.
Leadbeater helped Zach and his mum campaign against this “outrageous” type of trolling against those with epilepsy, and succeeded in adding an amendment into the online safety bill to make it illegal.
Leadbeater shows me the picture on her wall of Zach, who is now campaigning for better public transport access for those with disabilities. “He’s an absolute legend,” she says. “The most satisfying part of my job is when you can help people make a difference.”
On those days, she does feel glad to be a politician.
For over three decades, the education charity and awarding organisation ASDAN has worked to bridge the gap between education and employment. Today, that mission is being strengthened through a renewed commitment to digital learning, skills development and equity for all learners.
Providers face persistent skills gaps, rising employer expectations for work-ready, digitally confident learners and increasing demands on staff capacity. Alongside this, digital workloads linked to assessment, tracking and compliance continue to grow. In this context, ASDAN’s focus on flexible, accessible digital solutions and meaningful skills development supports both learners and practitioners to meet labour market needs, whilst ensuring no learner is left behind.
Digital learning designed for self-directed learners
ASDAN’s new digital learning platform, Equitas, has been purpose-built to support self-directed learning within post-16 education, apprenticeships and work-based settings. Rather than replicating traditional classroom models online, the platform embeds learning within meaningful activity, reflection and evidence.
At its core is ASDAN’s long-established plan, do, review cycle – a pedagogical approach that mirrors real-world learning and workplace practice. Learners plan an activity, carry it out independently or collaboratively, and then review what they have learned, the challenges they faced and the skills they developed.
Within Equitas, this cycle becomes a clear digital workflow. Learners upload evidence, respond to structured prompts and reflect against assessment criteria, building a personal record of learning that demonstrates both achievement and progression over time.
“Plan, do, review isn’t just a teaching method, it’s how learning and activity actually happen in the workplace,” says Tori Farren, ASDAN Education Development Partner. “Equitas allows learners to practise decision-making, problem-solving and reflection in a supported environment, which is exactly what employers expect.”
Supporting equity through flexible digital frameworks
Equitas has also been designed with inclusion and equity in mind. Its flexible, evidence-based approach enables providers to tailor learning to different contexts, pathways and learner needs, making it particularly effective in FE colleges, alternative provision and apprenticeship programmes.
Because progress is demonstrated through practical activity rather than time-limited exams, learners who may have struggled in more traditional academic settings can show what they are capable of. Digital access allows learning to take place across classrooms, workplaces and home environments, supporting blended delivery while reducing administrative burden for staff.
“Equity is about recognising different starting points and valuing different strengths,” Tori explains. “When learners can evidence real skills and experience, rather than just written performance, you unlock confidence and observe progression.”
A skills-led bridge between education and work
ASDAN’s approach is underpinned by a strong focus on employability skills. Across its programmes, learners develop and evidence six core transferable skills that employers consistently value:
learning
communicating
decision making
thinking
team working
self-awareness
These skills are embedded into all learning activity on Equitas, ensuring they are taught explicitly rather than assumed. Learners apply them through practical tasks, reflect on their use and gather evidence that can be shared with employers or progression providers.
This model complements both academic learning and apprenticeships. In work-based settings, Equitas provides a structured digital framework for recording skills development, supporting reflective practice and evidencing competence over time.
“Employers want people who can explain what they’ve learned and how they apply it,” says Tori. “ASDAN’s skills framework helps learners articulate their value, which is critical for interviews, progression and long-term success.”
Michelle Storer is the Senior Business Director for Partnerships & MATs at Hays Recruitment. She shares how employers are increasingly prioritising transferable skills:
“We’re seeing a clear shift in what employers across the labour market need from young people entering the workforce. They consistently tell us that what truly sets candidates apart are the transferable skills that enable them to adapt, communicate effectively, and make sound decisions in fast‑moving environments.
With 93% of employers reporting skills shortages in the past year according to the Hays Salary & Recruiting Trends guide 2026, there is growing recognition that education must focus not only on subject expertise but on building confident, capable learners who can apply their skills in real‑world contexts.
When learners can articulate their experiences, demonstrate progression and evidence these behaviours, they transition into work more smoothly and contribute more quickly. Embedding skills‑led learning across FE will be essential in building a workforce ready for the realities of tomorrow’s labour market.”
Qualifications that support progression and independence
ASDAN’s qualifications further strengthen the link between education and employment by developing independence, project management and reflective learning.
Their Extended Project Qualification (EPQ) supports learners to undertake in-depth independent projects, developing research, planning and presentation skills valued by universities and employers alike. Recently refreshed, ASDAN’s Personal Effectiveness Qualification (PEQ) incorporates a focus on employability, enabling learners to evidence workplace skills through practical experience.
ASDAN is also preparing to introduce the Foundation Project Qualification (FPQ, Level 1) and Higher Project Qualification (HPQ, Level 2) to it’s portfolio, extending this model to a wider scope of learners and opening new progression routes aligned with both academic and professional pathways.
As ASDAN develops these qualifications, they are inviting feedback from across the sector to help inform their design and delivery. Education professionals with an interest in skills development and post-16 pathways are encouraged to share their views in a survey, exploring how FPQs and HPAs could support progression, independence and employability.
Strengthening impact through leadership and growth
ASDAN’s commitment to employability is being further strengthened through the appointment of Gareth Reynolds as Director of Impact and Growth.
Gareth brings extensive experience across FE, HE, awarding organisations and professional bodies, with a proven track record in product leadership, digital transformation and improving learner outcomes.
He will focus on developing new digital solutions, strengthening partnerships and translating policy ambition into inclusive, high-impact provision.
“As the education and skills landscape continues to evolve, there is real potential to create meaningful, lasting impact for learners,” says Gareth. “I’m energised by the opportunity to work with ASDAN to ensure innovation and growth translate into genuinely inclusive opportunity.”
With FE providers looking for approaches that are flexible, inclusive and aligned with employer needs, ASDAN’s skills-led, digitally enabled model offers a clear route forward – supporting learners not just to achieve qualifications, but to become confident decision-makers ready for the world beyond education.
To explore how skills-led learning can be implemented in further education settings, complete this expression of interest form to speak with an ASDAN curriculum expert.
Apprenticeship providers will come under scrutiny from the Department for Education if they score the bottom two ratings in Ofsted’s revamped inspection reports, refreshed rules have revealed.
Changes made to the apprenticeship accountability framework (AAF) this morning also show that three “supplementary indicators” – breaks in learning, end-point assessment organisation data, off-the-job training – have been suspended.
Experts have warned providers should be cautious of the move, which will come into effect at the end of this month, as apprentices who lapse their planned end date will also now contribute to a new threshold that could put providers “at risk” of intervention.
Ofsted thresholds
In November, the DfE said it would initially take a “proportionate” approach and not use specific Ofsted grades in its decision to intervene in apprenticeship providers.
Ofsted’s new grading scale ranges from ‘exceptional’, ‘strong standard’ and ‘expected standard’ to ’needs attention’ and ‘urgent improvement’.
The DfE has now revised its approach. Today’s AAF update said the department will consider apprenticeship providers to be ‘at risk’ if they receive an ‘urgent improvement’ judgment for leadership and governance or inclusion at whole provider level.
Providers will also be scope for an ‘at risk’ classification if they fail safeguarding inspection procedures or receive an ‘urgent improvement’ judgment for any provision-type level evaluation areas for apprenticeships.
Apprenticeship providers that are classified as ‘at risk’ under the AAF normally trigger a performance review and management conversation, which can lead to extreme decisions such as contract termination.
Meanwhile, DfE will consider apprenticeship providers as ‘needs improvement’ if Ofsted issues a ‘needs attention’ judgment for the following evaluation areas: leadership and governance or inclusion, any provision-type level evaluation area for apprenticeships, or if a training company is found to be making ‘insufficient progress’ in a new provider monitoring inspection.
Providers that are classified as ‘needs improvement’ under the AAF can expect management conversation with the DfE to understand the reasons for “underperformance”.
‘Needs improvement’ providers could also be asked to create improvement plans and may face “proportionate contractual controls” or more stringent intervention if no improvement is found.
DfE added that it will not take Ofsted’s contribution to meeting skills needs into account in its evaluations.
Simon Ashworth, director of policy and deputy chief executive of the Association of Employment and Learning Providers (AELP), welcomed a “pragmatic link” between inspection outcomes and intervention during transition to the new system.
“‘Needs attention’ should trigger dialogue and support, not automatic punitive action,” he said.
“The sector’s quality profile is improving, and accountability must reinforce that progress while avoiding destabilising established and high-quality providers.”
He added that the changes to the AAF were an “understandable evolutionary step”.
Caution around apprentices past planned end date
Ofsted inspections are just one of several measures in the AAF, which have also been subject to revisions this morning.
DfE has suspended three “supplementary” quality indicators and refined another on the grounds that they no longer provide “sufficient value” in assessing provider risk or underperformance.
The DfE has refined the apprentice past planned end date (APPED) indicator to focus “solely” on apprentices who are on their programme and surpass their end date.
It has removed the 90 and 180-day parameters meaning learners who are past their planned end date from day one will count towards a threshold that could put a provider ‘at risk’ of intervention.
Officials can also now categorise providers as ‘at risk’ if they have 15 per cent or more APPEDs in their organisation.
Those who have between 10 and 15 per cent APPEDs will be classed ‘needs improvement’.
“Prolonged extension of training can indicate barriers to timely completion, reduced momentum and an increased risk of non‑completion,” the guidance said.
Ashworth warned that managing apprentices past their planned end date will “remain as important as ever”.
“It’s positive to see that the DfE has decided to finally disaggregate the measure on apprentices past their end dates that always convoluted measuring timely completion and apprentices on-programme and no longer attracting funding,” he said.
He added: “This refined measure does though mean providers will need to continue to carefully focus their efforts to ensure timely planning and subsequent delivery of the programme.”
Tony Allen, apprenticeships consultant and former contracts manager at the Education and Skills Funding Agency, said the changes were bad news for large organisations.
“If you’re a provider with 500 apprentices, and you’ve got 30 or 40 cohorts and they all finish a couple of weeks, three weeks late, they will appear on your dashboard.”
DfE’s guidance confirmed as such.
“Providers with a large number of apprentices should expect closer monitoring and performance management to support continuous improvement,” it said.
Allen added that the changes were “ill-thought through” as “smart” providers would put learners on a break in learning for one day to change the planned end date to avoid being at risk.
“I think the sector needs to be on their guard around some of these changes,” he added.
Three indicators suspended… for now
The AAF will no longer include breaks in learning, end-point assessment organisation data and off-the-job training as individual indicators through the framework, but DfE said it will keep its approach “under review”.
Ashworth said breaks in learning were a “significant” post-pandemic issue but are less so now through providers re-engaging learners.
“Last years’ policy change on off-the-job training now already states minimum hours for each standard, and assessment reform means these indicators are now no longer relevant,” he added.
Last May, the government introduced minimum off-the-job training (OTJ) hours for each apprenticeship standard, meaning providers no longer had to calculate how much OTJ training each apprentice requires depending on the length of their apprenticeship.
An HM Inspectorate of Prisons report on the teaching of reading in jails has highlighted emerging examples of excellent practice, with prisons putting literacy at the heart of their regimes.
But progress is now at risk due to national funding decisions.
Many people in prison struggle to read – almost two-thirds are at or below entry level 3 for literacy, compared to just 15 per cent of the general population.
A fifth, nearly 10,000 people last year, are at entry level 1, the lowest level.
The National Literacy Trust says adults below this level may not be able to read a road sign.
These people have been failed by mainstream education. Prison is an opportunity to put this right, and where prisons prioritise teaching people to read, it can be transformational.
Within prison, reading enables them to engage positively with the regime, participate in vocational training and keep in touch with their family.
On release, it is key to getting a job but also navigating day-to-day life, from accessing housing to being able to order from a menu.
As the HM Inspectorate of Prisons report shows, some prisons are seizing this opportunity. Due to a focus on reading by the inspectorate and by Ofsted, progress is being made.
But new contracts to deliver education in English prisons that began in October have cut education provision across the board, by as much as 65 per cent in some prisons. This has inevitably led to redundancies and reduces what is on offer to people in prison.
On top of this, prisons have a pot of money that they can spend on education to complement their core provision. One of the key ways this is spent is to provide literacy support and peer reading schemes.
Provided by charities such as the excellent Shannon Trust, this work frequently targets those who need the most support and may not yet be ready for classroom-based learning. But this budget has also been cut, from £14.1 million in 2022-23 to £12 million this year – a reduction of around 25 per cent in real terms.
This is madness. While prison education is still nowhere near good enough – it’s routinely the poorest performing sector that Ofsted inspects – it was slowly improving.
Last year, before the cuts, 10 per cent more people participated in education than in the previous year. Nearly a third of the prison education provision inspected in 2024-25 was rated as ‘good’, compared to 13 per cent in 2023-24.
There’s still a long way to go – 39 per cent was rated ‘inadequate’ and 31 per cent ‘requires improvement’, with no prison rated ‘outstanding’ since 2019 – but it is definitely progress.
We should be building on these positive signs with investment. Instead, courses and staff are cut, and programmes focusing on reading are being put at risk. And this will inevitably have the biggest impact on those who need additional support.
As the report found, specialist reading teachers in prisons “had either been cut recently or were under threat because of insufficient funding. This risked the progress of the prisoners most at need.”
For many neurodivergent learners and learners with learning difficulties, speech and language needs, or who had severely disrupted schooling, this kind of targeted and relational support is not optional. It is key to making engagement with education possible.
The need for a rethink becomes ever clearer. The government must find the money needed to reverse these cuts and ensure that people in prison can access good quality education that gives them the skills and qualifications that they need.
This will enable them to thrive on release, which reduces reoffending and ultimately saves public money.
Pressure on the FE sector feels worse than ever in the aftermath of the skills white paper and implementation of the renewed inspection framework.
Much of the narrative around teaching and learning is shifting, with a commitment to develop teachers by setting pathways for high-quality professional learning.
Colleges are being encouraged to adopt new pedagogical approaches, embed digital technologies and demonstrate innovation and improvement.
The updated Ofsted inspection toolkit reinforces this, placing greater emphasis on how effectively technology and digital tools are used to support curriculum intent, implementation and learning.
This focus is understandable. Digital capability, including the responsible use of AI, is increasingly seen as essential for learners and staff. Government policy reflects this.
The national skills drive, which focuses on creating opportunities for young people in tech, places emphasis on equipping learners with digital and AI-related skills to meet labour market demand.
Meanwhile, the World Economic Forum’s Future Jobs Report suggests that by 2030, around 40 per cent of employers anticipate job reductions where tasks can be automated, while roles created by AI will significantly outnumber those displaced. FE must prepare learners for a rapidly shifting employment landscape.
In response, there has been a surge in colleges advertising digital leadership and support roles to develop digital infrastructure and upskill staff.
But inevitably, as expectations around innovation rise, there’s a hidden workload created by innovation, particularly when digital and AI-related demands add a layer to existing systems.
Too often, innovation is portrayed as a creative act rather than an implementation process. Generating ideas is only one part of the puzzle – and much effort is needed to turn it into classroom practice.
Innovation is rarely workload-neutral. New approaches to digital pedagogy require teachers to redesign resources, learn unfamiliar platforms, manage technical issues during live delivery and reset classroom routines. Much of this work is invisible and has a direct impact on lesson quality, consistency and staff capacity.
In FE, this hidden workload is intensified by context. Teaching often takes place in mixed-ability, time-pressured environments, with learners who may have gaps in prior knowledge, confidence or access to technology.
This is amplified by digital inequality. Around 19 million people in the UK experience digital poverty, which raises questions about access and readiness that often sit behind digital strategies.
When innovation is introduced with insufficient structure or clarity, teachers are expected to manage this complexity while maintaining stability.
The debate around AI highlights this issue. Ofsted’s most recent annual report notes that very few inspectors who had seen AI in use felt it was improving outcomes.
Some inspectors reported negative impacts, while others raised concerns around oversight and accountability.
Ofsted itself has acknowledged a gap in research around AI’s impact on learning outcomes.
This is important because AI, like other forms of digital innovation, is often introduced with high expectations but limited guidance on implementation.
When responsibility, guidance and purpose are unclear, the burden transfers to teachers, support staff and middle leaders to make it work safely and effectively.
Policy continues to emphasise teacher professional development in FE, particularly relating to digital capability. But where is the capacity coming from? Professional development that adds new expectations without addressing workload risks becoming another pressure point.
Jisc has consistently argued that digital innovation should be pedagogically led, inclusive and designed to reduce cognitive and administrative burden. Used well, technology should make learning clearer and teaching more efficient.
Yet in many FE settings new platforms are added to existing systems, resulting in complexity rather than improved practice. There is a danger that pressure is being pushed downwards.
If innovation is to improve teaching and learning, leaders need to ask tougher questions. What work does this create for teachers? How long will that work last? What will be removed to make space for it?
If the sector is serious about improving teaching quality, the hidden workload linked to digital innovation must be acknowledged and designed out, rather than absorbed.
I have a secret. I like Monday mornings. There, I’ve said it. It’s out. I’m a Monday lover.
I have, like everyone I suppose, had times when Mondays hung heavy, casting their frosty shadows over my Sunday evening freedom. Usually around the time Antiques Roadshowbegan.
I had that Monday morning feeling again when I was teaching in a busy and bustling London comprehensive, where I never knew what a lesson would bring, let alone an entire day or an impossibly long and slow-passing week. All I knew was that whatever lay ahead was going to be enervating.
My full respect goes to those who spend their whole teaching careers in that challenging sector because I managed only a year. And then I was gone, jumping ship to the safety of the FE sector forever.
Once I had found my place, I realised one day that the Sunday evening dread had simply drained away. I could relax and enjoy what was left of a restful day.
Imagine yourself back in work after a holiday, on the first day of a new college term.
If your college is anything like mine, there’s something joyful about the buzz on the first morning back. People are reconnecting and discussing their holidays, asking about emails, making coffee over at the sink, sharing pictures on their phones, discussing student situations, coughing in the corner, or just quietly tapping away on laptops trying to bring themselves quickly back up to speed.
It really is one of those moments to relish, and let it all soak in.
Every Monday can be a miniature echo of this start-of-term buzz. Look around yourself the next time you find yourself in the middle of a pre-work Monday morning. Yes, there’ll be the curmudgeon present, complaining about something anodyne and ordinary. But there’ll also be friends saying hello. Professionals preparing to care. Students chattering animatedly.
Walking the corridors as lessons are about to begin is enlightening. Listen to the tone of the hubbub. It will, I suspect, have a vibrant, excited edge to its energy.
Hear the teachers greeting their charges. It is all unremarkable, and yet totally extraordinary, the personal care and relationship such comments convey.
We’ve all seen those viral videos of some enthusiastic and imaginative teacher – no doubt still at the start of their career, when creativity is still high – who greets each student as they enter the classroom with a separate, individual, and tailor-made handshake for every one of them.
I’ve never met such a teacher in my life. But I’ve met hundreds who welcome their students to class, joke with them and tease them and call them by name, creating a warm and creative atmosphere in the classrooms and corridors of their schools or colleges. That can be as valuable as any secret handshake, even if it is a lot less likely to go viral.
Monday mornings are where these joyous things live. Monday mornings are blank slates, open books, white pages ready to be written on. They are pure potential.
The week still contains every possibility hidden in the folds of its cloak. What will be plucked out and presented to us, nobody knows.
It might turn out to be a bad week. Again. But it might just have its joyous moments too. And on Monday morning, you still have the power to influence and shape what it’s going to be like.
The reason people seem to hate Monday mornings so much is because they represent a loss of opportunity, the end of freedom, the death of possibility. Maybe that is sometimes true.
But the very essence of education is that things – and people – can change. What is plastic can still be shaped. What is unknown is there to be discovered. What is a mystery is about to be revealed.
All of this is the very heart of education. It is also the deepest nature of a Monday morning.
So love your Monday mornings. Because, trust me, they won’t be going away any time soon. Having said which, please leave me alone until I’ve had my first workday cup of coffee. And then I’ll be ready to take on the world.
England is at a crossroads. We face major national missions – from accelerating housebuilding and delivering critical infrastructure to meeting clean‑energy targets and enforcing the Building Safety Act. Each depends on a skilled, competent construction workforce. Yet the reforms currently proposed for apprenticeships and qualifications risk weakening, not strengthening, the skills pipeline we need.
Earlier this month, the British Association of Construction Heads (BACH) wrote to the Prime Minister and key ministers warning that the direction of travel in construction skills policy is too narrow and insufficiently rooted in how our industry works. We are in danger of repeating past mistakes: reorganising qualifications without rethinking the structure of the system itself.
Designed for an old economy
A most concerning feature of the government’s current approach is the refusal to consider educational models beyond the traditional 16–19 academic pathway. The curriculum and assessment review’s proposals focus entirely on current educational model of GCSEs and A Levels, or similar, missing the chance to explore alternative structures.
This is out of step with most of Europe. Successful technical education systems in Germany, the Netherlands, Austria, Switzerland and Finland typically operate a 14–19 model, allowing young people to specialise earlier in applied and technical subjects with equal prestige to academic routes. These pathways produce young people with competent craft trades such as electricians, civil engineering technicians and manufacturing operatives, feeding productive, internationally competitive economies.
England by contrast continues to treat GCSEs as the central organising point of the entire system for 16 year olds. Young people who would thrive in practical and technical learning are kept in a narrow academic track until 16, then expected to choose between complicated new qualification labels at 16–19. This is not preparing them – or the country – for the labour market we have today.
Successful UK examples already exist. University Technical Colleges (UTCs) such as those in Sheffield prove that earlier technical focus works, delivering strong outcomes in engineering and technical industries. But instead of learning from these models, the current reforms try to retrofit new qualifications into a structure that is fundamentally out of date.
Limited review
The curriculum review should have been a chance to step back and ask how we build competency across industry. Instead, its terms of reference are narrow. It looks at adapting existing provision, not at whether the whole 16–19 framework is the wrong foundation to begin with.
CAR does not sufficiently explore earlier pathways, competency‑based approaches, or practical assessment models aligned to the Construction Skills Certification Scheme (CSCS) and the requirements of the Building Safety Act. Nor does it reflect the green and clean‑energy roles now embedded across every construction vertical.
In short: it reviews qualifications, but not the system. That is not enough.
Practical competence, not more classroom pathways
Construction is a competency‑driven industry. Employers need people who can demonstrate the skills, knowledge, experience and behaviours required for safe practice. Yet the proposed levels 2 and 3 pathways in the skills white paper are heavily classroom‑based and rely on assessment sampling that risks lowering standards.
At a time when building safety has never been more important, reducing rigour is the wrong direction. A classroom‑heavy approach will not produce the competent workforce demanded by employers, regulators or the public.
A better way
If we are serious about rebuilding our skills base, we need a system that reflects how young people learn and how construction operates. That means:
exploring a 14–19 technical route
embedding practical, on‑site learning
using competency‑based assessment, not sampling
designing content with employers, not around qualifications
integrating green skills across all pathways
supporting FE colleges with sustainable funding and staffing
The creation of a taskforce for construction apprenticeship reform is welcome. But to make it meaningful, government must pause the wider construction proposals in the white paper. Otherwise, we risk cementing flawed assumptions into policy for years to come.
England cannot deliver its national missions with a skills system built for another era. It is time to learn from successful international models – and from our own best practice – and build a structure that gives young people the pathways they need and the country the workforce it requires.
A recent HR training session featured a discussion about creating regular opportunities for staff to meet with you – and not just when they have a problem.
This made me reflect on my own leadership and how I can model a more inclusive culture.
As a head of department, I need to create time and space for meaningful and impactful connections with my team.
Inclusive leadership is about more than just good intentions. It’s about actively creating environments where people feel safe, respected, and truly part of the team.
A strong sense of team identity can drive collaboration and shared purpose. But inclusive leaders must also be mindful of individual needs and perspectives within the group.
Belonging to a team can be powerful. It builds unity, motivation and a shared sense of achievement.
However, inclusion also means recognising that each team member brings unique experiences and ways of thinking. Leaders need to create space where both team identity and individual authenticity are valued.
Team meetings should be more than just spaces for updates. They should be environments for safe and creative discussions.
But do all team members feel they can truly speak their mind? Or are some agreeing by default, staying quiet, or holding back out of fear of judgement?
To lead inclusively, we must consider whether:
Everyone has a platform to share their authentic voice
People feel comfortable to gently challenge ideas and be critical friends
There is time for reflection before decisions are made
Psychological safety doesn’t happen by accident; it is developed through intentional leadership practices.
Offering thinking time before team discussions can boost inclusion. It allows individuals to reflect and form their ideas independently before group dynamics take over. This can prevent dominant voices from steering the conversation too early and ensures all perspectives are heard.
Leaders might ask:
Have all ideas been considered from different lenses?
Have we created multiple communication points for contributions, verbal, written, or one-on-one?
Are we valuing quiet thought as much as loud contribution?
Creating a balance between individual thinking and team collaboration leads to better outcomes. When people feel safe to contribute their authentic perspectives, teams benefit from deeper insight, creativity and mutual respect.
It’s about actively creating environments where people feel safe, respected, and truly part of the team.
A strong sense of team identity can drive collaboration and shared purpose, but inclusive leaders must also be mindful of individual needs and perspectives within the group.
Ultimately, inclusive leadership is an ongoing practice. It requires curiosity, humility, and a willingness to slow down and truly listen.
As I continue to shape the culture within my department, I want to create not just meetings, but moments for meaningful connection, reflection and growth. My hope is that every team member feels valued not only for what they do, but for who they are.
My intent is to create opportunities for open conversations, invite perspectives that challenge my own, and hold space for honest, authentic dialogue around questions such as: How can we ensure quieter voices or different communication styles are better represented in our conversations, and Is there anything in our current ways of working that makes it harder for people to share ideas?
Inclusive leadership is about ensuring everyone has the confidence and space to speak, be heard, and make an impact.
