MOVERS AND SHAKERS: EDITION 485

Trevor Hewlett

Vice Principal (Curriculum), Homefield College

Start date: January 2025

Previous Job: Head of Curriculum, WEA

Interesting fact: A trek across the Sahara Desert raising funds for Macmillan Cancer Support taught Trevor the power of a positive mindset and an appreciation for everyday moments that bring joy and connection

Kieren McIntosh

Vice Principal (Curriculum and Quality), Lewisham College

Start date: January 2025

Previous Job: Group Curriculum Director, New City College

Interesting fact: At 17, Kieren studied music at Lewisham College and says he is proud to return 25 years later as vice principal as a first-hand FE beneficiary

Ban mandatory bikini waxes on beauty students, says mum

A mum whose daughter quit a beauty course after being told to undergo a bikini wax is campaigning for students to have the right to say no. 

Safiya removed her 16-year-old daughter from Barnsley College after being told peer-to-peer treatments were an assessment “requirement” in December.

A teacher claimed level 2 beauty therapy course students must do treatments – including bikini waxing – on each other as part of the learning process.

Following a review by management the college backed down and said Safiya’s daughter could practise on a “client”. But the teenager subsequently enrolled at another college and Safiya has launched a petition on website change.org.

TikTok protest

Safiya did not submit a formal complaint but later posted a series of critical videos on social media platform TikTok that gained nearly three million views.

She now wants colleges and training providers to make it clear to students they will not fail or be removed from courses if they refuse to undergo beauty treatments, including on “intimate” areas of the body.

The mum told FE Week: “It’s important that they’re encouraged to speak up, that children are empowered to know their voices are heard and that their bodies matter.

“They should have to consent and have rights over their own bodies – they shouldn’t be forced and coerced into doing [treatments] for the sake of their education.”

‘They need to experience it’

In a recording of a phone call with Safiya, posted on TikTok, a Barnsley College tutor says students “need” to experience treatments themselves through practice with other learners, before progressing to clients.

“They all do it”, the tutor insists. She then adds that if Safiya and her daughter have a “problem” they should “look for another programme”. 

Safiya is told exceptions would only be made due to a “medical condition”.

Barnsley College principal David Akeroyd said he had since “reviewed and enhanced” practical assessment procedures to make clear that learners had the choice to consent to treatments as part of their course.

“Students also retain the right to withdraw their consent at any time” he added.

“The safety and well-being of our students is at the heart of everything we do, and we remain committed to upholding the highest standards of learning and care.”

Common practice…

Beauty therapy students undergoing treatments as part of their course, including bikini waxing, is understood to be common practice.

Other colleges told FE Week that participation in treatments was optional, since medical, personal or cultural reasons could make students feel uncomfortable.

But in comments made on Safiya’s TikTok videos, several social media users claimed they had also felt uncomfortable when undergoing bikini waxing treatments at colleges and feared they would fail their course if they refused.

Safiya said her daughter’s new college was “completely understanding” about her bringing in her own client to practise on.

…But not mandatory

VTCT Skills, the awarding body for Barnsley College’s level 2 beauty therapy course, told FE Week it “does not mandate” how learners source models for treatments.

It said: “These decisions are made by individual training providers in line with their own policies and educational approach.”

City & Guilds, a market leader in beauty therapy courses alongside VTCT Skills, does not stipulate whether learners must practise on each other.

Becky Priest, an Essex-based waxing specialist and teacher, said Safiya’s daughter’s initial experience with the college tutor was “shocking”.

She explained that while bikini waxing is not technically considered intimate, it is in a part of the body that many women are “really self-aware” about.

Priest added: “These children should be protected – they might be in a room where they feel uncomfortable – you don’t know how that could damage them.

“Colleges have to respect that there are many factors, like scars from self-harm, that young students might not feel comfortable about.”

Is it time for England to revisit a national ESOL strategy? 

Reading Supporting ESOL in Devolved Authorities, a report by the Association of Colleges and Bell Foundation, made me reflect on my early years in the English for speakers of other languages sector in the 2000s.

I had sold the fish and chip shop I ran for 10 years to follow my passion for education and retrain to become an ESOL tutor.

There was excitement in the air back then. The launch of the adult English, maths and ESOL core curricula brought significant funding, equipping classrooms with new resources and professionalising the sector. The Institute for Learning was established, ensuring teaching quality.  

It felt like a national effort was underway to improve the lives of those left behind by illiteracy and low language skills.

 The Moser Report (1999) called for a national strategy, sufficient funding and a well-trained workforce to support adult learners. Now, 25 years later, the same needs remain. Is this the moment England returns to a funded national ESOL strategy?

The Leitch Review of Skills in 2006 shifted the focus of funding towards vocational training for those who stood to benefit most.

Suddenly, ESOL learners – often those with the fewest resources – were expected to pay for their education. This marked a sharp decline in opportunities for many, with a stronger emphasis on employability at the expense of accessible language learning.   

ESOL devo benefits

But the increasing recognition of ESOL within the devolved adult education budget through mayoral combined authorities is encouraging.

These authorities use localised place-based solutions to address ESOL needs within their communities.

At WM College, we’ve been able to use this flexibility to heavily subsidise course fees, meaning very few learners pay full cost.

However, despite the progress, we are constrained by a 56 per cent decline in real terms of AEB funding between 2009 and 2017, which limits the variety of courses we can offer and our ability to be demand led and innovative.  

The government’s recent announcement of an additional £50 million to help fund FE teacher pay has again overlooked adult education providers and is another stark reminder of the challenges we continue to face to recruit and retain good tutors.

ESOL accreditation rethink needed

Providers like WM College are once again left out, limiting our ability to offer demand-led accessible provision for the adults who need it the most.  

Employment-focused ESOL provision continues to be a challenge. Research by Schellekens reveals it could take up to 14.5 years for a learner with no English to reach employment-level proficiency. For many of our learners, securing higher-level employment is simply out of reach.

At WM College, we focus on practical, everyday language skills that support learners’ integration into their communities, building social cohesion and improving their wellbeing.  
 
However, the emphasis on accreditation in language learning may need rethinking. While certifications are valuable, the broader outcome of building social and cultural capital can be even more critical for many learners.

For those learners who do possess the language skills needed to progress into higher-level employment, there should be pathways and funding for access to advanced qualifications, such as the international English language testing system (IELTS), or gateway courses that lead into vocational training or professional qualifications.  
 
For our sector to be bold and innovative, funding must allow us to address the unique needs of our learners. ESOL courses should recognise not only learners’ starting points as English speakers but also the context of their entire lives.

At WM College we are incredibly proud that one of our ESOL tutors, Sam Pepper, was recently named Inspirational Tutor of the Year at the Mayor of London Adult Learning Awards for his dedication to helping learners achieve these wider life goals – an achievement that reflects the impact our staff have on the lives of our learners.

Our learners deserve funding that allows us to recognise the complexity of their lives and build courses that meet their real needs – not just their English skills but their ambitions and hopes for the future. 

It is time for the government to consider how ESOL learners can be better supported, and ensure no one is left behind as the demand for English language skills grows.  

To merge or not to merge – that is the question

I’m not going to quote Shakespeare at length, but many college leaders will feel they are suffering the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune today.

The Institute for Fiscal Studies reported late last year that 37 per cent of colleges were operating in financial deficit in 2022-23, and 44 per cent of these colleges had been in deficit for at least three consecutive years.

My sense is that after five years or so of having slowed down – partly as a consequence of Covid – we will see an increase in the number of colleges that fall into difficulty. This could trigger more central government intervention, and potentially more mergers.

I have written before about how colleges could get on the front foot by conducting their own “College led SPA” (structure and prospects appraisal) but I haven’t seen much appetite in the sector for undertaking them recently.

Whereas 10 years ago there may have been a government policy aim to have fewer, larger colleges in England, I am unable to detect any national blueprint for FE today.

There may be a generalised feeling in government that a proliferation of providers is not ideal. But there is probably also an understanding that structural consolidation has natural limits.

We’ll see if a post-16 strategy changes that, but for now the improvement and intervention functions in government seem happy to allow providers to exist as currently configured, provided they are healthy in quality and financial terms.

So – for now – the most likely trigger for a merger remains organisational failure, government intervention, a diagnostic assessment that follows and a commissioner-led SPA that recommends a merger.

The key question is whether mergers actually work. Do they improve student outcomes and do local communities actually benefit?

There’s not much hard evidence on that front. Department for Education research in 2019 found no strong statistical evidence of college mergers leading to an improvement or deterioration of college performance.

Ofsted statistical analysis in 2023 found that since mid 2016, of those merged colleges that received their first full inspection, 81 per cent were ‘good’ or ‘outstanding’. This was 16 per cent higher than the proportion judged that way prior to merging. However, those colleges that didn’t merge also improved, by similar percentage points.

Context is everything when it comes to mergers. The two London mergers I led as chair were necessary to secure the colleges’ futures, but they were very different cases.

The Kensington and Chelsea College (KCC) merger took place in the wake of the Grenfell tragedy. The college merged with a wonderful mainly adult education college, Morley College. And Morley definitively improved outcomes at KCC.

When I was chair in 2018, KCC extraordinarily received its fifth ‘requires improvement’ judgement. Morley College was judged ‘good’ in 2023, arresting years of poor outcomes at KCC.

The North Kensington Centre for Skills (as KCC is now named) is today a vibrant and thriving part of the local community – a fantastic transformation in just five years since the merger, and nearly eight since Grenfell.

Richmond upon Thames College (RuTC) was officially ‘good’ at the point of merger in early 2023. But years of circling around a merger had taken its toll on achievement and student experience.

RuTC merged with Harrow College and Uxbridge College, and HRUC (the merged group) has also just been judged ‘good’. HRUC’s leadership no doubt hoped to secure ‘outstanding,’ but the Ofsted report details progress made.

A key question was how the merger would work given the geographical distance between Richmond and Harrow and Uxbridge. Ofsted offers nothing to suggest that this has impacted negatively on the student experience at any campus.

However, it is a key question for future mergers. I would like to see more detailed surveys of parent and student opinions feeding into the merger due diligence process, to ensure there is a good cultural and student-experience ‘fit’ when a merger takes place across significant geographical distances.

It’s difficult to say whether mergers work on a policy level. But there will very likely be more of them.

I remain of the view that colleges should get on the front foot and run their own structure and prospects appraisals. It could be the most effective way for a college leadership to take arms against its sea of troubles, avoiding the slings and arrows coming down the line!

Sixth form college academisation reaches tipping point

The number of academy-converted sixth form colleges is set to overtake standalone sixth forms for the first time – with seven awaiting a government decision on applications.

Around 90 traditional sixth form colleges existed before legislation in 2015 gave them the option to become 16-to-19 academies and avoid paying VAT.

About a fifth have since merged with general FE colleges, 34 have converted to academy status and seven have live academisation bids.

If all applications are approved there will be just 31 standalone sixth form colleges left.

The trend highlights the diminishing appeal of being a standalone sixth form. The government’s pay snub to sixth form college teachers while funding a 5.5 per cent rise for their counterparts in 16-to-19 academies last year ignited strikes and a judicial review threat.

However, the change of government has caused uncertainty about the likelihood of future conversions, with one sixth form principal suggesting Labour had gone “lukewarm” on academisation.

What’s the appeal?

Paul Britton, chief executive officer of Wyke Sixth Form College in Hull, applied to set up a multi-academy trust with two secondary schools and an infant school last April but is still awaiting a decision.

He said the current funding system “incentivises” becoming a 16-to-19 academy as school budgets are less likely to be cut and academies don’t pay VAT that costs him upwards of £300,000 annually.

He told FE Week: “Sixth form colleges are at a crossroads where they either become an FE college or they become academies. The idea of being an incorporated sixth form is a hangover concept.”

Sixth form colleges are also held to account for meeting local skills needs through vocational courses despite many focusing on A-levels.

Another sixth form college principal awaiting a decision on academy conversion, who did not wish to be named, agreed financial security and local collaboration were drivers of conversion.

He said: “The recent FE teacher pay snub is just another example of the insecurities of being a sixth form.”

Labour’s approach to academisation appears to be “drifting and requires clarity”, the principal added.

Academies curbed

Labour’s new education bill has sparked criticism for attempting to curb academy freedoms, including on pay.

The bill also proposes to stop the enforced academisation of failing schools and instead introduce a “discretionary” duty that includes alternatives such as the involvement of regional improvement teams.

It will remove the legal presumption that new schools should be academies and allow local authorities to table their own proposals.

Schools and sixth form colleges with outstanding applications are also rapidly approaching the deadline for accessing a conversion support grant of £25,000 per school or college, which ends in February.

A government spokesperson told FE Week it will continue to consider applications from sixth form colleges that choose to convert or join a high-quality academy trust, where there is a strong case to do so.

According to DfE guidance, academy applications are ultimately decided by regional directors who consider each case “on its merits”.

Who wants to convert?

The most recent academy conversion applications have come from Hills Road Sixth Form College in Cambridge, Scarborough Sixth Form College in North Yorkshire, and Leyton Sixth Form College in East London.

According to Leyton’s governing board minutes from September last year, the exclusion of sixth form colleges from the July pay deal “raised serious concerns”.

To “maintain financial health and provide effective, impactful sixth form education” the board voted unanimously to academise with William Morris Sixth Form in Hammersmith.

Earlier this month the College of Richard Collyer in Horsham, West Sussex, launched a public consultation on the formation of a multi-academy trust with a nearby secondary school after the Department for Education approved its application in November.

Wilberforce College in Hull, which hopes to form a trust with Withernsea High School, is still waiting for a decision after submitting an application in August 2023.

Sixth Form Colleges Association deputy chief executive James Kewin said the interest in academisation “continues to grow” and it is possible that this year will see convertor sixth form colleges “outnumber FE-sector sixth form colleges for the first time”.

He told FE Week the main drivers of academisation have changed little since 2015 – they include a desire to work more closely with academies or other sixth form colleges to drive up standards, improve efficiency and create CPD opportunities.

Sixth form colleges became incorporated bodies under the 1992 Further and Higher Education Act, which brought independence benefits.

But this status means they face the same funding inequalities and local skills accountability measures as general further education colleges.

Kewin said that since sixth form colleges and general FE colleges were reclassified as public sector bodies in 2022, “many sixth form colleges report they find it difficult to identify the benefits of remaining in the FE sector as bureaucracy has increased, funding inequalities have not been addressed and policy continues to be driven by a narrowly-defined skills agenda”.

We took a hard look at soft skills to prepare students for work

At Heart of Worcestershire College we believe education should go beyond technical training and academic achievements. In today’s jobs market, employers increasingly value a combination of technical expertise and soft skills – those vital abilities that shape effective communication, innovation, teamwork and problem-solving.

With this in mind we’ve introduced our 5Cs initiative to prepare students for the realities of the modern workplace and help them thrive in their careers.

Why the 5Cs?

The 5Cs framework incorporates critical thinking, creativity, communication, collaboration and company behaviours.

It is the product of collaboration between students, staff and employers, plus insights drawn from our area’s local skills improvement plan (LSIP).

These efforts highlighted a growing need for employability skills that complement technical know-how.

Feedback from businesses highlighted the demand for candidates who excel in a range of skills alongside their qualifications.

They have long expressed the need for candidates who not only have technical proficiency but also possess a wider set of skills that demonstrate they are ready for work. The LSIP reinforced these findings, identifying core skills as essential to enhancing productivity and supporting economic growth.

By introducing the 5Cs, HoW College is not only addressing these workforce demands but is fostering a new generation of adaptable, confident and work-ready individuals.

Each 5C focuses on core skills essential for success in the workplace:

Critical thinking

Research, problem solving, analysis, scrutiny, decision making, diversity of opinion.

Creativity

Design, innovation, resourcefulness, adaptability and idea generation.

Communication

Writing and listening, digital, personal reflection, summarising, presenting and negotiation.

Collaboration

Teamwork, inclusivity, participation, engagement, interpersonal skills and conflict resolution.

Company behaviours

Time management, professionalism, accountability, reliability.

How it works

The 5Cs initiative is integrated into every aspect of the student experience. These core skills are not taught as standalone modules but are embedded across the curriculum.

Within classroom settings, students engage in projects that require collaboration, creative problem-solving and real-world application of critical thinking.

In vocational and technical courses, practical assignments mirror workplace scenarios where communication and company behaviours are as important as technical competence.

For example, bricklaying and plumbing students designed and built a Christmas tree as part of a project. This activity delivered lots of problems for them to overcome – they had to use critical thinking and creativity for solutions, collaborate with peers and agree the correct sequence of design and construction.

Regular feedback from local employers ensures the 5Cs initiative remains aligned with industry needs and expectations.

And to help students articulate these skills to future employers, the college has invested in a platform that supports them to assess their progress against the 5Cs, capture their journey towards their chosen career and support them in preparing for job opportunities.

Who benefits?

Students are at the heart of the initiative. By developing these skills, they become more employable and adaptable to a variety of roles and industries. These attributes are particularly important in today’s job market, where the ability to adapt and upskill is essential for a long and successful career.

Employers will also benefit. The 5Cs address the skills gap identified by local businesses, providing them with candidates who are ready to meet the demands of modern workplaces. As a result the initiative contributes to regional economic growth and productivity.

The initiative also reinforces HoW College’s reputation as a forward-thinking institution. By embedding the 5Cs into our ethos and mission we’re setting a benchmark for preparing students not just for jobs, but for impactful, fulfilling careers.

The 5Cs initiative for our students is also endorsed and supported by the Herefordshire and Worcestershire Chamber of Commerce.

Its chief executive, Sharon Smith, described it as a “fantastic step forward in addressing the skills gap that many employers are currently facing”.

As we implement the 5Cs, we’re excited about the impact it will have on our students, our college and the wider community.

If we want better outcomes, we must listen to apprentices

The AoA recently conducted its Big Apprentice Survey 2024, gathering insights from over 2,000 apprentices across the UK.

Our report provides insight for those working with apprentices into the impact and value of the schemes, the challenges encountered by apprentices and their perspectives on improvements needed.

Outside of Department for Education surveys, it’s a significant data set. But more than that; it is the voice of apprentices themselves.

The survey highlights what apprentices value most: practical, hands-on learning combined with clear career progression.

Three-quarters (74 per cent) value the ability to gain work experience at the same time as a qualification. Career progression is the next most valued benefit of an apprenticeship, cited by over half of respondents (51 per cent). 

They also report significant personal growth (78 per cent), a career foundation (59 per cent) and development of enhanced employability skills (57%) as key advantages.

These findings point to apprentices seeing apprenticeships as a strategic investment in their future, not just acquiring a qualification. Interestingly, these benefits are universal; we found no major differences in the responses from apprentices across different ages, levels or stages of apprenticeship.

One of the most important findings of the survey is that over a third (36 per cent) of apprentices believe they would not be working in their current industry without access to their apprenticeship. This rises to 40 per cent for those who received free school meals, highlighting the role of apprenticeships in promoting social mobility.

Listen to apprentices

Gathering direct feedback from apprentices offers us a unique and essential perspective on the strengths and weaknesses of the schemes and helps us to understand and address the factors that contribute to a positive experience.

Despite the current consultations, debates, and discussions about proposed skills and apprenticeship policy, apprentices are not as actively involved as they should be.

Their experiences can benefit future learners, yet they are often excluded from these conversations. Apprentices should have a seat at the table alongside employers, providers, and government.

Apprenticeships are challenging, and while it’s true they shouldn’t be easy, some believe apprentices should simply push through.

The survey reveals the most common challenges apprentices encounter include managing work/life balance (36 per cent), time management (33 per cent), and completing and recording off-the-job training (32 per cent). And these strongly correlate with the reasons why 62 per cent of apprentices reported feeling stressed or anxious in the last 12 months, with work/life balance (42 per cent) being the main cause.

Here we see differences in apprentices; the survey identifies that respondents with learning difficulties, those at higher apprenticeship levels, and those who are approaching their end-point assessment tend to experience higher levels of stress.

So, what can be done to support apprentices?

In their own words they told us:

  • Better mentorship programmes, clear career progression paths, flexible working arrangements and improved communication are highly desired from employers.
  • Enhanced learning support, tailored study options, improved communication with employers and reduced administrative burdens were cited as aspects for training providers.
  • Increased funding for apprenticeships, apprentice subsidies and mental health resources are needed from government.

Specifically for the government, apprentices shared their reactions to policy changes announced in the autumn Budget, revealing a mix of optimism and concern. Some, for example, view the increase in minimum wage positively whereas others worry it may negatively impact the number of apprentices that smaller companies hire, and call for incentives to help these businesses manage the burden.

Overall, the findings highlight the critical importance of apprentice wellbeing and the necessity for comprehensive support systems that address the practical aspects of apprenticeships, helping to manage workload and reduce stress.

Incorporating these elements into working practices and policy design is vital to ensure a positive experience that leads to successful outcomes.

We hope the survey results will prompt discussions among employers, training providers and government bodies to work together to enhance the apprentice experience.

After all, providing a better experience leads to more successful outcomes, deters people from quitting, and maximises return on investment – and who doesn’t want that?

Pearson fined £250k over string of rule breaches

England’s biggest exam board has been fined £250,000 after teachers who drew up its assessments could have known which papers their pupils would be taking.

Pearson told regulator Ofqual that it did not follow “its own policies designed to ensure the confidentiality” of papers.  

It also failed “to identify conflicts of interest” among 195 GCSE, A-level and BTEC examiners, who it employed “as tutors at schools where students sat” the assessments under the National Tutoring Programme.

Amanda Swann, Ofqual’s executive director for general qualifications, stated: “Our rules protect students taking regulated qualifications including GCSE, A Level and BTECs.

“We will take action when our rules are breached, and the interests of students are put at risk.”

Risk to exam ‘integrity’

Swann added there was “no evidence of any direct impact on students”. But Pearson “failed to guard against conflicts of interest and breaches of confidentiality and we intend to fine them accordingly”.

The incidents occurred in 2023. Six of them, Ofqual said, related to Pearson failing “to follow its own policies designed to ensure the confidentiality of live assessment materials, thereby creating a risk to the integrity of exams”.

In one case, “a teacher at one of Pearson’s centres was also a senior associate involved in the production of the final assessment for one of” its A-level papers.

The firm’s policy in such instances is to produce “multiple possible question papers” to ensure they do not know “with certainty” which of the exams will be used.

“Pearson confirmed that it did not follow this process for this GCE paper,” Ofqual said.

Papers remarked

Pearson “identified a similar failing in that multiple versions of an exam paper in another qualification were also not produced for summer 2023, despite the policy criterion being met”.

Multiple papers for four other qualifications were produced in a separate instance. But Pearson admitted “internal failures stemming from human error meant that the senior team could nonetheless have identified which version of the exam paper would be used”.

The exam board reported that 195 of its examiners in summer 2023 also “carried out tutoring in schools (under contract to Pearson) as part of the National Tutoring Programme”.

In all, they marked “7,244 exam responses by students at schools, where they had potential conflict of interest”. Any compromised papers were remarked by other examiners before grades were awarded.

“These individuals had not declared the tutoring activity in connection with their role as an examiner,” Ofqual said.

“No cross-reference or verification had been undertaken by Pearson which itself held all relevant information.”

Review launched

Ofqual stressed Pearson “co-operated fully” with its “enforcement process”. It admitted breaching “its conditions of recognition – which all awarding organisations are legally required to follow for regulated qualifications”.

Pearson subsequently agreed “to pay a monetary penalty in the sum of £250,000”, along with the regulator’s “reasonable legal costs”.

A spokesperson for the exam board said as soon it “identified the potential conflicts of interest in 2023 we notified Ofqual, took swift corrective action and resolved the issue”.

A “detailed review”, conducted alongside the regulator, found “no evidence of any adverse impact on students or schools and colleges”.

“While these events took place following a period of unprecedented disruption due to the pandemic, we acknowledge that established processes were not followed,” they continued.

“We have updated our systems and continue to invest in enhancing and automating our processes to improve controls and reduce risk.” 

Correction: This article was amended shortly after publication to say teachers ‘could have known’ which papers would be taken

College governance must play a key role in the AI revolution

As the prime minister highlighted in his speech last week, AI is already transforming our lives. The technology is unequivocally changing the way businesses operate across all sectors. Not ‘in the future’, but right now.

A definition of AI (by AI!) is: “The study of how computers may learn and behave intelligently, such as by solving problems and picking up new skills.”

There is clear alignment here with what we do, and deliver, in the FE sector. Colleges equip people with new skills, help them to solve problems and then apply this knowledge to the real world of work.

The fact FE appears to be ahead of the curve on AI is therefore no surprise. As this huge, technological juggernaut races towards us all, many colleges are embracing it, recognising its potential to improve provision and better prepare students for the future.

As Hull College demonstrated at its fantastic AI conference, this technology is shaping the future of teaching, learning and career preparation.

But managing and using these new technologies safely and ethically is a significant task – of which much responsibility is falling to governing boards. Governors need to be forward-thinking with a willingness to accept change. They need to recognise AI’s benefits to teaching staff in terms of reducing workload for example, yet have an acute awareness of the risks, such as data protection, cybersecurity and equality.

AI is enabling us to do things in a very different way right across the business. In terms of governance it is already helping us to streamline administrative tasks, such as generating meeting minutes and actions.

More widely, AI provides the capability to analyse huge rafts of data quickly. This can be incredibly helpful, helping colleges tailor provision and courses very specifically, which could help close achievement gaps.

However, this interaction between systems will create a complex web of data sharing, which will impact data protection and heighten cybersecurity risks.

And here is where AI ethics comes in, which for me is the most significant challenge for college governance – and indeed for leaders across all industries.

AI ethics issues range from data responsibility and privacy, to trust and inclusion. How will data be collected and used? And how can we ensure AI will support social mobility and not exacerbate inequalities through lack of access?

Accountability is also key. For example, if a college uses chatbots to speak to students and the wrong advice is provided, who is ultimately responsible?

There is also the potential for bias and/or discrimination. AI bias can occur due to human biases skewing an algorithm (or the original data) that an AI system uses to make decisions.

In an FE setting, this could lead to learners being inadvertently disadvantaged if the systems making ‘decisions’ about their progression pathways (for example) or forecasting their performance, have inbuilt bias.

Boards should consider the following:

  • Setting up an ethics committee to focus on the issues arising from AI rollouts. This could be an additional function of the audit and risk committee, or curriculum and standards committee. The checks and balances governors provide must extend to the use and implementation of AI – ensuring compliance within set frameworks, the monitoring of risks and fair access for all.
  • Understand, quantify and address risks around data protection and cybersecurity. Data privacy policies, access controls and data minimisation are all needed to protect people’s privacy and colleges’ digital infrastructure. Governors need to understand the risks and ensure safety measures are being taken.
  • Being aware of how AI is being used across areas of the business via reporting frameworks from college leadership teams. What tools are being introduced for staff/students, at what cost and with what support? Knowing this will enable governors to consider the impact of AI on the college community, in terms of wellbeing and efficiency. It will also provide the necessary level of accountability in all areas – whether that’s within finance, curriculum or communications.

The government has set a clear ambition for the UK to lead the AI revolution. Colleges can be at the forefront of this – but governing boards have a key role to play in ensuring ethical standards are upheld.