The Department for Education has hired seven law firms to provide legal advice on insolvency, audit and fraud cases – at a cost of up to £3.3 million.
Tender documents show the companies will be put on a rota over the next two years to advise on legal matters. Cases will likely involve “financially distressed” colleges, academy trusts, independent and higher education providers for the DfE’s provider market oversight (PMO) division.
The DfE anticipates there will be around 40 of these “projects” each year, although there is “no guarantee of work and no retainers”.
A spokesperson for the department said the tender had caps on what the winners can charge to “ensure greater value for money” to the taxpayer.
Hourly and day rates for each of the seven firms have been redacted in the tender documents.
But they do show the contracts commenced on September 3 for an initial one-year period – valued around £2,067,000, with an option to extend for a further 12-months – which would cost an additional £1,275,000.
Julian Gravatt, deputy chief executive of the Association of Colleges, said the DfE has spent “quite a lot” in recent years on lawyers and accountants to provide advice on restructuring and on funding rules.
Part of the problem, he told FE Week, is “under-funding, over-regulation and an environment in which mistakes result in lengthy investigations”.
The DfE launched its PMO team, currently led by director Matthew Atkinson, in late 2017.
The move came partly in response to the considerable number of untried and untested training providers that have hit the market in recent years, for example, through the register of apprenticeship training providers.
FE Week reported last month that a training provider called ABIS Resources Limited is suing the education secretary in the High Court after the firm’s FE loans and apprenticeship contracts were terminated. This is believed to be the first time a training provider has taken the DfE all the way to court over terminated skills funding contracts.
There have also been a number of high-profile cases of alleged fraud in recent years, while many other FE providers have fallen foul of complex data rules, which has led to contested clawback challenges following audits.
A college insolvency regime was also introduced in 2019. Hadlow College became the first to fall under the education administration process in May of that year, followed closely by its sister college, West Kent and Ashford College. Investigations into financial irregularities at the colleges are ongoing.
Multiple FE Commissioner reports have since warned that other colleges have been close to going insolvent.
According to the tender documents, the lawyers will provide legal services and advice for “restructuring and insolvency, such as in the run-up to and during an education administration” or independent business reviews.
Advice will also be required for “counter fraud and investigations”, including in the event of “legal challenge, assessment of relevant potential contractual action and strategic options depending on individual case factors”.
Elsewhere, the lawyers could be called on for “ongoing audits and provision of advice on funding error recovery action”, which will include a legal assessment on likelihood of legal challenge and possible “debt recovery”.
“This could include advice on freedom of information and GDPR provision,” the tender documents add.
[This article has been updated from its original version as the correct total for the legal advice could reach £3.3 million, rather than the £23.4 million originally reported.]
A top skills civil servant has signalled that the Department for Education is looking to move away from tendering for independent training providers.
Keith Smith, the DfE’s director for post-16 strategy, chaired a webcast on proposed reforms to FE funding and accountability last week and admitted his department “does do too much procurement”.
He said: “We have a huge amount of complexity in the system for people for competing and bidding for funds.
“We are very keen, if we can introduce a simpler system that can get us much clearer on the outcomes and success we’re trying to achieve, that actually we should have confidence in using that funding mechanism with the institutions we are funding.
“There are some really important questions here on the funding of independent training providers as commercial organisations. It is really important we think about those two questions together.”
Currently, independent training providers receive their adult skills funding through a mixture of direct procurement by the DfE and subcontracting from colleges or other providers.
Colleges meanwhile receive grant funding from the DfE annually without the need to tender.
It puts forward a single “skills fund”, which will bring together the adult education budget and national skills fund.
This new system is aimed to give providers “autonomy over their budget, reduce burdens and enable them to plan strategically for the long term”, according to last week’s webcast.
Allocated funding through the skills fund will be non-ringfenced and a lagged system will fund “real delivery – meaning there will be no reconciliation, funding on plans or clawback for under-delivery”.
The DfE also proposes moving to multi-year funding with “simple and consistent allocations”.
The consultation document says the department would like to consider how procurement for private providers “works and could be improved”.
Multiple tenders have plagued the department and private providers in recent years. The AEB tender of 2017 was beset with delays and had to be completely redone after officials realised it was botched. And when the final outcomes were released most providers had their funding slashed – including one case of a 97 per cent cut.
Providers teamed up to threaten the DfE with legal action before the agency found additional funding to top up contracts.
Later in 2017 the DfE had more issues with its tender for non-levy apprenticeship funding. For example, the agency awarded a contract to a defunct provider but an ‘outstanding’ college was rejected.
In 2019, the DfE delayed its European Social Fund tender three times following technical errors as well as claims the agency broke procurement rules, which led to more threats of legal action.
And this year another AEB tender was controversially run with multiple delays.
Other funding streams the DfE currently procures include skills bootcamps and traineeships.
The outcome of the funding and accountability consultation is due to be published in spring 2022.
NCFE has triumphed in the battle between awarding bodies for T Levels.
The new flagship technical qualifications hit a milestone this week with the awarding of contracts to develop six new courses for 2023 – the final year of the T Level rollout.
NCFE is set to earn by far the most from T Levels of any awarding body, having won contracts to design and award nine T Levels for rollout between 2020 and 2023, netting the charity £38 million.
City & Guilds has earned the second most, winning contracts to develop seven T Levels, worth £26.7 million; while Pearson has won four contracts, worth £11.3 million.
Since the Department for Education controversially decided to have just one awarding body for each T Level, awarding organisations have been competing for ownership of the 16-to-18 programme. Each successful awarding organisation wins a license to design and award the T Level qualification, but the copyright is owned by the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education.
Consequently, 20 of the 21 T Levels being rolled out are being awarded by NCFE, City & Guilds and Pearson.
The Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education, which awards the contracts with the DfE, announced on Monday that Highfield Qualifications will be developing its first T Level, in catering, for 2023 after winning a contract worth £2.6 million. NCFE will design another three and City & Guilds will design a further two for that year.
NCFE ‘fully committed’ to T Levels
NCFE said they were “delighted” to have won the 2023 contracts and they have been “really pleased” with the progress of the qualifications.
Asked for the secret of its success in winning the contracts, the awarding body argued it was “fully committed” to T Levels from their inception and “clearly demonstrated” the focus and resource it would put into developing them.
Subject experts have also been used on their bids to show “the T Level qualifications we develop will equip students with the relevant skills those sectors are looking for, while providing a practical and engaging approach to learning that supports students into their future careers”.
The income from T Levels has been a boon to NCFE, as the £38 million exceeds the charity’s total income for 2019/20 of £36.1 million.
NCFE’s latest financial statements report its “success” with T Levels “brings certainty of direction and stability” to their work.
The decision to have one awarding body per T Level came about after the 2016 Sainsbury Review of post-16 technical education.
The review recommended new technical qualifications “should be offered and awarded by a single body or consortium” to combat a “race to the bottom”, with qualifications becoming easier to pass.
Sector leaders, including Rod Bristow, Pearson’s then-president for the UK, raised concerns about this approach in 2018 when the DfE tendered for bodies to design the first wave of T Levels, for rollout in 2020.
Bristow warned of “inherent risks” and “adverse consequences” such as a “lack of resilience with the significant reliance on the ‘bid winner’, the loss of innovation and expertise, and a lack of choice for providers”.
A 2017 report by Frontier Economics, commissioned by the DfE, even warned that having just one awarding body created a “risk of system failure” in the programme.
Apprenticeship starts for the whole of 2020/21 grew marginally on the previous year, new figures show.
Provisional data published this morning by the Department for Education has revealed there were a total of 319,400 starts last year compared to 319,000 at the same point for 2019/20 – an increase of 0.1 per cent.
Starts for 2020/21 were, however, still 18 per cent down on the 389,000 recorded in 2018/19 – the year before Covid-19 struck.
FE Week analysis shows apprenticeship starts for young people and the lower levels continue to fall while those for adults and the higher levels shoot up.
Starts for 16- to 18-year-olds (64,400) and level 2 (83,700) both dropped by 15 per cent on the previous year. Meanwhile starts for people aged 25 or above (160,900) and level 4 or above (98,100) increased by 8 per cent and 21 per cent respectively.
Final data will not be available until later this year.
Colleges and universities have been warned not to use “inclusivity” as an excuse for lowering standards in spelling, punctuation and grammar by the Office for Students (OfS).
In an explosive statement today, the higher education regulator’s director of regulation, Susan Lapworth, has slammed colleges’ and universities’ assessment practices saying that “some universities and colleges ask academics to ignore poor spelling, punctuation and grammar to make assessment more inclusive”.
Lapworth continues: “The idea that they should expect less from certain groups of students is patronising.”
The OfS’ argument is based on a report it is publishing today called ‘Assessment practices in English higher education providers: Spelling, punctuation and grammar’.
The report is the result of a “review of policies and practices in a small number of higher education providers” in order to investigate practices around the assessment of students’ written spelling, punctuation and grammar. The report’s summary states that it finds “themes” that give the OfS “cause for concern”.
The review found that some assessment policies had been designed to intentionally not look at spelling, punctuation and grammar, and that some providers use the Equality Act 2010 as justification for this.
The OfS refused to tell FE Week how many providers were part of the sample for this piece of work. The report features five case studies but fails to detail any information about the participating providers.
When pressed by FE Week, an Office for Students spokesperson said: “We looked at a handful of higher education providers – we aren’t publishing the exact number. This wasn’t designed to be a representative selection of providers, and we didn’t look at the policy of any further education colleges.”
Despite only looking at a “handful” of providers, today’s guidance has been described as “instructive” and “prescriptive” to the sector as a whole, including OfS registered further education colleges.
Nonetheless, higher and further education minister Michelle Donelan today says “it is right that the Office for Students is putting universities which disregard poor written English on notice”.
OfS are taking aim at what it calls “inclusive assessment” which it defines broadly as policies which prevent a student being advantaged or disadvantaged by any chosen assessment methods.
In one of the case studies outlined in the report, OfS found that a provider’s inclusive assessment policy stated that “learning outcomes for modules and courses can be met without including technical accuracy in written English as an objective, as long as ideas and knowledge are communicated effectively.” This was deemed unacceptable by OfS because it could “lead to unacceptably low standards”.
In another example, a provider’s assessment policy required markers to focus more on knowledge, ideas and understanding and “ignore weaknesses” in English writing. The justification for this particular approach was to not disadvantage students whose first language was not English. According to the OfS, this method actually further disadvantages the very students it seeks to support, by “reducing the pedagogical benefits associated with assessment.”
There is little evidence that this is a widespread issue in higher education. Indeed, Universities UK told FE Week that “five case studies are presented here – it’s worth noting that OfS has 418 registered providers, so we consider it quite a leap to imply that this is widespread practice.”
Several universities hit the headlines in April 2021 for prioritising students’ abilities to demonstrate their knowledge and learning over precise and technical command of written English, except in subjects where an external body insists that the latter is a requirement.
Today’s OfS report appears to be in response to those reports in which the University of Hull, Worcester University and University of the Arts London had their inclusive assessment practices exposed by The Timesand The Daily Telegraph.
Just last month, in his final major sector event as education secretary, Gavin Williamson told the Universities UK Annual Conference that “lowering the bar for certain groups of students serves no one. It is patronising to expect less from some students under the guise of supporting them. Effective academic writing requires good spelling, punctuation and grammar from every student.”
The OfS says today that it will “issue guidance” to any higher education provider where it has identified practices that are likely to be of concern.
Established for almost thirteen years, IPS Ltd has created systems for the Further Education sector and has provided end-to-end solutions across the UK.
We understand that colleges already have systems in place and our focus is to join what they already have together to make them work in a brand-new way.
We focus on integrating to a colleges current MIS system and transform it into the Colleges heart of technology, using the data to push through to a range of systems; from ID Card Software, Cashless Catering, Access Control and even our online payment platform which enables staff and students to be self-reliant and use these functionalities without having to wait for even the College to be open, they can even book online therapy sessions with our partner Mindspace24/7, who provides qualified coaches and therapists to staff and students, helping them with any mental health issues that they may have at any time of day, even out of term time.
Our systems enhance Safeguarding policies, making students safer than ever, and all with the input that is done through the MIS system. Not only can we do this, but we also reduce the workload for staff as there is no need for any additional input to any other software.
“The systems have been integrated to our MIS system, Prosolution, so that they extract the data from it. Our MIS system is now the heart of the College.
The benefits from this have meant that no person is able to enter College premises without being on a current course, meaning they will not be able to access the college building if their course date has expired or they have previously withdrawn
As all the IPS Ltd systems are synchronised with each other, our students receive a variety of key benefits in using these systems. They can top-up their ID Cards to pay for items in the catering outlets, either online or using our facial recognition kiosks and can even use their ID Cards in the College libraries.
Having self-service systems in place has meant, queue time has been reduced for a range of departments, including catering, reception, and student services, meaning there is no need for large amounts of students to be in one area.
Our staff find them easy to use and they can function around the systems in no time at all. Catering Managers can add on new items and meal deals without having to be at a till.
When a student scans their card at the till, the Operators can see the credit that is on the card, and they also see the student photo to ensure that the right person is using the right card.
Most importantly our Finance department can see the overview of all revenue and individual reports for our catering departments, our external catering outlets and even our kiosks.
Overall, IPS Ltd continues to provide our college with new innovative technology to enforce our policies and procedures to a much stronger level, giving us the reassurance and confidence to be able to focus our attention at a higher level of capability.” John Billington, Director of Facilities & Technical Services, Hugh Baird College
To see how students use our systems during their time in college, why not look at our video.
Want to know more?
IPS Ltd has set up several monthly webinars, the first webinar is on Thursday 28th October 2021, from 10.30 am – 11.30 am, this webinar will provide you with information about how our integration and automation works and how our systems work with yours.
You can take a look at our webinar range HERE, and you and your colleagues are welcome to register to any of them or call 01202 006677 for more information.
IPS Ltd has partnered with Hugh Baird College and Sapien Care Group to bring professionals of today to speak with professionals of tomorrow.
Further Education College tutors spend time structuring lessons to enable students to learn the criteria that is required for them to successfully complete their courses.
Health and Social Care students have allocated hours in a number of areas, from workplacement, lessons and also enrichment hours, which students are required to complete away from their course timetable.
“For almost 13 years, IPS Ltd.’s primary customers are within the education sector, meaning that we meet many Further Education College staff from across the country, all of whom have a passion and vision for what they do and how it enables the student journey to be outstanding, aiming for them to gain the best knowledge for their future careers.
The IPS Ltd and Sapien Care Group partnership provides an extensive portfolio of professionals within the Health and Social Care setting, in turn this gives students in FE Colleges an exciting new opportunity to learn from them and ask them questions”. Robert Powell, Managing Director, IPS Ltd.
“Many students enrol onto our Health and Social Care courses, with their career pathway being very vague. I hear many of them say that they want to become a nurse but not knowing in what profession.” Philippa Law, Assistant Director for Technical Skills at Hugh Baird College.
With the combination of IPS Ltd, Sapien Care Group and Hugh Baird College, we are delighted to be able to present to you i-Enrich.
This brand-new opportunity provides you and your students to be a part of a series of webinars that are hosted by Robert Powell, Managing Director of IPS Ltd and compered by Philippa Law, Assistant Director for Technical Skills at Hugh Baird College.
Each webinar will present a unique topic that will be relevant to your students and will consist of guest speakers that are highly professional and work within the Health and Social Care setting, and your students will get to understand and learn from their life experiences and knowledge.
Meaning they are eligible to classify attending the webinars as a maximum of thirty enrichment hours from their course.
Each guest speaker is excited to be a part of this experience, to share their knowledge and know that they are speaking to the next generation of health and social care professionals.
We would like to invite you and your students to join us at our webinars so that they gain the i-Enrich experience
Webinars are accessible everywhere, meaning that all Health and Social Care students within all FE Colleges can join us and be a part of this experience, our aim is to give our future Health and Social Care professionals as much information as possible to help them to choose the right pathway, and for them to be able to learn from current experienced professionals of today.
As a college, you can book for your students and staff to be involved, they can ask any questions to our guest speakers and listen to their stories.
Take a look at a short clip of the previous September 2021 webinar, Working from the Bottom up with our Guest Speaker Trisha Kelly a Senior Consultant from Fulcrum Care
If you would like your Health and Social Care staff and students to be a part of our webinars, then there are two options available to you.
Either book to attend the full series or choose any webinars from our series.
For more information on the Health and Social Care webinars and to read about our highly professional guest speakers click HERE
If you have any further questions, contact IPS Ltd on 01202 006 677.
The colleges and adult learning providers chosen to take part in a £9.5 million government pilot to bolster teacher training in further education have been named.
The pilots, which involve a lead provider and partner colleges in different areas of the country, will focus on strengthening staff’s skills and confidence in using technology, as well as subject-specific development to improve curriculum design and teaching, learning, and assessment.
There will also be “tailored” support for the sector’s new and inexperienced teachers to help career progression and aid retention.
The money forms part of the government’s promise in January’s Skills for Jobs white paper to take spending on the sector workforce to £65 million in this academic year.
Skills minister Alex Burghart said: “I’m delighted to announce today’s grant awards, which will help providers and teaching staff access top-quality professional development, so they can become ever more brilliant educators and trainers.
“The path to good jobs starts with good teachers. That’s why we’re funding FE providers to equip teachers with the knowledge and skills they need.
“As we build back better, this is a great time to start a career in FE teaching, and use real industry experience to help people skill up and progress.”
The lead providers and their partners are as follows:
Priority theme 1: workforce capability and confidence to use technology effectively in education
These providers will lead on activities to support workforce capability and confidence to use technology effectively in education.
Tyne Coast College – lead provider
Partner provider:
Itchen Sixth Form College
Activity area includes:
collaborative peer-to-peer support
Norfolk County Council Adult Learning – lead provider
Partner providers:
Buckinghamshire Council
Central Bedfordshire Council
Adult Community Learning Essex
Hertfordshire Adult and Family Learning Service
Hull Training and Adult Education
Luton Borough Council – Luton Adult Learning
North Lincolnshire Council Adult Education and Community Learning
Southend Adult Community College
Thurrock Council – Thurrock Adult Community College
Wiltshire Council
Activity areas include:
collaborative peer-to-peer support
evidence-based training and CPD to improve practice
the development of online and blended pedagogy
City College Plymouth – lead provider
Partner providers:
Plymouth City Council
Achievement Training Ltd
Activity areas include:
collaborative peer-to-peer support
evidence-based training and CPD to improve practice
South Thames Colleges Group – lead provider
Partner providers:
Croydon College
Haringey Sixth Form College
City of Portsmouth College
Activity areas include:
collaborative peer-to-peer support
evidence-based training and CPD to improve practice
the development of online and blended pedagogy
Gateshead Council – lead provider
Partner provider:
Gateshead College
Activity areas include:
collaborative peer-to-peer support
evidence-based training and CPD to improve practice
the development of online and blended pedagogy
Priority theme 2: subject-specific professional development
These providers will lead on activities to support subject-specific professional development.
Middlesbrough College – lead provider
Partner providers:
Newcastle College
Newcastle Sixth Form College
John Leggot Sixth Form College
Activity areas include:
evidence-based approaches to improve subject knowledge and pedagogy
the application and adaption of generic pedagogic practices to specific subject areas
collaborative peer-to-peer support and subject networks
Burnley College – lead provider
Partner providers:
Blackburn College
Lancaster and Morecambe College
Preston’s College
Myerscough College
Activity areas include:
evidence-based approaches to improve subject knowledge and pedagogy
the application and adaption of generic pedagogic practices to specific subject areas
collaborative peer-to-peer support and subject networks
Waltham Forest College – lead provider
Partner provider:
Capital City College Group
Activity areas include:
evidence-based approaches to improve subject knowledge and pedagogy
the application and adaption of generic pedagogic practices to specific subject areas
collaborative peer-to-peer support and subject networks
Derby City Council – lead provider
Partner providers:
Derbyshire Adult Community Education Service
Workers Educational Association
Nottinghamshire County Council
Activity areas include:
evidence-based approaches to improve subject knowledge and pedagogy
the application and adaption of generic pedagogic practices to specific subject areas
collaborative peer-to-peer support and subject networks
Wigan and Leigh College – lead provider
Partner providers:
Hopwood Hall College
St Helens College
Stoke College
Education Partnership North East
Newcastle College Group
Activity areas include:
evidence-based approaches to improve subject knowledge and pedagogy
the application and adaption of generic pedagogic practices to specific subject areas
collaborative peer-to-peer support and subject networks
West Suffolk College Group – lead provider
Partner providers:
Suffolk New College
Inspire Education Group
Activity areas include:
evidence-based approaches to improve subject knowledge and pedagogy
the application and adaption of generic pedagogic practices to specific subject areas
collaborative peer-to-peer support and subject networks
Leeds College of Building – lead provider
Partner providers:
Bradford College
Calderdale College
Kirklees College
Luminate Education Group
Shipley College
Wakefield College
Askham Bryan College
Activity area includes:
collaborative peer-to-peer support and subject networks
Priority theme 3: supporting new or inexperience teachers
These providers will lead on activities to support new or inexperienced teachers.
Activate Learning – lead provider
Partner provider:
Barnet and Southgate College
Activity areas include:
covering the cost of additional teacher time to provide intensive support such as paired teaching, work shadowing and reduced workload
core induction programmes covering key areas of practice essential for new or inexperienced teachers to develop
support for newly qualified teachers to broaden their experience of face-to-face teaching plus strengthen skills and confidence to undertake classroom and in-person delivery
Cirencester College – lead provider
Partner provider:
Shrewsbury Colleges Group
Activity areas include:
core induction programmes covering key areas of practice essential for new or inexperienced teachers to develop
support for newly qualified teachers to broaden their experience of face-to-face teaching plus strengthen skills and confidence to undertake classroom and in-person delivery
Derby College – lead provider
Partner provider:
Nottingham College
Activity areas include:
core induction programmes covering key areas of practice essential for new or inexperienced teachers to develop
support for newly qualified teachers to broaden their experience of face-to-face teaching plus strengthen skills and confidence to undertake classroom and in-person delivery
Bridgwater and Taunton College – lead provider
Partner providers:
South Devon College
Cornwall College Group
Activity areas include:
covering the cost of additional teacher time to provide intensive support such as paired teaching, work shadowing and reduced workload
core induction programmes covering key areas of practice essential for new or inexperienced teachers to develop
support for newly qualified teachers to broaden their experience of face-to-face teaching plus strengthen skills and confidence to undertake classroom and in-person delivery
Northampton College – lead provider
Partner providers:
West Herts College Group
Moulton College
Stoke-on-Trent-College
Activity areas include:
covering the cost of additional teacher time to provide intensive support such as paired teaching, work shadowing and reduced workload
core induction programmes covering key areas of practice essential for new or inexperienced teachers to develop
support for newly qualified teachers to broaden their experience of face-to-face teaching plus strengthen skills and confidence to undertake classroom and in-person delivery
Kendal College – lead provider
Partner providers:
NCG
Lakes College
Furness College
Activity areas include:
covering the cost of additional teacher time to provide intensive support such as paired teaching, work shadowing and reduced workload
core induction programmes covering key areas of practice essential for new or inexperienced teachers to develop
support for newly qualified teachers to broaden their experience of face-to-face teaching plus strengthen skills and confidence to undertake classroom and in-person delivery
Wakefield College – lead provider
Partner providers:
Chesterfield College
Lincoln College
Nottingham College
Wigan and Leigh College
Activity areas:
covering the cost of additional teacher time to provide intensive support such as paired teaching, work shadowing and reduced workload
core induction programmes covering key areas of practice essential for new or inexperienced teachers to develop
support for newly qualified teachers to broaden their experience of face-to-face teaching plus strengthen skills and confidence to undertake classroom and in-person delivery
Barnsley College – lead provider
Partner providers:
Access to Music Ltd
Bournemouth & Poole College
City of Bristol College
Nelson & Colne College Group
Oaklands College
Runshaw College
Activity areas include:
covering the cost of additional teacher time to provide intensive support such as paired teaching, work shadowing and reduced workload
core induction programmes covering key areas of practice essential for new or inexperienced teachers to develop
support for newly qualified teachers to broaden their experience of face-to-face teaching plus strengthen skills and confidence to undertake classroom and in-person delivery
Harlow College – lead provider
Partner providers:
Chelmsford College
Colchester Institute
New City College
South Essex College
Writtle University College
The Sixth Form College, Colchester
USP College
Activity areas include:
covering the cost of additional teacher time to provide intensive support such as paired teaching, work shadowing and reduced workload
core induction programmes covering key areas of practice essential for new or inexperienced teachers to develop
support for newly qualified teachers to broaden their experience of face-to-face teaching plus strengthen skills and confidence to undertake classroom and in-person delivery
East Kent College Group – lead provider
Partner providers:
The Sheffield College
Bradford College
Activity areas include:
covering the cost of additional teacher time to provide intensive support such as paired teaching, work shadowing and reduced workload
core induction programmes covering key areas of practice essential for new or inexperienced teachers to develop
support for newly qualified teachers to broaden their experience of face-to-face teaching plus strengthen skills and confidence to undertake classroom and in-person delivery
“Teachers are the foundation of the education system – there are no great schools without great teachers.
“Teachers deserve high quality support throughout their careers, particularly in those first years of teaching when the learning curve is steepest.”
Bear that in mind, while we turn to the situation in FE.
Every year, around 10,000 FE teachers work towards a level 5 or above in an initial teacher training qualification .
Many FE providers offer robust professional development to support their new teachers. However, training for the mentors themselves seems to be less of a priority.
Evidence suggests that without appropriate conditions and expectations for mentors, the impact of mentoring is likely to be ineffectual, or even harmful to mentees.
In schools, school-based ITT and the subsequent early career framework has received a recent boost in funding. So it’s especially concerning that FE providers are given free rein when it comes to the early careers of their teachers.
There is no minimum entitlement, no consistency across providers, and insufficient time given to support new teachers to the sector.
In one recent ITT provider inspection in FE, inspectors noted that “it is often left to workforce mentors to use their professional judgement to determine what knowledge trainees need to learn [and this] slows trainees’ learning and development further”.
This shows us that there is now a greater emphasis from Ofsted on subject specialist mentors being able to support their mentee to apply their learning specifically from the ITT curriculum.
Another issue is that mentoring in colleges can vary significantly. We know that university ITT providers often pay institutions to host trainee teachers upwards of £600 per trainee, per year.
However, this only accounts for around half of those on ITT programmes.
A significant number of trainee teachers complete their training in-service through partnership colleges or awarding organisation providers.
Here, the mentoring largely relies on good will.
The mentoring largely relies on good will
Seldom is there remission for mentors and even more uncommon is any form of payment for this important role.
That’s despite the fact that we know institutions that provide the time for their mentors and their teaching staff through remitted timetables afford the opportunity for both to develop.
However, time alone is not enough. Evidence shows that successful mentors require sociability, openness and the ability to develop relationships built on shared control (as opposed to dominance).
None of this can be learnt simply through remission, or indeed payment. Instead, it relies on a willingness from mentors to develop their skillsets.
Steve is one of the University of Derby’s FE ITT mentors. In a recent interview, he highlighted that the mentor role isn’t just about giving time to the mentee, but also that the mentor should model positivity and how to handle the stresses of the teaching role.
They should encourage the mentee to develop their own authentic style.
Steve views the role as an honour and a pleasure, which is at odds with some mentors’ perspectives, who see the role in a more transactional way, whilst others find it burdensome.
So how do we ensure that our trainees are being supported by mentors like Steve?
First, university ITT providers need to invest in their mentors, offering specific training, not just an HR-prescribed list of actions.
Second, institutions need to engage with the new Education and Training Foundation mentor framework which has comprehensive resources to support leaders, mentors and mentees.
(At the University of Derby, aspects of this framework are integrated into a ‘mentor journey’, which provides clear milestones for mentors and optional development opportunities to support trainees as they move from novice to expert teachers).
And finally, providers must identify the right candidate for the mentoring role.
Is this individual committed to supporting the development of a mentee? Do they possess the skillset to encourage without dominating, to support without leading?
The successful mentor starts with the individual. But that mentor needs to be better invested in, and valued, in the first place.
This is understandable given current driver shortages across England, which have been linked to the fuel crisis.
Ministers wanted to act quickly on a driver shortage so introduced a skills measure and a three-month visa.
What is interesting is that the Department for Education used the National Skills Fund rather than the bigger apprenticeship budget to help a sector with workforce supply.
Perhaps this is obvious. No one starting an apprenticeship now would be finished by Christmas.
But, even if they did, government gave away most of its apprenticeship levers to employers and the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education in 2017.
So when DfE needs to act quickly, it has to do something else. Apprenticeships don’t help in the short term.
What about the long term?
There are standards in place and the post-2017 system puts employers in charge of the money.
Large firms have two years to spend the levy they pay or they can transfer funds down the supply chain. Smaller firms can access apprenticeship funds, albeit with certain obstacles like co-funding.
So, is the apprenticeship system part of the solution? I don’t know. What’s worse, I’m not sure the industry or policymakers know either.
A core feature of the current apprenticeship system is secrecy.
A core feature of the current apprenticeship system is secrecy
Because employers pay their levy to HMRC, their details, how much they pay and what they spend on apprenticeships are kept secret.
Taxpayer confidentiality is a core principle but it results in an absence of data about spending.
Employers in the retail, transport and distribution sectors have paid hundreds of millions of pounds in levy since 2017 yet very little of this is being spent on directly relevant apprenticeships.
It is easy to speculate why transport apprenticeship numbers are low but, without any data on what transport employers are doing with their levy funds, I’m not sure anyone knows which reason is relevant.
HMRC rules reduce scrutiny of actual employer spending and contribute to a situation in which Treasury had to find £10 million in a crisis.
Another factor may be the way employer decision-making is individualised in the English apprenticeship system.
Employers are given an apprenticeship account, some of which they can transfer, but there is no mechanism to pool funds.
This may be fine for some parts of the economy but it’s different from most levy systems in other countries or those that operated in UK the 1970s.
The Construction Industry Training Board and a few other sectors still operate a pooled levy. Perhaps this approach needs a review.
And then there’s the question about migration and skills.
There is some controversy about whether Brexit is a direct cause of the immediate HGV driver shortage but there should be no disagreement on the fact that this is a long-term issue.
The 2021 migration rules exclude jobs at level 2 from skilled worker visas and this has been clear policy since 2018.
Transport, food and care have been clearly identified as sectors affected by this change, but only in Home Office documents. Where’s the policymaking to work through the implications?
The post-Brexit migration rules were a hefty government intervention in the jobs market but our current approach to skills relies wholly on employers to work out a response individually. This just doesn’t work.
We know that leaving everything to the market in education often doesn’t work. Adults under-invest in themselves and are reluctant to borrow for training. Employers focus on short-term needs.
If UK migration policy cuts inflow of people to some sectors, skills policy needs to react.
Workforce planning is difficult and often fails, but sometimes it might be better to have a go.
DfE is moving forward with local skills planning arrangements with the intention that these should guide the single skills fund. Perhaps they need to be a tad more ambitious.
So they should think about planning apprenticeships and definitely publish more information.
Finally, they must use the forthcoming spending review to allocate a bigger budget, and set some national objectives.
