DfE refuses petition’s call to back down from defunding BTECs

The Department for Education has stood firm on plans to strip public funding from a range of qualifications at level 3 in the face of a 13,000-strong petition protesting the move.

The petition was started by the Sixth Form Colleges Association as part of its #ProtectStudentChoice campaign and calls on government to reverse a decision to defund applied general qualifications such as BTECs.

It has now received an official response, in which the DfE says it is “streamlining and improving” the quality of post-16 qualifications, and says the future alternatives to A-levels or T Levels “may” include some BTECs, so long as “they meet the new criteria for funding approval”.

 

Students ‘leaving education without the skills employers need’

In its response to a consultation on level 3 qualifications which ended in July, the department said funding would continue for BTECs where there is a “real need” for them, though it later added it expected applied generals to become “rare”.

The DfE is looking to introduce a twin-track system of A-levels and T Levels, where most young people pursue one of these qualifications at the age of 16. “Poor quality” qualifications which duplicate or overlap with T Levels or A-levels will have their funding removed from 2023.

Officials have restated the “strong” case for changing the current system, arguing: “For too long we have allowed too many young people to leave education without the skills employers need.”

The response cites a review of vocational education carried out by the prime minister’s now-skills advisor Alison Wolf, published in 2011, which found “the content of many technical qualifications was not valued by employers and provided little value to students”. What employers had told the 2016 Sainsbury Review, that “many individuals who have successfully completed qualifications remain poorly equipped to enter skilled work,” was also referenced in the DfE’s response.

“Now more than ever as we recover from the pandemic, we need students to finish education well equipped to progress to further training or to get a skilled job, allowing businesses to recover and thrive,” the response reads.

The government did say it plans to fund A-level-sized qualifications which will complement the general course but have a practical component and enable students to go on to specialist higher education courses.

What support students need to get to level 3 will be explored with a consultation on level 2 and below qualifications later this year.

 

Does DfE know the difference between technical courses and BTECs, SFCA asks

Upon receiving the government response, the Sixth Form Colleges Association said citing the Wolf and Sainsbury review showed the DfE “does not know the difference between technical qualifications and applied generals or is attempting to mislead”.

The Wolf report said BTECs are “valuable in the labour market,” while reform of the qualification was outside the Sainsbury Review’s remit, the SFCA retorted.

“So the DFE case for change for scrapping BTECs rests on one report that rated them highly and another that did not look at them at all.

“The case for ‘streamlining and improving’ these qualifications is very thin given there are not very many of them (e.g. 40 BTEC subjects across our sector) and they are very popular with students, employers and HE. Scrapping BTECs would be a disaster.”

The association, along with multiple other sector representative groups, published a joint letter to education secretary Gavin Williamson in July, under the banner #ProtectStudentChoice.

The letter highlighted how scrapping applied generals would hit disadvantaged students the most and urged the government to rethink.

You can see the petition for yourself here.

 

Read the government’s response to the #ProtectStudentChoice petition in full:

The government is streamlining and improving the quality of post-16 qualifications. We will fund a range of qualifications in addition to T Levels and A levels, which may include some BTECs.

The government will fund a range of qualifications to be taken alongside or as alternatives to T Levels and A-levels in future. This may include some Pearson BTECs provided they meet new criteria for funding approval.

Final plans setting out the groups of qualifications that will be available alongside T Levels and A-levels in future were published on 14 July. This followed a consultation on level 3 qualifications that ran from 23 October to 31 January.

The case for change is strong. For too long we have allowed too many young people to leave education without the skills employers need.

The Wolf Review (2011) found that the content of many technical qualifications was not valued by employers and provided little value to students.

Similarly, the Sainsbury Review (2016) found that employers continue to report that many individuals who have successfully completed qualifications remain poorly equipped to enter skilled work.

Now more than ever as we recover from the pandemic, we need students to finish education well equipped to progress to further training or to get a skilled job, allowing businesses to recover and thrive.

btecs
The #ProtectStudentChoice petition

Our reforms to level 3 qualifications will strengthen pathways to progression, creating clearly defined academic and technical routes centred around A-levels and T Levels with qualifications leading to further study, and/or skilled employment.

This clarity of purpose will provide students with a range of good options and allow them to see more easily how their study will help them to progress.

We have consulted in two stages on reforms to level 3 qualifications alongside T Levels and A-levels and have listened to feedback at each stage of the review.

The response to the second stage consultation sets out the range of situations where we see a role for qualifications to sit alongside T Levels and A-levels. Alongside T Levels, this includes technical qualifications that support progression to occupations outside of the T Level framework.

On the academic route, we will fund a small range of high-quality academic qualifications to sit alongside A levels and help students to progress to higher education (HE). These include A-level-sized qualifications designed to complement A-level study, often with a practical component, and large qualifications designed to enable access to specialist HE. These qualifications will fulfil a role similar to current applied general qualifications, which include some BTECs. We will set a high bar for quality and for demonstrating the need for qualifications, particularly if there is overlap with A-levels.

We recognise that some students do not always know what they want to do at 16 and that is why we need outstanding information, advice and guidance to support them to make good choices. Others may also need to study in different ways in the future such as accessing T Levels through the newly launched T Level Transition Programme.

We will explore how to support students who need additional support before they are ready for A-levels and other academic qualifications at level 3 through a consultation on level 2 and below qualifications later this year.

GCSE and A-level 2022 exams grading plan will be confirmed in October, says Ofqual

A decision on how exams will be graded in 2022 will be announced next month, Ofqual has said.

Ofqual chair Ian Bauckham told the Parliamentary education committee this morning that the regulator would confirm grading arrangements in October.

But the outcome of a consultation on modifications to assessments next year is still potentially weeks away, despite a stated aim to confirm decisions by “early September”.

The official consultation, launched July, stated that the government and Ofqual were “aiming to announce our decisions by early September”, with a decision on grading also coming in the autumn.

Bauckham acknowledged in May that teachers “need to know” of any “significant” changes before the start of the academic year.

But Ofqual would only confirm today that the outcome of the consultation would be published “in the next couple of weeks”.

Ministers have confirmed they want to see formal exams go ahead next year following their cancellation in 2020 and 2021, but with some adaptations aimed at making them fairer to pupils who have missed out on parts of their education.

Ofqual and the Department for Education launched a consultation in July on these adaptations, including a choice of topics for some GCSEs and advance information about content in most subjects.

The consultation closed on August 1, leaving schools waiting for confirmation that the proposals will be implemented.

Ofqual confirmed the arrangements for vocational and technical qualification exams for 2021/22 last month.

 

This story has been updated after Ofqual clarified that Ian Bauckham was talking only about the grading decision when he told the committee plans would be confirmed in October.

NCFE launches £1 million fund to discover the future of assessment

Organisations with their sights set on the future of assessment have been invited to apply to a £1 million fund, supported by NCFE.

The Assessment Innovation Fund is being made available for two pilots on an initial 12-month basis, with up to £100,000 being up for grabs for organisations such as providers, qualification developers, and awarding bodies.

“The fund is now open for applications from any organisation with an interesting idea about what the future of assessment might look like for the various stages of the learner journey,” NCFE has said.

 

NCFE wants ‘truly transformational’ assessment system

The awarding body envisions creating “innovative, robust and reliable” assessment solutions, which are “inherently fair and will provide an appropriate level of ‘recognisable value’ to all stakeholders who have invested in learning”.

Governance for the pilots will be provided by a panel of six AIF board members, which draws from awarding bodies, education technology organisations such as Jisc, providers and NCFE representatives.

NCFE’s head of assessment innovation Janine Oliver reasoned that, “as the pace of change in the world is ever-increasing, particularly due to disruptive new technologies, major societal trends, and not to mention the ongoing global pandemic, the needs of the labour market will continue to rapidly evolve”.

Which will require people to “continuously develop themselves to overcome challenges and seize opportunities” and integral to that will be “looking at the future of assessment and identifying the key ingredients required to create a system that is truly transformational for learners in technical and vocational education.

“Through this fund, we hope to enable and empower organisations to think big – to explore, innovate and importantly evidence how we can continue to evolve the way we assess in the future, learning lessons from the seismic global changes over the last two years.”

Applications for phase one of the fund close on 1 October.

Questions have been directed towards aif@ncfe.org.uk

 

The hysterical criticism of results show class-based elitism is alive and well

The cries of foul among some critics about last week’s results are completely out of proportion, writes Tom Bewick

It’s been another August like no other. As the hubbub from last week dies down a little, it’s worth reflecting on how it differs to the summer that went before. 

Last summer,  we first of all had the “exams fiasco”. Ministers all across the UK’s devolved education systems were forced into a set of last-minute, highly embarrassing U-turns.  

But back in 2020, the media and Westminster-based commentariat were much more empathetic with students’ plight.  

However this year, the intergenerational academic snobbery has been on full display. There have been various politicians and pundits frothing at the mouth about grade inflation, declaring A-Level and GCSE results “devalued” and “meaningless”.  

By contrast, last year the change in policy helped restore faith in these extraordinary arrangements for those most affected by them — learners.  

After all, no other generation has had to put up with as much disruption as this cohort of students. With formal examinations cancelled again this summer, the only sensible model on offer was teacher-assessed grades. 

Despite this, the Oxbridge-educated Telegraph columnist Allison Pearson wrote a diatribe this year to bemoan the “all must have prizes” syndrome that has infected the education establishment.  

And the political correspondent, Tom Harwood, launched a one-man Twitter tirade, calling for top grades to be fixed at low quartile percentages, like the finite number of medals handed out at the Olympics.  

The hysterical reaction underpinning both these kind of arguments is, in my view, clear evidence that class-based elitism is alive and well in Britain today.  

It’s the boneheaded belief that only a few must be allowed to succeed. The rest of us plebs are to be put in our place with, “sorry, old bean, your offspring don’t quite meet the grade.”  

Totally predictable and positively Darwinian in nature.  

Of course, exams are there to objectively assess performance and differentiate between candidates.  

And where you have, in effect, a rationing system of access to top university courses, independently marked exams are still one of the fairest ways of distributing ‘positional goods’ amongst the population. The alternative would be money and nepotism.  

But where the elitist argument falls flat on its face is the notion that in any single cohort of human beings, there is an artificially fixed amount of people who can succeed in the task that is being put before them.  

One useful analogy that helps debunk this myth is the climbing of Mount Everest, the world’s tallest summit at 29,000 feet.  

In 1953, Edmund Hilary and Tenzing Norgay became the first recorded people in history to conquer the challenge.  

Since then, nearly 7,000 climbers have done it, with an average of 800 people who attempt the summit each year. On that measure, the attainment of this singular goal has resulted in massive climbing inflation compared to Hilary’s time.  

Yet, the peak itself has not got any smaller. Instead, humans have learnt how to adapt. They are equipped in different ways.  

The same is the case in relation to those passing A-levels these days.  

The challenge is broadly the same as when these qualifications were first awarded in 1951, except teaching, learning and assessment models have adapted to take on the test over time. 

Critics argue that this is a corruption of the system.

But who would seriously argue that a sailor who has circumnavigated the globe using GPS is any less worthy of the achievement than when Ferdinand Magellan first managed it with a crude astrolabe in the sixteenth century?  

The truth is assessment systems are no different.  

Our alternative assessment system was always going to result in significantly higher grade results compared to previous cohorts. It’s just wrong-headed to make straight comparisons with other years. 

These angry critics must adapt to the world we live in today, not some imagined golden age of cucumber sandwiches and dreaming spires – where only the lucky few should advance. 

Sector views sought on domestic abuse guidance

Colleges and other education organisations are being asked for views on new statutory guidance on domestic abuse by the Home Office. 

The consultation is being aimed at all organisations with a statutory responsibility for safeguarding, including local authorities, Jobcentre Plus, police forces as well as all education settings from early years to higher education settings. 

New guidance is being drafted following the successful passage through Parliament of the Domestic Abuse Act 2021, which received Royal Assent in April. The act introduces, for the first time, a legal definition of domestic abuse which includes emotional abuse, controlling and coercive behaviour and economic abuse as well as physical abuse. 

Lockdown measures introduced in response to Covid-19 have been attributed to a sharp rise in domestic abuse. Between March 2019 and March 2020, 1.6 million women and 757,000 men experienced domestic abuse, which is a seven per cent increase on previous figures according to the National Crime Survey. The National Domestic Abuse Helpline saw a 65 per cent increase in calls between April-June 2020 compared to January-March 2020 before lockdown measures were introduced. 

The Home Office hope that this new statutory guidance will help education settings firm up their own safeguarding policies and procedures with clear information about what domestic abuse is, how to identify it and how to respond. Education settings will also be asked for views on inter-agency working locally, including on new Domestic Abuse Local Partnership Boards which local authorities are now required to set up. 

The consultation can be found on the Home Office website and closes on 14th September.

DfE puts out ‘Fire It Up’ campaign

The Department for Education is ditching the multi-million pound ‘Fire It Up’ campaign meant to boost apprenticeship numbers, amid the lowest levels of take-up by young people since at least the 1980s.

An update from the Education and Skills Funding Agency today revealed the government will instead focus on promoting every option available to people at post-16 and post-18.

“As a result of ongoing work to integrate government communications for young people about education, training and work, the Department for Education will no longer run the ‘Fire it Up’ advertising campaign,” the update read.

Consequently, the DfE says it will not be renewing the licence to use rapper Busta Rhymes’ 1997 track ‘Fire It Up’ for their apprenticeships TV advert.

Providers have been asked to remove the track from any of their channels promoting apprenticeships by 1 September, which is when the licence will expire.

 

‘Fire It Up’ cost DfE millions

fire it up
The blue feather logo

The blue feather ‘Apprenticeships’ logo can still be used on digital platforms, but not in print.

Any questions about using the campaign brand or assets should be directed to Marcomms.Mailbox@education.gov.uk

‘Fire It Up’ was the result of a £5 million, two-year contract the department signed with world-renowned advertising firm M&C Saatchi in November 2019.

The first stage of the advertising campaign, aimed at boosting the number of apprenticeships, started in January and saw some initial success.

In January, just 14 per cent of young people told the DfE they were considering an apprenticeship, but by September that had risen to 71 per cent.

The campaign also included the release of a grime music track, which cost the DfE £1 million but contributed to a 171 per cent increase in the number of users of the apprenticeship website in January to March 2020 compared to the same period in 2019.

 

Apprenticeship take-up at lowest levels since ’80s

News of the demise of ‘Fire It Up’ comes the same day think tank the Institute for Fiscal Studies released a report showing only three per cent of 16- and 17-year-olds took apprenticeships last year.

This is the lowest level since at least the 1980s and probably longer, the briefing on FE and sixth form spending revealed.

The DfE has stressed it is not discontinuing its communications activity around apprenticeships, with a spokesperson saying: “We are working across government to integrate all our communications about education, training and work both for young people and for adults.

“This will include communications about all options available to young people and adults respectively, including apprenticeships.”

DfE outlines new Covid case ‘thresholds’ to prompt extra controls in providers – but their use is optional

The government has updated its contingency framework for further education and skills providers to include new Covid case “thresholds” that could prompt extra controls – but it will be up to leaders whether to use them.

The updated guidance on managing cases from the autumn term suggests that providers may want to consider “extra action” once certain thresholds are met.

The first suggested threshold is if five students or staff likely to have mixed closely test positive for Covid within a 10-day period.

The second is if 10 per cent of students or staff who are likely to have mixed closely test positive within 10 days.

The guidance includes a different threshold for special providers, residential settings, and settings that operate with 20 or fewer students and staff “at any one time”.

For these settings, the suggested threshold is if two students and staff likely to have mixed closely test positive in a 10 day period.

In the guidance, the Department for Education said the thresholds “can be used by settings as an indication for when to seek public health advice if they are concerned”.

The DfE also states it will “make sense” for most settings to consider extra action if the number of positive cases “substantially increases”. This is because it “could indicate transmission is happening in the setting”.

The guidance states that identifying groups likely to have mixed closely will be “different for each setting”. For FE providers, they could include students and teachers on practical courses which require close hands-on teaching such as hairdressing and barbering; students on sports teams together; or students and teachers who have mixed in the same classroom.

 

Providers told to consider outdoor activities and ways to improve ventilation

The guidance also sets out actions for providers to “consider once a threshold is reached”.

As well as reviewing and reinforcing testing, hygiene and ventilation measures already in place, the DfE said providers should consider whether any activities “can take place outdoors”.

Providers should also consider ways to “improve ventilation indoors, where this would not significantly impact thermal comfort”, as well as “one-off enhanced cleaning” focussing on “touch points and any shared equipment”.

The guidance also states that settings “may wish to seek additional public health advice if they are concerned about transmission in the setting”, either through the DfE’s helpline or “in line with other local arrangements”.

Directors of public health or health protection teams “may give settings advice reflecting the local situation”.

In areas where rates are high, this “may include advice that local circumstances mean that the thresholds for extra action can be higher than set out above”.

 

Local health directors may recommend attendance restrictions as ‘last resort’

Local directors of public health and health protection teams may also advise providers to strengthen communications on testing at home, temporarily reinstate face coverings, reinstate on-site lateral flow testing and increased frequency of testing.

In “extreme cases”, and as a “last resort where all other risk mitigations have not broken chains of transmission”, directors of public health “may advise introducing short-term attendance restrictions in a setting, such as sending home a class or year group”.

High-quality remote learning “should be provided for all students well enough to learn from home”.

 

Measures come on top of new testing and isolating rules

The actions and thresholds suggested today come on top of measures already set out in operational guidance that providers should have in place.

These include on-site testing in the autumn, and twice-weekly testing at home for secondary students and staff after that.

As announced last month, although those who test positive should isolate and take a confirmatory PCR test, under-18s will not need to self-isolate if they are a close contact of a positive case. Instead, they will “strongly advised” to take a PCR test, and will need to isolate if it comes back positive.

Colleges facing “immense” challenge from rising student numbers, warns IFS

The Institute for Fiscal Studies has echoed calls for extra college funding to abate an “immense” resourcing challenge caused by a boom in student numbers, falling apprenticeship places and insufficient funding.

A new IFS briefing on further education and sixth form spending in England, published today, reveals FE and sixth form colleges’ funding per 16-18-year-old student has fallen by 11 per cent in real terms since 2010-11.

But the share of 16- to 17-year-olds in full-time education rose by 85 per cent during the pandemic, and that age group is set to increase by 17 per cent between 2019 and 2024.

Real terms funding for school sixth forms, meanwhile, has fallen by 25 per cent since 2010-11, so the IFS calculates 16-19 providers will need an extra £570 million in 2022-23 to maintain per student spending in real terms.

The funding rate for post-16 education is completely inadequate and has been for many years

Geoff Barton, general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders, said: “The funding rate for post-16 education is completely inadequate and has been for many years, despite the number of 16 and 17-year-olds staying in full-time education hitting an all-time high of 85 per cent in 2020. 

“There is no rhyme or reason why the funding rate for 16 and 17-year-olds is less than the minimum funding rate for secondary school pupils and nowhere near university tuition fees. All of this before the far-reaching impacts of the pandemic are factored in, with a profound need to catch up on lost learning.”

The briefing’s co-author Imran Tahir warns that colleges and sixth forms “face immense resource challenges,” including having to catch students up on learning lost during the pandemic.

A £400 million funding boost for 16-19-year-old students for 2020-21, announced by the Treasury in 2019, will only reverse funding cuts back to 2018-19, “leaving in place the vast majority of the cuts to funding per student over the previous decade,” he added.

 

Extra 200,000 16- and 17-year-olds by 2024

The Office for National Statistics has forecast there will be an extra 200,000 16- and 17-year-olds in England by 2024.

Alongside that, students are also choosing classroom-based qualifications, such as A-levels and BTECs, to the extent over 90 per cent of 16- to 17-year-olds are now taking them.

The proportion of that age group taking part in work-based learning also fell by around 30 per cent between 2019 and 2020, the IFS also found. Only three per cent of them took apprenticeships last year, while two per cent were in employer-funded training – the lowest levels for those two programmes since at least the 1980s.

Cheryl Lloyd, education programme head at the Nuffield Foundation, which funded the briefing, believes that “without further action,” the decline in apprenticeships could become permanent.

“To reverse this trend,” she said, “more support is needed for students, education providers and the businesses,” including incentives like protected funding for 16- to 18-year-olds and extra support for disadvantaged learners. 

Without extra funding, more pressure will be placed on sixth form and college finances “which are already strained as a result of extra costs during the pandemic and falls in spending per student over the past decade,” the briefing reads.

 

£400m boost had to be stretched due to student numbers

New funding streams for vocational courses has also meant FE suffered a nine per cent funding cut between 2013-14 and 2019-20, rather than the up to 18 per cent sixth forms have endured.

Thanks to the rush of enrolments during this pandemic, the £400 million boost will have had to be stretched to cover more students.

An added pressure on colleges is how they are funded for students on a one-year lag.

Earlier this month, the Association of Colleges put out a report saying college funding should move to an “in-year” model as it predicted an extra 90,000 students would need college places by 2024/25.

The IFS itself warned last year that, owing to FE’s lagged funding system, exceptional rises in student numbers could generate a real terms fall in funding per student in 2020/21.

student numbers
David Hughes

Association of Colleges chief executive David Hughes said in response to today’s briefing the lagged funding methodology “makes it increasingly difficult for colleges to cater to every student during times of population growth and even more so when there are also reduced opportunities in the labour market and on apprenticeships”.

He said there is an “urgent need” for the Department for Education to guarantee full funding for every student recruited by a college this autumn, as they do for universities.

Sixth Form Colleges Association deputy chief executive James Kewin has said the government can no longer “fund sixth form education on the cheap, and must use the spending review to introduce a multi-year funding model for the sector”.

 

Future years’ funding will be decided at spending review

In response to the briefing, a DfE spokesperson highlighted the £291 million of funding announced at 2020’s spending review to maintain the base rate at £4,188 per student in 2021-22.

This funding “has contributed to the current record high proportion of 16- to 18-year-olds who are participating in education or apprenticeships since consistent records began,” the spokesperson said.

They also pointed out the £3,000 incentive scheme encouraging employers to hire apprentices, which is running until next month, and the Post-16 Capacity Fund for providers to accommodate extra students this year.

The spokesperson added that future years’ funding will be considered in the upcoming spending review.

Student protests prompt college into review of certain A-level grades

A college has promised a “wholesale” review of A-level grades it handed out for certain subjects this summer, after students protested their results were unfairly changed.

Havering Sixth Form College, part of New City College London, has found grades in certain subjects such as maths and humanities were changed more than others so will be looking at whether grade boundaries were applied correctly during its moderation process.

The review is starting today, and a result is expected as early as this week.

The college is also “actively” considering all appeals and has extended the deadline to lodge them. Information about this will be published on NCC’s website.

Students and parents held a protest outside Havering Sixth Form yesterday after many learners received results which were lower than what they were expecting, throwing apprenticeship and university places into doubt.

They claimed NCC’s management had adjusted their original teacher-assessed results downward, to keep the overall marks in line with previous year’s cohorts.

 

MP hopes students will be ‘reassured’ about A-level grades

Hornchurch and Upminster MP and Cabinet Office minister Julia Lopez, who met with Havering’s principal Janet Smith yesterday to discuss the students’ complaints, said she was “pleased” the college “have listened to students’ concerns and will be reviewing individual appeals across the board.

a-level
Julia Lopez

“I hope that my meeting with Janet will lead to an outcome that reassures students of the integrity of their eventual grades, and helps with their next stage of education or the first steps in their working lives.”

Romford MP Andrew Rosindell wrote to NCC’s principal Gerry McDonald last week expressing his “concern” students had seen their results downgraded “significantly” by the college.

The college has said the moderation process, where teachers marked in-house assessments and grades were calculated using 2018/19 performance data before being moderated by principals, did not change the A-level grades students were given by teachers in most subjects.