Skip to content
1 May 2026

Latest news from FE Week

Theory is being wrongly applied in classrooms

It’s easy to be blinded by the scientific theory and not think carefully about each learner, writes Jennifer Wilkinson

It is no surprise that teachers, whose primary goal it is to help people learn, are fascinated with metacognition (the process that enables us to learn and even self-regulate).

The very thought that we could somehow hack into our brain’s core processor and harness its power in the classroom sounds like something from a sci-fi novel.    

So when the theory of “interleaving” began to trickle down from universities, senior management quickly became blinded by the science. And why wouldn’t they?    

What is ‘interleaving’? 

Interleaving is where students apply the same skills while switching between different topics. The idea is that students will make connections between different topics, which will force them to think harder about applying certain strategies.   

For example, if your English lesson focuses on inference, you might give your students a number of extracts based on different topics and ask them to identify the inference from each text. You could even ask them to compare the inference for tone.   

Researchers now overwhelmingly agree on the benefits of interleaving, including improved working long-term memory and strengthened problem-solving abilities, even if it is more difficult for students in the short run. 

However, in the feverish rush to include learning theory in practice, fundamental errors are being made.   

Basics come first 

For a start, interleaving is not meant to be used as an initial learning strategy but as a revision tool within a scaffolded curriculum.    

Just like the old saying goes, you must walk before you can run. Students need to learn the basics before applying a complex skill over a range of topics and contexts.    

Depends on subjects 

The theory lends itself better to some subjects, such as GCSE maths, over other subjects, like functional skills English. That’s because functional skills employ a contextual problem-solving model, which means the skills needed come from the context of the topic.

Interleaving takes for granted that students already have contextual knowledge, which is often simply not the case. By having multiple short extracts instead of a longer, more informative text, you limit the contextual knowledge that the student will gain from the reading. 

This is exactly why it is often not the best approach for students still developing their reading skills.   

Fun fact: when the functional skills qualifications were in their early stages back in 2006, it was explicitly recommended that interleaving not be used for this exact reason.    

However, in GCSE maths, this approach works well because of the absence of long narratives, which means students only need to apply the same skill and are not disadvantaged by the lack of context.   

Not designed for complex needs 

Finally, educational research tends to reflect the researchers: white, well-educated men, usually without any language barriers or learning difficulties.   

Educational research tends to reflect the researchers – white, well-educated men 

Now, I cannot speak for you, but that damn sure does not sound like my classroom. Asking students to jump from one topic to another can be highly confusing at the best of times, without factoring in complex learning needs.    

For students with dyslexia, ADHD, ADD and autism, the lack of consistency in the topic only compounds pre-existing difficulties. 

It makes it more mentally strenuous to connect information or draw parallels, resulting in cognitive overload that manifests in the classroom as behavioural issues, emotional breakdowns and burnout.  

Before you know it, your lesson has gone down the drain, and all the students remember is how much they hate the subject.    

Balance theory with practice 

Although interleaving definitely has its place, we need to be careful about how much weight we place on theory. It is the responsibility of senior management to make themselves aware of the research gaps. They need to ask themselves, can this theory really work in practice for all our learners?    

They should be creating an environment where educational theory can be challenged when it is not working.    

It is easy to become dazzled by the science. We need to elevate FE staff, and push for more inclusive research that focuses on FE and its learners.

Sustainability is now the ‘fourth functional skill’

Students at AELP’s first-ever green skills summit say sustainability should be learnt alongside English, maths and digital, writes Nichola Hay

Last week AELP held its first-ever green skills summit. The event, sponsored by the Skills Network, was a success. But it also showed there’s still much work FE can do to help reach net zero and to transition towards a green economy. 

Increasingly, AELP members have been highlighting how vital sustainability is becoming to our sector. AELP hosting its first green skills summit felt like an important step towards answering some of the challenges facing us.

Discussions throughout the day were thought-provoking. One key message came through consistently: this is not a time to rest on our laurels. We need to take more action.

I was delighted to chair the event and it was great to hear from a wide range of speakers, including skills minister Alex Burghart and deputy mayor of London Jules Pipe. We also heard directly from four young people working in the green economy.

Seray, Carys, Kofi and Ismail expressed exactly why sustainability is so important. They said sustainability is increasingly being seen as the “fourth functional skill” alongside English, maths and digital. 

It is becoming clear that sustainability and low carbon should be embedded into every curriculum as the fourth functional skill.

This would also be about changing individual behaviours – to think and act differently. It’s a skill that recognises the impact we each have on the environment, every day. 

However, teaching this skill does present a major challenge to educators, as there is currently a real gap in training, knowledge and resources available to the sector to deliver for our learners. There is not just a need to train our learners on this, but to upskill and support those delivering training too.

However, the positive news is that the summit showed there’s a real enthusiasm in the skills sector to ensure we are not just responding to employers’ demands, but that we’re showing leadership too. 

The immediate challenge following the event is to harness that enthusiasm and put it into action. 

Achieving the government’s ambitions to reach net zero by 2050 presents a sizeable challenge to the wider economy ̶ and we can’t wait until that deadline to make the changes needed. 

There will be two million new green jobs by 2030. The green jobs taskforce has a huge role to play in ensuring people have the necessary skills. But we also need government to recognise that independent training providers are well placed to deliver much of the skills training required.

Young people also need to know there are opportunities open to them. That starts with proper careers guidance that outlines all available options, including parity for academic and vocational routes. 

That’s why we’re so keen to see the government use the skills and post-16 education bill to enforce the Baker clause. 

We also need to ensure people get work experience in those careers – whether that’s short-term work experience or structured schemes such as traineeships.

The enthusiasm amongst young people in particular could easily turn to frustration if we don’t prove we’re serious about sustainability. 

Enthusiasm among young people could easily turn to frustration

That’s why I’m pleased that AELP has committed to setting up a “task and finish” group that will look at how to introduce a sustainability charter for ITPs, similar to its code of good governance. 

This charter, underpinned by key green and ethical principles, will enable providers to show that sustainability is at the heart of what they do – giving confidence to learners that this is a sector that takes our environmental impact seriously.

We will also need to work with the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education (IfATE) to ensure these skills are properly embedded into apprenticeship standards, with appropriate funding for providers.

Climate change will force us all to live differently. Hosting a green skills summit felt like a breakthrough moment.

But we cannot afford to stop here. We will need to make real changes – and quickly.

New branding isn’t enough to drive up demand for HTQs

Level 4 and 5 qualifications have historically suffered from a perception problem, writes Ian Pretty

Next September, the first round of higher technical qualifications will kick off. But the overall level of demand for these qualifications needs a closer look.  

First off, HTQs are level 4 and 5 qualifications, such as higher national diplomas and foundation degrees, that have been approved by the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education (IfATE). 

The approvals cycle for digital qualifications concluded in the summer, with the first digital HTQs to be taught from September 2022. This will be followed in 2023 by construction, health and science. The full rollout of all HTQs – including agriculture, hair and beauty, catering and design – will happen over a four-year period. 

Essentially, these already exist as HTE qualifications but are being relaunched with a HTQ “quality mark”. 

But we have some worrying findings.

At Collab Group we are embarking on a research project into FE college provision of level 4 and 5 HTE involving 26 of our colleges, beginning with a review of existing reports and data.

We have also sought to determine the number of learners currently undertaking HTE courses, primarily through analysing individual learner record data, or equivalent, from 22 colleges.

Worryingly, this analysis suggests that HTE uptake across England declined by one-third between 2015-16 and 2019-20. This is a surprising and concerning drop-off, especially at a time when the government is advocating the need for a higher skilled, higher wage economy.  

It is vital, therefore, that we better understand what barriers are limiting participation across level 4 and 5.  

Our research has identified several long-standing factors that complicate the ability to increase provision as a whole.  

Level 4 and 5 courses have always competed with degrees for students and are, on the whole, far less popular. This is perhaps unsurprising, given school guidance has always been skewed towards university, with the prestige of degrees as well as the attraction of the “university lifestyle”. 

Meanwhile, colleges have claimed a rise in unconditional offers for degrees has also deterred learners from higher technical education, according to a Gatsby Foundation study. FE colleges are now competing with universities at level 4 and 5 as the latter look to occupy more of this space. 

This is understood to be hurting qualification validation agreements between universities and colleges. If colleges cannot rely on validation from universities, then future provision remains uncertain.

The introduction of the apprenticeship levy has also been extremely damaging for HTE. Most courses are employer-funded but are excluded from the government funding for apprenticeships.  

Meanwhile among self-funding learners, reduced adult education budgets have also limited retraining opportunities.

Finally, a historical lack of clear information on why we have these qualifications and what skills they deliver has caused a perception problem for both learners and businesses. 

The Department for Education aims to stimulate demand for these qualifications through the HTQ programme. But is this really enough to turn the tide? These qualifications have historically been under-regarded and are now floundering under the competition from other courses.  

The DfE also plans to run an extensive communications campaign to support the rollout of HTQs. But this seems insufficient to address declining participation.  

What’s more, there is a real risk that introducing HTQs could split the market even further instead of stimulating demand. This was the case with the introduction of foundation degrees. 

The government must make absolutely clear who HTQs are for

So the government must make absolutely clear who HTQs are for. Are there two markets – those continuing in education and these returning to education?  

If courses need to suit both groups, then they must be designed in such a way to match these different requirements.  

A focus on modularisation in courses would allow for flexibility. But can this be done without sacrificing employer engagement in curriculum design?  

Consequently, the government needs to think hard about how HTQs can address the existing challenges faced by HTE. Without targeted action, these issues look set to persist regardless of what the qualifications are named.

AoC: Relax financial intervention rules to protect college reputations

Ministers are being urged to relax financial intervention rules for the rest of 2022 to protect college reputations in the face of ongoing challenges.   

The Association of Colleges has written to education secretary Nadhim Zahawi with the request after finding a “significant minority” of their members face “real financial difficulty” due to changing patterns in 16-to-18 recruitment and low adult enrolments caused by the pandemic.   

Colleges that receive ‘inadequate’ financial health ratings from the Education and Skills Funding Agency usually receive a financial notice to improve and subsequent FE Commissioner report, both of which are published and can lead to news articles in the local and trade media.   

David Hughes, the AoC’s chief executive, told FE Week the normal intervention regime “triggers all sorts of unhelpful things, not least of which is a public bad mark”.   

He feels this would be “unfair” over the next year, considering the unavoidable impact of Covid-19.   

“What you want is for colleges to feel confident about coming forward now. It’s not every college, but it’s a significant minority. We don’t want colleges to worry about that honesty which brings all of those potentially negative outcomes.”   

Hughes’ letter said the fact that most colleges have long-term bank loans and covenants “will continue to ensure discipline”.   

The FE Commissioner’s team paused most duties in March 2020 as a result of the first lockdown, while the ESFA also paused its routine funding audits.   

“Confidential” support to any colleges struggling financially as a direct result of the pandemic was offered by the FE Commissioner until normal duties were resumed in August 2020. Audits then got back under way in November.    

And in October 2020, the ESFA announced that colleges which apply for government bailouts will not automatically fall into formal intervention from that point on.   

A Department for Education spokesperson said: “We recognise the impact the pandemic has had on the FE sector.    

“Nobody wants to see any college get into financial difficulties, which is why our published guidance sets out that there is already the ability to take covid impact into account.”   

Hughes’ letter pressed that colleges face “several unprecedented challenges” just at the time the government wants them to develop more opportunities, such as skills bootcamps, traineeships and apprenticeships.   

The association said FE’s lagged funding system will “see many colleges facing reduced funding in 2022/23, even though it is likely that their learner numbers will begin to bounce back” due to summer exams taking place, which are expected to move the grade profile of GCSEs back towards 2019 levels.   

The AoC also said lockdowns have made engaging adults learners and employers “very difficult”. Despite this, there has been a “clear message” from the DfE that the normal 97 per cent performance threshold for the national adult education budget will apply in 2021/22.   

But this was set before Omicron emerged. The AoC said current data implies a clawback of £100 million in funding from colleges by the end of 2022.   

The association has called on Zahawi to adjust the clawback threshold to 90 per cent, as it was in 2020/21, as well as to hold a business case process for colleges.   

As part of the government’s education recovery package announced in October’s spending review, an extra £800 million has been committed over the next three academic years to fund an additional 40 learning hours for students on 16-to-19 study programmes and T Levels.   

This will increase the national FE base rate by 8.4 per cent – rising from £4,188 to £4,542. But this will only come into effect from August 2022.   

Hughes’ letter said the increase, on the face of it, “will help” but warned the extra hours “will squeeze the money available for rising costs”.   

He added that the combined cost of higher energy prices, the higher minimum wage and the national insurance rise “prevents adequate money to properly invest in all staff including teachers”.     

The 3 top challenges to unlocking prison apprenticeships

Practical issues still remain to be worked through, writes Peter Cox

“One huge benefit that apprenticeships would provide is hope, and sometimes hope is all you need to influence change.”

This moving statement by former prisoner David Breakspear was submitted to the House of Commons education select committee’s inquiry into prison education.

As National Apprenticeship Week comes to an end, it seems that there are, finally, genuine grounds for optimism.

The Ministry of Justice today announced that it will change the law to allow prisoners at open prisons across England to access apprenticeship opportunities while they are still serving time but are out on day release, or nearing the end of their sentence.

Opening up apprenticeships to more prisoners is a positive step in reducing reoffending.

Using education and training to support offenders from prison into employment is a crucial step in giving them the tools they need to transform their lives.

Novus stands ready to play its part. As part of LTE Group, a leading further education college group, it has more than 30 years of experience of delivering education and training in prisons.

In partnership with training provider Total People, also part of LTE, it has launched an innovative “foundation apprenticeships” pilot programme at HMP Hindley in Greater Manchester, mapping level 2 vocational provision to existing apprenticeship standards.

Learners who progress to an apprenticeship after their release will be able to demonstrate some of the knowledge, skills and behaviour required.

This could lead to a two-year apprenticeship being completed in as little as 12 months – fast-tracking the journey from prison to sustainable employment.

We are keen to explore how we can use our strong employer links to make use of the new flexibilities announced by the MoJ.

But if we are to ensure that apprenticeships achieve their full potential, there are three key issues which must be considered.

1. Employment, contracts and ROTL

An apprenticeship must be a real job – but exactly what is and isn’t possible for prisoners is not entirely clear.

Governors can already allow prisoners to be paid by an outside employer – and impose a levy on their earnings, with proceeds going to victim support.

In 2019 the government announced that more prisoners could be eligible for release on temporary licence (ROTL) earlier on in their sentence.

Little progress has been made since then, however, and practical issues remain to be worked through.

ROTL may not be appropriate for some prisoners or in some types of establishments, while learners switching prisons mid-apprenticeship would cause disruption to all parties. Excluding these groups limits the number of prisoners who could benefit.

Another option would be to open up apprenticeships to prisoners carrying out work within prisons.

At HMP Hindley, for instance, Novus runs a general maintenance programme under which prisoners refurbish cells, classrooms and toilets.

This isn’t a simulated environment. If activity could be carried out by a contractor, it could equally be done by an apprentice, provided that contractual requirements are met.

2. Attracting providers and employers

Even outside prison, training providers are understandably cautious in who they enrol. If an apprentice doesn’t progress to completion, the consequences are serious, both in terms of potential funding clawback and achievement rates.

Providers and employers need reassurance that they would not be penalised for situations out of their control, such as a prisoner not being released from their cell due to operational challenges.

And while some employers already recruit offenders, including Novus’ partners such as Greene King, Kier and Willmott Dixon, further incentives could encourage more companies to engage with prison education.

3. Ensuring “through the gate” support

If an apprentice is released part way through an apprenticeship programme, will they be able to complete it? Will they still receive support from the tutors they have come to trust? And who will ensure they are given safe accommodation during their apprenticeship?

All parties must work together to ensure apprentices receive the wraparound support they need. And we must not forget about pay.

A 21-year-old in the first year of an apprenticeship is entitled to a minimum hourly rate of just £4.30. Is this really enough to steer a vulnerable young person away from reoffending?

If prisoner apprenticeships are to be a success, they must be rigorous, respected and sustainable. If this can be achieved, then they could offer the hope that so many prisoners badly need.

Prisoners to finally be offered apprenticeships

Prisoners are to be offered apprenticeships for the first time to help cut crime and reoffending, the government has announced. 

Laws will be changed so that prisoners at open prisons across England are able to apply for apprenticeship opportunities in “vital industries”, such as hospitality and construction.

The scheme will initially be offered to up to a hundred prisoners across England before being rolled out across the wider prison estate.

The question of whether prisoners should be able to access apprenticeships has been long on the government’s agenda and was discussed in a recent prison education hearing.

“We want everyone to have access to the high-quality training they need to progress and build a brighter future,” education secretary Nadhim Zahawi said. 

“Apprenticeships will offer prisoners a life changing chance to gain the skills they need to secure a rewarding career, while providing more businesses with the skilled workforce they need to grow.”

Prisoners are currently able to study, train and work while in jail and a further 5,000 prisoners take part in work in the community through release on temporary licence, where they learn skills and help shore up local labour shortages.

“We are introducing prisoner apprenticeships to give offenders the skills and training they need to secure a job on release,” said justice secretary, Dominic Raab. 

“Getting offenders into work offers them a second chance to lead a more positive life and stay on the straight and narrow. 

“Breaking the cycle of crime is critical to our mission to drive down reoffending, cut crime and protect the public,” he said. 

The government’s decision was welcomed by Simon Ashworth, director of policy at AELP, who recommended giving prisoners access to apprenticeships in an education committee inquiry last year. 

Peter Cox, managing director of prison educatio provider Novus, said: “Opening up apprenticeships to more prisoners is a positive step in reducing reoffending. Using education and training to support offenders from prison into employment is a crucial step in giving them the tools they need to transform their lives.”

Under the scheme hundreds of prisoners will start an apprenticeship by 2025, the Ministry of Justice said, with “pre-apprenticeship training offered to thousands more – preparing them for a full apprenticeship scheme or a higher skilled job on release”.

In an Education Committee enquiry session last month, skills minister Alex Burghart said that there is currently no primary legislative barrier to prisoners becoming apprentices. 

Burghart said this might involve prisoners to go out on day release and take advantage of “existing funding streams”.

At the time, Burghart said that the DfE had only been doing provisional work on the issue and that no formal commitments had been made.

The launch comes in National Apprenticeship Week.

College alarm as study shows ‘elite’ sixth forms recruit from far and wide

“Elite” sixth forms teach few poorer students and recruit heavily from neighbouring areas, according to new analysis that challenges ministers’ levelling-up promises.

The government said new 16-to-19 free schools focused on getting learners into top universities would “transform education” in left-behind areas with “weak” outcomes.

But colleges leaders warn they will damage the viability of their offering while campaigners say they will lead to “selection for a lucky few and rejection for the majority” after a new study found similarities among their intakes with grammar schools.

Dave Thomson, author of the Education Datalab study, said super-selective sixth forms “may well prove popular, but they are hardly likely to recruit many disadvantaged students unless entry requirements are relaxed”.

The analysis, shared exclusively with FE Week, looked at the characteristics of the five per cent of sixth forms with the highest-attaining year 12 pupils, based on their GCSE results.

It found just 60 per cent of students at such schools lived in the same local authority area as where they went to school, compared to 82 per cent of all year 12 pupils.

The research also found just six per cent of pupils attending the most selective sixth forms outside London were disadvantaged, compared to a national average of 17 per cent.

“The one thing missing from most conversations about elite sixth forms is whether we need them and whether they’ll do the things they claim they’ll do,” David Corke, director of education and skills policy at the Association of Colleges, told FE Week.

“The answer to both is probably not… There are already hundreds of brilliant colleges and providers across the country, delivering excellent education and training to millions.”

He said this latest analysis shows that the more selective sixth forms “tend to recruit from further outside of their local areas”.

Corke added that it is known that excessive competition too often leads to poor outcomes and a narrower offer for students.

“The answer to levelling up places isn’t to further fragment the post-16 offer, nor to simply favour a small and elite group. It is to focus attention on the needs and progress of every young person by properly funding every sixth form and college, not just a select few new ones,” he added.

Responding to the Datalab findings, Bill Watkin, chief executive of the Sixth Form Colleges Association, said that the population is growing and additional sixth form places are needed in the system if extra young people are to be accommodated.

He argued the government’s post-16 capacity fund is helping existing, high-performing sixth form colleges to expand and the SFCA believes that is the most effective way to meet the increase in student numbers.

“The proposed specialist sixth forms are another way of building capacity, although as they tend to be small and narrowly focused on specific subjects, they are unlikely to represent a solution for more than a tiny number of students,” he said.

“And as this analysis from Education Datalab shows, highly selective sixth forms may not make a huge contribution to the levelling up agenda either, given they tend to recruit fewer disadvantaged students than other institutions.”

Watkin explained the government should make sure any new provision considers existing availability in the community and does not duplicate or displace what is already on offer. 

“It is sometimes a good thing to introduce a disruption to the system, but only when this leads to a constructive and positive outcome,” he said.

Janet Meenaghan, principal of Stamford College in Lincolnshire, told FE Week that in light of the research by Datalab it was “difficult to see how new specialist sixth-form free schools will contribute to the levelling up agenda”.

She said that in Lincolnshire, which is one of the 55 education investment areas set for new “elite” sixth forms, there are a “plethora of highly selective sixth forms” including grammars, 11-to-18 schools, private schools and sixth form colleges.

“But it’s further education colleges that tend to provide A-level choice for disadvantaged learners. And we do this extremely well,” she said.

“Stamford College has built a reputation for the high standard of our teaching, with an A-level pass rate that is always over 99 per cent, excellent student satisfaction rates and a strong record on progression, including to Oxbridge and Russell Group universities. We are an exemplar of levelling up.

“We don’t need more A-level providers. If the government is serious about levelling up, it should invest in FE colleges and redress the funding imbalance resulting from a decade of austerity.”

The OfS is – mostly – correct to say colleges should work closely with schools

The benefits run both ways – but the OfS should not expect colleges to drive school improvement, writes Marion Plant

“Universities and colleges have a moral duty to put their shoulder to the wheel of improving that wider community they sit within, and as both educational and civic institutions, improving attainment in our schools is an essential part of that work.” 

These were the words spoken on Tuesday by the new director for fair access and participation at the Office for Students, John Blake.

I agree strongly with that statement, and I will explain how and why. The more interesting and complicated part is how a college goes about it.  

I am in the slightly unusual position as a college leader because I am also the chief executive of a multi-academy trust.  We have four mainstream secondary schools in the trust.  We also have a sizeable 14-16 provision at the college – alternative provision and home educated.

First of all, I am concerned that the education system is so fragmented that if you are a parent, there is very little clear coherence about the route your child should take through education and ultimately into work.

It is the moral duty, of all those in the system, including those who fund us in government, to create greater coherence in the system.  

So if we are talking about colleges getting involved with schools, it should be all about about building coherent pathways into meaningful work. Closer partnership also allows seamless sharing of information at all stages, particularly for young people with SEND.

Colleges as institutions hugely benefit when they work closely with schools. For example, we have learnt a lot from our schools about best practice in English and maths GCSE. 

We support thousands of young people and adults to re-sit GCSEs in English and maths, but recruiting great teachers is challenging because of pay disparities.  Working together to improve performance before entering college helps close that attainment gap.

At the same time, schools can benefit from many aspects of college life. For a start, schools are usually smaller than colleges and we are able to provide the backing of a multi-million-pound organisation to help reduce back office costs and improve resilience. 

This benefit was clearly felt during the recent lockdowns when vulnerable pupils and key worker children from several local schools attended a ‘”joint provision” at the college’s main campus.

OfS director John Blake

Colleges can also provide a breadth of careers advice and experiences that schools might not have access to otherwise, with recognised qualifications, apprenticeships, supported internships and T Levels.  These are often opportunities that school teachers are less knowledgeable about.

At the same time, schools can themselves provide work experience opportunities for FE students, which is a growing need, given T Level work experience requirements. Schools have digital IT teams, childcare learning opportunities, and so on. 

FE staff can also benefit through continuous development opportunities. We have a SENDCO, for instance, who has worked across the age range of schools and colleges to extend their understanding of learner development across different age groups. 

Colleges can deliver adult education through schools

One important possibility is colleges delivering adult education through schools. This is often missed in conversations about school improvement.

Adult education with parents or carers at a school is a hugely powerful way of improving skills and confidence within local communities and also improving a student’s own attainment.

The question then is: is all this already happening in FE? Does the OfS need to call for this? 

We perhaps do a lot more work with schools than the average college, but we are not unique. Many colleges work closely with schools.

However, leaders and FE staff should recognise that, yes, there is a funding disparity between schools and colleges, but supporting schools has a moral purpose, and a clear business benefit.

I suspect the OfS doesn’t realise how much work some colleges are already doing with schools.  

But we should recognise that the experts in school improvement specifically are school teachers. Where I would urge caution is around any suggestions colleges get involved in intervention in school improvement.

Awarding bodies’ report reveals rocketing cost of regulatory burden

Awarding bodies are forking out more than £6 million a year complying with regulation that has risen “exponentially” over the past decade, according to new research.

Calls are now being made for a more streamlined system which reduces an “overwhelming and complex” regulatory burden – including abandoning a key policy in the skills bill to add the government’s apprenticeship quango to the list of bodies approving technical qualifications.

The findings have been published through a Federation of Awarding Bodies (FAB) report entitled Feel the Weight and shared exclusively with FE Week.

It shows that from 2014 to 2020, the number of regulatory bodies which set their own requirements and sanction regimes that awarding organisations must comply with across the UK grew from two to six.

Through a survey of members, the federation found compliance with these bodies costs an awarding organisation, on average, £4,618 per month and around £6 million as a sector annually. FAB believes “in reality” these figures will be much higher when including awarding bodies outside of their membership who deliver general qualifications.

However, the report does not provide estimates for how much compliance with regulators has changed cost-wise since 2014.

Unsurprisingly, specialist and niche awarding and assessment organisations reported particular challenges dealing with increases in regulatory burden. In some cases, small awarding bodies have chosen to surrender their recognition in some devolved nations.

“The current three country regulatory compliance in general is currently not only complex and high-maintenance but also high-risk, with the sanctions that Ofqual, Qualification Wales and the Council for Curriculum Exams and Assessment Regulation can individually impose, potentially for the same non-compliance,” one unnamed awarding body said in the report.

“There are benefits to regulation, but smaller awarding bodies are likely to find it increasingly difficult to justify, particularly professional and chartered bodies which already have an established reputation in their individual sectors for delivery of professional educational development.”

Reflecting on the findings, FAB chief executive Tom Bewick said: “Our starting point is that regulation is a positive thing for the sector. But equally, we must also monitor carefully the growth in regulatory burden for our members, which can stifle innovation and result in more cost and bloated bureaucracy that hampers progress.”

Ofqual, the main regulator for qualifications in England, said: “Our priority is to regulate on behalf of students of all ages, and apprentices. We look forward to continuing to work with the FAB, their members and other awarding organisations, working together with students as our shared compass.”

In addition, FAB’s report warns the implementation of the skills bill, which is currently making its way through parliament, creates “significantly more confusion” in the landscape for the regulation of qualifications.

One contentious reform is to hand the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education the ultimate sign-off power for the approval and regulation of technical qualifications in future.

Awarding bodies claim this is a retrograde step and would reverse the gains of independent regulation that parliament intended in 2009 when it set up Ofqual.

Unlike Ofqual, the institute is a non-departmental public body directly accountable to ministers, not parliament.

There is concern that IfATE’s new powers would therefore introduce a conflict of interest. Some also fear that having two regulators splitting responsibility for certain types of vocational and technical qualifications could create a muddled and cumbersome two-tier system of regulation.

The DfE said the measures in the bill will create a “single approval gateway for technical qualifications” via the IfATE, while Ofqual will retain its “statutory responsibility for recognising awarding organisations in England across all categories of both academic and technical qualifications”.