Latest news from FE Week | FE Week

Procurement proposals could shake up how colleges go to tender

There are many more freedoms – but also more scrutiny – in the government’s new procurement proposals that would affect how colleges go to tender, write Ben McGirr and Toshif Vally

You’d be forgiven for not noticing that in December, the Cabinet Office published a green paper called Transforming Public Procurement. The three-month open consultation is part of an attempt to move public procurement away from its EU roots and towards a more UK-driven national law.

Under it, colleges could get more freedom and control about how they contract for cleaning, catering, building and other services, thereby helping your bottom line. But it could come with more transparency strings attached too, so do watch out.

Under the proposed changes, first of all there will be more flexibility on running tenders. At the moment, there are multiple ways you can go to tender, and most colleges will only ever encounter one, which is a normal ‘open’ tender.

The second most common route is designed for handling a very large anticipated number of bids and involves shortlisting. All other routes tend to involve lawyers for complex negotiations, or relate to very complicated requirements.

Three new tender routes

Instead of all these different prescribed routes to tender, there would be just three streamlined ways.

The first way would just be a normal open tender, as now. This is a standard tender which currently stays out for a minimum of 30 days and you must take the bid at face value, with whoever scores highest in the tender getting the contract. Strictly speaking, colleges can’t negotiate the price set out by bidders.

The second way would be a new competitive, flexible route, which increases a college’s ability to negotiate. Essentially the government is suggesting you can set your own rules on what the tender looks like. They will establish some minimum requirements, but they haven’t gone into more detail on what these might be yet.

Under these suggestions, a college could set its own timeline for how long or short the tender is out, meaning that for a smaller purchase you could close the tender after a couple of weeks, rather than having to keep it open for a longer period.

The third route would, under limited circumstances, allow colleges to avoid a full tender, an option which has emerged from the Covid crisis. If you can justify a need to purchase ASAP, such as the urgent need to buy PPE, then you wouldn’t necessarily need to tender.

But be warned that if you went down this route, your college would have to be very transparent about why you did so. We expect there to more detailed guidance on when this would apply.

‘Social values’ and new database

Aside from these three routes, the government is also suggesting that buyers such as colleges can consider social value – and not necessarily have to award to the lowest bid. So a scored question on the tender might ask how social values can be achieved. The bidders might say they’ll offer some apprenticeships or environmental work.

This move would make it easier for colleges to spot the really poor performers.

Government guidance will probably set out which sectors are obligated and which are encouraged to take this social consideration.

Interestingly, the green paper also suggests a national database that would display bidders’ poor performance in previous contracts. At the moment, you are very limited in whether you can discount bidders based on poor performance in the past, to protect against biases. But this move would make it easier for colleges to spot the really poor performers.

Other suggestions include buyers being allowed to reopen bids at set dates under pre-existing agreements, which are known as frameworks, if they wish to.

New procurement transparency demands

But the biggest thing colleges should take note of is the new transparency proposal. There would be an enhanced obligation for buyers to publish evaluation reports for every tender, showing all their scores and notes.

At the moment, a lot of colleges probably don’t go into sufficient detail on this. It will mean a higher workload for those not accustomed to this careful evaluation method.

The consultation period will end on March 10, 2021 and changes would arrive in the next 12 to 18 months. So those in FE looking to buy should keep their eyes peeled.

More employers want technical skills delivered via FE, not university

Businesses are tired of graduates not having the right technical skills – but the FE white paper and other changes allow colleges to step in, writes Mark Smith

The word ‘university’ is derived from the Latin word universus, meaning ‘whole, entire’. In a strictly academic sense, it is the shortening of the Latin phrase universitas magistrorum et scholarium meaning ‘community of masters and scholars’.

In this word, working closely with employers, facilitating teachers and engaging learners for the modern, digital economy is not mentioned. And yet this is what modern British society has come to expect universities to do.

Technology, however, is finally putting paid to these unrealistic expectations.

‘Wasted years and fees’

Advanced technical skills meld academic and vocational learning, and these skills require an andragogy (the education of adults ̶ as opposed to pedagogy, the education of children) that is both academically stretching and practically rigorous.

But universities are ill-equipped to deliver this kind of education.

Having led Ada, the National College for Digital Skills, for the past seven years, I have had countless conversations with large tech employers and small- and medium-enterprise partnerships.

Many rue the wasted years and fees that aspirational technical talent has spent studying an outdated computer science course at university, in the mistaken belief it will get them a good entry-level job in the tech sector upon graduation.

This means most junior tech hires are recruited on potential and measured through in-house assessment centres by employers who are confident they can “re-educate” junior hires to become useful within three to six months.

Alternative routes for technical skills emerging

This approach is so embedded that employers have almost forgotten to complain about it. But now alternative talent sources are starting to emerge.

Higher level and degree apprenticeships, ‘bootcamps’ and retraining initiatives are hitting the mainstream consciousness.

This approach is so embedded that employers have almost forgotten to complain about it

As such, on-the-ball employers are rapidly updating their talent attraction processes. For example, Deloitte now hires a mix of technical apprentices, graduates and a few bootcamp completers each year.

Techies care little for formal qualifications. The quality of your github account or technical portfolio counts far more than the letters after your name, and this plays into what the FE sector has been quietly excelling at for many years: preparing people effectively for the world of work.

Colleges face capacity issues

But the tech sector demands skills that are continuously evolving, which means course leaders, awarding bodies and employers must work symbiotically for their mutual benefit.

This is an issue. College teachers are hugely squeezed for time.

As a volunteering manager for a large tech company said to me, “It recently dawned on me that when college staff say they are ‘at capacity’, this has an entirely different meaning to ‘at capacity’ in the business world: their entire weeks are literally timetabled almost to the minute!”

Finding a common language and understanding between college staff and employer volunteers (who donate their time and expertise to supporting learners) is challenging but crucial.

Many teachers feel they simply don’t have capacity and most volunteers start out irrationally scared of making fools of themselves and being heckled.

At Ada, we’ve found that by having high expectations of our staff, students and apprentices, the tech sector has responded by volunteering their time, expertise and energy. Teachers have also felt more fulfilled.

‘Unique opportunity’ for FE

As with any other industry sector, employee volunteers want to work with staff and students who are engaged and curious about their working world.

But the more than 40 companies we partner with complain that these skillsets are in desperately short supply in the UK, forcing them to pay inflated salaries for people who are not particularly talented.

The welcome announcements in the white paper (albeit with further details needed) are now coupled with increased remote volunteering experience due to Covid and the decline of Eastern European technical talent due to Brexit.

So these circumstances present a unique opportunity for FE colleges and employers to lead the way in the design and delivery of higher technical skills in England.

This will deliver value-for-money for learners and help redefine what being a “community” of learning really looks like.

Delayed traineeships are unacceptable in the face of our youth unemployment crisis

There is an urgent youth unemployment crisis that needs addressing with comprehensive traineeships fast, writes Stephen Evans

Young people are facing the double whammy of a disrupted education and a weakened labour market. Youth unemployment has doubled since March 2020. A period out of work when young can have serious long-term impacts, so this represents a national crisis demanding urgent action.

It was great, therefore, to see the chancellor’s July 2020 Plan for Jobs announce an extra £111 million to expand traineeships in England and £2.1 billion to create Kickstart, which covers the wages of young people at risk of long-term unemployment if employers create jobs for them for six months.

But, while the ambition is great and we have many of the right building blocks, there are problems with speed, design and coherence.

DfE is way behind DWP

On speed, it’s more than six months since the Plan for Jobs but we’re yet to see a single young person start one of the new traineeships, despite the fact this was about expanding an existing programme.

In fact, the Department for Education has only just decided which providers to allocate extra the traineeship money to. That simply doesn’t match the urgency of the crisis we face.

Meanwhile over at the Department for Work and Pensions, Kickstart was not only designed from scratch, but the first young people were in jobs funded by Kickstart by November. The chancellor was even sporting a Kickstart hoodie.

A lack of proper support

Speed isn’t everything ̶ the design of programmes also needs to be right. As FE Week reported, the government will now allow employers to apply direct to DWP for Kickstart funding, whereas previously, employers wanting to take on fewer than 30 young people had to apply via a gateway organisation.

But this risks many young people not getting the support that gateways were intended to ensure, particularly in small firms.

This training and support was central to the success of the Future Jobs Fund, a similar scheme introduced in 2009. The result could be lower take-up (as employers find it too complex to claim funding) and limited impact (as young people are less likely to find work at the end). Kickstart may have started swiftly, but we may be losing sight of what would make it a success.

We should emphasise that employers can still work through gateways if they wish to.

Access to the system is patchy

However the biggest problem of all is the overall coherence of the response.

Too often it feels as though we have a series of individual policies and that what young people are offered will depend on which bit of the system they access, rather than what they actually need.

For example, young people who arrive for help at the Jobcentre are far more likely to be offered a Kickstart job than a traineeship. And there seems little focus on getting young people out of work into an apprenticeship.

Better instead to have a “Youth Guarantee”, which ensures every young person is offered a job, apprenticeship or training place based on their aspirations. That would ensure young people are offered the full range of employment and skills support regardless of which part of the system they access.

A ‘youth guarantee’ for those outside system

Finally, who’s going to find and engage those young people who aren’t accessing any of this?

Only 33 per cent of 16- to 17-year-olds not in full-time education are in work

Only 33 per cent of 16- to 17-year-olds not in full-time education are in work. Most are not eligible for Universal Credit and so will miss out on Jobcentre Plus support and Kickstart. Who’s going to find them? What will we offer them?

That’s why Learning and Work Institute’s Youth Commission argued 16- to 24-year-olds should get an adviser who agrees a plan with them to find work, build a career and improve their skills up to level 3. This would focus on building skills as well as finding a job, and be open to 16- to 17-year-olds who are not eligible for Universal Credit at the moment.

If we’re to avoid a lost generation, we need to combine urgency, good design and coherence. A clear Youth Guarantee would be a great start.

MOVERS AND SHAKERS: EDITION 342

Your weekly guide to who’s new and who’s leaving.

Sarah Stewart, Chair, Gateshead College

Start date: December 2020

Previous job: Chief executive, Newcastle Gateshead Initiative

Interesting fact: She has been the High Sheriff of Tyne and Wear for the past year

Gillian May, Chief executive and group principal, The Windsor Forest Colleges Group

Start date: April 2021

Previous job: Principal, Berkshire College of Agriculture

Interesting fact: Prior to her career in education and skills, she was the general manager for logistics for Walkers Crisps

Lesley Davies, Chair, Hull College Group

Start date: January 2021

Previous job: Principal, Trafford College Group

Interesting fact: She is “a bit of a twitcher” and always takes her binoculars and bird book on walks and travels

Turing Scheme to open for bids next month

Bids for the UK’s new £110 million Turing Scheme will open to universities, FE providers and schools next month.

The Department for Education has today announced the “next phase” of the international student exchange programme by launching a website which outlines its funding rates and eligibility criteria ahead of a six-week bidding process in March.

The scheme, named after scientist Alan Turing, was unveiled in December as the replacement to the UK’s participation in Erasmus+ following Brexit.

It will allow students to study and work abroad from September 2021, and will target those from disadvantaged backgrounds.

The DfE said bids for a slice of the funding will open next month and it plans to issue funding decisions in July.

FE learners, including apprentices, can take part in the scheme which will see placements range from between two weeks and 12 months. Placements can start from just five days for learners with special educational needs and/or disabilities.

Funding for the scheme will go towards delivering the placements and exchanges, including grants to help cover travel expenses and costs of living and administrative funding for delivering the projects.

The rates provided will be “broadly in line” with what was on offer under Erasmus+, according to the DfE.

Under each project to cover administrative costs, £315 will be provided per participant for the first 100 participants. From the 101st participant onwards, £180 will be provided per participant.

An amount of funding will then be provided to go towards the direct costs of travel for a placement, which will depend on distance. Grants for this will range from £20 to £1,360.

For costs of living, there will be three rates available: Group 1 (high cost of living), Group 2 (medium cost of living), Group 3 (lower cost of living).

In terms of learners on an FE and vocational education  placement, they will receive:

To Group 1 destinations: £109 per day for the first 14 days, £76 per day after the 14th day

To Group 2 destinations: £94 per day for the first 14 days, £66 per day after the 14th day

To Group 3 destinations: £80 per day for the first 14 days, £56 per day after the 14th day

For FE students from disadvantaged backgrounds, including those in care, on universal credit, or in receipt of free school meals, they will receive “actual costs for additional travel expenses, including costs of visas, passports, and health insurance”.

Students with SEND will be funded “up to 100 per cent of actual costs for support directly related to their additional needs”.

‘We will open up the globe to our young people’

Universities minister Michelle Donelan said: “We are committed to making sure our students, particularly those from disadvantaged backgrounds, can benefit from studying and working abroad. Working with the British Council, we will open up the globe to our young people, and I look forward to seeing the exciting and enriching opportunities the Turing scheme will bring.”

David Hughes, chief executive of the Association of Colleges, added: “The Turing scheme opens the world’s door to work and study placements for college students. This is an important part of ‘levelling up’ the life chances for all of our young people – whatever their background.

“International mobility motivates and inspires young people to understand their place in the world, develop their life skills and build confidence and ambition. I strongly encourage colleges new to international exchanges to consider participating in Turing and hope that those who have been involved before can use this to extend opportunities for students.”

Pace of external quality assurance transferring to Ofqual slows to a crawl

Providers will be stuck paying for external quality assurance (EQA) for even longer than planned, as the process of transferring responsibilities to exams regulator Ofqual has slowed to a crawl.

EQA duties for just one standard, accident repair technician, were transitioned from the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education (IfATE) to Ofqual last month.

That is despite the watchdog telling end-point assessment organisations (EPAOs) in August that EQA for 54 apprenticeships in construction and engineering, handled by the institute through contractor Open Awards, would move over from January.

Each standard will be taken on a case-by-case basis

Sixty-nine apprenticeship standards, where the EPAOs were all formally recognised by Ofqual, transitioned last November.

Ofqual has said standards will be transferred “on a monthly basis”, and when each apprenticeship transfers will depend “on a number of factors”, such as how many EPAOs are delivering it, and whether they have Ofqual recognition.

“Each standard will be taken on a case-by-case basis,” a spokesperson said, adding that the regulator is continuing to talk to EPAOs to transition the remaining 245 standards that were originally planned to transfer over the summer.

Tom Bewick

For standards that have not transferred over, providers will continue to have to pay charges for EQA on each apprentice who takes their end-point assessment. IfATE controversially charges £40 for EQA, but awarding bodies have had to stump up almost £200 per apprentice by certain EQA bodies, leading Federation of Awarding Bodies chief executive Tom Bewick to brand it a “Wild West” market.

FE Week was first to report last September that charges would end once a standard’s EQA was moved to Ofqual.

An IfATE spokesperson said they are “working hard” to support EPAOs with their transition to Ofqual and “realise the benefits this offers”.

“We will continue to listen carefully to the sector,” they added.

What is happening with EQA?

EPAOs were told last year the transition of EQA would be a two-year process, with standards where IfATE carries out EQA transferring by the second quarter of 2021 and apprenticeships where an alternative employer body runs EQA transferring in year two.

Under the new system, all EPAOs will need to be “recognised” by Ofqual, meaning their qualifications can be considered for public funding to be taught in schools, colleges and other FE providers, and its certificates can carry the Ofqual logo.

When applying to be recognised, organisations have to be able to prove they have “adequate financial reserves which will support the organisation through the lifecycle of a qualification” as well as accounting and financial monitoring systems either in place, or in development if it is a new awarding organisation.

It was first revealed in February that Ofqual would be taking over EQA from IfATE and assorted employer bodies, with the Office for Students taking over apprenticeships with integrated degrees, when a consultation on the proposals was launched.

The decision to bring in Ofqual and the OfS was made, according to an IfATE report into external quality assurance published last December, because the other EQA bodies “lack the regulatory powers to enforce changes from EPAOs” when the EPA plan or conditions of the register of end-point assessment organisations have “not been complied with” by EPAOs, “and where the independence or validity of assessment has been compromised as a result”.

Revealed: ESFA investigation into fastest growing apprenticeship provider

England’s fastest growing apprenticeship provider is under investigation by the Education and Skills Funding Agency and faces going bust, FE Week can reveal.

Logistics.com (UK) Ltd only became a government-approved apprenticeship provider in March 2020, at which point it swiftly changed ownership. In the following eight months during a pandemic more than 1,100 apprentices, mostly working in nursing homes, were recruited, worth almost £5 million.

FE Week understands the provider was forced to pause starts in November while also having payments suspended as the ESFA launched an inquiry amid concerns at the speed and scale of enrolments.

The agency and the provider have remained tight-lipped about the specifics of the investigation, but it is understood the owner is now looking to sell the business or face going into liquidation following the ESFA’s decision to stop releasing funding.

A total of 86 staff would be affected.

The managing director of a brokerage company that sold employer contacts and worked with the provider for a period described how learners have now been left “high and dry” because the owners’ “eyes were clearly too big for their belly”.

Small freight company until March 2020

Logistics.com (UK), which is rated by five employers as an “excellent” “national” provider on the government’s Find Apprenticeship Training website, was incorporated as a small “freight company” in 2014 with no training delivery history and its latest accounts show just £609 of assets, according to Companies House.

Dominic Davies joined as a director in March 2020 shortly after the provider’s acceptance to the register of apprenticeship training providers. His then-business partner, Stephen Banks – who, like Davies, previously worked at the well-known but now-liquidated training provider Middleton Murray – played key roles in its operation.

The pair incorporated a number of different businesses over the course of last summer.

FE Week analysis of the government’s published statistics shows that Logistics.com (UK) recruited more apprenticeship starts than any other provider in the country in the eight months it was allowed to recruit.

To achieve this huge volume of enrolments the owners purchased sales leads and established partnerships with at least one NHS Trust to offer free apprenticeship training to large and small employers, funded from levy transfers.

Government policy is that large employers, such as councils and NHS Trusts, can share up to 25 per cent of their unspent levy funding each year with training providers to deliver the apprenticeships to small employers – administered via the online apprenticeship system.

The use of transferred funding was key to Logistics.com (UK) being fully funded by the ESFA to deliver free courses, as it meant employers would not need to pay the usual five per cent co-investment fee.

Logistics.com (UK), for example, worked with the Humber, Coast and Vale Health and Care Partnership to encourage GPs to take up a level 3 clinical coder apprenticeship.

An email advert seen by FE Week, sent last November by the partnership to a Hull University Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust mailing list, states that the usual cost is £5,000 but “working in partnership with Logistics UK Training” they would “look to cover the cost of the qualification from levy transfers from other organisations”.

Among the councils from whom FE Week is aware that Logistics.com (UK) applied for levy transfer funding include North Yorkshire County Council.

The council and NHS Trust did not respond to requests for comment at the time of going to press.

There is no suggestion of wrongdoing through the use of levy transfers.

Davies explained to FE Week that his strategy since taking over Logistics.com (UK) has been to “support the health and social care sector with apprenticeship training throughout the pandemic by utilising levy transfer funding”.

“Our team of 86 employees ensures we have an average caseload of 35 to 40 learners providing good-quality delivery via blended learning allowing us to react to lockdowns,” he said.

“This ensured learners would remain on track with their progression. We have and will continue to support our learners and employers ensuring impact on delivery is minimal.”

Davies added that his provider does have a number of learners on breaks in learning due to the pandemic and that it has “withdrawn learners as appropriate to ensure no funding overclaims have been made”.

FE Week spoke to Stephen Banks briefly and he claimed he had cut ties with Logistics.com (UK) in December despite personally seeking buyers for the provider in recent days. He put the phone down when more questions were asked and has not responded to various follow-up requests.

Companies House shows that Banks became the new owner of a single employee firm called 5 Stars Recruitment Ltd in October 2020 – three months after it was added to the apprenticeship providers register on July 29, 2020.

Lack of Ofsted oversight

Despite the significant number of apprentices, Ofsted has never paid Logistics.com (UK) a visit.

A spokesperson for the inspectorate said: “Since March 2020, due to the coronavirus pandemic, we have been unable to complete our intended new-provider monitoring visit schedule. We will return to conducting new-provider monitoring visits as soon as it is possible to do so. We take serious account of any information received that suggests there is a cause for concern about a provider, and this may give rise to an earlier inspection or monitoring visit.”

The ESFA investigation into Logistics.com (UK) comes as the agency looks to tighten up their register of apprenticeship training providers – a key policy in last month’s FE white paper.

The white paper said the government will undertake a “full refresh” of the register, commencing in April 2021 and will adopt “more stringent entry criteria for both new and existing providers, to better determine whether providers have the capability and capacity to be able to deliver these higher-quality apprenticeships”.

This will be the second time the register has been “refreshed”, after it was first launched in March 2017, relaunched in January 2019, only to be closed to most new applications since April 2020.

The Department for Education is left with unanswered questions as to why an earnings limit policy has yet to be implemented for new apprenticeship providers and how, given their lack of relevant or significant trading history, both Logistics.com (UK) and 5 Stars Recruitment Ltd successfully applied as ‘main’ providers last year.

When asked what the DfE is doing to protect apprentices during the investigation being led by the ESFA counter-fraud team, a spokesperson said: “We do not comment on investigations ongoing or otherwise.”

FE recruitment drive ‘pipedream’ without pay rises

Government aspirations to bolster the FE workforce “will be nothing more than a pipedream” unless colleges are given funding to raise teacher pay, a sector leader has warned.

Anne Murdoch, senior advisor for college leadership at the Association of School and College Leaders and the former general
secretary of the Principals’ Professional Council, raised concerns after the much-anticipated Skills for Jobs white paper included nothing on increasing pay for staff.

Instead, it promised that ‘significant’ new investment in the workforce in 2021-22 would include the launch of an ‘ambitious’ recruitment campaign to attract ‘high-calibre teaching staff’ and a sweep of professional development measures.

All this comes as new data on the FE workforce released by the Department for Education last month showed teacher pay across the sector has remained stagnant over the past decade, having only increased from a median of £31,620 in 2010-11 to £33,750 in 2019-20.

The research also showed the retention rate has fallen, especially after the first few years of teaching, with just over half (51 per cent) of teachers who started in 2016 still teaching after three years, while 68 per cent who started in 2000 were still teaching after three years.

Additionally, the data revealed that more FE teachers are leaving the profession within two academic years.

While last month’s FE white paper failed to back up the commitment to strengthen the workforce with funding for pay, for the schools sector the Conservatives included a promise to increase starting salaries to £30,000 in their last election manifesto.

The current pay gap between school and college teachers sits at around £9,000.

Staff pay in FE is set by individual colleges, although the Association of Colleges does recommend a pay increase each year. Its recommendation over the past few years has been a one per cent rise, which has often sparked a backlash from the University and College Union.

But funding per student in colleges fell by 12 per cent in real terms between 2010–11 and 2019–20, which has had a knock-on impact on the pay colleges can offer.

Murdoch described the “stagnation in pay” for teachers in FE as “scandalous”, adding that it is “hardly a surprise to find low levels of morale and a high percentage of staff leaving the profession as a direct result”.

The former Newbury College principal told FE Week that it was “difficult to see why” teachers would choose to work in FE when they could earn around £10,000 more working in schools. “Swift action is needed now to stop the yawning pay gap between school and FE teachers from widening even further,” she added.

“The minister’s aspirations for the future of the FE sector will be nothing more than a pipedream unless the government recognises the importance of the staff who work there and takes genuine steps to fund FE sufficiently so that college leaders can right the wrongs of the past decade on pay.”

She is the not the only sector leader to highlight the importance of pay in attracting professionals into the FE teaching profession.

During an FE Week webcast last week, Association of Colleges chief executive David Hughes stressed the importance of getting funding through to colleges and providers “so they can pay the right amount to recruit and retain people, particularly those with skills in and experience in those sectors of the economy that are most important”.

Education and Training Foundation chief executive David Russell, whose organisation carries out analysis of the FE workforce and also runs several streams of professional development for the sector, concurred with Hughes during the event, saying an element of reward was “missing” from the white paper.

The government is pushing ahead with the efforts to improve recruitment and retention that it did mention in the white paper, however.

This week it launched a £3 million tender for delivery partners for the Taking Teaching Further programme.

The white paper also revealed investment in the FE workforce will rise to over £65 million between 2020 and 2022, with part of the extra money going towards a new Workforce Industry Exchange programme, which will develop networks between teachers and industry.

Furthermore, the existing professional development programme for T Levels will be expanded for at least a year beyond March 2021, and a new national online Apprenticeship Workforce Development programme will be made available.

Workforce data collection will also be improved to be on par with that collected for schools and higher education and will include data on ethnicity and disabilities, so the DfE can measure the impact of policies on diversity in further education staffing and leadership.

A DfE spokesperson said the white paper reforms “cannot succeed without outstanding teachers and teaching,” and the quality and supply of the workforce is “critical to the vision”.

“We recognise the need to provide greater support for, and investment in, the sector’s teachers and leaders, and we have taken steps to reverse many years of underfunding of the FE workforce,” they added.

“The measures we are setting out in this white paper allow us to deliver greater support for recruitment, retention and teacher development.”

What does inclusivity in education look like?

After this last year, more people are aware that just because we’re in this together, doesn’t mean we all have the same experience or opportunities. How can we know what someone else is experiencing unless we try to understand it and how can we create equal opportunities if we don’t know the barriers that stand in their way?

Inclusivity is about tackling the challenges that many of us face to create a society where no one is left behind. These challenges are multifaceted and often quite personal. And there is nothing more personal than our mind.

The human brain is the most complex structure in the known universe. It makes us who we are, and it stores all the knowledge and experiences we gain over a lifetime. But how much do you really know about it? And how much can an understanding of the brain change the education sector for the better?

One in five people leave education with no basic qualifications*

Each of us thinks and learns differently.

For many learners, their experience of education is marked by negativity and underachievement. But low attainment doesn’t mean low aspirations.

We can build a more positive experience of education for many people. Identifying their strengths and areas where they might need support through cognitive assessment. Identifying hidden learning needs and providing personalised support that builds confidence and a new-found love of learning.

The course is hosted by Dr. Louise Karwowski, Cognassist’s Head of Science

We know we must act now. We know we can’t ignore the growing inequalities.

But where should we start? How do we know what works?

Educators are not psychologists – not often anyways. It’s hard to identify learners who require support and it’s easy to misinterpret the behaviour of struggling learners as something problematic rather than symptomatic.

Using an evidence-based approach helps to give learners more control in the learning process and gives staff the training to really understand and empower learners at all levels of education.

We can’t use a one size fits all approach to learning and education.

Organisations need to be more flexible and the sector can do more to support a diverse range of learners. But it’s a team effort.

One in three people are neurodiverse and could benefit from learning support*

That’s roughly 30 percent of the working-age population.

This evidence comes from over 70,000 cognitive assessments with post-16 learners. Cognitive research labs around the world would kill for this size of data set!

But does your provision and identification rate reflect this number? Simply relying on learners to self-disclose their needs is not enough.

And identifying learning needs can be transformative for learners.

Plus, it helps educators to become more understanding and effective in their roles too.

Your provisions make the difference between a “good” and “outstanding” Ofsted inspection, between completion and non-completion, and it changes the lives of people who would otherwise have been denied opportunities.

You don’t have to be a neuropsychologist to support neurodiverse learners

Understanding cognition and neurodiversity doesn’t require a PhD.

Often, something as simple as a conversation with the learner can help us to discover if they have had any previous support in school or feel like they struggle with certain things.

Most of the processing in our brain is beyond our conscious control so we might not notice the impact it has on our abilities to navigate education or working environments.

Someone can be perfectly capable of performing well at work but struggle within the education environment. Which leads people to think they’re bad at learning.

But this doesn’t reflect what we know about the brain. We learn new information every day of our lives, whether we realise it or not. And we all have different abilities.

Identifying the things that you struggle with and the coping mechanisms you use in your daily life can help to start the conversations with learners around their support needs without making them feel uncomfortable.

The journey to embracing neurodiversity is one we take together.

But supporting neurodiversity is not an optional extra

We hate to get all high and mighty on you. But all organisations have a legal duty to make reasonable adjustments for disabled learners, and most organisations would extend this support to learners who may not have a formal diagnosis but still experience day to day difficulties.

We can do more to break down barriers to learning and ensure no learner is at a significant disadvantage to their peers.

Each reasonable adjustment is a small but necessary step towards inclusivity in education, and they are a core part of providing quality education.

A commitment to being a diverse organisation must include neurodiversity and a robust support provision tailored to these learners.

And we want to give you the roadmap to get there.

Hosted by Dr. Louise Karwowski, Cognassist’s Head of Science

Get accredited in Neurodiversity for FREE

Look, we’ll be honest. Cognassist is a business. We sell our cognitive assessment and learning support services to education providers throughout the UK and internationally. But this is bigger than us. There’s almost no way to say this without coming across as some cheesy marketing pitch.

So let’s drop everything.

Currently I’m writing this while it’s pitch dark outside and well-past my finishing time. No joke. And the only reason I can come up with for this state of affairs is that I care. And if you’re reading this, then we’re obviously in the same boat – you probably work late all the time too.

I think it’s easy to feel frustrated in this sector, to feel like change isn’t happening quick enough or staff don’t have the resources to do everything they’d like.

But there is a real drive to change. And we want to help, whether you have access to a cognitive assessment tool or not. All of the content at Cognassist is free and it’s free for a reason.

We’ve created whitepapers, handbooks, how to guides, and now a Neurodiversity Masterclass. An online course fully endorsed by the NCFE that counts towards your continuing personal development.

Hopefully it helps you and your organisation to embrace neurodiversity and build better outcomes for your learners. That’s our whole mission.

Hope to see you there.

From myself, Cognassist’s Content Manager, Helen, and the team.

Visit cognassist.com/masterclass