DfE finally publishes ‘interim’ response to Augar Review

The Department for Education has finally published its initial response to Philip Augar’s review of Post-18 Education and Funding, almost two years after it was launched.

It is worth noting, however, that this is an “interim” response and the final conclusion will not be set out until the next Comprehensive Spending Review.

Much of the response reiterates plans outlined in the FE white paper, which you can read about here.

Here are the key things you need to know from the Augar response.

 

Lifelong loan entitlement to create ‘a flexible system’

Augar’s (pictured) report recommended the introduction of a “lifelong learning loan allowance” to be used at higher technical and degree level at any stage of an adult’s career for full and part time students.

As part of the prime minister’s lifetime skills guarantee, the DfE has committed to moving to a system where everyone has a “lifelong loan entitlement” from 2025, giving them access to the equivalent of four years of post-18 education.

The DfE claims this entitlement, to be consulted on in “early 2021”, will enable universities and colleges to provide a more “modular” offer.

 

New ‘Local Skills Improvement Plans’ to align courses to employer needs

The Augar report made clear that it was vital for post-18 provision to address labour market needs.

The DfE said it is their “vision” for the “substantial majority” of post-16 technical and Higher Technical Education to be aligned to employer-led standards by the end of this decade.

The department will also give employers a “central role” in shaping the technical skills provision offered in local areas beginning with Trailblazer areas where accredited Chambers of Commerce, and other business representative organisations, will “work with further education colleges and other providers to develop new Local Skills Improvement Plans”.

As per the white paper, these plans will be created by employers and providers, with the employers setting out a “credibly articulated and evidence-based assessment of skills needs to which providers will be empowered to respond”.

The DfE intends to legislate to put the employer leadership of Local Skills Improvement Plans on a statutory footing, “strengthening the voice of employers in local skills systems across the country”.

 

Rebalancing from academic to technical education

The DfE says it aims to create a “system whereby the quality of our technical and academic education is on a par, and the two are equally accessible.

“We want every student with the aptitude and desire to go to university to be able to do so and we want technical, employer-centric training to be a viable option for many more people.”

In 2018, the department announced plans to overhaul qualifications at levels 4 and 5 and create a “new generation” of courses at these levels.

The DfE said today that this “approved Higher Technical Qualifications offer” is a “high-quality prestigious alternative to the traditional full-length academic degree model” and will “ensure that everyone, no matter where in the country they are based, has access to the same quality of qualification and to equally good outcomes”.

They added that T Levels, rolled out for the first time in September 2020, will also help “close the gap” between academic and technical education.

 

Reforming skills funding

The DfE intends to make reforms to funding across the sectors in order to enable a “new, flexible, fairer system”.

The Augar response reiterates that as well as the lifelong loan entitlement, the department is making investments in further education “to ensure that public money is spent on high quality education and training that leads to good outcomes”.

“This includes a £400 million increase in 16-19 funding at Spending Review 2019, and a £291 million increase to 16 to 19 funding at Spending Review 2020. We have also committed to invest £1.5 billion of capital funding to refurbish the further education estate.”

The Augar report also highlighted the “significant, and growing, taxpayer subsidy in the higher education student finance system”. The DfE therefore intends to “freeze the maximum tuition fee cap to deliver better value for students and to keep the cost of higher education under control”.

This will initially be for one year and further changes to the student finance system will be considered ahead of the next Comprehensive Spending Review.

I fear today’s FE White Paper is the worst of both worlds

Neither political capital or actual capital are backing up today’s FE White Paper, writes Jonathan Simons

In 2009, while working in No 10, I worked with the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills on a White Paper called “Skills for Growth”.  

The White Paper committed to government working with local employers to develop “local strategies” to ensure that “skills provision fully reflect the needs of all areas in the region.” 

The following year, under the incoming Coalition government, I worked with BIS and DfE jointly on a White Paper called “Skills for Sustainable Growth”. In that, the government suggested a new system of finance and loans for individuals to access training later in life and to build up higher level technical skills. 

Stop me if this sounds familiar. 

It’s not that today’s analysis is wrong. It’s that none of it is new.  

There’s two broad options for policymaking in government, especially in complex areas like skills.  

The boring one is taking the existing policy architecture you have and evolving it.  

I was perhaps a little unfair in my impression that none of this has changed from a decade ago. The difference between FE loans in 2010, and the shape of a finance system in this White Paper are significant.

The latter is more flexible, and will build on 10 years’ worth of learning about who accesses credit, how it needs to work, how providers need to manage it, and so on. Similarly, a decade ago, the dominant feeling was that it was all about higher skills, and the middle skills were disappearing.  

Today’s White Paper is clear that intermediate skills have a vital role to play in the economy.  

The second option is to make big, dramatic changes. This can happen when there has genuinely been a paradigm shift in the environment, or when there is a change of political approach towards a sector.  

Such an approach is heralded by White Papers and legislation, and the spending of political capital, and actual capital.  

We’re arguably in such a moment now. The pandemic has revealed (or perhaps highlighted to those politicians not watching as closely as FE Week readers) the fissures in the skills system and labour market productivity.  

Millions of people have sadly lost their jobs and thousands of businesses are shuttered. The labour market of 2025 will be different to the labour market of 2020 on a scale that is very rarely seen within such a short window. 

But the pandemic has also meant that the Treasury is extremely reluctant to make long term financial commitments, while the future shape of the economy is unclear.  

So what I fear is that today has seen the worst of both worlds.  

Because government has committed to publishing this White Paper for over a year now, it has done so – despite the Spending Review in November cutting the ground away from under them.  

We’ve got soaring rhetoric. We’ve got big statements about a paradigm shift. But we have neither political capital, nor actual capital, backing it up. We’ve announced big things, before we have big levers to make them work. 

Chris Skidmore, the former higher education minister, wrote an excellent piece in Conservative Home in which he gently castigated his fellow politicians for rushing to make quick announcements in an effort to be seen to be doing something.  

The saving grace is government has left the political window open

He quotes psychologist and economist Daniel Kahneman about thinking fast, and thinking slow. All too often, Skidmore wrote, the temptation when we can’t answer a difficult question slowly is to answer a different, easier question quickly.  

The saving grace is government has left the political window open. In the next few months, with a fair wind and a successful vaccine rollout, we’ll know more about the medium-term economic impact.  

We’ll know more about what is signal and what is noise in the labour market. We may also have a change in personnel at the top which could lend this agenda greater political capital.  

So the mission for all of those who work in FE and skills policy is clear. We must see today not as the end, but the end of the beginning.  

The task is to continue to press government in the run up to this Autumn’s Comprehensive Spending Review. Only then will the reality of change and the investment of tomorrow meet the political rhetoric of today.  

Never in 37 years have I seen colleges in the limelight like this White Paper

This White Paper is the first glimpse of where further education could be heading – for the better – writes Sally Dicketts

Today’s eagerly awaited “Skills for Jobs” White Paper will be seen positively by the optimists in the sector and with disappointment by others. I sit in the first camp – I am full of optimism today.

It goes without saying that there is no such thing as a perfect White Paper. But we should all be delighted and recognise the significance of today’s release. And it is worth remembering that the most realistic alternative was not a different White Paper, but no White Paper at all.

I am optimistic because never, in my 37 years in the FE sector, have I seen government put colleges onto the centre stage and recognise the important role we undoubtedly play in achieving social mobility, greater equality and diversity and enabling economic growth and recovery.

We can individually quibble with parts of the paper, bewail issues of funding – or we can decide to change our destiny and embrace the work with employers even more than we do at present.

And I am optimistic because today’s White Paper is one of the first tangible examples of what government means when they talk about “building back better” and “levelling-up”.

Not only are colleges included (which just a few years ago we’d have been thrilled about), they are front and centre. This is one of the first major policy announcements on what a post-pandemic world could look like.

We will of course need to make sure that the bits we take issue with are ironed out, and any commitments are backed by funding, but that is what the consultation period will be for.

Now, more than ever, working together collaboratively will be key. The aim will be to really impact locally on the quality and range of technical education provided to our communities.

When I work with colleague principals and CEOs from all over this sector I am always wowed by people’s passion and thought for their learners and staff.

This thought and concern for learners now needs honing into envisioning a future where we are at its centre.

We need to be working with and helping to shape the implementation of this White Paper to ensure our learners benefit and get the skills knowledge and attributes to improve their life choices and our economies.

I look forward to working with you on finessing and using this White paper to further catapult this sector not only into the limelight but into being the powerhouse for skills to drive the economy and our communities to success.

We are responsible for the lives of so many young people and adults. Let’s use our collective ingenuity and interest in learning and development to make this difference with agility, thought and innovative use of technology and our people.

I have real optimism for our future, as long as we stay open and curious to change, work and support one another, and trust and believe in our staff and students to work their magic.

Hull College Group to close down Goole campus

A troubled college group is set to lose another one of its campuses at the end of this academic year, FE Week can reveal.

Hull College Group has taken the decision to close Goole College after finding that it is running at a loss and deeming the premises to be of “low quality”.

The move will involve Hull College dropping the word “group” from its name, as it will now only consist of one site having demerged from its other campus, Harrogate College, in 2019.

Former Dudley College boss Lowell Williams was employed by Hull College Group earlier this year as a consultant to work on an estates strategy, and has now taken the reins as interim chief executive.

In an interview with FE Week he said: “There is no need for the Goole College site.

“It is running on a loss and there are better options for young people and adults locally, so the college has made the decision to stop trading at the end of this academic year.”

A statement from the college added: “The detailed arrangements will be made available in due course as we work with East Riding Council and other local providers to ensure an ongoing place for all of our Goole College learners.

“The corporation have identified that Goole College is not in a position to best meet the future needs of learners and having maintained this loss making provision for some time, the college is no longer in a position to do so.”

Goole has been a part of Hull College since before the turn of the millennium, and according to its website, currently runs courses up to level 3 in areas such as hairdressing, mechanical engineering and welding, and health and social care; as well as ESOL, foundation courses, and higher education courses in teacher education and early years.

Williams said the college was informing staff of the decision this morning and insisted there are “significant redeployment opportunities” to the college’s main site, so he is “hoping but cannot guarantee” that there will not be any redundancies.

The interim chief executive said the college will speak with stakeholders about the decision, including the Conservative Brigg and Goole MP Andrew Percy, who has been approached for comment.

Recently published board minutes for October 2020 for Hull College also suggest it is looking at moving away from its city centre campus. The minutes said: “Governors discussed whether the college should consider a move away from its current city centre site with the interim chief executive explaining that this was not yet a theme that had been explored but he was preparing to engage in those conversations with key stakeholders.”

Hull College Group has run into a number of problems in recent years and received a £42 million bailout from the government in 2018 as part of a Fresh Start process.

Its financial troubles were what led to Harrogate College being transferred to the Leeds-based Luminate Education Group in 2019.

FE Commissioner intervention is ongoing at the college.

Traineeships tender results revealed

Bidders to the government’s traineeships tender are now being informed of their outcomes following a slight delay.

In decision letters sent out yesterday, seen by FE Week, the Education and Skills Funding Agency tells providers that they will be observing a ten-day “voluntary standstill period” from 19 January before entering into the contracts on 1 February 2021.

A total of 215 awards have been made from almost 400 bids, with the total funding standing at £64.4 million.

The funding is being split across the nine regions in England – ranging from £20.8 million for London providers to £2.6 million for the south-west. Forty five providers in London were successful in their bids (see table).

Click to expand

The contracts, which are just for 19 to 24 traineeships, are hoped fund around 20,000 new starts between February and July 2021.

The ESFA had planned to notify bidders of outcomes on 11 January, but previously said the “high volume of tenders received” had “necessitated having to inform you that notifications of award will be delayed slightly”.

The tender is one way the government plans to triple the number of traineeships starts this year – as pledged by chancellor Rishi Sunak over the summer as part of his plan to combat youth unemployment amid the coronavirus pandemic.

Employer cash incentives of £1,000 have also been made available, as has growth funding for providers to deliver 16-to-19 traineeships.

As FE Week revealed last week, Sunak was said to be personally “annoyed” at how long the tender took to get off the ground, considering he announced the plan to triple numbers in July.

‘The benefit-risk balance is unclear’: Government pauses daily Covid contact testing in colleges

The rollout of daily Covid contact testing in schools and colleges has been paused amid fears over higher rates of transmission from the new variant of the disease and following widespread concern over the accuracy of tests.

Public Health England announced today that “in light of this changing situation, we now recommend that the rollout of daily contact testing within schools is paused, other than for schools involved in further evaluation”.

The Department for Education then confirmed that it has accepted PHE’s recommendation to pause this programme in both schools and colleges, but made clear there is no change to their “main rollout of regular testing”.

Schools and colleges have been told to continue to test their staff twice-weekly where possible and test pupils twice upon their return to in-person teaching – as has been the case since January.

The key part of the mass testing scheme was daily lateral flow tests for students and staff who had been in close contact with a positive Covid case. Those who tested negative could stay in the classroom rather than have to isolate.

However new guidance from PHE explains that as the new variant of Covid has “higher rates of transmission and hence generates a higher secondary attack rate … the balance between the risks (transmission of virus in schools and onward to households and the wider community) and benefits (education in a face-to-face and safe setting) for daily contact testing is unclear”.

PHE said: “Since the announcement of the schools testing programme in December, we have seen the emergence of a new variant of the virus which has become dominant in the UK. The variant has been shown to have increased transmissibility and causes higher secondary attack rates. This increases the risk of transmission everywhere, including in school settings.”

NHS Test and Trace and PHE will now conduct “structured evaluation of daily contact testing as part of a wider evaluation of daily contact testing in a range of private and public settings”.

The Department for Education will support the evaluation so that the findings can “contribute to further public health advice on daily contact testing in educational settings”.

PHE has asked for schools or colleges who have found daily contact testing helpful and would like to take part in the evaluation to contact the NHS Test and Trace evaluation team at dct-pilotpmo@dhsc.gov.uk

Henley campus for sale after Coventry College breaches loan conditions

A college is selling one of its only two campuses to repay debt after being warned it could “face insolvency”.

Coventry College will lose its hospitality and catering provision and put 23 jobs at risk under plans to close its Henley campus by the end of August. All remaining courses and the “majority” of staff will transfer to its city campus two miles away.

Principal Carol Thomas said the sale was “in order to generate revenue” and create a “financially stable further education college which is fit for the future”.

Coventry College’s 2018-19 accounts, show that it breached the conditions of a loan from Barclays Bank, meaning the full balance of the loan – £9.4 million – was due within one year.

The college scrambled to refinance that loan by August 2020, with an FE Commissioner report from a visit in March last year warning if the college could not reach an agreement with the bank, it would have to meet its loan obligations and without government or other third-party support, that “will not be possible and will leave the college facing insolvency”.

The college told FE Week the loan has been extended from the August repayment date, and “expects to be cash generative after loan repayments in this financial year”.

A spokesperson said there are therefore currently “no solvency issues”, but confirmed the sale of Henley was to help repay debt.

The college said it had looked at refurbishing the former Henley College site, which has been running since 1964 and merged with City College Coventry to form Coventry College in 2017, but concluded that “is not possible as it would require significant financial investment”.

Coventry College received £1 million in capital investment from the government earlier this year. The board had explored further “funding options” with government education agencies, but this did not materialise.

The Henley campus was said to be “under-utilised” and in “a poor state of repair with ineffective and inconsistent quality of digital access,” so moving to one campus means all the college’s capital funding can go towards “the development of one modern further education campus,” Thomas said.

Local Labour MP Colleen Fletcher is protesting the Henley closure. She has written to education secretary Gavin Williamson to say she is “concerned this decision was in-part predicated on government failing to offer an appropriate level of financial support”.

“This example in Coventry may well be being repeated up and down the country,” she added.

“While I of course understand why colleges may wish to amalgamate, I am concerned that this may well represent a loss of opportunities for many.”

This is the latest bump in the road for Coventry College. It was rated ‘inadequate’ by Ofsted in 2015 before achieving two consecutive ‘requires improvement’ grades in 2016 and 2019.

Carol Thomas

Thomas took over last August, following a string of short-term leaders over the previous five years, and told FE Week in September the latest grade three had meant staff had: “Lost heart, they’ve lost passion, and they’ve lost confidence in their own ability.”

Coventry College is planning to move most of Henley’s provision, including courses in sport and public services, to its city campus at the end of the academic year, so no course is interrupted mid-term.

Aside from the fewer than 80 catering and hospitality learners, the decision will affect around 30 per cent of the college’s learners.

Alternative providers were being discussed for the hospitality and catering learners, the college added, but no names were provided to FE Week.

Of the 23 staff at risk of losing their jobs due to the move, six are full-time and the college says it is working with all of them to find new employment.

The college ran two staffing restructures last year, leading to 33 staff taking voluntary redundancy.

Fletcher is set to meet with the college about the closure, where she said she will raise concerns about losing provision from the Henley site.

Members of parliament protesting the ending of provision at their local campuses has become a common occurrence recently, as colleges seek to offload estates to balance their books.

Just last week FE Week reported on how a group of Cumbrian MPs, Conservative and Liberal Democrat, had written to Boris Johnson, asking for his support to save the county’s Newton Rigg College from closure. Similar situations occurred when site sales were announced for Cornwall College Group, RNN Group, and Warwickshire College Group.

Pictured top: Coventry College’s Henley campus

The challenges facing 2021 exam grades are very different to 2020

Ofqual and the Department for Education didn’t want to make this decision around exam grades, and now face a daunting task, writes Tom Bewick

Hard core Star Trek fans will know that it wasn’t Mr Spock that said to Captain Kirk, “It’s life, Jim, but not as we know it.”   

Instead, these famous lines first appeared in the 1987 song Star Trekkin’, sung by the Firm.   

So you may well find yourself, like me, interpreting lots of the joint consultation from Ofqual, written with the Department for Education, as something like: “It’s exams, Jim, but not as we know it.”   
  
On Friday Ofqual signalled that practical exam assessments should go ahead as normal, subject to guidelines on Covid-secure settings. If these exams can’t be delivered in situ or remotely then they can be delayed, said the regulator. 

This means it is likely that the examination element of T-Levels will now take place next year, which is fine – for licence-to-practice qualifications or non-exam assessments, there has never been a one-size-fits all way to award vocational and technical qualifications.  

Meanwhile planned tweaks to the Extended Extraordinary Regulatory Framework (EERF) will allow awarding organisations to adapt vocational and technical qualifications to ensure that the vast majority of learners can still progress.  

Indeed, the feedback from our members about the operation of the EERF to date has been broadly positive. And no issues appear to have been raised by Ofqual about this temporary arrangement. 
  
But you can tell the government and the regulator never really wanted to be in the position of cancelling the summer examinations for a second time.   
  
One of the painful conclusions from the “fiasco” of August 2020 was that, for all the contentious debates surrounding the merits of assessment regimes, objective national tests moderated and performed under invigilated conditions are still the fairest way of finding out what a learner knows and understands.   
  
Moreover, we know that ethnic minorities and bright working-class kids tend to lose out under teacher-assessed grades. Human psychology traits like racial discrimination and unconscious bias are big inhibitors to social progress.   
  
Indeed many private schools, which offer international GCSEs, are planning to go ahead with physical exams this summer. They know the societal prestige attached to a set of reliable, externally validated results.  
  
So one of the biggest dilemmas now facing Ofqual and exams is ensuring both consistency and fairness in awarding qualifications.   
  
This is a daunting task. 

Last year, students had by and large completed the required scope of learning by the time lockdown restrictions happened in late March. But in the past 12 months, young people in England have endured three national lockdowns. They have experienced a massive overall loss in teaching and learning.   
  
The north of England has also generally reported more college days lost due to coronavirus than the south.   
   
At the same time, many year 11 and 13 pupils are already sitting “mini-exams” which the government are saying can be used as valid “mock exams”.   

This is potentially a bureaucratic nightmare

  Meanwhile, teachers have been told to hold back on assessing students until all these different forms of assessment, including valid mock exams, have been taken into account.  
  
After that, mock exam results could form the basis of any appeals.  

What’s tricky here is students this year will be assessed on what they know, not what they could have known if the pandemic had never occurred. This is a departure from last summer’s arrangements, when teachers were asked to make judgements on what they thought students would have got if exams had gone ahead. 

Appeals will be open to all students this year. This is potentially a bureaucratic nightmare.  

The one saving grace is that the required “evidence” for an appeal (like mock exam results and/or assessed coursework) will give awarding organisations something to work with. 

No wonder, then, that Ofqual and the Department for Education have decided to work so closely together. It would appear that trapped on their Starship Enterprise, the regulator and Gavin Williamson are resigned to entwining their fates.
  
To quote the 1987 song again: don’t be surprised if the whole enterprise continues “boldly going forward”. But this won’t be plain sailing.  

 

Ofqual raises concerns over DfE reforms to BTECs and other level 3 qualifications

Government plans to remove funding for thousands of courses, such as BTECs, that compete with T Levels and A-levels risk destabilising the qualifications market and adversely narrowing learner choice, Ofqual has warned.

The exams regulator has today raised a number of concerns in response to the Department for Education’s level 3 qualifications review.

The DfE claims there is currently a “confusing landscape” of over 12,000 courses on offer to young people at level 3 and below, with multiple qualifications in the same subject areas available – many of which are “poor quality and offer little value to students or employers”.

Ofqual says it recognises the “potential benefits” of creating a “clearer landscape and “greater confidence in the currency of the qualification they achieve”, but warned of the scale of disruption this could cause under current recommendations.

“The DfE estimates that the qualifications that may no longer be funded could account for around 62 per cent of current non-A level 16 to 19-year-old enrolments at level 3 – and yet we know that the number of learners using qualifications other than A-levels to access higher education is growing, in particular the use of a combination of academic with smaller vocational and technical qualifications,” the response said.

“We can see from UCAS data about 2019 undergraduate admissions that the number of applicants accepted to higher education with A levels alone has fallen from 63 per cent in 2017 to around 60 per cent in 2019.

“While this accounts for more than 145,000 learners, nearly 22,000 learners were accepted with BTECs only in 2019 along with almost 18,000 learners who combined A levels with BTECs.”

Ofqual says this is “not an insignificant number” and “we should consider the impact on learners who may not be able to benefit in such a way when the reforms introduce an apparently more binary choice around qualification purpose and content”.

One key intention of the DfE’s proposed reforms is to establish two clearer pathways of study with A-levels and T Levels as the “programmes of choice” for 16 to 19-year old learners.

The exams regulator said they see a “potential risk” in relation to T Levels in that “some of the design features may appear to learners as barriers to accessing the programme of study, in particular the size and structure of the T Level programme”.

While providers and awarding organisations are “required to ensure qualifications are accessible”, some learners, including those with SEND or caring responsibilities, “may find T Levels less well-suited, too big or not sufficiently flexible for their individual study needs,” Ofqual warned.

The exams regulator added that the qualifications that appear more likely to be removed from funding currently have a higher proportion of learners with “particular protected characteristics”, such as disability, ethnicity or gender, or who are disadvantaged.

It is therefore “important to consider how the qualifications funded in future can be designed to continue to allow a diverse range of learners to access level 3 qualifications effectively and successfully”.

Ofqual goes on to predict that defunding existing qualifications will lead to “some market instability in the years after the reforms as a number of centres will choose to change the qualifications they offer, particularly if they are reliant on public funding”.

The response reminds the DfE that government has a “responsibility” to identify where there are risks to learners if, for example, an awarding organisation becomes “financially fragile or market instability causes a fall in confidence in regulated qualifications”.

It concludes by calling on the DfE to consider delaying the proposed reforms as 2021 will be an “exceptionally demanding year for awarding organisations because of the pandemic”, including the new arrangements that now need to be implemented following the cancellation of exams.

“We would ask the department to consider whether there are aspects of the proposed reforms for which implementation could be delayed by a year, in recognition of these exceptional circumstances,” Ofqual said.

Under the DfE’s plans, funding for the “majority” of qualifications that “overlap” with A-levels and T Levels would be removed by autumn 2023.

The deadline for the consultation was extended last week and is now 31 January. You can read it in full here.