Apprenticeship standard achievement rate fails to hit 60%

More than two in five apprentices on standards failed to successfully complete their qualification last year.

National achievement rate tables (NARTs) published this morning by the Department for Education show that the overall rate for all apprenticeships fell from 64.8 per cent in 2018/19 to 64.2 per cent in 2019/20.

The data shows that apprentices on old-style frameworks, which are being phased out, hit a 67.8 per cent achievement rate, but the new-style standards only achieved 58.7 per cent.

This is, however, an almost 12 percentage point increase on 2018/19 when just 46.9 per cent of apprentices on standards achieved.

The retention rate for standards continues to be low, sitting at 60.2 per cent.

Commentary published by the DfE alongside the statistics claims that a difference in apprenticeship achievement rates between framework and standards is “not, at least initially, an entirely unexpected consequence of our reforms”.

“Whilst some standards do have similar names to frameworks, standards are not designed to be a direct replacement for frameworks and as such, they should not be directly compared,” the document said.

“Department for Education reforms changed what an apprenticeship is: standards are longer, with more training and an independent end-point assessment to test occupational competency at the end. End-point assessment is a new assessment method, making achievements on standards more demanding and this could also impact the qualification achievement rate.”

Breaking the data down by subject area, it shows that agriculture, horticulture and animal care had the lowest achievement rate at 50.9 per cent, followed by construction at 52.3 per cent, and then leisure, travel and tourism at 55.6 per cent.

While the DfE has released achievement rate data at a national level for 2019/20, they have not published it at individual provider level or by institution type this year due to the pandemic.

The data will also not be used by bodies such as Ofsted, local authorities or devolved authorities or within ESFA, to hold providers to account.

The DfE commentary warned that “care should be taken when comparing outcomes with previous years due to the effects of the pandemic”.

“A number of things will have impacted these data. For example there was an increase in the number of breaks in learning for those with 2019/20 expected end dates in which we can observe a large number of outcomes being delayed until 2020/21,” it added.

Responding to today’s figures, a DfE spokesperson said: “Our reforms to apprenticeships have made them longer and better, with more off-the-job training and a proper assessment at the end. As more and more apprentices are on the new, more rigorous standards, we are pleased to see that the achievement rate for apprenticeship standards has increased by 11.8 percentage points from 2018/19 to 2019/20.

“The recently published FE White Paper outlined the steps we are taking to ensure every apprentice has a high quality experience, including investing in a comprehensive package of professional development available to all apprenticeship providers and their workforce.”

 

Government security centre warns colleges of ‘spike’ in cyber attacks

Schools and colleges have lost financial records, students’ coursework and Covid-19 testing data during a recent “spike” in cyber attacks targeting the education sector.

The National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC), part of GCHQ, yesterday published an alert warning colleges and other education settings to take further precautions to protect themselves against ransomware following “an increased number” of attacks since late February.

It comes a week after South and City College Birmingham, which teaches 13,000 students, was forced to shut its eight campuses following a “major” ransomware attack that disabled its core IT systems.

 

Cyber attacks a ‘growing threat’

Paul Chichester, director of operations at NCSC, said the targeting of the education sector by cyber criminals is “completely unacceptable” but is a “growing threat”.

Ransomware is a type of malware that prevents you from accessing your systems or the data held on them, the NCSC explains.

The data is usually encrypted and may be deleted or stolen. Following the initial attack those responsible will “usually send a ransom note demanding payment to recover the data”. Payment is usually requested in the form of crypto currency.

The criminals also threaten to release sensitive data stolen during the attack if the ransom is not paid.

The NCSC added: “In recent incidents affecting the education sector, ransomware has led to the loss of student coursework, school financial records, as well as data relating to Covid-19 testing.”

The cyber security experts said the attacks can have a “devastating impact on organisations” and may require a significant amount of recovery time to reinstate critical services.

FE Week has previously reported on a range of cyber attacks affecting colleges, which have included doctored emails from principals and hoax terror attacks.

Eighty per cent of further/higher education institutions identified a cyber security breach or attack in the 12 months prior to the end of 2019, according to the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport’s Cyber Security Breaches Survey 2020.

There has been a rise in attacks since late February 2021 “when establishments were preparing to welcome students back to the classroom”, the NCSC said.

The security centre added it could not release exact figures for the number of attacks conducted due to operational reasons.

However, it stated the attacks have caused varying levels of disruption and “there is no reason to suspect the same criminal actor has been behind each attack”.

 

So what can colleges do?

The NCSC recommends education providers to not encourage, endorse or condone the payment of ransom demands.

It warned the “payment of ransoms has no guarantee of restoring access or services and will likely result in repeat incidents to educational settings”.

The NCSC recommends a ‘defence in depth’ strategy in order to defend against malware and ransomware attacks.

The advice includes effective vulnerability management, installing antivirus software and implementing mechanisms to prevent phishing attacks.

Testing times? Inside the reopening of colleges

An Herculean effort has seen colleges deploy mass Covid testing to support a safe reopening. So how did it go, and what does the future hold? JL Dutaut finds out

“I wasn’t coping at home although my teachers really tried with me.”

Our dominant image of vulnerable learners amid this pandemic may be of children and young people. But these words were spoken last week to Westminster Adult Education Services principal Arinola Edeh by one of her students.

Vulnerability has been revealed everywhere by this year-long crisis. Colleges have proven to be a vital safety net. That’s why closing their doors again over two months ago was traumatic. Having welcomed students back once before, the picture of what was being inflicted on them was all the clearer.

However, this second round of closures has seen colleges drastically increase and improve their online learning provision. At Havant and South Downs College (HSDC), for example, principal Mike Gaston notes that training staff to facilitate live lessons has really paid off. “Teachers have expressed their gratitude for it,” he tells me. “It reassured teachers that their students were making good progress and has meant the return to lessons at college has been seamless for many.”

His students concur. With a caveat. “Live lessons during lockdown have been really varied and interesting,” one said. “But it’s much better learning with friends in class.”

The buzz has returned to our campuses

The feeling is shared across all the colleges I’ve spoken with this week. Everyone is grateful for the technological innovations of the past 12 months. But they are even more grateful to be back on site.  As Askham Bryan College, equine student Alicia Easdon put it quite literally, “I’m very ready to get back in the saddle!”

Animal management curriculum director Jo Richards tells me the horses are just as happy as Alicia. She and her colleagues, Fiona Macdonald and Iain Glendinning, are “over the moon” that students are back as the college literally comes back to life. The same phenomenon is happening at Bedford College Group’s agricultural college. CEO, Ian Pryce tells me one member of staff said they were pleased to get students back “because the lambing needed doing!”

As Pryce says, “The buzz has returned to our campuses.” Spring has clearly sprung, and there is perhaps no better analogy than that for the general joy of the past week. But the real reason this reopening feels different is perhaps the prime minister’s insistence that there be no U-turns on his roadmap to Covid freedom.

Arinola Edeh testing times feature

Despite the work to make settings Covid-safe, another lockdown always felt somewhat inevitable in the summer and autumn terms. Now, with mass testing in place and a successful vaccination roll-out in progress, there is genuine optimism that the end is in sight. London South East Colleges CEO Sam Parrett echoes every principal I’ve spoken with when she tells me she hopes “we can all look forward to some stability and a return to our normal lives as we head towards summer”.

But the first thing to note is that this is still far from a full return. At Stanmore College, for example, principal Sarbdip Noonan tells me they “are continuing online learning for the rest of term to reduce footfall on campus. The plan is for 65 per cent of students to return on site.”

And beyond phased reopenings, leaders are dealing with students who can’t attend and, more challengingly, some who won’t. MidKent College principal, Simon Cook, whose community suffered one of the highest Covid rates in the UK in November says “that has changed the psychology for many, and some feel safer in their homes. We need to help them feel comfortable and be patient.”

Some feel safer in their homes. We need to help them feel comfortable

For Dipa Ganguli, whose adult education college also caters for 16- to 19-year-olds, reopening hasn’t happened at all. “Prior to the PM’s announcement,” she says, “I had made a decision not to return on site until after the Easter holidays.” Staff at Sutton College are being tested weekly at the council’s testing centre, but the college doesn’t have the facility yet to test their learners.

Sutton College’s example reflects nothing if not the diversity of the further education sector and the fairly unique trust placed in the sector’s leaders to implement a locally led, safety-first reopening. For the vast majority, it has begun in earnest, supported by a staggering logistical effort. “It’s been no small feat,” says Leeds City College principal Suzanne Gallagher. “But by setting up mass testing, it has allowed us to identify a small number of cases and act quickly.”

Parrett’s LSEC conducted 5,000 tests last week. NCG CEO Liz Bromley tells me staff and student volunteers carried out 10,063 tests across the group’s campuses. Pryce reports an average of close to 1,000 lateral flow tests (LFTs) a day. Education Partnership NorthEast carried out 3,000. Mike Gaston says HSDC conducted 7,000.

Testing at Newcastle sixth form

And not one college leader I’ve spoken to reports a hitch. Student engagement is high across the piece too. Cook says numbers over the past week show “the significant majority of students have chosen to take part, and we expect that number to rise as the testing process is demystified”.

But while the time it takes to realise this effort has been accounted for in the government’s decision to allow colleges to determine the speed and extent of their reopening, it is unclear whether ministers have fully grasped the cost.

By and large, mass testing in colleges is being supported by an army of staff and student volunteers. For students, especially health and social care students who can tot it up as work experience, it’s hard to see a down side to this civic engagement. But for staff, it’s an additional role on top of managing increased on-site demand as well as ongoing remote provision. Workload implications mean potentially long-term costs in retention and recruitment.

Agency staff are brought in at a cost to carry out the actual testing

In the main, the ‘Big Society’ approach is working. For MidKent, for example, one good turn has earned another. “One of our local hospital trusts has been using a part of our land for over a year,” Cook tells me. “So they offered to help with staffing for the short period we need.”

But Liz Bromley tells me that NCG’s London colleges – Lewisham and Southwark – have both had to rely on agency staff to support their test centre volunteers. The group hopes to recover some of the cost, but it’s as yet unclear whether that will be possible. Stanmore College principal Sarbdip Noonan also reports that, while her staff and student volunteers control the queues, “agency staff are brought in at a cost to carry out the actual testing”.

It’s hard to know how widespread this hidden cost is, but it is clearly impacting unevenly.

What appears to be more evenly spread is the result of all this work. It’s an unscientific sample for sure, but almost every leader who’s touched on the subject of positive cases with me, regardless of region, has reported the same outcome – about one positive case in every 1,000 LFTs. The exception is LSEC where, Sam Parrett tells me, there have been 0 positives from 5,000 tests.

Sarbdip Noonan testing times feature

This has meant the return to classrooms itself has been able to progress with little disruption. But sustaining that depends on one other key factor: compliance with guidance on face coverings that leave providers with no recourse to consequences.

Happily, all the leaders who spoke to me report high compliance. Gaston says his students feel “like stakeholders in avoiding any further disruption to face-to-face education”. Liz Bromley acknowledges that “there are a very small number who are resistant. We just make sure that social distancing is in place. As long as the testing is happening, we are a little more confident that there is a very, very low risk of transmission.”

All in all then, last week’s reopening has been a nationwide success. And from this week, the demand on colleges will begin to lessen as students go home with self-test kits. The result is that “staff are generally very optimistic about the end of the academic year,” says Noonan, echoing every leader I’ve spoken with.

But as Bromley explains, most don’t expect “the real, genuine reopening” to be until September. Things will begin to look like normal, she hopes, but “even then I suspect there will be a new normal we’ll have to get used to”.

Transition this year could be slightly bumpier than normal

Not least among the challenges college leaders are anticipating is welcoming new students in the autumn. Cook, for example, is concerned that “we’ve not been able to welcome any prospective students to our campuses. We’ve done some great work with online open events, but the transition this year could be slightly bumpier than normal.”

For sure, the edtech revolution has helped and will continue to help. Edeh, whose college has so far only reopened for those on practical courses and entry-level students, is certain of that. “We don’t expect to move all our provision online,” she says, “but we have now seen its potential for establishing different delivery models.”

But if the past week has brought one thing front and centre for everyone, it is, as Parrett says, “the importance of social contact for everyone’s wellbeing”.

The crucial role of colleges in supporting good mental health is a message all seem to agree with. And they do so with a depth of feeling that was perhaps lacking from this discussion in pre-pandemic times.

The past week has let that genie out of the bottle, and it doesn’t look like there’s any putting it back.

So saddle up. The ride into Covid’s sunset promises to be an exciting one.

Impact of ‘spiteful’ ESFA adult education claw back plans revealed

A college has warned it will have to hand back over £4 million under the Education and Skills Funding Agency’s “spiteful” adult education budget claw back plans.

Leicester College told FE Week it has forecast to spend 53 per cent of its £11 million allocation for 2020/21 – meaning it could have to hand back 37 per cent up to the allowance threshold of 90 per cent announced on Monday.

“The college is unlikely to be able to make up the remaining allocation in the final term of the year,” a spokesperson said, as they believe many adult learners are “unwilling” to sign-up until the vaccine programme has completed.

The Association of Colleges has predicted that most of their members will deliver between 75 to 85 per cent of their allocations, which would mean a total clawback of between £22 million and £62 million.

‘Not clear’ what the implications will be

While the cause of under-delivery can largely be attributed to the various national lockdowns owing to Covid-19, Leicester College has been in continuous lockdown with the rest of the city since March 2020.

“The current year has been impacted by the pandemic far more severely than 2019/20,” the college spokesperson said.

While it is “not clear” what the full implications of this will be, the college said it is “clear” there will be consequences for cashflow, for its capital programmes and future plans for 2021/22.

The college is refurbishing its Abbey Park campus ahead of starting the government’s flagship T Level courses in a number of different areas this September.

Adult education threshold ‘feels a bit spiteful’

The ESFA has come in for widespread criticism for setting the 90 per cent threshold, which will affect grant-funded colleges and councils with AEB, 19 to 24 traineeships, and advanced learner loans bursary allocations.

adult education
Julian Gravatt

AoC deputy chief executive Julian Gravatt warned in a blog on his association’s website yesterday that other colleges will lose “six figure sums”.

Plus, he said, it could cancel out funding for the government’s new level 3 entitlement, due to start next month under the new National Skills Fund.

“It is good that DfE has accepted the need for a lower threshold, but a 10 per cent tolerance is not much given the disruptions of the year and will leave some colleges scrambling for enrolments or savings,” Gravatt added.

Sue Pember, formerly a senior Department for Education official before becoming director of policy for adult education network Holex, said during an FE Week webcast earlier this week the threshold “just makes it really hard, and feels a bit spiteful”.

Bob Harrison, chair of adult education provider Northern College and a governor of Oldham College, tweeted following the announcement: “So let me get this straight: The government forces our colleges to close and therefore we are unable to recruit and run our short courses.

“But we have already employed teachers and have fixed costs. Then the ESFA are going to clawback if we don’t hit 90 per cent of target? Its Catch 22.”

Luke Rake, principal of land-based Kingston Maurward College expressed his indignation, tweeting: “And lo! Adult education is killed off completely.

“Couldn’t deliver due to enforced lockdowns, didn’t furlough staff based on ESFA advice, ESFA now tells us we’ve still got to give the money back, having paid wages for a year. Helpful. Thanks.”

Threshold a ‘fair representation’ of delivery

A much more generous threshold of 68 per cent was set for last year’s AEB.

But in the announcement on Monday, the agency said the 90 per cent threshold was a “fair representation” of grant-funded providers’ average delivery.

They acknowledged the situation “is still difficult for providers,” but they “have been able to continue remote delivery very successfully during lockdown, having built on the experience of 2019 to 2020 to establish effective contingency arrangements to manage Covid-19 restrictions”.

Threshold rate for college adult education under-delivery lowered – but only to 90%

Colleges that deliver less than 90 per cent of their national adult education budget allocation this year face having their unspent funds clawed back, the Education and Skills Funding Agency announced today.

The agency said this new threshold, much higher than the 68 per cent set for last year, is a “fair representation of grant-funded providers’ average delivery” in 2020/21.

The policy means that only colleges with funding for AEB, 19 to 24 traineeships, and advanced learner loans bursary which hit 90 per cent of their allocations will be able to keep 100 per cent of the money.

Initial reaction from Association of College’s deputy chief executive Julian Gravatt was that “tens of millions of pounds are at risk,” as the ESFA AEB is worth around £450 million to colleges.

Gravatt told FE Week the tolerance is “not much” and would leave colleges “scrambling for enrolments or savings”.

He added: “We’re asking DFE for more information on the estimates that informed the decision and for a reconsideration of the level to avoid pressure on colleges to cut back just when the country needs them to do more.”

Head of policy for adult education network HOLEX Sue Pember called it “very disappointing and doesn’t cover any of the added costs of Covid-safe delivery or the extra support that students needed.

“Decision needs to be reviewed or a support fund created to cover the added costs of delivery. There may be fewer students but they needed more support,” she continued.

In a typical year, colleges are allowed to keep 100 per cent of the national adult education budget funding if they achieve a threshold of at least 97 per cent of their allocation.

Last year this was lowered to 68 per cent owing to the impact of Covid-19, and with national lockdowns continuing, many in the sector thought a similar threshold would be implemented this year.

Situation still ‘difficult’ for colleges

Announcing the new threshold today, the ESFA said: “We acknowledge the situation is still difficult for providers, but our latest data shows that a threshold of 90 per cent is a fair representation of grant funded providers’ average delivery.

“We also know that many grant funded providers have been able to continue remote delivery very successfully during lockdown, having built on the experience of 2019 to 2020 to establish effective contingency arrangements to manage Covid-19 restrictions.”

“Our primary aim is to support providers to continue to deliver as much quality provision as possible, whether that is face-to-face, online, or otherwise remotely,” the update continued.

The agency said it would publish further details for colleges with any questions by the end of March.

And AEB funding rules for the 2020 to 2021 academic year will be updated in April to include this change.

The announcement today only applies to the national AEB administered by the ESFA, not devolved mayoral combined authorities which decide their own funding rules.

One in five colleges were allowed to keep close to one-third of their allocated adult education budget despite failing to deliver any courses for the funding last year, as previously revealed by FE Week.

The threshold only applies to colleges, not independent training providers which will continue to be paid only for what they deliver.

The DfE has failed to work the industrial strategy into the skills white paper

It looks like the Department for Education and the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy aren’t talking to each other, writes Graham Hasting-Evans

Do you remember the “industrial strategy”? Back in 2017 the government developed an overarching economic plan spanning up to 2027. From this has flowed a number of sector industry strategies. 

These industrial strategies, developed by the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, set out the impact that digitisation, artificial intelligence, changes in materials, new ways of working and green technologies would have on sectors.  

From these, significant changes were identified to develop the required skills in the UK’s workforce: both 16- to 19-year-olds doing traineeships, apprenticeships and T Levels, and also the 34 million in the workforce who need some form of re-skilling.  

But what currently is not at all clear is how these industrial strategies fit with the Skills for Jobs white paper proposals put forward by the Department for Education. It is very hard to find joined-up coherence between the two. 

‘Heavily academic Board’

Take the white paper’s proposed Skills and Productivity Board. The idea behind this board is to provide expert advice on skills mismatches and how to make sure the courses and qualifications on offer across the country provide the needs of the employers and help grow the economy. It is chaired by Stephen van Rooyen, chief executive at Sky in the UK and Ireland.  

Yet it is quite a heavily academic board. I am a fellow of the World Confederation of Productivity Science and in my experience, productivity improvements are achieved through a series of very practical day-to-day changes. It is hard to see how the very academic Skills and Productivity Board will relate to the practically focused industrial strategies developed by BEIS.

Of course, more detail may be yet to come – but the fact the industrial strategy is only mentioned once (in passing) in the white paper is already a cause for concern. Instead, the DfE has created a board without any practitioners on it, other than the chair, and that worries me. 

‘Skills improvement plans must be local’

We also need to ask how the industrial strategy is meant to connect at the local level to the Chambers of Commerce, which were set up as the respected voice of the business communities they represent more than 150 years ago, in some cases.  

The chambers have been tasked with making sure the white paper’s “local skills improvement plans” are implemented, which means they should help ensure colleges and providers match their courses to local employers’ needs.  

How can the chambers do this without knowing what industrial strategies the government has for different kinds of employers and sectors? 

Some chambers are very proactive on the local skills agendas, linking to other organisations such as the combined authorities, Local Enterprise Boards, Confederation of British Industry and Federation of Small Businesses. Others less so.

The DfE seems to have failed to realise that there is already a productivity plan out there

Even if the local skills improvement plans are properly linked up to the industrial strategies, I’m concerned the plans won’t have the flexibility to really respond to the local situation. 

We need to remember each area will start from a different place. In some areas, maths and English skills will be sufficient, but in other areas there might be major gaps in these basic employability skills.  

All areas will have different mixtures of large employers or small employers. Somewhere like Derby is focused on manufacturing, but if you go down to Devon it will be more concerned with tourism and hospitality.  

My worry is the local skills plans will be cast from a central template, and local people won’t have enough flexibility to really make them work and match up with local needs and sector-specific industrial strategies. The plans mustn’t be managed from the centre. 

Overall, the DfE seems to have failed to realise that there is already a productivity plan out there – it’s the industrial strategy. It’s been completely formulated, yet it appears they’ve not threaded it into the skills white paper. 

It looks like BEIS and the DfE aren’t working together. The DfE must think again, and bring the industrial strategies into the heart of the FE white paper.

Public sector apprenticeship target restated for extra year

The public sector apprenticeship target is to continue for an extra year as the majority of bodies in scope struggle to hit the 2.3 per cent starts aim.

The Department for Education revealed on Friday it will be amending legislation to set a new one-year target from 1 April 2021 to 31 March 2022.

The original target, set under powers from the Apprenticeships, Skills, Children and Learning Act 2009, runs from 1 April 2017 to 31 March 2021 and mandates public sector bodies with 250 employees or more to start 2.3 per cent of new employees as apprentices over that four-year period.

The target encompasses schools, local authorities, central government and their arms-length bodies, NHS organisations, the armed forces, and emergency services.

The department told FE Week this new one-year target, which will stay at 2.3 per cent but will not count previous years’ performance, “demonstrates the government’s continued focus on delivering more apprenticeships in the public sector”.

Public bodies fail to hit target

Official DfE statistics published earlier this year shows most public sector bodies have so far failed to meet that bar over the first three years of the target, with an overall average of just 1.7 per cent between April 2017 and April 2020.

The police performed the poorest, with just 0.7 per cent over that period; followed by schools, with one per cent.

Best performing, by miles, was the only sector the meet the target – the armed forces, with 7.9 per cent.

The target only became a requirement for schools in March 2019. FE Week’s sister paper FE Week reported that year how schools were facing difficulties recruiting apprentice teachers.

This has been blamed on the high costs of training and employment, and ministers’ insistence apprentice teachers be supervised in the classroom, and that the profession remain exclusively for graduates.

Education and training apprenticeships, which include teacher and teaching assistant programmes, saw 5,610 starts in 2017/18, rising to 7,890 by 2019/20.

Target progress must be ‘easily accessible’

The guidance from the DfE which revealed the target extension also confirmed relevant public bodies would be still expected to publish their progress towards the target to the department.

The bodies will also have to publish their progress publicly, to “enable the government, the public, and wider stakeholders to understand each body’s headcount and the number of apprentices they employ”.

This information must be “easily accessible to the public, for example on the internal and external facing website of a public sector body in scope,” the guidance reads, as previous guidance on the target has said.

FE Week uncovered last October how scores of multi-academy trusts, councils and hospital trusts had failed to publicise what percentage of their staff had started an apprenticeship in 2019-20 on their websites by the September deadline.

At the time, the DfE appeared to be easing off mandating bodies to publish their guidance, saying it was simply “good practice” to do so.

Under this new guidance, public bodies have six months after the end of the target period to send their data to the DfE and make it public.

This is why we need an Association of Apprentices

Apprentices are often isolated from their peers, and a mentoring and networking service can help reduce drop-out, writes David Marsh

At the start of this month the Association of Apprentices was launched ̶ a membership organisation aimed at providing apprentices with a stronger support and guidance network.  

While the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education is a government organisation, set up to design new apprenticeship programmes, this is a group for apprentices themselves.   

Despite organisations existing for university students, such as the National Union of Students, a community for apprentices has not properly existed until now ̶ an observation that highlights the need to improve parity between higher and further education. 

As a group, apprentices are particularly in need of support from their peers – a community where they can share similar experiences and encourage greater buy-in and engagement.  

It is also support that not all apprentices have access to. When apprentices go to large organisations they will often have a community of apprentices around them, but those in SMEs and other smaller businesses may be on their own.  

‘Input from the Apprentice Council’

The Association is the brainchild of Sir Peter Estlin, the former Lord Mayor of London, and Jason Holt, the chair of the Apprenticeship Ambassador Network, an employer-led body sponsored by the Education and Skills Funding Agency. Both sit on its board.  

The other founding partners include the BBC, Blenheim Chalcot, Salesforce, Royal Mail, NHS, exam board NCFE and the organisation I lead, independent training provider Babington.  

Two apprentices from the organisation’s Apprentice Council will also become directors on the board, further amplifying the apprenticeship voice.  

The Apprentice Council has 30 apprentices, who will help design what the Association looks like going forward. The chair is Joel Roach, an apprentice with Microsoft, and the vice chair is Jasmine King, an apprentice with Flagship Group, a housing association.   

Over time, this network will grow and the more experienced apprentice members can start to support newcomers.   

‘Add value to apprenticeship offers’

The idea is to build geographical membership networks, so there would be an Association of Apprentices community in Leicester or in Bristol, for example, so that events can be hosted, just as events are held at universities. Our next event will be hosted by the BBC on April 12.  

Meanwhile, resources for careers advice and guidance will be created by the founding partners, and mentors will also be on hand to address any risks to engagement and drop-out.  

We want to encourage providers to understand more about the Association of Apprentices. Membership of the Association should add value to their programmes by offering a special forum for new apprentices, enhanced access to careers guidance and mentoring programmes.  

Meanwhile, the Council will help inform its evolving remit. The intention is not to be a lobbying organisation, but instead provide a robust support system for apprentices. That said, we will definitely be asking members for views and feedback and will share this as insight to support apprenticeships more broadly. 

‘Involve training providers properly’

Finally, it’s timely to reflect on what’s needed to create a strong skills system apprentices can flourish in. 

Employers play a vital role in FE, and are a central plank of the FE white paper. But while employers should absolutely be part of the future skills puzzle, it may be more apt to frame them as the brains, rather than the heart, of the FE system. 

LEPs and Chambers of Commerce also play an important role but they won’t necessarily want to be the delivery vehicle in the same way training providers can be. And employers won’t always have the expertise regarding the complex and wide range of funding streams.   

Further, three out of every four apprentices are trained by independent providers. But their role is significantly underplayed in the FE skills white paper, even though these providers have valuable frontline experience and the insight to support employers with their skills, training and recruitment decisions.   

Therefore, we must support employers by giving them the choice to work with the providers that best suit their strategic needs. 

Only then can we successfully deliver for young people – and apprentices especially.

Overworked staff need clear guidance around teacher-assessed grades this year

Staff don’t need to provide cartloads of evidence for teacher-assessed grades, just enough to form a professional judgment, says Jill Duffy

It is widely agreed that teachers and college leaders are facing an unprecedented workload.

Not only are you welcoming students back, identifying learning gaps and doing Covid testing, but results for your students taking key vocational qualifications (like our Cambridge Technicals) this summer will be based on teacher-assessed grades.  

Time and again when we listen to teachers and their teacher associations workload comes up as the headline issue.

The issue isn’t new, but with the impact of the pandemic there is a real question as to whether there are enough hours in a day to get everything done.

‘Consistent guidance needed’

It will come as no surprise that there are no simple “light touch” approaches to assessment – what we all do must meet the high bar needed to secure expectations of rigour and fairness for all students, regardless of the qualifications they are taking.

And much will, inevitably, fall to teachers and their colleges to exercise their professional judgment in generating teacher-assessed grades and to put in place the necessary quality assurance.

Nevertheless, it’s important you are supported with guidance that is clear, as consistent as possible across exam boards, and that meets regulatory demands.

We’re doing everything in our power to ensure that the guidance we produce will be simple and timely. So we are working to get guidance out to you about generating teacher-assessed grades for our Cambridge Technicals as well as our Cambridge Nationals next week.  

But at the same time, we can only go as fast as decisions are confirmed by policymakers and regulators. There is an Ofqual technical consultation about the vocational framework which closed just last week.

We can only go as fast as decisions are confirmed by policymakers and regulators

We know Ofqual is working hard to publish the outcomes next week, which is when we plan to publish fuller guidance on how grades for our key vocational qualifications will be arrived at.

‘Some tips for now’

But there are some things we think we can and should say now about Cambridge Technicals, our popular post-16 qualifications.

For students completing this year we will be asking for grades at qualification, not unit, level. This is a change from the approach we took in 2020 and should help to reduce your workload.

Our approach will be to allow you as much flexibility as possible, just as with A-levels, in identifying sufficient evidence by which to judge a student’s performance.

There is no requirement for the evidence to cover all of the content of a qualification. We don’t expect cartloads of evidence, virtual or otherwise  ̶  just enough, and no more, to inform a professional judgment.

The evidence you use can come from multiple sources and in different formats. For example, a recorded discussion would be viewed as a useful piece of evidence.

Your professional judgment will be supported by our performance descriptors, which indicate the level of performance required across the qualification.

There will also be no requirement to submit work for moderation. We are continuing to accept your requests for moderation of Cambridge Technicals units until March 29 and we will conduct virtual external moderation visits, where a college wishes, until the end of April.

We will allow teacher-assessed grades for your students who intended to complete a smaller qualification this year and have arrangements in place, so they can “top up” to a larger qualification next year.

‘Updates coming soon’

We will be asking you to submit your teacher-assessed grades to us by June 18 this year using the same grade submission system that we used in summer 2020. We’ll provide training, step-by-step guidance and FAQs as a refresher.

I hope this gives you some idea of the approach we will be taking and reassurance that we are committed to supporting you in the process of generating and submitting your teacher-assessed grades this summer.

Look out for our updates in the coming week. And we are, of course, always happy to hear your comments and concerns.