Creating a more transparent apprenticeship funding approach

We are determined at the Institute to create a more transparent approach for making apprenticeship funding band recommendations that will support high quality training for many years to come.

We are always prepared to listen to feedback and think seriously about how we can improve our work.

This project emerged from us recognising the widespread view from employers and the wider sector that the existing system was not transparent enough.

I have been overseeing this work.

To recap, the Institute provides recommendations to the Secretary of State for Education on the maximum government contribution (the funding band) for each new apprenticeship. We also review funding bands for existing apprenticeships.

A funding band is an estimate of the typical, eligible costs for delivering the training and assessment of an apprenticeship. Employers pay apprentices’ wages themselves.

The funding band system supports employers, helping more to benefit from apprenticeship levy funding by delivering value for money in the programme. 

We launched our first wave of improvements in May last year.

This focused on demystifying how the current system works. It is based around employers gathering quotes for how much training costs and comparisons with existing standards and qualifications.

We then embarked on the much bigger task of creating a new approach for making funding band recommendations.

The three main aims throughout have been to be more transparent with our processes, place greater reliance on independent evidence, and provide the flexibility to reflect the particular needs of apprenticeships.

We are also seeking to strengthen value for money for both employers and the taxpayer through these improvements.

We commissioned a report by IFF Research into the actual costs of delivering apprenticeships and used this research to develop our model, which draws on average delivery costs.

Our first consultation, run between February and May this year, explained this and requested views on how to address differences in costs.

We were pleased to receive over 200 valued responses to the consultation.

The majority thought that the proposed model was simpler to understand and strengthened transparency.

We also recognised respondents’ views that more refinement was needed to strike a balance between having an easily understandable model and one which sufficiently addressed the reasons for variation in cost between difference standards.

That’s why we are now seeking views on our refined approach.

We used feedback to develop a single approach that provides trailblazers with an early indication of the funding band their apprenticeship stands to receive, based on an automated “rates-based” model. If a trailblazer considers this estimate to be inappropriate for their specific standard, they can provide information for us to make a bespoke estimate of typical costs.

Our consultation on this refined approach launched today and will run for 6 weeks, closing at midnight on 6 October 2020.

A series of virtual roadshow events will also take place during this period, helping interested organisations and individuals understand how the model might work.

If you have any questions you can also contact my team on Institute-Funding.CONSULTATION@education.gov.uk.

Once this consultation process has closed, and the Institute has responded with our key findings, we intend to conduct a pilot to ensure it works well in practice.

I would like to thank everyone for your valuable input so far. Your comments and the benefit of your combined experience is invaluable.

The Institute has gone to great lengths to listen to and act on your feedback.

We have come a long way together and your continued support can ensure we develop an approach that will work well. This is an important opportunity for everyone who cares about apprenticeships to let us know what you think.

Pearson confirm final deadline for revised BTEC grades

All BTEC results will be ready by next Friday, awarding body Pearson has said, adding that level 3 results will be available from next Tuesday. 

This comes after Pearson committed an eleventh-hour U-turn and said results for levels 1 to 3 were to be regraded, less than a day before students were due to receive level 1 and 2 grades and after level 3 BTECs had already been delayed. 

Pearson’s senior vice president for BTEC and apprenticeships Cindy Rampersaud wrote in the email to schools and colleges: “We promised to share an update with you as soon as we could on timings and I am now able to confirm all eligible results will be available by August 28. 

“We are reviewing results at level 3, including those with UCAS requirements, as an absolute priority and will start releasing those to schools/colleges from August 25.” 

Pearson has reminded centres to ensure they have submitted all the necessary internal assessment grades to ensure final grades are awarded.

Government to U-turn on masks in colleges

Staff and students will be expected to wear face coverings in colleges in England from September following a government U-turn, FE Week understands.

Ministers are expected to announce the change later today following growing pressure in the wake of a similar decision in Scotland and changes to World Health Organisation guidelines.

It means staff and students will be expected to wear face coverings in schools and colleges,  in all places where social distancing can’t happen.

Students who cannot wear masks for medical reasons will be exempt, as will those in special settings.

However, it is not clear whether the requirement will be made statutory or enforced if schools or colleges opt not to follow it.

Current Department for Education guidance states that face coverings are not required in England because “pupils and staff are mixing in consistent groups, and because misuse may inadvertently increase the risk of transmission”.

But the decision this week by the Scottish government to make face coverings mandatory for high school pupils, and recently-updated World Health Organisation guidance stating pupils aged 12 and over should wear masks “under the same conditions as adults” has prompted speculation that England may soon follow suit.

Alok Sharma, the business secretary, told Sky News this morning that there was “no current plan” to review the guidance on face coverings in England’s schools.

But ministers appear to have caved to pressure after headteachers said it would be “prudent” to review the guidance.

Geoff Barton, the general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders, said earlier today that any U-turn should come “sooner rather than later” to give schools and colleges time to prepare.

It also comes after a number of schools across England announced they would break with the government guidance to either provide or require face coverings.

 

Update: The government has now confirmed it will update its guidance on face coverings, with stricter rules for colleges in high transmission areas. You can read our latest story here.

Now we must pick up the pieces of our broken system

The results are in but the work of ensuring students rebuild their confidence has only just begun, writes Liz Bromley

This week, teacher assessments plus adjustments by the qualifications regulator have caused GCSE grade inflation by some 20 per cent between grades 6 to 9, with more than 25 per cent more students receiving grades 7 to 9. Students are delighted (or dismayed) as ever, whilst admissions teams are wondering how to deal with the unanticipated rise in the number of students expecting entry to Year 12, how to make entry criteria fair, reasonable and legally robust, and what social distancing looks like in this new context.

For those who are admitted, enrolling them onto the right A levels, particularly for STEM subjects, is critical. Unexpected admissions achieved through inflated grades will be pyrrhic victories; being given a choice of which grade (teachers or Ofqual) to accept damages not only the credibility of the assessment boards but also the sense of achievement in this time of non-examination. The joy of results day has been reduced to confusion and panic as students question the latest changes; the Pearson about-turn on BTECs at the eleventh hour has not helped.

Young people will be unable to use their GCSE grades as anything more than stepping stones

Academic teams are now having to focus on what in-session support will be needed by students who may have grades on paper but lack the learning and confidence needed. It is imperative that we deliver significantly enhanced, embedded learning opportunities within subject curriculum to enable students, already victim to this devastated academic year, to be successful in two years’ time.

Maybe this will improve teaching practice for future years, but the planning comes late in the day and at a time when the A level results aftermath continues with complaints of malpractice, and FOI and SAR requests flooding schools and colleges. The anger that had been directed towards Government has been deflected onto the sector at exactly the time when all our time and energy is needed to get students into the right place and frame of mind for September.

Building greater flexibility into the system to move students onto the right courses if their first choices don’t work out will be key to retaining and rebooting student confidence in their own ability and in the education system. Some students will have a chance to become the person that their grades describe, but educators will be crucial in realising that opportunity with them.

When the pressure of this moment has abated, questions must be asked about the variable practice across schools and colleges in relation to CAGs, and how this has contributed not only to grade inflation, but also to an unfair pattern of results for schools which were cautious and conservative in their calculations. We must accept that this is the year when young people will be unable to use their GCSE grades as anything more than stepping stones – and we must do better.

Why, when it was clear in July that the Ofqual algorithm for A levels was only 75 per cent accurate, did we get to within hours of results day before really engaging with the options open for fair outcomes? Critical discussion with teachers – at the heart of the brewing issues – didn’t happen, and understanding the consequences of getting this wrong came far too late. The opportunity was missed to use this aberrant year for the whole jigsaw of education to be pieced together more creatively for student outcomes. The inevitable educational chaos requires us to start working right now to ensure next year’s year 13 students don’t suffer a similar experience.

We work in learning organisations. We have mission statements about changing lives, empowering learners, releasing potential. We must learn from the unintended consequences of the pandemic to organise ourselves now to respond better this time next year. Let us remember our core purpose and put our energies into ensuring that young people have the support they will need to get maximum benefit from studies now open to them, and never again create this year’s perfect storm.

Colleges ask for flexibility in COVID-19 catch-up funding to support ‘borderline’ students

College leaders have expressed concern about the ‘gaps in knowledge’ of new level 3 students starting in September after nearly four in five GCSE students achieved a pass this year. 

They are calling for flexibilities in how they can spend a £96 million catch-up fund for students, announced by the government last month to help students whose schools and colleges have been closed down since March. 

The funding can currently only be spent on students who have not achieved a grade 4, formerly a C, in GCSE English and maths by age 16. 

Yet results released today showed GCSE passes have risen by 8.9 percentage points after the government allowed students to receive the highest of either their centre-assessed grade or the grade calculated by their exam board – sparking fears of grade inflation. 

East Coast College principal Stuart Rimmer said enrolment this year has become “more complex than ever, especially around grade inflation, combined with a lack of Year 11 teaching in many schools since the lockdown”. 

He said colleges, which have become “over reliant on simply GCSE grades”, will need to use induction and diagnostic assessments “in a much more sophisticated way and think how to bridge skills and knowledge gaps in those first few critical weeks”. 

He supports the idea of catch-up funding, but says it needs to be issued as a grant and without “complex audit regulations”, as different colleges and groups within them will require different support. 

“For some it’s increasing workshop time, others it’s English and maths (especially in light of huge increase in grade performance), while other students will need more one-to-one tutoring either academically or emotionally. Flexibility is the key.” 

The principal of Brighton, Hove and Sussex Sixth Form College William Baldwin also expressed concern about result inflation, saying there will be fewer students with grade 3 coming through this year. 

He proposed a “simple way” to adjust catch-up funding would be to allocate the money to all students with a four and below in English or maths “to ensure we are engaging with all borderline students”. 

“The money need not be used for English and maths per se, but to help them transition to level 3 learning, or make a success or their level 2 courses.” 

The Association of Colleges has asked the Department for Education to allow flexibilities in how the catch-up funding is spent, with its chief executive David Hughes saying the disruption caused by the COVID-19 lockdown will affect all students, so they want colleges to be able to “flexibly work with those students most in need of extra support”. 

He said it was “clear some borderline students starting on level 3 study may need ongoing support with English and maths” and had asked the DfE to allow colleges to be flexible with their catch-up funding allocations in a number of ways, including through allowing smaller groups throughout the year so “students have the bespoke support they need for them to succeed”. 

The Department for Education confirmed the AoC had raised the matter with them, but reiterated that students who received support “all need to be those who had not achieved a grade 4 or above in at least GCSE maths or English by age 16”.

Results 2020: What you need to know about this year’s appeals and Autumn resits

Ofqual has confirmed today its appeals and resits process. We take you through what you need to know…

 

1. The appeal routes open are now just for errors

Schools and colleges can only appeal where there has been an administrative error with the CAG or rank order information.

Ofqual said rank order information was vital to support standardisation, but any change to a student’s position in the rank order would not change the student’s CAG.

Administrative errors might include, for example, mixing up two students with similar names, or accidentally copying across the wrong data. But importantly it does not relate to the professional judgements of centres in assigning CAGs.

 

2. That means students can’t appeal against a CAG

Ofqual says centres cannot appeal against the CAG that they decided was correct at the point of submitting it to the exam board.

The head of centre submitted a declaration to confirm that in the centre’s judgement this was the grade the students were most likely to have received had the exams gone ahead.

If a student is concerned that any reasonable adjustments were not taken into account when their school or college determined their CAG, Ofqual said they should discuss this with their school or college.

 

3. And the mock grade appeal route is gone, too

This was introduced at the eleventh hour last week before A-level results to offer pupils a “triple lock” policy to appeal grades.

However, because the government decided to award pupils the higher of their CAG or calculated grade, a route to appeal on the grounds of mock exam results is not available now.

 

4. Students can still raise concerns about bias

Ofqual has said that if students or others have concerns about bias, discrimination or any other factor that suggests that a centre “did not behave with care or integrity” when determining the CAG and/or rank order they should raise concerns with their school or college in the first instance.

They could also take concerns to the relevant exam board if more appropriate. Exam boards are required to investigate allegations, where there is evidence, as potential malpractice or maladministration.

Ofqual say such allegations would be “very serious and we expect them to be rare”.

 

5. Autumn exam series to go ahead as planned

The autumn exam series will be open to all students who had entered for GCSEs, AS and A levels in the summer series.

It will also be open to those who the exam boards believe have a “compelling case about their intention to have entered the summer series”. These will be held in November.

GCSE results 2020: Top grades increase, with nearly four in five pupils achieving a pass

The proportion of GCSEs at grade 7 or above given to pupils in England has risen by 5.7 percentage points from last year after the government U-turn to award teacher grades.

Pupils are receiving either their centre assessed grades or standardised grades, whichever is highest, this morning following the U-turn on Monday. 

In 2019, 21.9 per cent of grades given out to 16-year-olds in England were grade 7 or above, equivalent to the old grade A. Statistics published this morning show that this year, 27.6 of these top grades were handed out. 

The proportion of grade 4s or above has risen by 8.9 percentage points, up from 69.9 per cent last year to 78.8 per cent this year – meaning nearly four in five pupils achieved a standard pass.

Grade 5 and above, a strong pass, has risen from 53.5 last year to 61.5 this year.

And the number of grade 1 and above has also risen from 98.5 last year to 99.6 this year. 

Those receiving the top grade of 9 has risen by 1.9 percentage points from 4.7 last year to 6.6 this year.

Among the subjects that have seen the largest rise in grade 7 awards are a host of creative subjects, including performing and expressive arts, music and drama.

These subjects, along with classical subjects, ‘other sciences’, economics and engineering, which also saw increases of over 10 percentage points, are often taught in smaller cohorts. As with A level results, we have already seen that such subjects have benefited from this year’s awarding system.

Harder to explain may be a close to 11 percentage point increase in grade 7 awards for biology.

German also features among those with the greatest gains at grade 7, despite Ofqual’s efforts to “make an adjustment to the grading standards in GCSE French and German, to provide better alignment with GCSE Spanish.”

Universities agree to honour all first choice offers for pupils who hit grades after U-turn

Universities have agreed to honour all-first choice offers for thousands of students rejected last week who have now had their results upgraded.

The government’s Higher Education Taskforce, including the Russell Group of universities and representative body Universities UK, has agreed the commitment as the government lifts the cap on places for medicine, dentistry, veterinary science and teaching courses in the next academic year.

Additional funding for teaching grants is also being provided to increase capacity in medical, nursing, STEM and other high-cost subjects.

Universities minister Michelle Donelan (pictured) has said she wants universities “to do all they can” to take on students who achieved the necessary grades this year, or offer alternative courses or deferred places where required.

Universities admissions service UCAS received upgraded results for 160,000 A-level students from the four largest exam boards, after the government U-turned to award students their centre-assessed grades (CAGs), or calculated grades if higher.

100,000 students had already won a place at their first-choice university when the calculated A-level grades were released last week. Of the remaining 60,000 who had their grades updated under the CAG system, around a quarter will now meet the grades for their first-choice.

The government had already lifted temporary controls on student numbers for the 2020/21 academic year on Monday.

If a student receives a CAG which means they could go on to their chosen university, they should get in touch with that provider to discuss their options, it’s been advised. Students can ‘self-release’ from their existing offer of a university place through UCAS and accept a new offer at their preferred institution.

Schools and colleges received the revised A-level and As-level grades yesterday, and UCAS is aiming to share these grades with higher education providers by the end of the week so students can contact them.

Top results at A-level almost double under new system

The proportion of A*s awarded to A-level pupils has almost doubled – revised results released today show.

Exams regulator Ofqual has released data on GCSE and A-levels today after the government U-turned to award pupils their centre-assessed grade or the grade calculated for them by exam boards – whichever is higher.

The data shows the percentage of A* grades has risen from 7.7 per cent in 2019, to 14.3 per cent in 2020.

Under the calculated grade system, the results of which were released last week, the percentage of A* grades only rose to 8.9 per cent.

Today’s data shows there have been increases in all grades on last year, including grade C or above, which have risen from 75.5 per cent to 87.5 per cent – a rise of 12 percentage points.

Grades A and above have risen from 25.2 per cent in 2019 to 38.1 per cent in 2020; while the proportion of B or above grades has risen from 51.1 per cent to 65.4 per cent.

At AS-level, the number of C or above grades has risen from 56.9 per cent to 73 per cent. And the number of A-grades, the highest grade a student can receive in that qualification, has risen seven percentage points from 20.1 per cent to 27.1 per cent.