Introducing…David Phoenix

David Phoenix, a scientist who heads a group bringing together FE, HE and academies, shows why experimenting with a new model is critical for technical education 

Quite how long education secretaries in England have been banging on about “breaking down” the divisions between technical and academic education and their respective sectors is anyone’s guess.

At a speech in 1987, then-prime minister Margaret Thatcher bemoaned the “great difficulty” she had getting a new technical and vocational initiative “into a number of schools because the education system itself was not prepared to take it”.

Some 33 years on, and Boris Johnson has joined in as he says “now is the time to end the bogus distinction between FE and HE”. It’s almost a rite of passage for the education secretary to trot out such a speech at some point. College leaders can be forgiven for having especially well-exercised eye-roll muscles.  

Perhaps it would always take a scientist, rather than a polemicist, to gather evidence on the problem, test a theory and, once proven, apply it properly. Professor David Phoenix, chief executive of the London South Bank University Group, is chancellor of the university and boss of its subsidiary education groups, South Bank Colleges (which oversees Lambeth College) and South Bank Academies, which has an engineering-focused academy and UTC. The idea is for seamless learning pathways between the academies, colleges and higher education. It’s the only group in the country encompassing three education sectors under one governance structure, and needed special sign-off from ministers.   

But Phoenix, the son of a joiner, didn’t set out to go into educational reform. He just liked science club.  

“One of my big influences was my chemistry teacher, because he not only had a passion for the subject, but he supported us to do our own experimentation.” At this time Phoenix was in sixth form, having moved as a child from inner-city Manchester to Bolton. His first school had left him with big gaps in reading, maths and drawing that took a long time to fill in, he explains. Only by A-level had he caught up. “My teacher allowed us to have our little science club in the lab at lunchtime, to try things out. We created models of structures and quite complex purifications, and I found that really exciting.”  

Phoenix setting up experiments in primary schools

Having the freedom to try his own thing from scratch is something that Phoenix has valued – and made room for – throughout his life, sometimes to a quite extraordinary degree. First, he headed off to Liverpool University to study biochemistry and could be found in the labs once again, tinkering around. “I was lucky because there were lecturers there who let you go in and experiment, just try things out.” He recalls trying to find a solution to the fact most people hadn’t finished all their practical work. “We thought if we could just scale up our experiments, I could share some of my sample, and they could share some of theirs.” It didn’t go entirely to plan. “You find out with some of the more reactive elements, it’s not a good idea to scale them up! We certainly had a number of pieces of equipment that didn’t survive.” Behind what can seem a serious face at first, Phoenix’s eyes are definitely twinkling.  

Exploding test tubes aside, by final year Phoenix was working on drug design. He went on to do a PhD “about a molecule called a penicillin-binding protein” – we’ll leave that there – and afterwards was awarded a grant to work at a top lab at Utrecht University, in the Netherlands. He was just 24. All this was cross-disciplinary work, he tells me. “I kind of worked at the interface of multiple sciences. I applied chemistry and biology, physics and biophysics.” Just so his calculations could keep up, he also did a part-time maths degree at the Open University.   

An opportunity soon arose to transfer to the prestigious Pasteur Institute in Paris, but it was time to return to his now-wife, Stephanie, says Phoenix. He got a lectureship at the University of Central Lancashire, “and to be honest, I didn’t think I’d be there that long”.  

But again, it was the freedom to experiment that kept Phoenix in situ. “That institution was absolutely fantastic in terms of the environment it created. I was allowed to just run with ideas.” Almost as though explaining a simple wish to pop to the shops, Phoenix then says: “I had an idea to develop a Centre for Forensic Science. The idea was quite straightforward: bring together practitioners with scientists, so ex-police officers, crime scene specialists, biologists and chemists.” It sounds madly fun, especially the “automotive crime scene” garage. “We mocked up break-ins, accidents, and we had people go in and take DNA samples. They had to put knowledge into practice.”  

We mocked up break-ins, accidents, and we had people go in and take DNA samples

As with his scientific research, Phoenix sought to pull together disciplines and professions, applying different kinds of knowledge so better ways of working might be discovered. As dean and later deputy vice chancellor at the University of Central Lancashire, he remodelled the school of biosciences and created a new school of pharmacy with industry links. The strap line for the latter? “Fit to practise.”  

It was in 2013, a few years after being awarded an OBE for services to science and higher education, that Phoenix took the vice chancellor role at London South Bank University. It was “not seen as a happy institution”, he says. “It wasn’t performing very well, but the potential was fantastic.” A huge consultation including everyone from “professors and cleaners” was launched and performance indicators began improving. Yet a Daily Mail article soon arrived, reporting that Phoenix had been given a £350,000 interest-free loan by the university to buy a house near the campus, prompting former education minister Lord Adonis to fume: “He already gets a salary of £295,000 […] I think this sort of behaviour by universities is disgraceful.” Phoenix says a condition of his new role was to live near the university, which the loan partially helped with and it was paid back once he’d been able to secure a mortgage. 

At the House of Commons

Further challenges were to follow. Having taken on the 11-19 University Academy of Engineering South Bank in 2014, and the South Bank Engineering UTC two years later, Phoenix saw the benefits of taking over the struggling Lambeth College nearby to push forward the group’s reputation as a hub for technical and vocational education. Annual budgets, staffing arrangements and the college’s “strategic direction” would all pass over to the university under the transfer. Needless to say, there was resistance. “You can’t take ownership of an existing college, people said,” Phoenix tells me. “So I needed to get the skills minister [Robert Halfon] to agree to a national pilot, and he agreed.”  

Finding the people in charge who will allow Phoenix and his team to experiment is clearly the man’s special skill. The college transferred to South Bank Colleges in January 2019. This January, construction will also begin on a £100 million Vauxhall Technical College, the second college in the group, with a proposed opening date of 2022.  

The big question now is, is the experiment working? In 2017, the university achieved a silver rating in the government’s Teaching Excellence Framework and was named university of the year for graduate employment for the second year running in 2018 by the Times/Sunday Times “Good University Guide” ̶ meaning it looks increasingly strong as the powerhouse within the group.

The picture elsewhere is mixed, with signs of green shoots. University Academy of Engineering South Bank was graded ‘good’ by Ofsted in 2017, while South Bank Engineering UTC got ‘requires improvement’ last year, although inspectors praised staff for creating a “unique and nurturing learning environment”.  

Lambeth College was also graded ‘requires improvement’ just four months after transferring last year, but a monitoring inspection in March this year found the proportion of 16- to 19-year-olds achieving their qualifications had “markedly improved”, leaders were taking “decisive action” on poor subcontractors and had “rapidly” changed the way they improve teaching.  

So Phoenix is adamant – education provisions should work together like this. “One of my issues with the Sainsbury review [on technical education, in 2016] is that it spoke about learners having ‘choice’. But the problem is, you don’t know what you don’t know. What we’re doing is providing taster sessions for the college, the academy, the UTC, for students across the group. A student might go through the academy, do a level 2 at college, do an apprenticeship, or go on to HE for a business degree.” Phoenix explains that the proportion of learners getting level 4s in this country will not improve unless the “supply chain” is linked up in this way: “This requires FE-HE partnerships, and I think there is a key role for UTCS.”  

It’s a compelling vision, and typically Phoenix has yet again broken the box with a new initiative. When apprenticeships for 15 of his UTC students were cancelled this year, his team “created a year 14” so they could stay on for an extended diploma and a higher national certificate exam with the support of the university. “This gives them the chance to get a level 4 at no cost to them,” explains Phoenix. This kind of year 14 offer “could really differentiate UTCs from academies,” he adds.  

Phoenix in his role as advisor at the University of Guyana

Last but not least, Phoenix recommends spreading good practice around the entire system – and thinking beyond the usual horizons, he means overseas too. As an advisor on science to the University of Guyana, he tells me “there is so much the college sector can offer to other countries in need of vocational education”.  

It doesn’t seem too excessive to say that skills minister Gillian Keegan would do well to pay attention to what Phoenix is up to in this corner of London. If his performance indicators – particularly at the UTC and college – keep moving upwards, he may well prove a model for breaking down tired distinctions. And ultimately, for allowing educators to keep on “trying out”.

AoC calls for government to force post-16 providers to collaborate

The Association of Colleges has called for an end to competition in the FE market and for government to force collaboration between all providers which funding is conditional on.

The membership body has today published a report that claims competition has had a negative effect on choice, quality and the delivery of specialist courses and that “excessive” provision can “destabilise and fragment the post-16 education system at area level”.

Under a series of proposals put forward for greater coordination through a “place-based managed market”, the AoC calls for a “single post-16 commissioning and regulatory process” which applies to “all providers”, including school sixth-forms and independent training providers, to “promote efficiency, sufficiency, quality and equality and ends siloed regulation”.

The association also says a structure is needed which allows “strong, anchor institutions”, such as “successful colleges” to “lead provision and their area”.

There should be “clear conditions for funding, market entry and continued market presence based on strong local co-ordination”, it adds.

And under a new “rules-based framework”, the DfE should “require providers to engage with area coordination, with a duty to establish network strategies” and that there should be targets for “minimum and average class sizes for all providers”.

Ofsted should then inspect against this framework “to ensure that public resources are being deployed efficiently and responsibly”.

The report, titled ‘The impact of competition in post-16 education & training’, builds on the recommendations from the Independent Commission on the College of the Future report for England which last month called for new legislation to force all colleges to be part of “networks” where funding and accountability ultimately lies.

It comes ahead of the imminent FE white paper.

AoC chief executive David Hughes claimed that the recommendations put forward today would not mean a loss of autonomy for colleges, but that it should be colleges who lead on area co-ordination because they are “the major providers in an area and they can be given the responsibility to engage others, including employers, ITPs, schools, universities”.

Explaining the approach further to FE Week, Hughes said: “It is not going to be sitting around a table and deciding, for example, sixth form A delivers A-level maths, while sixth form B delivers BTECs in performing arts. That is not what we’re proposing, we are coming at it from the other end of saying what you want in an area is to look at what is needed broadly and to think about the curriculum offer spread and the levels to broadly meet the needs of the population and where there are gaps or problems you might do something.

“We’re not saying that somebody will be told they’re not allowed to deliver a qualification.”

Reacting to today’s AoC report, Association of Employment and Learning Providers managing director Jane Hickie said: “AELP is reluctant to comment again so soon after the commission’s report. But we honestly find the report’s references to it being about 16 to 19 provision and the references to markets confusing when forced collaboration between all types of providers across all post-16 provision appears to be the prescribed solution.  What is a ‘managed market’ really in this case other than an exercise in control by a lead college?  

“If the AoC is right to point the finger at the government for being at fault for being the market purchaser, then surely the answer is to make the individual learner the purchaser with the individual exercising choice via learning accounts over properly accredited courses supplied by government approved providers of whatever type. What is there to fear from individual choice?”     

A Department for Education spokesperson said: “Our priority is making sure people across the country gain the skills we know employers value and that will help our economy recover as we build back better from coronavirus.

“Our ambitious FE White Paper will set out plans to build on and strengthen the excellent work that is already happening, so we can unlock even more potential and level up skills and opportunities across the county. More will be announced in due course.”

Here are the AoC’s policy recommendations in full:

Area co-ordination of provision to support sufficiency, efficiency, quality and equality:

  • A single post-16 commissioning and regulatory process which applies to all providers and promotes efficiency, sufficiency, quality and equality and ends siloed regulation.
  • Clear conditions for funding, market entry and continued market presence based on strong local co-ordination.
  • A co-ordination process designed to protect successful specialist or ‘minority’ provision using a rules-based framework.
  • Cohort growth seen as an opportunity to promote efficiency and sufficiency with a temporary moratorium on 16 to 19 market entry.
  • Clear conditions for continued market presence based on the current size requirement for new sixth forms.
  • Where more provision is needed, commissioners to be required to formally agree that any new provider should meet these conditions without destabilising or fragmenting existing local provision in a way which jeopardises efficiency, sufficiency, quality or equality and has appropriately qualified staff, equipment and resources to do so in a viable fashion at both course and cohort level.

 

Investing in anchor institutions as hubs for specialist or ‘minority’ provision

  • Providers which have the track record and capacity to deliver specialist or ‘minority’ programmes successfully and efficiently to have ‘first call’ on investment.
  • Successful colleges are anchor institutions in their local economies but require significant capital investment to remain so, starting with a £240m capital injection followed by recurrent, formula driven building and equipment budgets.
  • A challenge fund to be put in place to support start-up costs for new areas that are highly specialised.

 

A rules-based framework

The Department for Education (DfE) should:

  • develop a rules-based framework to include:

o target minimum and average class sizes for all providers.

o subject level viability models based on cohort size.

o ringfencing of 16-19 funding for 16-19 learners.

  • require providers to engage with area coordination, with a duty to establish network strategies.
  • use its powers to review and consolidate the most inefficient providers.
  • undertake a back-to-basics review of the post-16 funding formula to determine if block, cohort or student funding drive the behaviours which optimise efficiency, quality and sufficiency.
  • define sparsity as a new element in the post-16 funding formula for areas that are extremely rural.

Ofsted should:
• inspect against such a framework to ensure that public resources are being deployed efficiently and responsibly.

Ofsted’s ‘support’ and monitoring visits from January: what FE providers need to know

Ofsted has today published further details about how their phased return to normal inspection activity of FE providers will work from January.

As announced last week, graded full and short inspections will remain suspended until the summer.

But monitoring visits will return from the New Year and the watchdog will introduce ‘support and assurance’ visits to colleges and providers that educate 16 to 19-year-olds.

Ofsted’s ‘interim visits’, which have been taking place this autumn term and resulted in a published letter but no judgements, will conclude at the end of December.

Here is what FE providers need to know from today’s guidance…

1. One-day ‘support and assurance visits’ will not result in a published letter

From January 2021, Ofsted says it will carry out “regionally-based support and assurance visits” to those colleges and providers that offer education to 16 to 19 year olds and were judged to be ‘good’ for their overall effectiveness at their previous inspection.

Before the visits, inspectors may request copies of “relevant quality improvement and/or self-assessment documents used by the provider”, but they will not require new documents to be produced for their visit.

During visits, inspectors will “discuss with providers the progress they have made in dealing with weaknesses and/or next steps identified at their most recent inspection”.

They will also discuss with leaders the steps they have taken to “ensure that learners continue to receive a full curriculum”.

Each visit will normally last one working day but this “may vary according to circumstances and provider type. It may be necessary to carry out some meetings, discussions or aspects of the visits remotely”.

After the visits, inspectors will write to the provider’s principal or chief executive outlining their findings and set out the “next steps the provider needs to take to ensure continued improvements in provision”.

The letter will not be published but “may be shared with relevant funding bodies”.

2. The return of new provider monitoring visits

During the pause in routine inspections, Ofsted had also put a temporary stop to monitoring visits to new providers, including to those with funding to deliver apprenticeship.

Instead, it conducted monitoring visits to apprenticeship providers which had made ‘insufficient progress’ at their first visit.

New provider monitoring visits are set to return from January, and will be carried out the same way as before routine inspections were halted. For example, with judgements on individual themes based on three progress bars: insufficient, reasonable, significant.

The watchdog has reminded providers it does share its findings with regulators, such as the FE Commissioner, the Education and Skills Funding Agency, and combined authorities.

Last week, Ofsted’s deputy director for FE and skills Paul Joyce told FE Week new provider visits had been suspended for the autumn due to them having to “prioritise our resources” where it was “best suited,” meaning the interim visits Ofsted has undertaken this term.

However, he added, a “number of providers” had been allowed into the apprenticeship market, “so it therefore became very crowded with untried, untested providers”.

3. Monitoring visits to ‘inadequate’ and ‘requires improvement’ providers to also resume

Also, from January, inspectors will return to carrying out monitoring visits to providers found to ‘require improvement’ or ‘inadequate’ at a full inspection.

Progress judgements will be made on the main areas for improvement found at the last inspection.

Inspections for ‘inadequate’ providers will depend on whether they are still funded, and whether they still deliver training covered by the Register of Apprenticeship Training Providers.

Following monitoring visits of grade three providers, they will receive another full inspection within 18 months of the visit’s report being published.

For monitoring visits to grade four providers, Ofsted will carry out another within six months, if the provider is still being funded.

Announcing its plans to resume inspection last week, Ofsted said it will continue to have the power to inspect an education provider if they have serious concerns about safeguarding.

In this latest guidance, it says if it has “significant” causes for concern, such as about safeguarding, inspectors will carry out a monitoring visit “at any reasonable time,” which will normally result in a progress judgement against each theme and a brief published report.

“Concerns arising from monitoring visits may lead to an early full inspection,” the guidance cautions.

4. Survey visits for thematic review of T Levels

Ofsted announced on Friday it would be carrying out survey visits to colleges and providers as part of a thematic survey of the first T Levels and the T Level transition programme, under orders from the Department for Education.

The survey will take place over two years – 2020/21 and 2021/22 – and the visits will “apply the education inspection framework methodology to assess educational effectiveness and the quality of education” for T Levels, Joyce said on Friday.

Ofsted has said an interim report of their findings will be published in September 2021, with a full report published in September 2022.

In conversation with Paul Joyce about Ofsted’s 2019/20 annual report

Ofsted published its annual report for 2019/20 last week, and while chief inspector Amanda Spielman chose not to use any of her speech to talk about the sector, deputy director for FE and skills Paul Joyce was on hand to catch us up on developments.

Here are four key points from FE Week’s interview with him…

1. No monitoring visits of new providers this autumn owing to resource issues

The education watchdog paused all routine inspection activity in March, and has only this week revealed it will resume monitoring visits to new providers come January, with full graded inspections to come in the summer.

Joyce said that in March, many providers were “not operating, so we could not go and see their provision to make the judgments”.

However, he said that in the autumn term, they had “prioritised our resources” where it was “best suited”, so made “interim visits” and second apprenticeship monitoring visits where the provider had received an ‘insufficient progress’ rating at their first visit – rather than carrying out first-time monitoring visits to new providers.

Apprenticeship provision was identified as the “weakest” area of FE and skills provision in Ofsted’s report for 2019/20 and Joyce admitted: “We remain concerned there are a number of new providers that have not yet had a visit. We will prioritise those providers, as soon as we’re able to do so.”

Nearly a quarter (24 per cent) of providers that received new provider monitoring visits last year had at least one ‘insufficient progress’ judgment.

2. College mergers research on the cards after poor performance

One finding from the annual report was that of the 26 newly merged colleges Ofsted had inspected since 2015, one-third were graded as ‘requires improvement’.

This is a lower rating than the “original grade profile before the mergers” for the colleges involved, the report reads.

Joyce said that “unfortunately, because of the suspension of routine inspections” the watchdog hasn’t been to inspect a number of other merged colleges that had been scheduled a visit as enough time had now elapsed since their merger had taken place.

“We will return to those as soon as we’re able to return to full inspections, and once we’ve inspected more, we will be able to do some research and evaluation into the effectiveness of mergers – what worked well and hasn’t worked so well.”

He also promised Ofsted would return to look at the possibility of campus-level inspections for college groups, and will continue work with the Department for Education, Association of Colleges and other bodies “about what we can do to improve reporting and possibly grading of campuses”.

3. Ofsted can’t say if apprenticeship quality is better now than before the 2017 reforms

Ofsted’s annual report quite starkly highlights how ten per cent of apprenticeship grades at inspection were ‘inadequate’ – which the report says is “clearly too large a number”.

However, Joyce refused to be drawn on whether quality has improved or worsened on average since the widescale reforms to the apprenticeships programme in 2017.

“It’s too early for me to definitively say whether standards-based apprenticeships are a better product than legacy frameworks,” he told FE Week.

“There are still frameworks and standards being delivered in providers. So, until frameworks go completely and we’re looking at only standards, it’s really difficult to make that comparison.”

He did say it was “unfortunate many new apprenticeship providers had been allowed to enter the apprenticeship market without the necessary oversight.

“A lot of brand-new providers without any experience are coming into the market, and through our monitoring visits we have demonstrated the quality is poor.”

Pressed on whether his criticisms on oversight were directed at the Education and Skills Funding Agency, he said: “With hindsight, there were a number of providers let into the market, so it therefore became very crowded with untried, untested providers.”

4. Would not be drawn on achievement rate data decisions

Joyce refused repeated requests for his view on the decision by the DfE not to publish and share with Ofsted qualification achievement rate (QAR) data for providers in 2019/20.

“We will deal with whatever situation we have,” he said. “We will use whatever data is available to us from the DfE, and we will use whatever data is available to the provider.

“I won’t want to use any data the provider does not see themselves, because that’s not open and transparent.

“If we’ve got it, we’ve got it; if we haven’t, we haven’t,” he summarised.

Since the interview, the DfE has announced that, although qualification achievement rate data will not be published for 2020/21, it will be shared privately with Ofsted, as well as providers and the department.

QAR data is used to inform inspection judgments as well as being central to Ofsted’s published “risk assessment methodology” when deciding which colleges and training providers to visit.

This is why we should delay the white paper even longer

The government should start again with a green paper for an FE strategy that stands the test of time, writes Stephen Evans

The much-anticipated FE white paper may now be delayed into 2021, we’ve found out. But is there a case for waiting even longer? 

Last week, ESFA chief executive Eileen Milner said the white paper would “certainly” be published this financial year, later than its expected launch this autumn.  

The purpose of the white paper is, I believe, to set out a clear, long-term vision of how we improve learning and skills for young people and adults that we can all get behind and play our part in.  

To do that properly, it needs to be co-designed with employers, providers and other stakeholders and be backed by investment.  

But the problem is that a white paper published after a one-year spending review while we are still in a pandemic and without open consultation doesn’t really allow that.  

So the risk is we get a document that gives a framework for what the government is already doing, but without the money to match the ambition.

That would mean it doesn’t stand the test of time as the dust (hopefully) settles following Covid-19.

The Lifetime Skills Guarantee, which provides an entitlement to a first level 3 qualification, is a case in point. 

It’s a step forward and we need far more people progressing to level 3. But it is limited in scope, with Whitehall officials deciding which courses people can do – including entire sectors being left out – and little support for maintenance costs.  

It also does nothing to tackle the sharp decline in learner take-up at basic skills and level 2.  

Not only is that a bad thing in its own right, it shows there are a limited number of people ready to progress to level 3.  

Meanwhile, the tight budget for the guarantee (£138 million per year when around 20 million adults don’t have a level 3) reveals the government is expecting limited take-up. 

Better surely to have a clear strategy for increasing learning at all levels, allow local areas to tailor support to their industrial strategies, and let people and employers make their own decisions?  

In other words, to move beyond fragmented initiatives and the assumption that “Whitehall knows best”.  

The government could do this by publishing a green paper setting out its ideas, then genuinely work with local government, employers, colleges and providers over the next year. 

This would then be followed by a lifelong learning white paper, alongside a longer-term spending settlement next year. 

What could this green paper say?

  1. Ambition and investment

Analysis from the Learning and Work Institute shows that England will fall even further behind the skills profile of other countries by 2030 on current trends. We should benchmark ourselves against the best in the world. We can’t deliver that on the cheap: before the pandemic, we argued for an extra £1.9 billion per year for the next decade. 

  1. Learning pathways

We need a much clearer plan for how people can progress in their learning, switch between provision, and how learning routes interact with each other. For example, how does someone who doesn’t have a level 2 get into learning, progress on to a T level and then on to a higher apprenticeship? This needs thinking about in terms of a system ̶ not individual policies. 

  1. Local leadership 

We’ve argued for a more ambitious approach to devolution, agreeing a single funding pot tied to local labour market agreements focused on outcomes. There would then be more scope to integrate and align services for people and employers.

  1. Upskilling and retraining 

We need much wider and broader entitlements for adults to upskill and retrain in more flexible ways, bolstered by a learning account giving people the chance to invest in learning beyond these entitlements.  

A clear plan is important but it will be more effective if developed collaboratively with the sector. 

Better to get it done right ̶ even if that takes a bit longer.

Advance notice of exam topics comes with problems too

The latest government intervention fails to take account of socio-economic inequalities, writes Rachael Booth

This week we found out that students sitting assessments next summer will be given advance notice of topics and allowed to take in exam aids in an effort to offset learning disruptions caused by the pandemic. 

In colleges and schools, the delay of information has already had a significant impact on student and staff wellbeing, with tension mounting on what plans will be decided. And we still don’t know yet what aids will be permitted for each subject or what FE-based courses will be included. 

But the new decision appears to give some students an unfair disadvantage and overlooks key socio-economic factors. 

GCSEPod conducted a survey with 2,649 16-year-olds and found 66 per cent of teenagers consider knowing topics in advance as a very fair measure. However, does having sight of the topic beforehand change the value of the result?  

Although there are revision advantages, examiners may have higher expectations, potentially resulting in added pressure for the students. Issues may arise for teaching and learning. Knowing a topic beforehand may beg the question ̶ are educators just teaching to test?  

Universities could be led to believe that students only have knowledge on a niche subject, rather than a well-rounded perspective of the whole topic. 

We also need to know what the expectations around exam aids are. They could dissuade students from preparing for their tests altogether, giving them the wrong idea about preparation and so hindering their meaningful understanding of information.

This latest proposal by the government may also only serve to further support those who have the means to access additional tutoring and resources. If they don’t reference deprivation in some way, then these measures will reinforce inequalities for years to come.

Another contingency measure would be to adjust grades by region to take into account varying degrees of coronavirus disruption. However, this risks students in, for example, the north losing out, as although they may be given more generous results, universities may see this as devaluing their grade.

The measures don’t go far enough and do not take into account socio-economic inequalities. A more strategic contingency plan needs to take this socio-economic inequality into account to avoid accentuating the culture of poverty. To do this, we need to assess access to resources to ensure all students are equipped with the appropriate tools and unfair advantages are eliminated.

Affluent students who have their own laptops and decent wifi connectivity at home are more likely to perform better than those who don’t have access to technology outside of the classroom. This is evident through last year’s private school grades and there needs to be radical change to address this disparity. 

A third alternative would be to reduce subject content and focus on academic and analytical skill acquisition, making clear to students and teachers what this focus will be. This would take account of disruption to learning. Although students would be measured on a narrower basis in terms of subject content, it would allow them to demonstrate their skill set and understanding.  

At Leeds Sixth Form College, we’ve noticed increased stress surrounding exams due to previous disruptions caused by the pandemic.  Enforcing rigorous assessments with reduced content means students would develop exam skills and learn to cope in a high-pressure environment. 

Another option could encompass a combination of centre-assessed grades and examinations. Students would still do exams, combined with teacher-based assessments. By working with awarding bodies, we could produce centre-assessed grades that have been quality assured. This may be fairer but would require a great deal of planning. 

The government needs to appreciate the human aspects and mental health implications of the current situation. While the announcement about advance notice of topics is welcome in its clarity, it comes with its own set of issues. 

There needs to be a clear and strategic assessment method that addresses inequality and gives every student a fair chance to succeed.

AoC announces Dr Shaid Mahmood as next chair

The Association of Colleges has announced Dr Shaid Mahmood as its next chair of the board.

He takes over the role with immediate effect from New City College chief executive Gerry McDonald, who has held the position in the interim since July after Julie Nerney stepped down.

Mahmood is currently a chief officer for Leeds City Council and chair of the Luminate Education Group.

“I’m honoured and humbled to be appointed as chair of the Association of Colleges,” he said. “Our members are central to our work and their support and challenge is crucial to amplifying the influence of FE on national policy and funding.

“Undoubtedly, these are challenging times for the nation. They are also exciting times with much progress already being made by the AoC with opportunities for FE to play its part in the nation’s recovery and the improved resilience of its communities.”

Mahmood is a PhD graduate and worked in the business sector for 12 years.

David Hughes, AoC’s chief executive, said he was “delighted to welcome Shaid” and looks “forward to working closely with him in his new role as chair”.

“This is a crucial time for AoC and for the FE Sector – we have the immediate and future impacts of Covid, an imminent White Paper, and the continued push for funding and reform,” he added.

“I am confident that Shaid will help steer AoC and the sector through what is going to be a challenging but exciting time.”

MOVERS AND SHAKERS: EDITION 336

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


Palvinder Singh, Trustee, Education and Training Foundation

Start date: December 2020

Concurrent job: Group deputy principal, Kidderminster College, NCG

Interesting fact: He once attended a wedding at Vatican City


Lynette Leith, Trustee, Education and Training Foundation

Start date: December 2020

Concurrent job: Assistant principal for technical and vocational studies, Newham Sixth Form College

Interesting fact: She trekked on the Great Wall of China for seven days to raise money for the Teenage Cancer Trust


Gavin Batty, Vice principal for technical and professional education, Barnsley College

Start date: January 2021

Previous job: Director of curriculum and operations, Leeds City College

Interesting fact: He has competed in national swimming championships and starred in the Royal Life Saving Society national pool lifeguard training manual


Stuart Galloway Security sector product manager, NOCN Group

Start date: November 2020

Previous job: Senior associate, WSG Associates

Interesting fact: He enjoys playing walking football

Little known skills-based work academy programme given major funding boost

Marius Ardelean found himself without a job and with little prospect of finding another after Covid-19 struck. But he is now about to start a new career after retraining through a long-running skills programme that is finally getting its time in the sun.

The 34-year-old (pictured top) had quit his job at the British Museum restaurant at the beginning of the year to visit his family in Romania, with a plan to then switch careers in the UK.

However, upon his return he could not find work, despite sending out “hundreds” of CVs, and he had to resort to Universal Credit.

He spoke to his local Jobcentre Plus about finding a course to retrain and that is where he came across sector-based work academy programmes (SWAPs) which has now ultimately led to him finding a job in the care sector.

Marius is one of thousands of people the government is hoping to help back into work through SWAPs this year, following a £17 million investment by the chancellor Rishi Sunak to “triple the number” in 2020/21.

The new National Skills Fund will also be used to fund the scheme from April 2021, taking a share of £127 million announced in last week’s spending review. However, just how much is unknown, and a DfE
spokesperson said: “This is a level of detail we are not going to be getting into.”

Launched in 2011, SWAPs are jointly run by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) and the Department for Education (DfE), and are administered by Jobcentre Plus; they involve pre-employment training, a guaranteed job interview and a work placement to help prepare those receiving unemployment benefits for new jobs.

They are described by the Association of Employment and Learning Providers as a “mini adult traineeship”, which can last up to six weeks, and are funded through the adult education budget.

According to DWP statistics, 330,000 SWAP starts were recorded between August 2011 and November 2017, but the department then stopped publishing the data.

It is therefore hard to pin down precisely the recent popularity of SWAPs, and the DWP refused to say how many starts would be required this year to meet the chancellor’s target of “tripling” their number.

But colleges and training providers already involved in the programme told FE Week it has been catering for great swathes of learners in recent years, with the vast majority finding employment straight after completion.

“The evidence shows they work, so we will expand them,” Sunak told the House of Commons during his summer statement.

Funding for SWAPs is being dished out to the Education and Skills Funding Agency for nationally AEB funded providers and also to mayoral combined authorities who administer the budget for providers in their area.

The government says colleges and providers that wish to get involved in SWAPs should get in touch with their local Jobcentre Plus and the DfE as their first port of call.

AEB allocations can then be topped up to account for SWAPs, which will be based on a provider’s historic delivery to unemployed residents studying courses at level 2 and below, spanning two to five weeks in length.

A spokesperson added that FE providers are “part of the SWAP local design process and are informed when to expect referrals and how many by Jobcentre Plus”.

Marius’s two-week SWAP was with Barnet and Southgate College and was formatted to teach skills such as what to do in interviews and how the law operates with regard to the care sector, as well as having him work towards a level 1 certificate in the subject.

The course ran close to business hours, 9.30am to 4pm, and was carried out over Zoom and Microsoft Teams.

“It was good to get back on track,” he said, adding: “The main thing with the course is it has direct contact with future employers.

“So, there were three companies and we got to know them, they got to know us, so we could ask questions related to the care sector and the jobs they offer.

“In this current time, you send your CV and it gets lost or ignored. But through this course we had an opportunity to speak with the employers and after we had finished, I had interviews with two of them.”

Barnet and Southgate College’s executive director of commercial partnerships Tracey McIntosh (pictured), who oversaw the 2,000 people go through a SWAP last year, said: “Personally, I think it’s a win-win opportunity for all of us. This is a great example of partners working together with the students at the heart of it.”

Aside from the care sector, her college runs SWAPs in such areas as construction, external wall insulation and the Civil Service, with the age profile of participants stretching from 19 to 55.

Asked whether she would recommend other providers to get involved, McIntosh jokes: “No, because it’s my business!

“Of course we would recommend it, as we do pretty well.”

She added that employers “keep coming back” for SWAPs because they are part of the development of them, and it costs them nothing – as any costs associated with the work placement are met by the DWP.

Mat Chapman, managing director of independent provider The Development Fund, which runs SWAPs to help recruit and train drivers for major bus companies, says they see 80 per cent employment outcomes off the back of the programmes.

He says one of the employers he works with “was pleased with how it increased their ability to recruit. It expanded their numbers where they were struggling to get people into bus driving schools.”

He stresses the importance of tailoring the pre-employment training for the employer – which the DWP says has to be “matched to the needs of your business sector” – so, for instance, his courses cover the theoretical knowledge expected of drivers.

“If you’re recruiting to a marketplace, you want them to understand the fruit and veg they are selling,” he says.

Railway operators Southern Railway and Gatwick Express have recently completed their first SWAP with East Sussex College, where 12 learners were taught “essential” customer service skills and qualifications on a four-week course.

The operators’ managing director Angie Doll (pictured, with the SWAP learners) said they, with the college, had created what they feel is “a valuable opportunity for all learners on the programme”.

“We are continuously looking at ways to attract and retain a diverse workforce that is truly representative of the communities we serve,” she continued.

“Working in collaboration with East Sussex College and Jobcentre Plus means we have been able to offer those who aren’t in employment the opportunity to gain skills and qualifications to help them into the world of work.”

Stuart Cleworth, operations director for Wates Construction, which works with Barnet and Southgate College and independent provider Ixion Holdings on SWAPs, says supporting initiatives like this “is vital for the construction industry as it provides us with the perfect opportunity to enhance and build on the knowledge of those engaged, helping to equip them with the real skills our sector require”.

Ixion has been using virtual reality and remote activity, such as remote construction site tours, to continue delivering the work experience placement during the pandemic, and the provider’s national construction operations manager Joe Makowski said SWAPs fill “essential skills gaps”.