Latest news from FE Week

Bidding opens for £7m flexi-job apprenticeship development fund

Applications have opened for a £7 million fund to set up flexible apprenticeships in sectors struggling to meet the 12-month minimum duration for an apprenticeship.

The Department for Education will be welcoming bids to set up a small number of flexi-job apprenticeship agencies to allow learners to work across multiple projects with multiple employers in sectors where jobs are predominantly short-term.

Gillian Keegan

Apprenticeships and skills minister Gillian Keegan said the flexi-job courses will “unleash exciting new opportunities in sectors such as the creative industries and construction where employment is increasingly flexible and project-based”.

The scheme, she says, will also help larger organisations “to grow starts in their supply chains, levelling up chances for people to build the life they want”.

Up to £1 million on offer for apprenticeship agencies

Organisations will be able to bid for between £100,000 and £1 million to set up the new agencies.

Applicants will have to meet a “robust” set of criteria to be successful and must be able to set out how they will meet the needs of their chosen sector or region, ensuring apprentices and employers have a high-quality experience.

The funding will be available in England this year, with the first start on a flexi-job apprenticeship expected in early 2022.

“Good quality” apprenticeship training agencies, which employ apprentices and place them with a host employer so the firms do not have to recruit an apprentice themselves, will be able to “diversify” as new flexi-job apprenticeship agencies.

The £7 million was announced by chancellor of the exchequer Rishi Sunak in his spring budget.

A response to a consultation launched in April on the flexi-job proposals, which featured in prime minister Boris Johnson’s landmark speech on adult education last September as well as the Skills for Jobs white paper, is also being published today.

The consultation revealed all 111 ATAs would have to apply to a new register of approved flexi-job apprenticeship schemes

Flexi-job apprenticeships could help sectors currently ‘excluded’

Association of Employment and Learning Providers chief policy officer Simon Ashworth said flexi-job apprenticeships “could certainly result in greater participation of apprenticeships in sectors or occupations currently excluded from apprenticeships because existing models are not compatible with the expectation of continuous employment with the same employer over 12 months”.

But he warned providers they will “need to manage any break in learning effectively to make sure that individuals are not out of work for too long and suffer from eroded learning and a disjointed experience,” and said flexi-job providers should have an “enhanced” pastoral support network to assist apprentices.

The Association of Colleges’ senior skills policy manager Teresa Frith said it was “great” to see employers getting involved in the development of flexible apprenticeships.

While she said “this model of delivery will certainly not be simple to set up, it is easy to see the potential benefits for both the apprentices – for example in the range of work experiences they could cover, and for employers who want to support the development of their sectoral workforce, but do not have the ability to support a whole apprenticeship.”

Frith hopes there will be “no opportunity for employers to use this to merely avoid the direct employment of apprentices as has occurred in weaker examples in the past”.

Later this month, TV and film sector representative body ScreenSkills will be launching a pilot where 20 apprentices will undertake multiple placements with Netflix and WarnerMedia over 13 months.

Culture secretary Oliver Dowden, whose department is putting £100,000 into the pilot, said it was “hugely exciting” government was working with the producers to make apprenticeships “more flexible”.

He said this will mean “many more young people from all backgrounds will have the chance to get a start in the UK’s world-class film and TV industry”.

ScreenSkills chief executive Seetha Kumar said the “diverse” group of apprentices will start their induction later this week.

New £55k chair wanted to steer Ofqual through ‘unprecedented challenges’

The government is searching for a new Ofqual chair to steer the regulator through “unprecedented challenges” and shape the future of exams during a “period of significant change”.

The successful candidate will be paid £55,120 per year for working two days a week. They will take over from current interim chair Ian Bauckham, an academy trust boss who stands down in December.

Education secretary Gavin Williamson said he wants an “exceptional individual” for the “exciting and high-profile national role”.

This will be a period of significant change for the qualifications system

“This will be a period of significant change for the qualifications system and for Ofqual as an organisation, and the new chair will play a key role in shaping the system for years to come,” Williamson said.

He added the cancellation of exams has created “unprecedented challenges both operationally and in terms of public confidence which will place a premium in the coming years on innovative thinking, efficient delivery and effective public engagement and communications”.

But the advert warns: “Each year there is far more that Ofqual could do than its resources allow.”

The regulator’s budget this year was £23.6 million, a 20 per cent increase on the £19.6 million in 2019-20. Ofqual got £4.8 million additional programme funding this year to cover vocational qualification reform including in apprenticeships and also overseeing the formation of new T-levels.

Strategic thinking and skillful political operator

Essential criteria for the chair role includes “first-rate strategic thinking”, the ability to “skilfully navigate the political landscape” and a “track record of success in board level financial, commercial and people management”.

The successful candidate would also “ideally” have senior leadership experience in the education or training sector.

DfE “particularly encourages” applications from under-represented groups – including those based outside of London and the south east. Applicants who have “achieved success through non-traditional educational routes” are also encouraged.

The initial job will be for up to three years, but this can be extended for “consistently good performance”. The term is capped at 10 years.

‘An unsolvable problem’: Former Ofqual chair opens up about 2020 grading fiasco

The successful candidate will be paid an “honorarium” of £55,120 for working two days a week, although they may “need to work additional hours as necessary for the proper performance of their duties”.

This is 27 per cent more than the £43,400 paid to previous permanent chair Roger Taylor, who resigned after the 2020 grades fiasco.

The appointment panel is led by Julia Kinniburgh, the DfE’s director general for Covid response and schools recovery group.

Other members include Dr Paul Phillips, Weston College principal, Dame Ruby McGregor-Smith, a DfE non-executive director, and Dr Rebecca Surender, pro vice-chancellor at Green Templeton College, Oxford University.

Applications must be submitted by Monday, August 16 with a planned start date of January 1.

Williamson’s policy adviser and former academy trust boss Dr Jo Saxton has been appointed as Ofqual’s new chief regulator.

ESFA U-turns on banning providers from assessing learning difficulties for funding

The government has U-turned on a controversial new funding rule which could have meant apprentices’ learning difficulties could have gone undiagnosed.

In its draft 2021/22 apprenticeship funding rules for main providers, the Education and Skills Funding Agency had proposed banning providers from assessing apprentices for funding for any learning difficulties as a standard part of enrolment.

Yet the agency has now updated the rules to strike out that clause.

ESFA has ‘thoroughly reviewed’ rule

A summary of changes document for the rules explains: “We received significant feedback about the changes we had proposed to the learning support section of the rules and accepted that there were further changes we needed to make.

“We have therefore undertaken a thorough review of this section and have worked closely with provider representatives and other stakeholders.”

The learning support section itself warns it has been “substantially amended,” and now reads: “Before a claim for learning support funding can be made, an assessment must be undertaken to identify whether an apprentice has a learning difficulty or disability that directly impacts their ability to complete the apprenticeship on which they are enrolled.”

The funding entitles providers to £150 a month for a learner with a learning difficulty or disability, to pay for adjustments to complete their apprenticeship.

Until now, many providers ran the assessments as part of their enrolment process to identify barriers to learning; for example, being disorganised.

Sector leaders ‘delighted’ government has listened

Providers were in uproar when the ESFA proposed they “must not put apprentices through a generic needs assessment, where there is no prior assumption of need, to solely result in a need being found and payment requested”.

The Association of Employment and Learning Providers chief executive Jane Hickie told FE Week it was “totally wrong,” and providers warned it could have increased dropout rates as apprentices would not have accessed the support they need.

Ofsted, which has strict rules for providers assessing an apprentice’s proper starting point, said: “It is clearly best for learners if a specific learning difficulty or disability has been diagnosed at the outset.”

Reacting to the ESFA dropping the proposed rule, Chris Quickfall, chief executive of Cognassist which provides learning difficulty assessments to providers, said he was “delighted” the government “has listened to the concerns of multiple parties and safeguarded access to funding for apprentices with hidden learning needs.

“We champion assessment upon enrolment as standard because, unfortunately, too many people reach adulthood without a clear understanding of how they think and learn, including any level of neurodiversity they may have.

“We welcome the change of approach by ESFA and support the greater focus on how funding can best be used to support those with learning needs to ensure everyone can flourish in education and work.”

A Department for Education spokesperson said: “Our priority is to ensure that apprentices with learning difficulties or disabilities get the support they need to complete their apprenticeship and build a successful career.

“We have listened to feedback and revised our rules so they are as clear as possible and will ensure learning support funding reaches those who need it.”

Here’s how to solve the ‘hyper problem’ of interrupted learning

Delivering ‘more, but faster’ is not what the evidence advises about improving learning, writes Tim Oates

The development of a national approach to “learning after interruption” has been controversial.

There are plenty of headline grabbing suggestions about what we might do, but it’s tricky to all at once hold in our heads everything we need to do.

It’s one of those intimidating “hyper-problems”.

Simply extending learning hours and doing more of the same is not going to address the scale or nature of the problem.

‘Reduce teacher load’

To start with, we need to acknowledge that teachers have been affected just as much as learners. Surveys tell us that staff are exhausted.

They have had to undertake one of the most pressured transformations of learning ever seen in peacetime.

So we need to aim at approaches which are manageable and ultimately reduce teacher load, not increase it.

The next thing is controversial. We need to attend to learners’ workloads to reduce the burden on teachers.

Learning happens in the changed knowledge, skills and behaviours of each young person. It is their learning. To achieve this, they will need to work in a focussed and effective way.

And we know that this learning consists of four things: high quality contact time, social learning, quiet reflection, and self-study.

In other words, we need to focus not just on what colleges and schools need to do, but on what students need to do too.

‘Start with learning habits not content’

So…what does research tell us about the action we should take?

John Hattie did a fascinating analysis of education in New Zealand after the interruption to learning following the Christchurch earthquake in 2011.

It shows how dedicated action managed to elevate educational standards above where they would have stood had the interruption to education not occurred.

Research has also looked at approaches in Louisiana (after Hurricane Katrina) and those supported by the Inter-agency Network for Education in Emergencies.

It may seem counter-intuitive, but our starting point should not be content gaps: we know that even high attaining students tend to focus on subjects which they enjoy or are committed to.

Initial action should attend to decay in learning habits and changes in learning dispositions. And we must identify any welfare and safeguarding matters and address them.

‘Monitor learning’

Yes, tests can be stressful, but with good support they can be extremely helpful.

Accurately determining problems by using dependable tests of reading age, mathematics and by examining samples of writing can inform swift and effective action.

Monitoring learning and acting immediately on misconceptions is also essential.

My long-held view is that we need to flood the system with high quality questions and use them throughout contact time and self-study.

‘Target core concepts’

Failure to master core concepts in subjects can cause accumulated confusion and a lack of wider understanding of the subject. And that in turn ramps up teacher workload.

Experienced teachers are highly skilled at developing accessible and exciting approaches to learning these core elements. It’s what they excel at.

‘Use complex language and good textbooks’

The work of the late neuroscientist Jane Mellanby shows that complex language (such as “…what would happen if that were not the case…”) encourages development of reasoning and analysis, accelerating learning across the whole of the curriculum.

Some young people are never exposed to such language outside college or school – so it’s essential that it is present in education.

Here at Cambridge Assessment we are surveying research on textbooks and it’s clear from the evidence from high performing systems that they still have a valuable role.

Teachers can refer students to a key section or a defined task to be done. Students can go back over things or look forward. Textbooks are not to be underestimated.

‘Aim to improve, not just recover’

All of this moves us away from doing “the same, only faster” or “the same, but for a longer day”.

It is all heavily evidence-driven and geared towards a leaner, more focussed workload for teachers.

And it holds the potential for something special. Not just helping those most affected by interrupted learning, but actually improving both equity and attainment.

Subcontracting rules watered down just a day after being published

A new rule that would force providers to gain permission before charging subcontracting management fees above 20 per cent was published in “error”, the Education and Skills Funding Agency has claimed.

The ESFA says the policy will now be corrected, just a day after sending it out to the sector.

In a new subcontracting “standard” published yesterday, the agency had said subcontracting top-slices “should only exceed 20 per cent in exceptional circumstances, which, in all cases will require ESFA approval”.

This would be the first time that providers have ever had to seek permission before charging management fees above a threshold.

It was welcomed by the Association of Employment and Learning Providers, which has been lobbying for top-slices to be capped at 20 per cent for five years.

But the ESFA quickly rowed back on the rule and told FE Week it was an “inadvertent drafting error that will be corrected today”.

AELP chief executive Jane Hickie did not buy the ESFA’s claim.

She said: “Does the department think we were born yesterday? The wording was too deliberately crafted for it to be an inadvertent error and someone has obviously kicked up about the requirement since the standard was published.

“If the new rule had stood before today’s U-turn, we would have finally arrived at the correct and sensible solution. Programme budgets should reach learners at the frontline and there has never been any justification for holding back more than 20 per cent of the funding other than in exceptional circumstances.”

The ESFA added that while prior approval will not be required for the charging of management fees above 20 per cent, the agency does “reserve the right” to challenge where fees retained are more than this threshold, as set out in current funding rules.

FE Week has exposed controversially high top-slices over the past decade, finding examples of management fees that reach 40 per cent to cover administrative costs.

Previous analysis by this publication for the 2016/17 academic year, for example, found that top-slices exceeded £100 million, and 28 per cent of prime providers were charging more than 20 per cent.

The ESFA’s refusal to clampdown on excessive fees comes despite mayoral combined authorities doing so after they took control of the adult education budget for their areas in 2018.

First to impose a strict cap was the Greater London Authority, which rules that no top-slice of a subcontracting deal can surpass 20 per cent.

The ESFA did launch a consultation on subcontracting reforms last year, and is taking other steps to crackdown on the practice. The new rules aim to force “significant” reductions to subcontracting e by 2022/23.

Hickie said: “Hopefully under the wider subcontracting reforms, we will also see the end of discredited practices such as year-end tactical subcontracting. However the FE and accountability system consultation raises more questions about where we go next and today’s shabby development hardly fills us with confidence that the right solutions will be adopted.”

Here is how the IfATE would deliver on the Skills Bill

The Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education has developed an ‘Employer Centred, Future Facing’ strategy to go with the Skills Bill, writes Jennifer Coupland

The Skills and Post-16 Education Bill is a fantastic endorsement of the employer-led approach to identifying what training is needed to plug the nation’s skills gaps.

Employers know what works, and putting them at the very heart of developing apprenticeships has made a big difference to the end product that eventually helps set learners on a path to successful careers.

The Bill would enable the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education to put employers at the centre of a unified skills system that works better for everyone, setting standards for all technical qualifications as well as apprenticeships.

As the Bill is making its way through Parliament, we are thinking about how the Institute should deliver on the proposals.

‘Three key themes to our strategy’

In particular, we are looking at how we gather and act on insights and intelligence from the thousands of large and small employers who voluntarily guide our work.

We know employer time is precious, so it’s vitally important that we make the best possible use of it.

We are also focused on how to make sure that opportunities for progression, right across technical education from entry up to postgraduate level, are made clearer than ever before through our occupational maps.

Finally, we are looking at how we will go about securing continuous improvement, constantly striving to refine how we work with everyone who cares about skills development and welcoming all ideas for how to do this.

These three key themes form the basis of our “Employer Centred – Future Facing” strategy for the next three years.

Subject to the passage of the Bill, the Institute would be responsible for approving most post-16 technical qualifications, creating a unique opportunity to unify the skills landscape.

A guiding principle would be whether employers feel these are relevant and needed.

For example, we would want to be confident that our approval of a classic car repair qualification would serve the sector’s needs and make a candidate more attractive for long-term employment.

‘Action will be taken where qualifications no longer benefit’

The Bill also proposes that we should conduct regular reviews of approved technical qualifications, which is something we already do for apprenticeships.

This could mean working with an awarding organisation to improve the qualification or, in other circumstances, withdrawing approval.

We would only take action if it was clear that qualifications no longer benefitted employers and learners.

Another aim is to prevent unwanted proliferation which brings confusion and complexity to the landscape.

The Bill proposes a new power for us to pause approval of certain qualifications. This is known as a moratorium and could be applied at a particular level, sector or type of qualification.

‘Ofqual and the IfATE will complement each other’

Finally, the Bill anticipates cementing the close working relationship we enjoy with Ofqual.

Ofqual has done a huge amount of great work with us to date, on everything from external quality assurance for apprenticeships, to T Levels, and for the rollout of higher technical qualifications.

Ofqual and the Institute have unique strengths, the combination of Ofqual’s regulation of qualifications and the Institute’s employer-facing expertise is entirely complementary and should benefit the sector for many years to come.

These are exciting times and we have come a long way since the Institute launched in 2017 – initially just to embed the employer voice across apprenticeships.

It is great news that this Bill will build on our successful experiences so far and we are incredibly grateful to our growing army of supportive employers for making this possible.

The dedication and expertise of further and higher education providers, awarding organisations, and learner representatives will also remain vitally important to us in the months and years ahead.

We look forward to harnessing all this goodwill to ensure our country gets the world-class training it needs – so we can keep pace with digital innovation, adapt to Brexit, and support economic recovery from Covid-19 in a positive and environmentally sustainable way.

Hospitality and catering courses added to level 3 lifetime skills guarantee offer

The government has added hospitality and catering courses to its new level 3 adult offer after controversially excluding the industry when the policy was first announced.

Almost 400 level 3 qualifications covering sectors including engineering, construction, public services and IT have been fully funded for all adults without a full qualification at level 3 – equivalent to two full A-levels – since April 2021 under the £95 million National Skills Fund scheme.

Industries such as hospitality, tourism and the media were left off the original list because they were deemed to be a low priority with low wages.

But following heavy lobbying from the likes of the Food and Drink Federation, the list has today been updated with 12 courses in the hospitality and catering industry.

level 3 — READ MORE: Level 3 ‘lifetime skills guarantee’ qualification list excludes major economic sectors

Nine of the courses are offered by awarding body City and Guilds, two are from VTCT and one is from Pearson.

In total there are 42 additions to the list today, adding courses to existing sectors in the list such as agriculture, building and construction, digital, health and social care, and food and drink manufacturing.

Mayoral combined authorities and awarding organisations have been allowed to submit bids for qualifications to be added to the list since it launched. The Department for Education accepts applications every other month.

The new level 3 offer builds on a similar policy that has been in place since 2013. It allows adults up to the age of 23 to be fully funded for their first full-level 3 qualification from the adult education budget. Those aged 24 and over have since had to take out an advanced learner loan to pay for the course.

Williamson slammed for ‘ignoring’ concerns about scrapping BTECs

Twelve education bodies have today slammed the education secretary for “ignoring” their concerns and ploughing ahead with plans to scrap the majority of BTECs.

In a letter to Gavin Williamson, sector leaders reiterate that disadvantaged students have the “most to lose” and that it is “impossible to square the government’s stated ambition to ‘level up’ opportunity” with the proposals.

The twelve organisations are part of the #ProtectStudentChoice campaign, which has now launched a petition to reverse the plans.

A notable absence from today’s letter and the campaign is the Association of Colleges. When approached for comment, the AoC said it does “share the overarching concern that students must not be left behind in a rush to introduce T Levels” but refused to say why it has chosen to not back the campaign.

Under the proposals, the Department for Education will introduce a twin-track system of A-levels and T Levels, where most young people pursue one of these qualifications at the age of 16. “Poor quality” qualifications which duplicate or overlap with T Levels or A-levels will have their funding removed from 2023.

This will impact a range of applied general qualifications, but BTECs, offered by awarding body Pearson, are the most popular.

The education bodies’ letter claims that it is “clear” from the government’s response to the level 3 review that Williamson’s department “has ignored the concerns expressed by us (and most other respondents) about the proposal to remove funding for the vast majority of applied general qualifications such as BTECs”.

Almost 1,350 people responded to the consultation and the vast majority – 86 per cent – disagreed with the DfE’s plan to strip funding from qualifications which overlap with T Levels and A-levels.

‘We urge you to rethink plans to remove funding for BTECs’

The letter points out that the DfE is choosing to move forward with the reforms despite the department’s own impact assessment report admitting that students from SEND, Asian ethnic, and disadvantaged backgrounds, as well as males “are disproportionately likely to be affected by the changes” because a high proportion of these learners choose to study BTECs.

While a delay to the introduction of the government’s proposals would be “welcome”, the letter goes on to say that this “would not change the fact they have the potential to do huge damage to social mobility and are completely out of step with the views expressed by our members”.

BTECs — READ MORE: What you need to know from the government’s response to the level 3 qualification review

The letter concludes by urging the government “to rethink plans to remove funding for the vast majority of applied general qualifications and instead provide assurances that they have an important role to play alongside the equally valuable A levels and T Levels in the future qualifications landscape”.

In response, a DfE spokesperson said: “Great qualifications are essential to helping everyone, regardless of their age or background, to reach their career goals and get good jobs.

“Our reforms will simplify and streamline the current system, ensuring that all qualifications are fit for purpose, are high-quality and lead to good outcomes.

“We are putting employers at the heart of the skills system and boosting the quality of qualifications on offer so that all students, including those from disadvantaged backgrounds, leave education with the skills employers need.”

After being asked why his association has not signed up to the #ProtectStudentChoice campaign, AoC chief executive David Hughes said: “We continue to work with DfE officials and have discussions with ministers about this and will press them to only de-fund qualifications once it is clear that they are not needed to meet the needs of all students and employers.

“In some areas it is clear that current applied generals and Tech Levels will need to be funded alongside T Levels, but it is likely that some will be superseded by the new T Levels once they have become established.

“The key test is whether they meet the needs of the whole cohort of learners ready to learn at level 3, and whether they support the breadth of progression in both learning and work those learners aspire to.”

The twelve organisations that have signed the letter are:

Association of School and College Leaders

Collab Group

Edge Foundation

Grammar School Heads Association

NASUWT: The Teachers Union

National Education Union

NEON: The National Education Opportunities Network

National Union of Students

SSAT: the schools students and teachers network

Sixth Form Colleges Association

UNISON

University Alliance

Union calls for formal review after OCR confirms 42% exam fees rebate

Exam board OCR has confirmed it will give schools and colleges a rebate of 42 per cent of fees for GCSEs and A-levels.

The announcement is likely to put more pressure on AQA – the country’s largest exam board – to up its rebate. The board will only return 26 per cent of entry fees, after saving £45 million.

The Association of School and College Leaders has now written to Ofqual asking for a “formal review” on the different level of discounts.

“We feel that it is important to look critically at how rebates have been calculated and the reasons for large differences. This is crucial in retaining the confidence of school and college leaders,” ASCL’s policy director Julie McCulloch said.

In a statement, OCR said it is “important to return as much as possible to schools and colleges given the huge amount of extra work that teachers and leaders have done this year.

“To recognise this we have decided to increase what we will pay back to schools and colleges beyond this year’s savings alone.”

OCR said savings this year amount to £15.5 million, but they will return £18.4 million to the sector. This will be 42 per cent of fees for general qualifications and 20 per cent for the main vocational qualifications.

Explaining the rebate, OCR said it had made some “significant” cost savings, such as not having to print and post exam papers and hiring the usual number of examiners.

But they also faced “exceptional costs” such as additional online training and support to exam officers and teachers, development of new IT to submit grades, “construction” of optional assessment materials and quality assurance checks.

OCR say they have increased their rebate to take into account the Department for Education funding for appeals and autumn exams. The boards have frozen fees for autumn.

It leaves just Pearson left to announce its rebate. WJEC Eduqas said last month it would discount exam entry fees by 42 per cent this summer.

However the Welsh government topped up the discount to 50 per cent, something ASCL has now asked education secretary Gavin Williamson to consider.

“It would recognise the enormous amount of work involved in assessing students this summer and help address the fact that school and college finances have taken a huge hit because of costs associated with the pandemic,” McCulloch added.

An ASCL survey found two third of headteachers believed schools and colleges should get at least 75 per cent back.

Last year, Pearson, OCR and AQA all gave about a quarter of fees back to schools and colleges. They faced criticism in January when FE Week’s sister publication FE Week revealed they had all increased entry fees.