Latest news from FE Week | FE Week

Labour can do much better than simply tweaking the levy

There is considerable focus on the way Skills England will be set up, including what will happen to the functions of IfATE. Whoever leads the new body needs to set out a clear vision for a world-class skills system with an associated road map for delivery.

To succeed and be around for the long-term, Skills England will need leadership with the clout to influence the whole of government, not just a sponsoring department.

However, even more important is the new government’s plans for the growth and skills levy. How it will choose to use the money available to grow the talents and opportunities of our workforce will be critical to the economy and lifting the UK’s poor productivity.

The new levy will be critical to all five of the government’s five missions to rebuild Britain.

Since the 1960s, the UK has had numerous forerunner levies in one form or another, including in construction and related engineering for companies of all sizes.

These have been run and adapted over time by industry and sector skills councils, generally with success. A more recent and more familiar example is the apprenticeship levy introduced in 2017.

Employers complained that the apprenticeship levy focused only on large firms, lacked flexibility and was over-bureaucratic. So the growth and skills levy presents a rare opportunity for the government to really “put the employer in the driving seat” through a new sector-led approach.

Drawing lessons from historical industry levies which have proven effective over six decades and from devolution policies, we suggest industry groups oversee the new levy’s implementation, while the government focuses on collecting funds and setting regulatory frameworks.

This approach would emphasise local input, collaboration with the UK’s devolved nations and regions, and set clear skills outcomes aligned with technological advancements, AI, and net-zero goals.

This approach would emphasise local input

Sector-specific strategies would also ensure inclusivity for SMEs and the self-employed, with a commitment to leveraging experts in new technologies for workforce training, including partnering with further education colleges.

There could be a structured sector deal or sector license with five-year renewable terms, promoting strong governance and an industry-wide commitment to skills development.

The overarching goal is to place responsibility for skills upgrades in the hands of industry professionals, who can better respond to real-time economic demands, technology shifts and the move to net zero.

Skills and productivity improvements will involve considerable commitment and contributions from local government in England and the administrations in Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales. Their engagement must be integral to the way forward.

So, what might be the underpinning conditions of a sector deal or license? Here are five key considerations:

First, clear outcomes for the delivery of the skills needed for sustainable economic growth and productivity improvements and for upgrading businesses and workforces (including SMEs and the self-employed) for new technologies, AI and net zero.

Second, an industry-developed national sector skills strategy for the whole of the sector including SMEs and the self-employed.

Third, strong governance through a sector leadership group that looks at sector strategies as a whole, including the skills requirements. This is essential, and the governance organisation must be able to take the whole of the sector with it.

Fourth, close working with devolved authorities to support the differing priorities and needs of each locality.

And fifth, a commitment from the sector to utilise the skilled people who are at the cutting edge of introducing the new technologies, AI and net zero skills to support training and occupational standards development.

Instead of assuming all that will happen is tweaking of the existing apprenticeship levy, let’s start a real debate about what the growth and skills levy should look like and how it should be governed and operated.

The above proposed approach puts responsibility where it really rests and in the hands of the people who can truly implement the changes in skills that the UK’s economy desperately needs.

All level 7 apprenticeships will be axed, skills minister suggests

The axing of level 7 apprenticeships from levy funding will be “pretty widespread”, the skills minister warned as she suggested a blanket ban on public subsidy for the programmes is coming.

Jacqui Smith addressed apprenticeship levy reform concerns in her speech at today’s Association of Employment and Learning Providers conference, in which she also defended the “independence” of incoming quango Skills England.

Prime minister Keir Starmer announced plans to remove some level 7 apprenticeships from the scope of levy funding to shift resources towards young people training at lower levels during Labour’s party conference in September.

It comes amid strain on the Department for Education’s already stretched apprenticeship budget which has been almost fully spent in the past two years.

Smith said today: “In order to open up the growth and skills offer to deliver new training where it’s needed most, you will be aware that we’ll be asking more employers to step forward and to fund level 7 apprenticeships outside of the levy.

“We know that for too long employers have not invested enough in skills, and that’s something which needs to change. We’re clear that levy funded training is only one element of the investment from employers in the skills needs of their workforce, and we want to encourage and support employers to go further in investing in these training needs as we build towards that responsive and collaborative skills system.”

Level 7 apprenticeship starts are dominated by the accountancy or taxation professional and senior leader standards. But other popular programmes include advanced clinical practitioner, solicitor, academic professional, chartered town planner, district nurse and community nurse specialist practitioner.

Some sector leaders have praised the decision as it removes so-called “deadweight” costs – paying for training that would have happened anyway in the absence of the levy.

But other training providers, universities and employers fear that removing all level 7 apprenticeships from the levy will disproportionately hit the NHS, schools, councils and the civil service which often spend their levy on these apprenticeships.

Pressed on whether the DfE and Skills England will engage with the sector on potential areas to keep in scope of the levy, Smith said this will happen but suggested it is unlikely any standards will survive as the removal of funding “will be pretty widespread”.

She said: “We absolutely need to hear the evidence, the examples, exactly that type of information about where we might be able to make some changes to enable us to make these decisions.

“I just don’t want in six months’ time for people to say I wasn’t honest. We are going to have to shift funding from level 7 in order to be able to fund the other priorities that I have set out. I wouldn’t want people to leave this room with an impression that there will be a lot of flexibility around that.”

Asked directly if this means all level 7 will be cut, Smith replied: “More than some people hope, I suspect.”

AELP has argued the level 7 axe could be avoided if the £800 million gap between the amount taken in by the apprenticeship levy from employers and the actual programme budget was plugged.

Smith said she has “made this point to the Treasury”.

Skills England independence fears ‘wrong’

Labour consistently claimed in opposition that its proposed new skills body, Skills England, would work across government to fix the “fragmented and broken” training system. The party has since set up the organisation in “shadow” form, appointed an interim chair from inside the DfE and advertised for board members and a chief executive.

Last month we learned the new organisation will be set up as an executive agency within the DfE rather than as an independent body, and the £130,000-a-year CEO role will be at senior civil service director grade, reporting to the director general for skills, Julia Kinniburgh, which is more junior than people expected.

Smith attempted to dispel the fears of a lack of independence.

She said: “Skills England will have an independent board which will provide leadership and direction, as well as scrutiny to ensure that it’s operating effectively and within the agreed framework. We have had hundreds of applications for that board, and very, very many applications to be the chair of Skills England as well.

“It will be close enough to government to be the authoritative and driving voice to inform policy development and to ensure that the whole of government is brought into the priorities that it identifies.

“The idea that Skills England would not be both independent from and challenging to government, I think people will realise is wrong when we announce our chair.”

Our three recommendations to the government’s Level 3 review

It is now more than three months since the government announced it was conducting a “short review of post-16 qualification reforms at level 3 and below”. A last-ditch appeal from 455 school and college leaders urging ministers to introduce a corresponding pause to the defunding of applied general qualifications (AGQs) such as BTECs was unsuccessful.

But now the review is underway, there are signs that the government’s approach is evolving. For a start, the focus of the review has narrowed considerably: from qualifications at Level 3 and below, to Level 3 only and finally just to Level 3 qualifications due to be defunded in 2025.

This has reduced the number of qualifications in scope from around 5,700 to around 500, but it is still a tall order to make considered decisions on the future of courses studied by tens of thousands of young people between now and the end of the year.

Skills minister Jacqui Smith’s recent opinion piece in FE Week also struck a more conciliatory tone and indicated that the new government now sees a bigger role for applied general and other qualifications alongside A and T Levels.

This is welcome news, but does it mean the review will now lead to a better outcome for young people? The Protect Student Choice campaign believes it can, if the government implements the following three recommendations that we shared with ministers last month:

Retain funding for 21 AGQs in key subjects

Just 38 of the 500 qualifications within the scope of the review are applied general qualifications. We have identified 21 courses with significant enrolments that are essential to retain in key subjects such as applied science, health and social care, IT and engineering.

All meet the government’s criteria of high levels of demand/take-up by learners, supporting the skills needs of employers, offering good progression to related employment and successful outcomes in higher education, and offering good outcomes for learners from different backgrounds and different levels of prior attainment.

Confirm that students can enrol on these until 2026/27

If the government confirms its position on these 21 AGQs by December, that will provide colleges and schools with some much-needed certainty for the 2025/26 academic year.

However, given the lateness of the decision, that will soon be replaced by uncertainty for the following year. To address this, students should be able to enrol on AGQs approved through the review up to and including 2026/27.

No restrictions on combining qualifications

The previous government planned to introduce funding rules that would stipulate the applied subjects that students could study alongside A Levels, and other restrictions that would limit the size and number of AGQs that could be included in study programmes.

These restrictions should not be introduced. Colleges and schools must retain the autonomy to decide the combination of qualifications that will lead to the best outcomes for their students.

These sorts of restrictions do not apply to A Level-only study programmes, and they should not apply to students pursuing AGQs.

Implementing these three recommendations would be hugely beneficial to young people and hugely reassuring to colleges and schools.

The campaign’s immediate priority is the current review and securing a sensible outcome in December. But other challenges are close at hand.

For example, it remains unclear when decisions will be made about the Level 3 qualifications that are outside the scope of the government’s review; all have an uncertain future beyond September 2025 (including 79 AGQs in subjects such as business).

The campaign is focused on AGQs because we believe it is vital to retain a genuine three-route qualification system at Level 3.

Asking what qualifications should sit alongside A and T Levels in the future isthe wrong starting point. The right starting point is to ask how we ensure there are high-quality academic, applied and technical qualifications to meet the needs of all young people and employers.

That’s the fundamental point the Protect Student Choice campaign will continue to make, while remaining focused on encouraging the government to adopt our three practical recommendations next month.

Why I won’t give up on our English GCSE resitters

“What about the mental health impact of resits?” I was asked, when addressing an FE English and maths conference just after Covid.

“Yes, they can definitely help,” I replied.

The conference had temporarily moved online, so I was safe from my recurring nightmare of being shanked in the toilets at that event. But I couldn’t unsee a comment in the chat: “They won’t help my students.”

It lingers; the comedy of such low professional esteem, mixed with pity for students who deserve better, and the tragedy of a teacher who has lost belief in their own subject.

I became an English teacher because I believe stories have the power to change lives. I have seen them do so seismically, redrawing young people’s trajectories. And I have seen them do so subtly, providing moments of joy, hope and curiosity.

More recently, I have been reminded of their power through my own need.

A year ago, my mum died suddenly. The façade of grown adult immediately crumbled, sending a little boy running back to reading and writing stories.

“All I could think was that tomorrow cannot come. Time cannot go on. I am pulling the emergency brake of time,” explains Margaret, in Lev Grossman’s young-adult story The Map of Tiny Perfect Things. She relives her mother’s last day on loop. It is the kind of elegant and beautiful metaphor reliably found in YA fiction.

Teen novels provide vicarious survival training for the turbulence of life that will never be found in the ephemera of functionalism or the pedantry of linguistics, but which is completely compatible with the open text choices of the current English Language GCSE.

And they scale in accessibility from tailored ‘hi-lo’ (high chronological age, low reading age) options, through to the aspirationally-literary, allowing a well-designed resit course to lead students through a bookshelf that stands a chance of engaging them, moving them and connecting them to something beyond assessment requirements.

Stories have the power to change lives

I once spent most of a term carefully exploring the novel Thirteen Reasons Why, with more than one resit learner remarking, “This is like therapy”.

Writing, too, is a crucial mental health intervention. Students will take the opportunity to tell their own stories of grief, given the space to write freely. Some did so under a research project, leaving me with samples of the writing and permission to share them.

A health and social care student described her father entering a hospice: “We went up to see Dad, he wasn’t looking his best but I could see he was still fighting. The nurses there let me give him his tablets, take him to the bathroom, and change the dressings on his legs because I wanted Dad to know that I tried.”

A foundation student with speech and language difficulties discovered his voice in writing: “Mum walked in crying and said ‘I’m so so sorry but your dad passed away this morning’… I was starting to cry. On that day I didn’t have any friends because days before this, someone got me in big trouble.”

The catharsis of literacy should not be the preserve of those from better-off backgrounds who more reliably achieve it by age 16.

Supporting learners to read and write stories is what GCSE English resits look like when teachers are, in turn, supported to do the thing that made them sign up to the job in the first place.

Those stories will empower and inspire our young people, and will be there for them when they wouldn’t have known they needed them.

“Forgetting her mother, failing her mother and her friends and herself – those are awful things,” the narrator of John Green’s Looking for Alaska acknowledges feelings that could seem crushing and were too much for his friend, “but she did not need to fold into herself and self-destruct. Those awful things are survivable.”

Being human means inevitably experiencing times of poor mental health. Stories help young people to talk and learn about the normalcy of sadness, loss and hopelessness. They gift a resource of companionship and an outlet of self-expression that will lend strength, whenever it is needed, and will remind them that it is not forever.

The need for English has never been greater.

Read all of Andrew Otty’s Uncivil Servant columns here

We can’t afford complacency in the fight for BTECs

Despite being one of the most established technical qualifications at Level 3, the future of BTECs has been overshadowed in recent years.

The previous Conservative government had planned to remove funding for all BTECs between 2024 and 2028 in order to clear the ground for T Levels while also citing perceived quality issues.

Then in July, just weeks ahead of the beginning of the new academic year, defunding was paused. New secretary of state for education, Bridget Phillipson announced that a ‘short, focused review’ of Level 3 qualifications overseen by skills minister Jacqui Smith would take place before the end of the year.

This news has no doubt brought a sense of relief to colleagues in the sector who have been arguing for at least the past six years that defunding BTECs would generate a number of negative impacts for learners and institutions.

We should not, however, be complacent and assume that the outcome of the review is a forgone conclusion in favour of BTECs, particularly since it is unclear what will be in scope given the department for education have declined to publish the terms of reference.

Instead, we must continue to press the government to keep these qualifications.

The loss of BTECs would limit choice for learners who want applied general qualifications that combine the development of practical skills with academic learning and would force them instead to make a binary choice between purely academic qualifications and technical qualifications that lead (though not always seamlessly) to a specific occupation.

In 2018, one in four students entering higher education held a BTEC (double the 2008 figure); and it remains far from clear that T Levels will ever be able to match this scale.

T Levels can make a valuable contribution to the Level 3 landscape but they are unproven and their lack of flexibility and their size, rigour and links to specific occupations mean they will only ever appeal to a minority of learners.

This could cause universities to enter into financial insolvency

Only 16,000 young people enrolled on a T Level this year and the lack of learner demand has caused some colleges to roll back on their T Level programmes.

This muted enthusiasm is compounded by the fact that the high number of teaching hours, need for specialist equipment and securing a 45-day work placement for each enrolled learner also makes them challenging and expensive for sixth forms and colleges to deliver.

Indeed, I have previously argued that to ensure they deliver the quality expected they should be limited in delivery to colleges and ‘technical’ sixth forms that have sufficient business links to provide high-quality placements.

It is difficult to see a situation where T Levels will be able to serve the 200,000 students who are currently enrolled on BTECs – leaving the risk that a significant number of these young people, who are disproportionately from underprivileged backgrounds, could be disenfranchised from the skills system.

This risk was identified in the Department for Education’s own impact assessment, which concluded that disadvantaged students had the most to lose if BTECs were defunded.

In addition to the significant impact on learners, there would also be a knock-on effect on the finances of the sixth forms and colleges that offer them, as well as the universities that recruit BTEC award holders.

The apparent quality issues cited by government failed to take into account work prior to 2016 to reconstitute BTECs as more rigorous RQF BTEC Nationals.

As more higher education institutions move towards authentic assessment and away from traditional exam-based examinations, the use of continuous assessment and portfolio work favoured by BTECs also puts them more in line with the expectations of some university courses than A Levels.

In any case, at a time when 40 per cent of higher education providers are expected to be in deficit in 2023/24, a significant cut to the number of young people holding eligible Level 3 qualifications could be the thing that causes one or more universities to enter into financial insolvency.

Technical skills are severely lacking in the UK. In Coursera’s 2024 Global Skills Report we were ranked as the 45^th most technically proficient country, behind European neighbours Switzerland (1^st), Germany (3^rd), and France (5^th).

If Labour is serious about kickstarting economic growth, they need to open up more routes through our skills system into technical roles, not cut them down. T Levels are one answer, but not the whole answer.

As a sector, we need to be unapologetic about the need to retain BTECs. Now is not the time to withdraw one of the most reputable technical Level 3 qualifications on offer.

Country’s only ‘inadequate’ FE college improves to ‘good’

Croydon College has lifted its Ofsted grade to ‘good’ in all areas following an ‘inadequate’ grading last year due to concerns about behaviour.

The college, which has more than 2,700 students across two campuses, has taken “effective actions” to improve the quality of its education, behaviour and attendance, inspectors said.

This has resulted in “notable improvements” and led to “increased and high achievement rates”, good behaviour and improved attendance.

This means no further education colleges are now graded ‘inadequate’ by Ofsted.

Croydon’s report, published today, said since the last inspection the college has also improved its personal development curriculum, previously described as “limited” in delivery.

‘Extremely proud’

Caireen Mitchell, principal and chief executive officer of Croydon College, said: “We are absolutely delighted with the overall rating of ‘good’ for the college.

“Our teachers do this job because they want to make a difference to the lives of young people, they want them to succeed and do well in whatever career they choose, and I am extremely proud that this has been reflected in the Ofsted report.

“As a team we are committed to creating a safe and effective learning environment for our students and we will continue to improve and develop as an education provider that the communities of Croydon and Coulsdon can be proud of.”

In May last year, Ofsted dealt the college a grade four report to the “surprise” of its leaders.

This made it the first general FE college in the country to receive the lowest grade since the watchdog launched its 2019 education inspection framework.

The mixed report issued ‘inadequate’ judgments for leadership and behaviours, some of which it described as “inappropriate”, and ‘requires improvement’ for four areas including quality of education. It issued ‘good’ judgments for apprenticeships and adult learning programmes.

An FE Commissioner team visited the school two months later, and said the college should “harmonise cultures” with Coulson Sixth Form College, which Croydon College merged with in 2019.

‘Marked’ improvements

Ofsted has now found that staff have set “high standards” for behaviour at both campuses, with learners presenting as “polite, courteous and respectful”.

It added that Coulsdon’s achievement rates have “increased markedly” and its special educational needs and disabilities students “enjoy a much-improved curriculum”.

It also praised the college’s “experienced” teachers for using “effective teaching strategies” and giving good support.

But better teacher training has resulted in “improved” achievements in subjects such as health and social care, A levels and GCSE maths, although subjects such as sports, hairdressing and engineering “have not improved sufficiently”, inspectors said.

Governors are now “effective” at holding senior leaders to account through “accurate reporting and data”, which the FE Commissioner suggested needs to be managed more effectively.

Learners also told inspectors the college is “a safe haven”.

According to Ofsted data released last year, 91 per cent of general FE Colleges held a ‘good’ or ‘outstanding’ judgment.

Are we running out of STEAM?

In the world of industry that lies beyond education, the compartmentalisation of subjects created by our current education system does not exist. Professionals who excel in their fields present a rich mixture of specialist knowledge and skills, complimented with personal attributes such as problem-solving, resilience, collaboration skills, communication skills, innovative thinking . . . the list goes on. We know that people who regularly access their creativity present these attributes in abundance.

I sat down with my sister Fleur Moseley, a medical communications consultant and director of Little Orange Puppy, an organisation specialising in the development of strategies, communications and education for the pharmaceutical sector, to learn how creativity and science collide and combine in her career. Moseley begins by highlighting the importance of storytelling in the medical science industry.

“In my work there is a lot of evidence and high-level science involved, and the question is, how do we create stories that are memorable? Stories that are simple but still scientifically accurate and credible. It is about taking a wealth of information and transforming it into something that different audiences can understand and follow.”

Moseley goes on to explain how creativity enables her company to transform complex scientific data into accessible formats that allows an identified audience to develop the required level of understanding to facilitate change. Often a change that will significantly improve, if not transform, their life.

“Fundamentally, this is about identifying what needs to change to optimise someone’s health, whether that’s their own actions or someone else acting on their behalf. A lot of this involves creative problem-solving: understanding what people are currently doing, what they should be or need to be doing, and what obstacles are preventing them from making those changes. It’s about creating programmes that identify these barriers to optimal behaviour or health management, then developing educational resources, evidence, or practical tools to help people reach those goals. So, I see this as creative problem-solving, looking at a problem from various angles.”

In addition, Moseley expands on how using more illustrative ways to present data and analytics can increase information impact and understanding.

“Visualisation of data can take many forms, and you see examples in the news when they present graphics to show how scientific data are changing.”

The importance of graphic imagery as a powerful communication tool is a sentiment shared by biologist Michael Dickinson, founder of the Dickinson Lab at The California Institute of Technology. Dickinson has dedicated his career to studying how flies fly, developing a reputation as a leading expert in the complex feat of insect flight. In 2013, he presented a TEDx talk hosted by Caltech, within which he exhibited some of the extensive illustrations he has created to capture and share his findings. Dickinson shared some thoughts about the crucial role visual communication plays in his scientific work and teachings.

“Visual communication is an absolutely essential part of my work. I cannot really comprehend anything without being able to sketch a picture of it. I can convey my ideas to colleagues much more effectively in a picture or movie than I can in words.”

He goes on to talk about the power of the visual image within learning and retaining information: “It is the pictures in textbooks we remember, not the words. For me, art, history, and literature are as important a part of science as math and chemistry.”

The testimony of both of these experts suggests that mastering and embedding creative skills within an industry specialism can not only help to sustain individual practice but encourage the breaking of conventions, the formation of new ideas and a more effective communication of knowledge to others. It is only in this sharing of knowledge does all humanity benefit from the endeavours of the individual.

So, what does this mean to us as policy-makers, education institution leaders and as educators? It is our responsibility to create an educationally developmental experience for our young people that best prepares them to succeed in their professional lives, regardless of what sector they choose to work within.

As the custodians of education, it is imperative that we break subject silos, fostering instead an interdisciplinary learning model that collaboratively explores how arts and creativity can be interwoven within STEM subjects. The perception is often that the creative arts has to fight for its place in the conversation. However, a more effective approach would be for STEM subject-leaders to proactively explore how to embed creative arts within curriculum design, delivery and assessment.

Perhaps the next time there is a quiet moment in the laboratory, computer room, or workshop, take a stroll along the creative arts corridor, come find an arts educator, and let’s have ‘A’ conversation.

For more fascinating insights into creative arts education, join us at the Teach Inspire Create Conference on Friday 22 November where UAL Awarding Body will be hosting leading educators and creative industry professionals. From inspirational keynote speeches on the use of ethical AI to workshops with innovative companies exploring AR & Storytelling to youth empowerment and climate action, as well as an exclusive panel discussion about how to connect creativity with the curriculum, this conference is a must for all educators. Book your space here.

Winners of Mayor of London Adult Learning Awards 2024

England’s largest community education college has been named London’s most inclusive provider of adult education.

City Lit is among ten inspirational winners recognised at this evening’s Mayor of London Adult Learning Awards, sponsored by Ascentis and FE Week.

The college won the award for its Centre for Deaf Education, one of only a handful of dedicated specialist education services which has been serving the Deaf community for over a century.

Courses include British Sign Language, English, maths and digital skills for Deaf people, lipreading and managing hearing loss; and support for Deaf students accessing mainstream courses. An FE Week feature earlier this year highlighted the fascinating heritage of the centre.

Speaking at the ceremony at London’s City Hall, deputy mayor for business and growth Howard Dawber, said: “We want this city to be a city where everybody can get on, where there’s a route for you to take part in all this economic activity going on.

“That’s why these awards today reflect the importance of innovation, it’s about trying things out and making an effort”

Working Men’s College (WM College) advanced English for Speakers of Other Languages practitioner Sam Pepper was named the winner in the inspirational tutor in adult education category.

Pepper’s nomination caught the eyes of the judges for his extensive knowledge and contagious passion for ESOL teaching.

Pepper’s portfolio includes teaching level-1 classes in the evenings to working adults, community ESOL for parents at a primary school, and digital ESOL courses he’s developed with his team.

“I get a lot of joy from supporting learners in their learning journey and helping them find their feet as residents of London,” he said. “I am grateful to be part of a thriving learning community through a job I find stimulating and which serves the needs of local people.”

Student Stephanie Webber won the learning for personal progression award. Webber has overcome harrowing personal obstacles to become the “happy and confident” learner she is now, on a level 4 counselling diploma at Barking and Dagenham College.

Living through 40 years in a cycle of abuse alongside learning difficulties and a chronic pain condition, it was a key worker in a women’s refuge that sparked Webber’s passion for learning. A level 2 counselling course at Redbridge Institute of Adult Learning gave her the confidence and sense of purpose to move on with her life, passing the level 2 and the level 3 course. She now plans to pursue a degree in counselling and psychotherapy, followed by a PhD.

The apprenticeship employer of the year award went to London Ambulance Service NHS Trust for the third year in a row.

It began its apprenticeship programme in 2018 to help alleviate paramedic workforce shortages. It boasts the highest results among all ambulance services, with 97 per cent staying with the service after a year of completing, and 66 per cent progressing to degree apprenticeships.

See below for the full list of winners and highly commended finalists:

Ofqual demands ‘honesty’ in new rules for awarding organisations

Awarding organisations could be called out for being “dishonest” or criticising their competitors under new enforceable rules proposed by the qualifications regulator.

New so-called “principle conditions” will be added to Ofqual’s already 100+ page rulebook for awarding organisations, subject to a consultation launched today.

Six principles, one of which requires awarding organisations (AOs) to “act with honesty and integrity”, will be added to Ofqual’s general conditions of recognition (GCR), which the regulator claimed will help AOs make decisions in “new, unexpected or novel situations”.

The principles include acting “with honesty and integrity”, ensuring qualifications “are fit for purpose”, and “where possible, promote public confidence in qualifications”.

Ofqual’s GCR is its rulebook for AOs. It regulates who can run AOs, how qualifications should be developed and titled and even where the Ofqual logo should go on certificates.

Breaches to the GCR can result in sanctions ranging from mandating certain improvements, to financial penalties and removing the AO’s powers to award qualifications.

Ofqual declined to comment when asked if it was bolstering its rules in the wake of recent fines and regulatory actions taken against awarding organisations such as City and Guilds, Pearson and NCFE.

The regulator admitted its expectations on awarding organisations haven’t changed, but stressed the new rules will help awarding organisations make decisions by “removing regulatory uncertainty”.

‘Potential’ burdens for awarding organisations

Sir Ian Bauckham, Ofqual’s chief regulator, said: “These principles will play an important role in helping Ofqual secure standards and public confidence in qualifications.

“While the principles are new, the concepts and expectations they articulate already underpin our rules.

“They will provide additional support to help awarding organisations’ decision-making and can apply at both strategic and operational levels.”

The consultation acknowledges awarding organisations will face “some additional burden” from the new principle conditions. Ofqual believes this is “justified”.

It states: “The long-term benefits to awarding organisations, and to Ofqual, of a clearer understanding and more consistent interpretation of the framework will outweigh the potential short-term burden of familiarising and ensuring the principles are met.”

This comes as several awarding organisations introduce inflation-busting exam fee hikes for their qualifications, adding costs to colleges and providers.

Rob Nitsch, chief executive of the Federation of Awarding Bodies, told FE Week: “The headline principles reflect a best practice that FAB’s members would recognise.

“However, we will be looking closely at the potential impact and especially the additional regulatory burden that the proposal will generate, which we know is a very significant matter of concern for the industry.”

Public confidence in all qualifications

If agreed, awarding organisations will be issued statutory guidance which will set out examples of incidents that constitute a breach of the new principles.

For example, “not taking sufficient care about the accuracy of information that the awarding organisation provides to Ofqual and users of qualifications” would be considered a breach of the first principle, “act[ing] with honesty and integrity”.

Incidents which see results delayed to students, or running negative advertising campaigns against competitor qualifications, could see AOs in breach of principle 4: “Maintain, and where possible, promote public confidence in qualifications.”

Ofqual’s proposed guidance on this principle specifically states its expectation to maintain and promote public confidence in all qualifications, not just the ones they award.

Ofqual’s existing rules already require awarding organisations to make sure qualifications are fit for purpose. A new condition, and guidance, is now proposed as one of the six principles which says: “An awarding organisation must ensure that each qualification that it makes available, or proposes to make available is, and continues to be, fit for the purposes for which it is intended.”

The consultation closes on February 12, 2025.

Ofqual’s proposed six principle conditions

An awarding organisation must:

Act with honesty and integrity
Treat learners fairly by acting and taking decisions with due impartiality and based on appropriate evidence
Ensure that each qualification that it makes available, or proposes to make available is, and continues to be, fit for the purposes for which it is intended
Act in a way that maintains and, where possible, promotes public confidence in qualifications
Act in an open, transparent and co-operative manner with Ofqual and, as appropriate, with users of qualifications
Conduct its activities with a proactive approach to compliance with its Conditions of Recognition